Luận văn a study of politness strategies in the conversational activities of the course book market leader intermediate

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOL UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES, NGUYEN TIT LA A STUDY OF POLITENESS STRATEGIES IN THE CONVERSATI

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOL

UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES,

NGUYEN TIT LA

A STUDY OF POLITENESS STRATEGIES IN THE CONVERSATIONAL ACTIVITIES OF THE COLRSE BOOK

“MARKET LEADER, INTERMEDIATE (NEW EDITION)

Nghiên cứu các chiến lược lịch sự được sử đựng trong các bài hội thoại của

giáo trình tiếng Ảnh thương mại “MARKET LẺADER, INTERMEDIATE"

(Tái bản)

MLA MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS

Field: English Linguistics Code: 60.22.02.01

Hanoi, 2014

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOL

UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND ENTERNATEONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES,

NGUYEN THI LA

A STUDY OF POLITENESS STRATEGIES IN THE CONVERSATIONAL ACTIVITIES OF THE COURSE BOOK

“MARKET LEADER, INTERMEDIATE (NEW EDITION)

Nghién cin cae chign lege lich sw được sử dựng trong các bái hội thoại của

giáo trình tiếng Anh thuong mai “MARKET LEADER, INTERMEDIATE”

(Tai ban)

M.A MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS

Field: English Linguistics

Code: 60.22.02.01

Supervisor: Dr Kiều Thị Thu Hương

Hanoi, 2014

DECLARATION

Thereby, vertify the thesis named “A study of politeness strafegics in the conversational

activities of the course book “Market Leader, Imermediate” (New edition)” is the result of

my own work for the Minor Degree of Master of Arts at University of Languages and

Trlermalional Studies, Vicinam National University, Hanoi The research has not been

submitted for any degree at any other universities or institutions I agree that the origin of

February, 2014

Nguyễn Thị Là

portrission lo carry oul and complele lltis MLA thesis and lo use (he Department’

Secondly, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my supervisor, Dr Kiéu Thi Thu

Huomg, Vice-Dean of the English Faculty - Diplomatic Academy of Vietnam for ber

valuable comments, endless encouragement, kind guidance and correction

T also wish to acknowledge all the lecturers at the Post Graduate Department, University of Languages and International Studies whose lectures have enriched iny knowledge in many fields of linguistics as well as of daily life They are Prof Dr lloang Van Van, Prof Dr Lé

Hug Tién, Asoc Prof Dr V6 Dai Quang, Dr Lé Van Canh, Dr Nguyễn Huy Kỷ, Dr Ngồ Hữu Hoàng, Dr Ha Cam ‘Tam, Dr Huynh Anh Tuần

My sincere thanks go to say colleagues and friends at Hanoi University of Business and

Technology, who have constantly assisted me in completing the research:

Finally, I would not have been able to complete this work without the wholc-hearted

support and endless encouragement from my husband, our parents and our son

ABSTRACT

When people from different cullures using different languages communuicale to each other,

there exists the possibility of miscommunication In order to avoid misunderstanding and

culture shock, learners of foreign languages especially of English should know how to

behave properly in cach certain siluation Reing considered one of the key factors of successful cross-culture communication, politeness strategies are commonly used in daily

social interactions Therefore, the author conducts this study with the aims of invesligating

politeness strategies in conversational activities of the course book “Market Leader, Intermediate” (New edition) Her attempt is to help students at Hanoi University of

Business and Technology achieve success in communication in their future work

In the coursebook “Market Leader, Intermediate” most of conversational activities are

disoussed and analysed mainly on politeness theories of Brown & Levinson and Nguyen Quang The research shows that the frequencies of politeness stratogics occurance in conversational activities of the material are not always the same The findings show that

negative politeness strategies are employed more frequently than positive politeness, bald- on-record and off-rccord strategy Most politeness strategies are used in such conversational activities as making disagreements, agreements and requests

Tn addition, the author also suggests some recommendations thal might work in the Vietnamese context to improve the teaching and learning of verbal communication for students at [anoi University of Business and Technology.

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES

ABBREVIATIONS AND CONVENTIONS

6 Design of the study

PART LU: DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER I: LITERATURE REVIEW

1.1, Speech Acts

1.1.1 Speech Acts and Speech Events

1.1.2 Classification of Speech Acts

1.1.2.4 Function-based Appraach

1.1.2.2 Structural-function Based Approach

1.2 Politeness theory

1 2 1, Notions of politemess theory

1.2.2 Conversational-maxim View on Politeness

1.2.3.1 The Concept of Face - - - 13

1.3 Previous study THÍ KH HH 1H HH gi tH ưêg 28 CTIAPTER I: POLITENESS STRATEGIES IN CONVERSATIONAL ACTIVITIES

OF THE COURSEBOOK “MARKET LEADER, INTERMEDIATE? .25

2.1 Mcthodology chen hhhehererimierieoi.e

2.1.2 Rescarch techmiques .ccccesee susie essen sereenssnnesaeniss essen eo

2.1.2.3 Steps for Data Analysis cscs esses esses esmiesieseenesseeieeseess eerste SO

2.2.5, Off-record Strategy in Conversational Activities of

“Market Leader, Intermediate” 0 csccsssssseessessieeinstnsnstintinicesntene ence SS

CHAPTER 3: IMPLICATIONS FOR POLITENESS STRATEGIES IN TEACHING ENGLISH AS A FOREIGN LANGUAGE AT HANOI UNIVERSITY OF BUSINESS

PART II: CONCLUSION

3.3, Suggestions for further study - - eee AB

APPENDIX

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

TABLES

Table 1, The five general ftmctions of speech acts

Table 2: The frequency of occurrence of politeness strategies in conversational

achivitics of the course book “Market Leader, Tricrmediale” 2

‘Table 3 ‘The frequency of politeness strategies in terms of functions of utterance .28 Table 1: Frequency of occurrence of positive politeness strategies in

conversations ofMarkct Leader, Intermediate”

‘Table 5: frequency of occurrence of negative politeness strategies in

FIGURES

Figure 1: Circumstances determining choice of strategies 15

tipure 2: Siratepies to minimize risk o losing fae o0 +~.158

Figure 3: The frequency of occurrence of politeness strategies in conversational

aclivities of the course book “Market Leader, Intermediate”

Vigure 4: ‘The frequency of bald-on-request strategy in terms of

Figure 5: The frequency of positive politeness strategies in terms of

Figure 6: Frequency of occurrence of positive politeness stralegies

in conversations of “Market Leader, Intermediate” so

Figure 7: The frequency of negative politeness strategies in terms of

Figure 8: Frequency of ocourrence of negative politeness strategies

vũ

ABBREVIATIONS AND CONVENTIONS

viii

PART I: INTRODUCTION

L Rationale

Tw the age of international communication, more and more people from different cultures

and backgrounds have teamed up to exchange all kinds of information ‘Lherefore, there is

a great demand for a complete mutual understanding among parties Interlocutors must

have nol only # good language compotenee bul alsa proper cornrmumicalien competence Th

such a situation, English has been chosen as the main foreign language in the syllabuses of

most schools, colleges, universities and educational institutes throughout Vietnam And the

number of people learning English for various purposes such as jobs, business, travelling is

continually increasing every day

However, the traditional teaching method with emphasis on leaching grammar rules and

structures cammot offer students much help in acquiring successful cross-cultural communication skills his is completely true for those whose major is Linglish for

business The reason is that students may confront with difficulties in achieving

contextual, situational and cultural appropriateness in communication As a result, cultural shock and communication breakdown might happen in communication even though the

students are very good at grammar For that reason, it is necessary for them to learn not

only linguistic knowledge and interactional skills but also knowledge of the target culture

‘They must be aware of their own culture and English speaking cultures as well, especially

the hidden parts of culture including face, Casework and politeness beuause politeness is

really a vital part of all social interactions

For those reasons, the author of this study aims at investigating and emphasizing the

important role of polileness slralogics in the conversational avtivilies of the course book

“Market Leader, Intermediate” by David Cotton, David Falvey and Simon Kent so as to

improve the teaching and learning of verbal communication in English for the second —

year sludenis al Hanoi Universily off Business and Technology

2 Objectives of the study:

The objectives of the study are:

- To study bald-on-record politeness strategies, on-record strategies and off-record

strategies in mosl typical contextual environments m1 the contversalioral activities of the

course book “Market Leader, Intermediate”

- To put forward some suggestions for efficient ways of teaching the course book

3 Research questions

1) What politeness strategies are used in the conversational actwities of the caurse

book “Market Leader, Intermediate”?

2) Which politeness strategy is the most commonly used?

4, Scope of the study

Although there are a lol of important issues im pragmatics, this thesis only focuses on politeness strategies particularly expressed in conversational activities of the course book

“Market Leader, Intermediate” The investigation is based mainly on the theoretical

framework suggested by Brown and Levinson [(1978)1 987 |

5 Methodology:

‘The major methods that the author has emplayed are quantitative and qualitative That is to

say, all the considerations and conclusions are based on the analysis of the data from the book within the theoretical politeness framework by Brown and Levinson 1n addition, the

following sources are also used

- Reference Lo publication,

- Discussion with the supervisor,

- Discussion with the colleagues,

- Personal observations

6 Design of the study

The study is divided into three parts:

Part I: Introduction

‘This part includes the rationale, objectives, research questions, scope, methodology and

design of the study

Part II: Development

‘Lhis part covers three chapters:

Chapter J: Literature review which focuses on the [hcorctical background of speach acts, classification of speech acts, politeness theory

Chapter HU: Politeness strategics in conversational activitics of the coursebook

“Market leader, Intermediate” This

wapler analyses four types of politeness siralegies

found in the conversational activities in fourteen units of the course book “Market Leader,

Intermediate” The strategies are expressed in three most common types of speech acts

disagreement, agreemint and request.

Chapter TH: Implications for politeness strategies in teaching English as a foreign

language at Hanoi University of Business and Technofogy This chapter presents some

advice for Leachers to teach the coursebook effectively

Part DL Conclusion which summarizes the main findings, mentions the limitations of the

study and give some suggestions for further study.

PART II: DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER I: LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapler provides the theorelical framework in which the study is carmed oul TL

inchides three main sections Section 1 reviews the notions of speech act theory in which the author mentions some types of classifications of speech acts In section 2 she demonstrales politeness theory with view points of some [anus Hngunsts such as: Grice, Lakoff, Leech, Brown and Levinson However, the study mainly bases on the politeness

theory proposed by Brown and Levinson and Nguyen Quang The last section reviews

some recent sludics related to politeness slrategies

1.1 Speech Acts

1.1.1 Speech Acts and Speech Events

Speech acts, as introduced by Oxford philosopher Austin (1962) and further developed by American philosopher Searle (1976), consider the types of acts that utterances can be said

to perform In Oxford dictionary speech act is defined as “an utterance considered as an action, particularly with regard to its intention, purpose, or effect” In other words, people use grammatical and lexical units not only to produce utterances to convey information,

but also to implicate something

"We nse the term speech act to desoribe actions such as ‘requesting,’ ‘commanding,’ ‘questioning,'

or informing.’ We ean define a spoceh ae as the action performed by a speaker with an ullerance

If you say, IV be there af six, you are not just speaking, you seem to be performing the speech act

of promising"

(Yule, 2006:45 )

A speech act might contain just one word, as in "Sorry!" to perform an apology, or several words or sentences: "I’m sory I forgot your birlhday I just lot il slip my mind.” Speech acts include real-life interactions and require not only knowledge of the language but also

appropriate use of thal language within a given culture Let’s Inok al the followmy

example to see what action is performed via the utterance

It’s hot in here

Tw lorms of grammatical structure, this senlence is a statement which provides the

information about the atmosphere right at the place where the utterance is made, However,

by saying this, the speaker also wants to do an action towards the hearer It might be a

request to ask him/ her to open the window or tum on the air-conditioner With that

purpose, this utterance can be considered a request rather than a statement itself, Here are some other examples of speech acts we use or hear every day:

Greeling: "Hi, Fric How are things going?"

Request: "Could you pass me the mashed potatoes, please?"

Complaint: "I’ve already been waiting three weeks for the computer, and I was told it

would be delivered within a week.”

Invitation: “We're having some people over Saturday evening and wanted to know if you'd like to join us."

Compliment: "Hey, I really like pour tie!"

Refusal: "Oh, I'd love to see that movie with you but this Friday Just isn’t going to

work."

The speaker is expected to corcetly mtorpret the speaker's intention via the process of”

inferences Therefore, the hearer needs to take all the circumstances suurounding the

conversation because they can make a lot of help in inferring the hidden intention People call those cireunslances speech events According to Yule (1996:87), a spooch event can

be considered as “an activity in which conversational participants interact via language in

@ conventional way to achieve some outcome”

Tn the very influential book writlen in 1962, Austin claimed that specch acls can be

analysed on three levels

* A loculianary acl: is the performance of an actual ullerance ancl its ostensible meaning,

comprising phonetic and phatic acts

Lg: “the door is here!”

* An illoculionary act: is closcly cormecled with the speaker's inlerion such as stating,

questioning, promising, giving commands, threatening and many others locutionary acts are considered the core of the theary of speech acts Basically, illooutionary act indicates

how the whole utlerance is to be laken ine the conversation Sometimes if is nol cagy Lo

determine what kind of illocutionary act the speaker performs ‘herefore, in order to correctly decode the illocutionary act performed by the speaker, it is also necessary for the

hearer to be acquainted with the context where the speech acl occurs

Let’s analyse the example: “tHe door is here” his siraple declarative sentence oan be interpreted in at least two ways It can be either understood literally as a reply to the

indirect request to ask somebody to leave Obviously, the sentence contains a “force” which is known as its #locutionary force The sentence has thus got two illoautionary

forces: direcl speech act and indirect speech act

* Perlocutionary act: Pcrlocutionary acts can be described in terms of the level of ther

psychological consequences, often performing an act by saying something such as persuading, convincing, scaring, enlightening, inspiring, or ofhorwise gelting someone Lo

do or realize something,

E.g: Would you open the door?

The act is successful if the hearer recognizes thal he should open the door As a

perlocutionary act it succeeds only if the hearer actually opens the door

As another example, consider the following utterance: "By the way, I have a CD of Westlife; would you like to borrow it?" Its illocutionary function is an offer, while its intended perlocutionary effect might be to impress the listener, or to show a friendly attitude, or to encourage an interest in a particular type of music

Ta conclusion, there are three avis or dimensions expressed via an atterarec: locution,

illocution and perlocution, in which illocutionary act is the main focus of speech act

theory

£.1.2 Classification of Speech Acis

1.1.2.1 Function-based Approach

According lo Searl (1976-10-16) and Yule (1996:53), there are five calegories or five

types of goneral functions performed by specch acts: declarations, representatives,

expressives, directives and commissives

© Declarations: “are those kinds of speech acts that change the world via their utierance” (Yule, 1996:53) The speaker brings about some state of affairs by virtue

of the ullerance itself The performance of the act brings about a change in the

world ‘this class includes declarations such as baptisms, pronouncing someone

guilty or pronouncing someone husband and wife

Rg: Priest: I now pronounce you husband and wife

» Representatives: these speech acts presents a state of affairs The speaker's

unftention is to make lus words fit the world

Bp: ftwas a warm sunny day

« Expressives: are the speech acts which express certain psychological states or what

the speaker (ects such ax: pleasure, pain, likes, dislikes, etc

Hạ: J like fish and chips

© Directives: are the specch acts which the speaker uses to gel the hearer to carry oul

a future course of action This class consists of requests, commands and advice, etc

Fg: Could you lend me some money, please?

© Commissives: are the speech acts in which the speaker becomes committed to

doing some future action, ¢.g promises, guarantees, oaths, ote

Lig: 1’H give it back to you tomorrow

Following Searl’s classification of speech acts, Yule (1996:56) summarizes the five

general (unclioms of specch acis with their key [features in a lable:

X= situation Declarations words change the world S causes X

Representatives make words fit the world S believes X

Expressivcs, take words [it the world S feels X

Directives make the world fit words S$ wants X

Commissives make the world fit words —_S intends X

Table 1: The five general functions of speech acts (following Searl 1979) 1.1.2.2 Structural-function Based Approach

Another approach to distinguish types of speech acts bases on the structure of an utterance

In English, there are three main types of sentence structures: declarative, interrogative and

imperative According to Yule (1996:55), however, “whenever there is a direct

relationship between a structure and a function, we have a direct speech act Whenever

there is an indirect relanonship between a structure and a function, we have an indirect

speech act” ‘Therefore, there are two types of speech acts: direct speech act and indirect

speech act Let's consider the following examples to understand more about direct and

indirect speech acl

(a) Can you open the window?

In terms of structure, this sentence is an interrogative However, the speaker's intention is not to ask about the hwarer’s ability of opening the window He/ She wants to request (he hearer to open the window Normally, people use an imperative not an interrogative to

make a command or request Obviously, the relationship between the structure and function of this sentence is indirect and thus we have an indirect speech act

Having the same meaning and function bul the idea in (a) is expressed in the form of an imperative as in (b) Thus, the relationship between the function and structure 1s direct so that (b) is a direct speech act

(B) Open the window

In conclusion, in indirect speech acts the speaker means more than or other than what is said, Indirect speech acts are said to be more polite than direct speech acts when they come

to perfonn specch acts hike requesting, commanding, refusing, disagreeing and so on

1 2 Politeness theory

1 2 1 Notions of politeness theory

In daily conversations and in most social interactions, people always try to choose appropriate ways of uttering to fit themselves with the situations ‘I'he ultimate aim of this action is ta establish or maintain a good relationship towards their interactional partner The use of language io behave accordingly is called politeness Poliloness has becn considered as a pragmatic phenomenon, requiring a great deal of researches to improve

human interaction and therefore reinforce the study of language in its social context

Although the essence of politeness is popular in all cultures, il is exprossed differently in

different cultures It is also a culturally defined phenomenon, and what is considered polite

mone cullure can be in many cases quile rude or simply strange in another Tn language

study, politoness is defined in Wikipedia as the practical application of good manners or etiquette And it is “the interactional balance achieved between two needs: the need for

pragmatic clarity and the need lo avoid coerciveness” (Blim-Kulka, 1987-131)

Meanwhile, in terms of cultural aspect, “Politeness is the ability to please others through

one’s external actions” (Watt, 2003:39) According to Lhomas, “politeness is interpreted

as a strategy (or series of strategies) employed by a speaker to achieve a variely of goals,

such as promoting or maintaining harmonious relation.” (Thomas, 1995:157) Sharing the

same view, Yule (1996:60) claimed that politeness is “a fired concept, as in the idea of

“polite social hehavior” or “etiquette, within a culture””

in Vietnamese language, the word “lich sy” has the closest meaning to “polite” in linglish

It means “having elegant manners and observing property in conformity with social rules

and expectations im interactions” (Hoang Phe et al (1988), translated by Nguyorr Duc

Hoai, 1995) V T, 1 Huong (2000:148) assumes that “lich sy” contains “Ié phép”, “ding mue”, “khéo Iéo”, “tế nhi”, which are interwoven but not correspondent

1.2.2 Conversational-maxim View on Politeness

1.2.2.L Grice's Principle

Paul Grice is the first linguist who introduced Cooperative Principle (CP) in the article

“Logic and Conversation” (1975) The CP runs as [ollow

Make your conversational contribution such as is required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the

accepted purpose or direction of talk cxchange in which you are cngaged

(Grice, 1975:45)

According to this view, in ordinary conversations speakers and hearers share a cooperative principle In other words, speakers shape their utterances to be understood by hearers The

principle can be explained by four rules or maxims, which are called Grice’s maxims or

Gricean maxims ‘They are maxims of quality, quantity, relevance and manner

> — Maxim af Quality: Be wuthful

1 Don’ Lsay what you believe to be false

2 Don’t say what you lack adequate evidence for

> Maxim of Quantity

Make your contribulion as informative as required

t9 Don’t make your contribution more informative than is required

> Maxim af Relation: Re relevant

Grice believed in universal application of the CP However, researches into other

languages and cultures have proved that different languages and cultures have different ways of conveying and inferring information In such oases, instead of observing the CP,

people violate the maxims As a sequence, the hearer must have a suitable interpretation for the ullcrance

Let's look at the following example to see what maxim is violated and what the hearer has

to infer from the answer

A: Is Jill good at singing?

B: She's a great dancer

Obviously, when asking the question “Is Jill good at singing?” A expects B to answer

“Yes” or “No” Bub instead of saying thal, B gives ivelevant information Thus, in this

case A has to infer the hidden idea B wants to convey that is she’s not good at singing

Here the irrelevant information shows that the Relation maxim is flouted but B politely

expresses his assessmonl loward Jill's singing ability without making a bad impression Cor

A about Jill

1.2.2.2 Lakoft’s rules

Making Gricoan maxims more concrete, Lakoll proposed three rules of Pragmatic Competence or Sub-maxim or sub-rules Lakoff’s theory of politeness suggests that people

follow a certain set of rules when they interact with each other, which prevent interaction

from breaking down The purpose of the mules is to make the hearer “feel good” Below are three Lakoff’s rules of politeness:

> Rule 1: Don’t impose

(used when fonnal/ impersonal politeness is requires)

This rule means avoiding reference to personal problems, habits, taboo topics and the like

The speaker should always remember to keep appropriate distance from audience

» Rule 2: Give opinions

(used when informal politeness is required)

This rule means expressing oneself in such a way [hal one’s opinion or requesl can he

ignored without being rejected In other words, speaker should utter mm such a way that it allows the hearer’s response

> Rule 3: Make A feel good

This rule means maintaining equality between interactants in conversation The speaker should always respect the hearer’s personal habits, strengths, weaknesses and so on

Ta general, the rules sccm to be suitable io Western notions of politeness, which

emphasizes non-imposition and freedom of actions ‘Therefore, they are difficult to be

considered universal niles of politeness because the notions of politeness in Eastern

cultures seem lo be more complex

12.2.3 Leech’s Maxims

Leech’s theory approaches politeness from a more pragmatic perspective He began by

establishing two pragmatic systems: pragmalinguistics and sociopragmatics (1980(1977)

10

and 1983) Accordingly, Politeness Principle (PP) is “minimizing fother things being

equal) the expression of impolite beliefs”, and there is a corresponding, positive version:

“maximizing (olher things being equal) the expression of polite beliefs" which is

somewhat less important

Politeness principle proposes how to produce and understand language based on politeness The purpose of PP is lo establish feolmg of communily and social relationship

‘Thus, PP focuses on process of interpretation that the center of the study is on the effect of the hearer rather than the speaker

There are six maxims of the politeness principle that are used to explain relationship between sense and force in daily conversation, those are

»> Tact Maxim: minimize cost to other and maximize benefit to other

Eg: “Won't you sit down?”

‘This utterance is spoken to ask the hearer sitting down ‘Ihe speaker uses indirect utterance

to be mare polite and minimizing cost to the hearer This utterance implies that sitting

down is bene! to the hearer

» Generosity Maxim: minimize benefit to self and maximize cost to self

This maxim is centered to self, while the tact maxim is to other The example will be

illustrated as [olksws:

“You must come and dinner with us."

Te is an advice that is evolved in directive iloculionary act In this case the speaker implies

that cost of the utterance is to himself Meanwhile, the utterance implics that benefit is for the hearer

> Apprebatian Maxim: minimize dispraise of other and maximizing praise of other

This maxim instructs to avoid saying unpleasant things about others and especially about

the hearer

For example

A: “The performance was great!”

B: “Yes, wasn’t itl”

Tn the example, A gives a good comment about the performance He says the pleasant

thing about the hearer ‘I'his expression is a congratulation utterance that maximizes praise

of the hearer Thus this utterance is included the approbation maxim

> Mndesty Maxim: minimize praise of self and maximize dispraise of self

‘This maxim is applied in assertives/ representatives and expressives like the approbation maxim Both the approbation maxim and the modesty maxim concern to the degree of

good or bad evaluation of other or sell However, the approbation maxim is exampled by

courtesy of congratulation On other hand, the modesty maxim usually occurs in apologies

‘The sample of the modesty maxim is below

“Please accept this small gift as prize of your achievement."

In this case, the utterance above is categorized as the modesty maxim because the speaker maximizes dispraise of himself The speaker notices his utterance by using “small gift”

> Agreement Maxim: maximive agrecment between self and olher people and minimize disagreement between self’ and other

The disagreement, in this maxim, nsually is expressed by regret or partial agreement This maxim occurs in asscrtives/ representatives illocutionary act There example will be

illustrated below

ds “English is a difficult language ta learn.”

B: “True, but the grammar is quile easy.”

From the example, B actually does not agree that all part of English language difficult to

leam He does not express his disagreement strongly to be more polite The polite answer

wall influence the effect of the hearer Tn this case, B’s answer mirimize his disagreement

using partial agreement, “true, but ”

> Sympathy Maxim: minimize anlipalby between self and other and maximize

sympathy between self’ and other In this case, the achicvement being reached by other

must be congratulated On other hand, the calamity happens to other, must be given

sympathy or condolences This maxim is applicable in asscrlives/represcnlalives The

example is as follows

“’m terribly sorry to hear about your father.”

Tt is a condolence expression which is expressed lhe sympalhy for misfortune This

utterance is uttered when the hearer gets calamity of father’s died or sick ‘his expression shows the solidarity between the speaker and the hearer

Tw spile of the fact Lal Leech’s maxims make it easier for us to compare and explain cross-

cultural differences in understanding politeness and the use of politeness strategies, they

cannot cover contextual factors such as role of participants, setting and sex Moreover, they seem lo be best applied in Anglo-American cultures where social distance is valued

12

1.2.3 Face-management View on Politeness

12.3.1 The Concept of Face

This approach was put forward by Brown and Levinson (1978, 1987) The central of their

politoness theory focus on the notion of “Face” which was first proposed by Goffman (1967) According to them, “Face” can be understood as the “public self-image” of each person which might be damaged, maintained or enhanced in conversalion “Hi refers to that emotional and social sense of self that everyone has and expects everyone else to

recognize” (Yule, 1996: 60)

Face consists of two aspeots: positive face and negative face Positive face is defined by

Brown and Levinson (1987:60) as “the individual desire that her’ his wants be

appreciated and approved of in social interaction” Yule (1996:62) made it clearer when saying, “Positive face is the need to be accepted, even liked, by others, to be treated as a member of the same group, and to know that his or her wants are shared by others” In short, it is the want to be accepted as a member of the same group

Posilive face is threatened when the speaker or hearer does not care about their mleractor’s

feelings, wants, or does not want what the other wants Positive face threatening acts can

also cause damage to the speaker or the hearer When an individual is forced to be

separated [rom others so that their well-being is treated less importantly, positive face is threatened For example: damages to hearers can be expressions of disapproval (e.g

iusulls, accusations, and complaints) contradictions, disagreements, and damages lo

spoakors can be acceptance of a compliment or confessions

Negative face, on the other hand, is defined as “the desire for freedom of action and

freedom from imposition” (Brown and Levinson, 1987:112) or “ihe need to be

independent” (Yule, 1996:62) It is the want to be separate from a group

Negative face is threatened when an individual does not avoid or intend to avoid the obstruchon of them mierlocutor's freedom of aclion Tl can cause damage to cither the speaker or the hearer, and makes the one of the interlocutors submit thei will to the other

Freedom of choice and action is impeded when negative face is threatened Tor examples:

damages to hearers can be orders, requests, suggestions, advice, remindings, threats,

offers, and promises; and damages to speakers can be excuses or apologies

In English-speaking context, people tend to mark their social distance by using address

form in conversations The reason is because they expect their public self-image or face

wants to be respected Whenever there is an action which threats the hearer’s self-image, the speaker is said to perform a face threatening act (FTA) For example

A: He's a very generous man

B: No, Liotally disagree with you He cares a lot about what he gives others

In this situation, B strongly expresses his disagreement with a very direct way Thus, he’s aaid lo be performing a FTA

In order to avoid FTA in communication, interlocutors should choose appropriate ways to lessen negative impacts of utterances towards their hearer If they can do so, they are

su

fully performing @ face saving act (FSA)

Brown and Levinson worked on how to reduce K'I'As by setting some strategies which are very influential and well-known in politeness studies

1.2.3.2 Strategies for FSAs

In Brown and Levinson’s Politeness Strategies, the concept of “face” is the central part of their theory A set of possible strategies to minimize risk of losing face is suggested by these Lwo authors The choice of the strategies will be performed on the basic of the speaker's assessment of the size of the face threatening acts (FTAs) The following figure shows circumstances determining choice of the strategies

Do the FIA | 'WIh redresslve action |

Figure 1: Circumstances determining choice of strategies

(Brown and Levinson, 1987:60)

Tn spile of his high appreciation of the above charL, Nguyen Quang (2001) has some

comments on its universal value, especially on the sorting numbers two and three for

positive and negative politeness He proposed the following figure:

Figure 2; Strategies to minimize risk of losing face ‘Nguyen Quang, 2001)

It is easily seen from the figure that the speaker has to choose whether to do the KIA or not If he/ she decides to do the FTA, there are four possibilities: three sets of on-record stralegies im which they produce the FTA without any redress action (bald-orerecord),

produce the F with positive politeness and produce the ¥'I'A with negative politeness; and one set of off-record strategies If the risk of the PTA is too strong, the speaker can

choose nol lo do it

> Bald-on-record strategy: this is a direct way of uttering when the speaker wants to

say exactly what he/ she means It is “the most direct approach, using imperative

Jorms The other person is directly asked for something” (Yule, 1996: 63) For example:

- Raise your hand!

- — Helpt

This stralegy is mostly used in emergencies, mililary or intimate conlexls where the

speaker has a higher status or power than the hearer Sometimes, people can use some

15

mnifigating devices such as: please, would you, could you, etc to soften the demand However, in daily interaction between social equals, bald-on-record behavior would threat

the hearer’s face and should be avoided Communicators should utler in ways thal save

other’s face Brown and Levinson suggested them to use positive politeness strategies and

negative politeness strategies

> Positive politeness strategy:

Positive politeness is used to satisfy the speaker’s positive face It is an attempt by a

speaker to treat the listener as a friend or as someone to be included in the discourse In terms of definition of positive politeness, Nguyen Quang (2002) states thal “positive politeness is any communicative act (verbal and/or non-verbal) which is intentionally and appropriately meant to show the speaker's concern to the hearer, tus enhancing the sense

of solidarity between them” According to Yule (1996.64), a positive politeness strategy

“leads the requester to inquire for a common goal, and even friendship” Tbe tendency to use positive politeness is to emphasize closeness between speaker and hearer It can be scout as a “solidarity sirategy” This stralogy is usually used by people who have known one another in order to indicate common ground and solidarity in which speaker shares

hearer’s wants Thus, the usage of positive politeness is not only to redress the FTA, but

also lo indicale thal speaker wanls to come claser to hearer

Viewing, that the Vietnamese always want to let others know that they pay attention to other’s problems and give help whenever il is needed, Nguyen Quang (2003) xuggesls seventeen positive politeness strategics, of which the initial fifteen ones are adopted originally by Brown & Levinson, they are as follows:

* Strategy 1- Notice, alfend ta H (her/his interest, wants, needs, pods, ele )

This strategy suggests that S should take notice of aspects of H's conditions

lig

- Your coat is very nice Where did you get it?

- Ai chà chà! Hôm nay nhân dịp gi mà diện 66 cit dep thé A này, có tiền cha lở vay

năm chục? (IWew, hơu smart you look today! What occasion? By the way, can I borrow 50,000 VND, if'you have?)

* Strategy 2— Exaggerate (interest, approval, sympathy with H)

This is often done with exaggerated intonation, stress, and other aspects of prosodic

Eg

- What a fantastic garden you have!

- My God Your writing? It's really fantastic!

* Strategy 3 - Intensify interest to H in S's contribution

S intensifies the interest of his or her own contribution, by “making a good story” and draws H as a participant mto the conversation with direct questions and expressions like you know, see what

Eg:

-L come into his room, and what do you think 1 see? a huge mess all over the place

and right in the middle, a naked

- I dropped in her house, and you know what I see? A huge mess over the living

room, the clothes are scattered over the room, and

* Strategy 4 - Use in-group identity markers

Using any of the innumerable ways to convey in- group membership: address forms,

language or dialect, jargon or slang and ellipses

Eg: -Ileh, mate, can you lend me a dollar?

- Here's my old mate, Fred How are you diving today, mule? Could you give ux a

hand to get this car to start?

-Ta di chit anh ban (Shall we go, mate?)

* Stratepy 5

$ seeks ways in which it is possible to agree with H

Seek agreement in safe Lopics

Eg: A: “She had an accident last week

B: Oh my God, an accident”

* Strategy 6 - Avoid disagreement

The desive to agree or appear lo agree wilh H leads also to mechanisms for pretending

to agree such as white lics and hedges

Lig.: Well, ina way, J suppose you're sort of right But look at it like this

* Strategy 7—Presuppose, raise, assert common ground

‘The value of 3’s spending time and effort on being with H, as a mark of friendship or interest in him, by talking for a while about unrelated topics

Eg

- People like you and me, Bill, don’t like being put around like that, do we? Why don’t

we go and complain?

* Stratepy 8 - Joke (a put Hat ease

Tokes arc based on mutual shared background and values and putting H “at caso”

Eg: Great summer we've having It’s only rained five times a week on average

* Stratepy 9 - Assert or presuppose S’s knowledge af and concern for H’s wants Asserting or implying knowledge of H’s wants and willingness to fit one’s own wants

in with them

Fig: know you like chocolates, so T’ve bough! you home awhole bax of them

* Strategy 10 - Offers, promises

Strategies 10 to 13: The speaker and hearer can claim some kind of reflexivity between

their wants

Li.g.: 1’ take you out to dinner on Saturday

* Strategy 11 — Be optimistic that the hearer wants what the speaker wants

Fig know you're abvays glad fo gel a tip or bro on gardening

* Strategy 12 — Include both $ and IT in the activity

Eg

- Let's go for awalk

- I'm feeling really hungry Let's stop for a bite

* Strategy 13 - Give or ask for reasons

Exg.: Why don’t we eat out tonight?

* Strategy 14 — Assume or assert reciprocity

Speaker asks hearer to cooperate with him by giving evidence of habil or obligations obtained between speaker and hearer Hence, they are locked into a situation of helping each other

Fig Dad, if you help me with my maths homework, I'U mow the lawn afier school

tomorrow

« Strategy 15 — Give gifts to Hf (goods, sympathy, understanding, cooperation)

S may satisfy H’s positive-face wanl by actually satisfying some of H’s wants (action

of gift-giving, not only tangible)

Eg: A: Have a glass af whisky, Dick

Bz Terrific! Thoanks

* Strategy 16 - Encourage

3 wants to comfort as well as encourage II when he gets some bad news or ina trouble

This can be considered as redress action or face saving acts

E.g.: Don't worry Everything will be alright

* Strategy 17— Ask personal questions

Personal questions are considered 1o be curious and sometimes impolite However,

when the conununicators want to show their concern or interest, this strategy is also

employed

Fig Are you married?

> Negative politeness stratepies:

Negative politeness is “redressive action addressed to the addressee's negative face: his want to have his freedom of action unhindered and his attention unimpeded” (Brown and

Levinson, 1987:129} In other words, it is “a face saving act which is oriented to the

person's negative face tend to show deference, emphasize the importance of the other's hime or concerns, and even include an apology for the imposition or interruption” (Yuko, 1996:62) Obviously, the tendency to use negative politeness forms emphasizes the

hearers’ right to freedom That is why negative politeness strategies are called deference

stralegics While posilive politeness narrows the distance between interlacutors, negative

politeness keeps a distance between them or avoids interfering with other’s personal

affairs This stralegy is most preferred by alive English speakers because Western

cultures highly appreciate individual's freedom of action To express negative politeness, speakers often choose deference markers, hedges, modal verbs, expressions of apology,

ete

According to Nguyen Quang (2003), there are eleven negative politeness strategies of which the initial ten ones are adopted originally by Brown and Levison, they are as

follows:

* Strategy 1: Be conventionally indirect

In this strategy a speaker is faced with opposing, tensions: the desire to give hearer an

“out” by being indirect, and the desire to go on record These silualions could be

solved by the compromise of conventional indirectness, the use of phrases and sentences that have contextually unambiguous meanings which are different from their

literal meaning, such as “could you”, “can you", “why for God's sake?”, ete

E.g: Could you give me the book on the table, please

* Strategy 2: Question/ hedge

This stralegy denves from the wanl nơi to presume or coerce H Tn Hleralure, a

“hedge” is a particle, word or phrase that modifies the degree of membership of a predicate or noun phrase ina set, such as “sort of”, “rather”, “kind of”, etc

Fig: I suppose thal Harry is coming T wonder if (vou know whether) John went out

* Strategy 3: Be pessimistic

This strategy gives redress to hearer’s negative face by explicitly expressing doubt that

the conditions for the appropriaieness of speaker's speech acl obtain This strategy can

be done through namely, doing indirect requests with assertions of felicitous conditions like: “Couldn't possibly”, “by any chance”

E.g: I don’t imagine there'd be any hope of you

* Strategy 4: Minimize the imposition

This strategy indirectly may pay hearer defense, This strategy will let the H understand

thal there is ne Hnpasition even whether the H could do something for S or nol

E.g: I yust want to ask you if I can borrow a tiny bit of paper

* Strategy 5: Give deference

Speaker humbles himself, his capacities, and possessions This strategy occurs between

S and H who have different social stalus, and normally § is al a lower position Giving

deference can be realized with the use of such phrases: “excuse me”, “sir”, “sorry to bother you but ”, “please to accept my apology”, eet

E.g; Sorry to bother you but it’s time for dinner

* Strategy 6: Apologize

By apologizing for doing an FTA, the speaker can indicates his reluctance to impinge

on hearer’s ucgative face and thereby parlially redress thal inpingernont S car usc

this strategy with some phrases, such as: “I’m sure you but ”, “I wouldn't

normally ask you but ", "1 hope this doesn’t bother you too much”

Eg: I’m sure you must he very busy, but

* Strategy 7: Impersonalize S and I, avoid the pronouns I and you

Plwase the FTA as if the agent were other than S and the addressee were other than H

E.g.: - Turn that wretched music down

- It's important that you finish the work on time

20

* Strategy 8 State the FTA as a general rule

One way of dissociating speaker and hearer from the particular imposition in the ITA,

and hence a way of communicating thal speaker does nol want Lo impinge bull is

marely forced to by circumstances, is to state the FTA as an instance of some general social rule, regulation, or obligation

E 2 T'm sorry, bul late-comers cannot be seated till the next interval

“ Strategy 9: Nominalize

In English, people tend to use more nouns to be polite The more $ normalizes an

expression, the more he dissociates from il

Eg: Your regular attendance gives you bonus mark

* Strategy 10: Go on record as incurring a debt or as not indebting a hearer

Speaker can redress an FTA by cxplicitly claiming his indebtedness to hearer, or by disclaiming any indebtedness of hearer, by means of expressions such as for requests and for offers

Rig: I'd be elernally grateful if you would (for vequest) I could easily: do it for

you (for offers)

* Strategy 11: Avoid asking personal questions

This is a good strategy in communication, especially in cross-cultural communication

to avoid causing I'I'A to LL, to show respect to 1] and to create distance between § and

H

Eạ: How are thngs?

By presenting figure 1, Brown and Levinson implied that negative politeness strategies

are more polile than positive politeness ones They also studied and concluded that some

languages and cultures tend to prefer negative politeness (American Knglish) while some others are likely to use positive politeness more often (Chinese, Japanese)

> — Off-record stratepy:

1n real-life communication, it's easy for us to observe that in many cases a speaker doesn’t

need to say exactly what he/ she means, but the hearer still correctly understands what is

being conveyed Why does the speaker perform such an indirect speech act? Let's study the following examples ta see the reason:

- Uh, I forgot my pen

- Hmm, I wonder where I put my pen

(Cited from Yule, 1996: 63)

We oflen hear these sertences im the context at school or a library where someone doesn’ L

bring their pen Obviously, the speaker doesn’t address to any certain body and these statements might be ignored by hearers But if he/ she is successful in getting a pen from

someone, is because “mare has been communicated than was said” (Yule, 1996: 63)

In many other cases, off-record strategy is performed with the aim of avoiding a disagreement or refusal toward other For instance

A: Shall we go to the concert tonight?

B: My mum has fallen ill

(Cited from K T T Huang, 2001: 25)

Clearly, B’s reply doesn’t dircetly answer A’s invitation, but il can be interproted aa a

refusal Ile won’t be able to go to the concert because his mother is ill

We have seen a lot of off-record utterances and daily conversations and in social

inleractions, bul it scems easier Cor nalive speakers rather than foreign or scvond language

speakers of a certain culture to understand off-record utterances in that culture The reason

is thal the native speakers share the same cultural norms and they have similar linguistic

knowledge as well as pragmatic one Besides, because off-record utterances don’t dircetly

address to the other, they are considered more polite than bald-on-record utterances and

they should be encouraged 10 use

1.3 Previaus study

ver the last three decades, politeness has become one of the most popular discussions in pragmatics, soviolmguistics and cross-culture communication There have been a greal number of researches focused on pragmatics and its effects im many aspects of uman

interactions

Tm 2003, Pamela Hobbs at the University of California, Los Angeles cared out a sludy on

“the medium is the message: politeness strategies in men’s and women’s voice mail message” The study found out that unlike previous sociolinguistic researches in which

women tore offen usc politeness strategies in their speech than ion, the collected data

22

showed that male speaker’s use of politeness markers was roughly equal to that of women’s In addition, positive politeness strategies were used almost exclusively by male

speakers, and only by allorneys, and the two speakers who used the greales| munber of

politoness markers in individual messages were both men

With the desire of exploring the impact of simultaneously engaging in a face to face conversation and a lext message conversation, Jennifer Maginnis (2011) used politeness strategies modelled by Brown and Levinson (1978, 1987) to conduct a study named

“Texting in the presence of others: the use of politeness strategies in conversation” The

resull reveals the facl thal when a face to fz ¢ parlner ignores (no verbal’ nonverbal politeness) a text message interruption the partner is seen as more relational’ socially appropriate, immediate, attentive and polite

In Vietnam, there have been considerable researches concerning about politeness strategies expressed in course books at schools or universities ‘lriew ‘Ihi ‘Trang (2009), in her research, focused on positive and negative politeness strategies in conversational

aclivitics of the course book “New Headway, Intermediate” The theorclical framework of

the study is politeness theories proposed by Brown and Levinson (1978, 1987) and

Nguyen Quang (2003) The research shows that positive politeness strategies are used

more frequenlly tham negalive polilericss strategies In English speaking cullures, wher interlocutors get more familiar to each other, they tend ta use negative politeness strategies

im commumcation, especially in making requesls

Sharing the same interest, Pham Thi Hong Lien (2012) also carried out a study to examine how often positive politeness strategies and negative politeness ones occurs in the textbook

“New English File, intermediate” The study imdicates that im this course book posilive

politeness strategy is the most frequently used in order to show their respect and regard from the speaker to the hearer Most positive politeness strategies are in use except strategies 2, 3, 11 and 15 Beside, negative politeness stralogics used in this course book

are: strategy 1, strategy 2, strategy 3, strategy 4, strategy 5, strategy 6 and 7 Among them,

strategy 2, 1 and 6 are most frequently used

Casing about politeness theones in a more parlicular communicalive context, ie, the

expression of sympathy employed by American and Vietnamese native speakers, ‘'a ‘thi

‘Thanh Hien (2010) used the model of politeness strategies proposed by Blum-Kulka et al (1989) The findings show that Americar speakers used more external modifications

23