The Paradox of Politeness
Do performatives serve as “softeners” or “deceivers” in Canadian discourse? Examining how tie-up phrases like "to be honest" or "as I said" can obscure the truth in our daily conversations.
By Jimy Beltrán
When I first arrived in Canada from Ecuador in 2014, I was struck by two things:
How often people talk about the weather
And the degree to which people were polite — particularly with respect to the words they chose to converse with others
I remember submitting one of my first papers during my undergraduate studies. I received an email from the professor which read, “I appreciate the effort you have made in this essay and I like the direction you are going in, but…” — followed by a list of drastic changes which I had to incorporate towards my paper. I was unsure as to how to feel or perceive the professor’s statement. If he liked the direction of my essay, why did he essentially ask me to redo it?
Maybe I am overthinking. But, now every time I hear or read phrases like that, I simply wait for the other shoe to drop. Inherently, I anticipate some form of criticism to follow such a phrase.
The more I paid attention, the more I realized how frequently people use these kinds of phrases in political discourse, in classrooms, and with their friends. Consider how often you hear someone say “to be honest”, “as I said”, “don’t take this personally”, “I hear you, but”, or “I love her to death, but…”
Language experts call these performatives or qualifying phrases, also referred to as “tie-up phrases”. Initially, they may give the impression of being harmless, formal, or simply polite. However, when used before another statement, they often indicate that bad news or some form of “tacit” dishonesty is imminent.
James W. Pennebaker, the chair of the psychology department at the University of Texas (Austin), who is a researcher of performative phrases, suggests that "politeness is another word for deception. The point is to formalize social relations so you don't have to reveal your true self".
Tie-ups in Canadian Politics
What makes performative phrases interesting is that they prevent the listener from establishing a “truth value” to what someone is saying. This allows the speaker to steer away from the underlying statement, distracting the listener and making misrepresentation (or in extreme cases, lying) easier.
“[Performatives] are used to obfuscate the issue…you are distracting your interlocutor so that they are taken to a meta level, thinking about the fact you are talking to them rather than the statement you are making… that can certainly make it easier to lie,” said linguist Jason Riggle, Associate Professor at the University of Chicago.
In 2017, when Justin Trudeau was quizzed by a journalist on whether he broke federal ethics laws, by taking his family to the Aga Khan’s private island, he kept repeating, “as I said, this was a personal family vacation to visit someone that I have known all my life,” followed by, “we look forward to discussing (this matter) with the Conflict of Interest Ethics Commissioner, but we do not see an issue on that.”
The Prime Minister was “truthful” when he stated he planned to speak to the Ethics Commissioner about his family vacation to the Aga Khan’s island. However, the dishonesty lies in his insinuation that there was no conflict of interest, when he had in fact received gifts from a significant lobby group.
In using performative phrases like “as I said,” Trudeau obfuscated the issue at stake and deflected the accusation of unethical behavior. This represents a common thread in Canadian politics.
Performative phrases provide an avenue for “less authentic” communication from politicians, as they use softeners or deceivers to manipulate the audience's perception. Has this contributed towards growing-levels of receding trust towards Canada's political or policymaking ecosystem? Do citizens simply expect their leaders to say the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Are All These Performative Phrases “Bad”?
It depends on how we use them. As I have established, performatives could be used to obscure an underlying dishonesty. But they could also be leveraged to soften the blow of honesty. Consider “no offense, but”, “don't take this personally, but,” or in the case of my professor, “I like your direction, but...”
Perhaps, there is an underlying truth you want to share, but the performative enables you to temper or tweak it — making the speaker sound more polite and the message more digestible or attractive to the listener.
The uses of performatives can be legitimate. Sometimes you have to use them to sound less punitive and more approachable, in order to maintain a relationship or achieve a certain goal. This is because we have a social contract to be “nice” to people. In other words, we live in communities where social capital is paramount.
In a country as diverse and multicultural as Canada, performatives enable us to maintain relationships which are critical to navigate our professional and personal lives. Through contradiction, they become “social lubricants” that connect us with people who might not share our own cultural, ethical, or religious backgrounds and perspectives.
Without performatives, our societies will be harsher social environments. So there is an argument which says that we need such phrases in order to have more productive conversations.
Dangers of Performatives
The contrarian nature of tie-up phrases not only serves to soften the blow on the receiver’s end, but also to protect the sender in the process. Performatives can also be used by the sender to legitimize their own psyche and justify that they are not an “unkind person”, who would say something offensive or harsh.
This becomes particularly poignant in cases when people say things like, “I am not a racist, but,” immediately followed by a racist statement. “On an almost unconscious level we are protecting ourselves,” said Pennebaker.
This is to say that performatives can indirectly normalize and reinforce racist or discriminatory behavior. To cite the previous example, when someone uses a performative statement that is racist in nature, they are not only describing their own thoughts or feelings, but are also performing an action that reinforces discrimination and harmful stereotypes.
Performatives can be used to misrepresent your intentions. Take for instance, ”with all due respect,” which is simply another form of dishonesty, and in a way, misrepresentative of your attitude. When someone says it, we all know that they mean the opposite. These contradictory sentiments exist in two separate spheres and respect is likely not present.
So these terms have an impact on our relationship-building skills, both in-person and in the virtual space. The use of phrases like “as far as I know” are used to manage our image in society by avoiding committing to certain ideological positions, and in the process, emotionally distancing ourselves from it. This creates issues of trust and relationship-building that counterbalances the ability to forge productive conversations.
Do We Need Them?
Tie-ups are present in languages around the world and are likely to have existed for millenia.
They balance a fine line between dishonest and honest politeness. But they can also be a signal of larger systemic issues that might speak more about ourselves, than what we are trying to say.
This brings us to a question of whether as a society we are simply “fake” in order to be “nice.” But this frame is too simplistic. Performative phrases enable us to connect and forge relationships; they are gestures of goodwill that allow people to build bridges, and showcase sympathy and understanding. But they can also jeopardize this very intent.
After two years of lockdowns due to the pandemic, this is an opportunity for us not only to pay closer attention to the ways in which we use performative languages in our speech and in our writing — but also to practice them actively, in our actions and not just in our words.
And if you are not ready for that, perhaps what is better is to remain silent and listen. Sometimes the best thing to do is say nothing, listen, and learn.
Jimy Beltrán is a Master of Public Policy candidate with the Max Bell School of Public Policy at McGill University. Originally from Venezuela, his interests lie in agriculture, technology, and defense.