作者：杨柳青
　　1.Introduction
　　Language， as one of the most influential aspect for manifesting the uniqueness of human beings， enables people to produce and receive information. This paper has been divided into three parts. It starts by identifying the term of intercultural communication， and then introduces politeness theory and face strategies. Finally， it ends by demonstrating the significance of the theory concerned with learning intercultural communication.
　　2. Background to Intercultural Communication and Definition of the Term
　　Intercultural communication concerns with actual examples of communication between individuals from different backgrounds. There is an example in terms of intercultural communication. The researcher Bailey （2000） used four hours of video recordings and interview responses to analyze the ways in which Korean immigrant shopkeepers in Los Angeles with African-American customers. What is noteworthy is that the complex communication appears the clash of styles.
　　3. Politeness
　　Recently， there is a growing number of studies have refined or challenged the notions of politeness. Many studies appear to distinguish ‘common-sense politeness’ which is related to good manners and courtesy，， from ‘linguistic politeness’ which is used to describe how interlocutors deal with the problems of face in interaction.
　　With regard to ‘linguistic politeness’， Brown and Levinson （1987） state three facets of interpersonal scenes are generally associated with politeness： （a） the relative power of the speaker over the addressee； （b） the distance between two participants； （c） the weight of imposition， which is related to what one really wants and how essential it is. These three aspects are in agreement with those of Scollon and Scollon （2001）， which constitute a politeness system.
　　4. Face
　　The formal notion of face is generally believed to have derived from China. A Chinese anthropologist Hu first introduced this term in 1944， despite the fact that the concept had been used in English for at least several centuries before that. Many works written by the American sociologist Erving Goffman also depended on ‘interpersonal relationships on the concept of face’ （Scollon and Scollon， 2001） so that provided a large number of data for the investigation of sociolinguistics.
　　The politeness theory （also known as ‘strategies of face’） proposed by Brown & Levinson （1978） argues about the reason why individuals tend to choose a certain linguistic form over another while communicating with other people， so as to figure out the universality of language use. In Brown and Levinson’s theoretical proposition， each model person （i.e. every normal adult person） is supposed to own positive face and negative face. Here ‘face’ refers to the public self-image that one wants to present in public. The two relevant parts： positive face is the need of a model person to be approved of and appreciated by others； negative face implies the desire of an adult that his/her actions can be unimpeded. Thus， it is clear that face is comprised of wants and needs which can be only satisfied by others. Since the two face are likely to be threatened during interaction， Brown and Levinson （1987， p.24） put forward ‘face-threatening acts’ to illustrate a majority of actions are assumed to threaten face. However， a model person will try to minimise the threat to the face of another model person. Generally speaking， each individual tend to project a good self-image in public and accept the public image of others when they intentionally interact with each other.