Conversational opening structure in english and vietnamese

The findings indicate that, unlike Schegloff’s framework, the American and Vietnamese parties construct an opening section from four sequences namely summons-answer, greeting, phatic com

242

Conversational Opening Structure in English and Vietnamese

Hoang Tra My*

Abstract: This study aims to describe and compare the opening structures of English and

Vietnamese conversations The study is based on 214 English and 197 Vietnamese staff-manager conversations occurring in office settings gathered in movies From Schegloff’s (1968) framework, the method of qualitative content analysis is applied to code the data manually and to find out opening sequences and the ways of combining these sequences to construct an opening section used by American and Vietnamese staff and managers The findings indicate that, unlike Schegloff’s framework, the American and Vietnamese parties construct an opening section from four sequences namely summons-answer, greeting, phatic communication and topic initiation One-sequence and two-sequence opening structures are by far more frequently deployed than three-sequence and four-sequence opening structures by both the American and Vietnamese subjects However, the ways of employing and combining particular sequences by both parties are dissimilar

Keywords: Conversational Opening; Conversational Opening Section; Conversational

Opening Structure; Opening Sequences; Content Analysis

Received 28 th February 2018; Revised 18 th March 2019; Accepted 4 th April 2019

DOI: https://doi.org/10.33100/jossh5.2.HoangTraMy

1 Introduction

1.1 Aims of the study

This study focuses on examining English

and Vietnamese opening structures In

particular, we only gathered and analyzed

conversations between staff and their

managers occurring in office settings The

study aims to answer two research

questions: (1) What sequences are employed

to open a staff-manager conversation by

American and Vietnamese subjects? And (2)

How are these sequences combined to



VNU-University of Languages and International Studies

Hanoi, Vietnam; email: hoangtramy.hn@gmail.com

construct an opening section by American and Vietnamese subjects?

1.2 Analytical framework

There exist conventional rules and stereotyped patterns of behaviors that interactants employ unconsciously in conversation or the processes of opening, maintaining and closing a conversation following certain orders or sequences (Corder 1973: 36) In examining telephone conversations, Schegloff (1968) proves that

a telephone opening section consists of four sequences namely summons-answer,

how-are-you This opening structure has

been regarded as a “canonical opening” by

numerous researchers in studying different

channels of interaction for several decades

Notably, Schegloff and other researchers

prove that his core opening sequences can

be applicable to naturally occurring

conversations (1968: 1080) Accordingly,

the present study applies this framework to

find out opening sequences exploited by

American and Vietnamese staff and

managers

Firstly, the summons-answer sequence is

a stage of establishing a framework of

participation In telephone conversations,

“summons” refers to the phone ringing

while “answer” refers to the physical

response “hello” of the recipient In

naturally occurring conversations, Schegloff

(1968: 1080) suggests some classes of

summons, for example, terms of address

(e.g., “John”, “waiter”), courtesy phrases

(e.g., “Pardon me”) or physical devices (e.g.,

a tap on the shoulder, waves of a hand, etc.)

Secondly, the identification-recognition

sequence is a stage when the parties get

mutual identification and recognition of

each other Because of the inaccessibility of

visual channels, this sequence is achieved

verbally in a telephone conversation

Thirdly, the greeting sequence is a stage

when parties exchange greeting rituals as a

way of expressing politeness and respect

towards each another Lastly, the

“How-are-you” sequence is a stage when parties

produce the question of “how are you?”,

functioning as a ritual exchange to help

parties to avoid an abrupt opening section

1.3 Data collection and analysis

The findings of this study are based on

the data of 214 English and 197 Vietnamese

staff-manager conversations collected from

American and Vietnamese films To ensure

equivalent content and forms, the American and Vietnamese films selected have to follow common criteria such as broadcasting channels, production time and context These films discuss current issues of society

in the official context like working environments of business people, politicians, members of Congress, and police Additionally, gathered conversations must have opening sections and be between two participants – a staff and a manager aged from 20 to 60

The process of data analysis is divided into two stages: In the first stage, the qualitative content analysis is applied to code the data manually based on Schegloff’s (1968) framework In this process, English and Vietnamese opening sequences are generated by adding new sequences emerging from the data and omitting sequences not present in the data In the second stage, the ways of combination of these opening sequences to construct an opening section are revealed and compared between the two languages

2 Results and discussions

2.1 English and Vietnamese opening sequences

The findings of the present study indicate that, unlike Schegloff’s (1968) framework,

an opening section of a face-to-face conversation in English and Vietnamese

follows four sequences, that is,

summons-answer, greeting, phatic communication and

occurrences of these sequences is illustrated

in the table below:

Table 1: Conversational opening sequences in English and Vietnamese

Table 1 shows that the distribution of

four opening sequences in English and

Vietnamese is comparable All these four

sequences account for fairly high

percentages in the two languages Precisely,

sequences make up 47%, 37%, 57%, and

36% in English and 58%, 47%, 45%, and

42% in Vietnamese respectively It can be

inferred from these percentages that all these

four sequences are optional in both

languages The American and Vietnamese

participants can choose to use one or

combine several sequences to construct an

opening section The detailed analysis of

each sequence is evaluated as follows

Firstly, summons-answer appears to be a

frequent sequence in opening sections with

47% of the English data and 58% of the

Vietnamese data A summons-answer

sequence aims to get the other’s attention

before participants lead in a topic The act of

getting the other’s attention is exceedingly

essential in interaction because without the

attention of both interactants, a conversation

is unachievable In telephone conversations,

due to the inaccessibility of two interactants,

a summons-answer sequence is compulsory;

however, in face-to-face conversations,

thanks to nonverbal behaviors, this sequence

is optional As usual, in a face-to-face

conversation, besides verbal channels, an interactant may get the other’s interaction

via nonverbal channels, for example, eye

contact, waves of hands, touching on the shoulders, tap on the back and so on

Secondly, unlike Schegloff’s (1968) framework, the second sequence of the

opening section is greeting According to

Schegloff, a summons-answer sequence is followed by an identification-recognition sequence In telephone conversations, receivers cannot know whom they are talking to; hence, it is essential for callers to identify themselves until the receivers recognize them In other words, a conversation is often performed only when two parties recognize each other In telephone conversations, due to the inaccessibility of other channels, the sequence of identification-recognition has to

be performed verbally

In contrast, in face-to-face conversations, this sequence is principally performed visually Owing to the accessibility of eye contact in face-to-face conversations, interactants recognize or identify each other

by “linking the sight of him with a framework of information concerning him” (Goffman 1963: 112) The identification-recognition is accomplished at pre-speech moments mainly visually instead of verbally (Hopper 1989: 181) Verbal behaviors are

deployed only when nonverbal behaviors are

unachievable due to some visual obstacles

The display of the identification-recognition

sequence visually accounts for its absence in

the present study, which only deals with

verbal behaviors

The findings show that the Vietnamese

participants utilize the greeting sequence

slightly more frequent than American ones

with 47% vs 37% respectively In

face-to-face conversations, a greeting sequence may

follow a summons-answer sequence or be

the first sequence in an interaction (Sacks

1970) The frequency of occurrences of the

greeting sequence in the Vietnamese

conversations can be attributed to the culture

of greeting According to Phạm Văn Tình

(2000: 225), Vietnamese people highly

appreciate “greeting” because it has a big

role in initiating a conversation and it

influences the rest of the conversation

Hence, it is understandable that greeting

sequence frequently appears in the

Vietnamese data

Thirdly, according to Schegloff (1968),

after the greeting sequence, interactants

move to the “how-are-you” sequence

Factually, in telephone conversations,

Schegloff calls it how-are-you sequence

because of the question of “how are you?”

often appears after the greeting sequence

Nevertheless, in face-to-face conversations,

participants employ various inquiries and

responses after the greeting sequence

Accordingly, in the present study, this

sequence is named “phatic communication”

as in Malinowski’s (1923: 313) definition

which shares the same features with the

sequence of “phatic inquiries and phatic

responses” of Omar’s (1992) classification

Functionally, this sequence, including

some small talk, helps conversations to be

carried out smoothly and participants to

keep and maintain their social relationships

Westerners are regarded as straightforward speakers; therefore, it can be inferred that the American participants tend to open a conversation directly On the contrary, Vietnamese people are often roundabout speakers; consequently, it can be deduced that the Vietnamese participants are inclined

to produce much phatic communication before initiating the main points Astonishingly, the findings prove a contradiction with a higher frequency of occurrences of this sequence in English conversations (with 57%) compared with Vietnamese ones (with 45%) The numbers indicate that both the American and Vietnamese participants tend to perform some phatic enquiries and phatic responses before raising main topics

Finally, unlike Schegloff’s (1968) opening structure, the findings of the present study unveil that the final strategy of the English and Vietnamese conversations is

topic initiation This sequence is relatively

common in the English and Vietnamese data with 36% and 42% respectively The topic initiation sequence can be considered as a bridge to connect the opening section and the main topic of a conversation This sequence can be performed by some questions or phases like disjunct markers or attention-getting tokens Thanks to this sequence, participants can be alerted to the upcoming topics Notably, unlike the three previous sequences, which are normally constructed with two turns of speaking, the topic initiation sequence is usually constructed with one turn of speaking

2.2 English and Vietnamese opening sections constructed with sequences

Although these four sequences occur in both English and Vietnamese opening

sections rather evenly, the structure of the

English and Vietnamese opening sections is

somewhat opposed to each other due to the

different combination of these four

sequences The English and Vietnamese

opening sections can be formed with one

sequence, two sequences, three sequences or four sequences The preference of combining these sequences to construct an opening section of the American and Vietnamese parties is described in the following table

Table 2: English and Vietnamese conversational opening structures

It is demonstrated in table 2 that the

structures of the English and Vietnamese

opening sections share more similarities

than differences Generally, opening

structures formed with one sequence and

two sequences appear by far more frequently

than those formed with three sequences and

four sequences The two former structures

make up 83% in English and 78% in

Vietnamese whereas the two latter account

for 17% in English and 22% in Vietnamese

Unexpectedly, the data highlighted that the

utilization of all four sequences in an

opening section is applied in a small

minority of the Vietnamese conversations

(6%), yet is absent in the English

conversations This finding unveils that this

combination seems to be improper and

lengthy in English whereas it is acceptable

although not preferable in Vietnamese The

distribution of each English and Vietnamese

conversational opening structure is depicted

in the following parts

2.2.1 English and Vietnamese one-sequence opening structure

Opening sections formed with one sequence appear to be the preferable structure in both the English and Vietnamese data with 42% and 39% respectively These numbers indicate that approximately half of the English and Vietnamese conversations investigated are opened briefly with only one sequence Although all four opening sequences can be used to initiate a conversation independently, the rate of deployment of each sequence is different in each language and between two languages The distribution

of four sequences in a one-sequence opening structure is depicted in the following table

Table 3: The distribution of one-sequence opening structure

Firstly, among the four sequences, the summons-answer sequence is the most frequently employed by both the American and Vietnamese parties with 21% and 17% respectively With this sequence, interactants get the other’s attention and then initiate a topic of concern instantly The purpose of the opening section is just to get the other’s attention rather than maintain or enhance social relationships between parties Let us see the following examples

(1) Manager: Donna, call the court! We need priority status on the docket

Staff: Yeah, I already tried You drew Judge Palermo You know what you have to do,

don't you?

(Suits, season 1, episode 5 – 13:59) (2) Manager: Cô Hoa! Bây giờ theo tôi qua công ty Thành Tâm

Miss Hoa! Now go with me to Thanh Tam company

Staff: Em nhập dữ liệu còn chưa xong nữa

I haven’t finished with inputting the data yet

(Ngày mai ánh sáng, episode 31 – 7:17)

It can be seen from the two examples illustrated above that opening sections built with summons-answer sequence are extremely hasty Both examples (1) and (2) are between a male older manager and a female younger staff It can be observed that summons-answer sequence

in these situations is only performed with one turn of speaking Factually, the “summons” is produced by the managers verbally with the act of calling the staff’s names, but the “answer”

is produced by the staff visually instead of verbally When the managers call “Donna” in (1) or

“Cô Hoa” in (2), the staff redirect their eye contact towards their managers as a way to respond

to their summonses Right after getting the staff’s attention through eye contact, the managers continue raising the main topics of concern

Secondly, one-sequence opening sections constituted with greeting exist equally in the English and Vietnamese data with 10% and 11% respectively In the Vietnamese data, the greeting sequence is often expressed in two turns of speaking In other words, when a greeting

act is raised, it is common for the other interlocutor to respond to it with another greeting as in example 3 below

(3) Staff: Dạ, em chào anh!

Hello, brother!

Manager: Chào em, từ khi xảy ra chuyện đến giờ anh chỉ mong…

Hello, sister! Since that happened, I have just hoped to…

(Lập trình cho trái tim, episode 18 - 9:14) However, a close investigation on the English data highlights that the American parties do not have a habit of re-greeting their interlocutors as in example 4 below

(4) Staff: Morning Thought I'd get in early and destroy Allison Holt

Manager: How's that going?

(Suits, season 2, episode 12 – 33:20)

In this example, a staff greets his manager and initiates the topic of the conversation in one turn of speaking The sudden mentioning of the topic as in (4) makes the English greeting sequence function like a getting attention device rather than a ritual exchange On the contrary, the Vietnamese greeting sequence as in (3) is not only to get the other’s attention but also to express politeness and respect towards the other interlocutor

Thirdly, opening sections constructed with phatic communication sequences are more common in English (10%) than Vietnamese (4%) The limited occurrence of opening sections formed with this sequence is opposed to the repeated appearance of this sequence in general This difference indicates that the sequence of phatic communication seems to be combined with other sequences to generate an opening section rather than to stand independently In addition, these percentages also prove that the Vietnamese parties are inclined to avoid initiating a conversation with a mere phatic communication sequence while this structure is acceptable in the English conversations For example, in (5), an English staff opens his conversation with a phatic communication sequence by commenting on his manager’s appearance

(5) Staff: You got here just in time I'm getting us access

Manager: Hanley Folsom?

(Suits, season 2, episode 15 - 28:07) Lastly, like opening structures with phatic communication sequences, those constructed with topic initiation sequence rarely occur in the English and Vietnamese data with 1% and 7% respectively It can be inferred from the percentages that the American and Vietnamese are reluctant to produce an opening section by a topic initiation sequence solely This structure is presented in example 6 below In this conversation, a Vietnamese staff opens his conversation with the use of the reporting verb “thưa” combined with the polite particle “dạ” put at the beginning of the utterance

(6) Staff: Dạ thưa chú, việc chuyển công tác của Nghĩa có liên quan gì tới việc xin nghỉ

của Hoàng không chú?

Dear sir, is Nghia’s job transfer related to Hoang’s resignation?

Manager: Nghĩa có ý định chuyển công tác lâu rồi nhưng mà Ban biên tập vẫn đánh giá

cao năng lực của cậu ấy

Nghia has intended to transfer his work for a long time, but the editorial board still appreciates his ability

(Nguyệt thực, episode 39 - 39:27)

2.2.2 English and Vietnamese two-sequence opening structure

Like opening sections formed with only one sequence, two-sequence opening sections are frequently deployed in both the English and Vietnamese data, with 41% and 39% respectively In staff-manager conversations in offices, two-sequence opening sections are supposed to be ideal because they are not too long to be a waste of time or too brief to create sudden or abrupt openings The two-sequence opening structure consists of six substructures depicted in the following table:

Table 4: The distribution of two-sequence opening structure

The distribution of the six two-sequence opening structures is clearly distinguishable in the English data but is quite similar in the Vietnamese data It appears that the American parties prefer certain structures to others while the Vietnamese parties consider these structures relatively similar The distribution and illustration of each two-sequence opening structure are shown as follows

Firstly, among six two-sequence opening structures, the combination of summons-answer and phatic communication sequences is the most commonly deployed of the American parties with 14% In contrast, this structure accounts for a minority of the Vietnamese data with only 7% With this combination, interactants get the other’s attention and then produce some small talk before raising the main topic of a conversation Examples (7) and (8) below demonstrate this structure in both languages

(7) Manager: (Knocking on the door) Bothering you?

Staff: No No, not at all

Manager: I heard about your proposal to buy Durham Foods out of bankruptcy

Impressive

Staff: Well, the way I see it is a win-win

(Suits, season 2, episode 4 - 37:04) Staff: (Knocking on the door)

(8) Manager: Vào đi!

Come in!

Staff: Huệ gọi tôi?

You called me?

Manager: Tôi có bảo anh đem số tiền cắc của nước uống tăng lực đi gửi ngân hàng đâu?

I didn’t tell you to take the change of energy drinks to deposit in the bank

(Mưa bóng mây, episode 23 - 6:40)

In example 7, the summons-answer sequence is produced by the manager with the act of knocking on the door After producing this sequence, the manager continues performing the phatic communication sequence with the question “Bothering you?” With this question, the manager checks for the convenience of talking In this case, if the conversation bothers the other interlocutor, it may be ended at this point, and the topic will not be raised Nevertheless, with the response “No No, not at all” of the staff, the manager starts raising the topic of the conversation In a similar manner, in (8), the summons-answer sequence is built with the act of knocking on the door and the phatic communication is a confirmation question Although the staff knows clearly that the manager called him, he still asks “You called me?” In this situation, this question is not to get information but just to inform the manager of his presence Secondly, the combination of the summons-answer and greeting sequences is utilized limitedly by both parties with 6% of the Vietnamese data but only 2% of the English data In this structure, interactants get the other’s attention and produce greeting utterances before initiating a topic of concern Example 9 below illustrates this combination in a Vietnamese opening section

(9) Staff: (Knocking on the door)

Manager: Vào đi!

Come in!

Staff: Chào anh ạ! Giám đốc muốn mời anh ăn tối bàn công việc cho dự án mới luôn

ạ!

Hello, brother! The director would like to invite you to dinner to discuss the new project!

(Mưa bóng mây, episode, 23– 16:17)

Thirdly, the combination of summons-answer and topic initiation sequences is the most common in the Vietnamese data with 9% and less frequent in the English data with 4% With this combination, interactants get the other’s attention then use some supporting devices to raise the topic of concern In fact, opening sections with the combination of these two sequences are brief However, compared with opening sections with summons-answer sequence only, this combination makes conversations less abrupt thanks to the topic initiation sequence, functioning as a bridge to connect the opening section and the body of the conversation Below are examples of this structure:

(10) Staff: Anh Sơn!

Mr Son!

Manager: Có chuyện gì vậy?

What’s up?

Staff: Em Em Em gửi anh bài viết mới

Here is a new article

(Nguyệt thực, episode 41 - 23:30) (11) Manager: (Knocking on the door)

Staff: What is it, Louis?

Manager: Got a hard truth to tell you

(Suits, season 2, episode 15 – 40:31)

In (10) the summons-answer is produced by the act of calling the other’s name while in (11) this sequence is performed with the act of knocking on the door Nevertheless, in both cases, the sequence of topic initiation is formed with a question It can be easily observed that

in both examples, the parties asking the topic initiation question are not parties who will initiate the main topic of the conversations Thanks to the question, the other interlocutors may mention the main topic instantly

It can be seen that in the three previous structures, summons-answer sequence is combined with a greeting, phatic communication or topic initiation sequences Because summons-answer

is always the first act of any interactions, the order of these structures is fixed In other words,

it is impossible for greeting, phatic communication or topic initiation sequences to be performed before the summons-answer sequence

Fourthly, it is remarkable that the combination of greeting and phatic communication is utilized equally by the American and Vietnamese parties with 8% With this combination, interactants greet each other and then exchange some small talk before raising the main topic

of their conversation The greeting sequence is relatively formulaic with one or two turns of speaking while the phatic communication sequence is diversified The findings unveil that the phatic communication sequence can be expressed via one turn of speaking or extended up to several turns of speaking For example, in (12), a Vietnamese manager produces a phatic communication sequence briefly with only one turn of speaking