A Study of Conflict Talk in the US-Ukraine Leaders' Dialogue from the Perspective of Impoliteness Theory

Abstract

As an important theoretical framework in the field of pragmatics, impoliteness theory focuses on deliberate verbal and nonverbal behaviors that intentionally breach established social norms and consequently impair interpersonal bonds. Conflict talk, a closely related phenomenon, refers to confrontational discourse arising from fundamentally divergent viewpoints and competing objectives between communicators. Taking the highly publicized US-Ukraine leaders' summit held on February 28, 2025, as the primary research corpus, this study conducts a comprehensive and systematic analysis based on the foundational principles of impoliteness theory. Through detailed discourse analysis, it is found that United States representatives extensively deployed five major impoliteness strategies---namely, bald on record impoliteness, positive impoliteness, negative impoliteness, sarcasm or mock politeness, and withhold politeness---to reinforce their dominant geopolitical position and assert control over the negotiation. In stark contrast, the visiting head of state mainly reacted defensively, attempting to mitigate face threats while advocating for his nation's critical needs. These intense linguistic confrontations not only mirror substantial ideological and strategic divergences concerning the ongoing conflict and future military aid policies, but they also profoundly reveal how power asymmetry, complex face negotiation, and conflicting national interests interact dynamically in high-stakes diplomatic scenarios. Ultimately, this research sheds critical light on the underlying nature of verbal conflicts within international political discourse, offering valuable theoretical implications and practical insights for advancing diplomatic communication, international relations, and global conflict management strategies.