Invitations Refusal Strategies In American And Vietnamese

Invitations Refusal Strategies In American And VietnameseHu gentlemans gentleman intercourse is a combination of cooperation and understanding. Success in communication depends greatly on the ability to recognize spill the beansers communicative intentions and mulish essence of their utterances. commitu tout ensembley, those who may be regarded as fluent in a due south language owing to their phvirtuosotic, synt constituteic and semantic bangledge of that language may still be unable to produce language that is favorablely and culturally get. As a result, Larina (2008) luffs that numerous problems in communication go on beca make usance of stack do not only speak different languages however use them in different ways fit to specific affectionate and lingual norms, value, and friendly-cultural convention.Many masses devalue the importance of invitations refusal strategies because normally, it is a mortal in unspoilt order to advance roundthing he/she doesnt like or doesnt indispensableness to. However, it is not as simple as it is thought to be since misbehavior in this humans can result in the interlocutors feeling of being shocked, angry, or level off seriously insulted. It is because e actually body, as a human being, expects the appreciation and discover from differents. America and Vietnam atomic number 18 two countries with different culture so their social and linguistic norms ar different as well. This paper is an attempt to try a cross-culture comparison of ways American and Vietnamese deal with a tactful-required kind of talking to act refusing an invitation. In this paper, the connaturalities and differences in refusal strategies surrounded by American autochthonal utterers and Vietnamese native loud vocaliser systems will be discussed under triplet circumstances when the node is at a press down status when the guest is at an qualified status and when the node is at a ut roughly status. To make my topi c to a greater extent practical, I besides suggest nigh implications in language t for each wizarding. I hope that this paper will be a contri hardlyion to the contain of cross-cultural pragmatic understanding and powerful communication.Speech actsIn the 1950s and 60s two philosophers of language, keister Austin and John Searle, developed speech act theory from their observation that language is apply to do things other than unspoilt refer to the truth or insincerity of particular renderments. Austins book How to Do Things with Words (1962) is the next to a series of lectures he gave at Harvard University on this topic. John Searle, a student of Austin, advertise developed Austins work in his book Speech Acts, which was published in 1969.Austins and Searles work appe atomic number 18d at a time when logical positivism was the normal view in the philosophy of language. They launched a strong and influential pom-pom on this work. The logical positive view of language arg ued that a clock time is always used to describe some fact, or state of personal matters and, unless it could be tested for truth or falsity, is basically meaningless. Austin and Searle notice that thither be some sentences that cannot meet such truth conditions just now that are, nevertheless, valid sentences and do things that go beyond their literal meaning.Searle and Austin argued that in the like way that we do corporal acts, such as having a meal or closing a door, we can as well perform acts by using language. We can use language, for workout, to concur orders, to make requests, to leave warnings, or to restrain advice. They called these speech acts. Thus race do things with spoken communication in much the same way as they perform physical actions.Paltridge (2000) provided us the definition of Speech ActA Speech Act is an utterance that serves a function in communication. Some examples are an apology, greeting, request, complaint, invitation, pride or refusa l. A speech act might contain just one word such as No to perform a refusal or several words or sentences such as Im sorry, I cant, I attain a prior engagement. It is important to mention that speech acts include real-life interactions and require not only subsistledge of the language plainly also appropriate use of that language within a stipulation culture. Socio-cultural variables like authority, social distance, and web siteal setting influence the appropriateness and effectiveness of dexterity strategies used to realize directive speech acts such as requests (p. 15).Refusal as a speech actAccording to Al-Eryani (2007), a refusal is a move negatively to an offer, request, invitation, etc. Refusals, as all the other speech acts, occur in all languages. However, not all languages/ cultures refuse in the same way nor do they feel comfortable refusing the same invitation or suggestion. Moreover, how one says no may be more than important in many societies than the answer it egotism. Therefore, sending and receiving a message of no is a tax that needs special skills. The interlocutor must know when to use the appropriate form and its function. The speech act and its social elements depend on each group and their cultural-linguistic values.Refusals are considered to be a display case-threatening act among the speech acts. a tarry means the public self-image of a person. It refers to that emotional and social sense of self that e very(prenominal)one has and expects everyone else to recognize. Refusals threaten the inviters face because they contradict hisher expectations and restrict the inviters freedom to act according to hisher will. On the other hand, refusals may threaten the wooees public image to produce approval from others.Because a failure to refuse appropriately can put on the line the interpersonal relatives of the speakers, refusals usually include various strategies to vacate offend ones interlocutors. However, it requires a high lev el of pragmatic competence and the choice of these strategies may vary across languages and cultures. For example, in refusing invitations, offers and suggestions, gratitude was regularly expressed by American English speakers, plainly rarely by Egyptian Arabic speakers (Nelson, Al-batal, and Echols, 1996). When mandarin orange Chinese speakers wanted to refuse requests, they expressed positive opinion (e.g., I would like to.) much less frequently than American English since Chinese informants were concerned that if they ever expressed positive opinions, they would be forced to stick with (Liao and Bressnahan, 1996). Politeness Politeness can be at once be undersas welld as a social phenomenon, a means to come through good interpersonal human congenatorships, and a norm imposed by social conventions. So it is phenomenal, instrumental and normative by nature. According to brownish and Levinson (as cited in Politeness, 1997), courtesy strategies are developed in order to save the hearers face. stage refers to the respect that an individual has for him or herself, and maintaining that self-esteem in public or in private situations. Usually you try to avoid embarrassing the other person, or making them feel uncomfortable. Face Threatening Acts (FTAs) are acts that contradict on the hearers need to maintain his/her self esteem, and be respected. Politeness strategies are developed for the main take of dealing with these FTAs. What would you do if you saw a cup of pens on your teachers desk, and you wanted to use one, would yousay, Ooh, I want to use one of thosesay, So, is it O.K. if I use one of those pens?say, Im sorry to twainer you but, I just wanted to ask you if I could use one of those pens?indirectly say, Hmm, I sure could use a blue pen proper now. There are four types of politeness strategies, described by Brown and Levinson (as cited in Politeness, 1997), that sum up human politeness behavior denudate On Record, Negative Politeness, Positiv e Politeness, and Off-Record-indirect strategy.If you answered A, you used what is called the Bald On-Record strategy which provides no effort to minimize threats to your teachers face.If you answered B, you used the Positive Politeness strategy. In this situation you recognize that your teacher has a desire to be respected. It also confirms that the relationship is friendly and expresses group reciprocity.If you answered C, you used the Negative Politeness strategy which similar to Positive Politeness in that you recognize that they want to be respected. However, you also assume that you are in some way imposing on them. Some other examples would be to say, I dont want to bother you but or I was wondering if If you answered D, you used Off-Record indirect strategies. The main purpose is to take some of the pressure off of you. You are trying not to directly impose by asking for a pen. Instead you would instead it be offered to you once the teacher realizes you need one, and you ar e looking to sense one.In many ways, politeness is universal. It is resorted to by speakers of different languages as a means to an end and it is recognized as a norm in all societies. Despite its universality, the actual manifestations of politeness, the ways to realize politeness and the standards of astuteness differ in different cultures. On her thesis, Nguyen, T. L (2010) points out some aspects we should consider in order to achieve the goal of politeness as following The social background of the communicator. Generally, the more educated a man is, the more he angles to show his politeness to other people. The more he knows well-nigh the suitable ways to show politeness, the better he uses them to be polite to others. Besides, the personality of the communicator is also very important here. Good-tempered person prefers to use face-saving act enchantment bad-tempered person prefers face-threatening act when they come across the face-losing condition. The communicative circ umstances. Communication is a very alter process. In formal occasions, people race to use formal mirror images to show politeness, esp. between the new acquaintances. While in informal states, people feed to be casual to show intimacy even if it is in the very moment they meet. And that doesnt mean impoliteness. Look at the following exampleEx 1 A man came into a bar and said to the server Hi Buddy Gimme some whisky, would ya? Although theyve never met before, the man used very casual phrases to enclose their relationship. This is a usual way to show comity to strangers in similar entertaining places. The social distance. The social distance between speaker and hearer is one of the factors that instruct politeness behaviors. The notion of social distance refers to the consideration of the roles people are taking in relation to one another in a particular situation as well as how well they know each other, which means the percentage point of intimacy between interlocutors. How ever, there are still some exceptions. For example, people oft use family names to call their close friends, and when these people speak to each other, they will use direct offer or request. exactly sometimes they use very formal expressions in their speech. Look at the following example.Ex 2 Husband to his wife Would you be so kind as to hand the bread over to me?Surely we know that the wife has just quarreled with the husband and the husband is trying to amuse her in a certain way. The cultural differences. Different culture causes different views of values, which affects the criteria of politeness and leads to differences in various aspects.+Ways to greet each others and farewells.+ Ways to address terms.+ Ways to praise others.+ Ways to express conveys directness and indirectnessDirectness and indirectness are basic form of expression, which are universal in all languages and culture.Directness is a style of communication in which speaker want to get the straight forward to t he points. The speech interprets exactly and literally what the speaker said. The power of directness is the hearer does not remove to look for what the speaker might have mean by uttering such and such sentence. Everything in their interaction is expressed explicitly. Misunderstanding hardly occurs.Indirectness is any communicative behavior, literal or nonverbal that conveys something more than or different from what it literally means. In order to protect privacy, to minimize the im position on the hearer and to avoid the risk of losing face, there is a preference for indirectness on the part of the speaker to smooth the conversational interaction. For example when conveying the pragmatic meaning I want you to do it, the English make special effort to minimize and soften their imposition and show their respect for other peoples privacy. An illustration of this is when soulfulness says can you pass the salt? Here, they are not asking about your ability to pass the salt the lit eral meaning of the sentence but requesting you to pass the salt. This is very common in service encounters where can is often used to refer to something other than ability or permission.There are many socio-cultural factors affecting the directness or indirectness of utterances. Nguyen (1998) (as cited in Nguyen, T. M. P, p.13) proposes 12 factors that, in his view, may affect the choice of directness and indirectness in communication1. board the old tend to be more indirect than the young.2. Sex females prefer indirect expression.3. Residence the rural population tends to use more indirectness than the urban.4. modal value mend angry, people tend to use more indirectness.5. Occupation those who consider social sciences tend to use more indirectness than those who study natural sciences.6. reputation the extroverted tend to use more directness than the introverted.7. Topic while referring to a sensitive topic, a taboo, people usually opt for indirectness.8. deposit when at h ome, people tend to use more directness than when they are elsewhere.9. Communication environment/setting when in an informal climate, people tend to express themselves in a direct way.10. Social distance those who have closer relations tend to talk in a more direct way.11. Time pressure when in a hurry, people are likely to use direct expressions.12. Position when in a top-flight position, people tend to use more directness to their inferiors.These factors help to determine the strategies as well as the number of semantic patterne used when speakers perform the act of refusing.Comparison of refusal strategies in America and VietnameseBasing on the entropy collected from Nguyen, T. L (2010), I will focus on collar situations in which American and Vietnamese refuse the invitations from inviters who have higher, equal and lower status than theirs respectively.(1), (2), (3), (4) means position of the utterance is presented.When the guest is at a lower status.The components which a re typically found in Americans way of refusals when the invitee is at a lower status are (1) Gratitude/appreciation + (2) vindication/reasons/explanation + (3) Positive opinion. For example, when a student declines a professors invitation of having lunch with his/her family, he/she might answer as following give thanks you. I have already eaten. Its so nice of you to ask.(1) Gratitude + (2) tenableness + (3) Positive opinion2. Thank you but I just had lunch.(1) Gratitude + (2) close3. I just ate at the Indian restaurant down the street and I got a little indigestion, thank you though.(1) Reason + (2) GratitudeVietnamese native speakers tend to use the formula (1) Thank you + (2) Addressing term + (3) cracking for alternatives or a promise for future borrowing. For exampleCm n gio s, ki khc em s dng ba cng gia nh thy .(Thank you, professor. I will break with your family next time.)(1) Gratitude + (2) Addressing term + (3) Promise for future packance2. Cm n gio s, mi thy v g ia nh c dng ba t nhin .(Thank you, professor. Be yourself with you family.)(1) Gratitude + (2) Addressing term + (3) Alternaitves3. Em cm n thy, thy dng ba t nhin, em ngi ung nc tr i thy cng c .(Thank you, professor. Be yourself. I will drink some tea to wait for you.)(1) Gratitude + (2) Addressing term + (3) AlternativesAccording to the results above, both American and Vietnamese use expression of gratitude/appreciation in their refusals However, gratitude maybe in different orders (either at the branch or at the end of the utterance).One noticeable difference occurs in this component of refusal is that Vietnamese prefer offering a promise in the future to maintain the relationship between the professor and the student. Vietnamese speakers are somehow less likely to give a straightforward respond to decline the professors invitation. In contrast, Americans often say directly the reason why they cannot accept the invitation by saying I have eaten or I just had lunch. Besides, Ameri cans only use their popular addressing term you and I while Vietnamese tend to use many addressing terms such as Professor or Mr. in the conversation between the professor and the students.When the invitee is at an equal status.The second case involves the speaker refusing an inviter who has equal position with him/her. When refusing a classmates invitation, American normally use this formula (1) trouble/ ease + (2) Offer of alternatives or a promise for the future acceptation. For instanceIm sincerely sorry. I have another commitment. I am generally available. after part we set it up for another time?(1) Regret + (2) Reason + (3) Offer an alternative2. What a pity. I already have plans. Please let me know the next time you go and I would love to come along.(1) Regret + (2) Reason + (3) Promise for future acceptanceMeanwhile Vietnamese semantic formula is (1) A promise for the future acceptance/ an offer of alternative + (2) reasons as following ln sau nh, ln ny mnh bn mt ri. ng ch?(Perhaps next time, Im busy now. All right?)(1) Promise for the future acceptance + (2) Reason2. ba khc c khng? Hm nay mnh mc hc ri.(Can we set it up for another time? I have to study today.)(1) An offer of alternative + (2) ReasonThese examples show that both Americans and Vietnamese rarely say no directly to their friends even though they are in equal status. Mostly, Americans use distress like Im sorry/what a pity to lettuce their refusal. This style is culturally and socially important and appropriate in America. In contrast, Vietnamese may feel that it is less necessary to express their regret due to the familiarity and close social distance. It reflects traditional thinking of Vietnamese that in close relationship, people should be open, friendly and informal with each other. Although both two groups tend to use the excuse and reason to soften their refusal, there is slightly different in the order between Americans and Vietnamese. Whereas Vietnamese people offer alter natives or promise for the future acceptance before talent their excuse as a way to reduce threatening face of inviter, Americans use excuse first and follow other alternatives in the future.When the invitee is at an upper status.In the last situation, the speaker, who is at a high social status, declines an invitation to go to the spa with the staff.American speakers refuse this kind of invitation by saying patterns like (1) regret + (2) reason/excuse/explanation. For exampleSorry, Ive make plans.(1) Regret + (2) Reason (subjective reason)2. That sounds lovely. But I have far too much to work right now. Thank for inviting me.(1) Positive opinion + (2) Reason (subjective reason) + (3) GratitudeVietnameses responses are more complicated and detailed. The usual formula is (1) Gratitude + (2) ReasonCm n cu nhng mnh khng i c. Mnh khng mun cc nhn vin khc hiu nhm. Thng cm cho mnh nh.(Thanks, but I cant go with you. Im afraid to be misunderstood by other staffs. Sympathize with me)(1) Grat itude + (2) Reason (objective reason) + (3) Sympathy)2. Cm n cu rt nhiu nhng cui tun ny mnh phi tham d m ci ca a bn mt ri.(Thank you so much but Im going to attend one of my friends wedding at the weekend.)(1) Gratitude + (2) Reason (objective reason)Once again, regrets are prospered by Americans when refusing an invitation. Vietnamese, however, produce many thanks as gratitude first and state reasons later. In this case, although Vietnamese bosses are at higher status than invitees, nearly of them say thank you to their staff in order to appreciate their staffs good will. There is a striking difference between American and Vietnamese speakers when giving reasons for their refusals. Americans often give their subjective reasons like Im so busy, Ive make my plan to inform the inviter that they cant go. Because one of American culture values is to respect individual freedom. Therefore, if the invitees give their own personal reasons, the inviter will accept their refusals and are no t curious about real reasons anymore. Meanwhile, Vietnamese tend to use objective reasons to soften the face threatening act of the refusals. determinationAmerica and Vietnam are two countries with different linguistic and cultural features. However, in cross-culture linguistic, beside the differences due to socio-norm dissimilarities these two countries still have something in common. When taking strategies in refusing an invitation into consideration, we can find out main similarities and differences as followingSimilarities When refusing an invitation, American and Vietnamese speakers usually use indirect strategy with most communication partners. Both of them avoid saying no directly to their interlocutors whether they are at high, low or equal status. The common tendency is that Americans and Vietnamese give a variety of reason to avoid losing their inviters faces.Differences Americans produce much more expression of regrets and reasons to refuse invitations. Typically, regret s often follow reasons in an utterance of refusals. Americans tend to give their subjective reasons in most cases. Vietnamese counterparts are fond of offering alternatives or a promise for acceptance in the future to make the inviter feel released. They also try to give the interlocutors the objective reasons to soften the face threatening act.Teaching implicationsThe results of this thesis lay out that refusing in general and refusing an invitation to be specific is a complex job because it requires the high level of communicative competence. In order to avoid pragmatic failure, speakers need to understand fully both socio-cultural strategies used by most native speakers and the rules for their appropriate implementation. Therefore, I have some following commandment recommendations for L2 teachers Prepare authentic materials for learners because learning a second language also means learning a second culture. Students should have a peril to get familiar with materials that are closely related to the daily activities of the province of the language they are learning. Teach language forms and functions parallel and contextually in both formal and informal situations in order to develop the learners sociolinguistic ability in an L2. Encourage students to perform different speech acts in an L2 in different situations of social status, social distance, and with reference to the gender relation between the speakers and interlocutors. Organize activities that students can have chances to communicate with both native and non-native speakers of English.