A vietnamese american cross cutural study on the use of hedging in argument

LIST OF TABLES, FIGURES AND CHARTSTABLES Table 1: Holliday‟s view of culture...7 Table 2: DCT‟s features...21 Table 3: Frequency of using hedges in argument...25 Table 4: Frequency of he

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF

POST- GRADUATE STUDIES

NGHIÊN CỨU GIAO VĂN HÓA VIỆT - MỸ VỀ CÁCH RÀO ĐÓN

KHI TRANH LUẬN

M.A MINOR THESIS

FIELD: ENGLISH LINGUISTICS CODE: 60.22.15

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF

POST- GRADUATE STUDIES

NGHIÊN CỨU GIAO VĂN HÓA VIỆT - MỸ VỀ CÁCH RÀO ĐÓN

KHI TRANH LUẬN

M.A MINOR THESIS

FIELD: ENGLISH LINGUISTICS CODE: 60.22.15

SUPERVISOR: PHAN THỊ VÂN QUYÊN, M.A

I certify that the work contained in this thesis is the result of my own research Iconfirm that this thesis has not been submitted for any other degrees to any otheruniversity or institution

Signature:

Name: Nguyễn Thị DuyênDate: Octocber 2,2012

First of all, I would like to send my great gratitude to my supervisor, Mrs.Phan Thị Vân Quyên for her insightful instructions, detailed comments andcorrection of my drafts of this thesis I am deeply indebted to her enthusiasticassistance as well as her encouragement during my course of writing this thesis

In addition, I wish to express my sincere thanks to my colleagues atThaiNguyen Univeristy of Information and Communication Technology for theiruseful suggestions and cooperation to obtain indispensable data for this study report

I would also like to convey my big thanks to those who are candidates ofMaster course 19 – ThaiNguyen for their invaluable materials and references of thisstudy

Last but not least, my thanks go to my family, my friends who stimulated andsupported me to accomplish this research

This study aims to find out the similarities and the differences in the use ofhedges in argument by American and Vietnamese students Additionally, the goal ofthe thesis is to help Vietnamese learners of English avoid potential problems whenusing hedges to argue with English native speakers Participants of the study were

30 American students and 30 Vietnamese students who are at the age of 20-25 Thedata was collected via a discourse completion task (DCT) which was accompanied

by the sample of questionnaire The survey questionnaire was designed in twoversions- one in English delivered to American participants, one in Vietnameseversion for Vietnamese informants Finally, contrastive analysis was discussed andsome suggestions were made for Vietnamese learners of English in using hedges toargue with English native speakers

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii

ABSTRACT iii

ABBREVIATION vi

PART A: INTRODUCTION 1

1 Rationale 1

2 Aims of the Study 2

3 Scope of the Study 2

4 Design of the Study 2

PART B: DEVELOPMENT……… 3

1.1 Communication 3

1.1.1 Verbal communication 4

1.1.2 Non- verbal communication 5

1.2 Culture 6

1.3 Cross-cultural communication 7

1.4 Potential problems in cross-cultural verbal communication 8

1.5 Cross-cultural study 9

1.6 Politeness 11

1.6.1 Face 11

1.6.2 Politeness Strategies 12

1.7 Argument 13

1.8 Hedges and Use of hedges in argument 15

1.9 Review of previous studies 18

CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY 20

2.1 Research question 20

2.2 Subjects of the Study 20

2.3 Data collection instruments 20

2.4 Procedures 22

2.5 Methods of the study 22

3.1 Realization of hedges used in argument 23

3.2 The frequency of using hedges in argument .25

3.3 Use of hedges as seen from informants’ parameters .27

3 4 Use of hedges as seen from communicating partners’ parameters .30

3.5 Contrastive analysis 35

3.5.1 Similarities 36

3.5.2 Differences 36

3.6 Implications 37

PART C: CONCLUSIONS 38

1 Summary 38

2 Suggestions for further Studies 39

RERERENCES 40

APPENDIX I

LIST OF TABLES, FIGURES AND CHARTS

TABLES

Table 1: Holliday‟s view of culture 7

Table 2: DCT‟s features 21

Table 3: Frequency of using hedges in argument 25

Table 4: Frequency of hedging types used by American and Vietnamese informants 28 FIGURES Figure 1: Elements of Commnunication (Hybels & Weaver II, 1992:7-10) 4

Figure 2: Possible strategies for doing FTAs (Brown & Levison, 1987) 12

Figure 3: Use of hedge in argument from gender perspective 27

Figure 4: Use of hedges to different kinds of partners 30

Figure 5: Use of hedges from communicating partner as parents 31

Figure 6: Use of hedges from communicating partner as close friend 32

Figure 7: Use of hedges from communicating partner as classmate 34

CHART Chart 1: Distribution of hedging categories in argument 26

PART A: INTRODUCTION

1 Rationale

In many species, human beings have the highest development with the use oflanguage It is the language that made human different from the other species andput an important mark in the human‟s evolution The appearance of language helpsman communicate to each other easily The more developing the society is, the morecomplicated the language is

In the trend of globalization, all countries together would like to be loyalfriends and potential partners not only in economy but also such other field ascultures and politics It is the opening-policy applied by many governments thatstimulates the exchanging and studies different cultures which has been increasedpromptly Hence, cross-cultural communication attracts more and more attentionsand the studies of the linguists As the world has been so far changing, it isextremely essential to do researches on how people from different culturescommunicate to each other

Therefore, there have been plenty of studies on cultural diversities as well asthe differences between cultures Language is indispensable factor affecting theintercultural communication Language is used to communicate but how to get asuccessful conversation concerns with different elements, for instance, the topic ofthe conversation, the mutually interesting connections among the speakers and thehearers, the understanding of each other Obviously, argument is unavoidable incommunication The participants of the conversation, especially those in familiarrelationship are at a high rate of having conflict in every communicating Actually,the struggle may be developed to be a debate or a strong disagreement through theconversation However, as considered to be the most intelligent living creatures,human know how to put an end to a debate That is when hedge is employed as auseful means of communicating

Actually, variety of researches on hedging has been carried out before.Hedging, however, is still a broad issue that needs further exploration Therefore,

hedging in argument is chosen for the research In this minor study – A American Cross-Cutural Study on the Use of Heding in Argument - the basic

Vietnamese-emphasis is on comparing Vietnamese and American cultures on using hedges toargue, with the hope to pay contribution on the string of hedging studies

2 Aims of the Study

The aim of the study is to find out the similarities and differences of usinghedges in English and Vietnamese At that time, the study examines whethercultures affect the way of using hedges in argument by the American andVietnamese In addition, the paper wishes to help Vietnamese students avoidpotential conflicts in cross-cultural communication when argue with English nativespeakers

3 Scope of the study

The study is only confined the area of verbal communication, potentialproblems in communication by both American and Vietnamese The data analysis ofhow participants of the study use hedges in argument is mainly done using thecombination of qualitative and quantitative methods

The study mainly concentrates on the relations of student-studentcommunication including Vietnamese and American students The situations of thequestionnaire are issues between the students and their parents and friends

4 Design of the Study

This paper contains 3 parts

PART B: DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

This chapter provides an overview of basic theories of the study At the verytwo first of this chapter, the key notions of communication and culture are discussed

in section 1.1 and section 1.2 Section 1.3 reviews the theories of cross-culturalcommunication This is followed by section 1.4, in which potential problems incross-cultural verbal communication are mentioned Section 1.5 focuses on thecontent of cross-cultural study Politeness, argument and hedges are in turn appeared

in section 1.6, section 1.7 and section 1.8 Section 1.9 reviews previous studiesabout hedges and different strategies of using hedges in communication

1.1 Communication

Obviously, human always interact to each other by various means Withoutcommunication, it is extremely difficult for man to share ideas, information, andother complicates feelings Human can communicate to each other in a variouschannels such as language, signs, writing, or behavior Yet, language is not theunique tools for man to express their thoughts and opinions Consequently, thequestion raised is that “What is communication?”

Hybels & Weaver II claimed that communication is “the process of sharinginformation, ideas and feelings” (1992:5) This process concerns with a sender and arecipient who are sharing and exchanging of messages The recipient, of course,need not to be present of the sender‟s intention at the time of communication.However, communication requires both participants to share the commonality Inanother word, one of the most important factors leading the success ofcommunicating is the mutual understanding of the sender and addressee who sharethe shame custom and culture

In a communication process, it takes into accounts the elements ofcommunication It is assumed that the communication consist of such elements assender – receiver, message, channels, feedback, noise and setting of the

communication (Hybels & Weaver II, 1992) From the figure 1, it certainly showsthat sender- receivers are those who get involved in communication The ideas andfeelings shared by a sender- receiver is called message, and feedback is the response

of the receiver- senders to each other Channels are the means which used to sharemassage including sound, sight, verbal and non-verbal signals The figure alsopoints that the interference that keeps a massage from being understood oraccurately interpreted – the noise Setting is defined as where the communicationoccurs

Setting Message-

Receive

Sender-Channel

Figure 1: Elements of Commnunication (Hybels & Weaver II, 1992:7-10)From the figure, it can be shown that there exist different channels ofcommnunication which is consisted of verbal and non- verbal communication

1.1.1 Verbal communication

Verbal communication is one way for people to interact to each other bydifferent means such as sounds, words and language Verbal communication, itself,refers to the transform the message and feedback of both senders and recipients.Language, as a result, is a useful means for participants in communication toexpress their thoughts, ideas, and especially feelings Words, or sentencesthemselves cannot be messages in communication without the participants‟ emotionand attitudes It is likely that the purpose of using verbal communication is to

inform, inquire, argue, and discuss topics of all kinds, and so on However, there hasbeen variety of challenges in verbal communication Misunderstandings andlanguage barriers appear to be attracted the most solutions even the senders andreceivers face–to- face communicate and share the common language and culture.Anglicist, especially Americans, can have problems when talking to each otherbecause of differences For instance, New Yorkers tend to faster and respond morequickly (“high involvement”) than Californians (“high considerateness”) To someNew Yorkers, Californians seem slower, less intelligent and not as responsive Tosome Californians, New Yorkers seem pushy and domineering (Nguyen Quang,1998:40).Levels in verbal communication are mainly divided into interpersonalcommunication and public speaking Additionally, verbal communication belongs tothe intralanguage which takes grammar, lexis, phonetics, rules of language use andetc into account Hence, it seems certain that study verbal communication is thestudy of the skeleton of language paralleling with the cultural patterns of the targetlanguage and the comparative language.

1.1.2 Non- verbal communication

Besides verbal communication, one indispensable channel of communicating

is non-verbal communication It can be claimed that the participants ofcommunication process, means, message – feedback and setting of non-verbalcommunication is larger and wider-spread than verbal one Dislike the using oflanguage as verbal communication to have interaction with others, non-verbalcommunication is performed without speaking words

In his research, Albert Mehrabian (1981) draws the conclusion of theeffectives of a massage in communication Specifically, the intralanguage andparalanguage only occupies in turn 7% and 38% of the effectiveness while theextralanguage or non-verbal communication takes up to 55% of total effectiveness

of a massage Consequently, non-verbal communication plays an extremelyimportant role of the success of relaying message in communication Non-verbalcommunication or “silent” communication includes the use of gestures, facial

expressions, eye contact and conversational distance (Nguyen Quang, 1998: 61).The movement of the body or part of the body is defined as gesture In fact, themovement of hands is the most popular part of gesture Gesture, facial expression,eye contact and conversational distance have distinctive features belonging todifferent cultures.

Obviously, both verbal and non-verbal communication plays an extremelyimportant role in the ways people of different cultures interacting to each other,even those who share the same communicative commonality

1.2 Culture

Every country has its own customs, tradition of ceremonies, and cultures Interm of cultural communication, culture is understood as the values, belief,attitudes, which are considered as the hidden part of iceberg (Nguyen Quang,1998:3) The informal and hidden pattern of human interaction of one culture is notalways shown clearly Therefore, studying the relationship between culture andcommunication becomes more important not only to help one to find out thecharacteristics of one‟s culture, but also the effects of others‟ culture on his ways ofcommunication

Hybels & Weaver II (1992:25) claimed that the goal of giving definition ofculture is to clarify the crucial link between culture and communication, as follow:

Culture is a learned set of shared interpretation about beliefs, values, norms and social practice, which affect the behaviors of a relatively large group of people.

The writers explained that the shared interpretation mentions to cultures existing inpeople‟s minds When the communication takes place, the meanings of symbols onones‟ mind are shared with other people, which form the basis for culture.However, there exist symbols only shared to a few, and not all people are aware ofthe same symbols Similarly, Nguyen Quang (1998) suggested that the culturaldifferences are obvious phenomenon, and “what is appropriate in one culture may

be inappropriate in another culture” According to Hybels & Weaver II (199:27),

beliefs refer to “the basic understanding of a group of people about what the world

is like or what is true or false” Values mention to what is good or bad or what isregarded as important defined by a group of people in sharing their culture Therules for appropriate behavior which provide the expectations of the participants incommunication process are defined as norms Social practices are the predictablebehaviour patterns that are followed by members of a culture Hall (1959) definedculture as the sum of people‟s behaviour patterns, attitudes and material things Inaddition, culture is also made definition as the values, beliefs, orientations, andunderlying assumptions of those in one society (Samovar, Porter, & McDaniel,2007:20) Below is the point of view of culture shown by Holliday (2004:4) Heclassified the culture basing on essentialist and non-essentialist view with threecategories as nature, place and relation

Nature

Place

Relation

Table 1: Holliday‟s view of culture

Of all the ideas of linguists, it can be drawn that culture and communicationhave a crucial relation, in which culture has strong effect on the ways people

communicate from coast to coast This is raised the problems of cross-culturalcommunication

1.3 Cross-cultural communication

The communication nowadays is not limited among those who share the samebelief, norm, values and so on The development of the modern society creates the need

of exchanging and communicating of people from different cultures Hence,intercultural communication appears as a useful means of communication

The differences between intercultural communication and cross-culturalcommunication have been studied Intercultural communication is defined as

“interaction between people whose cultural assumptions are distinct enough to alterthe communication event” (Samovar, Porter, &McDaniel, 2007:10) In other words,intercultural communication focuses on “sharing of meanings” across cultures whilethe cross-cultural communication concentrates on the comparison of communicationstyles Specifically, “intercultural communication occurs whenever a message isproduced by a member of one culture for consumption by a member of anotherculture, a message must be understood” (Samovar and Porter, 1991:10) On theother hands, it is assumed that the process of exchanging, negotiating, andmediating one‟s cultural in non-verbal gestures, and relationships is defined ascross-cultural communication Seeking of similarities and differences betweencultures is the basis of cross-cultural communication Consequently, interculturalcommunication involves face-to-face communication between people from differentcultures while cross-cultural communication involves comparison of face-to-facecommunication (Gudykunst & Mody, 2002)

Generally, communicating to people whose beliefs, norms, and valuesculturally different from ours easily leads to misunderstandings In other words, that

is when we communicate across cultural boundaries The misinterpreting candevelop to cultural conflict or can cause cultural shock to everyone, especially thosewho are inexperienced in cross-cultural communication Therefore, problems areeasy to occur in cross-cultural communication The following section refers topotential problems in commnunication across cultures

1.4 Potential problems in cross-cultural verbal communication

Communicating among people who share the same culture, belief, norms,and values still conceal itself problems The participants of the conversation cannotsolve the problems themselves, and even lead to an argument or struggle.Consequently, there have been existing problems in cross-cultural communication.

In this paper, due to the limitation of the study, the main focus is on the cultural verbal communication between American and Vietnamese students

cross-To study the directness and indirectness speech acts, Nguyen Quang(2004:202) carried out a case study by one Request-Reason conversation in bothVietnamese and English 112 Vietnamese learners of English and 26 American and

8 Australian were requested to read the conversation and give feedback andcomments Most Vietnamese students agree with the indirect way of the researcher

in the conversation to make the offer more acceptable In contrast, the American andAustralian assume that it is not necessary to talk around such as talking about theweather, the elder people, and their health They all directly come to thecommunicative point without adding any more reasons guiding to the point asfollow

- Excuse me, sir Could I have 3 days off please? My mother’s ill, you know.

Another problem in cross-cultural communication is that “the judgementsthat people make about regional differences within a country are similar to thosethey make about people from another culture” (Nguyen Quang, 1998:40).Consequently, misunderstanding and argumentation is easier to appear betweenthose of different cultures Hence, there have been varieties of cross-culturalcommunication studies that do research to find out the solutions and suggest advicesfor communicators to be successful in communicating to people from differentcultures

1.5 Cross-cultural study

Obviously, the study of cross-cultural communication plays an important role

in study of linguistics and cultural studies Cross-cultural study, itself, examines thehuman behaviour, belief, and attitudes, and so on cross cultures Carol

R and Melvin Ember (2002) suggested the outline of a cross-cultural study whichconsists of organization and classification, numbers of questions, measures of study,and the analysis of the result The classification including three main parts: selection

of cultures, source materials and classification The section of cultures mainly bases

on the criteria of maximum cultural diversity, maximum geographical dispersal andadequacy of literature within the scope of the two preceding criteria

The background knowledge of theories in cross-cultural communicationstudy suggested by Ember, C & M (2002) consists of the detailed description ofculture in which a particular community sharing that culture written by aprofessional social scientist In classification part, the writer preferred to assign eachdocument with coding Then, each category should be included a brief descriptivestatement, indicating the range of information

First what are the foci of study? Second, what are the issues of coherence or decoherence within the foci studied? Third, how do these issues apply between foci

(Ember, C & M, 2002:2)The authors suggested that firstly, the one has to define clearly what the problem tostudy in term of foci is Comparing communities is not the only the approach ofcultural comparison, but the focus on the people, the specific communicativecommonality shared in that community The second question concentrates on thecoherence and decoherence within that foci Making a comparison is to find out thecorrelation and uncorrelated features of the two cultures which can apply suitably inthe foci of the study

Aneas (2009) suggested that the data collection and analysis of a cultural communication essentially base on the certain situations with participants ofthe study In other words, the researcher plays an extremely important role incarrying out the research, gathering and analyzing the data, recording andconveying the message in interaction between those who are culturally different

cross-It cannot be denied that the study of cross-cultural communication has beenstrongly developed since “The silent language” by Hall (1959) was published.Nowadays, the world is changeable, the way people interact to each other,consequently, is not the same as it was Therefore, studying the events andphenomena all over the world attached with cultures and communication helpsresearchers themselves clearly understand the distinctive features of the customs,cultures that differ from their own culture.

In the string of cross-cultural communication studies, politeness plays animportant role in getting a successful conversation The following section discussespoliteness and politeness strategies in communication

1.6 Politeness

Politeness, in this paper, is discussed from the point of the view of linguisticsand in close relation with cultures and communication It is a number of principlesfor being polite in communication, especially when interact to a particular culture.According to Richards (1992:81), politeness is how languages express the socialdistance between their speakers and their different role relationship In addition,politeness refers to how face work, in which the attempt to establish, maintain andsave face during conversation is carried out in a speech community The followingsub-section presents face and politeness strategies

1.6.1 Face

Studying politeness, many linguists suggested that in conversation, thepoliteness related the face of the speakers and the hearers Face is “the public self–image that every member wants to claim for himself” (Brown & Levinson, 1987)

In other words, the expectation of being respected their self-image in the public ofpeople is face want Face is consistently at risk of possibly losing incommunication Yule (1996:61) also pointed that

A person’s negative face is the need to be independent, to have freedom of action, and not to be imposed on by others, and a person’s positive face is

the need to be accepted, even liked, by others, to be treated as a member of the same group, and to know that his or her wants are shared by others.

Both negative and positive faces require the maintenance, respect and sharing incommunication However, the possibility of threatening, imposing or even losingface is at high rate Politeness which is responsible for enhancing, maintaining andprotecting face provide politeness strategies to reduce face threatening act

strategy is most often utilized by speakers who closely know their audience E.g

Do the dishes It’s your turn or Give me those!

Positive politeness strategy which is applied in positive face attempts tominimize the threat to the hearer's positive face and satisfy his/her want Positivepoliteness tends to show solidarity, emphasies that participants have common goal

in conversation so it is most commonly used in situations where the audience knowseach other fairly well

+A positive politeness strategy might be the request: E.g

It would be great if you could do the dishes for me.

+ The speakers appeals to a common purpose friendly:

E.g You must be hungry now How about something for lunch?

Negative politeness strategy standing for negative face presumes that thespeaker will be imposing on the listener, even apologizing for imposition orinterruption Negative politeness concerns not to impose on others or restrict theirfreedom, but maintain distance

+ A question extended and containing a modal verb:

E.g I know you’ve been kinda strapped for cash, but could I borrow $5?

+ Expression apology for the imposition:

E.g I’m sorry to interrupt you, but can you explain this again

Linguistically, negative politeness can be expressed by:

+ Using a passive construction:

E.g Dinner is served (avoids directly imposing on a guest)

+ Indirect speech acts:

E.g It’s hot in here (request somebody to open the door or turn on the fan)

+ Hedges:

E.g I somehow understand what you’ve said

+Avoiding using address form directly:

E.g Someone’ eaten apples on the table

In short, politeness strategies play a fundamental in communication Differentacts of speech require different politeness strategies In interaction, arguing isunavoidable if the participants do not meet the common communicative point Thefollowing sections will discuss this issue

or reader, by putting forward a constellation of propositions intended to justify (or refute) the standpoint before a rational judge.

In this definition, the writer clearly shows what argumentation is and whatcharacteristics of argumentation are Obviously, argumentation is a verbal activitywhich occurs mostly in communication In other words, argument is a form ofverbal communication which may appear in intercultural communication

Van (1996) pointed that argumentation is a social activity which involves two

or more participants in the conversation responding the claim or supporting a claimwith evidence It is also an activity of reason in which the speakers aim to supportfor the claim The goal of argumentation is to justify one‟s standpoint or to refutesomeone else‟s In addition, argument consists of controversial issues Arguing is,

of course, persuasive and contested When having arguments, the relationshipsamong participants are stimulated in communication This is reflected by the highrate of arguing in conversations in everyday life

Arguments between participants of the conversation help themselves clearlysolve the problem or find out a new point However, the participants‟ speech act inargumentation is different from one to another, from coast to coast and fromdifferent cultures To gain their point in arguing, naturally, the participants attempt

to use flexibly techniques, especially politeness strategies Perelman (1969)

suggested three techniques in arguing as quasi-logical techniques, techniques structuring reality, and techniques of dissociation Quasi-logical techniques involve

the argument ofthe string of problems happening logically A sufficient agreement isthe starting point of further persuasion or arguments is the technique basing on thestructure of reality Techniques of dissociation aim to qualify apparent point toreality

Argument activities between students about their daily life happen variously

It can be an argument among students about a classmate‟s new coat, hairstyle, andbags and so on Aggression such as teasing, insulting, swearing may appear Thismay develop as conflicts in cross-cultural communication Hence, useful strategies

for argumentation, including calming oneself, showing respect to each other incommunication and finding out the best solution or method to satisfy all aresuggested Additionally, tips of controlling the one‟s emotion, finding the commonideas between participants and modesty are considered best techniques applied inargument.

Generally, such suggestions for strategies implemented in argumentationbase on politeness strategies with the aim to save face of the interlocutor Oneeffective strategy employed much in communication as well as in argumentation ishedges In discussing politeness strategies in communication, Nguyen Quang (2004)listed various forms of hedges which are employed in politeness strategies Thefollowing section reviews theories of hedges

1.8 Hedges and Use of hedges in argument

Studies show that two main approaches about hedges have been discussed sofar Lakoff (1972) paid attention on the logical properties of words and phrases Interm of semantic analysis, he argues hedges as words whose function is to makemeaning fuzzier or less fuzzy (e.g sort of) Lakoff (1972:195) defined hedges asfollows:

For me, some of the most interesting questions are raised by the study of words whose meaning implicitly involves fuzziness-words whose job it is to make things fuzzier or less fuzzy I will refer to such words as ‘hedges’

Besides, hedging has been view from the perspective of pragmatics In

discussing cooperative principle in conversation, Yule (1996:37) assumed that

“there are certain kinds of expressions speakers use to mark that they may be indanger of not fully adhering to the principles These kinds of expression are calledhedges”

E.g As far as I know, they’re married

I won’t bore you with the details, but it was an exciting trip

Not to change the subject, but is this related to the the budget?

This may be a bit confused, but I remember being in a car

Brown & Levison (1987) suggested that hedges can act as one of thepoliteness strategies in communication According to the linguists, communicativefunctions of hedges are to strengthen or weaken the statement as well as to softencomplaints, requests and commands.

E.g + Strengthened statement: You know, he’s only my partner at the company.

+Weakened statement: It maybe late now Shall we go home?

+Softened complaints: I think you behaved badly last night

+Softened request: Would you please lend me your car for a while?

+Softened command: Close the door, will you?

Nguyen Quang (2004: 46) pointed that using hedges in conversation helps tomitigate the disagreement of the speakers, and then reduce the face threatening ofthe hearers

E.g You really should sort of lay all the cards on the table.

It’s easy a pie, in a way.

In short, saving face for the other is crucial role of hedge in communication

in general and in argumentation in particular Consequently, hedging is considered

as a politeness strategy from the perspective of pragmatics

In argument, hedges are used variously Such expressions of hedges as If I may say so, As you probably know, This may be a bit confused are normally

employed to propose an argument

E.g If I may say so your handwriting is bad.

This may be a bit confused, but are you the last one to leave the room?

To express disagreements, hedges like I’m not sure if this is right, I may be mistaken, I'm not sure if this makes sense, Do you see my point, Know what I mean, and so on are often applied.

E.g I’m not sure if this is right, but someone has stolen my pen.

I may be mistaken, but John is travelling to Australia now.

To give an end to an argument, hedges employed consist of I don’t know if this is clear at all, I should say that, Ok, so is that clear, etc.

E.g I should say it‟s enough for arguing.

In term of hedging classification, Yule (1996:38) divided hedges into four

categories towards Grice‟s maxim of quality (e.g As far as I know, I may be mistaken but, I guess…), quantity (e.g As you probably know, I won’t bore you with all the details but,…), relation (e.g I don’t know if this is important but, Not to change the subject but, ), and manner (e.g This maybe a bit confused but, I’m not sure if this makes sense but, I don’t know if this is clear at all,…)

Besides, Prince (1982) divided hedges into two categories as approximators and shields with two more subclasses in each category.

 Approximators which affect the truth condition of proposition consists of adaptors and rounders

(+)Adaptors help to express the degree of the truth of proposition, for

example somewhat, sort of, kind of, some, a little bit, quite, to some extent, etc.

E.g He is an intelligent student but a little lazy.

She somewhat looked at me in the meeting yesterday.

(+)Rounders indicates the inexactness of terms as approximately, something

around, about, roughly, essential, etc.

E.g The number of students taking part in the contest is approximately two

hundreds.

The average mark of the test is something between five and six

 Shields reflect the commitment of the speakers to the truth of propositional content Two subclasses of shields are plausibility shields and attribution shields

(+)Plausibility shields relate to the speakers‟ expression of doubtful attitude

or uncertainty such as I think, I guess, I believe, I suppose, I’m afraid, I don’t see that, as far as I’ concerned, etc.

E.g I guess he was the last person leaving the room

As far as I’m concerned, her plan is the most feasible.

(+)Attribution shields include according to, as is well known, someone

suggests that, the possibility will be, etc These will help the speakers express their

attitude indirectly and avoid taking the responsibility of the truth of the message

E.g According to his father, he left home very early in the morning.

The price has been increased rapidly, as far as anyone knows.

Generally, hedge with its functions and forms play an important role incommunicating, especially in argumentation The theory of hedges will helpresearchers a lot in carrying out the survey Hence, review of previous studies abouthedges is the main content of section 1.9

1.9 Review of previous studies

Inspired of hedges in cross-cultural communication and pragmatics, the

researchers put an effort to do this minor study A Vietnamese-American Cutural Study on the Use of Heding in Argument Together with collecting related

Cross-references and information, the writer had an overview of different studies ofhedges

An overview of the study “Hedging in Invitation Declining: A American Cross-cultural Study” by Đặng Thị Kim Chung (2003) is made In thispaper, seven main hedging strategies in invitation declining were found Besides,factors affecting hedging were also listed Moreover, the writer suggested severalexercises and activities as a guide for teachers to teach hedges in general and ininvitation declining in particular

Vietnamese-“Analysis of Grammatical Forms and Semantic Functions of Hedging inPolitical Discourse: American President Debate” by Rufaidah Kamal Abdul Majeed(2010) attract the attention of many readers In this study, the American President