an investigation into starting and closing telephone conversations between friends and relatives in american english and vietnamese = nghiên cứu phần mở đầu và kết thúc cuộc hội thoại qua điện thoại giữa bạn bè

American English and Vietnamese” with the attempt to find out the similarities and differences of the telephone conversation openings and closings in American English and Vietnamese.. An

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION i

ACKOWLEDGEMENTS ii

ABSTRACT iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS iv

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES vi

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS vii

PART A: INTRODUCTION 1

1.Rationale 1

2.Aims and Significance of the study 2

3.Scopes of the study 3

4.Methods of the study 3

5.Design of the study 4

PART B: DEVELOPMENT 5

CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW 5

1.1Theoretical Background 5

1.1.1Communication and telephone communication 5

1.1.2Conversation and telephone conversation 7

1.1.3Characteristics of a telephone conversation discourse 9

1.1.4The characteristic of a telephone conversation interaction 10

1.2Prior research on telephone conversations 10

1.2.1Telephone openings 11

1.2.2Telephone closings 13

1.3Summary 14

CHAPTER 2: THE STUDY 16

2.1Data collecting procedure 16

2.1.1Instruments 16

2.1.2Participants 17

2.2Data analysis 17

2.2.1Findings from the data corpus 17

2.2.2Findings from the survey questionnaire 25

2.2.3The similarities and differences of starting and closing telephone conversations in American English and Vietnamese 30

2.3Summary 33

PART C: CONCLUSION 34

1.Summary of the findings 34

2.Limitations of the study 36

3.Implications and suggestions for further research 37

REFERENCES 39

Website: 41

1.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communication 41 APPENDIX #1 I

COMMON FRAMEWORK I Note: AmE: American English II

APPENDIX #2 II

TRANSCRIPTION (American native speakers) II III

APPENDIX #3 XI

TRANSCRIPTION (Vietnamese native speakers) XI

APPENDIX #4 XX

SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE (For American Native Speakers) XX

APPENDIX #5 XXIII

BẢN CÂU HỎI KHẢO SÁT (Dành cho người Việt bản ngữ) XXIII

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES

Figure 1 Frequency of the callees speak first 26

Figure 2 Frequency of greeting the callers/ callees 27

Figure 3 Frequency of asking what the caller/ callee doing 27

Figure 4 Frequency of the callees initiate final closing 29

Figure 5 Frequency of expressing joy about engaging in the conversation 29

Figure 6 Frequency of giving reasons to end the phone 30

Table 1 Occurrences of opening sequences 18

Table 2 Occurrences of closing sequence 22

Table 3 Sample of interaction with four phases analysis 23

Table 4 Frequency of acts in the openings 25

Table 5 Frequency of acts in the closings 28 Table 6 Common opening patterns I Table 7 Common closing patterns II

PART A: INTRODUCTION

1 Rationale

Nowadays, under the circumstance of globalization, telephone is a very popular means of communication It has been at every office, every home because of its convenience People use telephone for many purposes, for example, for business, chatting, asking health, etc People may talk with others wherever they are and whenever they want Using telephone is safe, fast and in some way, it is cheap

We cannot deny the superiority of using telephone Therefore, it is necessary to have

a successful telephone conversation In order to achieve that, beside the main information needed to convey through telephone, opening and starting are also important sections The opening may motivate both speakers while the ending may help the caller and the called feels “satisfactory"

Conversation routines such as greeting and leave-taking may often be perceived as mechanical, but they are certainly not meaningless Although scholarly attention on discourse and communication research has shifted to institutional settings, this is not suggested that we can leave aside studies of casual conversations, which constitutes a major part of our daily experience A conversation is face-to-face communication but a telephone conversation is non face-to-face communication However, both of them are face-threatening act

Conversational analysis of telephone conversations has received much attention of linguists as Hopper (1989), Godard (1977), Schegloff (1972, 1979, 1986), Schegloff and Sacks (1973) Some cross-cultural studies on telephone conversations have been carried out as Godard (1977), Hopper & Kolaeit Doany (1989) All telephone conversations, once they start, must end, the way in which departure and termination achieve varies within and across cultures While telephone conversations in many languages and cultures have been studied, the Vietnamese language is conspicuously absent in the literature

Therefore, the author would like to choose the topic “An Investigation into Telephone Conversation Openings and Closings between Friends and Relatives in

American English and Vietnamese” with the attempt to find out the similarities and

differences of the telephone conversation openings and closings in American English and Vietnamese An analysis of the opening and closing sequences of 15 dyads of telephone conversations, which are transcribed from American records and Vietnamese records, together with the synthesis data from the questionnaire are as serve for the study The current investigation hopes to contribute new data to a growing body of work on cultural universalities vs particularities in the functions performed in telephone opening and closing sequences

2 Aims and Significance of the study

The study deals with the exploitation of a formula in starting and ending telephone conversations in Vietnamese language, which is done based on the study of telephone conversation by Schegloff (1968, 1972, 1986) and Schegloff and Sacks (1973) The main objective of this study is to find out the similarities and differences in opening and closing telephone conversations in American English and Vietnamese In other words, this study aims specifically at:

- Exploring a formula of the beginning and ending of telephone conversations in Vietnamese language

- Discovering the similarities and differences of telephone openings as well as telephone closings in American English and Vietnamese

- Helping speakers of American English and Vietnamese get a better communication when talking on the phone to have a successful telephone talk and improving their communicative competence

To serve the above-mentioned objectives, two research questions come out:

1 Based on Schegloff‟s theory of opening and closing sequences in American English, is there a formula in beginning and closing telephone conversations in Vietnamese? If there is, how is the act of telephone conversations, in terms of opening and closing telephone conversations, realized by Vietnamese people?

2 What are the similarities and differences in starting and closing telephone conversations

in American English and Vietnamese?

The study should be of potential interest to those who care for telephone conversation analysis This is also a base for the American or Vietnamese to get a better communication

on the phone when using American English or Vietnamese It can also be applied this in teaching telephone communication

3 Scopes of the study

In the study, the author would like to concentrate only on the opening and closing of telephone conversation, not on the whole one

Furthermore, the author tries to find out the similarities and differences of telephone conversations in two languages: American English and Vietnamese The similarities and differences are found in verbal words, not in intonation or non-verbal words (such as yelling)

The telephone conversations used for the research are the casual ones That is, the telephone conversations are between friends and relatives

In addition, the author‟s interest in this area is inspired by studies in cross-cultural communication That is, cultural aspects between the two peoples, not only on linguistic aspects would be mentioned Some important cross-cultural similarities and differences in telephone use between American English and Vietnamese are noticed

4 Methods of the study

In this study, the theoretical background relies on the research of some foreign researchers concerned with the subject Especially, the structure of my analysis will be heavily relied on frameworks pioneered by Schegloff (1968, 1972, 1986), Schegloff and Sacks (1973) and further elaborated by Hopper (1989) The current work focuses on data collected from recodered telephone conversations of native speakers of Vietnam and America and the survey questionnaires A combination of qualitative and quantitative method is used to analyze the data According to Larsen-Freeman and Long (1991), both qualitative and quantitative paradigms are not competing, but complementary, and the choice between the two is unnecessary They also assert that much can be gained from a combination of the two Within this study, qualitative method helps the author give an observation of the acts of how people in America and Vietnam open and close the telephone conversations, which can be considered to be the basis for the content of the

survey questionnaire Qualitative method also helps the author explain why American and Vietnamese people act as doing so The quantitative method is used to give frequency counts of telephone opening and closing sequences in two languages This method raises the validity and realiability for the study

There will be a comparative analysis in American English with Vietnamese as a fact

in two languages to achieve the exploitation and strategies It is through such cross-cultural comparisons that the greatest relevance to second language learning will be realized

5 Design of the study

This minor thesis consists of three parts

Part A is the introduction to the paper It gives reasons for choosing the topic and raises the research requirements: aims and significance of the study including research questions; scopes and methods This part also outlines the organization of the study

Part B is the development of the research In this part, there are two chapters

Chapter 1 is the literature review This chapter explicates some notions of conversation and communication Some prior researches on telephone conversations of some linguists are reviewed in this chapter Chapter 1 is a base for the analysis and discussion in the later chapter

Chapter 2 is the study This chapter includes data collection and data analysis procedure Then the findings will be presented

Part C is conclusion It is the last part of the minor thesis that summarizes the major points and deals with the limitation of the study as well as giving suggestions for further study

Apart from the three parts, the references and appendices including transcription of recorded telephone conversations in American English and Vietnamese and two survey questionnaires are added in the end of the paper

PART B: DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter consists of two sub-parts The first sub-part discusses some theoretical background of the study in which focuses on some concepts about communication, cross-cultural communication, communication between friends and relatives and conversation, conversation analysis, telephone conversation The second sub-part is concerned with previous research on telephone openings and closings

According to Richard et al (1992) communication is „the exchange of ideas, information, etc between two or more persons The sender/ speaker transmits message to the receiver/ listener” However, communication is not merely an exchange of information This information is understood by the receiver in more or less the way it is intended by the sender An important function of communication is to keep a particular society going There are three forms of communication: graphic, verbal and non-verbal communication

Graphic communication is the act of using written words to exchange ideas, thought, information, etc

Non-verbal communication is the act of saying what is on your mind without speaking words The communication depends rather on other channels such as eye contact, body language

Verbal communication is the act of saying what is on your mind with words It means that you use language and speech to share or exchange information

A communication can be formal or informal

Informal communication usually uses with friends and family During the communication, people may use shortened version of words or slang words

Formal communication uses in a professional setting such as in the office In this kind of communication, no slang is used and words are pronounced correctly

1.1.1.2 Cross-cultural communication

Each culture has a unique character Cultures adapt to meet specific sets of circumstances, such as climate, level of technology, population, and geography This adaptation to different conditions is evident in differences in all elements of culture, including norms, value and language Therefore, Cross-culture is the exchange of culture and the results of these changes

Richards et al (1992) defines “cross-cultural communication is an exchange of ideas, information, etc between persons from different cultural backgrounds” It is clear that there are often more problems in cross-cultural communication than in communication between people of the same culture background

In cross-cultural communication, there may easily be misunderstanding and communication failure According to Gumperz (1982), the differences in cultures can result in misunderstanding in cross-cultural transitions That is caused under the affect of some sociological factors such as age, sex, place of living, etc The misunderstanding becomes more acute when the interacting parties are using the same linguistic code but not the same cultural nom Despite conventionality, what is said and how it is sad is extremely important in cross-cultural communication Although the exchange of information is certainly involved, the language behavior plays out within a set of social relation and cultural expectation,

1.1.1.3 Communication between friends and relatives over the phone

Generally saying, communication between friends and relatives is the one with very close relationship The participants know clearly about each other The communication may occur in the non-institutional setting

Conversation routines such as greeting and leave-taking may often be perceived as mechanical but they are certainly meaningless, as Laver (1981) rightly observes: “These verbal behaviors can be understood as important strategies for the negotiation and social relationship between participants in conversation.” Although scholarly attention on discourse and communication research has shifted to institutional settings, this is not to suggest that we can leave aside studies of casual conversation, which constitutes a major part of our daily experience

As being mentioned above, a conversation may be formal or informal Communication between friends and relative over the phone occurs in non-institutional settings with a very close relationship Therefore, this kind of communication is informal

1.1.2 Conversation and telephone conversation

1.1.2.1 Conversation

Conversation is obviously with spoken rather than written language It is necessary to clarify the term “conversation” There have been numbers of ideas about conversation Francesca Pridham (2001) sees “conversation as any interactive spoken exchange between two or more people and can be:

- Face-to-face exchanges – these can be private conversations, such as talk at home between the family, or more public and ritualized conversations such as classroom talk

or Question Time in the House of parliament;

- Non-face-to-face exchanges, such as telephone conversations;

- Broadcast materials such as a live radio phone-in or a television chat show”

In another study, Rob Nolsco & Lois Arthur (1987), “conversation” refers to a time when two or more people have the right to talk or listen without having to follow a fixed schedule, such as an agenda To have a successful conversation, participants must display a willingness and ability to collaborate

A conversation is not structured in advance It is created by the parties in the process

of their conversing Conversation structure is considered under pragmatics and discourse view with two kinds: local structure and global structure

Local structure includes turn-taking, adjacency pairs, preference organization and conversation sequences

- Turn-taking is seen as everything one speaker says before another speaker begins to speak (Sacks et.al., 1974) Schegloff and Sacks (1973) share the same view that “a pair

is made up of two turns made by two different speakers” It means that speakers alternate: speaker A says something, then speaker B says, then speaker A…

- Adjacency pairs: adjacent sequence of two utterances, produced by different speakers, ordered as First, Second, both of particular type Response pairs: question/ answer; greeting/ greeting; invitation/ offer; acceptance/ apology …

- Pre-sequence is a sequence which includes a turn recognizable as potential initiation of another specific type of turn, eg:

Summon is a turn preceding an explanation for that summon

Global structure belongs to general class of verbal interchanges in which social activities consists of talking It is structured as follows:

- Opening section

- Substance section (topical organization)

- Closing section (organization ensuring coordinated exit)

In conclusion, Communication between humans is an extremely complicated and ever-changing phenomenon There have been numbers of definition and some even appear

to contrast to each other Personally speaking, I prefer the idea of Finegan et Al (1994), which defines “A conversation can be viewed as a series of speech acts – greeting, enquiries, congratulation, comments, invitations, request,… To accomplish the work of these speech acts, some organization is essential: we take turn to speak, answer questions, mark the beginning and end of conversation, and make corrections when they are needed” This definition seems to be the most satisfactory in order to assist me in carrying out further study of starting and closing telephone conversations

it is being said

1.1.2.3 Telephone conversation

A telephone conversation is the conversation over the phone denoting communicative and contents It relates only two parties In other word, Telephone conversation is a verbal communication That is, two people use spoken words to communicate over the phone Like the conversation, a telephone conversation normally proceeds in three stages:

a) Opening (sociability)

b) Main body (shifting topical focus)

c) Closing (sociability) At the end of the closing, both parties hang up

The founder of the study of telephone conversations is Schegloff (1968, 1979, 1986) who has noted that the opening is the place where a channel of communication as well as

an access is set up In his research, he proposes the sequences of openings and closings of telephone conversations which will be discussed later

1.1.3 Characteristics of a telephone conversation discourse

- Synchronous talking: telephone conversations are considered a synchronous of communication because a caller communicate with the called through the phone by spoken in real time although (Greenfield & Subrahmanyam, 2003)

- Topics in turns: Several topics are discussed in turns The two may have to several

conversations, and the streams of conversation often in order (Herring, 1999; Parrish, 2002)

- Using turn-taking rules, hence more input Turn-taking and adjacency pairs are compulsory The caller and the called can only participate in one conversation at a time (Parrish, 2002)

- Lack of body languages: The environments of telephone conversation preclude face cues such as eye contact, gaze, body orientation, and gesture that enable speakers

face-to-to know when they have an attentive listener and listeners face-to-to know whom a speaker is addressing and what he/she is talking about (Greenfield & Subrahmanyam, 2003)

1.1.4 The characteristic of a telephone conversation interaction

There are benefits of communicating over telephone Let‟s examine some generic properties of this type of interaction When people are asked why they like using talking over the phone, they generally mention things like (Coghlan 2004, Mynard 2002, d'Eça 2003):

- Immediate support, timely Feedback and getting answers faster (save time)

- Interactive discussion, more dynamic communication

- Less formal interaction, producing intimacy/closeness/warmth/ emotion

- Creating sense of urgency

- Greater interactivity, improving internal communication

- Better social relations, improves interactive competence

- Real time interaction of relationships

- Promoting active involvement, learner autonomy

- No restrictions regarding location

1.2 Prior research on telephone conversations

There has been numerous researchers pay much intention on telephone conversations Telephone conversations have been explored under many aspects and across culture Since the limitation of this study, only telephone openings and closings are reviewed

1.2.1 Telephone openings

Schegloff is the pioneer to be interested in telephone conversation opening with his dissertation on it in the late 1960‟s From that, a number of researchers have advanced the study of telephone interactions, both inter-culture (Hopper 1989; Schegloff 1979; Schegloff & Sacks 1973) and cross cultures (Godard 1977; Sifianou 1989) Many of the researchers above concentrate on aspects of the opening and closing of telephone conversation, such as turn-talking, initiation of sequences, etc

The organization of telephone openings in French is explored by Godard (1977) She suggests that there are some differences between summon-answer sequences in French versus American telephone opening Godard offers an objection to Schegloff‟s work She argues that his “summons-response” sequence cannot be universally applied, and maintains that it is important to consider cultural aspects into consideration

Sifianou (1989) finds that in Greek telephone openings, there is a greater variety of linguistic options for the answering the phone

In her study of Swedish telephone conversation openings, Lindstrom (1994) describes how Swedes use a variety of responses when answering the phone

Hopper and Schegloff are two researchers who individually have done much work in the investigation of telephone conversations

Hopper et al (1990) use Schegloff‟s work to determine the extent to which Schegloff‟s set of four opening sequences might be universally applicable and which elements might be specific to North America culture

Hopper & Chen (1996) investigate telephone openings in Taiwan They explain sequences in telephone conversations in Taiwan seem to be similar to the American English

And there are many more researchers has paid attention in this field such as Houtkoop-Steenstra (1991) with Dutch telephone openings investigation, Pavlidou (1994) with a comparision of Greek and German telephone conversation openings

In Vietnam, the investigation into telephone conversations, both seems to be absent

in the Vietnamese language

All of the researchers cited above raise valid points to keep in mind when analyzing data from another culture However, I find very persuasive Hopper et al.‟s (1990) assertion

that “Schegloff‟s discussion of telephone opening and closing sequences includes virtually every format that have been argued as being unique to Greece, France or Holland- and all from North America data!” Overall, I will rely heavily on frameworks pioneered by Schegloff (1968, 1972, 1986), Schegloff and Sack (1973) and further elaborated by Hopper (1989) in structuring my analysis

Four core opening sequences in Schegloff’ s theory

Schegloff(1986) has noted that the opening is the place where a channel of communication as well as an access is set up In his study, there exists an ordered set of four core opening sequences: summons-response sequence (the phone ring and hello); identification-recognition sequence (Tim?/ yes); a greeting adjacency pair (hi/hi); a “how you are” adjacency pair (how are you?/ I‟m alright, how are you?) (Schegloff, 1972)

For example

(ring)

1.Nancy: Hello? (Summon-aswer)

2.Hyla: Hi Nancy? Me, Hyla (Identification/recognition)

3.Nancy: Oh,Hi (Greeting)

4.Hyla: How are you? (Exchange of how you are)

5.Nancy: Fine, how‟re you?

1) Summons-answer: Schegloff (1986) finds that in ordinary call, telephone‟s ring

constitutes a summoning act, and any answer to that act demonstrates “the availability of

an attentive ear and a mouth ready to speak” Schegloff (1986) The adjacency pair (summons-answer) prescribes that the answerer speaks first by providing his or her voice sample The summons-answer sequence in line 1 opens a channel and confirms the availability of both the speaker and the hearer

2) Identification or recognition: A caller in ordinary conversation may respond with just

“Hello” or may continue by addressing the answerer, or by providing self-identification of

by initiating the topic of the conversation The form of address or self-identification depends on the relationship between the two parties (Schegloff 1968) Thus, identification

or recognition sequence is the place where the relationship between the speakers is established The identification/ recognition sequence in line 2 establishes the identities or relationship of the two interlocutors

3) Greetings: After the identification, greetings may be exchanged This may be done in

many ways For example, a caller may use address terms to an answerer or use greeting terms Greeting tokens may be combined with address terms or just a simple “hello” or

“hi” There is no neat mapping between sequences or sequence type in the openings (Schegloff 1986) The greeting sequence in line 3 not only puts the participants into “a ritual state of ratified mutual participation” (Goffman 1963) but also identifies the speakers‟ relationship

4) The “How are you?”: Although the “How are you?” can serve as “greeting substitute”

(Sack et al., 1974), Schegloff (1986) has stated that, in the context of openings of telephone conversation, “how are you?” is not “greeting substitute”, but addresses the current state of recipient He also argues that the answer to „how are you?” is relevant to the next turn of the talk For example, the response to “how are you?” in ordinary conversation can be organized into three sets: positive (really good), negative (terrible) and neutral (fine or okey) (Schegloff 1986) It is found that English speakers use exchange of

“how are you?” as a bridge where the reason for the call or first topic is introducred The exchange of “how are you?” sequence in line 4, 5 has features of greetings and is a pathway to the first topic, setting the direction of the talk

1.2.2 Telephone closings

As telephone openings, closing parts are also received much attention of researchers,

by far Schegloff and Sacks are the most The structures of telephone closings have been well explored in conversation analysis (Schegloff and Sacks, 1973; Jefferson, 1973) Schegloff and Sacks (1973) have argued that speakers follow orderly sequences in closing the telephone conversation They have observed that participants employ certain procedures to signal their desire to bring the conversation to the end Schegloff (1979) identifys markers in American English that they call “pre-closings” such as “well”, “right”,

“okey” It means that, one party is ready to terminate the conversation over the phone but

is offering the other party the opportunity to open another topic of conversation These

“pre-closings” can take various forms They also have suggested that the conversational procedures in the closings are of a universal character (Schegloff and Sacks 1973) Schegloff (1979) describes various stages of closing but without giving precise name to all

of them However, the author of this study would like to tentatively put them in to the

following categories: (1) Pre-closing, (2) Shutting down, (3) Recapitulation, (4) Terminal exchange

Four core closing sequences

1) Pre-closing: A way of initiating a closing such as “Okay”, “All right”, “So”, “Well”,

etc Not all sequences “Okay” and “Well” are pre-closings They are pre-closing only if they occur after a topic boundary (Schegloff and Sacks 1973)

2) Shutting down: an utterances serving to finish up a previously mentioned topic, such as

“That‟s all” „Well, The baby is crying”, “It‟s late now”, “I have something else to do”…etc

3) Recapitulation: involves a brief summarizing of the topic discussed and/ or

arrangements made Recapitulation also includes such elements as sending best wishes

to other family members and other shutting down details for the sack of simplicity Such recapitulation is often an optional element in a personal conversation

4) Terminal exchange: are the actual “goodbyes” or some equivalent appropriate to the

specific context of the conversation such as „Bye‟, „Cheer‟, „OK‟, „See you‟,

„Goodbye‟, „You‟re welcome‟

For the example quoted from an informal telephone conversation by two American interlocutors, which was transcribed (Tapescript 7 - Appendix #1) as the following:

Pre-closing A: Alright

T: Oh, yes Shutting down A: That‟s the reason for the call

Recapitulation T: Oh I know, we‟ll meet tonight

A: Ahha It‟d better to stop the phone now T: Yes You‟re alright

A: Ok See you later T: Yes Take it easy

Terminal exchange A: Bye

T: Bye

1.3 Summary

Briefly, the chapter has revised theory relating to communication and conversation Telephoning is a means of communication Thus, conversation analysis together with telephone conversation characteristics has been concerned in this paper Prior researches of telephone conversations have also been mentioned, in which Schegloff‟s sequences of telephone openings and closings are focused It is the database of data analysis in the later chapter Based on the framework of Schegloff, the researcher wishes to discover the norms

of opening and closing telephone conversations in Vietnam as well as find out the cultural cross of telephone openings and closings between Vietnamese and American people

CHAPTER 2: THE STUDY

In the preceding, the literature on the research topic was briefly reviewed to form the theoretical basic for the whole study Turning to practical side, this chapter firstly presents data collecting procedure, in which instruments and participants are discussed in detail Then an analysis of the collected data is carried out to maximize the validity and reliability

2.1 Data collecting procedure

2.1.1 Instruments

The instruments used to collect data is the corpus study and the survey questionnaire The corpus consists of a databank of natural texts, compiling from writing and/ or a transcription of recorded speech The main focus of corpus linguistics is to discover patterns of authentic language use through analysis of actual usage The aim of a corpus based analysis is not to generate theories of what is possible in the language Its only concern is the usage patterns of the empirical data and what that reveals to us about language behavior (Elena, 2001)

In this study, two corpora include 15 American English texts and 15 Vietnamese texts (see appendix #1 & appendix #2) transcribed from fifteen dyads of recorded telephone conversations of native speakers Using the corpus study is appropriate and sufficient for this research because the aim of the author is to focus on the objective view

of language more than to discover its rules One advantage of corpus study is that it can investigate almost any language patterns

The survey questionnaire for this study includes thirteen questions, in which there are seven questions relating to telephone opening and six questions relating to telephone closing One questionnaire is written in Vietnamese to survey Vietnamese native speakers and one is written in English to survey American native speakers but the content and outline of the two questionnaires are the same The questionnaire is designed in multiple choices (MCQs) (Gillham, 2000) to show the frequency of people act in the telephone openings and closings The content of the question bases on Schegloff‟s ideas about telephone openings and closings (Schegloff,1968, 1972, 1986) MCQs is an appropriate instrument for gathering information in this study as the researcher can survey a large

number of respondents in a short time and the information from questionnaire can be confidential for the respondent

2.1.2 Participants

The survey questionnaires are delivered to 46 Vietnamese and 46 American people

in which there are 24 Vietnamese women and 20 American women 30 Vietnamese and 35 American informants live in the city, the rest live in the countryside The informants range

in age between 22 and 60 years old The Questionnaires are mostly sent to the informants via email as by this way the researcher can survey on a great number of informants from a far distances and it is easy quick and time- saving

Participants in the fifteen dyads of recorded telephone conversations are 10 American speakers and 12 Vietnamese speakers All Vietnamese participants and most of the American participants are living and working in Vietnam Each particiapant participates in more than one conversation However, age, sex and social backgrounds of the participants are various, and there is no information collected in terms of relationships

of the interlocutors of each phone conversation However, the telephone calls include conversations between friends and relatives In doing so, the callers were asked to audio-tape telephone calls initiated by themselves from their home The conversations are naturalistic telephone calls in the sense that the callers were instructed to only make and record calls as communication needs arose These recorded telephone conversations made

to family, friends, and relatives to keep in touch

Due to the acquaintance limitation as well as the restriction of time and ability, collected data are only 46 dyads of survey questionnaires and 15 dyads of recorded telephone conversations However, it is thought that those numbers are valid enough for the study

2.2 Data analysis

2.2.1 Findings from the data corpus

Data are transcribed texts collected from the 15 dyads of telephone conversations recorded naturally The aim of the records is to seek out the patterns of opening and closing of telephone conversations in Vietnamese The categories are based on the four

core sequences of Schegloff The American English data corpus is to reaffirm Schegloff‟s theory of opening (Schegloff 1968) and closing patterns (Schegloff and Sacks 1973) I did

a simple count on how many of the categories for openings and closings appeared in the data After this initial counting step, I returned to look more closely at the actual text to find examples in support of both concordances and differences between the data and the current theories After all, major similarities and differences between one‟s own cultures are highlighted

Openings

Schegloff proposed four available adjacency pair sequences in telephone conversational openings: summons/ answer; identification/ recognition; greeting sequence, and the “how you are” sequence I have previously mentioned to the definition of the four categories “hello/ hi” in the summons/ answer sequence does not serve as a greeting, but rather answer to the summons of the ringing of the telephone Therefore, once recognition

is achieved, in many cases the participants will do an additional “hello/ hi” which functions this time as an actual greeting to a known interlocutor

Table 1 Occurrences of opening sequences

Categories Number of occurrences in

Vietnamese

Number of occurrences in American English

1 Summons/ responses (Eg:

4 A “how you are” adjacency

pair (how are you?/ I‟m

alright, how are you?)

In the table above, I summarize the number of occurrences of each sequence found in the fifteen samples of telephone conversations between friends and relatives which are transcribed from the records

The numbers of occurrences of four phases in American English confirm Schegloff‟s theory about telephone opening sequences Thus, the number of collected data is reliable enough to carry out the research and support for the study It is the base for the analysis of the data and the base to compare the strategies of the two languages

The table 1 shows that mostly, there are frequently used patterns in each of the four phases of opening telephone conversations However, greeting adjacency pair only appears 20% in Vietnamese language while other phases appear not less than 80% Thus, greeting adjacency pair is not often used by Vietnamese people Clearly, if we look at nothing but the numbers, there appears to be a strong fit with Schegloff‟s suggested categories A telephone call may involve in two consecutive conversations in a single call When the telephone was passed to the second member, both parties already knew who was going to

be on the line, and so there was no need for this sequence between them Essentially, the identification/ recognition was carried out in advance of the beginning of their conversation

The following extract is an example of the most typical opening sequences:

0 “ring ring ring” (the bell of the telephone)

1 H: Alo (Hello)

2 D: Alo, Hạnh có phải không? (Hello, Is that Hanh?)

3 H: Vâng ạ Ai đó ạ? (Yes Who‟s that?)

4 D: Dung đây mà, không nhận ra giọng à? (Dung, don‟t you recognize me by my voice?)

5 H: À, Dung à, lâu ngày quá Khỏe không? (Ah, Dung, long time no see How are you?)

6 D: Khỏe Thế Hạnh và gia đình thì sao? (Fine How about you and your family?)

7 H: Cảm ơn nha, mình và cả nhà khỏe cả (Thanks, my family and I are well)

( tapescript 21- appendix#2)

………

8 “ring ring ring”(The bell of the telephone)

9 T: Alo! (Hello)

10 A: Anh Tường hả? (Tường, isn‟t it?)

11 T: Ờ (Yes)

12 A: Khỏe hông? (How are you?)

13 T: Ờ, anh khỏe, em đang làm gì đấy? (Well, I‟m fine What are you doing?)

14 A: Em đang trong Sài Gòn đây (I‟m in Sai Gon)

15 T: Ở trong Sài Gòn à? Vào Sài Gòn sớm thế? (In Sai Gon? Why do you go to SG so early?)

16 A: Em vào được 2 tuần rồi (I have gone here for 2 weeks)

(Tapescript 16 - appendix #2)

Lines 0, 1, 8, 9, show the summons/ response sequence: “Ring, ring, ring” and

“Hello” Lines 2, 3, 4, 10, 11 show the process of the identification/ recognition sequence, which in this case actually takes two talking turns for each participant The answer to summons in lines 2 ad 9 - “Hello” may offer voice samples for recognition by the other party

Normally, every phone conversation initiates by the answer to the summons of the phone bell It is as a “signal” to show that there is someone picking up the receiver The following step is to identify who is involving in the conversation This step is a must in any telephone conversations if there is the answer to summons of the bell of the phone According to Schegloff, after the interlocutors recognize each other, they often greet to each other As the number of occurrences in Vietnam, only 20% Vietnamese people greet their co-participants in the beginnings of the conversation This stage seems to be not popular when Vietnamese people talk to their friends or relatives over the phone It is supposed that in Vietnam the greeting sequences “hello/ hi” often occur among people who are different age, social background…and in “formal” situations To Vietnamese people, friends and relatives are in close relationships so in the telephone conversations, greeting to each other after recognition is rare This action may sometimes occur when the interlocutors are different ages and the conversations might be, in some way, a little

“formal” one

One quality of Vietnamese people is care for each other That‟s why the number of occurrences in the “how you are” sequence appears 80 % The questions about privacy express the interests in the partner In this sequence, people not only ask about one‟s health, they may also ask some other questions, just for showing the concern on their co-participants Such the questions are “what are you doing? (line 13 or see T18, 24- appendix

#2) or “Have you eaten?” (see T23, 24- appendix #2) etc This seems to be in contrast to the American, these questions may be perceived as rude and infringement of private life In this stage, the popular action of the American is caring about the other‟s health with “how are you?” and answers “well/ good/ I‟m fine” Thus, I would like to call the “how you are” sequence of the opening telephone conversation that Schegloff has proposed in American English by the “inquiry” sequence in Vietnamese The inquiry sequences include not only

“how are you?”, but also extended questions such as “what are you doing?” or “have you eaten” etc These inquiries reflect Vietnamese culture: the caring quality of each other, not the curiosity

In sum, the openings of telephone conversations in Vietnamese often follow three stages: summons/ answer (the bell of the ring and anwer “Alo”(hello) ); identification/ recognition ( who‟s that? Is this Dung? It‟s me, Thai …); and the inquiry (how are you? What are you doing? …)

Closings

Closing the telephone conversation is realized by the cooperation from both interlocutors Based on the above Schegloff and Sacks‟ (1973), this study tries to explore if there is a formula of telephone closings in Vietnamese language An analysis of the corpus

of the transcription of telephone conversation records in Vietnamese is made based on the following sections that Schegloff and Sack (1973) proposed: (1) Pre-closing is a way of giving signal to initiate a closing by using such terms are “Okay”, “All right”, “So”,

“Well”, etc.; (2) Shutting down is the use of expressions to start the ending part of the telephone conversations such as giving reasons for closing the topic and ending the phone calls; (3) Recapitulation involves a brief summarizing of the topic discussed and/ or arrangements made Recapitulation also includes such elements as sending best wishes to other family members and other shutting down details for the sack of simplicity Such recapitulation is often an optional element in a personal conversation and (4) Terminal

exchange are the actual “goodbyes” or some equivalent appropriate to the specific context

of the conversation such as „Bye‟, „Cheer‟, „OK‟, „See you‟, „Goodbye‟, „You‟re welcome‟ This section examines the above four phases to analyze the closing section Although these phases may not always be clearly exclusive, this study examines each of the phases

as a separate entity in order to see how each particular part is realized in the Vietnamese telephone closings

Table 2 Occurrences of closing sequence

Categories Number of occurrences

in Vietnamese

Number of occurrences

in American English

1 Pre-closing (E.g: O.K ) 66.7% 73.7%

2 Shutting down (E.g: Oh, The baby is

The numbers of occurrences of each closing stage in the table 2 show that the pattern

of closing a telephone conversation in Vietnamese language may exist the four stages: closing (appear 66.7%), shutting down (appear 53.3%), recapitulation (73%) and terminal exchange (93.3%) Terminal exchange phase seems to be the most popular in both languages

pre-Pre-closing: Of the fifteen records (see Appendix 2), this phase has 66.7% in which one of

the interlocutors cues a signal to initiate a closing section and the other agrees to it This type of exchange is called a “pass” because it indicates that the speaker has not now anything more to say The terms can be a signal to initiate a closing section is “Ừ/ À/ Rồi/ Vâng/ Dạ/ Ừm” in Vietnamese language and “Yes/ Well/ O.k/ Uhm/ Hmm” in American English language

Shutting down: After the signal to initiate a closing section, one of the interlocutors give

out the reason(s) to start ending the phone This is the beginning of closing part The reasons for ending may be various as long as they are reasonable ones for closing to “keep face” with their partners

For example, In Vietnamese language, some expressions can be used such as “Ồ, mình lại có việc bận chút”(Oh, It‟s time I have something else to do); “Mình phải đi có việc” (I have to leave my home now); “Thôi muộn rồi” (It‟s late now), “Mình nói chuyện khá lâu rồi”( We‟ve talk too long)

Recapitulation: Schegloff found in American culture, there are important moves

exchanged very frequently between pre-closing and terminal exchange: wishing health, promise of future contact, gratitude or apology

Wishing each other‟s health is most often employed in 8 interactions in Vietnamese language (see appendix 2) Gratitude and the promising future contact is seen often as well Gratitude is expressed by saying “thanks/ thank you” A caller thanks for his/ her partner talking with him/ her A callee thanks the other for calling Also there is thanking about specially what participants previously talk about For example line 2 and 4 is a way

of gratitude

Line1 D: Ừ chị gọi hỏi thăm vậy thôi Cố gắng nhé

(I phone just to inquire you Try your best)

2 M: Vâng, cảm ơn chị vì đã quan tâm (Yes, thanks for caring)

3 D: Cho chị gửi lời hỏi thăm tới ông bà nhé (Give my regards to your parents)

4 M: Vâng Cảm ơn chị (Yes Thank you)

(T29- appendix #2)

Terminal exchange: In the terminal goodbye exchange, the very last goodbye adjacency

pair is examined Of the fifteen telephone conversations (appendix 2), “Thế thôi nha”, “Ừ, nha”, “Bai bai”, “Chào nhé” “Chào” “Chào anh/chị” are frequently used as terminal exchanges.All of these expressions are commonly used as goodbye words between people who are close to each other “Bai bai” is originally comes from English word “Bye”, but commonly used as a casual terminal exchange in Vietnamese among the young people The expressions “Chào” or “chào anh/ chị” in the last section of the conversations

in Vietnamese are served as “goodbye” expression in English

The following example (T24- Appendix #2) marks interaction with the pattern consisting of four phases

Table 3 Sample of interaction with four phases analysis

1 Pre- closing H: Ừ (Yes)

D: Ừ (Yes)

Signal to move to the closing

2 Shutting down

H: Thôi, nói lâu rồi, tớ ngừng đây

(Well, we‟ve talked for long I stop here)

H: Ừ (Yes) D: Thế nhé Nghỉ ngơi đi nha (That‟s all for now)

H: Ừ Thế nhé (ok That‟s all for now)

Reason for ending

Summary of talking

3 Recapitulation

D: Khỏe nha (Good health) H: Cảm ơn nha Dung cũng thế (Thanks! The same to you) D: Ừ Nói chuyện sau nha (Ok Talk

to you later)

Wishing health Gratitude

Promise of future contact

4 Terminal exchange H: Thế nha, chào nha (Bye)

D: Ừ, tạm biệt nha (Ok Bye) Actual closing

In this interaction, pre-closing is realized by one interlocutor gives a signal “Ừ” (Yes) and the other shows the agreement “Ừ” (Yes) This signal informs that speakers H and D have nothing more to say or they want to end the telephone conversation Then H gives reason for ending After that, the speakers exchange three moves in recapitulation stage including wishing health, gratitude and promise of future contact Terminal exchange

is always in the last of the conversations In this interaction, it is achieved by the exchange

“Thế nha, chào nha / Ừ, tạm biệt nha” (Bye/ Ok Bye)

It is noted that, closing part does not always appear all the four stages There may exist two or three stages in the closings The appearance depends on personal conversations

The example below (T20- appendix #2) is one kind of closing which has two stages:

Shutting down C1: Thôi đến giờ tớ có việc rồi (It‟s time I have something else to do)

C2: Ừ (Yes)

Terminal exchange: C1: Chào nhé (Good bye)

C2: Ừ, bai (ok Bye)

In conclusion, the analysis of data shows that the closing section of Vietnamese telephone conversations is similar to American English and may follow a formula consisting of four stages: Pre-closing; shutting down; recapitulation and terminal exchange However, all the four stages do not always appear in the closings Closing can

be achieved by only pre-closing and terminal exchange, yet shutting down and recapitulation are optional However, from the point of norms of interaction, shutting down and recapitulation are as important as the other two phases

2.2.2 Findings from the survey questionnaire

The aim of the survey questionnaire is to identify how and how often people in Vietnam and America act in the openings and closings of telephone calls Then, a comparison is made to find out the similarities and differences between Vietnamese and American English in the way people start and end the telephone conversations The quantitative method and contrastive analysis method is used to achieve this objective

2.2.2.1 Openings

Table 4 Frequency of acts in the openings

Situations

Frequency (%) Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never

A V A V A V A V A V

1 The callees speak first 80.4 82.6 10.9 8.7 8.7 8.7

2 Answer to summons by saying the phone

3 Answer to summons by saying names 32.6 0 6.5 10.8 58.8 74 2.1 15.2

4 Answer to summons by saying “Hello” 87 78.2 13 21.8

5 Answer to summons by asking name of the

6 Recognize the caller/ callee after

7.Greet the caller/ callee 87 0 8.7 19.5 4.3 32.6 0 47.9

8 Ask about the caller/ callee‟s health 69.5 28.2 30.5 67.4 0 4.4

9 Ask the caller/callee how the things are

going on 10.8 54.3 32.6 28.2 56.6 17.5

7 10 Ask the caller/ callee if he/ she has

11 Ask the caller/ callee what he/ she is doing 0 52.1 0 45.8 4.3 2.1 95.7 0

12 Ask the caller/ callee if he/ she has been

summons of the phone bell

The chart below shows the frequency of the callee raise his/ her voice first to begin the telephone conversations

Figure 1 Frequency of the callees speak first

As it can be seen from the figure above, the difference between American English and Vietnamese in frequency of the callees speak first in the telephone openings There are 82.6% Vietnamese people always speak first in the beginning of telephone conversations and 8.7% Vietnamese people often do that 80.4% American people always and 10.9% American people often speak first The rest small number is for sometimes doing so The

figure 1 shows that there is nearly the same in the frequency of identifying who start the telephone conversation The callers speak first may happen in the case there is some incident with the line or the called has not caught up with the beginning of the call when he/ she picks up the receiver The answer is usually “Hello” in American English and

“Alo” in Vietnamese language This answer is served as the answer of the summons rather than greeting In some cases, it is both the answer of the summons and the greeting

As previous discussion, Greeting the callers/ callees after recognition to each other is popular in American culture but not popular in Vietnamese culture This discover is more strongly supported by the chart below:

Figure 2 Frequency of greeting the callers/ callees

87% of the American always greet the callers/ callees after identification/ recognition and 8.7% of them often do that Whereas none of the Vietnamese people always greet to each other and only 19.5% people do that A majority of Vietnamese people rarely say

“hello/ hi” after they recognize who are taking part in the conversations

After greeting to each other in American English or identification/ recognition in both language, a number of questions are raised to show the care for others before going to the real purpose of the phone Both people of two countries concern about other‟ s health The numbers in the situation 8 of the table 3 prove for this In contrast, American people avoid asking what relate to private life The questions such as “have you eaten?”; “what are you doing?” seem to be not popular in American culture Mean while these questions may popular in Vietnamese culture The following chart is one of the example show how often people in two countries ask the caller/ callee what he/ she is doing before he/ she talk over the phone:

Figure 3 Frequency of asking what the caller/ callee doing

The above figure shows that a majority of American people (95.7%) never ask their partner what he/ she is doing before he/ she engages in the telephone call Whereas a great number of Vietnamese people (52.1% often and 45.8% sometimes) use that question in the openings as a concern on their partner

2.2.2.2 Closings:

Table 5 Frequency of acts in the closings

Situations

Frequency (%) Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never

3.Use term(s) such as “Well,

Uhm, Ok”… for pre-closing

76.1 26.2 23.9 58.7 0 10.8 0 4.3

4.Summarize the topic of the

call before final closing

5.Express the joy about

engaging in the conversation

54.3 0 34.9 26 10.8 67.5 0 6.5

6.Remind friend/ relative to

take care of his/ her health

13 0 73.9 65.2 13.1 30.5 0 4.3

7.Give well-wish(es) 60.8 13.1 39.2 58.7 0 28.2

8.Give regards to other

members in the family

17.4 47.8 28.3 52.2 54.3 0

9.Make an arrangement or

promise

13 0 37 17.4 50 63.1 0 19.5

10.Exchange goodbye in the

end of the conversation

100 87 0 13

11.The callers get the last

word in the phone

Note: “A” stands for American people & “V” stands for Vietnamese people

The result from table 5 shows that there are some similarities and differences in the acts of people in both Vietnam and America close the telephone conversation

For instance, it is difficult to identify who initiates final closing more often- the caller

or the called? According to numbers found from the survey (shown in situations 16, 17- table 4), it can be compared the frequency of the callees initiate final closing in the chart below:

Figure 4 Frequency of the callees initiate final closing

It can be seen from Figure 4 that there is no far distance in the number of how often the called initiate final closing of telephone conversations In America, 21.8% callees often start to the telephone closings and 78.2% callers sometimes initiate The near numbers are

in Vietnam: 17.4% callees often start to the closings ad 82.6% the callees initiate the finals

So the act of initiate final closing may be the same in two cultures The differences in the acts in the closing sections may also vary across cultures For example, the chart below

compares numbers of people in two countries expressing the joy about engaging in the conversations:

Figure 5 Frequency of expressing joy about engaging in the conversation

Findings from the Figure 5 show that there is a great difference in the frequency of expressing joy about engaging in the conversation between American people and Vietnamese people 54.3% American people often show the joy meanwhile no Vietnamese often do that In contrast, there is 67.5% Vietnamese people rarely express their joy of engaging but only 10.8% American seldom expess their verbal emotion of the phone conversations The reason for this different act may be lie in the habit of communication or

in the “concept” of acting The Vietnamese may think the interlocutors are in close relationship so the conversations shoud be informal ones

An other example is giving the reasons to end the phone which is displayed in the following chart:

Figure 6 Frequency of giving reasons to end the phone

The Figure 6 shows the contrast in frequency of giving reasons to end the phone in America and Vietnam Only 21.8% American people often give the reasons for ending and

60.8% American people rarely give the reasons for ending Whereas 56.5% Vietnamese people often give the reasons for ending and 13% Vietnamese people rarely propose the reasons Perhaps, the diffirence lies in particular culture of one‟s own country

2.2.3 The similarities and differences of starting and closing telephone

conversations in American English and Vietnamese

After finding from the records and survey questionnaires, there are some similarities and differences of starting and closing telephone conversations occur across cultures of Vietnam and American

2.2.3.1 Openings

Similarities

- The analysis of telephone calls in Vietnamese suggests that there is a similarity to the sequential organization of telephone openings in American English In telephone conversation openings, an ordered set of core opening sequences: summons/ answer (the phone ring and response); the identification-recognition sequence (that is, partners display each other‟s recognition of the other) (for example, hello Clara? Yeah); and the how are you sequence (how are you/ Good, how are you)

- The callees often speak first in both America and Vietnam When the phone rings, the callee picks up the receiver and raise his/ her voice first This is a signal of beginning a conversation The answer to summons usually by „greeting” phrase – “Hello/Hi” in America culture and “Alo” in Vietnamese culture though this phrase does not serve as actual greeting Saying the phone number/ name or asking name of the caller does not often appear in both cultures

- Both American people and Vietnamese people pay much time to care about participant‟s well-being Before going to the real content of the conversation people often exchange some information about health, weather

co Some verbal cues are the same in two languages In summon/ response sequence,

“Hello/ Yes” in American English language are equivalent to “Alo/ Dạ/ Vâng” in Vietnamese language The process of identification/ cognition of the caller/ the callee are the same in American English and Vietnamese The American native speakers use