This paper examines how face needs are seemingly disregarded in parliamentary discourse, and the circumstances that frame such apparent infractions. Pivoting around politeness theory, politeness principles and maxims of conversation, the study uncovers means and ways in which Members of the Parliament of Ghana engage one another in debates on often contentious issues of national importance. By an analysis of content, the study identifies insults, accusations and imperatives as bald strategies used by the parliamentarians. All the actors in the debates – the Speaker, Majority MPs, Minority MPs – employed bald on-record utterances in a variety of ways and from either provocative or corrective positions in the discourse. The findings suggest that the Standing Orders on debates in the House are framed, in part, within the maxims of conversation proposed by Grice (1975), and they guide and influence the Members’ use of politeness strategies during the debates. Besides, Members tended to commit face-threatening acts when they correctively pointed out that a previous speaker had flouted the maxims of quality and relevance. In view of the findings, the study recommends that closer attention be given to the role of context in the research on politeness.

°­±ð²â·É´Ç°ù»å²õ:ÌýPoliteness, Conversational Maxims, Context, Parliament, Standing Orders, Bald on-record