CHIẾN LƯỢC ĐƯA RA LỜI BÌNH PHẨM BỞI BAN GIÁM KHẢO TRONG CHƯƠNG TRÌNH TRUYỀN HÌNH THỰC TẾ: TÌM KIẾM TÀI NĂNG MỸ VÀ TÌM KIẾM TÀI NĂNG VIỆT NAM

This study examines the similarities and differences in the application of giving criticism between the American and Vietnamese judges in two reality shows: America’s got Talent and Vietnam’s got Talent. The research primarily focuses on the popularity and preference of employing criticizing strategies by the two panels. The research results are based on the collection nine episodes of America’s got Talent season 6 and Vietnam’s got Talent season 1. The criticizing utterances employed by American and Vietnam panels were noted down and categorized into five criticizing strategies. The results of the research show that criticizing communicative act is performed with a variety of strategies. The study showed some significant similarities and differences in the choices as well as frequencies of using criticizing strategies by American and Vietnamese judging panels. It is hopeful that the research could contribute to the understanding as well as enhancing AmericanVietnamese cultural communicative knowledge and be a useful source of reference for researchers in the future.

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI

UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHER EDUCATION

GRADUATION PAPER

CRITICIZING STRATEGIES BY JUDGES IN TWO REALITY SHOWS: AMERICA’S GOT TALENT AND

VIETNAM’S GOT TALENT

Supervisor: Đỗ Thị Mai Thanh (M.A) Student : Hoàng Thị Thủy

Course : QH2010.F1.E2

HÀ NỘI - 2014

ĐẠI HỌC QUỐC GIA HÀ NỘI

TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC NGOẠI NGỮKHOA SƯ PHẠM TIẾNG ANH

KHÓA LUẬN TỐT NGHIỆP

CHIẾN LƯỢC ĐƯA RA LỜI BÌNH PHẨM BỞI BAN GIÁM KHẢO TRONG CHƯƠNG TRÌNH TRUYỀN HÌNH THỰC TẾ: TÌM KIẾM TÀI

NĂNG MỸ VÀ TÌM KIẾM TÀI NĂNG VIỆT NAM

Giáo viên hướng dẫn: Đỗ Thị Mai Thanh (M.A) Sinhviên : Hoàng Thị Thủy

Khóa : QH2010.F1.E2

HÀ NỘI - 2014

I hereby state that I: Hoang Thi Thuy (QH2010.F1.E2), being a candidate forthe degree of Bachelor of Arts (TEFL) accept the requirements of theUniversity relating to the retention and the use of bachelor’s Graduation Paperdeposited in the library

In terms of these conditions, I agree that the origin of my paper deposited inthe library should be accessible for the purposes of the study and research, inaccordance with the normal conditions established by the librarian for the care,loan or reproduction of the paper

SignatureHoang Thi Thuy

I am deeply indebted to a number of people for helping to make this studypossible First and foremost, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to

my supervisor – Ms Do Thi Mai Thanh (M.A) who supported and encouraged

me generously throughout this research study Without her guidance andsupport, my thesis would not have been possible

I am greatly indebted to Ms Nguyen Thi Thom Thom (M.A) for her valuableadvice and excellent academic guidance which are decisive factors in thecompletion of this thesis

I would like to sincerely thank all my lectures at University of Languages andInternational Studies, Vietnam National University, Hanoi for their profoundknowledge and outstanding teaching

My appreciation is also extended to my close friends Nguyen Thi Mai Thu andBui Thi Nguyet for their kind support and encouragements

Last but not least, my heartfelt thanks go to my parents, especially my motherwhose support and encouragement did play an important role in the success of

my study

i

This study examines the similarities and differences in the application ofgiving criticism between the American and Vietnamese judges in two realityshows: America’s got Talent and Vietnam’s got Talent The research primarilyfocuses on the popularity and preference of employing criticizing strategies bythe two panels

The research results are based on the collection nine episodes of America’s gotTalent season 6 and Vietnam’s got Talent season 1 The criticizing utterancesemployed by American and Vietnam panels were noted down and categorizedinto five criticizing strategies

The results of the research show that criticizing - communicative act - isperformed with a variety of strategies The study showed some significantsimilarities and differences in the choices as well as frequencies of usingcriticizing strategies by American and Vietnamese judging panels

It is hopeful that the research could contribute to the understanding as well asenhancing American-Vietnamese cultural communicative knowledge and be auseful source of reference for researchers in the future

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgement……… i

Abstract……… ii

Table of contents……….iii

List of tables……… v

List of figures……… v

PART A: INTRODUCTION……….1

1 Statement of research……… 1

2 Research aims and research questions…….……… 2

3 Significance of the study………3

4 Scope of the study……… 3

5 Organization of the study………4

PART B: DEVELOPMENT……… 5

CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW……….5

1.1.Cross-culture communication………5

1.1.1 Culture ……….5

1.1.2 Communication………6

1.1.3 Cross-cultural communication……….8

1.2.Criticizing as a communicative act………9

1.2.1 Criticism………9

1.2.2 Criticism – a communicative act………10

1.3.Reality show……… 15

1.3.1 Definition……….15

1.3.2 Got Talent……….16

1.3.2.1 Definition of Got Talent………16

1.3.2.2 Format of Got Talent……….17

iii

CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY………18

2.1 Research design………18

2.1.1.Selection of subjects……… 18

2.1.2.Participants……… 18

2.1.2.1 American judging panel (season 6 – 2011)………19

2.1.2.2 Vietnamese judging panel (season 1 – 2011)……….19

2.1.3.Data collection procedures……… 20

2.1.4.Data analysis procedures………20

CHAPTER 3: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION……….21

3.1 Results……… 21

3.1 1 Result of research question 1……… 21

3.1.2 Result of research question 2………28

3.2 Discussion………36

PART C: CONCLUCISON……… 38

1 Summary of the findings……… 38

2 Implications……… 39

3 Limitations of the study………40

4 Suggestions for the further studies……… 41

REFERENCES………42

APPENDICES……….46

Appendix A: America’s got Talent……… 46

Appendix B: Vietnam’s got Talent……… 60

iv

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

Table 1.1: Taxonomy of mitigating strategies in criticizing

Table 3.1: The use of criticizing strategies by two judging panels in America’s got talent and Vietnam’s got talent

Table 3.2: Use of strategy 1 by American panel and Vietnamese panel

Table 3.3: Use of strategy 2 by American panel and Vietnamese panel

Table 3.3: Use of strategy 3 by American panel and Vietnamese panel

Table 3.4: Use of strategy 4 by American panel and Vietnamese panel

Table 3.5: Use of strategy 5 by American panel and Vietnamese panel

Figure1.1: Diagram of components of communication

Figure 3.1: Use of criticizing strategies by the American panel in American’s got talent

Figure 3.2: Use of criticizing strategies by the Vietnamese panel in Vietnam’s got talent

Figure 3.3: Use of criticizing strategies by American judges and Vietnamesejudges in America’s got talent and Vietnamese’s got talent

v

PART A: INTRODUCTION

1 Statement of research

Language is defined as a powerful communication system for humanbeings to express thought, ideas as well as forge friendships, cultures amongnumerous countries around the world Therefore, it is can be definitely believedthat language and culture are closely related and interdependent Language is atool to convey culture and culture also reflects language in another way “Culture

is in language, and language is loaded with culture” (Karen (2008)) Similarly,this point is shared by Hudson (1981):” As for the relation between language andculture, most of language is contained within culture” Hence, different cultureswill have different ways to show their desires, compliments or criticism about oneaspect

In communication, while giving encouragement plays an important role inhelping people have motivation to continue their work whereas the others- whoare thin-skinned and easily up-set when receiving criticism According toFleishman, he said that “Most of us, swimming against the tides of trouble theworld know nothing about, need only a bit of praise or encouragement- and wewill make the goal” Encouragement is considered a useful tool for people in anycases; Winston Churchill stated, “Criticism may not be agreeable, but it isnecessary It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body It callsattention to an unhealthy state of things” Obviously, the role of criticism isundeniable Different culture will have different strategies to give criticism.Culture shock often happens in cross-cultural interaction when interactants are notaware of this aspect Thus, in intercultural communication, raising learners'awareness of the cultural difference is crucial

Criticism plays an essential component in terms of reflecting thefundamental culture and value of a specific country However, criticism – a

vi

communicative act seems not to be investigated much by linguistics as well asresearchers There have been some studies regarding the act of criticizing, and theapplication of them in academic documents such as “a study on verbal criticism inEnglish and Vietnamese” (Doan, 2010), “a comparative study of criticismbetween American and Vietnamese online newspapers” (Pham, 2008) Yet thesedid go insight into analyzing criticism in term of language Thus, for the

abovementioned reasons, in this study, researcher will focus on America’s got

talent 2011 and Vietnam’s got talent 2011 with the aims of providing the

Vietnamese audiences with a specific look into the differences and similarities interm of criticizing strategies by judges in these two reality shows Hopefully, thisstudy will contribute to cross-cultural communication between America andVietnam about giving criticism strategies

2 Research aims

The study is conducted to investigate the common strategies in giving

criticism on the performances of contestants in America’s got Talent and

Vietnam’s got Talent In addition, the research will also point out the similarities

as well as the differences in the application of those strategies between Americanand Vietnamese judging panels Besides, the study is carried out with the aim ofhelping the Vietnamese audiences be aware of intercultural communication ingiving criticism in a TV reality show

In order to achieve the purposes stated above, the study revolves around thefollowing questions:

1 What are common criticizing strategies used by Vietnamese judges, and what ones are chosen by American judges in Vietnam’s got Talent and America’s got talent?

2 What are differences and similarities in the application of these strategies between the American and Vietnamese judges in the two reality shows?

vii

3 Significance of the study

This research investigates strategies in giving criticism in two reality

shows American’s got Talent and Vietnam’s got Talent 2011 It is set to find out

common strategies employed by American judges as well as Vietnamese judges aswell as the similarities and differences in the applications of those It is hopefulthat the outcome of the study would be a source of reference materials forteaching English to Vietnamese learners

In addition, the study can help Vietnamese learners know more aboutthe differences and similarities in American-Vietnamese cross-culturaldimensions

Last but not least, the researcher hopes that this study can provide aninsightful view into criticizing theory for Vietnamese readers

4 Scope of the study.

The study focuses on strategies in giving criticism employed by bothAmerican as well as Vietnamese panels Criticizing is reflected through verbaland non-verbal communication However, because of limited knowledge,materials and time; within this graduation paper, the researcher desires to examineverbal criticizing strategies which are popular and familiar with learners

In addition, to raise learner’s awareness of the application ofcriticizing strategies, the data used for illustration and exemplification are takenmainly from nine episodes of two reality shows: America’s got Talent (season 6)and Vietnam’s got Talent (season 1)

viii

5 Organization of the study

The study consists of three parts and each of which is set to deal with a

specific aim

Part A: Introduction

This part presents overview of the study including statement of the problemand rationale for the study, research aims and research questions, significance,scope and the organization of the study

Part B: Development

Chapter 1: Literature review

In this chapter, the researcher provides the readers with the background ofthe study including all the terms as well as the key theoretical concepts and thediscussion of related studies

Chapter 2: Methodology

This chapter describes the participants and instrument as well as theprocedures to conduct the research

Chapter 3: Findings and discussion

Chapter 3 presents the results of the study that researcher investigates fromthe collected data based on the two research questions In addition, a detaileddiscussion about the employment of the study are provided as well

Part C: Conclusion

In this part, the researcher will summarize the major issues discussed in thestudy and point out the limitations as well as propose several suggestions forfurther studies

ix

PART B: DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW 1.1 Cross-cultural communication.

1.1.1 Culture

The term “culture” can be considered as the most complicated concept

to define because it consists of numerous definitions and “the definition of cultureremains elusive and contested” According to Hall (1976, p.16), “Culture is notgenetically inherited, and cannot exist on its own, but is always shared bymembers of a society” In this definition, the researcher tends to emphasize theassociation between culture and humans Moreover, culture is the reflection ofwhat human beings want as it is a set of “shared and enduring meaning, values,and beliefs the characterize national, ethnic, or other group and orient theirbehavior” (Mulholland, 1991) Hence, culture itself covers all features of human’slife

In addition, several researchers also have attempted to define “Culture”concept by their ways For instance, Tylor (1874, p.1) points out that “ Culture ,taken in its wide ethnographic sense, is that complex whole which includesknowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities and habitsacquired by man as member of society” While Tylor just provides the audienceswith his general background knowledge about the theory of culture, Lederach(1995) stated that “Culture is the shared knowledge and schemes created by a set

of people for perceiving, interpreting, expressing, and responding to the socialrealities around them” In other way, culture is “everything that people have, think

or do as a member of a society” (Ferraro, 1998)

x

To sum up, culture refers to patterns of human’s behaviors, as well asinteractions In other words, culture is the result of human’s intervention in theprocess of socialization Through those patterns, it can be easily identified or evendistinguished the people in a certain cultural group Thus, most of thosedefinitions play important parts in helping the researcher analyze and hypothesizeseveral aspects in this study.

1.1.2 Communication

Communication is absolutely indispensable discipline in human life.Linguists also try to give different definitions about the term “ communication” intheir own way by basing on the importance of its As Hybels and Weaver (2001,p.5) stated, “ any process in which people share information, ideas, and feelingsthat involve not only the spoken and written words but also body language,personal mannerism and style, the surrounding and things that add meaning to amessage” In other words, communication is the means of transferring messagesthrough non-verbal and verbal language such as speech, visuals, signals, writingand behaviors as well

Similarly, Bach and Harnish (1979) defined communication as “theexchange and negotiation processes between at least two individuals through theuse of verbal and non-verbal symbols, oral and written/visual modes, andproduction and comprehension processes” It can be inferred that the process ofcommunicating involves verbal and non-verbal communications as well The twokinds of code are referred to as forms of communication The following diagram

of Nguyen Quang (2002:9) will attain a better view at components ofcommunication:

xi

Figure1.1: Diagram of components of communication

( Nguyen Quang, 2002:9)The function of communicating is not only to give information to eachother but also to send messages through eye-contact, body language or even tone

of speaker’s voice Thus, through verbal as well as non-verbal communication, thespeaker can provide the receivers with meaningful message (Levine and Adelman(1993) Beisler (1997) also has the similar definition about this term,

“communication is the transmission from one person to another of a message

xii

CommunicationVerbal communication Non-verbal communication

Body language Object language Environmental language

…

-Setting-Conversational distance-Time

-Lighting system/color

which is understood by the receiver as the sender intended” In other words, amessage or communication is generally sent by a sender with intended purposeand receiver as well Through several opinions about the definition ofcommunication, it cannot be denied that as long as a person is surrounded byothers, it is inevitable to communicate Thanks to communicating, message orinformation could be sent and those play vital part in the existence of humankindspecifically and the society generally.

1.1.3 Cross-cultural communication

With the process of globalization, especially the increase of global trade,different cultures will meet conflict and blend together as Hofstede (1991) notedthat culture commonly means “civilization” In other words, culture includesnormal things in life such as greeting, communication, etc Hence, people fromdifferent cultures will find it hard to communicate not only due to languagebarrier but also because of different communication styles Thus, cross-culturalcommunication has been studied seriously

According to Kramsch (1998, p.81), cross- cultural communication can beunderstood as “the meeting of two cultures or languages across the politicalboundaries of nation states” This is the exchange and negotiation betweenindividuals coming from different cultures Sharing the same idea, Levine andAdelman (1993) believe that “cross-cultural communication is communicationbetween people from different cultures; communication that is influenced bycultural values, attitudes and behaviors; the influence of culture on people andrecreations and responses to each other”

It can be inferred that the term cross cultural communication describes theability of communicating and forming relationship with people coming fromdifferent culture This is based on the knowledge of several factors such as values,norms, manners and social structure Thus, it is undoubtedly seen that culturesignificantly contributes to one of the biggest challenge for cross-cultural

xiii

communication When languages are distinct, the potential of misunderstandingwill increase without the translation

It is understandable that culture shapes communication and the way ofinterpreting communication Cross-cultural communication gives members fromdifferent background opportunities to exchange ideas, share information andexperience However, in order to keep the communication smooth and successful,people need to be aware of potential problems that may happen duringcommunicating

1.2.Criticizing as a communicative act

1.2.1 Criticism.

Giving criticism is an art and the giver is the artist, too According toOxford Learner’s Dictionary, criticism is “the act of expressing disapproval ofsomebody/something and opinions about their faults or bad qualities; a statementshowing disapproval” Criticism is considered as something unpleasant because it

is often implied to point the faults of someone Besides the main function ofcriticizing, Wajnryb (cited in Hoang (2007, p.144) stated, “Criticism may provide

a rich, timely potentially fruitful opportunity for learning” When the speakerfinds that a performance of the candidate is unsatisfactory, he/she has to decide togive the act of criticism with the aim of bringing the most suitable advice for thecontestants Hence, learners enable to realize their weak points and improve them

in appropriate ways Similarly, Collins Cobuild Advanced Learner’s EnglishDictionary (2006) defined, “criticizing is an act of making fair, careful judgmentsabout the good and bad qualities of someone or somebody” For instance “Thankyou for your report I can see you put a lot of effort in it However I was hopingyou could touch it up a little by summarizing it more carefully and adding somegraphs This content is solid, but if you could make those small changes, I wouldappreciate it” (Pham, 2011, p.12)

xiv

Therefore, coming to such decisions of giving criticism, speakers need toknow the appropriate time to produce the speech act Basically, there areconstructive and destructive criticisms Constructive criticism is the process ofoffering valid and well-reasoned opinions about someone or something, usuallyinvolving both positive and negative comments, in a friendly manner rather than

an opposite one In collaborative work, this kind of criticism is often a valuabletool in raising and maintaining performance standards Destructive criticism isintended to “harm someone, derogate and destroy someone’s creation, prestige,reputation and self-esteem”.( Oxford Learner’s Dictionary)

It can be denied that criticism could be positive or negative,maintain or threat the communicator’s face; however, criticism can be thefundamental reflection of the society’s value; therefore, the study of criticism can

be a key attribute of providing the audiences with crucial information about socialnorms as well as values embedded in culture

1.2.2 Criticism – a communicative act

When producing an utterance, the speaker usually assigns a meaning for thecommunicative purpose As an act of communication, that purpose succeeds if theaudience identifies, in accordance with the speaker’s intention, the attitude beingexpressed John Austin (1962) put the first foundation on the existence of speechact and up to now, numerous linguists such as John Searle (1969), Searle (1979)inherits Austin’s ideas and elaborates on several aspects of Austin’s notion

Speech act theory has been commented upon and become a source ofinspiration for many linguistic theorists One of them is Habermas, who has takenSearl’s theory as the starting for the development of his product called “Theory ofcommunicative action” Habermas (1984, p.85-101) defined, “Communicativeaction is individual action designed to promote common understanding in a group

xv

and to promote cooperation, as opposed to strategic action designed simply toachieve one’s personal goals” It can be inferred that communicative actions asthe interaction of social actors pursuing goals by achieving shared understandingand coordinating their plans of action In Haberman’s theory, the illocutionary act

is not related to grammatical forms as it is in Searle’s theory In that case, theillocutionary effect depends on the language function According to Habermas,there are three major types of language functions: constatives – while sayingsomething, the speaker refers to the objective world, regulative – related to thesocial world and expressive – when the speaker refers to her/his own subjectiveexperience As Habermas (1984, p.94) states: “Achieving understanding inlanguage is…introduced as a mechanism for coordinating action” An essentialrequirement for successful communication action is the “satisfaction of theconditions determined by the ideal speech situation” (Cooke, 1997, p.33)

Criticising is seen as a communicative act with the communicative purpose

as showing “disapproval of somebody or something” (Oxford Learner’sDictionary) Some researchers have investigated the relationship betweencommunication and criticism (Christensen & Heavey, 1990) Criticism is the mostsignificant factor of the expressed emotion index (Hooley & Teasdale, 1989) Acriticism can be realized by either direct or indirect strategies Following Blum-Kulla (1987), the directness level of a criticism was determined by the degree ofillocutionary transparency, and thus the amount of effort needed to interpret theillocutionary point of this criticism Meanwhile, “The more indirect the mode ofrealization, the higher will be interpretive demands (Blum – Kulka, 1987:133)

In addition, Wajnrub (1993) holds “an effective criticism must be keptsimple specific, well-grounded, linked to strategies for improvement anddelivered as an attempt to share experience It also needs to be softened by means

of a number of strategies These include ‘measuring words’ (to avoid being too

xvi

negative), ‘soft-pedaling’ (i.e using internal and external modifications to lessenthe harshness of the criticism), ‘using affirmative language’ such as comfortingmessages, ‘distancing and neutralizing’ (to depersonalize the criticism) and ‘usingnegotiating language’ (to avoid imposing on the addressee.) (Wajnryb, 1993; cited

criticism with hearer’s choice/actions/work,

Usually realized by means ofnegation word “No” or performatives

“I don’t agree” or” I disagree” or viaarguments against hearer

Stating errors or problems found withhearer’s choice

Usually expressed by means of suchstructures as “I find it difficult tounderstand…”, “it’s difficult tounderstand ”

Warning about the negativeconsequences or negative effects ofthe hearer’s choice

“I think it’s not a good

way to support to one’s idea, “Umm that’s not really a good sentence”

“I don’t quite agree with you with some points.”

“And there are some incorrect words”

“You had a few mistakes”

“ I can’t understand”, “I find it difficult to understand your idea”

“Someone who doesn’t agree with you would straight away read that and turn off

choice, and by means of differentkinds of hints to raise hearer’sawareness of the inappropriateness ofhearer’s choice “You have to talk about

xviii

Usually expressed via structure as

“you have to”, “you must”, “it isnecessary”

Usually expressed via theperformative “ I advise you…” orstructures with “should”

Rhetorical questions to raise hearer’sawareness of the inappropriateness ofher/his choice, etc

Utterances expressing speaker’suncertainty to raise the hearer’sawareness of the inappropriate of thehearer’s choices, etc

Including other kinds of hinds andmay include sarcasm, exaggerations

your opinion in your summary”

“You should change it a little bit”

“Did you read your writing again after you finish it?”

“Are there several paragraphs ah not sure about the paragraphs

“ I prefer a writing style which are not too personal”

Table 1.1: Taxonomy of mitigating strategies in criticizing.

( Nguyen Thi Thuy Minh, 2003:236)Generally, reality shows have been investigated by many researchers such

as Hua (2013), Pham (2011) and Tran (2011) When mentioning realitytelevisions, there will be numerous aspects for researchers to research, forinstance the performances of the contestants or strategies in commenting as well

as giving encouragements to the candidates’ presentations

In the context of Vietnam, especially at the University of Languages andInternational Studies, many researchers are fond of these topics and as a result alot of studies have been carried out

Pham (2011) and Tran (2011) had the same research topics on reality showswhich were about commenting strategies on the contestants’ performancesemployed by judges in America and Vietnam Hua (2013) developed another

xix

aspect of commenting The researcher focused on encouraging strategies on thepresentations of candidates in the Voice In three aforementioned researches,researchers concentrated on the aspects of commenting, encouragement or evencompliments; however, this graduation paper will be carried out by researchingthe different topic – criticism The researcher finds out the study of Nguyen(2003) consisting of many features about criticism which can be useful for theresearch The researcher will make use and adapt several terms mentioned inNguyen’s taxonomy of mitigating strategies in criticizing.

1.3 Reality show

1.3.1 Definition.

For the past several years, reality television has dominated “mainstreamtelevision programming, providing relatively inexpensive entertainment” (Gardyn,2001) Nowadays, reality show is considered as a kind of entertainment whichmakes people feel like they are in the real situation This is becoming more andmore developed and as a result, “reality television saw an explosion of globalpopularity starting in the summer of 2000” (Hua, 2013, p.17)

According to Collins Cobuild Advanced Learner’s English Dictionary,reality show is a “type of television programming that aims to show how ordinarypeople behave in everyday life, or in situations, often created by programmemakers, which are intended to present everyday life” Similarly, Hill (2005) stated

“reality television or a television programming genre that presents purportedlyunscripted melodramatic or humorous situations, document actual events, andusually features ordinary people instead of professional actors, sometimes in acontest or other situation where a prize is award”

xx

It can be inferred that the function of a reality show is to feature talentculled from the ranks of ordinary people, not professionally trained actors Inaddition, reality shows offer the chance for a renewed interest in those normalpeople.

Reality show typically does not have a script, so participants taking part

in those will be put directly in a real situation and act Everything will bereflected by the performances of the candidates, and the winner of the show willdepend on the content of each program such as the voting of the audience, givenmarks from judges

1.3.2.2 Format description of American’s got Talent (2011) and Vietnam’s got Talent (2011)

The format of America’s got Talent is primarily based on the global BritishGot Talent franchise The selection process of the show consists of three mainperiods: Producers’ auditions, Judges’ auditions and live shows In the firstperiod, the audition will be held in various cities with the aim of choosing the

xxi

appropriate candidates Following the producers’ auditions, the above candidateswill perform their special abilities in front of four celebrity judges The judgesterminate the candidate’s act by pressing their red buzzer and if the candidatereceives X from all of the judges, they have to stop their performance In contrast,receiving three or more “yes” votes from the judges, the candidate definitely goes

to the next round Finally, during the live shows, a group of candidates’performances from Top 20 will compete by the number of voting from viewers aswell as judges The more voted candidates, the more will be chosen into Top 10.All of the candidates in Top 10 continue performing the best of their abilities andwaiting for public vote The candidate with the most votes will be the winner

In this chapter, the researcher has provided the basic theoreticalbackground to the study issue, including the definitions and concerningknowledge of certain key concepts as well This chapter is presented to help thereaders orientate themselves to the content of the research Thus, researcher canfind out significant results through this chapter and her chosen materials

CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY 2.1 Research design

2.1.1 Selection of subjects

In this research, the developed approach was triangulation which has recentlybeen applied widely by a lot of researchers Triangulation approach, is known as amixing design which contains “the combination of two or more theories, data sources,methods or investigators in one study of a single phenomenon to converge on a singleconstruct, and can be employed in both quantitative (validation) and qualitative(inquiry) studies” (Yeasmin & Rahman, 2012, p.156) Since quantitative andqualitative approach have their own limitations, there is mounting evidence shown that

xxii

mixing these two types of methods can contribute to a better understanding of theproblems rather than either approach alone (Greene & Caracelli, 1997)

Qualitative approach was applied as one of the main methods in this research

As a widely-used research design, it “focuses on discovering and understanding theexperiences, perspectives, and thoughts of participants” (Harwell, 2011, p.148) To bemore specific, the researcher will collect, watch and analyze criticizing strategiesemployed by the two judging panels in nine episodes of the two reality shows

Quantitative research method attempts to maximize objectivity, replicability,and generalizibility of findings (Michael, 2011, p.149) After analyzing criticizingstrategies, the researcher will calculate the frequency of using those communicativeacts

The researcher will carry out the study by choosing nine episodes ofAmerica’s got Talent 2011 and Vietnam’s got Talent 2011 including episode 1( Judges’ auditions), episode 2 (judges’ auditions), episode 6 (judges’ auditions),episode 7 (judges’ auditions), episode 8 (judges’ auditions), episode 9 (judges’auditions), episode 10 (judges’ auditions), episode 11 (judges’ auditions) andepisode 14 (quarter finals 1) As for Vietnam’s got Talent 2011, researcher alsochoose nine episodes consisting of episode 1 (judges’ auditions called “Vong loaisan khau”), episode 2, episode 4, episode 5, episode 6, episode 7, the 2nd semi-final, the 5th semi-final and the 6th semi-final

Television and the Internet are the great sources for researcher toinvestigate as well as analyze her related study Youtube channel, the officialwebsite of America’s got Talent (America’s got talentauditions.com) andVietnam’s got Talent (Vietnamgottalent.vtv.vn) can help researcher complete thestudy as well The chosen episodes from researcher are considered typical ones inthe show in terms of format and content In addition, they are basic data thatcontribute to the success as well as the reliability of the research

2.1.2 Participants

xxiii

2.1.2.1 American judging panel (season 6-2011)

2.1.2.2 Vietnamese judging panel (season 1- 2011)

A musician, music maker

2.1.3 Data collection procedures

xxiv

After collecting ten reality shows of each version in American’s gotTalent and Vietnam’s got Talent, researcher will watch chosen episodes and writedown all comments from both American judges as well as Vietnamese judges.After that, researcher will mainly focus on criticizing comments to analyze based

on her framework mentioned in the previous part

2.1.4 Data analysis procedures

After noting down to discover the valid sayings expressing criticism fromall judges in America’s got Talent and Vietnam’s got Talent, the criticizingcomments will be classified into specific criticizing strategies After that,researcher will calculate the proportion of using those strategies Later on,researcher will visualize the collected information in the form of tables, charts andgraphs for better illustration and explanation

CHAPTER 3: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

In this chapter, all the data collected will be revealed and discussed indetail with the aim of achieving successfully the study

3.1 Findings

3.1.1 Research question 1: What are common criticizing strategies used by Vietnamese judges, and what ones are chosen by American judges in Vietnam’s got Talent and America’s got talent?

xxv

In the previous chapter, the first question “What are common criticizingstrategies used by Vietnamese judges, and what ones are chosen by Americanjudges in Vietnam’s got Talent and America’s got Talent” will be reflected by theinterpretation of data collecting from 122 criticizing utterances by American panel

as well as 101 ones by Vietnamese panel Data collected enabled researcher tosort out the common strategies in giving criticism by the two panels

Based on several abovementioned researches such as Doan (2010), Pham(2008) and Nguyen (2003), there are possibly five strategies in expressingcriticism as follows:

Strategy 1: Exaggerating.

In this strategy, the judging panels carried out by maximizing his/herdisapproval or dispassionate about the contestants’ performances In other words,they use this strategy in order to describe the worst act of each candidate than itreally is In fact, it is definitely easy to realize this strategy thanks to theappearance of several intensifiers such as very, so extremely, unbelievable, etc inEnglish and vô cùng, thực sự, bao nhiêu, etc in Vietnamese Exaggerating consists

of telling jokes Jokes are considered as one of the world best medicine to peoplewho are bored or need a good laugh The main purpose of using this strategy isnot only to point out the quality of an act which can be considered as bad as theowner of that performance but also to express humorous moments for theaudiences and help the contestants realize the hidden message under those sayings

As observed, several popular expressions or utterances used by America’s panelare:

For instance:

xxvi

I don’t know that it’s a headline act and I think it’s a million dollar 1It’sfun at a party and, uh…i think the party’s over (Howie Madel- Mr Shake it up-Episode 6)

Well it reminded me of Howie in many ways that act A sort of very longannoying noise (Piers Morgan – Boston Typewriter Orchesta – Episode 6)

I’m sure in 20 years your silly action will be accepted (Sharon Osbourne –Episode 8- Nick)

First of all did anyone ever tell you you look like David letterman? (HowieMadel- Episode 3- The paper Horn man)

That was one of the most stupid things I’ve ever seen in my life (PiersMorgan – Episode 2)

Nobody does that No one does that Noone You are the only one that doesthat (Howie Madel- Episode 2)

That was very very ridiculous (Sharon Osbourne – Episode 2)

It’s the most ridiculous (Hoqie Madel – Episode 2)

I think that one of the most pathetic things I’ve ever had to sit through(Piers Morgan – Episode 2)

Meanwhile, Vietnamese panel are keen on applying the followingexpressions:

Tiết mục của bạn quá dở (Huy Tuấn – Epidosde 1)

xxvii

Tôi nghĩ phần thi của bạn quá tẻ nhạt (Thúy Hanh – Episode 1- Trương VănHoàng)

Anh không nhìn thấy có một sự đặc biệt nào trong tiết mục của em cả, vôcùng trống rỗng (Huy Tuấn – Episode 1)

Vâng cảm ơn giọng hát của bạn, giọng hát của bạn rất hay và bạn làm tôinổi hết gai ốc lên Tôi cứ tưởng tôi bị cảm cúm nhưng không phải nên tôi phảikiểm soát lại mình (Thành Lộc – Episode 2 – Nguyễn Xuân Trung)

Bạn hát nghe như là đi ăn cướp ý Hát rock đâu cần phải chạy lăng xăng tứtung trên sân khấu như thế đâu (Huy Tuấn – Episode 2)

Bạn hát thế nào mà anh Thành Lộc chạy luôn (Huy Tuấn- Episode 1)

Thực ra thì tiết mục của em đủ để mua vui cho một đám cưới nhỏ ở đâu đấythôi (Huy Tuấn –Episode 2)

Anh nghĩ là cho bạn ấy thời gian để sửa quần áo, nghĩa là gặp lại bạn nămsau với tiết mục nó hoàn hảo hơn (Huy Tuấn – episode 2)

Tôi thích cái môi của bạn ghê lắm Bạn hát mà tôi cứ sợ cái môi bạn nó rơi

ra khỏi cái hàm của bạn nhất là khi mà bạn ngân (Thành Lộc – Episode Nguyễn Anh Tú)

According to the data collected, both America and Vietnamese panel are

in favor of using exaggerating strategy in order to giving criticism to thecontestants Instead of saying “I don’t agree directly”, they make use of thisstrategy to let the candidate realize how bad or ridiculous his/her performance is

Strategy 2: Avoiding disagreement

xxviii

When this strategy is utilized, it means that at the beginning, judges tend

to criticize the contestants’ acts without concentrating on any special aspect inorder to respect their efforts, and afterwards, panels will express their disapprovaltowards the contestants The typical expressions of this strategy employed byAmerican panel as well as Vietnamese panel are:

Because you’re my fan, I wanna give you a little time I thought it might bethe warm-up Maybe you’re so sweet, but I gotta tell you I don’t know what youare doing there (Piers Morgan- Mr Special – Episode 3)

The odd thing about you is that I couldn’t buzz you because I was enjoying

it too much…not in a normal way…yeah we want to entertain people We wantpeople to enjoy us I have never heard anything like this before (Howie Madel –Rat and Tack -Episode 8)

Chà thiệt là khó Thưa các bác, giờ phút này đây tôi vẫn bày tỏ sự ngưỡng

mộ đối với tất cả các bác Tuy nhiên với cảm xúc riêng của tôi thì tôi vẫn cầnđược nghe cái sự đột phá trong phần diễn tấu của các bác và rõ ràng là trong phầnbiểu diễn của các bác thiếu cái phần đột phá đó và tôi nghĩ là nếu các bác có thểtiếp tục vào vòng trong thì đối với tôi chưa đủ Nên tôi không đồng ý ( Thành Lộc– Episode 1 – Làng Then)

Theo tôi thì bạn chỉ dừng lại là bạn có nhiều kĩ năng Đây là 1 cuộc thi tàinăng (Thành Lộc – Episode 1)

It is likely that panels criticize the contestants’ performances by using thisstrategy with the aim of not saying disapproval in direct way to save the hearers’faces and this can be the most effective way to giving criticism to achieve thejudges’ purposes

xxix

Strategy 3: Asking questions

The ability to ask questions is one of the most important skills in everyaspect, especially in criticizing The two panels make use of asking questionsabout the feeling of contestants after their acts with the aim of letting them realizethe judges’ disapproval of their performances American and Vietnamese panels

do not usually use this strategy as their main one in giving criticism and following

is several typical examples of this strategy:

How is your feeling? How do you feel it went? (Howie Madel – Episode Udi Abignale)

1-I just don’t understand Why anybody would want to do this? (PiersMorgan – Episode 1- Cherries Jubalie)

Did you enjoy that? (Piers Morgan – Episode 8- Rat and Tack)

Ai nghĩ ra cho cháu ý tưởng này vậy? (Huy Tuấn – Episode 3)

Tôi không hiểu em đang diễn gì thế ? (Thành Lộc – Episode 5 – NguyễnHiền)

Thực sự là tôi không hiểu ý tưởng của các bạn.ý tưởng của bạn là gì vậy?(Huy Tuấn – Semi final 1)

Bạn có thấy bài hát này quá sức với bạn không? (Thành Lộc – Semi final 1)

Strategy 4: Giving advice

In this strategy, the panels pointed out the drawbacks of the contestants’performances, and then they suggested some ideas which are really useful and

xxx

necessary for the contestants to improve themselves in near future if they want toparticipate and receive agreements For instance:

Điểm mạnh cũng như điểm yếu của các bạn trong phần biểu diễn này chính

là tiếng trống Tiếng trống đó là một thay đổi chính làm cho các bạn lạ hơn vìtiếng trống yếu không đủ để các bạn thu hút chúng tôi Nhạc hơi yếu tiếng trốngkhông đủ mạnh (Thuý Hạnh – Episode 3)

Giọng của bạn yếu so với bài hát này Tôi nghĩ bạn quá mạo hiểm khi chọnmột bài hát không phù hợp với chất giọng của mình.( Thúy Hạnh – Semi final 2)

Giọng bản yếu và bạn bắt chước hoàn toàn phong cách của người khác, bạnnên biểu diễn theo phong cách riêng của mình ( Huy Tuấn – Episode 2)

It’s too cheesy So you need to change the look: the singing, the dancing,the hand waving (Piers Morgan- Episode 3- Triple threat)

The singing…I suggest you need to practice… you know…the singing.(Piers Morgan – Episode 3- Rudi and Sitar

If you believe more in yourself, you will be much better (Sharon Osbourne– Episode 4- Emily)

Tiết mục của bạn chắc chắn sẽ thú vị hơn nếu các bạn biết cách làm mớicác bạn (Huy Tuấn- Episode 2 – Linh)

According to data collected, this strategy is not favored to both theAmerican panel and Vietnamese panel as well

Strategy 5: Comforting and refusing.

xxxi

This strategy is employed due to the fact that the panels would like toexpress their disapproval and opinions about the qualities of the contestants’performances by showing their appreciation of the contestants’ efforts, and thenthey pay attention to giving criticism than the first one, which is considered to be

a lead-in For instance:

You’ve got so much enthusiasm You really entertain me However it’s not

a million dollar act for me (Sharon Osbourne – Episode 1- Walt Winson)

I love your spirit I admire you But I can’t agree with your act (SharonOsbourne – Episode 7-Anita Mc goy)

I was thoroughly entertained I love the uniqueness of you It’s different.However this is America’s got talent, so it’s a no from me (Sharon Osbourne –Episode 6)

Thực ra thì phần trình diễn hát của bạn ý thì tôi nghĩ rằng là nếu mà bạn hátvới bạn bè hoặc hát karaoke sẽ rất hay nhưng những cái luyến láy, hơi của bạnchưa đủ để tham gia 1 cuộc thi tài năng (Thúy Hạnh –Episode 3- Nguyễn TuấnAnh)

Còn tôi thì không thích lắm vì trong phần trình diễn của anh có 3 phần:phần hát phần trình diễn của anh, phần vũ đạo thì trong đó được phần vũ đạo.Trong đó được phần vũ đạo, và bài hát giai điệu hơi ngô nghê và cái giọng hát thìkhông có ấn tượng gì cả (Huy Tuấn- Episode 5)

3.1.2 Research question 2: What are differences and similarities in the application of these strategies between the American and Vietnamese judges

in the two reality shows?

xxxii

Basing on the data collected, they will be presented in forms of tables andcharts in order to find out the prevalence of the use of criticizing strategies bypanels in America’s got Talent and Vietnam’s got talent.

Table 3.1: The use of criticizing strategies by two judging panels in America’s got talent and Vietnam’s got talent

Strategy 5: Comforting and refusing 26.45% 30.69%

The information from the table reveals that the final strategy which is aboutcomfort and criticizing seems to be the most popular one employed by bothAmerican and Vietnamese judges To be more specific, the proportion of usingthe fifth strategy by American panel accounts for 26.45% which ranks the firstplace in comparison with the other strategies These are the most significantexpressions:

You’ve got so much enthusiasm You really entertain me However it’s not

a million dollar act for me (Sharon Osbourne – Episode 1- Walt Winson)

xxxiii

I love your spirit I admire you But I can’t agree with your act (SharonOsbourne – Episode 7-Anita Mc goy)

I was thoroughly entertained I love the uniqueness of you It’s different.However this is America’s got talent, so it’s a no from me (Sharon Osbourne –Episode 6)

Similarly, Vietnamese examiners also prefer this strategy when givingcriticism and as a result the percentage of using strategy 5 is the highest one out

of five strategies (30.69%) Several typical examples of employing strategy byVietnamese examiners are:

Thực ra thì phần trình diễn hát của bạn ý thì tôi nghĩ rằng là nếu mà bạn hátvới bạn bè hoặc hát karaoke sẽ rất hay nhưng những cái luyến láy, hơi của bạnchưa đủ để tham gia 1 cuộc thi tài năng (Thúy Hạnh –Episode 3- Nguyễn TuấnAnh)

Còn tôi thì không thích lắm vì trong phần trình diễn của anh có 3 phần:phần hát phần trình diễn của anh, phần vũ đạo thì trong đó được phần vũ đạo.Trong đó được phần vũ đạo, và bài hát giai điệu hơi ngô nghê và cái giọng hát thìkhông có ấn tượng gì cả (Huy Tuấn- Episode 5)

On the other hand, the proportion of applying strategy 3 (asking questions)

by both American and Vietnamese panels is merely around 4%, which points outthat American as well as Vietnamese judges show the least concern for employingthis strategy

*American panel

xxxiv

Use of criticizing strategies by American panel

Figure 3.1: Use of criticizing strategies by the American panel in

American’s got talent

As can be seen from the data, among the top-ranked strategies listed out bythe present researcher, with 26.45% out of 121 utterances from three Americanjudges, the final strategy (Comfort and refusing) was the most commonlyemployed by the panel Besides, another strategy utilized by American panel isstrategy 1 (exaggerating) which also accounts for a large proportion (22.3%).Following closely strategy 1is strategy 2 making up 15.7% out of total in whichthe judges criticize everything on the contestants’ performance withoutconcentrating on any specific aspect In contrast, strategy 3 (asking questions) isutilized totally 5 times out of 121 utterances, which is 4.13% Meanwhile strategy

4 (Giving advice -7.43%) ranks the fourth successfully The data reveals to theresearcher that American panel mostly criticizes the qualities of contestants’ acts

by comforting and then giving criticism

*Vietnamese panel:

xxxv

Use of criticizing strategies by Vietnamese panel

Figure 3.2: Use of criticizing strategies by the Vietnamese panel in

Vietnam’s got talent

This chart illustrates the strategies that Vietnamese judges applied inreality show Vietnam’s got talent According to the statistic figures of this study,Strategy 5 (Comforting and refusing) which accounts for 30.69% is the mostpopular one employed by the Vietnamese panel to criticize the contestants.Meanwhile, remarkable percentages (23.7%) of strategy 2 as well as 18.81% ofstrategy 4 were utilized by three judges This means that avoiding disagreementand giving advice play important keys in giving criticism to the quality ofcontestants’ acts Following up, exaggerating when giving criticism was alsoemployed by Vietnamese examiners and it accounts for a significant numberwhich was 16.83% Meanwhile, strategy 3 (asking questions) which contributesonly 3.96% were not preferred employed by Vietnamese examiners at all Thedata show clearly that Vietnamese judges tend to utilize comfort and criticism intheir criticism strategies

xxxvi

Following is the figure illustrating the use of five criticizing strategies byAmerican and Vietnamese examiners

Figure 3.3: Use of criticizing strategies by American judges and Vietnamese

judges in America’s got talent and Vietnamese’s got talent

Overall, it can be clearly seen from the figure that the proportion ofemploying strategies in giving criticism by Vietnamese panel is remarkably higherthan American one In addition, it is worth noticing that both of American andVietnamese panels use variety of methods to verbally give criticism to theperformances of the contestants Although the judges are keen on employingstrategy 5 (comfort and refusing), there are still some significant differences inthe ways they apply these criticizing strategies Such differences will bespecifically analyzed as follows

 Strategy 1: Exaggerating.

xxxvii