【正文】 Liao Chaochin(1994) investigates the strategies, maxims and development of refusal in Mandarin Chinese. Pan Yuling (2002) studies politeness in Chinese facetoface interaction. Some concentrate on the contrastive analysis of politeness in different cultures. (Wang Yaping, 2003)As mentioned above, on one hand, politeness theory is mainly applied to daily munication discourses while oral business negotiation is left with much less attention. On the other hand, as many of their studies are largely restricted to its managerial and strategic aspects while most of the scholars in managerial field concentrated on the use of strategies without the support of detailed language data. This thesis will conduct a further and prehensive study in linguistic strategies of politeness theories in business negotiations with the regard to lexicon, tense, voice,and other syntactic devices.Chapter Three Theoretical Foundations Four Main Views of Politeness TheoriesBy what the author has reviewed in the last chapter, definitely, more and more scholars have focused their attention on the phenomenon of politeness. Many Linguists attempt to explain politeness from different perspectives and at various levels. However, there is still a lack of general consensus regarding the essence ofpoliteness. In 1990, Fraser groups the four main approaches accounting for politeness: the social norm view, the conversationalmaxim view, the facesaving view and the conversationalcontract view. (Fraser, 1990)According to Fraser (1990:221), the socialnorm approach has few adherents among current researchers. The socialnorm view is the traditional view of politeness equated with formality and social class, which deals primarily with social desirable behavior and the language at the level of set phrases.The conversationalmaxim view is mainly based on Grice39。s politeness principle are inconsistent with each other. Xu Shenghuan (1992) criticizes the flaw of Leech39。s politeness principle puts more constraints on the utterance than Grice39。 He Ziran, 1987。 Garcia (1989) analyzes the use of apology by native and nonnative English speakers。s theory of the CP (Cooperative Principle) to explain politeness. (Lakoff, 1973) She condenses the Gricean Maxims into a single conversational maxim: Be clear. But when the issue arises regarding the conflict between clarity and politeness, she states: Politeness usually supersedes. Based on the former studies, Scollon and Scollon outline three types of politeness systems: deference politeness system, solidarity politeness system, and hierarchical politeness system, in which relative power and social distance are still the main variables that determine the use of two politeness strategies:involvement and independence strategies. (Scollon and Scollon, 1995)Most previous studies are focused on spoken language in nonprofessional settings, while some articles are studying the professional settings from different aspects. In the nonprofessional settings, Goffman (1967) probes interactional ritual on facetoface behavior。s psychological test method is of significant importance to quantitative study on polite language. However, it only testifies that there are polite and impolite phenomena on all kinds of ingredients and expression of human languages. It does not reveal a more plex problem hidden behind such phenomena, that is, the basis for people to choose polite language. (Clark, 1980) Lakoff39。 whereas, tactfulexpressions help them to explore the possible existence of a mutually beneficial settlement, and move toward it. Negotiators have to pay attention to the input and feedback of information and timely adjust their language. Therefore, negotiators should duly take some effective language strategies and tactics to realize their given goals, such as making a feint to the east and attacking in the west, beating somebody in his own game, talking while fighting, answering questions through debating, this reason, we must pay special attention to politeness strategy and its relevant tactful language. Below we will illustrate politeness and its language to see how the strategy of politeness language works in the context of business negotiation. Studies on the Development of Politeness TheoriesPragmatics is the study of language in use. As for the research of pragmatics, it has a history of more than forty years. In recent years, with the rapid development on pragmatics, politeness theories bee the main topics. Studies abroadThe word polite in English can be dated back to the 15th century. It is derived from the Latin word politus, which means to socialize. In the 17th century, politeness is associated with the norms of social conduct extant in the upper classes, and this sense of the term has survived in collocations such as Polite Society. The really serious study of politeness can be traced back to the German Romantic Movement in early 1920s. Politeness is then taken up by the school of idealism to bolster theories about the relationship between psychological feeling, national character and verbal creativity.Later, Buhler, Kainz and Halliday all address the issue of politeness in their discussions about language functions. As early as 1950s, Goffman proposed the Theory of Facework in his On Facework: An Analysis of Ritual Elements in SocialInteraction.(Goffman, 1955).He gives theoretical study on face from the anthropological perspective. According to Goffman, face is a sacred thing for every human being, and an essential factor that municators have to pay attention to. According to Goffman, giving face leads the recipient to infer that the speaker respects the recipient and considers him or her to have high repute, esteem, and standing in society. This social recognition affirms the recipient39。t reached agreement to some idea。 likewise, we can alsoarouse some uncertainty as is needed. What39。re able to municate your point of view,