Judges’ criticisms in the voice of america and the voice of vietnam TV singing contests from cross cultural perspective

ABSTRACT This research aims to 1 identify the criticizing strategies employed by the judges in The Voice of America and The Voice of Vietnam TV singing contests, 2 find out the similarit

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

HANOI OPEN UNIVERSITY

M.A THESIS

JUDGES’ CRITICISMS IN THE VOICE OF AMERICA AND THE VOICE OF VIET NAM

TV SINGING CONTESTS FROM CROSS-CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE

(LỜI PHÊ BÌNH CỦA GIÁM KHẢO CHƯƠNG TRÌNH GIỌNG HÁT MỸ

VÀ GIỌNG HÁT VIỆT NHÌN TỪ GÓC ĐỘ GIAO TIẾP GIAO VĂN HOÁ)

TRẦN VĂN THUẬT Field: English Language Code: 8.22.02.01

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

HANOI OPEN UNIVERSITY

M.A THESIS

JUDGES’ CRITICISMS IN THE VOICE OF

AMERICA AND THE VOICE OF VIET NAM

TV SINGING CONTESTS FROM CROSS-CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE

(LỜI PHÊ BÌNH CỦA GIÁM KHẢO CHƯƠNG TRÌNH

GIỌNG HÁT MỸ VÀ GIỌNG HÁT VIỆT

NHÌN TỪ GÓC ĐỘ GIAO TIẾP GIAO VĂN HOÁ)

TRẦN VĂN THUẬT Field: English Language Code: 8.22.02.01 Supervisor: Dr Huynh Anh Tuan

HANOI - 2020

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

To complete this master's thesis, apart from my own efforts, there is the enthusiastic guidance of the teachers and lecturers, as well as the encouragement and support of family and friends during the time of studying and doing the master's thesis

First of all, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to Dr Huynh Anh Tuan,

my supervisor, who has wholeheartedly helped and created the best conditions for

me to complete this thesis His advice and direction has helped me confidently conduct the research on new issues and solve the problem scientifically and comprehensively

In addition, I would like to express my sincere appreciation to all the lecturers in the Faculty of English, Hanoi Open University who have been dedicated to conveying valuable knowledge, as well as supporting me throughout the process of learning, researching and until the implementation of the thesis

Finally, from the bottom of my heart, I would like to extend my profound thankfulness to my family, colleagues and friends for always trusting, following, supporting and caring for me during the time when I studied, conducted the research and implemented this master's thesis

ABSTRACT

This research aims to (1) identify the criticizing strategies employed by the judges

in The Voice of America and The Voice of Vietnam TV singing contests, (2) find out the similarities and differences between criticizing strategies employed by the judges in The Voice of America and The Voice of Vietnam singing contests from cross-cultural perspective This research used qualitative and quantitative approaches Qualitative approach was used to describe and analyze the data, and quantitative method was also employed in this research to obtain the frequency of the data occurrences in order to support the qualitative interpretation The data were

in the form of utterances containing criticism uttered by the judges in The Voice of America and The Voice of Vietnam TV singing contests in the years of 2018 and

2019 The data were analyzed based on Nguyen (2005)‘s framework of criticizing strategies and explained based on Hofstede (1980)‘s and Hall (1990)‘s theories on culture The results of the research show that the judges in both The Voice Shows applied all the strategies namely direct, indirect and combined strategies when giving criticisms However, due to cultural differences, the American judges tend to use the direct strategies more frequently than the Vietnamese judges, who mainly applied indirect strategies This study also suggests some implications for better understanding and giving criticisms in English and Vietnamese

Keywords: speech acts, cross-cultural communication, criticism, The Voice

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

Table 3.2: Culture patterns and communication styles in America and Vietnam

Table 4.3: Result of survey on the use of direct strategy of giving criticisms

in The Voice of America and The Voice of Vietnam TV singing contests

67

Table 4.4: The indirect criticisms in The Voice of America and The Voice

of Vietnam TV singing contests

69

Table 4.5: Result of survey on the use of indirect strategy of giving criticisms in The Voice of America and The Voice of Vietnam TV singing contests

70

TABLES OF CONTENTS

Page

Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Rationale 1

1.2 Aims and objectives of the study 2

1.3 Research questions 3

1.4 Methods of the study 3

1.5 Scope of the study 3

1.6 Significance of the study 4

1.7 Structure of the thesis 5

Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 6

2.1 Previous studies 6

2.1.1 Previous studies on criticisms overseas 6

2.1.2 Previous studies on criticisms in Vietnam 8

2.2 Theoretical background 10

2.2.1 Language, culture and communication 10

2.2.2 The speech act of criticizing 16

2.2.3 Cross- cultural communication 28

2.3 Summary 37

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 38

3.1 Source of data 38

3.2 Research approaches 39

3.3 Methods of the study 41

3.4 Data collection and data analysis 41

3.5 Summary 46

Chapter 4: CRITICIZING STRATEGIES EMPLOYED BY THE JUDGES IN THE VOICE OF AMERICA AND THE VOICE OF VIETNAM TV SINGING CONTESTS 47 4.1 Criticizing strategies employed by the judges in The Voice of

America TV singing contest 47

4.1.1 Direct criticisms 47

4.1.2 Indirect criticisms 51

4.1.3 Combined strategy 54

4.2 Criticizing strategies employed by the judges in The Voice of Vietnam TV singing contest 54

4.2.1 Direct criticisms 54

4.2.2 Indirect criticism 58

4.2.3 Combined strategy 62

4.3 Similarities and differences between criticizing strategies employed by the judges in The Voice of America and The Voice of Vietnam TV singing contests 64

4.3.1 In terms of the criticizing strategies 64

4.3.2 In terms of direct criticisms 67

4.3.3 In terms of indirect criticisms 68

4.3.4 In terms of combined strategy 72

4.4 Summary 73

Chapter 5: CONCLUSION

74 5.1 Recapitulation 74

5.2 Concluding remarks 75

5.3 Limitation of the research 76

5.4 Implications and Suggestions for further research 77

APPENDICES

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Rationale

“Cross-cultural communication is the communication (verbal and non-verbal) between people from different cultures; communication that is influenced by cultural values, attitudes and behavior; the influence of culture on people’s reactions and responses to each other” (Levin, D.R & Adelman, M.B.,1993)

Cross-cultural communication itself is not a new phenomenon, but has experienced for thousands of years, associated with the fate of all peoples and communities around the world So far, when entering the 21st century, mankind has achieved great achievements in science and technology Thanks to modern media, internet, the strong development of the domestic and international transport, especially in the aviation industry, etc., opportunities for exchanges, communication, and mutual learning among cultures and cultural communities across the planet are strongly increasing In this context, globalization has become an inevitable trend that attracts all nations and cultures in the world As a result, understanding the similarities and differences in culture, especially speaking culture among communities, plays an extremely important role

Communication, language and culture are inseparable elements In order to communicate well, the target audience not only needs to be fluent in the language, but also needs to understand the culture of the community using that language Differences in culture will make communication difficult Brown & Levinson (1987) think that each language has its own rules of communication and each culture has its own rules about how to communicate with each other Therefore, learning and using a foreign language requires learners to not only acquire knowledge of phonetics, vocabulary, grammar, but also need communication skills, cultural knowledge, i.e how to use communication strategies in specific contexts to achieve specific goals

Criticism is one of the purposes of linguistic communication (or communication by some other means) that any society or nation has In daily communication, criticism

is carried out for a variety of purposes: showing disagreement, overcoming things that are not standard, expressing dissatisfaction, advising However, this is a very

necessary behavior which is important in communication because it is a negative behavior and a face-threatening behavior of both the speaker and the listener Therefore, choosing appropriate criticizing strategies is considered an art of communication

Furthermore, a number of studies regarding the speech act of criticizing have been carried out in different languages and in interlanguage of English learners of different language backgrounds such as House and Kasper (1981), Tracy, Van Dusen, and Robison (1987), Tracy and Eisenberg (1990), Nguyen (2005, 2008), Vu (2009), Tran (2016) and others The problems posed for Vietnamese learners and users of English concerning criticisms have not yet been adequately investigated because, although several researches into criticisms have been conducted; they only looked at the criticisms from pragmatic or syntactic perspective Therefore, a study

on the similarities and differences in giving criticism in English and Vietnamese cultures is believed to be of great importance The findings from the research would partly help Vietnamese learners of English avoid miscommunication, cultural shock and communication breakdown

From the interesting things about learning about the culture of the community along with the attraction of using cultural communication in analyzing linguistic actions,

we decided to choose the topic ―Judges‘ Criticisms in The Voice of America and The Voice of Vietnam TV Singing Contests from Cross-cultural Perspective‖

1.2 Aims and objectives of the study

The study is conducted with the main aim to contrast criticizing strategies used by the judges in The Voice of America and The Voice of Vietnam TV singing contests from cross-cultural perspective, thus partly providing to increase the awareness of the similarities and differences between English and Vietnamese cultures in giving criticisms To achieve the set aim mentioned above, the study tries to fulfil the following objectives:

- Describing and analyzing the criticizing strategies employed by the judges in The Voice of America and The Voice of Vietnam TV singing contests;

- Finding out the similarities and differences between criticizing strategies employed by the judges in The Voice of America and The Voice of Vietnam

1.4 Methods of the study

To achieve the purpose of the research, considering English as the source language and Vietnamese as the target language, we mainly apply the following methods:

- Descriptive method: The criticisms of judges are described and analyzed based on their different strategies and their linguistic expressions based on Nguyen (2005)‘s framework

- Contrastive method: We rely on the results that have been analyzed and described

to contrast in order to find out the similarities and differences between the judges' criticisms in The Voice of America and The Voice of Vietnam TV singing contests

in terms of cross-cultural communication The use of those strategies is explained based on the cultural and social characteristics of each country

1.5 Scope of the study

Within the framework of the thesis, we would like put the focus on the strategies used by the judges in The Voice of America and of Vietnam TV singing TV contests 2018 and 2019 when making criticisms Since the study focused on analyzing the verbal criticisms, the factors related to non-verbal communication such as facial expressions, body languages were not put into account What is more,

the study‘s main aim was to contrast the criticizing strategies used by the judges; therefore, the interaction between the judges and the contestants, i.e the responses

to the judges‘ criticisms were not included Additionally, the choice of different criticizing strategies were explained based on cross-cultural communication theory

1.6 Significance of the study

- Theoretical significance:

Theoretically, the findings of the study reveal that the theoretical frameworks (theory of speech acts, theory of criticizing strategies; theory of cross-cultural communication) used in the present study are highly reliable and appropriate for investigating the speech act in different languages and different cultures such as American and Vietnamese cultures What is more, the systematically organized information of the study may help learners gain an insight into criticizing strategies used by American and Vietnamese native speakers, and it is hoped that the study would find out the influences of cultural factors on the choices of criticizing strategies by the speakers of the two cultures

- Practical significance:

Practically, the results of the thesis have certain practical values in explaining ways

to use criticizing strategies in English and Vietnamese effectively Firstly, the study

of criticisms associated with cultural and social factors can be expanded to study other speech acts thereby contributing to the cultural studies of the linguistic community Besides, the results of the thesis help to provide useful advice in the use

of criticism in communication effectively In addition, the results of the thesis will

be useful references to be used for future studies on languages and culture, as well

as in teaching English to Vietnamese and teaching Vietnamese to foreigners, especially in social communications

1.7 Structure of the thesis

The thesis is divided into five chapters:

Chapter 1: Introduction introduces the rationale, aims and objectives, scope of

the study, research questions, methods and significance of the study

Chapter 2: Literature review pays attention to summarizing the previous studies

into criticisms, giving an overview of the relationship between language and culture, the notion of speech acts, the act of criticizing, the theory of cross-cultural communication, politeness theory, which are relevant to the purpose of the study

Chapter 3: Methodology concentrates on describing the research orientation, the

research methodology in details and comprises the information of the subjects, instruments of data collection and the process of collecting and analyzing data

Chapter 4: Criticizing Strategies Employed by the Judges in The Voice

of America and The Voice of Vietnam TV Singing Contests analyzes the

strategies employed by the judges in The Voice of America and The Voice of Vietnam TV singing contests when making criticisms, investigates the similarities and differences in the criticizing strategies in English and Vietnamese in the two singing contests from cross-cultural perspective In this chapter, the criticizing strategies as well as the criticism modifiers in the two languages used by the judges

in the The Voice singing contests will be described, compared, and contrasted in terms of cross-cultural communication Additionally, the implications to the strategies in making criticisms in English and Vietnamese in cross-cultural communication environment are also presented in this chapter

Chapter 5: Conclusion draws the conclusion of the study, the limitations of the

study and proposes some suggestions for bettering the study as well as for better researches in the future

References and Appendices are attached in the end of the thesis

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

The literature review is organized into two parts: previous studies and review of theoretical background The first part summarizes the previous investigations into criticisms both overseas and in Vietnam The second part aims to review the literature on the relationship between language, culture and communication, definitions, classifications of speech acts, the act of criticizing, theory of cross-cultural communication, which are all related to the study

2.1 Previous studies

In real-life communication, giving and responding to criticisms are considered

―arts‖ since they can easily hurt other people‘s feelings, especially those who come from different cultural background if the speakers and he hearers do not apply proper words or style in criticizing Therefore, the speech act of criticizing has become an interesting topic and has been studied by different researchers both in the world and in Vietnam

However, all the previous studies only investigated the criticisms and criticizing strategies from syntactic or pragmatic perspective, and there have not been any works investigating criticizing strategies in English and Vietnamese from cross-cultural perspective

2.1.1 Previous studies on criticisms overseas

As mentioned earlier, how people from different cultures communicate in general and criticize others in particular have been interesting topics for researchers all over the world So far, a number of studies have been conducted into this field

Tracy, et al (1987) studied the features of criticisms made by speakers of different cultural backgrounds and made a distinction between ―good‖ from ―bad‖ criticisms According to the findings, a good criticism is one that displays a positive language and manner; suggests specific changes and possible critic; states justified and explicit reasons for criticizing and does not violate the relationship between interlocutions and is accurate

Tracy and Eissenberg (1990) in their investigation into the preferences for message clarity and politeness in giving criticism found that among people from different races and gender the superiors tended to give more weight to message clarity that did subordinates and that this preference also varied according to gender and race

Cao (2005) investigated the way Chinese lecturers perform the speech act of criticism and the way students respond to this speech act Ethnographic approach was employed to get the data The study used the Speech Act Theory of Austin and Searle as well as the theory of politeness of Brown and Levinson as a theoretical framework The study‘s results are interesting The study found that the choice of criticism strategies was mainly influenced by social and cultural factors

Shang-Chao (2008) compared the speech act of criticism in Chinese and English The study claimed that all speech acts including criticism are influenced by cultural factors It was found that speakers of the two languages use different strategies when making criticism According to the findings, Chinese people used more indirect strategies to express criticism than the English people

He (2008) studied the speech act of criticism used in American Sitcom: Growing Pains This study looked at the strategies affecting the speech act of criticism and the response to the criticisms in natural situations The study was carried out based

on the pragmatic theories of the Cooperation Principle (CP), the Politeness Principle (PP) and Face View The study concluded that certain pragmatic strategies were used by American participants The study also suggested how to overcome pragmatic failure and enhance cross-cultural awareness

Nuryani (2016) investigated criticizing strategies used by the characters in the film This Means War This study also studied the factors affecting the choice of these strategies in the film The corpus of the study focused on the dialogues of the characters The findings of the study were that, first of all, there were three types of politeness strategies of criticism used in the film: bald on record, positive politeness, and off record Secondly, the characters used five politeness principles,

namely tact maxim, generosity maxim, approbation maxim, modesty maxim, and agreement maxim when making criticisms

2.1.2 Previous studies on criticisms in Vietnam

In Vietnam, there have been also several works analyzing and contrasting criticisms and criticizing strategies in English and Vietnamese, for example:

Nguyen (2005) investigated two speech acts: criticizing and responding to criticism employed by a group of Vietnamese EFL learners The participants of the study included 36 Vietnamese English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners, 12 Vietnamese native speakers and 12 Australian native speakers The findings of the study revealed that there are differences between the ways Vietnamese EFL criticized and responded to criticism and that of the native speakers of English in Australia Added to this, the study also showed that proficiency had little impact on the use of these two speech acts

In a similar vein, Nguyen (2008) conducted a research into the strategies of criticism used by Vietnamese learners of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) To achieve this goal, the researched used a peer-feedback task, a written questionnaire, and a retrospective interview to collect the data from 36 adult learners The findings

of the study showed that Vietnamese EFL learners‘ strategies of criticism are different from those of the native speakers of Australian English Some factors were identified to explain these differences including the learners' lack of L2 linguistic competence, communicative competence, and the pragmatic transfer from the L1

Hoang (2008) conducted research on The Speech Act of Criticizing by the Vietnamese and the Anglo-American The results of the study have shown similarities and differences in the implementation of criticism by Vietnamese and British Americans Notably, the study provides information about speech acts from the perspective of cultural interference, about the difference in critical action between two cultures and two peoples; The influence of social and contextual factors on criticism and action by Vietnamese and British Americans

Vu (2009) examined what politeness strategies are employed by American and Vietnamese teachers when they give criticisms to their students‘ presentation from

cross-cultural perspective The researchers used questionnaire as the method to gather data The study found some interesting findings First, the teachers in the two countries employed a variety of direct and indirect strategies However, the number

of strategies teacher utilized did not imply the degree of directness and indirectness Second, Vietnamese people are inclined to be less direct than American in theory but when criticizing their students‘ presentations, they appeared to be more direct than their counterparts

Doan (2010) in ―A study of verbal criticism in English and Vietnamese‖ analyzed the sentences and criticisms quoted from short stories and novels of English-speaking countries such as Britain, America, Australia, New Zealand in the early nineteenth century and the period before and after 1945 The author applied the classification of the previous studies and shared the concept of speech acts, and therefore had the same way to classify criticizing strategies, which is divided into direct criticism and indirect criticism Regarding the frequency of criticism, the author said that compared to Vietnamese people, Americans are less critical, especially in personal topics or related to personal opinions Vietnamese people are more critical than Americans, but they are often dominated by more social and situational factors

Tran (2016) conducted a cross-cultural study on criticizing in English and Vietnamese The main source of data is from the literature works in the two languages The results of the study showed that there are some cultural differences and some pragmatic problems which the Vietnamese learners of English may face when learning this speech act

By investiagating the previous works done demoestically and internationally on the same topic of giving criticisms, the author can easily find out the research gap While the positive relationship between people‘s communication patterns and their cultural identities has been widely acknowledged in a wealth of literature on pragmatics, there is no empirical research set out to explore how English and Vietnamese speakers pragmalinguistically approach to criticism in naturally-occurring communications To supplement the knowledge gap, this study illuminates how American and Vietnamese judges pragmalinguistically encode their

criticisms while doing evaluations in The Voice TV Shows With the linguistic variations observed in this research, we would be able to go beyond the surface structure of the language to explicate how and why people‘s cultural orientations have impacts on their rhetorical management of criticisms, especially in the media discourse

is a system of signs For him, a sign consists of a signifier (the sound- image or the written shape) and a signified (a concept), in the manner that, they both are inseparably linked with each other (ibid) In other words, the sound-image cannot

be separated from the concept, that is to say, these two never part with each other (ibid)

Another definition of language is that ―Language is a purely human and non- instinctive method of communicating ideas, emotions and desires by means of voluntarily produced symbols‖ (Sapir, 1921)

Crystal (1971, 1992) gave his definition of language as ―the systematic, conventional use of sounds, signs or written symbols in a human society for communication and self-expressions‖

Noam Chomsky (1957) said: ―Language is a process of free creation; its laws and principles are fixed, but the manner in which the principles of generation are used is free and infinitely varied Even the interpretation and use of words involves a process of free creation.‖

Language, as defined in Cambridge International Dictionary of English, ―is a system of communication consisting of sounds, words, and grammar, or the system

of communication used by people in a particular country or type of work‖

According to Oxford learners‘ dictionaries, ―language is the system of communication in speech and writing that is used by people of a particular country

or area.‖

In Vietnamese, several definitions of language have been proposed, one of which is

“Ngôn ngữ là một hệ thống tín hiệu âm thanh đặc biệt, là phương tiện giao tiếp cơ bản và qua trọng nhất của các thành viên trong một cộng đồng người; ngôn ngữ đồng thời cũng là phương tiện phát triển tư duy, truyền đạt truyền thống văn hoá - lịch sử từ thế hệ này sang thế hệ khác”, which can be understood as ―Language is a

special speech signal system, the most basic and important means of communication of members in a community of people; language is also a means of developing thinking, conveying cultural and historical traditions from generation to generation‖ (Nguyen Thien Giap, 2008)

2.2.1.2 Definition of culture

There are many definitions of culture, but no single definition sufficiently covers all

of its meanings The concept of culture has a very broad connotation and has been studied and given hundreds of definitions by many linguists of many countries around the world Every scientist in a specific linguistic community and national culture, based on considerations favoring a certain aspect of the cultural concept, may give his own definition of cultural The English or Vietnamese dictionaries also provide definitions of culture with different traits However, in general, all definitions of culture have a common feature that considers culture as a whole of the physical and spiritual values created by a community of creators throughout history

Eduard B Tylor (1871) defined culture as ―that complex whole which includes knowledge, beliefs, art, morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society,‖ (cited in Sackmann, 1991)

Lincoln (2000) explains that culture refers to a group of people and to some factor

X that defines the group, while the group also defines the X He suggests that the X could include communication, artifacts, modes of behavior, and various kinds of preferences

According to Spencer-Oatey (2008), culture can be defined as ―a fuzzy set of basic assumptions and values, orientations to life, beliefs, policies, procedures and behavioural conventions that are shared by a group of people, and that influence (but do not determine) each member‘s behaviour and his/her interpretations of the

‗meaning‘ of other people‘s behaviour.‖

In Vietnam, social science researchers also give different definitions of culture In one of the earliest studies focused on Vietnamese culture, Prof Dao Duy Anh insisted that: ―Culture in general is all aspects of people‘s life, in other words, culture is all activities in human life‖ (Dao Duy Anh, 2012)

In the work ―Cơ sở Văn hoá Việt Nam‖ (The foundations of Vietnamese culture),

Prof Dr Tran Ngoc Them stated: ― ăn h a là một hệ thống hữu cơ các giá trị v t chất và tinh th n do con người sáng tạo ra và t ch lũy qua quá tr nh hoạt động th c

ti n, trong s tương tác giữa con người v i môi trường t nhi n và x hội của

m nh‖ (―Culture is a general system of material, spiritual values which is created by

human and is accumulated in the realistic activities in the context of interacting amongst humans, natural environment and society‖), (Tran Ngoc Them, 1999)

In a nutshell, culture is the product of human beings, and is formed during the process of working to survive and develop of human Culture is manifested in the types and forms of organization of human life and actions as well as in the material and spiritual values created by human Created by people, culture also participates

in creating people, maintaining sustainability and social order Culture is preserved, handed down and developed from generation to generation Culture is a measure of people and society‘s f development throughout the periods in history

2.2.1.3 Definition of communication

Communication is commonly understood as an act of giving and receiving information, which concerns interaction among participants According to Sarbaugh (1988), communication is defined as a process In communication one party interprets the other party‘s meaning by observing their signs and symbols in use, no matter if they are the real intention of the senders or if the signs and symbols are being delivered without senders‘ conscious In the cross-culture environment, communication has been viewed as the center of culture discrepancy although language has a big portion of influence on people as well (Guirdham, 1999)

Basic communication elements include verbal and non-verbal communication, state, trait and style in communication, situations, messages and communication strategies Communication doesn‘t exist without these attributes

2.2.1.3.1 Verbal and non-verbal communication

Speech and writing belong to verbal communication The benefit of language usage

is clearly expressed information and intentions, exchanging thoughts and ideas directly The weak function of using language is the difficulty of expressing feelings and relationships that is a common shortcoming in communication Further, language has its limitation when the communication is conducted among people who speak different languages Body language is typical in non-verbal communication and it is widely used in expressing feelings and attitudes Human beings have general expressions with their body language but also differ across cultures People from the same culture seem to show more similarity in behavior than people from differing cultures

2.2.1.3.2 State, trait and style in communication

Personal trait plays an important role in communication style that tends to be more sensitive to listeners Hart & Burks (1972) presented that sensitivity to listen means speakers are easily adjusting their communication way by listeners‘ despondence These groups of people are considered to be more flexible in cross-cultural communication Assertiveness means fast and confident decision making without inference to others Assertiveness is understood differently in different culture, positively it is efficient and negatively it is aggressive It is in close connection with culture background Besides, Hofstede‘s cultural dimensions can give a good explanation of this effect Therefore, communication style is concluded that under

the influence of both individual personality and culture tendency (Gudykunst et al., 1996)

2.2.1.3.3 Situations

Situations mean the whole communicating environment when communication is conducted Participants, subject, where and how it is communicated People tend to adjust their communication style in certain ways depending on the situation Different cultural background also shows different understanding of the same situation (Hall, 1981) In cross-cultural work related communication context, people may have their own priority, value on work task with the influence of their culture

2.2.1.3.4 Messages

Messages are the conveyed information in communication behavior, it consists of messages exchanged and acquired meaning It is argued that messages are to be sent and received, while meanings are not It requires receivers own interpretation and inference, thus misinterpretation or inference may result in misunderstanding which leads to communication failure (Guirdham, 1999) In cross-culture communication, the tendency of misunderstanding is higher due to the culture barriers

2.2.1.3.5 Communication strategies

People choose appropriate strategy to communicate in order to attain expected goals And goals work as the major motivation in choosing communication strategies In work situations, power and position are seen as decisive factors in the strategy selection (Guirdham, 1999) And Tannen (1990) commented on the strategy selection difference between men and women Meanwhile, culture is argued have an influential impact on communication strategy application

2.2.3.4 The relationship between language, culture and communication

Language is the most important means of communication to keep and reflect the cultural identity of each ethnic group We cannot imagine the culture of a nation without communication From that, there are relationships between language,

culture, and communication

Some people say that language is the mirror of culture, in the sense that people can see a culture through its language Another metaphor used to symbolize language and culture is the iceberg The visible part is the language, with a small part of culture; the greater part, lying hidden beneath the surface, is the invisible aspect of culture This author's understanding of language and culture is conveyed through the following three new metaphors

From a philosophical view:

language + culture = a living organism

(flesh + blood)

Language and culture makes a living organism; language is flesh, and culture is blood Without culture, language would be dead; without language, culture would have no shape

From a communicative view:

language + culture = swimming (communication)

swimming skill + water

Communication is swimming, language is the swimming skill, and culture is water Without language, communication would remain to a very limited degree (in very shallow water); without culture, there would be no communication at all

From a pragmatic view:

language + culture = transportation (communication)

vehicle + traffic light

Communication is like transportation: language is the vehicle and culture is traffic light Language makes communication easier and faster; culture regulates, sometimes promotes and sometimes hinders communication

In short, Language, culture and communication are different things that cannot be

separated Language is surely the most important tool of communication that individual have at their disposal This is because it is language that permits people

to communicate The purpose of acquisition of language as proved by Chomsky is for communicative purpose That is why human communicate perfectly using language means Other means of communication have several weaknesses thus human language is the best means of reflecting culture through communication

2.2.2 The speech act of criticizing

2.2.2.1 Definition of speech act

Speech act is a part, a form in the whole life activities of people This idea was mentioned by Heghen very early, he wrote: "Words are essentially actions taking place among people, so it is not empty" (Quoted by Pham Van Tham) However, it was not until the 1960s that authors J Austin (1962) and J Searle (1969) raised their concern into this issue and proposed the theory of speech act

In his lectures published under the title ―How to Do Things with Words‖ (1962), Austin develops the first systematic theory of utterances as human action He derives his theory from the basic notion that language is used to perform actions According to Austin, when one uses language, he/she does things such as making promises, laying bets, etc The theory of speech acts describes how this is done (Austin, 1962)

Thus, Austin (ibid.) defines a speech act as ―the act of uttering a certain sentence in

a given context for a determined purpose.‖ For Grundy (2000), a speech act is ―the act or intent that a speaker accomplishes when using a language in context, the meaning of which is inferred by hearers.‖

Austin comes up with an idea that in producing an utterance, a speaker performs three acts simultaneously These are: a locutionary act which is the act of producing sounds and words with their referential meaning An illocutionary act which is the act of doing something by saying something, thus, it is the act which results from the illocutionary act A perlocutionary act is the act of causing a certain effect on the hearer and others, such as convincing, persuading, etc (Brown and Yule, 1989)

Therefore, criticizing is also considered a speech act in which people give their comment on someone or something in a particular context

In an attempt to bridge certain gaps in Austin‘s theory of speech act, J.R Searle (1969) makes several contributions to the theory He proposes a framework of rules

or conditions governing the successful production of acts that are commonly used in communication These conditions are called felicity conditions (FCs) They include:

- Propositional content conditions (PCC) concern the propositional act

- Preparatory conditions (PC) are about background circumstances and knowledge about speakers and hearers that must hold prior to the performance of the act

- Sincerity conditions (SC) concern speakers‘ intentions, beliefs, and desires

- Essential conditions (EC) are related to the illocutionary point of an act, namely,

―what the utterance counts as.‖

2.2.2.2 Classifications of speech acts

In fact, the number of speech acts is huge, so understanding and classifying them is

a very complex issue So far, pragmatists have not been able to agree on the classification as well as on their number According to our observations, there are some basic classification directions as follows:

2.2.1.2.1 The classification before Austin and Searle’s

Wittgenstein mentioned speech acts, although the philosopher did not use the term

―speech act‖ but used the term "language game" He listed a range of speech acts such as giving an order and obeying an order, describing the surface of an object and measuring it, reporting an event, investigating a problem, forming and testing a hypothesis, presenting research results in tables, writing and reading stories, acting, solving puzzles, telling jokes, asking, thank you, greeting, praying , but he could not classify them

2.2.1.2.2 The classifications of Austin and Searle’s

In fact, speech acts are diverse and not the same in every language Therefore, the classification of speech acts will not be simple At a later stage, pragmatists tried to understand and categorize these speech acts As far as we can see, some authors

have tried to categorize speech acts, but the most notable ones are the two classifications of Austin and Searle

a Austin‘s classification

Austin advances his five categories very tentatively, more as a basis for discussion than as a set of established results ―I am not‖, he says (1962), ―putting any of this forward as in the very least definitive.‖ I think they form an excellent basis for discussion but I also think that the taxonomy needs to be seriously revised because

it contains several weaknesses Here are Austin's five categories:

Verdictives: Verdictives are typified by the giving of verdict, as the name implies,

by a jury, arbitrator, or umpire However, they need not be final; they are, for example, an estimation, reckoning, or appraisal It is essential to give a finding to something-fact or value-, which is for different reasons hard to be certain about Examples are evaluating, analyzing, describing, canceling, characterizing, acquitting

Exercitives: One of these is the giving of a decision in favour of or against a certain

course of action or advocacy of it, 'a decision that something is to be so, as distinct from a judgment that it is so Some examples are: ordering, commanding, advocating, pleading, pleading, declaring, recommending, appointing, naming , warnings, declarations

Commissives: ―The whole point of a commissive‖, Austin tells us, ―is to commit the

speaker to a certain course of action‖ Some of the obvious examples are: promise, vow, pledge, covenant, contract, guarantee, embrace, and swear

Expositives: are used in acts of exposition involving the expounding of views, the

conducting of arguments and the clarifying of usages and reference‖ Austin gives many examples of these, among them are: affirm, deny, emphasize, illustrate, answer, report, accept, object to, concede, describe, class, identify and call

Behabitives: This class, with which Austin was very dissatisfied ―includes the

notion of reaction to other people's behaviour and fortunes and of attitudes and expressions of attitudes to someone else's past conduct or imminent conduct‖

With this classification, criticizing can be seen as a form of behabitive which people use to react to others‘ action or speech

Regarding the classification of Austin, the author himself realized that his classification still has issues that are not really satisfactory such as: there are points that are overlapping, some are cannot be clearly identified In addition, we find that this classification has other critiques, especially those of Searle (1997) and Leech (1983) Searle said that because of Austin's classification, the criteria were overlapping and unclear, so there were incompatible elements placed in a class Furthermore, there were actions of their nature that were of the same type but Austin was classified in different classes Thus, it is clear that Austin's classification still has certain limitations

b Searle‘s classification

Searle pointed out the limitations in Austin's classification because he thought that

J L Austin did not set classification criteria, so the classification results sometimes trampled on each other Searle conducted a classification of speech acts JR Searle said that, first of all, it‘s necessary to classify speech acts, not verbs, to name them, and if a suitable criteria system for speech acts was established, it could help to solve the problems Searle listed 12 differences among the speech acts that can be used as criteria for classifying speech acts, and he identified 5 types of speech acts

as follows:

Assertives These are assertions which represent the state of affairs, or as Mey

(1993) claims, they represent reality Speakers‘ purpose in performing representatives is to commit themselves to the belief that the propositional content

of the utterance is true In an attempt to describe the world the speaker says how something is, or tries to make ‗the words match the world‘ to use Searle‘s expression (1969) Examples include: asserting, concluding, stating, etc

Expressives are speech acts that tell about the feeling of the speaker They express

the psychological state of the speaker in statements of pleasure, pain, dislike, joy or sorrow In using an expressive, the speaker does not get the world or the words to match each other Examples are: thanking, complaining, criticizing, etc

Declarations These utterances are those which bring about the state of affairs that

they name They take the form of blessings, christenings, weddings, firing and so

on Declaratives are typically broadcast within a social group and rely for their success on a speaker being sanctioned by the community, institution, committee or even a single person in the group to perform such acts under stipulated specialised conditions These are the acts which Austin gave the name ―performatives‖

Directives These speech acts are intended to get the listener to carry out an action

They express what the speaker wants These include commands, requests, invitations, dares, challenges and so on They can be both positive and negative In using a directive, the speaker attempts to make the world fit the words (via the hearer)

Commissives These acts commit the speaker, at varying degrees, to some particular

future course of action Very similar to Austin‘s class of the same name, these acts place obligations on the speaker In using a commissive, the speaker undertakes to make the world fit the words

Unlike in Austin‘s classification, the act of criticizing, in Searle‘s classification, is put into expressive category of speech acts, which is used to express speakers‘ feeling

2.2.2.3 The act of criticizing

or an act for which he/she is deemed responsible.‘ However, Tracy et al‘s (1987) suggest two main points to distinguish between criticizing and complaining, which are ―content and form and the salient role identity‖ of the giver and the receiver: criticisms are usually associated with higher social status and complaints with lower social status, although there may also be exceptions

Criticism has been defined as an utterance which is associated with bad habit or condition of the addressee John L Austin (1962) defines criticism as an act which functions to express the speaker‘s negative reaction of the addressee‘s bad habit Leech (1993) defines criticism as an utterance functioning to express a psychological act toward negative condition of the hearer

Tsui (1994) defines criticism as a kind of assessment which gives negative judgment or evaluation of certain people, events or objects toward the addressee Similarly, Searle in Martinich (1996) states that criticism is an act which tries to express negative evaluation of the hearer‘s condition

Nguyen (2005) states that criticism is an illocutionary act whose illocutionary point

is to give negative evaluation on the hearer‘s choices, actions, words, and products for which he/she may be responsible According to Hyland (2000), criticism is defined as ―the expression of dissatisfaction or negative comment on the volume.‖

It is a negative evaluative judgment, it is often painful and difficult to give or receive

As criticism is usually a negative evaluation of someone or something, the act of criticizing itself thereby potentially threatens other‘s face It is confirmed by Riekkinen (2009) that criticism is an act that may cause Face-Threatening Act (FTA) since it expresses a negative evaluation to the hearer Therefore, the act of criticizing needs appropriate politeness strategy in order to make the criticism to be accepted

In brief, criticism is a negative judgment or evaluation addressed towards someone

or something Therefore, in performing this act, people have to be aware of the context of speaking and then be able to determine which strategy is best applied in delivering their criticism

2.2.2.3.2 Preconditions of criticisms

According to Nguyen (2005), criticizing refers narrowly to an illocutionary act whose illocutionary point is to give negative evaluation on the hearer‘s (H) actions/choice for which s/he may be held responsible This act is performed in the hope of influencing H‘s future actions for H‘s betterment as viewed by the speaker (S) or to communicate S‘s dissatisfaction/discontent with or dislike with regard to what H has done but without the implicature that what H has done brings undesirable consequences to S (adapted from Wierzbicka, 1987) From Minh (2005)‘s point of view, the following preconditions need to be satisfied in order for the speech act of criticizing to take place:

- The act performed or the choice made by H is considered inappropriate according

to a set of evaluative criteria that S holds to or a number of values and norms that S assumes to be shared with H

- S holds that this inappropriate action or choice might bring unfavorable consequences to H or to the general public rather than to S himself or her- self

- S feels dissatisfied with H‘s inappropriate action or choice and feels an urge to let his/her opinion be known

- S thinks that his or her criticism would result in a change in H‘s future action or behavior and believes that H would not change or offer a rem- edy for the situation otherwise without his or her criticism

2.2.2.3.3 The Similarity and the Difference between Criticism and Complaint

Complaints: utterances that the speaker uses to express disapproval or unpleasant feelings towards a past or ongoing action caused by the hearer (Olshtain & Cohen, 1991)

Criticisms: the act of giving judgement or opinions about the quality of something (Oxford advanced learners‘ dictionary)

Like complaining, criticizing involves a negative evaluation of a person for an act for which he or she is deemed responsible

However, from what has been said before, one concludes that the information expressed through criticism is not usually specific It may have blaming in it The expression is usually harsh and judgmental It may cause the other person to go on the defensive and become angry Generally, criticism tends to focus on a person‘s character not personality

Complaint, on the other hand, can be a specific statement of anger, unhappiness or other negative feelings For example, a wife may tell her husband that she is angry, unhappy or displeased about something he has done In this case, the wife‘s complaints provide her husband specific information about her feelings and about her husband‘s behaviour that bothers her

Yet, Nguyen (2005) assumes that both criticism and complaint threaten the face of the hearer since they acknowledge what is bad about the hearer and express the speaker‘s dissatisfaction As for Sauer (2000), the speech act of complaint is different from that of criticism in the sense that criticism is stronger than complaint

in that the speaker‘s responses are much more blunt, contemptuous, and direct

Both criticism and complaint have the same felicity conditions But, the preparatory condition makes them distinctive acts In criticism, the unacceptable act done by the hearer has unfavourable consequences on the hearer, while in complaint, it has unfavourable consequences on the speaker himself/herself

To reveal this relation between the two speech acts, below are some examples that show how a wife is criticizing her husband and complaining to him

- You never helped around the house; you are so lazy (criticism)

- You‘re so messy You always leave stuff everywhere! (criticism)

- I‘m angry that you didn‘t take the trash out earlier this morning even though I asked you to get it out there before the trash pickup (complaint)

2.2.2.3.4 Criticizing strategies

There are different ways to classify criticizing strategies according to different authors In the following part, we will clarify three of the classifications

a Destructive criticisms and constructive criticisms

Monti et al (2002) state that there are two types of criticism: destructive (aggressive) and constructive (assertive)

- Could you tell me when you start running late, so that I know that you are O.K (ibid.)

According to Monti et al (ibid.), speakers can use various techniques to avoid directing their criticisms at persons These techniques include:

- Softening criticism by showing that the mistakes committed by the criticized are done by others even by the criticizer himself/herself

- Avoiding the tone which expresses sarcasm, anger, hostility or condescension This is a way of criticizing indirectly (Pettinger, 2007)

- Facial expressions have their own effect ,e.g., smile during criticism helps create a positive vibration (ibid.)

- Disguising the criticism through implying it This involves suggesting the correct ways of doing things

- Avoiding criticizing a person‘s character through criticizing his/her behaviour only

- Avoiding criticism in public since criticizing someone publicly offends the criticized person (ibid.)

What has been said about destructive criticism and constructive criticism leads the researcher to differentiate between direct criticism and indirect criticism

b Implicit criticisms, explicit criticisms and severe criticisms

Xiaoli Zhou and Yaxin Wu (2016) propose another classification of criticizing strategies According to them, the various strategies people use to criticize fall into three categories including implicit criticisms, explicit criticisms and severe criticisms (illustrated in Table 2 below) The explicit strategies are those in which the faulty or misconduct of the recipient is directly displayed or pointed out The implicit type refers to those in which the impropriety of the recipient‘s acts is indirectly hinted or implied rather than being stated plainly and some inferences are required for the recipient to perceive the speaker‘s criticizing intention Severe criticisms are negative evaluations of or even intensified attacks on the recipient‘s character and personality

Table 2.1 Xiaoli and Yaxin‘s Classification of strategies to make criticisms

Implicit criticisms Stating the harm the recipient causes to the speaker

Request the recipient to justify his/her act Innuendo


Irony
 Self-criticizing
 Explicit criticisms Pointing out the recipient‘s fault


Stating adverse consequences of the recipient‘s act Directing the recipient to change his/her acts Severe criticisms Abusing the recipient‘s personality or identity

c Direct criticisms and indirect criticisms

Nguyen (2005) says that direct criticism is a direct expression of negative evaluation without reservation It means that the criticizer directly points out the hearer‘s mistakes Direct criticism threatens the positive face of the hearer (i.e his/her public self-image) and the openness of communication The main purpose behind direct criticism is not to modify the sorts of defects, but the desired effect will be achieved with harsh criticism that maintains insulting and condemning Indirect criticism helps communication to flow It means implying rather than declaring the problems with the hearer‘s choices, actions, works, etc Indirect

criticism does not imply that it is not as forceful and harsh as direct criticism,

sometimes; it can be even more forceful than direct criticism

Fagan and Martin (2004) think that indirect criticism refers to those cases in which criticism is mitigated by means of hedging devices such as modal expressions (may, perhaps), semi-auxiliaries (seem, appear), and approximators of quantity, frequency, degree and time (most, frequently, generally, approximately, etc)

Table 2.2 Nguyen’s taxonomy of criticisms:

―I think it‘s not a good way

to support to one‘s idea‖

―Umm that‘s not really a good sentence‖

Disapproval Describing speaker (S)‘s attitude

towards H‘s choice, etc

I don‘t like the way you write that

Expression of

disagreement

Usually realized by means of negation word ‗‗No‘‘ or performatives ‗‗I don‘t agree‘‘ or

‗‗I disagree‘‘ (with or without modal) or via arguments against

H

‗‗I don‘t quite agree with you with some points (.) about the conclusion‘‘

‗‗I don‘t really agree with you as strongly as you put it here‘‘

―You had a few spelling mistakes‘‘

Statement of

difficulty

Usually expressed by means of such structures as ‗‗I find it difficult to understand ‘‘

‗‗It‘s difficult to understand ‖

I can‘t understand‘‘

I find it difficult to understand your idea‘‘

Consequences Warning about negative

consequences or negative effects

of H‘s choice, etc for H himself

or herself or for the public

Someone who don‘t— doesn‘t agree with you would straight away read that and turn on‖

2 Indirect criticism:

Implying the problems with H‘s choice/ actions/ work/ products, etc by correcting H, indicating rules and standard, giving advice, suggesting or even requesting and demanding changes to H‘s work/ choice, and by means of different kinds of hints to raise H‘s awareness of the inappropriateness of H‘s choice

Correction Including all utterances which

have the purpose of fixing errors

by asserting specific alternatives

to H‘s choice, etc

‗‗safer‘‘ not ‗‗safe‘‘

‗‗And you put ‗‗their‘‘ I think t-h-e-r-e‘‘

Indicating

standard

Usually stated as a collective obligation rather than an obligation for H personally or as

a rule which S thinks is commonly agreed upon and applied to all

‗‗You must pay attention to grammar‘‘

‗‗You have to talk about your opinion in your summary‘‘

‗‗I still want you to consider some points‘‘

‗‗What I would have liked

to have seen is like a definite theme from the start like you‘re just TALKING about it‘‘

―‗I think if you make a full stop in here the ah (.) this sentence is clear is clear‘‘,

can‘‘, ‗‗you could‘‘, ‗‗it would

be better if ‘‘ or ‗‗why don‘t you‘‘ etc

‗‗It could have been better

to put a comma (.) so ah ((laugh))‘‘

Expression of

uncertainty

Utterances expressing S‘s uncertainty to raise H‘s awareness of the inappropriateness of H‘s choice, etc

‗‗Are there several paragraphs ah not sure about the paragraphs‘‘

Asking/

presupposing

Rhetorical questions to raise H‘s awareness of the inappropriateness of H‘s choice, etc

‗‗Did you read your writing again after you finish it?‘‘

Other hints Including other kinds of hints

that did not belong to (h) and (i)

May include sarcasm

‗‗I prefer a writing style which are not too personal‘‘

In this study, Nguyen (2005)‘s classification of criticizing strategies is used as the framework for the data analysis for a number of reasons First of all, it details the strategies and the linguistic expressions accordingly; therefore, it is easier to follow Secondly, this framework with direct and indirect strategies seems to be the most suitable one with the cultures of America as Vietnam

2.2.3 Cross- cultural communication

The concept of cross-cultural communication has been defined in different ways with different connotation by various authors Studies of communication in one culture and across cultures have led to the technological terms of intra-cultural communication, intercultural communication, cross-cultural communication and transcultural communication However, to avoid confusion, we would like to differentiate the terms as follows:

- Intra-cultural communication is communication between people who live in the same country and come from the same cultural background

- Intercultural communication is communication between people who live in the same country but come from different cultural backgrounds

- Cross-cultural communication is communication between people who live in different countries and come from different cultural back grounds

- Transcultural communication is various forms of communications between people with diversified cultural backgrounds In other words, it is an incremental learning journey whereby intercultural communicators learn to mutually adapt to each other‘s behaviors appropriately and flexibly

2.2.3.1 Definition of cross-cultural communication

As seen from the previous parts, culture shapes communication and ways of interpreting communication Thus, there is high likelihood that problems arise when people from different cultures communicate with each other That is the reason for the term ―cross-cultural communication‖ comes to life

Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied linguistics gives the definition of cross-cultural communication simply as ―an exchange of ideas, information, etc between people from different background‖ (1992)

In a broader sense, cross-cultural communication is ―communication (verbal and non-verbal) between people from different cultures; communication that is influenced by cultural values, attitudes and behavior; the influence of culture on people‘s reactions and responses to each other‖ (Levine and Adelman, 1993)

Undoubtedly, cultural differences are the source of difficulties and failures in cultural communication Only with awareness of cultural differences can people keep their communication smooth and easy In other words, knowledge is the key to effective cross- cultural communication First, it is essential that people understand the potential problems of cross- cultural communication, and make a conscious effort to overcome those problems Second, it is also important to assume that one‘s efforts will not always successful; hence, they need to adjust behaviors appropriately

cross-To sum it up, in order to communicate with people from different countries successfully, people should enrich their own knowledge of other cultures and have a receptive attitude towards cultural differences Only then, cross- cultural communication will be a joyful experience which provides opportunity for people

to broaden their mind to the world

2.2.3.2 Dimensions of national cultures

Hofstede (1980) argues that there are four dimensions of national culture: low vs high Power Distance; individualism vs collectivism; masculinity vs femininity; and uncertainty avoidance Before long, the fifth dimension is found by Harris Bond, which was called Confucian dynamism (Bond & Hofstede, 1988) Subsequently, Hofstede takes it into his framework in terms of long vs short term orientation

2.2.3.2.1 Low vs High Power Distance

Power distance is ―the extent to which the less powerful members of institutions and organizations within a country expect and accept that power is distributed‖ (Hofstede, 1997) In low power distance countries, the authority is distributed within the organization Superiors are dependent on subordinates as consultation on

a limited extent Therefore, the emotional distance between them is relatively small:

it is quite easy and pleasant for subordinates to approach and contact their superiors However, in high power distance countries, power is always centralized within the organization Only a considerable dependence exists from subordinators to superiors ―Subordinates respond by either preferring such dependence, or rejecting

it entirely, which in psychology is known as ―counter-dependence‖: that is dependence, but in a negative sign‖ (ibid) High power distance countries thus show

a pattern of polarization between dependence and counter-dependence (ibid)

2.2.3.2.2 Individualism vs Collectivism

―Individualism pertains to societies in which the ties between individuals are loose: everyone is expected to look after himself or herself and his or her immediate family Collectivism as its opposite pertains to societies in which people from birth onwards are integrated into strong, cohesive in groups, which throughout people‘s lifetime continue to protect them in exchange for unquestioning loyalty‖ (Hofstede, 1997)

2.2.3.2.3 Masculinity vs Femininity

Masculinity and femininity means the extent of how the society views the role of male and female In ―masculinity‖ society, people are more competitive, assertive, and ambitious Moreover, accumulated wealth and material possessions are always valued (Usunier & Lee, 2005) While in ―femininity‖ culture relationships and quality of life are more valuable (ibid)

2.2.3.2.4 Long vs Short term orientation

Hofstede (1997) argues that the dimensions of culture can be described as a society's "time horizon‖ or, the importance related to the future comparing with the past and present In long term oriented societies, persistence (perseverance), ordering relationships by status, thrift, and having a sense of shame is included in the value while in short term oriented societies, normative statements, personal steadiness and stability, protecting ones face, respect for tradition, and reciprocation

of greetings, favors, and gifts‖ are included In Asia, China and Japan are regarded

as typical long term oriented countries with a relative high score while the western courtiers are more about short term orientation (Hofstede, 1997)

2.2.2.3 Edward Hall: High-context versus low-context

With the understanding of cross-cultural communication, information underlies virtually everything It is not surprising that in cross-communication the speed of the specific message can be decoded in an important element (Hall, 1990) The sense of language is created through communication; the meaning of the language is determined according to context In 1976, Edward Hall put forward his theory about high-context and low- context communication, this concept provides a new perspective to the relationship of cross-culture

During the communication in high-context culture, most of the information exists in the material context or internalized communications and rarely appear in the clear message In the low context, a large amount of information depends on the delivery

of a clear message The type of context decides all the aspects of communication This means that in the low context, people are to rely on language use to achieve the purpose of communication In the high context, people rely less on the language usage as people in the low context do

Generally, in high context communication people use indirect messages to express their opinions Compared with high context, low context communication is more likely to reflect direct exchange and explicit messages (Richardson & Smith, 2007)

In the high context and low context dimension, Vietnam has high context culture and America has low context culture There are many differences compared with Vietnamese and American context culture The way of communicating is different,

in America, people use a direct way to communicate, while in Vietnam, people use indirect ways to communicate and In America, people are more caring about individualism, they do not want to be influenced by other people, so most of the time they are outspoken and express their emotion directly This situation in Vietnam is different because Vietnamese people consider other‘s feelings and the problem of losing face In order to avoid embarrassing situations, they do not want

to tell their opinion or refuse others request directly

The main differences between communication in high-context culture and context culture is summarized in the following table:

low-Table 2.3 Communication in high-context culture and low-context culture

Factors High-context culture Low-context culture

Overtness of

messages

Many covert and implicit messages, with use of metaphor and reading between the lines

Many overt and explicit messages that are simple and clear

Outer locus of control and blame of others for failure

Use of nonverbal-

communication

Much nonverbal communication

More focus on verbal communication than body language

Expression of

reaction

Reserved, inward reactions Visible, external, outward

reactions Cohesion and