A study on teacher talk in EFL classrooms at backan education college

Main similarities and differences in using addressing terms and personal pronouns of the Vietnamese and American at work...30 1.1.. What are similarities and differences in the use of ad

NGUYỄN THỊ THU HÀ

PERSONAL PRONOUNS IN VIETNAMESE AND

AMERICAN ENGLISH (FROM CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE)

(ĐẠI TỪ NHÂN XƯNG TRONG TIẾNG VIỆT VÀ TIẾNG ANH MỸ, XÉT TỪ GÓC ĐỘ VĂN HOÁ)

M.A Minor Thesis

Field: Linguistics Code: 60 22 15

HÀ NỘI – 2009

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE POST- GRADUATE DEPARTMENT

**************

NGUYỄN THỊ THU HÀ

PERSONAL PRONOUNS IN VIETNAMESE AND

AMERICAN ENGLISH (FROM CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE)

(ĐẠI TỪ NHÂN XƯNG TRONG TIẾNG VIỆT VÀ TIẾNG ANH MỸ, XÉT TỪ GÓC ĐỘ VĂN HOÁ)

M.A Minor Thesis

Field: Linguistic Code: 60 22 15 Supervisor: Assoc Prof Dr Nguyễn Văn Độ

HÀ NỘI – 2009

TABLE OF CONTENTS

STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY i

ABSTRACT ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS……… ………… ….iii

ABBREVIATIONS……… ……… … … v

PART 1: INRODUCTION……… …… 1

1 Rationale 1

2 Aims and Significance of the study 1

3 Methods of the study 2

4 Scope of the study 2

5 Design of the sudy 3

PART 2: DEVELOPMENT 4

Chapter 1: Theoretical Background 4

1.1 Culture and language 4

1.2 Speech acts 5

1.3 Linguistic politeness 7

1.4 Overview of the Vietnamese and American English addressing system 8

1.4.1 Overview of the Vietnamese addressing system 8

1.4.1.1 Personal pronouns 8

1.4.1.2 Kinship terms 12

1.4.1.3 Status terms 13

1.4.1.4 Personal names 13

1.4.2 Overview of the American English addressing system 13

1.4.2.1 Personal pronouns 13

1.4.2.2 Kinship terms 15

1.4.2.3 Status terms 16

1.4.2.4 Personal names 16

Chapter 2: The study 17

2.1 Methodology and procedures 17

2.1.1 The survey questionnaire 17

2.1.2 The informants 17

2.1.3 Data collection 18

2.2 Data analysis: Findings and Discussion 18

2.2.1 Consideration of selecting addressing terms 19

2.2.2 Frequencies of using addressing terms 20

2.2.3 Frequencies of combining personal pronoun “I” with other addressing terms 23

2.2.3.1 “I - title” ( Tôi – chức danh) 24

2.2.3.2 “I – kinship term”(Tôi – từ thân tộc ) 24

2.2.3.3 “I- first name” (Tôi – tên riêng) 25

2.2.3.4 “I – last name” (Tôi – tên họ) 25

2.2.4 Factor (factors) greatly impacting on the way people address at work 26

2.2.5 Trends of using the dyad “I - You” at work 28

2.3 Limitations of the study 29

PART 3: CONCLUSION 32

1 Main similarities and differences in using addressing terms and personal pronouns of the Vietnamese and American at work 30

1.1 Similarities 30

1.2 Differences 31

2 Implications for English language teaching and translation strategies 33

REFERENCES 36

APPENDIXES I

Full name Kinship terms Last name Number Neutral addressing term Title

Title + Last name

- To present basic characteristics of the Vietnamese and American English addressingsystem

- To concentrate on how the Vietnamese and American address as well as factors affecting on their choice of using addressing terms

- To investigate culture features of Vietnam and America lying in the use of the firstpersonal pronoun “I” at work This is both significant and useful for Vietnamese learners ofEnglish and foreigners who have little knowledge of Vietnamese culture.

- To find out similarities and differences in the use of the first personal pronoun “I” of the Vietnamese and American

Accordingly, all findings of this study, expected for being implicated in translationstrategies and making a useful contribution to the further study, help Vietnamese learners ofEnglish avoid miscommunication and misunderstanding while working with Americans

So, the study is aimed to solve these two research questions:

1 What are similarities and differences in the use of addressing terms in general andthe first personal pronoun “I” in particular of the Vietnamese and American?

2 What are cultural features lying in the use of first personal pronoun “I” to address?

The study begins by exploring theoretical background relating to the topic Therelationship between cultures and languages is the first hypothesis that confirms a fact thatlanguage cannot separate from culture and via verse Speech acts, especially the illocutionaryacts, is the second hypothesis that makes contribution to addressing terms The thirdhypothesis is politeness that is extremely important communication strategy cannot beignored, especially in the case of using addressing terms Besides, interlocutor‟s parameterslike age, gender, or occupational status, etc also impacts on the way they use addressingterms

With the data collected from American and Vietnamese informants, the researcher hasnecessary linguistic input and reliable information of addressing and the use of personalpronouns Then, the researcher takes advantages of analyzing and statistic methods to analyzecollected data On that basis, we draw out conclusion and some general comments aboutsimilarities and differences in using addressing term and personal pronouns between theVietnamese and American by synthesizing method

4 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

A great number of studies focus on characteristics of Vietnamese addressing forms incomparison with that of other cultures However, investigating the first personal pronoun “I”

in Vietnamese and American English is still a new topic in Vietnam Therefore, the studyaimed to concentrate on the impacts of socio-cultures on the way the Vietnamese andAmerican address, especially the usage of personal pronouns, the combination between thefirst personal pronoun “I” with other addressing terms and trends of using the first personalpronoun “I”at work place as well, which are useful for Vietnamese learners of English whohave difficulties in using addressing forms in general and the first personal pronoun whileworking with Americans

Addressing is an interesting phenomenon in cross – cultural communication.Therefore, analysizing similarities and differences of using the first personal pronoun “I”between the Vietnamese and American at work from cultural perspective are seriouslyanalyzed

5 DESIGN OF THE STUDY

The study will consist of three main parts: Introduction, Development and Conclusion.Part 1: Introduction consists of Rationale; Aims and significances of the study;Methods of the study; Scope of the study and Design of the study

Part 2: Development concludes two chapters Chapter 1 presents Theoreticalbackground which will provide Culture and Languages, Speech acts, Linguistic politeness andOverview of the Vietnamese and American English addressing system that lay the foundationsfor the next chapter In chapter 2, the findings of the study will be presented and discussed

Part 3: Conclusion presents similarities and differences in using addressing forms ingeneral and the first personal pronoun in particular as well as implications for Englishlanguage teaching and translation strategies

PART 2: DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER 1: THE LITERATURE REVIEW

1.1 CULTURE AND LANGUAGE

Culture has multiple meanings in different disciplines and different contexts.According to Nguyen Van Do (2004:64), culture is a system of values and non-values,standards and non-standards existing through the ways people in a society behave to thenature, social environment and themselves in the process of establishing and developing thatsociety Another adequate definition about culture which is cited in Larry A Samovar (2007)

is Triandis‟s In his point of view, culture is a set of human-made objective and subjectiveelements that have increased the probability of survival in the past and satisfied theparticipants in a society and shared among those who can communicate with each otherbecause they have a common language and live in the same time and place Hence, language,religion, values, traditions and customs as well are hearts of culture

Actually, language is a part of culture, without language, culture can not be protectedand developed Not only does language allow people of a society-a culture to shareinformation, ideas and feeling but it is also one of significant tools for the transmission ofculture

The relation between culture and language preciously described and presented throughthe following model:

Language

Human

1.2 SPEECH ACTS ACROSS CULTURES

We perform speech acts when we offer an apology, greeting, request, complaint,invitation, compliment, or refusal and so on In general, a speech act is an utterance that serves

a function in communication To communicate is to express a certain attitude, and the type ofspeech act being performed corresponds to the type of attitude being expressed As an act ofcommunication, a speech act succeeds if the audience identifies, in accordance with thespeaker's intention, the attitude being expressed For instance, in a birthday party, the speakermeets young lady and produces the utterance “You have a wonderful smile” or “I really likeyour skirt” These utterances are likely considered as compliments By contrast, in a funeral,for example, these utterances are produced, willbe ironical Hence, the same utterance can beinterpreted as different kinds of speech act up to contexts or certain situation

A speech act might contain just one word, as in "Sorry!" to perform an apology, orseveral words or sentences: "I‟m sorry I forgot your birthday I just let it slip my mind."

According to the social-interactionist view, a speech act is a language phenomenon thatresults from acts of speaking or writing when someone (Speaker) says (or writes) something tosomeone else (Hearer) at a certain time in a certain context According to Austin (1962),speech acts are grouped into three ways:

+ Locutionary act: The act that constructs an utterance by following grammars andvocalizing the sentence For example, if a person says to you, “You can‟t do that,” the

locutionary act is to construct a sentence that literally means that you cannot do that by

making relevant physical sounds

+ Illocutionary act: The act that actually performs an act in uttering the sentence In thesame example, the illocutionary act is to prohibit you from doing that

+ Perlocutionary act: The act that tries to accomplish by uttering it That is, by saying the sentence, he stopped you from doing that

Among locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary acts, Austin (1962:120)especially focuses on the importance of illocutionary and extends his analysis by making a

distinction between illocutionary and perlocutionary acts: “illocutionary acts are conventional

acts while perlocutionary acts are not conventional” In order to perform an illocutionary act,

the speaker must rely on the socially accepted convention without which the speaker cannotinspire a social force into his or her utterance By contrast, a perlocutionary act is an effect ofthe illocutionary act This distinction is reflected in whether a person performs an act “in”saying or “by” saying For instance, “In saying I would shoot him I was threatening him,” that

is considered as an illocutionary act, and “By saying I would shoot him I alarmed him” that is

in a perlocutionary act

Speech act classification

Following Austin's speech acts theory, Yule, G (1997) identifies five categories ofspeech acts based on the functions assigned to them: representatives, directives, expressives,commissives and declaratives

Representatives: speech acts that state what the speaker believes the case or not.

Representatives consist of assertions, claims or reports, etc For example, “It is cold today” or

“No one makes a better cake than me''

Directives: speech acts that make the addressee perform an action The different kinds

are: suggestions, asking, ordering, requesting, inviting, advising, begging, etc For example:

“Could you close the window?''

Expressives: speech acts that express how the speaker feels about the situation The

different kinds are: thanking, apologizing, welcoming, deploring, etc For example: “I amsorry that I lied to you''

Commissives: speech acts that speakers use to commit themselves to some future

action The different kinds are: promising, planning, vowing, betting, opposing, etc Forexample: “I'm going to Paris tomorrow''

Declaratives: speech acts that change the state of the world in an immediate way The

speakers have to have a special institutional role, in a specific context, in order to perform adeclaration appropriately For examples: “You are fired, I swear, I beg you'' or “I now declareyou are husband and wife”

The act can succeed if the hearer recognizes the attitude of the speaker beingexpressed, such as a belief in the case of a statement and a desire in the case of a request.However, an utterance can also succeed as an act of communication even if the speaker does

According to Green (1989:145), “Politeness refers to whatever means are employed to

display consideration for one’s addressee’s feelings (or face), regardless of the social distance between the speaker and the addressee”.

As a matter of fact, however, it is the hearer who finally decides whether the speaker‟sutterances are polite or not Thus, when we define the term “politeness”, the hearer cannot beignored to be taken into consideration And Grundy (1995:139) defines politeness as follows,taking not only the speaker but also the hearer into consideration:

Politeness is the term we use to describe the relationship between how something is said and the addressee’s judgment as to how it should be said.

Brown and Levinson (1987) claim that politeness is a linguistic universal by showingthat the same politeness strategies found in speech also occur in written communication

According to them, politeness is divided into “negative politeness” and “positive politeness”.

“Negative politeness” mainly concentrates on addressee‟s face wants, which are concerned

with the desire not to be imposed upon and is characterized by self-effacement and formality.Using the dyad “I-first name” to call a colleague is an example of an expression of negative

politeness By contrast, “positive politeness” is solidarity-oriented It is characterized by the

expression of approval and appreciation of the addressee‟s personality A

shift to more informal style such as using slang words is considered to be an expression ofpositive politeness.

Generally, although the act is politely formed by an individual agent, that act isintrinsically a social one because of being socially determined and geared towards thestructuring of social interaction In order for an act to be regarded as “polite”, it has to be setupon a standard, a standard which lies beyond the act itself which is recognized by both thespeaker and the hearer or a third who may be a part of the interaction

1.4 OVERVIEW OF THE VIETNAMESE AND AMERICAN ENGLISH ADDRESSINGSYSTEM

1.4.1 Overview of the Vietnamese addressing system

The Vietnamese system of address is highly diversified and intricate The debate onwhat constitutes the entire domain of the system is still controversial (Hồ Thị Lân, 1990).However, it is widely agreed that it consists of four subclasses: personal pronouns, kinshipterms, status terms, and personal names All of them can be “alternatively used to refer to theaddressor, the addressee(s), as well as third parties in social interactions” (Lương Huy Vũ,1990: 4)

1.4.1.1 Personal pronouns

The Vietnamese personal pronouns are also referred to as “real personal pronouns”.These personal pronouns can be summarized as in Table 1 below, which is modified fromDiệp Quang Ban (2003)

Table 1: Vietnamese personal pronouns

Ta /

Adapted from Diệp Quang Ban (2003: 112)

The 1st person personal pronouns, ta, mình, Người and chúng ta, were not originally

included in his original table, although they are covered in his discussion

The 1st person singular personal pronoun tao (I) and its reciprocals mày and mi (you)

in the 2nd person (tao and mày are the only Vietnamese personal pronouns that can be used

reciprocally) are used mainly among intimates, close friends of the same age to express

intimacy Otherwise, they also imply strong disrespect and arrogance The plural form of tao

is chúng tao, while its reciprocals can be chúng mày, bay, or chúng bay.

Of the 1st person personal pronouns, tôi (I) and its exclusive plural chúng tôi (we), are

fairly neutral terms used between people of distant relationship or in formal situations; they arerarely used between close friends or blood kin or in informal situations They are not pairedwith any personal pronouns in the 2nd person (indicated by „/‟ in table 1), but are paired with

various kinship terms Due to their neutral expressiveness of meaning, tôi and chúng tôi are

becoming more and more extensively used in virtually all social communication contexts inmodern Vietnamese society

Ta („self‟) (1st person) can be used as either singularly or plural to mean „I‟ or „we‟,

respectively In the plural use, ta functions the same as the 1st person inclusive plural chúng ta

meaning „I/we including you‟ in English; and both are normally used in formal situations

When used as a singular pronoun, ta is an arrogant term implying the speaker‟s superiority

over the addressee It is thus not normally used in everyday conversations with this meaning.

It is, however, still used in literature, especially poetry, to express intimacy, in which case itscorresponding 2nd person pronoun is mình („self‟) The 1st person singular ta and its plural

uses are illustrated in the following examples

+ ta singular (arrogant)

Đi ra đi, cho ta còn làm việc

Go out go, for I work

“Get off, so that I can concentrate on my work”

+ ta plural

Ta đi chứ, các cậu?

We go?, [plural marker] uncle?

“Let‟s go, shall we?”

The other 1st person singular personal pronoun is tớ (I), which is normally used among

schoolmates to express intimacy Its common reciprocal 2nd person terms are the kinship term

cậu („maternal younger brother‟ or „uncle‟) or đằng ấy („over there‟) The exclusive plural

form of tớ is chúng tớ.

The pronoun, mình (I), mentioned above can be used in different persons and numbers

(Diệp Quang Ban, 2003) It can be used in the 1st person singular by “females speaking toclose intimate equals of either sex” (Cooke, Joseph, 1968: 112) or as a 2nd person singularterm addressed to spouses or close intimates of the opposite sex According to Diệp Quang

Ban, the identity of person of mình is not inherent in the pronoun itself, but can only be

determined by the contexts in which it is used (Diệp Quang Ban, 2003: 113) The following

examples illustrate these four uses of mình These examples are taken from Diệp Quang Ban

(2003: 113) with the English translations by the researcher

- mình as 1st person singular

Hãy tin mình, mình không bao giờ để Sự phải khổ đâu

Believe self (I), self (I) never leave Su must miserable

“Believe me, Su, I‟ll never give you a hard time”

- mình as 2nd person singular

Mình xem bức tranh này có đẹp không?

Self (you) look picture this yes beautiful no?

“Do you think this picture is beautiful?”

- mình as 1st person inclusive plural

Nước mình như vậy, suốt đời không được mó đến khẩu súng.

Country self (we) as such, throughout life no touch gun.

„This is the way our country is, we never have a chance to possess guns”

Tôi tự động viên mình như thế

I self assure self (I) so

“I assured myself”

The third person singular personal pronouns, hắn („he/she‟), y („he‟), and nó („he/she/

it‟) can all be used with reference to people When used among friends of the same age, they

express intimacy and familiarity Otherwise they imply disrespect and are disparaging Nó is

also used of things, animals, and objects

In the 3rd person reference range there is also another pronoun which is greatlydifferent from all the others in socio-cultural meaning and pragmatic implication This is

Người that is used exclusively to express a very high degree of respect That is probably the

reason why it is written with an upper case first letter

The 3rd person plural họ („they‟) is a neutral term used of a group of adults It is more

respectful than chúng and chúng nó (also meaning „they‟ in English) which are used when

speaking of children or to imply gross addressee inferiority

Trần Ngọc Sanh (2003) also mentions other personal pronouns such as chàng and

nàng as the 3rd person These pronouns, however, are rarely used in modern Vietnamese,

although they may be used in literary works where their usages imply intimacy andfamiliarity

Thus, generally in the category of Vietnamese personal pronouns, there are fivecommon pronouns for 1st person singular reference The corresponding plural forms for the

five singular pronouns are created by the addition of chúng to the singular forms, except for

mình and ta, which can also be used in plural reference Mình is also used as a 2nd person

singular pronoun, 1st person inclusive plural, and reflexive in all persons Not all 1st personpersonal pronouns have corresponding personal pronouns in the 2nd person reference system

Except for tao which can be used reciprocally with 2nd person pronoun (mày or mi), the others

are commonly paired with kinship terms, status terms, or even personal names The 3rd personreference includes four commonly used pronouns in the singular forms and three in plural

Except for tôi/chúng tôi and Người, the use of Vietnamese personal pronouns pragmatically

implies both intimacy and familiarity among close, intimate friends of the same age or a lack

of deference and high degree of arrogance towards the addressee and/or third-partypronominal referent of superior age According to Luong Huy Vũ (1990:129), if Vietnamesepersonal pronouns are used among family members, they “presuppose and imply not only thenegation of solidarity but also the lack of deference towards the referent and the breakdown in

the formality of the interactional situation” The third person pronoun Người stands apart from

the others in its socio-cultural meaning and pragmatic implications The use of it is normallyassociated with people of very high rank, including deities, who deserve extraordinary respect

1.4.1.2 Kinship terms

Kinship terms constitute a much more important part of the Vietnamese system of

address and reference than pronouns According to Cooke (1968), “kinship terms are nouns,

most of which have a primary meaning denoting blood kin” They appear so frequently and are

so varied and diversified that not only do they impose difficulty for foreign learners ofVietnamese, but sometimes it is also hard for Vietnamese people to use them properly and

appropriately Luong Huy Vũ (1990: 37) observes that “Vietnamese kinship terms are used

not only for third-party reference, but pervasively also in address and self-reference”.

According to Nguyen Quang (2002:159), there are 34 kinship terms in the Northern dialect ofViet Nam like cố-chít, mẹ-con, anh-em, etc

1.4.1.3 Status terms

Apart from personal pronouns and kinship terms, Vietnamese also makes use of status

terms According to Cooke (1968), status terms comprise occupational titles such as bác sĩ („doctor‟), thầy giáo („teacher‟ (male)), or luật sư („lawyer‟) , etc Status terms are chiefly

in the last position in their full names The given names are used either alone or with a kinship

or status term The usage of plain personal names without a kinship or status term impliesintimacy, familiarity, but lacks of respect Thus, they are mainly employed by people ofsomewhat the same age or by superiors to inferiors Personal names that are used by inferiors

to superiors are normally accompanied by a kinship or status term showing the degree ofrespect that the addressee is supposed to deserve

To conclude, Vietnamese addressing system is an open one, which makes foreigninterlocutors confused when using addressing terms while communicating, especially in socialcommunication because many factors, for example, age, gender, power, social status,occupation, context of interaction, relationship or attitude of addressee, etc have to highly betaken into consideration

1.4.2 Overview of the American English addressing system

The American English system of address and reference also includes four subclasses:personal pronouns, kinship terms, status terms, and personal names Of these, only personalpronouns are pervasively used for personal reference The other three are mostly used foraddressing as free forms

1.4.2.1 Personal pronouns

According to Halliday and Hasan (1976), there are three types of reference in English:personal reference, demonstrative reference, and comparative reference In Celce-Murcia andLarson Freeman‟s words “the personal pronouns in their various permutations constitute thepersonal reference system in English” (Celce-Murcia & Larson Freeman, 1999: 297) Differentforms of subjective, objective, possessive, and reflexive personal pronouns can be seen clearly

in Table 2, adapted from Quirk (1972)

Table 2: English personal, reflexive, possessive pronouns

Subjective case Objective PRONOUNS Determiner Nominal

case function function Singular I Me myself my mine

Plural we Us ourselves our ours

masculine He Him himself his

Feminine she Her herself her hers

Neutral It itself its

Plural they them themselves their theirs

Adapted from Quirk (1972: 209)

It can be seen from Table 2 that American English personal pronouns distinguishsubjective, objective, and possessive cases In 2nd person reference there is no distinction in

number Both singularity and plurality are expressed by the same form you In the American English system you is the only bound form of address and incorporated into the sentence It

should also be noted that, American English does not have contrasting inclusive and exclusiveforms The 1st person plural pronoun we contains both inclusive and exclusive meanings and

can often be ambiguous These examples taken from Celce-Murcia & Larson Freeman (1999 :

304), illustrate the inclusive and exclusive meanings of we.

- Inclusive use of we

We should (all) go to the movies next Saturday

(Addressed to person who has been waiting)American English also marks gender difference in the 3rd person singular pronoun,

having he for males and she for females With regard to meanings and implications associated

with usage, (Celce-Murcia & Larson Freeman, 1999: 304) point out “English has no way to beeither formal or intimate linguistically” through the use of personal pronouns They are

adequate for use in all normal communication contexts although some archaic usages persist inrestricted contexts, for example „Your Majesty‟ when addressing a reigning sovereign or

„Your Honour‟ when addressing a judge The self- and addressee-reference pronouns, forinstance, remain the same regardless of who is speaking to whom Besides, the age, attitude,feeling, and relationship of the participants as well as the formality of contexts are not takeninto consideration

1.4.2.2 Kinship terms

The basic modern American English kinship terms with common usages within familycircles and in possible extended contexts Actually, English kinship terms are very restrictedlyused in the 1st person, mostly associated with baby talk; i.e., speaking to small children The

kinship terms more likely to be used in this way are grandfather, grandmother and

mother/mum(my), father/dad(dy).

American English kinship terms are more pervasively used in the 2nd and the 3rdperson In 2nd person use, they normally function as free forms of address such as non-

integrated parts of the sentence, particularly their informal various; e.g., Grandma, Granny,

Nanna, Grandpa, Granddad, Mum, Dad, etc, and normally with a capital letter.

American English kinship terms are not normally used in extended social contexts

between non-related people Only a few terms are used in this extended meaning Aunt and

Uncle, for example, can sometimes be used by children to address their parent‟s friends.

Brown (2004) refers to this fictive use of Aunt and Uncle as “honorary Aunts and Uncles” line resource) Brother and Sister can also be extended to a non-related person if the speaker

(on-considers that person as his/her brother or sister; e.g., among some political or ethnic groups

1.4.2.3 Status terms

American English status terms include occupational terms (such as doctor or

professor) and honorific titles (Mr/Mrs) Like kinship terms, status terms are used either as

free forms of address or 3rd person reference in restricted (normally formal) contexts The

Brown and Ford (1961) point out a person can be addressed by his/her first name, lastname, a title + last name, or multiple names (the use of a variety of names) The choice ofwhich one to use depends on various factors such as level of intimacy, age, and professionalstatus Multiple names are employed in very informal contexts between highly intimatefriends The use of first names is also an indication of intimacy However, this use has nowbecome very widespread even when there is a considerable social gap between interlocutors.Titles with last names are normally used in formal contexts or at the beginning of anacquaintanceship to show respect.

CHAPTER 2: THE STUDY

2.1 METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES

2.1.1 The survey questionnaire

As mentioned in Introduction part, there are delivered questionnaires (written inVietnamese and English, most of them have the equivalent values) consisting of five questionswhich discuss factors governing the way people address in general and the practice of usingthe first personal pronoun “I” at work within the two communities in the light of culture

It should be noted that the survey questionnaire is designed with the purpose of dealingthe research questions highlighted in Introduction part As a result, all of questions in thesurvey questionnaire are aimed to find out some similarities and differences in using the firstpersonal pronoun “I” at work and great impacts of different socio - cultural factors on the waypeople address in both countries Vietnam and America

The informants are asked to tick the appreciate choice At the end of the forth and sixthquestions, there is also a blank space in which the respondents are free to give their ownopinion

Also, the researcher designs the survey questionnaire with some clear tables and readyparameters for the informants to tick the answer easily

2.1.2 The informants

The Vietnamese informants are forty in number: 20 females and 20 males The age ofthem varies from 20 to 55 at the time of the survey Their jobs mostly are officials in theuniversity, doctors, businessman and mathematician All of them spend time working in thecity Especially, Vietnamese informants were all born and brought up in Vietnam so they arenot perfectly affected by other cultures, which helps the researcher has reliable results for thestudy collected from their answers

Most of the American informants who are scientists, officers and teachers are working

at University of Minnesota Their ages varies from 25 to 60 at the time of the survey 40% of

informants are female, 60% are female Although the United States of America is considered

as a multi-cultural nation, which may have effects on informants, they are all Native Americancitizens Therefore, as the Vietnamese informants, they are not impacted much by othercultural cognition This means that the information collected from the American informantsare really reliable

2.1.3 Data collection

All the data are collected and analyzed from cultural perspective To get informationfrom American, the researcher send the survey questionnaire in English by email to aVietnamese friend who is living and working in America for 8 years is extremely enthusiasticand kind enough to deliver the questionnaire to his American friends After

To Vietnamese informants, the procedure of collecting data is a little bit easier becausethe researcher can face to face interview the informants; ask more open questions relating tothe subjects as well as explain the survey questionnaire preciously in case there is someambiguous information in the questionnaire

2.2 DATA ANALYSIS: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

Concerning to analyzing the research data, the collected information is organized in theform of tables or charts In addition, to have total and specific look of the practice of usingpersonal pronouns and some factors impacting on the way we address at work, the researchermostly analyses questions by questions in the questionnaire Then, the similarities anddifferences in using addressing terms and personal pronouns of the Vietnamese and Americans

at work are drawn out Finally, the findings of the study are used as implications for Englishlanguage teaching and translation strategies

In this part, all the questions in the questionnaire are shown and analyzed preciously.The analysis is done carefully basing on the data collected from the above mentionedinformants both from Vietnam and America The results which the researcher received fromsurvey questionnaire are reliable