Linguitic means to express modality in offers in english and vietnamese a contrastive analysis m a thesis linguistics 60 22 15

---NGUYỄN THỊ QUẾ HƯƠNG LINGUISTIC MEANS TO EXPRESS MODALITY IN OFFERS IN ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE - A CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS Phân tích đối chiếu các phương tiện ngôn ngữ thể hiện tình thái

-NGUYỄN THỊ QUẾ HƯƠNG

LINGUISTIC MEANS TO EXPRESS MODALITY IN OFFERS IN ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE - A CONTRASTIVE

ANALYSIS

(Phân tích đối chiếu các phương tiện ngôn ngữ thể hiện tình

thái trong câu đề nghị tiếng Anh và tiếng Việt)

M.A Minor Thesis

Field: English Linguistics Code: 60 22 15

HANOI - 2011

-NGUYỄN THỊ QUẾ HƯƠNG

LINGUISTIC MEANS TO EXPRESS MODALITY IN OFFERS IN ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE - A

CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS

(Phân tích đối chiếu các phương tiện ngôn ngữ thể hiện tình

thái trong câu đề nghị tiếng Anh và tiếng Việt)

M.A Minor Thesis

Field: English Linguistics Code: 60 22 15

Supervisor: Assoc Prof Dr Nguyễn Xuân Thơm

HANOI - 2011

of offering to produce the natural and appropriate utterances.

The study starts with providing some theoretical preliminaries, in which the notion

of modality and offer with its definition, classification and characteristics is presented Themain part focuses on analysis and comparison of modal linguistic means used in Englishand Vietnamese offers Data used in this study are collected from various sources oftextbooks, especially English practical textbooks, articles, and stories in English andVietnamese To obtain the main objective of the study which is to show the similarities anddifferences of the modal tools in the two languages, we take examples in both English andVietnamese into consideration

Finally, some major findings are pointed out The results show that in offers, bothtwo languages have three kinds of modal markers, which are lexical markers, grammaticalmarkers, and prosodic markers However, the usage of the these markers is not the same inEnglish and Vietnamese

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii

ABSTRACT iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS iv

PART A: INTRODUCTION ……… ……1

1 Rationale 1

2 Aims of the study 1

3 Research Questions 2

4 Scope of the study 2

5 Method of the study 2

6 Significance of the study 2

7 Organization of the study 3

PART B: DEVELOPMENT 4

Chapter 1: Theoretical background 4

1.1 Modality 4

1.1.1 Definition of modality 4

1.1.2 Classiffication of modality 5

1.1.3 Linguistic means to express modality 8

1.2 Offering as a speech act 13

1.2.1 Speech acts and classification of speech acts 13

1.2.2 Offering and forms of offers 16

1.2.2.1 Offering as a speech act 16

1.2.2.2 Forms of offering 18

1.2.2.3 Politeness in offering……… …… …… 19

1.3 Summary 20

Chapter 2: A contrastive analysis of linguistic means to express modality in offering between English and Vietnamese 22

2.1 Modal markers in direct offers 22

2.1.1 Lexical markers 22

2.1.1.1 Modal Verbs 22

2.1.1.2 Modal particles in direct offers in Vietnamese 23

2.1.1.3 Other lexical makers 25

2.1.2 Grammatical markers 25

2.1.2.1 Imperative mood 25

2.1.2.2 Vocative 27

2.1.3 Prosodic markers - Intonation 28

2.2 Modal markers in conventionally indirect offers 28

2.2.1 Lexical markers 29

2.2.1.1 Modal Verbs 29

2.2.1.2 Modal particles in Vietnamese 30

2.2.1.3 Other lexical markers 31

2.2.2 Grammatical markers 31

2.2.2.1 Interrogative 31

2.2.2.2 Conditional 32

2.2.2.3 Suggestory formula 32

2.2.3 Prosodic markers – Intonation 32

2.3 Modal markers in non-conventionally indirect offers 33

2.3.1 Lexical markers 33

2.3.2 Grammatical markers 34

2.3.3 Prosodic markers 34

2.4 The similarities and differences of using linguistic means to express modality in offers in English and Vietnamese 34

2.4.1.Similarities 34

2.4.2 Differences 35

2.5 Summary 36

PART C: CONCLUSION 38

1 Conclusions 38

2 Implications 39

3 Limitations 40

4 Suggestions for further study 40

REFERENCES 42

a request or giving a command With these sentence types, modal verbs like 'can', 'may','will', 'must' help in expressing various social functions such as making a request, seekingpermission, expressing rights, obligation and possibility Sentence types, mood choices andmodal verbs are examples of modal markers Thus, it can be said that modality is directlyrelated to the social functions of language The notion of modality as well as linguisticmeans to express modality has been studied by a lot of scholars so far; however, research

on the way of using modal tools in a specific kind of speech act has been limited

Offering is one common type of speech act, which shows consideration towardseach other and therefore it can reinforce social relationship In different countries, orcultures, people make offers in different ways Modality is closely related to the emotionand attitude of the speaker; therefore, in offering, modal tools are usually used Whenthinking of modality, what appears first in our mind may be the modal verbs, which is afamiliar concept Besides modal verbs, there are many other lexical markers such as modaladverbs, modal adjectives…, grammatical markers such as mood and vocative, andprosodic markers However, the use of linguistic means to express modality in offering isnot the same in all languages English and Vietnamese have their own specific features,which leads to a lot of differences in using language

For the above reasons, the author would like to choose the topic “Linguistic means

to express modality in offers in English and Vietnamese - a contrastive analysis” with

the attempt to find out the similarities and differences of the modal tools in English andVietnamese offers It’s also hopeful that this minor thesis will be of some help to those whoare interested in this aspect of language

2 Aims of the study.

The study aims at :

- Exploring the modality markers in making offers in English and Vietnamese.

- Comparing and contrasting the range of modality markers in order to clarify thesimilarities and differences in the way Vietnamese and English people use linguistic means

to express modality in offering in their own language and culture

- Contributing to promoting awareness among foreign language teachers and learners of the mentioned issue

3 Research Questions

In general, with the aims above, the following research questions will be addressed:

- What are linguistic means to express modality in offers in English and Vietnamese?

- What are the similarities and differences between linguistic means to express modality in offers in English and Vietnamese?

4 Scope of the study

The study gives a description and analysis of linguistic means to express modality

in offers in terms of (1) lexical markers, (2) grammatical markers, and (3) prosodicmarkers It centers on the similarities and differences in using modality markers in thespeech act of offering between English and Vietnamese

The materials on offers in English are taken from some English practical textbookssuch as Functions of English, Headway Intermediate, Life Lines, Streamlines, BusinessObjectives… and examples of offers in Vietnamese are taken from some short stories byThạch Lam, Nam Cao, Thế Lữ, Nguyễn Huy Thiệp…

5 Method of the study

A combination of different methods of analysis will be used in this study The first

is the descriptive method English and Vietnamese modal markers used in offering will bedescribed in turns in each kind of offering strategy in order to find out their features

However, the major method utilized in this study is the contrastive analysis betweenthe use of linguistic means to express modality in offering in English and the use of them

in Vietnamese

6 Significance of the study

Theoretical significance: This study gives a selected definitions and explanations

by linguists related to the notions of modality and speech act of offering Through thestudy, readers can also see the comparison of this topic between English and Vietnamese

Practical significance: This study will provide information that can help teachers

and learners of English gain an insight into modality in general and modality in the speechact of offering in specific, which contributes to the teaching and learning English

7 Organization of the study

This study consists of three main parts:

PART A: Introduction: This part introduces the rationale, the aims and objectives,

the scope, the method, the research questions and the organization of the study

PART B: Development: There are two chapters in this part:

Chapter 1 discusses the theoretical background for the study by discussing theory

of modality and offering as a speech act

Chapter 2 focuses on the linguistic means to express modality in offers in English

and Vietnamese Besides, it also gives the similarities and differences between them

PART C: Conclusion: This part presents the major findings of the study, the

conclusion of the study, implications and suggestions for further study

PART B: DEVELOPMENT

Chapter 1: Theoretical background

This chapter provides the theoretical background including the notions of modalityand the speech act of offering It consists of two main sections The first section reviewsthe definition, classification of modality and linguistic means to express modality Thesecond section reviews the issues on speech act of offering such as definition, classificationand forms of offers

Kiefer (1994) holds a philosophical perspective when he talks about modality as

"the relativization of the validity of sentence meanings to a set of possible worlds Talkabout possible worlds can thus be construed as talk about the ways in which people couldconceive the world to be different" For this reason modality is perceived as a universallinguistic phenomenon despite the different means in which it is realized

Modal logic deals with various propositions which are drawn from human attitudesand experiences from which semantic choices like necessity, possibility, impossibility,available for utterances, are derived The method of analysis in modal logic is based on

"the proposal that a proposition can be said to be true in one particular (real or imagined)world and false in another" (Perkins 1983, p6) Modality is, thus, interpreted in terms of anevent or a proposition and analyzed with respect to the universe in which such events orpropositions are thought of as true or false

Lyons (1977) pointed out that modality refers to people’s opinions and attitudestowards propositions expressed with language or circumstances described by propositions

Most of the grammarians deal with modality in terms of modal verbs However,modality is not a formal notion, it is a semantic notion It is "a conceptual category, a type

of meaning, or complex of meanings, with various reflexes in language" (Khlebnikova

1976, p3) Modality refers to certain meaning categories like question, assertion, request,ability, wish, permission, possibility, insistence etc.

In Palmer’s theory (Mood and Modality, 1986), modality is defined as semanticinformation associated with the speaker’s attitude or opinion about what is said Whereas,Bybee (Morphology: A study of the Relation between Meaning and Form, 1985) offers abroader definition that modality is what the speaker is doing with the whole proposition

Halliday who made a significant contribution to the functional paradigm, believesthat a text is a product of social and cultural context from where it springs He is of theopinion that people use language with one another in order to manage their social lives.Modality is directly related to the social functions of language Modality, which expressesdifferent semantic implications like permission, request, obligation, necessity, possibility, isused to perform different communicative acts Halliday regards modality a form ofparticipation by the speaker in the communicative act Modality is related to the

interpersonal function of the language In An Introduction to Functional Grammar (1985)

Halliday views that modality represents the speaker’s angle, either on the validity of theassertion, or on the rights and wrongs of the proposal It is obviously seen that hisdefinition of modality does not diverge much from Palmer’s and Bybee’s

Quirk (1985, p219) regarded modality as the speaker’s judgment on the authenticity

of propositions Quirk claims that modality can be defined as “the manner in which themeaning of a clause is qualified so as to reflect the speaker’s judgement of the likelihood ofthe proposition it expresses being true”

In Vietnam, for the past few years, modality has been the focus of many linguistsand researchers such as Cao Xuân Hạo, Hoàng Phê, Đỗ Hữu Châu and others HoàngTrọng Phiến broadly explains modality as a grammatical category which appears in allkinds of sentence

Although there are different opinions on the definition of modality, it is not difficult

to see that many linguists share the point of view that modality is directly related to thesocial functions of language and speaker’s attitude, as Palmer says: “Modality in languageseems to be essentially subjective, and in reference to the speaker’s opinion or attitude”

1.1.2 Classification of modality

As mentioned above, modality is not only an appealing but also complicated topic.However, many linguists have an agreement on the one of the principal divisions, that isbetween epistemic and non-epistemic modality.

Wright identifies four types of modality: alethic, epistemic, deontic, and existential.

Alethic modality focuses on truth, epistemic modality on knowing, deontic modality onobligation, and existential modality on existence (Wright 1951) As a logician, Wrightdescribes modality within the framework of logic, he fails to offer a description ofmodality that reflects language use

Jennifer Coates (1983) focuses on a linguistic description of modality within theframework of describing the semantics of the nine modal verbs and one quasi-modal verb

(ought) in contemporary British English in her 1983 book The semantics of the modal auxiliaries Coates (1983) identifies two types of modality: epistemic and non-epistemic.

Like the epistemic modality defined by Wright, epistemic modality according to Coatesfocuses on “the speakers’ assumptions or assessment of possibilities” as well as “indicatesthe speaker’s confidence (or lack of confidence) in the truth of the proposition expressed”(Coates 1983) Unlike the epistemic modality of logic, however, Coates (1983) argues thatthe epistemic modality is more subjective, focusing on the attitude or opinion of thespeaker rather than the truth value of the proposition In addition to epistemic modality,Coates also discusses non-epistemic modality with the term “root modality” However,unlike with epistemic modality, no definition emerges for non-epistemic modality otherthan the caveat that root modality is “more difficult to characterise” (Coates 1983) By notproviding a clear definition in conjunction with the broad encompassment of the term rootmodality to include subdivisions most often defined separately in linguistic descriptions ofmodality, Coates fails to provide a comprehensive description of modality

Quirk et al (1985) distinguish between intrinsic and extrinsic modality Extrinsic

modality involves ‘human judgment of what is or is not likely to happen’ (1985) andcovers (epistemic and non-deontic root) possibility, (epistemic and non-deontic root)necessity and prediction, whilst intrinsic modality involves ‘some kind of intrinsic humancontrol over events’ Deontic modality and volition are categorized together as intrinsicmodality As for ability, the authors note: ‘The “ability” meaning of can is consideredextrinsic, even though ability typically involves human control over an action’ (1985) ForQuirk et al., an assertion or question about a being’s ability to do something implies some

sort of judgment about the likelihood of actualization of the situation, and it is this aspect

of ability meaning that informs their categorization of ability as extrinsic

Palmer (2001) distinguishes between propositional modality, which is concerned with ‘the speaker’s attitude to the truth-value or factual status of the proposition,’ and event modality, which is concerned with whether or not the event referred to in the utterance can

or must be realized Propositional modality subsumes evidential and epistemic modality,

the essential difference between these being that ‘with epistemic modality speakers expresstheir judgments about the factual status of the proposition [John may/must/will be in hisoffice], whereas with evidential modality they indicate the evidence they have for itsfactual status’ (Palmer 2001) Within event modality, Palmer distinguishes between

dynamic modality, which covers ability and volition, and deontic modality, which, as usual,

accounts for permission and obligation Dynamic modality ‘comes from the individualconcerned,’ whilst deontic modality comes ‘from an external source’ (2001)

Dynamic modality is similar to deontic modality except that the control is internal

to the subject (Palmer 2003) Evidential modality is similar to epistemic modality exceptthat , instead of judgment, evidential modality allows a speaker to offer evidence for the

“truth-value of the proposition” (Palmer 2001) Palmer (2003) also addresses thedistinction between the realis and the irrealis stating that only the irrealis expressesmodality Despite the exclusion of the realis as a type of modality, Palmer offers the mostcomprehensive and most reflective description of the modality of Modern English

Palmer’s classification of modality in modal system

with the “intermediate degrees” between the positive and negative poles, such assometimes or maybe (Halliday, 2000) Halliday defines modality as the interpersonalcomponent of a dynamic discourse, from which a speaker’s attitude or judgment isexposed, be it an inclination or obligation By four sub-categories of type, orientation,value and polarity, the modality system can be generated into 144 categories and theycould specifically describe all the variants occurring in the mood system However, as far

as this paper is concerned, a general distinction is made on type only; that is, modalizationand modulation are two basic concerns in the current study, as shown in the table:

Halliday’s modality system of modalization and modulation.

Types of Modality

Modalization

Modulation

Modality as the grammaticalized expression of the subjective attitudes and opinions

of a speakers and, more significantly, a description of the types of modality incitescontroversy among linguists and logicians Although many scholars have proposeddescriptions of the types of modality in language, no two agree on a single analysis Fromthe initial alethic, epistemic, deontic, and existential modalities proposed by Wright to themoat recent epistemic, deontic, dynamic, and evidential modalities proposed by Palmer, noscholar yet to offer a fully comprehensive description of linguistic modality Even Palmer,whose analysis best reflects the modality expressed in actual language use, however fails toacknowledge that all language use expresses speaker subjectivity by denying the realis as atype of modality

1.1.3 Linguistic means to express modality

Modality is expressed linguistically by a number of devices like moods, modalauxiliaries, quasi auxiliaries, adjectival and participial expressions, nominal expressions,lexical verbs (Perkins 1983) Apart from these grammatical categories, modality is also

manifested in orthographic devices like punctuation, prosodic features like stress andintonation-contour (Searle 1969) Verbal categories like tense are also used in some cases

to express modality Lyons says that "reference to the future is often as much a matter ofmodality as it is of purely temporal reference" (Lyons 1977:816) In general, modality can

be conveyed by lexicalisation, grammaticalisation, and prosodification (Võ Đại Quang,2009)

Lexical markers include modal auxiliary verbs, modal adverbs, modal adjectives,

modal nouns, modal lexical verbs, and hedging devices

In English, modal auxiliaries play the very important part in conveying modality.

The key way to identify a modal verb is by its defectiveness (it has neither participles norinfinitives) In addition, modal verbs do not take the inflection -s or -es in the third personsingular, unlike other verbs The primary semantic characteristics of modals is that theyallow the speaker to express an attitude to the non-factual and non-temporal elements ofthe situation They are used to express various attitudes like possibility, ability, willingness,probability, obligation, intention etc In a study on modality, Võ Đại Quang has made a list

of 13 modal auxiliaries including: can, could, may, might, shall, should, will, would, must, ought to, used to, need, and dare.

Unlike English, in Vietnamese it is not easy to give the criteria for distinguishingthe modal auxiliaries from main verbs or particles There are a number of linguists whohave carried out studies on modal verbs in Vietnamese such as Trương Văn Trình, NguyễnVăn Hào, Nguyễn Kim Thản…and they hold different views of Vietnamese modalauxiliaries Trương Văn Trình (1970) states that by using the modal auxiliary, the speakerexpresses his idea, notion of certainty, doubt or obligation, volition etc , but according to

Hữu Quỳnh – Ngữ Pháp Tiếng Việt hiện đại, modal verbs are used to express the speaker’s

attitude towards factual events Nguyễn Văn Hào (1988) divides modal auxiliaries into two

types (i) the modal auxiliaries expressing volition such as có thể (can), không thể(cannot), dám (dare), toan (intend), định (intend), phải (must), cần (need), nên (should), muốn (want)… (ii) the modal auxiliaries receiving actions such as bị, được, chịu đựng Nguyễn

Kim Thản offers a clear argumentation on Vietnamese modal verbs As for him, modalverbs do not indicate actions or states but the ability, necessity or intention of doingsomething or the maintenance of the state expressed by the main verb Nguyễn Kim Thản

lists some of the modal auxiliaries in Vietnamese such as cần, có thể, dám, định, nên, nỡ, khỏi, phải, toan, muốn…(Nguyễn Kim Thản 1977: 166, 169).

Some adverbs can express modality According to Quirk (1985: 211), modal

adverbs present on the truth-value of what is said, express levels of the speaker’s belief inthe truth of a proposition They can be placed in almost all positions in a statement;however their most common position is at the beginning Some modal adverbs are

certainly, surely, evidently, probably, maybe, perhaps, possibly, actually, presumably, really, necessarily, hopefully… Võ Đại Quang (2009) divides these modal adverbs into two

groups

Group A: actually, certainly, clearly, definitely, indeed, obviously, plainly, really,surely, for certain, for sure, of course;

Groups B: frankly, honestly, literally, simply, fairly, just

Modal adverbs in group A can be combined with any other lexical verbs whereasmodal adverbs in groups B seem to appear with verbs of attitude or cognition

Examples: Do you actually know her? Did you actually come there?

Do you honestly admire her?

Adjectives can also express modality when they are combined with to + infinitive

or a that clause.

Examples: - It is impossible to run 60 miles per hour

- It is essential that you drink enough liquid

Modal adjectives like sure, likely, possible have the similar meaning as the adverbs surely, possibly They are used to express the speaker’s not doubting or seeming to doubt

what he believes or knows

There are nouns that can express modality They are often followed by a that

clause or to + infinitive.

Examples: - There is a slight possibility, that you get the next train

- The chance to win is not very good in a casino

Some modal nouns such as possibility, probability have the same meaning as their derivations possible, probable, possibly, probably; however, structures with nouns convey a more formal style Some other nouns such as risk, chance, notion, opinion, no doubt… can

be seen as devices expressing uncertainty if they appear in their typical constructions

Examples: In my opinion, he is a good guy

Modal lexical verbs such as think, suppose, believe, ect (propositional-lexical

verbs) and feel, look, appear, sound, ect (verbs of senses and perception) also show the

speaker’s opinion and attitude toward the content of the subordinate clause Palmer

considers think/ suppose/ believe… to be weak assertive, the speaker does not totally

commit himself to the truth content of the proposition

Examples: - I guess you’re feeling tired after a long day of waiting

When using verbs of sense, the speaker means to say that he is not certain aboutwhat he is saying

Examples: - Mary looks ill (The speaker is not certain but just guesses Mary’shealth basing on her tired face or voice)

Another modal lexical marker is hedges (As far as I know, I may be mistaken,

but…, I am not sure if this is right, but…) These hedging devices are effective means of

conveying the respect of the speaker to the hearer

Grammatical markers consist of Mood and Vocatives Grammatical mood can be

defined as a set of distinctive verb forms that express modality Modality is thegrammaticalized expression of the subjective attitude of the speaker, which includesopinions about possibility, probability, necessity, obligation, permissibility, ability, desire,and contingency Mood, in many languages including English, has three categories:

Indicative mood, Subjunctive mood, and Imperative mood The indicative mood allows

speakers to form sentences that express assertions, denials, and questions of actuality or

strong probability The subjunctive mood allows speakers to form sentences that express

commands, requests, suggestions, wishes, hypotheses, purposes, doubts, and suppositions

that are contrary to fact at the time of the utterance The imperative mood allows speakers

to form sentences that make direct commands, express requests, and grant or deny

permission However, in Vietnamese, the division of mood is different According to Diệp

Quang Ban (Ngữ Pháp Tiếng Việt, 2005), mood in Vietnamese consists of four types:

declarative, interrogative, imperative and exclamative The name of each type of mood is

correspondent to the name of the sentence type in interpersonal function

Vocative is used to attract the attention of the hearer Moreover, another important

function of vocatives is that they convey the emotion of the speaker either respectfuldistance or familiarity Vocatives in form of proper names show friendliness; endearments

such as dear, darling, honey, ect express warmth; and the use of title, occupation or rank

including Mr/ Mrs/ Ms + proper name, Dr., Prof., Prime Minister, expresses respect and

formality to the hearer

Prosodic markers play a certain role in conveying the speaker’s emotion or

attitude, especially in intonational language like English It is said that “the way they saidit” is sometimes more important than “what they said” Connor (1980) defines intonation

as "the way of using tunes to add something to the words, and what it adds is the speaker'feeling at that moment" Tune is the combination of different "notes of the voice" which go

up and down constantly when people speak In this way, Connor's tune corresponds to thepitch patterns of the voice, and intonation is how people use this pitch variation to conveypragmatic meaning It is important to note that in his definition, Connor mentionsintonation as the tool to convey speakers' feeling According to Roach (1991), intonationhas the following functions: attitudinal function, accentual function, grammatical function,

and discourse function Attitudinal function is the ability of intonation to enables speakers

to express emotions and attitudes when they speak; this adds special kind of meaning tospoken language, which is the role in conveying modality Roach (1991) gives a short

description of the four common intonation patterns According to Roach, the falling tone

signals finality and definiteness The rising tone is normally employed in general question,

listing, encouraging and when speakers want to signal something "more to follow" The

fall-rise tone conveys uncertainty, doubt, and in requesting The rise-fall tone conveys the

state of being surprised, impressed In a study by Võ Đại Quang (2009), four types of

intonation patterns express speaker’s different emotions and attitudes The Glide-downemployed would mean strong commitment while a Glide-up used would be interpreted asbeing suspicious attitude If the speaker is grumbling, he/she would be likely to use theTake-off The Dive expresses the hesitation or irony of the speaker Besides, otherparameters such as key, loudness and speed are also important in conveying modalmeaning

In Vietnamese, the system of tones has limited the role of intonation in conveyingmodality Because Vietnamese is a tonal language, (unlike English, which is an intonationallanguage,) expressing emotion by changing the pitch of the sentence or phrase would makethe meaning of the sentence different; therefore, many particles have arisen that can beadded to the end of the sentence to express emotion It is the main cause that leads to the

increase in the number of a group of words called modal particles (ạ, nhỉ, nhé,

à…) It can be said that in Vietnamese, modal particles are a useful tools in expressingspeaker’s attitude and feeling Most of modal particles in Vietnamese do not contain

meaning and they are classified as function words opposite to content words (Nguyễn Anh

Quế, 1988) Nguyễn Kim Thản (1997) refers them to grammatical words Hoàng Phê andothers (1998) claim that modal particles can not stand apart from other content words insentences, and they show the grammatical relationship among content words Nguyễn VănChính (2000), Nguyễn Văn Hiệp (2001) share the same idea that modal particles areclosely related to the context Their position is flexible, at the beginning, in the middle, or

at the end (usually) of a sentence

Examples: - Thích quá!

- Anh cứ lấy xe của tôi mà đi.

- Hãy để mình giúp!

1.2 Offering as a speech act

1.2.1 Speech acts and classification of speech acts

Inferring the function of what is said by considering its form and context is anability which is essential for successful communication Speech Act Theory provides uswith a means of establishing the function of what is being said The theory was developedfrom the basic belief that language is used to perform actions

According to Austin's theory (1962), what we say has three kinds of meaning:

1. Propositional meaning - the literal meaning of what is said

2. Illocutionary meaning - the social function of what is said

3. Perlocutionary meaning - the effect of what is said

According to Austin (1960), Speech acts is a theory of performative language, inwhich to say something is to do something On any occasion, the action performed byproducing an utterance will consist three related acts:

a) Locutionary act is ‘what is said’, the form of uttered; the act of saying

something

b)Illocutionary act is ‘what is done in uttering the word’, the function of the word,

the specific purpose that the speaker’s have in mind The illocutionary force is the

speaker's intent, a true 'speech act' (informing, ordering, warning, undertaking…)

For example: the utterance “I swear to give it back next time” is used to perform the

illocutionary act of promising

c) Perlocutionary act is ‘what is done by uttering the word’; it is the effect on

listener, the listener’s reaction

For example: the utterance “There is something in your shoulder!” may cause the

listener to panic and to look on his shoulder The perlocution of this utterance is to causethose emotion and action

The classification of illocutionary acts proposed by Searle (1976) is a development

of ideas that appears in Austin’s theory Speech acts are classified according to thedirection of fit between speech acts and the outside world

- Declaratives are those kinds of speech acts that change the world via their

utterance and bring about correspondence between the propositional content and the world;thus direction of fit is both words-to-world and world-to-words The acts of declarativesare approving, betting, blessing, christening, confirming, cursing, declaring, disapproving,dismissing, naming, resigning, etc

- Representatives are those kinds of speech acts that express Speaker's belief that p

and have a truth value, show words-to-world fit The types include arguing, asserting,boasting, claiming, complaining, criticizing, denying, describing, informing, insisting,reporting, suggesting, swearing, etc

Example: I met your parent yesterday informing

- Expressives are those kinds of speech acts that express Speaker's attitude to a

certain state of affairs specified (if at all) in the propositional content There is no direction

of fit and propositional content must be related to Speaker or Hearer (1975) The acts areapologizing complimenting, condoling, congratulating, deploring, praising, regretting,thanking, etc

- Directives are those kinds of speech acts that are attempts to get Hearer to do

something, therefore they show world-to-words fit, and express Speaker's wish or desirethat Hearer do A The acts are advising, asking, begging, challenging, daring, demanding,forbidding, insisting, inviting, ordering, permitting, recommending, requesting, suggesting,etc

Example: Don’t go to the party! Forbidding

- Commissives are those kinds’ acts that commit Speaker to some future course of

action, so they show world-to-words fit, and Speaker expresses the intention that Speaker

do A The acts are committing, guaranteeing, offering, promising, refusing, threatening,volunteering, vowing etc

Another classification is given by Bach and Harnish (1984), in which the position

of offers can be recognized in the commissives category There are four main types ofcommunicative illocutionary acts

Constantives (assertives, predictives, retrodictives, descriptives, ascriptives,

informatives, confirmatives, concessives, retractives, assentives, dissentives, disputatives,responsives, suggestives, suppositives) express the speaker's belief and his intention ordesire that the hearer have or form a like belief

Directives (requestives, questions, requirements, permissives, advisories) express

the speaker's attitude toward some prospective action by the hearer and his intention thathis utterance, or the attitude it expresses, be taken as a reason for the hearer's action

Commissives (promises, offers) express the speaker's intention and belief that his

utterance obligates him to do something (perhaps under certain conditions)

Acknowledgments (apologize, condole, congratulate, greet, thank, bid, accept,

reject) express feelings regarding the hearer or, in cases where the utterance is clearlyperfunctory or formal, the speaker's intention that his utterance satisfy a social expectation

to express certain feelings and his belief that it does

A different approach to distinguish types of speech acts can be made on the basis

of structure, provided by the three basic sentence types in English which relate to thethree general communicative functions (Yule, 1996:54):

Utterance

You wear a seat belt

Do you wear a seat belt?

Wear a seat belt!

Whenever there is a direct relationship between a structure and a function, we

have a direct speech act Whenever there is an indirect relationship between structure and function we have an indirect speech act For example, in English most requests are

done by using declaratives:

Example: It's cold outside:

The utterance above, used as a statement, is a direct speech act (I hereby tell you that it is cold outside), used as a command/request, it is an indirect speech act (I hereby request you that you close the window).

One of the most common types of indirect speech acts in English has the form ofinterrogative, which is not typically used to ask a question (we don't expect only ananswer, we expect an action)

Example: Could you pass the salt?

Would you open this?

Indirect speech acts are generally associated with greater politeness in English than direct speech acts

1.2.2 Offering and forms of offers.

1.2.2.1 Offering as a speech act

There are different types of speech acts and offering is one kind among those whichpeople use a lot in daily life According to the definition from Oxford Advanced Learner'sDictionary, to offer is to say that you are willing to do something for somebody or givesomething to somebody In other words, it is a way that a speaker wants to express awillingness to help or to serve the hearer It can be a gift offer, favor offer, food/drink offer

or an opportunity offer It helps reveal people’s consideration towards each other andtherefore it can reinforces social relationship People can make offer in many ways whichare influenced by their culture, customs, or personal characteristics The structural form ofthe offer can be in the form of a question, a statement or a polite command

For a characterisation of the nature of offers, Searle (1976) categorises offers ascommissives since they commit a speaker to some future course of action x - acategorisation followed by Bach/Harnish (1979) Similarly, Edmondson/House (1981) alsounderline the speaker’s role in offering by categorising offers as attitudinal illocutions and,more specifically, as a type of Willing, as they involve situations in which a speaker

communicates that s/he intends to - potentially at least - perform a future act in the interest

of the hearer Wunderlich (1977) argues that offers have the standard form: “If you want it,

I shall do a” (original emphasis) For example, the offer, “Do you want a sandwich?”, can

be said to have the standard form, “If you want a sandwich, I’ll make you one.”

In English Speech Act Verb: A Semantic Dictionary (1987) by Anna Wierzbicka,

offer has the following meanings:

- I think of X as something that could be good for you

- I say: I will cause X to happen if you say you would want me to do it

- I think that you may want it to happen

- I don’t know if you want it to happen

- I assume that you will say if you want it to happen

Offering implies something like a benefit for hearer It can be more or lesstentative, but it has a degree of uncertainty “I don’t know if you want me to do it” As aresult, offers usually call for an answer from the hearer

There is another idea that offers have a double illocutionary purpose: to let hearerknow of speaker’s willingness to do something for him and to cause hearer to say “yes” or

“no”, to enable speaker to act accordingly This idea would be supported by the fact thatresponses to offers are frequently double “Yes, thank you” or ”No, thank you”

Offering also shares some features with the speech act of inviting, volunteering and promising.

The similarity between offering and inviting is that in both cases, the action

envisaged by the speaker will be desirable or beneficial to the hearer The difference is theperson who perform the action With offering, the speaker will perform the action, but withinviting, the hearer will do

In case of volunteering, both types of speech acts show the speaker’s willingness to

do something not because it is good for him but for other people However, unlike offering,volunteering does not have to be directly beneficial for the hearer, or indeed for otherpeople We volunteer to do something that has to be done This may mean that we will freesome other people of the burden of having to do it, and thus benefit those other peopleindirectly

Another speech act which refers to an action by the speaker and which is beneficial

to the hearer is promise Promises refer to actions situated in distant or indefinite future and

they are more hypothetical than offers, which refer to the present or the immediate future

On the other hand, the action envisaged in an offer is conditional and dependent on thehearer’s response; whereas, in case of a promise, the action is presented as certain, becausethe hearer’s attitude is taken for granted

1.2.2.2 Forms of offering

In terms of strategy, offers can be made by using three kinds of offering strategies:direct strategies, conventionally indirect strategies, and non-conventionally indirect

strategies Direct strategies are realized by offers syntactically marked (Imperatives) or by

other verbal means that name the act as an offer (Let me , I’ll …., I would like to …or I

can……) Conventionally indirect strategies realize the act by reference to contextual

preconditions necessary for its performance, as conventionalized in a given language.(Suggestory formulae: “How about going out for dinner tonight?” or Query preparatory:

Can I…., May I …, Shall I…., Would you like to….) Non-conventionally indirect

strategies are not conventionalized in the language and hence require more inferencing

activity for the hearer to derive the speaker’s intent (We’re having a party tonight Are youfree?)

In terms of forms, offers are grouped in three major categories with seven types

Three major categories are offering in forms of questions, statements, and imperatives; seven types are offering in forms of tentative questions, permission questions, elliptical questions, Wh-questions, tag questions, statements and imperatives.

1. Offering in form of Tentative Questions begins with the auxiliary “shall”, “would”, or

“do”

Examples: Shall I get you an envelop?

Would you like me to repair it?

Do you want me to check for you?

2 Offering in form of Permission Questions uses the modals such as “may”, or “can”

Examples: May I help you?

Can I get you anything to drink?

3. Offering in form of Elliptical Questions can be used in informal situations in which the relationship between the speaker and the hearer is quite close

Example: Tea?

4. Offering in form of WH – Questions usually begins with “how” and “what” Offers with

“how” seem to be softer more pleasant to hear and are used when the speaker and thehearer are not in close relationship

What about some more wine?

5 Offering in form of Tag Questions is not varied There is only one form of tag question with “shall I” which can be seen in daily conversations

Examples: I’ll answer it, shall I? (Swan, M 1990, p.108)

6. Offering in form of Statements is employed with the structure “will/shall + V”, thesubject of the statement is “I”, and sometimes “if you like” is added at the end of the

statement

Examples: I’ll get you a cup of tea

I’ll do the the washing up if you like

7. Offering in form of Imperatives is considered as of less formality These offers are usually said with a falling intonation and added “please” at the end of the utterance

Example: Let me help you

According to a study by Hoàng Thị Thu Lan (2000), in English, the most popularoffer form is offer in form of Tentative questions, the second popular offer form is offer inform of Statements The least popular offer form is offer in form of Tag questions

1.2.2.3 Politeness in offering

Politeness is a universal phenomenon in every society Brown and Levinson builttheir theory of politeness on the basis of the concept ‘face’ According to them, “face is thepublic self-image that every member wants to claim for himself” (1987) This definition isexplained more by Yule (1996) as “face means the public self-image of a person It refers

to that emotional and social sense of self that everyone has and expects everyone else torecognize.” Face includes two types: “positive face” and “negative face”, which are tworelated aspects of the same entity and refer to two basic desires or wants of any individual

in any interaction “Negative face” refers to “The want of every competent adult memberthat his actions be unimpeded by others” “Positive face” refers to “The want of everymember that his wants be desirable to at least some others” In other words, negative face

is the wish and need to be independent and free to do things and not to be interfered and