A cross – cultural study on american – vietnamese verbal expressions in offering a gift and responding to a gift offer Ưng Thị Thu Quyên Trường Đại học KHXH&NV Luận văn ThS. Chuyên ngành: English Linguistics; Mã số: 602215 Người hướng dẫn: Dr. Hoang Thi Xuan Hoa Năm bảo vệ:2010 Abstract: When people from different linguistic and cultural backgrounds come into contact, there always exists the possibility for misunderstanding, as a result of clashing rules of interaction. This thesis is an attempt to provide a cross-cultural comparison of a speech behavior in American and Vietnamese: offering gifts and responding to gift offers. The study is carried out in the light of cross-cultural communication and is based on the authentic data collected. Special emphasis is given to: the realization of strategies used in offering gifts, the realization of strategies used in receiving gifts and the realization of strategies used in refusing gifts.The findings of the study provide evidence that offering gifts and responding to offers is a sensitive communicative act. Therefore, various offering strategies, receiving strategies, and refusing strategies are resorted to. In addition, the speakers of the two groups employ the strategies in different ways in similar contexts. This suggests that the performance of offering gifts and responding to offers is culture – specific and reflective of the fundamental values of the society Keywords: Tiếng Anh; Kĩ năng nghe; Kĩ năng nói; Giao văn hóa Content: v TABLE OF CONTENTS  Certificate of originality of project report  Acknowledgements  Abstract  Abbreviations Part A. Introduction I. Rationale 1 II. Aim of the study 1 III. Scope of the study 2 IV. Design of the study 2 Part B. Development Chapter I. Theoretical background. 3 I.1. Language and communication 3 I.2. Language and culture. 3 I.3. Communicative competence 4 I.4. Speech acts 5 I.4.1. Definition 5 I.4.2. Types of speech acts 5 I.4.3. Politeness strategies: 5 I.4.3.1. Bald on – record 6 I.4.3.2. Positive politeness 6 I.4.3.3. Negative politeness 6 I.4.3.4. Off – record 7 I.5. Offering as a speech act 7 I.6. Gift offering. 8 Chapter II. Methodology 10 II.1. Instrument 10 II.2. Procedures 10 II.3. Informants 11 II.4. Coding of the data and mode of data analysis 12 Chapter III. Strategies in gift offering 15 III.1. Communicative strategies used in gift offering. 15 III.2. Similarities and differences of gift offering between American and Vietnamese 21 III.2.1. Data analysis. 21 III. 2. 2. Major similarities and differences 21 vi III.2.3. Concluding remarks 22 Chapter IV. Strategies in responding to gift offers 24 IV.1. Agreeing to receive a gift 24 IV.1.1. Communicative strategies in receiving a gift 24 IV.1.2. Similarities and differences of gift receiving between American and Vietnamese 28 IV.1.2.1. Data analysis 28 IV.1.2.2. Major similarities and differences. 28 IV.1.3. Concluding remarks 29 IV.2. Refusing a gift. 29 IV.2.1. Communicative strategies used in refusing a gift. 29 IV.2.2. Similarities and differences of gift refusing between American and Vietnamese 33 IV.2.2.1. Data analysis 33 IV.2.2.2. Major similarities and differences 33 IV.2.3. Concluding remarks 34 Part C. Conclusion I. Summary of the findings 35 I.1. Offering a gift 35 I.2. Receiving a gift 37 I.3. Refusing a gift 39 II. Implications: 41 1. Implications for cross-cultural communicators. 41 2. Implication for ELT. 41 III. Limitations and suggestions for further research. 42 References 43 Appendix A: Survey questionnaires Appendix B: Data analysis 1 Part A. Introduction I. Rationale Language is very important for international communication nowadays. People from different cultures when using a second language as a main means of communication, more or less, experience misunderstandings. Why does communication breakdown may occur in cross-cultural communication? Why are many utterances grammatically correct but communicatively and culturally meaningless? This is mainly because participants lack knowledge of each other’s culture. For example, the following is a story I heard from my friend. The students gave their American volunteer-teacher a carefully wrapped gift on the Vietnamese Teachers’ Day. They were very surprised at seeing the teacher open the gift in front of them. And he said “Thank you very much. It’s very nice!” The disappointment immediately appeared on the students’ faces as they expected longer and more formal sentences than that and thought how impolite the teacher opened the gift at once. Vice versa, the teacher seemed to be impatient and embarrassed when listening to the monitor’s words “On the occasion of Vietnamese Teachers’ Day, we have a special gift for you. We hope that you’ll love it. We wish you happiness, good health and big success.” What was wrong in that situation? The American teacher was completely reasonable in his behavior and there was nothing grammatically wrong in the monitor’s words. Obviously, cultural differences here confused the participants and make the communicative process unsuccessful. From her personal observations in teaching career, the writer would like to have an insight into a really nice social manner- offering gifts and responding to gift offers from cross-cultural communication perspective. As a result of that, to seek a proper answer of what and how to say to offer a gift and respond to a gift offer. Why a gift offer, traditionally considered to bring benefit to the Receiver, is occasionally still refused? And why sometimes the Receiver’s behavior hurts the Giver? II. Aim of the study and research question The aim of this study is: To compare and contrast the strategies employed by Vietnamese and American people when they offer a gift and respond to a gift offer in their own language and culture. The study aimed to get the answers to the following question: What are the similarities and differences in American and Vietnamese when offering a gift and responding to a gift offer? 2 III. Scope of the study This study is limited to the verbal aspects of the act of offering gifts. Nonverbal aspects of the act such as paralanguage, extra-language and the like are not investigated. Conclusions will be based on the analysis of the data collected from the questionnaires, not spontaneous discourse. It is said that data obtained from questionnaires about what people might say in certain situations may not always be the same as what they actually say in real life. It may be because the answers in written form seem to be more formal than speaking one. Obviously, it takes longer thinking so the answers are less natural. But it was felt that the data would indicate possible similarities and differences between American and Vietnamese ways of giving gifts and responding to the offers. The informants feel free from time pressure and their names are unknown so the data would be reliable. The Northern Vietnamese dialect and the English spoken as the first language in the United States are selected for contrastive analysis. Thus, the study will not go to a fixed conclusion but based on statistic data, give remarks, comments and assumption on the frequency of some verbal ways of offering gifts. This study is only confined to one aspect of language in action: what strategies are most commonly found in association with gift offering. Moreover, gift offering in this study is simply understood as a nice cultural behavior in daily life expressing deep gratitude, concern and attention to the Receiver. Of course, gifts can be offered without saying a word but the non – verbal aspect of gift offering, as mentioned before, is beyond the scope of this study. Moreover, this is as minor thesis so what kind of present should be given, to whom (the influence of informants’ parameters on the choice of strategies: age, gender, etc.) and what kind of present should be avoided are not touched in this study although the author is highly aware of them as a cultural characteristics of each nation. IV. Design of the study Part A: Introduction: All the academic routine required for the study is represented. Part B: Development: This is the focus of the study and consists of four chapters Chapter I. Theoretical background. Chapter II. Methodology Chapter III. Strategies in gift offering. Chapter IV. Strategies in responding to gift offers. Part C: Conclusion. 43 REFERENCES 1. Austin, J. L. (1962) How to Do Things With Words. Oxford University Press. 2. Blum – Kulla, S. (1978). Indirectness and politeness in requests: Same or different? Journal of pragmatics II, North Holland. 3. Blum – Kulla, S. (1989). Investigating cross – cultural pragmatics: An introductory overview. Cross – cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Norwood, N. J. Ablex. 4. Brown, Penelope and Stephen C. Levinson. 1987. Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 5. Clyne, M. (1981). Culture and discourse culture. Journal of pragmatics. 6. Clyne, M. (1994). Intercultural communication at work. Cambridge University Press. 7. Clyne, M. (1996). Towards a linguistics of intercultural communication. Cambridge University Press. 8. Cottrill, L. (1991). Face, politeness and indirectness. University Canberra. 9. Do, N. V. (2004). Tìm hiểu mối liên hệ ngôn ngữ - văn hóa. 10. Ellis, C. (1995). Culture shock! Vietnam. Graphic Art Center Publishing Company, Portland, Oregon. 11. Ha, N. T. H. (2005). A cross – cultural study on English – Vietnamese expressions in offering a gift and responding to a gift offer. M. A. Thesis. VNU – CFL. Hanoi. 12. Hanh, N. T. H. (2003). Some Vietnamese – English cross – cultural differences in expressing surprise. M. A. Thesis. VNU – CFL. Hanoi. 13. Hoang, N.H. (1998). A cross – cultural study on thanking and responding to thanks in English and Vietnamese. M.A thesis. VNU-CFL. Hanoi. 14. Hinkel, E. (1999). Culture in second language teaching and learning. Cambridge University Press. 15. http://www.linguaphone.co.uk 16. http://www.surprise.com 17. Kasper, G. (1990). Linguistic politeness. Journal of pragmatics 93. North Holland 18. Kramsch, C. (1993). Context and Culture in language teaching. Oxford University Press. 19. Kramsch, C. (1998). Language and culture. Oxford University Press. 44 20. Lan. H. T. T. (2000). Offering in English and Vietnamese. M. A. Thesis. VNU- CFL. 21. Lanier, A. R. (1973). Living in the USA. International Press, Inc. 22. Nhat, T. N. M. (1997). Making requests and responding in English and Vietnamese. M. A. Thesis. VNU – CFL. Hanoi. 23. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Encyclopedic Dictionary (1998). Oxford University Press. 24. Quang, N. (2001). Intercultural communication. VNU-CFL. 25. Quyen, P. V. (2001). Some English – Vietnamese Cross – cultural differences in refusing a request. M.A. Thesis. Canberra Australia. 26. Wanning, E. (1991). Culture shock! America. Times Book International. 27. Wierzbicka, A. (1985). Different culture, different languages, different speech acts. Journal of pragmatics 9. 28. Wierzbicka, A. (1991). Cross – cultural pragmatics: The semantics of human interaction. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, New York. 29. Wierzbicka, A. (1992). Semantics, culture and cognition. Oxford University Press. 30. www. findarticles.coms/p/articles/mi. . offering gifts and responding to gift offers from cross- cultural communication perspective. As a result of that, to seek a proper answer of what and how to say to offer a gift and respond to a gift. language and culture. The study aimed to get the answers to the following question: What are the similarities and differences in American and Vietnamese when offering a gift and responding to. Publishing Company, Portland, Oregon. 11. Ha, N. T. H. (2005). A cross – cultural study on English – Vietnamese expressions in offering a gift and responding to a gift offer. M. A. Thesis. VNU –