Luận văn a cross cultural study on american vietnamses verbal expressions in offering a gift and responding to a gift offer

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOT UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POST — GRADUATE STUDIES UNG THI THU QUYEN A CROSS — CULTURAL STUDY ON AMERICAN — VIETNA

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOT

UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST — GRADUATE STUDIES

UNG THI THU QUYEN

A CROSS — CULTURAL STUDY ON AMERICAN — VIETNAMESE VERBAL EXPRESSIONS IN

OFFERING A GIFT AND RESPONDING TO A GIFT OFFER

NGIIEN CUU GIAO THOA VAN TOA VIET MỸ VỀ CÁCH

SỨ DỤNG NGÔN TỪ ĐÉ TANG QUA VA NHAN QUA

SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR

THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN ENGLISH

Supervisur : Dr Hoang ‘Thi Xuan Hoa

LL Aim of the study

TI Scape of the study

IV Design of the study

Part B Development Chapter L Theoretical background

LI Language and communication

12 Language and culture

ILA Coding of the data and mode of data analysis,

Chapter ITT Strategies in gift affering

IIL1 Communicative strategies used in gift offering,

TH.2 Similarities and differences of gift offering between American and Viemamese

vị

TI1.2.3 Concluding remarks

Chapter LV Strategies in responding to gift offers

IV.1 Agreeing to receive a gift

IV.1.1, Communicative strategies in receiving a gift

IV.1.2 Similarities and differences of gift receiving between American and Vietnamese TV.1.2.1 Data analysis

IV.1.2.2 Major similarities and differences

1V.1.3, Concluding remarks

TV.2 Refusing a gif

IV.2.1, Communicative strategies used in refusing a gift

IV.2.2 Similarities and differences of gift refusing between American and Vietnamese 1V.2.2.1 Data analysis

TV.2.2.2 Major sinilarihes and differences

IV.2.3 Concluding remarks

1 implications for cross-cultural communicators

2 Implivation for ELT

IIL Limitations and suggestions for further research

References

Appendix A: Survey questionnaires

Appendix B: Data analysis

Speaker Hearer

Giver Recgiver

Face ‘Threat

Imowtedge of cach olher’s cullure For example, the following is @ story T hoard fom my friend, The students gave their American voluntesr-teacher a carefully wrapped gift on the Vietnamese ‘Teachers’ Day ‘They were very sumprised at seeing the teacher open the gift in front of them And he said “Thank you very mnch its very nice!” The disappointment immediately appeared on the students’ faces as they <xpected longer and more format sentences than that and thought how impolite the teacher opened the gift at once Vice versa, the teacher seemed to be impatient and embarrassed whan listening lo the monitor's words “On the occasion of Vietnamese Teachers’ Day, we have a special gift for you, We hope that you'll love it We wish you happiness, good health and big success ” What was wrong in thal situation? The Amicrican toachor was completely toasonabls in his bohavier ang there was nothing grammatically wrong, in the monitor’s words Obviously, cultural differences here confused the participants and make the communicative process twnsueoessful rom her personal observations in teaching career, the writer would like to

‘have an insighl into a really nice social rmanner- offering gifls and responding to gi offers from cross-cultural communication perspective, As a result of that, to seek a proper answer

of what and how fo say to offer a gift and respond to a gift offer Why a gift offer, traditionally considered to bring benefit to the Receiver, is occasionally still refused? And why sometimes the Receiver’s behavior hurts the Giver?

IL Aim of the study aud research question

The aim of this study is: To compare and contrast the strategies employed by Vietnamese and American people when they offer a gift and respond to a gift offer in their own janguage and culture ‘The study aimed to get the answers to the following question: What are the similarities and differences in American and Vizinamesc when offering a gift and

responding to a gift offer?

will be based on the analysis of the data collected from the questionnaires, not spontaneous

Northem Vietnamese dialect and the English spoken as the first language in the United States are selected for contrastive analysis Thus, the study will not go to a fixed

conclusion but based on statistic data, give remarks, comments and assumption on the frequcney of some verbal ways of offering gifts This study is only confined to onc aspect

of language in action: what strategies are most commonly found in association with gift offering Moreover, gifl offering in this study is simply understood as a nice cultura

behavior in daily life expressing deep gratitude, concern and attention to the Receiver Of

course, gifts can be offered without saying a word but the non — verbal aspect of gift offering, as mentioned before, is beyond the scope of this study, Moreover, this is as minor thesis so whal kind of present should be given, fo whonr (Ihe irdluence of informants?

parameters on the choice of strategies: age, gender, etc.) and what kind of present should

be avoided are not touched in this study although the author is highly aware of them as a cultural characteristics of cach nation

TV Design of the study

Part A: Introduction: All the academic routine required for the study is represented

Part B: Development: This is the focus of the study and consists of four chapters

Chapter L ‘Chzoretical background

Chapter LL Methodology

Chapler ITT Strategies in gift offering

Chapter IV Strategies in responding to gift offers

Part C: Conclusion.

Part B DevelopmenL Chapter I Theoretical background L1 Language and communication

Language is considered as one of the highest and the most amazing achievements of

human kind in labor process, In the Oxford “Advanced fcarner’s encyclopedic dictionary”

(1998:506), language is defined as a “system of sounds, words, patterns, ete used by tmmans to communicate thoughts and feelings” Ths, language is a means of communication and communication is the aim of language According to Richard ct af (1992:28) communication is “the exchange of ideas, information, etc between two or more persons ‘Ihe sender/speaker transmit message to the receiverilistener™ However, communivation is not mercly an exchange of information An important function of communication is to keep a particular society going, Individuals cooperate with one another to sustain reality and they use language as one of the means to do so

Ii communication, whether ar not the language is intended and spoken, any communication behavior is perceived and interpreted, Such factors as the speaker’s

communicative intention, the interlocutor’s expectation and communicative effects of the

The

message are comribulivc to the suei of communication This means,

communicative cffects natch the intentions” (Clyne, 1996:144) Thus, the spcaker’s idea is

grasped and the hearer’s interpretation is relevant to what the speaker (S) desires

Commumication breakdown is a hidden tisk in any cormmumication settings 1 falls inlo twa types: non-communication where no message is communicated and miscommunication where any unintended message is communicated, in conclusion, through language we can affect every aspect of our relationships and successful communicators Tuusl be aware of their own and their interlocutars’ expectations of communication

L2 Language and culture

Anna Wierzhicka (1992:371) regards “language as a mitror of culture and national character.” Peopte can understand the cultural charaeteristic of the nation through the language they use, Différent cultures use language differently, even though some cultures possess the same language such as American culture, British culture, and Australian culture, Richard ct al (1992:94) defines: “Culture is the total sct of belicf’, attitudes, customs, behavior, social habits of the members of a particular society” This definition not

naturally but they are leamt through the socialization process im which you grow up a full member of a society Thal is why culture does nol belong to any single person but to alt people, It is believed that language and culture are interrelated, language contains culture

in itself and culture is expressed via language Language, as a means of communication, is also bound up with cullure in eumplex ways Kramsch (1998:4) views the relationship

‘between language and cultwe as follows: language expresses cultural reality When people express their ideas, they use a stock of knowledge about the world that they share with one another, language cinbodies cultural reatity Members of a community troalo cxpiericnce through language; language symbolizes cultural reality Language is a system of signs with cultural values Language of a group can be viewed as a symbol of their social identity

It can be obviously seen that language and culture are interrelated and interwoven with cach other, Every cultural rcality is expressed, cmbodicd and symbolized by language From a broader point of view, Nguyen Van Do (2004:71) mentions the relationship

‘between language-cullure and the sociely in which human beings are central, According ta his argument, without people, culture and society would not exist So, it is possible to interpret and describe a culture in its language In its turn, culture influences the way in which language is used It provides guidelines for our linguistic behavior

1.3 Communicative competence

When leaming a new language, the students must Jeam its grammatical niles to make a sentence correctly in grammar ‘this abikity is called “lingustic competence” If the linguistic competence of studonts is good, he can do grammatical sxercises fluently and gel high marks in exams, But that is not enough In real-life communication, we also need

“communicative competence” It is the Students” ability to know “when and where to use these sentonees and to whom” (Ricliard ot al (1992:65))

In order to communicate appropriately, students are supposed to have sharad knowledge According to Saville-Vroike (1982:26), communicative competence consists of three components: linguistic knowledge, inloraction skills, and cuflural knowledge The relation

of these communicative components consolidates that knowledge of language and

interaction skills are not enough Choosing what to say and how to say fo fit info a

community and its language are very essential Kor successful communication, especially

cross-cullural connmumication, learners rust awars of the fargel cule and the difference between the target and the source cultures In other words, both knowledge of language and its culture decide successful communication

1.4.2 Types of speech acts

According to Austin (1996:51), there are four kinds of spccch acts: 1, ilocutionary act is a complete speech act, made in a typical utterance, which consists of the delivery of the propositional contonl of the utterance (mcluing references and a predicate) and a particular Hocutionary force, whereby the speaker asserts, suggests, demands, promises,

of vows; 2 petlocutionary act is a speech act that produces an effect, intended or not, achieved in an addressee by a speaker’s nilerance, 3 propositional acl is a speech acl that a

1.4.3 Politeness strategies

Politenzss strategies are used to formate messages in order to save the hearer’s face when

face-threatening acts are inevitable or desired In Brown and Levinson (1987: 180), there

such as farnily or close friends Brown and Levinson (1987: 181) oultinc

‘various cases, in which one might use the bald on-record strategy, including: great urgency

or desperation: Warch out! Speaking as if great efficiency is necessary: Hear me out ; task-oricniled: Pass me the hammer, lille or no dosira 10 maintain sormconc's face: Don't

forget to clean the blinds! ; doing the FTA is in the interest of the hearer: Your headlights are on! , Offers: Leave it, I clean up tater Eat!

14.3.2 Positive Politeness

Positive politeness strategics scck to minimize the threat to the hearcr’s positive face They

are used to make the hearer feel good about himself, his interests or possessions, and are most usually used in situations where the audience knows each other fairly well In

addition to hedging and attempts to avoid conflict, some strategies of positive politeness

include statements of friendship, solidarity, compliments, and the following examples:

ailend lo hearer’s interesis, needs, wanls: You look sad Can I'do anything? , Use solidarity

in-group identity nuarkers: Hey, mate, can you lend me a dollar?, be optimistic: Pi just

come along, if you don't mind; include both speaker (S) and hearer (H) in activity: If we

help each other, 1 guess, we'll hoth sink or swim in this course; wish or promise: If you wash the dishes, T'll vacuum the floor, cxaggcrale interest in Hand his interests: That's a

nice haircut you got; where did you get it?, avoid Disagreement: Yes, it’s rather lorig; not

short certainly

1.4.3.3, Negative Politeness

Negative politeness strategies are oriented towards the hearer’s negative face and emphasize avoidance of imposition on the hearer ‘hese strategies presume that the speaker will be imposing on the listener and there is a higher potential for awkwardness or

embarrassment than in bald on record strategies and positive politeness strategies Negative face is the desire to remain autonomous so the speaker is more apt to include an ont for the

listener, through distancing styles like apologies, ere are some examples: be indirect: Would you know where Oxford Streat is?; use h

or questions: Perhaps, he might have taken it, maybe, Could you please pass the rice?,, be pessimistic: You couldn't find your way to lending me a thousand dollars, could you?, minimize the imposition: It’s not too much out of your way, just a couple of blocks; apologize: T'm sorry; it's a lot to ask, but can you lend me a thousand dollars?, Favor seeking, or a speaker asking the hearer for a favor, is a common example of negative politeness strategies in use Held observes three

iain stages in favor-socking: the proparatory phase, the facal phase, and the final phase

> The preparatory phase is when the favor-seeking is preceded by elaborate precautions against loss of face to both sides It often involves signals of openings and markers to be used to clarify the situation (¢.g “You sec,’ or ‘s0,") The reqnest

is often softened, made less direct, and imposing (e.g past continuous ‘I was wondering’; informal tag “What d’you reckon)

> The focal stage is subdivided into elements such as asker’s reasons or constraints (cg ‘Pve tricd everywhere but can’t get onc’), the other’s face (c.g ‘you're the

only person | can turn to’), and more

> The third stage is the final siage which consists of anticipatory thanks, promises, and compliments (<.g ‘I knew you would say yes You're an angel.”)

Off-record (indirect)

‘The final politeness strategy is the indirect strategy This strategy uses indirecl language and removes the speaker from the polential to be imposing For example, a speaker using the indirect strategy might merely say “wow, it’s getting cold in here” insinuating that it would be nics if the listener would get up and tum up the thermostat without directly asking the listener io do so

L5 Offering as a speech act

According to Searle's speech act classification (in Levinson 1983:245), the position of offers ean be casily recognized in the class of commissives But Hancher (in Wierzbiska, 1987:192) states that offering has “a double nature”, being “a commissive” ike a promise but also “a directive” like a request ‘This statement is reasonable as offering something to somebady is both to try to dircot that porson’s bshavior, and also commit onesclf to a comesponding course of behavior, Anna Wierzbiska (1987191) states the following meaning of offers: | think of X as something that could be good for you, 1 say: I will cause

say if you want it to happen

Offer falls info Iwo types: offer something and offer Io do something Offering to do something means to say that one is willing to do it, Offering something to somebody

“shows or expresses willingness or intention to do or to give something, etc.” (Oxford Advanced Loamner’s Dictionary: 623) The spoaker assumes thal the proposed course of events could be good for the hearer, but it is not quite clear how the relevant component should he formulated Wierzbicka (1987) argues that the formula “i think of X as somethings that you may want” may bo tnore appropriate than the formula “T think of X as something that would be good for you”, Also, according to Wierzbicka (1987: 191 192) offering shares some common features with such other speech acts as inviting, volunteering and promising but there are still differences among them:

~ Inthe case of inviting the action is to be performed by the hearer whercas it is to be performed by speaker in that of offering

- Volunizering does nol have to be direcily beneficial (or hearer, or indeed or other people, We volunteer to do something that has to be done Consequently, we will free some other people fom the burden of having fo do it and thus benefit them indirectly

+ Promising refers to actions sitmicd in distant or indofinite falure and consequently they are normally hypothetical than offering, which refers to the present of the immediate fisture

Offering can be more or less tentative, but they always embody a degree of uncertainty “T don’t know if want me to do it”, Consequently, they always call for an answer trom the hearer, One might suggests that offering has @ double illocutionary purposes: (i) to let

‘hearcr know of speaker’s willingness to do something for hinv/her and (ii) to cause hearer

to say “yes” or “no” to enable speaker to act accordingly,

L6 Gift offering:

Gift offering belongs to the type of offer something, Gil is defined as “a thing given willingly without payment” (Oxford Advanced Leamer’s Encyclopedic Dictionary, 1998:379) Offering a gift is a culture — specific behavior What gift to offer, on what

occasion, how to offer gifts and respond ta the offer are not the same among different cuftures, Here are some instances: In Franog, if you reecive an invilalion to a person's

hhome, take good chocolates, flowers or a good bottle of cognac You should not take wine because they drink that everyday, so it is too ordinary In Germany, for social invitations, flowers or chocolates are suitable gifis And you should give an odd number of flowers, say, eleven or thirteen, not twelve and the present them without the wrapping paper (Liz 'faylor, 1996:128) The most suitable gift in Viemam when you come to someone's home

is fruil pul in plastic bags, and uthor kinds of gifls carefully wrappod in colorful wrapping paper Unlike the Westemers, the Vietnamese “will not open your gift in front of you but will accept it, place it aside and open it later” (Claire Ellis, 1996:157) Claire Ellis (1996-157) also slatas thaLin Vietnam, “presenis are given on mumerous occasions” And if

“in the West, a gift is a symbol of thanks from the giver, in Vietnam, where the Buddhism prevails, giving a gift is one way in which the giver can gain greater merit for the next life Hence, the whole action is to the benefit of the giver, not the receiver” There are thousands of reasons Jeading to the behavior of offering gifts, from ordinary occasions such as coming to visit a friend, retuming from a trip, ete to important events like attending

a wedding party, getting a job promotion, elc Besides, in Vietnam, offering gifls alsa

comes from the reason of religion They believe and expect to receive more in their future.

Chapter I Methodology

11 Instrument

The theoretical background of the study relies on the research of vatious home and foreign authors concerned with the subject In order to achieve the objectives of a cross-cultural reswarch, the main method of the study is tho quantilative one, Alt the considerations, comments and conclusions in this thesis are largely based on: survey questionnaires, statisties, description and analysis of the collected data and personal observation It was

clearly necessary lo study gill offering made by the two groups af informants in similar

situations involving the same social and contextual variables (namely social distance and relative status) Considering the necessity for variable control and practical sffeciveness, the DCT was the most appropriais methodological instrument for this sdy The DCT would allow the rescarcher to gather a great deal more data in comparable situations from more subjects than would have been possible through random observations of naturally occurring discourse The questionnaire contains two social siluations with high frequency

of occurence, The first situation is that “how would you actually say when you offer a birthday gift o the following person?” ‘The second one is that “how would you actually say

in response lo a gilt offer on your birthday from the foHowing porson?” Tr this thesis, we only choose a specific setting for research, that is “on the occasion of one’s bisthday” because by using the same situations, which hopefully would be able to elicit responses for gift offering from both the Vietnamese and Americans, for both groups of respondents, we could dircolly compare the stratcgics uscd by them to detonnine similaritics and differences in the relationship of strategy use to the social power and distance The habit of offering birthday gift is very popular in America but in Vietnam, now it is just almost common in the city Therefore, all the Victnamesc informants sclected for the

questionnaire are living in Hanoi, one of the biggest cities in Vietnam

11.2 Procedures

In order lo collect sufficient data for the analysis, a survey questionnaire was designed The survey was conducted with both Vietnamese and Amertean speakars They was required to fill it out with specific ntterances used whan they give and receive a present in specific situations and under certain variables such as age, social distance, social hierarchy, etc

11

‘these utterances were then analyzed from the cross-cultural perspective, in the light of

The full text of the qu:

informants were required to express verbally when they offer a birthday gift to and respond

to a gift offer from the following people: a new friend/colleague you have just met for a very short time (far social distance), their close friend (chose social distance), their brother

or sister (intimate relationship, same family rank), their employee (lower social status), their employer (higher social status) ‘‘he survey was done in some language centers in Hanoi (Apollo cantor, Clever Loan Contin); in the Fribassy of the United Stales al Lang

Ha Street, Hanoi and at some universities in Hanoi (Foreign Trade University, University

of Industry and Viemam National University, Hanoi) It took each participant about 10 xrừnnfos lo complete the DCT The roscarcher was sitling there to pravide any infortnation

or clarify any point that was wiclear to the informant, and to make sure that the infoumants did not skip any situation

However, it should be noted thal there are some uspeets of communication, which the questionnaire fails to capture, for example: Paralinguistic factors: pitch, rate, volume, vocal filers, etc Non — verbal factors: gestures, body motions, facial expressions, ete Setting of communication: place, timc, conversational distance, kind of presents, on what occasions, ete, With respect to these limitations, the study is only regarded as a preliminary study and

any conclusions avg (enlalive and suggestive

IL3 Informants

American informants The questionnaire was mostly handed to American people who work at the Embassy of the United States in Hanoi and teach at some English centers in Thmoi, Vietnam such as Apollo center, Clever Learn center, elt The rest was sent by email The total number of American informants is 50

Vieinamese informants: The same mumber of Vicinarnesc formants as the Americar oncs was chosi

, with the hope to collect as accurate dala as possible for the contrastive analysis The Vietnamese informants come ftom Hanoi and the North off Vietnam as the Janguage in this area is temporarily taken as standard Vietnamese These informants all are

lecturers at Hanoi University of Industry, Forcign Trade Universily and Victuam National

University All the informants are assured that they would not bs identified in any diset

50% of the informants is male and 50% of the informants is female, The questionnaire was handed to equal number of informants within two age ranges (24-39, 40-61) Care was taken so (hat the informants im Vietwarn matched with the American ones in terms of

ion of the data wilh the hope of oblaining more authgnlic replies from ther

gender, age, educational background and residence (urban) As a result, the mean age of both groups was identical (average: 35 years, range: 24 — 61), minimizing any possible fleet the age of the speakers in this intergroup comparison

The informants selected for this study do not totally represent American and Vietnamese

‘They only have some features in common of a specific group of people For example: they

‘have the same age range (24-61); they all arc living in the urban, and to some oxtent, they have the same educational background

11.4, Coding of the data and mode of data analysis

In this study, a response was everything an informant said in responding to a situation in order to make a gift offer or a response to a gift offer, which can be an utterance or a number of utterances in order to arrive at a set of strategies, we first divided the response into discourse components, which, in the present study, is an ullerance (phrase, sentence,

or several sentences) constituting a part or whole of an offer ar a response The discourse

components were next coded into relevant categories of pragmatic strategies The

strategies used as the framework for the analysis of the present study were built on the

Nhal, 1997, Hanh, 2003) were supplcmentary Following

Ha, N.T.H (2005), the stratepies were arranged in a table as follows:

1 Direct offer [Usually made when the G shows hisher | - Hey! I have got a gift

straightforwardness without any hedging or | for you (Situation 1) hesitation

2.Showing This is the way that the G wants to pay|- I thought you would concern his/her special attention to the R like this one (Situation

Receiver surprise by having th R guass what the gifl | yon; ean you gucss what

4 Showing | Usually expressed in ther choice of |- This is a small gift for modesty vocabulary such as “small”, ‘just’ “and | you

gif for you.(Sitnation 1)

~ Best wishes for you!

- Happy birthday to yout (Situation 1)

= Much tove from all of

us (Situation L)

8, Asking for

permission

to offer a gilt Offen expressed by using questions with

modal verbs “may” or “can™

Table | Offering gift swrategies

- Siz, may I give you something?

- Could I make you

of the G Often using modal verbs

“should” or “need” in negative form

- Wow, this is a wonderful/great gift

~ You are very kind

- It's so sweet of you (Situation 2)

‘this gives the 11 almost no further

chance to insist

- Pim so honored

- Pm very surprised with this, (Situation 2)

= I's very kind of you, but it’s not necessary

(Situation 2)

- Qh, T already have this

- It's not appropriate (Situation 2)

- No, thank you

anyway! (Situation 2)

9 Delay Would be dircct with an excuse o1

Teason to save the G’s face ~ Let if next time

Vable 2 Responding to gift offer strategies

The list of slratcgics, however, would be modificd based on the data of the present study Thus, may be some categories were collapsed, and the calegorics that were not reflccied in the data were dropped fiom the classification scheme, Apart from the strategies, we found linguistic modifiers embedded in the offering and responding made by the informants but

dục to Limitation of this thesis, they were not analyzed and compared including the external

modifiers and infernal modifiers.

Chapter ILL Strategies in gift offering The focus of this study is on the verbal expression in offcring gifts and responding to gift offers in Vietnamese and American languages and cultures from cross cultural perspective In fact, what to say to give a gift, and how to respond to a gift offer are culture

— specific and depend very much or the paramctars of the communicating partners, the selationship between the Giver (G) and the Recaiver (R), the context and reason of gift offers And, in addition, paralinguistic and extra linguistic also include in this speech act,

‘bal, as we micntioncd carlicr, they are beyond the scope of the thesis

Analyzing data collected by conducting the survey questionnaire, we realized that informants’ parameters did not much influence their choice of strategies of offering gifts and responding to gift offers, so the use of ths strategies as seen ftom informants’ parameters is not analyzed in this study From our knowledge of cross — cultural communication, we would like to provide a descriptive account of the strategies employed

to offer gifls and respond to gift offer by speakers of American and Vietnamese Moreover,

we want to indicate the similarities and differences of verbat expression in the two languages

I1L.1, Communicative strategies used in gift offering

In our observation, the following strategies are found from the survey questionnaire,

8 | Asking for permission to offer a gift 0.4% 0.2%

able 3.Strategies used to offer a gift

It can bs easily seen from the above tabile thal all stratogies are employed by both groups of informants Both graups use the siratsgy “asking for permission” af the lowest rate, In oar

observation, sometimes, in some situations the informants resort to several strategies at the same lime, nol only one, lo praduce tare effective offers

1 Direct offer

According to politeness strategy theory in Brown and Levinson (1987:180), this is bald on

— record strategy Both Atuerican and Vietnamese employ dis strategy al a rather high sate, but the Americans use it at a considerably higher rate: 31.6% in American and 24.8%

in Vietnamese his is the most commonly used strategy by the Americans, but only the sccond by the Vicinamsse This slrilogy is realized in differont ulleraness which have tha

same illocutionary effect

For example

By the American informants

- Hil This is a gitt for you

- Hey! Lhave got a gift for you

- Ilere is a nice present for you

By the Victnamesc informants:

-_ Em xứ: tặng anh/chị một món quả (I want to give you a present)

+ Tang cau nay! (Tere is a gill for you)

- Chị có món quà sống em này ( have a gift for you)

It can easily be seen that Vietnamese informants often use the per formative verb đăng/xin Hingcin their ullerances whils Americans do nol, Instead of that, they use preposition for so

sis thal, for (iris strategy, the degree of dircetness in ulleran

2 Showing concern for the R

Relying on the relationship with the R, the G tries to say in way that makes the R know and fecl that the G really understand his/her taste, hobby, ctc Thus, the gap between them would be smaller, Surprisingly, this strategy is used by the Americans much more often

than by the Vietnamese (201.4% vs 5.6%) The Americans often resort ta short senfences

bat the Vicinamese profer using longer ullerances, They can be:

By the American informants

- thought you fike this gift

- I thought you night enfay ïL

+ Tknow you will fave this

By the Vietnamese informants:

-_ Em biết là sẩ» rất thích cái này nên đã mua tặng sép a (1 know you like this so I

buy it for you)

- Minh nghi chic la ban sé rée vai khi nhan ditge mén qua nay (I am sure that you'll

be happy getting this gift)

Brown and Levinson (1987:190) stale that when giving a gifl, tho G assumes thal the R will like or likes it Thus, by employing this strategy, the G makes the positive face want of the R be satisfied ‘The G notices and understands the R’s taste, hobby, need, want, ete and

fo some exlent, the G has or appears to have the samc taste as the R Tt is posilive

politeness strategy

3 Giving the R a surprise

This strategy is often accompanied by nonverbal behaviors For example, hiding the gift

‘behind the back, the G wears a mysterious expression of the face and says:

By the American informants:

+ Thave something for you Can you guess what it is?

- Hey, Ihave a nice sewprise for you

By the Vietnamese informants:

- Nay, dd may biér edi gi day! (Tley, guess what il is!)

-_ Chị đhừ đoán xem cm có củi gì tặng chỉ đây này (Picase gucss what I have for you)

-_ Minh cỏ cải này rat hay muén ting ban, dut dodn xem! (I'd like to give you

something very nice, please make a guess!)

This strategy is uscd at a rather low ratc by the both of groups However, the Americans zesort to this strategy more often than the Vietnamese (4.00% vs 2.00%) Usually, when giving gifts to their close friend, the informants employ this strategy This is also positive

politeness strategy

4, Showing modesty about the gift value

the gift is modost in order thal the R can be happier to reecive the gifl without any wonder This is positive politeness, according to politeness strategy theory The rate of the

Vietnamese employing this strategy is slightly lower than the rate of the Americans (10.4%

vs 12% respectively) The ultcrances can be:

By the American informants

- ‘Thisis a small gift for you

= Just a small present for you

- Chave got a hidile gift for you

By the Vietnamese informants:

- Fm có món qué nko xin biéu sép a (Thave a little present to give you)

- Chang đảng là bao, xin chị nhận cho em vui (It’s not much I’ be very happy if

you take it)

-_ Cửa ñ lòng nhiều, mang sứp nhận cho @ (A little gift, greal emotion, T hope you will take it)

In Vietnamese utterances, the words expressing small quanhty like “nhó”, “chủt”, “chẳng dang”

spiritual aspect of the act of offcring gift than on the material aspect of the gift itself Thus,

“4t are often used Vietnamese people frequently place more significance on the

the iđlom “của ít lòng nhiều” (a little gift, great emotion) is used by many Vietnamese informants Showing modesty about the gift value, the G would Tike to make the R not worried too much about the receiving behavior as the gift is humble, Therefore, this is also

an efftotive way to persuade the R to receive the gift

5 Stating reason of gift offering

Giving ra

sơn is one of the positive politene

s siraicgics Sometitnes, the informants slalz

the reason for offering gift Here are some examples:

Ly the American informants

- On the occasion of vour birthday, Vhave a gift for you

- Today is your birthday, so please receive this gift

= Tlereis a gift for your birthday

By the Victnamesc informants:

- Mimg ban mén qua nin dip sink nhat! (1 have a gift for you on the occasion of your birthday)

+ Fin xin ling sép món quả nhỏ nhân dip sinh nhật ([ tave a small gift for you on

‘your birthday)

do this accidentally, but intentionally It is noticeable that, this strategy is mainly used in the situation of offering gift to boss or employee

6 Wishes

‘This strategy is the most fiequenily used by the Vietnamese: 34% compareil to only 1.6%

by the Americans, The Vietamese often expect good health, happiness, propetty, success, ete and their utterances are conventional and formulaic Wishes by the Americans are often short and simple while the Vietnamese tend to make tong ullerance of wishes His believed that the more wish

they gót, the more likely they become tras

By the American informants

- Best wishes for you!

- Happy birthday lo you!

By the Vietnamese informants:

- Chute anh’chifem sinh nhét vui vel (lappy birthday to you!)

- Ching om chaic sép site Aide, hank plnic va thea det (Wish you health, happiness

and success)

-_ Sang tuễi mới, che chị ngày cảng trẻ đạp và tràn đẩy niêm vui (On your birthday,

wish you long yaulh, beauty and (ull pleasure)

One interesting is that, although the wishes are conventional and formulaic, wishes in

5.2% respectively) The G’s feelings toward the R are expressed by nouns “love”, “heat”

strategy is more employed by the Vietnamese than the American ones (6.4% and

By the American informants

+ Much love from all of us

- This is something from my heart

By the Vietnamese informants:

- Xin vii mig téng anh mén quà nay (I’m pleasant to give you this gift)

- Rồi vi được Hang ou mon qua sink nbét (’'m very happy to give you this birthday

gift)

‘The American informants seem lo be quile open and extrovert when revealing their feelings while the Vietnamese ones tend to be more reserved and introvert, They apparently mind expressing teal emotion and try to hide it ‘he Vietmamese informants olten express their feeling when giving gifts lo their close friend ar family member of the samme rank because the distance betwen the communicative parlicipanis is very close On the other hand, when interviewed, some Americans stated that they are very happy to let the R know their feeling:

8 Asking for permission to give a

Surprisingly, both American and Vietnamese informants employ this strategy at the same rate (0.4%) And this is the least frequently used strategy by both groups of informants They arc:

By the American informants:

- Sir, may J give you something?

+ Could Fmake yon happy?

By the Vietnamese informants:

by the American informants In the term of degree of formality, the words “xin man phép”

in Viemamese seems to sound more formal than the modal verb “Can “or “Could” in American

TIE.2 Similarities and differences of pifi offering between American and Vietnamese

+ American informants use the following strategies with:

© All the informants: dircot offer, showing concomn for the Rand showing modesty about the gift value

c 80% of the informants: stating reason of gift offering

© 60% of the informants: giving the 2 a supriae

6 40% of the informants: wishes and expressing the G’s fecting,

© 20% of the informants: asking for permission to offer a gift

~ Vietnamese informants use the following strategies with

© all the informants: direct offer, showing modesty abaut the gill value, stating reason of gift offering, wishes and express the G’s feeling

© 60% of the informants: showing concem for the R

© 40% of the informants: giving the R a surprise

© 20% of the informants: asking for permission to ofter a pitt

- The dafa analysis has revealed the domination of strategy “direct offer” in the choice of Asnorican informants, In almost siluations, this stratogy is used al a considerably high ralc Only when offering gift to employees or employers they prefer employing strategy “stating, reason of gift offering”

- On the other hand, strategy “wishes” is the most popularly used by Vietamese informants with all partners in almost situations, Only when the gift is offered to their close friend, strategy “direct offer” is more favored, and when to their employee, they resort to strategy “stating reason of gilt offering” more frequently,

Chapter IV Strategies in responding to gill offers

Offcring gift is one of the positive politeness stratcgics, First and foremost, it brings benefit

to R Thus, in responding to the offers we realize that the R welcomes it and avoids FTA of

the G, even though he/she does not want to receive the gift Some Americans got very

surprised when they were filling in our strvey ques liormairs Thoy said that thoy raroly, if not never, refuse to receive a gift, They usually open the gift and thank the G and showing their feeling If the gift is declined, they take it back without hesitation Because they explained thal they do nol want fo force the partner ta do the thing he/she distikes, In contrast, the Vietnamese often insist until the R agrees to take the gif If not, sometimes they quietly leave the gift in the Hs house, hardly ever take it back

TV.1 Agreeing to recetve a gift

IV.1.1, Communicative strategies in receiving a gift

“The following strategies are realized from the data collection:

Table 4 Strategies used to receive a gift

As we can see from the table above, the American employ strategy “thanking” the most while the Vietnamese prefer using strategy “token refusal” In contrast, this strategy is used

al the lowes! tale by the Americans Tor the Vietnamese, the smallest percentage belongs

to strategy “complimenting the gift”

1 Thanking

‘This strategy is used by the Americans and dominant in almost their utterances Their thanking oflen inchades intensifirs like “so much, very much, cle” I is similar to wards

like “chân thành, rất nhiều, ete” in Vietnamese This is the most commonly used in

American: 34% while it stands at the third place in Vietnamese utterances When uttering

“thank you”, the Vistnamesc, who have an intimate relationship with cach other, often feck

a certain distance between the § and the II, so this expression is not frequently used in the case of clase friend or farnily member Here are some examples

By the American informants

© Wow! Thank you very much

© Oh, thank you so much!

© Thank youa lot!

By the Vietnamese informants:

© Cam on om nhiều (Thank you very muel)

©_ Xin chân thánh cám ơn (Sineerely thank yod)

Rat eda on bạn (Lhank you so much)

2, Token refusal

In American, almost all informants use modal verbs “should” or “need” in negative fon Some American informants resort to a question “what is it for?” Others show that the gift

is too much for them so they are not worthy And in Vietnamese, besides a lovely

complaint, the informants resort to a mild warning like “lan sau khéng phai lam thé nay

đâu nhé” or “nhan [an nay théi nhé” ‘Lhis is the most commonly used swategy by the Vietnamese informants (28%) while the American anes employ il al the lowest rate (12%)

Here are some examples:

By the American informants

© Oh, no You shouddn't do Tike this Thank you anyway

«Thanks alot, what is it for?

co Oh, you don ‘i need to give mea gitt

By the Vietnamese informants:

© Cau bay vé quả Lần sau không phải làm thế này đâu rửtế! (How formal you are! Don’t do that next time!)

© Bay dat lam gi cho tén kém vay em? (Why do you have to spend so much

Tray regard you as a greedy and rude type of person if you receive the gift and say “thanks” Tight away Thus, the Vietnamese often agree to have a teal or drink when they arc insisted by the host several times It is quite similar to the case of gift offering, Although the R, in his‘her minds, really wants to get the gift, he/she still gives a refusal at first, but it

is only a Loken refusal That is called “li chét chiéu

which is the most favored by the Vietnamese informants Many of them interviewed, replied that by employing this strategy, they show their politeness so that the G do not

qiisumderstand about them Generally, in the casi rotating fo malertal clement, the

‘Vietnamese seam to be more cautious and formal

3 Complimenting the gift

This strategy in American stands al the fourth place (13.2%) while it stands al the Tast place in Vietnamese (11.6%), As we discussed above, the Viemamese never open the gift immediately when receiving it so this strategy may not be favored, The Americans often use adjectives like “nice, great, wonderful, ete” in their compliments and sometimes an exclamation preceded by thanking

By the American informants:

© Wow, this is a swonderfid present,

© Thank you What a grea gift!

© Oh, thanks a lot Itis very fovely

By the Vielnamese informants

© Mén qua dep lắm, cám ơn em nhớt (This is a wonderful gift, Thanks)

© Mén quả của câu đhở vị độ, cắm ơn cậu nhiều! (Your giữ is very interesting, ‘thank you so much!)

e Đây là món quả rầt ý ngiữa với am Cảm ơn chị nhiều lắm! CThis gi is very useful for me, Thank you very much!)

‘The difference between the rate of this strategy employed in American and Vietnamese shows that compliments of the American informants tends towards the object (the gift) a 4ittle more than the Vietnamese ones

4 Complimenting the G

‘This stratsgy is crmployed al a highcr rale by the Vietnamese than by the American (25.2% and 22% respectively), This suggests that, on the contrary to the American informants, the compliments of the Vietnamese ones tend towards the subject (G) a bit more than the

American ones ‘The percentage of the informants using strategy “complimenting the Giver” is much bigger than thal in “complimenting the gill” (22% vs 13.2% in American and 25.2% vs 11.6% in Vietnamese) This shows that both cultures appreciate the gift offering and the ( more than the gift itself Adjectives like: kind, nice, sweet, etc are of frequent use in both languages Here are some examples

By the American informants

© ‘Thank you so much You are very kind

© Oh, you are so wonderfiil

© How kind of you! Thank you!

o Cam onnhé, may Aiéu y tao ghé (hanks, you really know my taste)

5, Expressing the R's feeling

The American informants employ this strategy at a higher rate than the Vietnamese (18.8%

and 13.2% respectively) ‘I'he verb “thich” (like) with intensifiers “rat, qua, lim” (really, a lot, much) are offen used in Vietnamese while the adjectives like “honored” and

“surprised” are much resorted to in America

By the American informants

© Oh, F'mso honored

© Wow, I'm so suprised with this

By the Vietnamese informants:

© Cam nem, chỉ rất #hich n6 (Thank you, I like it very much)

œ Ôi, cảm ơn sếp rất nhiéu, om &é¢ ngé qual (Thank my boss, I’m so

surprised!)

© That bat ngo! Minh rar wai khi aban duoc mon qué nay (What a surprise!

Tm very luppy lo receive this gift) Once again, the high percentage of this strategy in American shows that the American seem to be more open and extrovert than the Vietnamese Im expressing their feelings

although the sentences in American are often shorter and simpler More than that, the

of the Vietnamese informants sccms lo ba more complicated Their choice mush dapends

on the relationship between the G and the H For detailed analysis, please see Appendix B

@)

2.2 Major similarities and differences

* Similarities:

- All sttategies are employed by both groups of informants

+ Strategy “complimenting the @” holds the second lace in the order of percentage in both American and Vieinamese

* Differences:

In the same situation, wilh the same partner, the American and Vietnamese have employed different stratogies

American informants use the following strategies with:

all the informants: “thanking”, “complimenting the G” and “expressing the R’s feeling” + 80% of the informants: “complitnenting the gift” and “Loken relusal”,

Vietnamese informants resort to the following strategies with

all the informants: “thanking”, “complimenting the G”, “token refusal” and “expressing the R’s fooling”,

~ 80% of the informants; “complimenting the gift”

- ‘The data analysis has revealed the domination of “thanking” in the choice of the

Asnorican while the Vietnamese prefer “token refusal”.

29

- ‘The lowest rate of “thanking” falls in communicating with their close friend and brother/sister in Amurican whircas this rate of “loken refusal” in Vietnamese belongs to the case of their close friend

1V.1.5 Concluding remarks

Although receiving is nat an FTA, the informants have tactfully chasen different strategies All the five strategies are resorted to by both groups However, each group has employed them differently ‘he most commonly chosen strategy by the American informants is

“thanking”: 34% This has boon shown in ils constantly dominating parcentage over all ofher strategies In the ranking of occurrence of strategies, the second place belongs to

“complimenting the Giver” ‘lhe Vietnamese informants favor strategy “token refusal” anost: 28% For most of the Vislnaneso, before recciving a gifl, first they oftsn refuse it as

a polite manner The refuusal here is only token or conventional for the reception later However, strategy “token refusal” is the most frequently resorted to some certain communicative partners: a new friend/colleague, employee and employer

Suatg

the rate of the American informants (only 22%) ‘his suggests that the Vietnamese tend to

omplimenting the Giver” comes the second with 25.2%, a slightly higher than

use lhe negative politeness stralegies more (lian the Americans

TV.2 Refusing a gift

IV 1 Communicative strategies used in refusing a gift

Afler analyzing the data, we can calegorize the refusing ullerances of the informants as in