Ambiguity in language derives, in part, from the multiple motivations that underlie the choice to use any particular expression. The use of some lexical items, such as probability expressions and scalar terms, can be motivated by a desire to communicate uncertainty as well as a desire to be polite (i.e., manage face). Research has demonstrated that the interpretation of these items can be influenced by the existence of a potential politeness motive. In general, communications about negative events, relative to positive events, result in higher likelihood estimates whenever politeness can be discerned as a potential motive. With few exceptions, however, this research has focused only on the hearer. In the present research we focused on the dyad and examined whether speakers vary their messages as a function of politeness, and the effect that this has on subsequent judgments made by a recipient. In two experiments we presented participants with situations that varied in terms of face-threat and asked them how they would communicate potentially threatening information. Both experiments included a second set of participants who read these utterances and provided judgments as to the degree of uncertainty conveyed by the utterance. In both experiments, messages in the face-threatening condition conveyed greater uncertainty than messages in the non-face-threatening condition, and the probability estimates made by the second set of participants varied as a function of conveyed uncertainty. This research demonstrates that when examining speakers and hearers together, severe events may be judged less likely (rather than more likely), because speakers tend to hedge the certainty with which they communicate the information.