A study of english politeness strategies for expressing annoyance with reference to the vietnamese equivalents

THESIS A STUDY OF ENGLISH POLITENESS STRATEGIES FOR EXPRESSING ANNOYANCE WITH REFERENCE TO THE VIETNAMESE EQUIVALENTS LÊ THỊ TUYẾT HƯỜNG Field: English Language Code: 60220201 Supe

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

HANOI OPEN UNIVERSITY

TIẾNG ANH LIÊN HỆ VỚI TƯƠNG ĐƯƠNG TIẾNG VIỆT)

LÊ THỊ TUYẾT HƯỜNG

Hanoi, 2016

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

HANOI OPEN UNIVERSITY

M.A THESIS

A STUDY OF ENGLISH POLITENESS STRATEGIES FOR

EXPRESSING ANNOYANCE WITH REFERENCE TO THE

VIETNAMESE EQUIVALENTS

LÊ THỊ TUYẾT HƯỜNG

Field: English Language Code: 60220201

Supervisor: Dr MAI THỊ LOAN

Hanoi, 2016

CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY

I, the undersigned, hereby certify my authority of the study project report entitled

A study of English politeness strategies for expressing annoyance with reference to the Vietnamese equivalents submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master in English Language Except where the reference is indicated,

no other person’s work has been used without due acknowledgement in the text of the thesis

Hanoi, 2016

Le Thi Tuyet Huong

Approved by SUPERVISOR

(Signature and full name)

Date:………

A special word of thanks goes to teachers and students in Faculty of English at Hanoi Open University and many others, without whose support and encouragement it would never have been possible for me to have this thesis accomplished

Last but not least, I am greatly indebted to my family for the sacrifice they have devoted to the fulfillment of this academic work

ABSTRACTS

Cross-communication has been proved to be one of the most intriguing issues that attracts the attention of many experts and researchers in Vietnam The fact that there are more studies conducted in almost all aspects of cross- communication is the best evidence Speech act, to be specific, is the matter of interest that receives a distinguishable concern from many researchers

Therefore, this study focused on the use of politeness strategies for expressing annoyance in English with reference to the Vietnamese equivalents, based on the solid theoretical background of pragmatics and cross-cultural pragmatics The author hopes that the similarities and differences in strategies for expressing annoyance in English with reference to the Vietnamese equivalents will contribute to the avoidance of cultural conflicts

Data used for analysis in this study were collected through survey questionnaires which consist of 2 main parts The first part is to collect informants’ parameters (age, gender, occupation and foreign language acquisition) The second part consists of 3 situations given by the author to collect the idea and attitude of Vietnamese and English informants when expressing their annoyance according to their communicate partner (close friend, acquaintance, colleague, boss and stranger)

The author has made this research with great interest and hoped that it will

be effective to the learners However, mistakes and errors are unavoidable, all comment and suggestions are highly appreciated

LIST OF TABLES

page

Table 1: Realization of strategies used by Vietnamese and English informants according to their age……… 45 Table 2: Realization of strategies used by Vietnamese and English informants according to their gender ……… 47 Table 3: Realization of strategies used by Vietnamese and English informants according to their occupation……….….48 Table 4: Realization of strategies used by Vietnamese and English informants according to their language acquisition ……… 50 Table 5: Realization of strategies used by Vietnamese and English informants according to their communicative partners ………52

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION 3

1 Rationale 3

2 Aims and objectives of the research 4

3 Scope of the research 4

4 Methods of the research 5

5 Significance of the research 5

6 Structure of Thesis 6

CHAPTER II: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 7

1 Review of the previous related studies 7

2 Culture and Communication 9

2.1 Culture 10

2.2 Communication 11

2.3 Culture- Communication correlation 13

3 Cross- cultural pragmatics 14

4 Speech acts 15

4.1 Notions of Speech Acts 15

4.2 Classification of Speech Acts 16

4.3 Direct and Indirect Speech Acts 18

4.4 Expressing annoyance as a speech act 19

5 Politeness 20

5.1 The notions of Politeness 20

5.2 Politeness Strategies 22

5.2.1 Bald-on- record 23

5.2.2 Positive politeness 23

5.2.3 Negative politeness 29

6 Summary 35

CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY 36

1 Research questions 36

2 Data collection technique 36

2.1 The questionnaire 36

2.2 The informants 37

3 Data analysis techniques 38

4 Summary 38

CHAPTER IV: FINDING AND DISCUSSION 40

1 Realization of the strategies 40

1.1 Bald-on record 40

1.2 Hedging opinion 42

1.3 Avoid giving opinion 43

1.4 Joking 43

1.5 Telling a white-lie 44

1.6 Give (or ask for reason) 45

2 Data analysis 46

2.1 Use of the strategies as seen from informants’ parameters 46

2.2 Use of strategies in terms of communicative partners 52

3 Major cross-cultural similarities and differences between the English and the Vietnamese 55

3.1 Similarities and differences as seen from informants’ parameters 55

3.2 Similarities and differences in terms of communicative partners 58

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION 61

1 Recapitulation 61

2 Concluding remarks 61

3 Limitations of the current research 64

4 Suggestions for a further research 65

REFERENCES 66

Cross-cultural communication based on knowledge of many factors It describes the ability to successfully form, foster, and improve relationships with members of a culture different from one’s own We can realize cross-cultural communication’s factors such as the other culture’s values, perceptions, manners, social structure, decision-making practices An understanding of how members of the group communicate- both verbally and non- verbally, in person,

in writing or in any other kind of communication is also its factor

Nevertheless, miscommunication is a very broad area, and with the world becoming smaller and more diverse, miscommunication seems to be happening

more and more As expressing annoyance is an act with high risk of making the hearers lose face, it requires different supplementary steps to reduce the weightiness of the utterance That is the reason why expressing annoyance is chosen for the project

For any of those purposes, the author would like to spend time and effort to provide a more comprehensive picture of the speech act of expressing annoyance The study promises to make itself meaningful, reliable and applicable to the reality

2 Aims and objectives of the research

The thesis aims at helping Vietnamese learners of English to have a better understanding of the strategies expressing annoyance and be able to use them in daily communication

With this aim, the thesis finds out the politeness strategies for expressing annoyance in English and Vietnamese; compares and contrasts the communicative strategies used by English and Vietnamese people when they want to show their annoyance in verbal communication Moreover, avoidance

of cultural conflicts between Vietnamese and English leading to miscommunication is also its objective

3 Scope of the research

The data acquired from the survey questionnaire on ways of expressing annoyance in English and Vietnamese is the study’s limitation The answers from informants are collected via email Due to the time constraint and the scope of a Minor Thesis, only 30 English informants were chosen for data analysis with reference to Vietnamese equivalents

The study also focus on the speech act of expressing annoyance only Only Vietnamese Northern dialect and English native speakers are chosen for contrastive analysis Social relationship is focused and the kinship between the informants (speakers) and the communicative partners (hearers) is ignored in this study The informants were asked to express their annoyance to a certain person only, not a thing or object

4 Methods of the research

The methods which are used in the research are interviewing English and Vietnamese friends, colleagues and relatives; describing and analyzing of the collected data; consulting with supervisor and discussing with the colleagues

In addition, in order to set up the theoretical framework for the research, the author refers to both Vietnamese and English publications

5 Significance of the research

(i) Theoretical significance

In terms of theoretical significance, the research is expected to contribute

an in-depth understanding of speech acts in English when expressing annoyance with reference to the Vietnamese equivalents

(ii) Practical significance

Cross- culturally compared and contrasted, the data has uncovered some major similarities and differences in choosing politeness strategies to express annoyance It is the similarities and differences recognized that hopefully

contribute to the avoidance of cultural conflicts leading to communication breakdown

6 Structure of Thesis

The thesis is designed with five chapters:

Chapter 1, Introduction shows rationale, aims, objectives of the research, scope

of the research, methods of the research, significance of the research and organization structural of the research

Chapter 2, Theoretical background provides an overview of the issues to be

covered and the situations in which the study is carried out

Chapter 3, Methodology presents the research questions, the major methods,

the minor methods and the techniques employed in the research The chapter also describes the way the data are collected and analyzed

Chapter 4, Finding and discussion describes and analyses the communicative

strategies used to express annoyance in English with reference to the Vietnamese equivalents to find out and discuss the major cross-cultural similarities and differences between the English and the Vietnamese informants

Chapter 5, Conclusion summaries the major findings found out from the

investigation and data analysis, presents the limitations of the study

CHAPTER II: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

1 Review of the previous related studies

It cannot be denied that the expression of the annoyance is very easy to make other lose face and impact on the relationship between the speaker and the hearer It is the reason why studying on expressing annoyance has drawn much attention of researchers in many countries recently

First of all, American Psychological Association (1999) conducted an research on controlling anger The authors indicated that anger is a completely normal, usually healthy, human emotion But when it gets out of control and turns destructive, it can lead to many problems—problems at work, in personal relationships, and in the overall quality of life And it can make people feel as though they are at the mercy of an unpredictable and powerful emotion Some brochures are meant by the author to help people understand and control anger

Tiedens (2001) had a research on the effect of negative emotion expressions

on social status conferral There are four studies examined status conferral The studies show that people confer more status to targets who express anger than to targets who express sadness In the first study, participants supported President Clinton more when they viewed him expressing anger about the Monica Lewinsky scandal than when they saw him expressing sadness about the scandal Studies 2-4 showed that anger expressions created the impression that the expresser was competent and that these perceptions mediated the relationship between emotional expressions and status conferral

In 2005, Morris wrote an article about managing emotions in the work place The article examines the implications of this research for more effective management of annoyance during service transactions The rapid and significant increase in the number of jobs which require regulated displays of annoyance, as well as the potential impact of emotional displays on service quality and customer satisfaction, certainly makes this issue one worthy of additional attention

Website wikiHow (2015) uploaded an article entitled How to express anger without hurting people This article was written by Jessica Casey The author divided the article into 4 part: Calming yourself down; Understanding your anger; Talking about your emotions and Getting professional help Through this article, Jessica wants people to express their anger productively, calm themselves down and work on understand their anger and other emotions Then, they can communicate their anger in an assertive manner that will be less likely

to hurt the other person

In the context of Vietnam, Đỗ Thị Hồng Thùy (2010) had a study on joking between friends and relatives in Vietnamese and English cultures This study is confined only to the verbal aspects of the act of joking The author aims to investigate the English- Vietnamese cross- cultural interaction on speech act of joking between friends and relatives The study’s central focus is on which strategies used in joking in both languages English and Vietnamese

Also in 2010, Ưng Thị Thu Quyên was concerned about American- Vietnamese verbal expressions in offering a gift and responding to a gift offer This study compares and contrasts the strategies employed by Vietnamese and

American people when they offer a gift and respond to a gift offer in their own language and culture

Bùi Khánh Ly (2012) did a study on cognitive metaphors of negative emotions in English and Vietnamese Her study investigated cognitive metaphors of three negative emotions: anger, sadness and fear in English and Vietnamese based on the theory of cognitive semantics The author discovered and explained the similarities and differences in cognitive metaphors of the three negative emotions in English and Vietnamese, especially in anger

Nguyễn Thị Thùy Linh (2013) had a research on expressing satisfaction in American English and Vietnamese Her research aims to have a thorough examination in the similarities and differences in directness and indirectness strategies of expressing satisfaction be Vietnamese and English informants, whereby to find out some similarities and differences in politeness strategies of expressing satisfaction in English and Vietnamese

2 Culture and Communication

When two or more strangers from different cultures communicate or exchange their information and attitude, they are doing intercultural or cross-cultural communication, trying to show or let the other(s) learn about their cultural values, norms, and beliefs Since intercultural communication and cross-cultural communication are not very much different and are used interchangeably, we therefore would like to adopt the view of intercultural communication as the exchange of information between individuals who are unalike culturally What is more, such communication is much influenced by different factors, notably the binary system of competence-performance (what

one knows vs what one does) and context (which sets the scene and shapes the meaning that will attributed to what is said)

Cross-cultural or intercultural communication is simply defined as “the exchange of information between individuals who are unalike culturally” (Rogers and Steifatt 1999: 103) or “whenever a message producer is a member

of one culture and a message receiver is a member of another” (Samovar and Porter, 1985: 39) In cross-cultural communication, people from different cultures may not understand each other or get in trouble if they bring their cultural values and norms into mutual exchanges One of the typical examples

of cultural misunderstanding is that they transfer what is accepted in their culture to new situation of communicating with others from a different culture This leads to not only serious misunderstanding, but also communication breakdowns or fatal consequences Nevertheless, it is not the common way for many Vietnamese people to do the same job Therefore, when contacting each other, a Vietnamese and his Anglophone counterpart may have unexpectedly negative comments on each other about the same act According to Thomas (1995), one of the reasons for communication failure is that interlocutors may not have a good acquisition of the common language used in cross-cultural communication

2.1 Culture

Many intellectuals have defined the term “culture” until now Culture includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society (Tylor,1974) Alternatively,

in a contemporary variant, culture is defined as a social domain that emphasizes the practices, discourses, and material expressions, which, over time, express

the continuities and discontinuities of social meaning of a life held in common (James,2010)

The definition of culture is wider than something people think, wear, eat, or speak, etc… It is the everyday life, but in the humanities, one sense of culture,

as an attribute of the individual, has been the degree to which they have cultivated a particular level of sophistication, in the arts, sciences, education, or manners The level of cultural sophistication has also sometimes been seen to distinguish civilizations from less complex societies Such hierarchical perspectives on culture are also found in class-based distinctions between a high culture of the social elite and a low culture, popular culture or folk culture of the lower classes, distinguished by the stratified access to cultural capital

2.2 Communication

According to Mckenzie (1997), communication is about transmitting ideas

or messages Communication is the process of attempting to convey information from a sender to a receiver with the use of a medium There are several means of communication There are auditory means, such as speaking, singing and sometimes tone of voice, and nonverbal, physical means, such as body language, sign language, paralanguage, touch, eye contact, or the use of writing Communication is defined as a process by which we assign and convey meaning in an attempt to create shared understanding This process requires a vast repertoire of skills in intrapersonal and interpersonal processing, listening, observing, speaking, questioning, analyzing, and evaluating Use of these processes is developmental and transfers to all areas of life: home, school, community, work, and beyond It is through communication that collaboration and cooperation occur Communication is the articulation of sending a message,

through different media whether it be verbal or nonverbal, so long as a being transmits a thought provoking idea, gesture, action, etc We can understand that communication is the process of exchanging information

There is the definition from Hybels and Weaver (1992), which proposes

“Communication is any process in which people share information, ideas, and feelings that involve not only the spoken and written words but also body language, personal mannerism and style, the surrounding and things that add meaning to a message”

Nonetheless, research by Birtwhisle in 1970 studied that communication is usually described along a few major dimensions: Content (what type of things are communicated), source, emisor, sender or encoder (by whom), form (in which form), channel (through which medium), destination, receiver, target or decoder (to whom), and the purpose or pragmatic aspect Between parties, communication includes acts that confer knowledge and experiences, give advice and commands, and ask questions These acts may take many forms, in one of the various manners of communication The form depends on the abilities of the group communicating Together, communication content and form make messages that are sent towards a destination The target can be oneself, another person or being, another entity (such as a corporation or group

of beings) Communication can be seen as processes of information transmission governed by three levels of semiotic rules:

 Syntactic (formal properties of signs and symbols),

 Pragmatic (concerned with the relations between signs/expressions and their users)

 Semantic (study of relationships between signs and symbols and what they represent)

Therefore, communication is social interaction where at least two interacting agents share a common set of signs and a common set of semiotic rules Communication has been playing the primary role in our lives It is a vital part

of personal life and is also important in business, education, and any other situation where people encounter each other Communication is required everywhere

2.3 Culture- Communication correlation

Culture informs communication It brings understanding to communication through a common background of shared experiences and histories The people of a unique culture usually share a geographic location as well This common geography also affects the unity of the group in that they will all share the same experiences of weather and topography Shared experiences over hundreds or even thousands of years create culture that contributes to understanding and communication

Cross-cultural communication is a field of study that looks at how people from differing cultural backgrounds communicate, in similar and different ways among themselves, and how they endeavor to communicate across cultures

Intercultural communication is a related field of study It is a form of

communication that aims to share information across different cultures and social groups It is used to describe the wide range of communication processes and problems that naturally appear within an organization or social context made up of individuals from different religious, social, ethnic, and educational backgrounds Intercultural communication is sometimes used synonymously with cross-cultural communication In this sense it seeks to understand how people from different countries and cultures act, communicate and perceive the

world around them Many people in intercultural communication argue that culture determines how individuals encode messages, what medium they choose for transmitting them, and the way messages are interpreted

3 Cross- cultural pragmatics

The academic field of pragmatics offers a wide range of possible definitions and does not provide clear-cut boundaries to the adjacent fields of semantics and sociolinguistics The often used definition of pragmatics as the study of language use isn’t sufficient at all, so that one rather has to look what pragmatists are doing, namely to study the interrelation of the structure of language and the principles of the usage of language A further definition already comes quite close to the real meaning of pragmatics:

“Pragmatics is the study of those relations between language and context that are grammaticalized, or encoded in the structure of a language.” (Levinson 1983: 9)

In the recent years, it came to a rising reaction against the universalism of pragmatics, which claimed special pragmatic functions and modes to be universal, accounting for every other language culture As other cultures use different languages which are underlying different traditions and values, their pragmatic system, consequently, is likely to be different Under that statement,

a new academic field was created, namely cross-cultural pragmatics The main concept is that in different cultural societies the members speak differently and act differently Such differences are based on different cultural values with the speaking culture which may cause misunderstandings in communication with other cultures To avoid such misunderstandings, one has to analyze the

pragmatic nature of a distinct language by looking at the pragmatic functions which are differently grammaticalized in different languages Only in this manner, one can try to make a comparison between the different pragmatic natures of each language Cross-cultural pragmatics isn’t important only for comparing different cultures but also for general pragmatics as a whole General pragmatics is only able to phrase its theories with the help of cross-cultural studies

The variation of speech act is also one characteristic feature when describing different languages An example would be complementing, which is widely spread in the English culture If comparing Germans to British, the German speakers are clearly more direct than the English The character of speech acts

is dependent from each culture and the consequence would be the variation of pragmatic validity within every culture

4 Speech acts

4.1 Notions of Speech Acts

There are all sorts of other things we can do with words such as making requests, asking questions, giving orders, making promises, giving thanks, offering apologies, etc Moreover, almost any speech act is really the performance of several acts at once, distinguished by different aspects of the speaker's intention: there is the act of saying something, what one does in saying it, such as requesting or promising, and how one is trying to affect one's audience

The theory of speech acts, according to Bach (1979), is partly taxonomic and partly explanatory It must systematically classify types of speech acts and the

ways in which they can succeed or fail It must reckon with the fact that the relationship between the words being used and the force of their utterance is often oblique For example, the sentence 'This is a pig sty' might be used nonliterally to state that a certain room is messy and filthy and, further, to demand indirectly that it be straightened out and cleaned up Even when this sentence is used literally and directly, say to describe a certain area of a barnyard, the content of its utterance is not fully determined by its linguistic meaning in particular, the meaning of the word 'this' does not determine which area is being referred to A major task for the theory of speech acts is to account for how speakers can succeed in what they do despite the various ways in which linguistic meaning underdetermines use

In general, speech acts are acts of communication To communicate is to express a certain attitude, and the type of speech act being performed corresponds to the type of attitude being expressed For example, a statement expresses a belief, a request expresses a desire, and an apology expresses a regret As an act of communication, a speech act succeeds if the audience identifies, in accordance with the speaker's intention, the attitude being expressed

4.2 Classification of Speech Acts

Speech acts are utterances that perform actions Their focus is usually less

on their truth value than on their illocutionary effect, the effect that a speaker wishes to have on his or her environment The study of speech acts initially focused on performative acts such as making a bet, naming a ship (or a person),

or declaring two people to be married (Flowerdew, 2013) However, no utterance exists in a vacuum, and all speech can be considered to have

illocutionary effects Therefore, the study of speech acts has broadened to include more or less every kind of utterance, as well as the interpersonal aspects

of whole texts A variety of methods exist for classifying speech acts based on their illocutionary effects Austin (1975) and Searle (1976) devised two well-known taxonomies of speech act that are still used today to study the

interpersonal features of texts

According to Austin, illocutionary acts can be classified into five types, i.e.,

verdictives, exercitives, commissives, behabitives, and expositives

Verdictives: exercising judgment

Exercitives: exerting influence, exercising power

Commissives: assuming obligation, declaring intention

Behabitives: adopting attitude, expressing feeling

Expositives: clarifying reasons, argument, or communication

The second most influential person who took Austin’s words in caution and revised his work is Searle (1976) For him, the illocutionary points include:

Representatives: Illocutionary acts that undertake to represent a state of

affaires

Expressives: Illocutionary acts that express only the speaker’s

psychological attitude towards some state of affairs

Directives: Illocutionary acts that S uses to get H to do something or

carry out some actions

Commissives: Illocutionary acts that commit S to do something

Declaratives: Illocutionary acts that bring about the state of affairs/ the

changes in the world via their utterance they refer to

Though there are many other classifications proposed by other linguistics such as Yule (1996:55), the classifications of Austin and Searle are the most influential and noteworthy

It can be said that Austin’s theory has laid basic and firm foundation for Searle (1976) to present the clearest and most useful working classification of speech acts

4.3 Direct and Indirect Speech Acts

Sari (2009) indicated that a speaker performs a speech act with every utterance It can be a question (“Where is the car?”), a command (“Give me the sweater!”), a statement (“Something smells bad in here.”), or a bunch of other speech acts, like promises, threats, or requests

In terms of speech acts, directness could be explained as matching the speech act with the grammatical structure it most naturally takes In the examples above the question, the command, and the statement are all easily recognizable, and can be interpreted at face value

Asking direct questions from someone you are not that close with may make the hearer feel you’re being nosy or intrusive Furthermore, they might feel you are forcing them to be rude by asking a question they cannot skate over and must answer with a direct “I don’t want to tell you.”

If directness was defined as matching your speech act with your structure, indirectness would then be e.g using an interrogative structure (“Are you wearing that to the party?”) to convey a non-question speech act, like a statement (“I don’t think you should wear that to the party”) or even a command (“Go put on something else.”)

As already noted, indirectness is very useful in socially distant situations People have varied levels of directness tolerance, and until you know where the limit is, it is wise to stay well on the polite side

The author thinks that direct and indirect speech acts are interesting factors

in social situations where some people know each other better and some are new acquaintances We use direct speech to our old friends and indirect speech

to the newcomers is an efficient way to keep the two groups separate

4.4 Expressing annoyance as a speech act

The “Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary Encyclopedic” (1992) shows that expressing annoyance is “an act of expressing slight feeling of displeasure and hostility”

Annoyance is an un pleasant mental state that is characterized by such effects as irritation and distraction from one’s conscious thinking It can be lead toemotions such as frustration and anger The property of being easily annoyed

is called irritability (Wikipedia)

Expressing annoyance may be direct or indirect speech act

For example, in expressing annoyance to your friend who is speaking aloud continuously in the library, you may produce such an utterance:

We can list the functions of expressing annoyance as: (1) to express displeasure, disapproval, blame, censure, threats or reprimand as a reaction to a perceived offense/violation of social rules; (2) to hold the hearer accountable for the offensive action and possibly suggest/request a repair (Olshtain & Weinbach, 1993)

In social interaction, annoyance is a common emotional phenomenon However, the expression of the indignation is very easy to make other lose face and impact on the relationship between the speaker and the hearer Therefore, the research is aimed to provide some strategies to minimize the negative consequences of the speech act

5 Politeness

5.1 The notions of Politeness

Politeness is an important matter which is always highly appreciated and preferred in social communication Theory of the politeness is the theory that accounts for the redressing of affronts to a person's face by face-threatening acts Although politeness has been studied in a variety of cultures for many

years, Penelope Brown and Stephen Levinson’s politeness theory has become very influential In 1987, Brown and Levinson proposed that politeness was a universal concept, which has controversy within academia Politeness is the expression of the speakers' intention to mitigate face threats carried by certain face threatening acts toward the listener Another definition is a battery of social skills whose goal is to ensure everyone feels affirmed in a social interaction Therefore, being polite can be an attempt for the speaker to save their own face or the face of a referent With its importance, politeness has been

of concern by a large number of linguists According to Brown and Levinson, there are two types of faces:

Negative face: the want of every “competent adult member” that his action

be unimpeded by others In other words, this is the desire for freedom of action and freedom from imposition by others

Positive face: the want of every member that his wants be desirable to at

least some others Or in other words, this is needed to be accepted, appreciated and approved of in social interaction

Ten years later, Brown characterized positive face by desires to be liked, admired, ratified, and related to positively, noting that one would threaten positive face by ignoring someone At the same time, she characterized negative face by the desire not to be imposed upon, noting that negative face could be impinged upon by imposing on someone Positive face refers to one's self-esteem, while negative face refers to one's freedom to act These two aspects of face are the basic wants in any social interaction; during any social interaction, cooperation is needed amongst the participants to maintain each other's face Participants can do this by using positive politeness and negative

politeness, which pay attention to people's positive and negative face needs respectively

5.2 Politeness Strategies

In everyday conversation, there are ways to go about getting the things we want When we are with a group of friends, we can say to them, "Go get me that plate!" or "Shut-up!" However, when we are surrounded by a group of adults at

a formal function in which our parents are attending, we must say, "Could you please pass me that plate, if you don't mind?", and "I'm sorry, I don't mean to interrupt, but I am not able to hear the speaker in the front of the room." In different social situations, we are obliged to adjust our use of language to fit the occasion It would seem socially unacceptable if you were to speak the same way to adults as you would to your friends

Richard Nordquist (2016) - a grammar and composition expert indicated that, in sociolinguistics and conversation analysis, politeness strategies are speech acts that express concern for others and minimize threats

to self-esteem ("face") in particular social contexts

Positive politeness strategies are intended to avoid giving offense by

highlighting friendliness These strategies include juxtaposing criticism with

jokes, nicknames, honorifics, tag questions, special discourse markers (please),

and in-group jargon and slang

Negative politeness strategies are intended to avoid giving offense by

showing deference These strategies include questioning, hedging, and presenting disagreements as opinions

The best known and most widely used approach to the study of politeness is the framework introduced by Penelope Brown and Stephen Levinson Brown and Levinson's theory of linguistic politeness is sometimes referred to as the

"'face-saving' theory of politeness

5.2.1 Bald-on- record

According to Brown and Levinson(1987: 74), bald on record strategy is a direct way of saying things, without any minimization to the imposition, in a direct, clear, unambiguous and concise way, for example "Do X!" Brown and Levinson (1987) claim that the primary reason for bald on record usage may be generally stated as whenever the speaker wants to do FTA with maximum efficiency more than s/he wants to satisfy hearer's face, even to any degree, s/he will choose the bald on record strategy For example:

+ “Please send us the offers”

+ “Cứu tôi với”

5.2.2 Positive politeness

According to Ivona Baresove (2008), Brown & Levinson (1996) suggested

15 following sub-strategies of positive politeness:

(1) Notice, attend to the hearer (interest, want, needs, goods)

This strategy, in general, suggests that the speaker should take notice of the hearer’s conditions such as noticeable changes, remarkable possessions and anything which the hearer want to notice and approve

+ What a beautiful dress!

+ Ôi bạn mới cắt tóc à?

(2) Exaggerate (interest, approval, sympathy with the hearer)

This strategy is used to reduce the impending face threatening acts It creates

a friendly environment and it is often done with exaggerated intonation, stress, and other aspects of prosodic, as well as with intensifying modifiers

+ No one can split wood like you can We could not have managed without you Could you help us again this weekend?

+ Khả năng tiếng Anh của bạn thật xuất sắc!

(3) Intensify interest to hearer

This strategy draws the hearer into the narration, for example by using the

“vivid present” (which is, according to Brown and Levinson, commonly utilized in positive-politeness conversations)

+ Yesterday, when I came to the office, Mr Brown was already there, and when he saw me…

+ Tôi chưa từng gặp cô gái nào xinh đẹp như em

(4) Use in-group identity markers

Some politeness strategies, such as this one, are not always utilized in the same way in English and Vietnamese cultures People use this strategy to include other people in one’s own group through the use of in-group identity

(5) Seek agreement

(5.1) Safe topics

The safe topics encourage the speaker to impress his agreement with the hearer and satisfy the hearer or to be confirmed in his opinions

+ This dress is really suitable for you

+ Thời tiết hôm nay đẹp quá phải không?

(5.2) Repetition

Repeating is good way to impress the agreement with the utterances (or

to stress interest and surprise) For example:

+ A: Peter has got a new job at PVComBank

This strategy is used to agree or pretend to agree

+ A: This movie is really interesting,isn’t it?

B: Maybe

+ A: Anh thấy em mặc bộ váy này có đẹp ko?

B: Cũng được

(6.2) White lies

This strategy is used to reduce the face threatening acts to the hearer

A: This cake is delicious, isn’t it? I made it the whole yesterday

B: I think it is such a beautiful cake

+ A: Em thấy đôi giày này có đẹp không?

B: Vâng,em thấy nó cũng hợp với anh đấy

(6.3) Hedging opinions

Hedging opinion is often used when the speaker may want to avoid a precise communication of his attitude

+ I really sort of think…

+ You really should sort of try harder

+ Nó thật sự rất là đẹp!

(7) Presuppose/raise/assert common ground

This strategy includes “point-of-view” operations, which are methods aimed at reducing the distance between the speaker’s and hearer’s points of view This includes, for example, asserting common ground through assuming that the hearer knows something that he cannot possibly know:

+ I had a really hard time learning to drive, didn’t I?

(8) Jokes

Joking is a basic positive-politeness technique, it can be utilized in English, for putting the hearer “at ease” Furthermore, a joke may be used to minimize an FTA of requesting, as in:

+ Let’s have a look at your wine cellar! (rather than “ please open a

bottle of wine for me”)

+ Đợi em chút Em phải “xử lý” hết chỗ bánh này đã

(9) Assert or presuppose the speaker’s knowledge of and concern for the hearer’s wants

This strategy shows awareness of and concern for hearer’s wants as a way of indicating cooperation and a way to put pressure on the hearer to cooperate with the speaker It is to assert or imply knowledge of the hearer’s wants and willingness to fit one’s own wants in with them

+ I know you need to finish your thesis today, but couldn’t you spare just

a few hours to write me a letter of recommendation?

+ Mẹ biết là con thích cái ô tô này,nhưng nó rất đắt và con đã có nhiều ô

tô rồi Thay vào đó mẹ sẽ mua cho con 1 cuốn truyện cổ tích nhé, nó rất bổ ích cho con đấy

(10) Offer/promise

Offers and promises are used in both English and Vietnamese people regularly In order to distract the hearer from potential face threats, the speaker may stress cooperation (or future cooperation) in various areas to demonstrate good will This can take the form of offer, promises, or suggestions, often with little sincerity of intended fulfillment

+ We do not have any positions open at this time, but we will keep application on file for six months

+ Cảm ơn cô đã mời cháu Tuần sau cháu sẽ đến dự bữa tiệc của cô

(11) Be optimistic

This strategy is aimed at minimizing the face threatening act by presuming the hearer’s willingness to cooperate, and a positive outcome

+ You will come to help me on Tuesday, won’t you?

+ Tôi nghĩ bạn sẽ không phiền nếu tôi nhờ bạn đóng cửa sổ giúp tôi phải không?

(12) Include both the speaker and the hearer in the activity

This strategy uses the inclusive “we” instead of “I” or “You”:

+ We don’t like that color, do we?

+ Chúng ta cùng nhau đi chợ đi

(13) Give (or ask for) reasons

The speaker fosters cooperation by involving the hearer in his reasoning process so that the suggestion will be seen as a mutual decision This strategy often involves the use of the English construction “why not do something” This conventionalized form implies that the speaker asks if there are any reasons against his suggestion, and assumes that there are none, and thus that the hearer will, of course, cooperate:

+ Why don’t you come over tonight?

+ Tại sao anh không chờ đến lượt mình nhỉ?

(14) Assume or assert reciprocity

The existence of a beneficial relationship between the speaker and the hearer may also be claimed or urged by giving evidence of reciprocal rights

+ I will do the homework for you if you wash the dishes for me

+ Hôm qua tớ đã trực nhật rồi, hôm nay đến lượt cậu làm nhé

(15) Give gifts to the hearer (goods, sympathy, understanding, cooperation)

The speaker anticipates hearer’s wants, tangible or intangible, shows support towards their fulfillment, and makes efforts to satisfy particularly the desire for goodwill

+ We wish you good luck in finding a job suitable for your many talents

5.2.3 Negative politeness

(1) Be conventionally indirect

The most common form of conventional indrectness that is used both in English and Vietnamese is indirect speech act Although indirect, they are so conventionalized that they can be considered on-record expressions

+ Can you please pass the pencil?

The following utterance is an example of another common indirect way of making a request:

+ It is a present so I would like to have a ribbon put on it, but…

The speaker makes the request by expressing his wish followinged by the conjunction ‘but’ and falling intonation, with the actual request omitted

(2) Question, hedge

Many speech acts contain the speaker’s opinions and assumptions Some of these are potentially Face threatening acts, particularly assumptions about the hearer’s beliefs, wants, and abilities There are several kinds of hedges, such as Hedges on illocutionary force, Adverbial-clause hedges, Prosodic hedges For example:

+ Yes, she is kind of beautiful, in a way

+ Em nghĩ rằng chương trình này không phù hợp với máy tính của em sếp

+ Close the door, if you want

+ Nếu anh bận thì mai tôi gọi lại cho anh cũng được

(3) Be pessimistic

This strategy, which is used both in English and Vietnamese, is based on minimizing the imposition by the implication that the speaker does not expect a positive outcome:

+ I don’t suppose you could lend me the book

+ That would be too much to ask, wouldn’t it?

+ Bạn không thể cho tôi mượn điện thoại à?

(4) Minimize the imposition

This strategy is based on utilizing expressions that are to minimize the size

of the Face threatening act, as in:

+ I just need a moment of your time (a favorite of door-to-door sales

men)

In minimizing the gift, the speaker is minimizing the face threat of accepting the gift

(5) Give deference

Many deference phenomena are encoded in language structure Showing respect to the hearer and humbling the speaker may also be a chosen strategy:

+ It’s probably not what you are used to, but it’s the best we have

+ Mời vào, nhà tớ không được rộng rãi và hơi bừa bộn

(6) Apologize

Apology serves as a means of showing regret or reluctance to impose This can be done through admitting the impingement, indicating reluctance, giving overwhelming reasons or begging forgiveness

+ I know it is a lot to ask, but you are the only one who can help me

+ I am sorry to bother you, but could you please turn down the music

Though common in both languages, in Vietnamese this strategy is utilized to

a much greater degree Even if not in wrong, a Vietnamese person will apologize to maintain a good relationship

+ Xin lỗi vì đã làm phiền, nhưng anh có thể vui lòng cho em mượn cái điện thoại của anh một chút được không ạ?

(7) Impersonalize the speaker and the hearer

The speaker seemingly imposes less on the hearer by avoiding the pronouns

‘I’ and ‘You’ The imposition becomes agentless, and the hearer is not specified

as the object of the imposition

+ $50,000 would really help the re-election campaign