A CROSS-CULTURAL STUDY ON EXPRESSING SATISFACTION IN AMERICAN ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE. Nguyễn Thị Thùy Linh. QH.1.E

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI

UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

ENGLISH DEPARTMENT

NGUYỄN THỊ THÙY LINH

A CROSS- CULTURAL STUDY ON EXPRESSING SATISFACTION IN AMERICAN ENGLISH AND

VIETNAMESE

SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE

DEGREE OF BACHELOR OF ARTS (TEFL)

Hanoi, May 2010

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI

UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

ENGLISH DEPARTMENT

NGUYỄN THỊ THÙY LINH

A CROSS- CULTURAL STUDY ON EXPRESSING SATISFACTION IN AMERICAN ENGLISH AND

VIETNAMESE

SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF BACHELOR OF ARTS (TEFL)

SUPERVISOR: Prof. NGUYỄN QUANG, Ph.D.

Hanoi, May 2010

RENTENTION AND USE OF THE THESIS

I hereby state that I : Nguyễn Thị Thùy Linh, 06.1.E1., being a candidate

for the degree of Bachelor of Arts (TEFL) accept the requirements of the

College relating to the retention and use of Bachelor’s Graduation Paper

deposited in the library.

In terms of these conditions, I agree that the origin of my paper deposited

in the library should be accessible for the purpose of study and research, in

accordance with the normal conditions established by the librarian for the

care, loan or reproduction of the paper.

Signature

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First and foremost, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to

Prof. Nguyen Quang, my supervisor, for his valuable guidance, instructive

comments and dutiful supervision, without which this thesis would not be

completed.

I would also like to give my sincere gratitude to all of the lecturers at

ULIS-VNU, Hanoi for their scholarly knowledge, experience, and

enthusiasm in their lectures. During the process of implementing the

research, they have created favorable conditions for me, not only in terms

of accessing to essential materials but also of their heart-warming

encouragement.

I also take this opportunity to express my immense thankfulness to my

friends and classmates, who have always stayed by my side, given me

constructive comments and perked me up every time I need. Particularly I

want to say a special thanks to two friends of mine, Vu Thi Kim Chi and

Nguyen Thuy Linh, who are all living and studying in the U.S. for their

invaluable help in distributing the survey questionnaire.

I cannot forget to acknowledge the important contributions of both

Vietnamese and American informants, whose names cannot be mentioned

in the thesis.

Finally, I would like to express my enormous debt to my parents for their

continual encouragement and immeasurable support.

i

ABSTRACT

Based on the theoretical background of cross-cultural communication, this

study aims at investigating the similarities and differences in expressing

satisfaction in the Vietnamese and American languages and cultures. It

focuses primarily on the popularity and preference of strategies of

expressing satisfaction.

To succeed in doing such research, the author of the study takes

informants’ social parameters such as age, sex, marital status, living area,

and knowledge of foreign language(s) into consideration. Besides, their

surveyed responses are carefully analyzed to build a frame, a common set

of strategies in the field.

The conclusion is drawn from data analysis and findings are presented and

compared in a brief and concise way. Some common patterns of

expressing satisfaction in both Vietnamese and American English cultures

from the data are also presented and illustrated with the hope of partially

helping avoid cultural shock and communicating breakdown.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART A: INTRODUCTION...................................................................... 1

I. Rationale................................................................................................ 1

II. Aims of the study................................................................................... 2

III. Method of the study ............................................................................. 3

IV. Scope of the study................................................................................ 3

V. Design of the study................................................................................ 4

PART B: DEVELOPMENT....................................................................... 5

CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND.................................. 5

1.1. Culture and communication................................................................ 5

1.1.1. Culture ........................................................................................... 5

1.1.2. Communication............................................................................. 9

1.1.3. Culture- communication correlation........................................... 12

1.1.4. Cross-cultural communication.................................................... 14

1.1.5. Communicative competence....................................................... 15

1.2. Speech acts. ....................................................................................... 18

1.2.1. The notion of speech acts. ........................................................... 18

1.2.2. Classification of Speech Acts ...................................................... 19

1.2.3. Expressing satisfaction as a speech act ....................................... 22

1.3. Politeness .......................................................................................... 24

1.3.1. Face and politeness ...................................................................... 24

1.3.1.1. Face ...................................................................................... 24

1.3.1.2. Politeness ............................................................................. 24

1.3.2. Positive politeness ....................................................................... 27

1.3.3. Negative politeness...................................................................... 29

CHAPTER 2: THE STUDY..................................................................... 32

2.1. Comments on the survey questionnaire and the informants............ 32

2.1.1. Comments on the survey questionnaire....................................... 32

iii

2.1.2. Comments on the informants....................................................... 34

2.2. Data analysis ..................................................................................... 35

2.2.1. Strategies in expressing satisfaction (SES) ................................. 35

2.2.2. Factors affecting the choices of SESs ......................................... 36

2.2.3. Realization of SESs in American English and Vietnamese ........ 37

2.2.3.1. Realization of SESs in American English ........................... 37

2.2.3.2. Realization of SESs in Vietnamese ..................................... 53

PART C: CONCLUSION......................................................................... 74

I. Review of major findings .................................................................... 74

II. Suggestions for further study .............................................................. 76

iv

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

Table 1: The five general functions of speech acts (following Searle 1979)

Table 2: Use of strategies as seen from American informants’ parameters

Table 3: Use of strategies as seen from Vietnamese informants’ parameters

Table 4: Comparisons of favored strategies between American and

Vietnamese informants

Figure 1: Ferrando’s diagram of culture

Figure 2: Nguyen Quang’s diagram of components of communication

Figure 3: Bach and Harnish’s classification of speech acts (1979)

Figure 4: Possible strategies for doing FTAs (Brown and Levinson)

Figure 5: Nguyen Quang’s diagram of possible strategies for doing FTAs

Figure 6: Solidarity- social distance dimension (Holmes)

v

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

S Speaker

H Hearer/ Addressee

FTA Face threatening act

NP Negative politeness

PP Positive politeness

vi

PART A: INTRODUCTION

I. Rationale

With the great speed of developing and expanding, English has emerged as

the most powerful international language all over the world. Starting from

its use gradually turning into colossal, plus the characteristics of

convenience, English on those days can be said to be the “golden key to

every door”.

In Vietnamese context, as a result of the open policies and a lot of

encouragement and support from society, the needs of learning English

have also been magnified. However, for the sake of examination, the real

purpose of learning English has been somehow distorted. A long time ago,

the method of English teaching at school was Grammar- Translation

Method with the stress on grammatical points. Up till now, thanks to the

conscientious research from language teachers and educators, the pendulum

of English language teaching has swung to Communicative approach.

Acquiring a new language means a lot more than the manipulation of

syntax and lexicon. Language is not just a system of sounds, words and

grammatical structures in isolation, yet it is seen as a system of

communication existing in a community. The goal of language teaching is,

therefore assumed to be learners’ ability to communicate in the target

language.

As a matter of fact, to attain the good command of communication, culture

learning apparently becomes indispensable. Winston Brembeck (1977: 37)

noted that, “To know another’s language and not his culture is a very good

way to make a fluent fool of oneself”. It is also true of English. In order to

help learners achieve communicative competence, we have to pay close

attention to the target culture. That dialectical connection has always been

a concern of researchers and it has received more and more confirmations.

1 | P a g e

Thomas (1983) states that the lack of social linguistic competence results in

rudeness, miscommunication or even communication breakdown because

non-native speakers’ inappropriate use of cultural norms and conventions

are considered as manifestation of “impoliteness or unfriendliness” due to

“boorishness or ill will” rather than lack of pragmatic knowledge.

Accordingly, culture learning no longer remains humble and unnecessary

in the syllabus. In contrast, it needs to be taken into great consideration

and concentration. Nguyen Quang (1998: 2) states that, “One cannot

master a language without profound awareness of its cultural background

and in both verbal and non-verbal communication, culture makes itself

strongly felt.” Learners can truly master English only when they are able to

have good understanding of the interrelationship between culture and

language.

With these reasons in view, the researcher would like to carry out a small-

scale study on Expressing satisfaction as a speech act, which is viewed in

the light of Politeness (Positive politeness-Negative politeness) in

American English and Vietnamese. Due to the limit of the paper, she would

not be able to deal with all aspects but draw out some major differences

and similarities in expressing satisfaction in the two languages. It is hoped

that the study may help learners avoid culture shock and pragmatic failures

in expressing satisfaction as well as in cross-cultural communication.

II. Aims of the study

The study focuses on those following aims:

- To provide some similarities and differences in politeness strategies

of expressing satisfaction in American English and Vietnamese.

- To find out factors that affects the choice of politeness strategies

when expressing satisfaction in American English and Vietnamese.

2 | P a g e

- To raise awareness of cross-cultural factors in expressing satisfaction

and help learners of English avoid cultural shock in cross-cultural

communication.

III. Method of the study

Quantitative method is primarily deployed. Remarks, assumptions and

conclusions of the study are mainly based on the contrastive analysis of

data. What is more, the qualitative method will assist along and be paid due

attention to.

The practical approaches are:

Conducting survey questionnaires

Referring to publications

Consulting the supervisor

Discussing with Vietnamese and American friends

Applying personal observation

IV. Scope of the study

The paper investigates expressing satisfaction as a speech act in English

and Vietnamese. Therefore only verbal expression of satisfaction is

analyzed. The study focuses on the dimension of Politeness (Positive

Politeness and Negative Politeness).

Due to the limitation of time and resources, the study only concentrates on

investigating strategies of expressing satisfaction in English and

Vietnamese in some situations together with some typical socio-cultural

factors among various ones governing the choice of politeness strategies.

Besides, the number of informants is limited: 40 informants from the U.S

and 40 informants from Vietnam (Northern Vietnam).

3 | P a g e

V. Design of the study

The thesis consists of three main parts:

Part A: Introduction

This part includes, the rationale, aims, scope of the study and methodology.

Part B: Development

This is the main part of the study which is divided into two chapters.

Chapter 1: Theoretical background

Chapter 2: The study

In the first chapter, in order to lay the basis for the study, definitions and

theories of culture, communication and speech acts are critically discussed

and contrastive analysis of data is offered.

Part 3: Conclusion

In this part, the major findings are summarized, conclusions drawn and

suggestions for further study made.

4 | P a g e

PART B: DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

1.1. Culture and communication

1.1.1. Culture

The term “culture” has been defined by many scholars from time to time. It

may not be an exaggeration to say that there are nearly as many definitions

of culture as there are fields of inquiry into human beings.

In its simplest meaning, culture is thought to be something non-natural or

ordinary- it is the everyday life, something people think, wear, eat or speak,

etc. However, the definition of culture is wider than those above, as seen

from the scientific view.

Richards (1993:94) defines culture as “the total set of beliefs, attitudes,

customs, behaviors, social habits, etc. of the members of a particular

society.” Culture in its broad sense covers all aspects of human life. It

includes both material culture- physical artifacts and objects like “ao dai”,

vases, pagodas and nonmaterial culture- abstract creation like symbols,

norms, customs or values.

However, it must be noted that “the essence of culture is not its artifacts,

tools or other tangible culture elements but how the members of the group

interpret, use and perceive them.” (Banks, 1989:8). Therefore, Ferrando

(cited in Nguyen Quang’s Lecture notes) gives the definition: “Culture is

everything that people have, think or do as a member of a society.”

5 | P a g e

Figure 1: Ferrando’s diagram of culture

Thus, culture refers to the patterned ways of thinking, feeling and reacting.

People within a culture usually interpret the meaning of symbols, artifacts

and behaviors in the same ways. In other words, culture provides the fabric

that enables human beings to interpret their experiences, and guides their

actions. Culture gives them a common framework of meaning and, hence,

allows them to know what they can expect of others and what others can

expect of them. For example, in Vietnamese culture, when a compliment is

given, a denial is expected. Meanwhile, in America, a “thank you” is

expected.

Within the limitation of the paper, the definition offered by Levine and

Adelman (cited in Nguyen Quang’s lecture note) is chosen to be the most

appropriate one.

Culture is a shared background (for example, national, ethnic, religious)

resulting from a common language and communication style, customs,

beliefs, attitudes and values.

As condensed and precise it turns out, this definition emphasizes the

importance of language in the way that it is the chief vehicle by which

people communicate ideas among each other and the principal means by

6 | P a g e

which human beings have created culture and transmit it from generation to

generation.

In order to gain a deeper understanding towards culture, it is useful to

examine more closely its characteristics. According to O’Neil

(http://anthro.palomar.edu/culture/culture_2.htm), culture is identified with

the followings:

1. Culture is learned

Culture is non- natural; people have to learn to get it. In other words,

people are not born with culture but become culture bearer by learning it.

Children learn it from adults; the following generation learns it from the

previous one. Through exposure, observation and imitation, they take in

culture elements and internalize them.

2. Culture is transmissible

In all cultures, symbols act as the physical existence of cultural elements

and they are the means by which culture is passed along from generation to

generation. Symbols include objects, words and acts which have come to

be socially accepted as standing for something else; people use symbols to

spread culture, and thanks to this, culture is learned. Through day-to-day

interaction, people learn and transmit culture. The more people acquire

knowledge of culture, the more widely and deeply culture is transmitted.

Herein, it is observable that the first characteristic of culture leads to the

second one.

3. Culture is dynamic

All cultures are inherently predisposed to change. They never remain static.

Within each culture, there are dynamic processes operating that encourage

the acceptance of new things and ideas together with the omission of no-

longer-useful ones. For example, white complexion used to be considered a

criterion of beauty but tan is now admired. Women used to be confined to

7 | P a g e

the role of housewives, yet now they can join in various social activities

and pursue their own careers.

From this point of view, O’ Neil states: “All culture knowledge does not

perpetually accumulate. At the same time that new cultural traits are added,

some old ones are lost because they are no longer useful”. That is,

processes leading to change include invention and cultural loss. Invention

brings new items while cultural loss seems to be an inevitable result of old

patterns being replaced by the other new ones.

It is noted that new cultural traits are added not only due to the invention or

discovery of absolutely new tools, practices or concepts but also due to the

diffusion of traits. Diffusion occurs when the influence of one culture is

spread to one another.

4. Culture is selective

According to Geertz (1973), culture is a set of standardized orientation to

recurrent problems and a mechanism for the normative of behavior. That is,

each culture selects a configuration of dos and don’ts, rights and wrongs. It

defines the limit of behavior patterns and, therefore, distinguishes one

human group from another based on the typical features of each. For

example, American people appreciate individualism while Vietnamese

people are group- oriented. Obviously, the selectivity of culture makes up

the uniqueness in each one.

Actually, the selectivity is carried out every time, everyday and throughout

the whole history of culture whenever a certain thing or perception is

created, accepted, changed or left behind.

5. Facets of culture are interrelated

As culture is a complex whole, cultural elements do not exist separately.

They are integrated and interdependent. Within a culture, when one thing is

touched, everything else is affected. For instance, when women in some

Muslim countries are allowed to go out with no veil, they have more

8 | P a g e

chances to contact the outside world and improve their knowledge. They

can take part in social activities, thus, their status in society is improved.

6. Culture is ethnocentric

Ethnocentrism is the viewpoint that one’s ethnic group is the centre of

everything, against which all other groups are judged. More specifically,

one group sees it as superior and rates others based on its own measures.

Ethnocentrism leads people to reject alien ideas or things as addressed

unnatural. It is normal that a group considers its way of life the only right

one and somehow unleash scorn for the others’ ways. Take the following

case as an example. Asian people find it unacceptable for Western ones to

leave their parents in old- aged institutions. In contrast, Western people

regard children upbringing in Asian countries as spoiled and negative

because it does not give children much independence to grow.

Ethnocentrism therefore is a factor of resistance to change. It maintains

ethnic lines despite transculturation. To some extent, this characteristic

seems to be on the contrary to the third one. However, conflict propels life

and it is their co-existence that ensures the equilibrium of the development

of culture.

To sum it up, human life and culture are inextricably connected. Our ways

of life form culture and culture affords use a kind of map for finding our

way about life.

1.1.2. Communication

From the dawn of human civilization till now, communication has been

playing the primary role in our lives. It takes places in almost every human

action and accounts for the most of our lifetime. Recognizing that

phenomenal function of communication and how broad the term denotes, a

lot of researchers have attempted to reason the definition of it.

9 | P a g e

As defined by Hybels and Weaver (2001: 5), Communication is “any

process in which people share information, ideas, and feelings that involve

not only the spoken and written words but also body language, personal

mannerism and style, the surrounding and things that add meaning to a

message.”

It is understood that communication refers to the process of exchanging

information. During that process, information is enclosed in a package and

is channeled and imparted by a sender to a receiver via a medium. Herein,

“medium” covers not only verbal means such as speech, song, tone of

voice, etc but also nonverbal means such as body language, sign language,

touch, eye contact and even writing. Going further, Williams (1989:10)

defines communication in more details:

“Communication refers to:

(1). The exchange of symbols, common messages, information

(2). The process of exchange between individuals through a common

system of symbols

(3). The art of expressing ideas

(4). The science of transmitting information”

Generally, communication can be viewed as “the process of sharing

meaning through verbal and nonverbal behavior” (Levine and Adelman,

1993).To attain a closer look at communication and its system, the diagram

designed by Nguyen Quang as given below may serve the purpose.

10 | P a g e

Figure 2: Nguyen Quang’s diagram of components of communication

Communication

Nonverbal communication

Intralanguage

- Vocal characteristics: pitch, volume, rate, vocal quality, types of vocal flow

- Vocal inferences - Silence

Extralanguage Paralanguage

- Vocabulary - Grammatical rules - Phonetic rules - Rules of language use

Environmental language

Objective language

(artifacts)

Body language

(action language, kinesics)

Verbal communication

- Eye contact - Facial expressions - Gestures - Postures - Physical characteristics - Body movement - Touch/ haptics/ tactile - …

- Clothing - Jewelry - Make- up - Artificial scents - Flowers - …

- Setting - Conversational distance/ proxemics

- Time/ chronemics - Lighting system - Color - Heat - …

11 | P a g e

It is undeniable that communication is the prerequisite of our lives thanks

to its various functions and implications. According to Nguyen Quang, we

communicate to satisfy the double nature of our beings: the “Social being”

and the “Conscious being”. It is through communication that we gain

personal identity, which meets the Conscious being’s need. In our early

years, our parents told us, “You’re so pretty”, “You’re really smart”. Later,

we interact with our friends, teachers, colleagues who communicate their

views of us. Their messages help us form and enhance our sense of self.

Also, the Social being’s need to be connected is met by communication

because “Communication is a key foundation of relationships. We build

connections with others by revealing our private identities, asking

questions and listening to answers, working out problems, remembering

shared history, and planning a future.” (Wood, 2009:167). Hence, no one

can live as a human being without communication. This has been proved

by the case of a child brought up by wolves in the jungle who lived and

behaved as a real wolf and hardly had any concept of himself as a human.

In brief, communication is a vital part of human life. Without

communication, people would stagnate and our society would not exist

anymore.

1.1.3. Culture- communication correlation

As the two terms “culture” and “communication” have been cracked

thoroughly, another issue that comes to light is the relationship between

them. Needless to say, culture is implicitly and inextricably related to

communication. As Samovar (1981:20) insightfully remarks:

“Culture and communication are inseparable because culture not only

dictates who talks to whom, about what and how the communication

proceeds, it also helps to determine how people encode messages, the

meanings they have for messages, and the conditions and circumstances

12 | P a g e

under which various massages may or may not to be sent, noticed or

interpreted. Culture is the foundation of communication.”

Decoding from this comment, culture is meant to determine the way people

communicate. For instance, when an American sees a bus coming, he

always uses the present progressive (“The bus is coming”) while his

Japanese fellow chooses the present perfect tense to express (“The bus has

come”). Another example is, Western people tend to start their

conversation with the topic of the weather while Eastern people, especially

the Vietnamese prefer to talk about personal life such as marriage, family

and so on. Thus, the principles of communication are culturally affected or

communication practices are largely created, shaped and transmitted by

culture.

However, the relationship between culture and communication is not just

one sided. The reverse is also the case; that is, culture is created through

communication. Communication, in this light, is the means of human

interaction through which cultural characteristics- whether customs, roles,

rules, rituals, laws, or other patterns- are created and shared. It is not so

much that individuals set out to create a culture when they interact in

relationships, groups, organizations, or societies, but rather that culture is a

natural by- product of social interaction. In a sense, culture is the “residue”

of social communication. For example, from early ages, children are told to

say “thank you” by parents when being given present. That is a way

children learn about politeness through communication.

Overall, culture and communication cannot be separated “for as soon as we

start to talk about one, we are almost inevitably talking about the other”

(Condon and Yousef, 1975:34). They interact and assist each other in any

circumstances. It is true that, communication shapes culture and conversely

culture shapes communication.

13 | P a g e

1.1.4. 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”.

(1992:92).

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, 1993:94).

It is understandable that when cross-cultural communication occurs, many

difficulties, misunderstandings or communication failures may happen

because people of different backgrounds have different communicating

styles. They often interpret others’ speech according to their own cultural

convention and they tend to use their own culture to value others. If the

cultural values of the speakers are widely different, misinterpretations and

misunderstandings can arise and even result in a total breakdown of

communication. This can also lead to confusion, anger, disappointment and

culture shock as an inevitable consequence.

An interesting example is, in a party where there are a lot of guests from

different countries in the world. A Vietnamese lady wearing such an

attractive dress enters the room. An American man immediately notices her

and as a pretext to approach the girl, he comments, “Wow! You look so sexy

in that dress. “To his surprise, her face flushes tomato red and she tries to

14 | P a g e

shun him during the party. This is a typical example of communication

breakdown due to lack of cultural knowledge. In American culture,

especially among the young, saying that someone is sexy is merely a

compliment. However, in Vietnamese culture, it is still a taboo to say so

and people find it hard to accept a compliment relating to sex.

Undoubtedly, cultural differences are the source of difficulties and failures

in cross-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.

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.

1.1.5. Communicative competence

For most people communication is simply talk. It is a natural event and

happens almost every single minute all over the world. Nevertheless, it is

important to note that communication does not mean to be a merely simple

action, for lying beneath every transaction of communication, a goal is

attached together. When we communicate, we transmit (as by speech,

signals, writing or behavior) information (thoughts and emotions) so that it

is satisfactorily understood. Human beings do not exchange data- we

understand information. Communication, therefore, refers to the process as

15 | P a g e

“sharing meaning” and to some extent; communication is defined as “the

management of messages for the purpose of creating meaning”.

In other words, the goal of communication is shared meaning which leads

to effective decision making and problem- solving. But how does one

determine the effectiveness and appropriateness of any given interaction?

And even more important, how do we know if communication is

competent?

In order to provide an answer to those questions, “communicative

competence” was coined and gradually becomes a common term.

The idea of communicative competence is originally derived from

Chomsky’s distinction between competence and performance. By

competence, Chomsky means the shared knowledge of the ideal speaker-

learner set in a completely homogenous speech community. Performance,

on the other hand, is concerned with the process of applying the underlying

knowledge to the actual language use, commonly stated as encoding and

decoding (Hymes).

Hymes finds Chomsky’s distinction of competence and performance too

narrow to describe language behavior as a whole. Hymes believes that

Chomsky’s view of competence is too idealized to describe actual language

behavior, and therefore his view of performance is an incomplete reflection

of competence. For Hymes, Chomsky’s linguistic theory represents a

“Garden of Eden” viewpoint that dismisses central questions of use in the

area of performance.

He believes that we should be concerned with performance, which he

defines as the actual use of language in a concrete situation. Hymes deems

it necessary to distinguish between two kinds of competence: linguistic

competence that deals with producing and understanding grammatically

correct sentences, and communicative competence that deals with

producing and understanding sentences that are appropriate and acceptable

16 | P a g e

to a particular situation. Thus Hymes coins a term “communicative

competence” and defines it as “a knowledge of the rules for understanding

and producing both the referential and social meaning of language”.

Without a doubt, Hymes’ viewpoint in communicative competence theory

resonates so well with the need of cross-cultural communication

knowledge. A good command of English grammar, lexis and phonology is

helpful but this along is not enough. People should bear in mind that things

such as “the place of silence, appropriate topics of conversation, forms of

address and expression of speech acts” are different across cultures and for

some time, these primarily decide the effectiveness of cross-cultural

communication.

Inside the indication of communicate competence, there are many

components enclosed. In Richard’s opinion, they namely are:

Knowledge of the grammar and vocabulary of the language

Knowledge of rules of speaking (e.g. knowing how to begin and end

conversations, knowing what topics may be talked about in different

types of speech events, knowing which address forms should be used

with different people one speaks to and in different situations.

Knowing how to use and respond to different types of speech acts,

such as requests, apologies, thanks and invitations.

Knowing how to use language appropriately

In a brief and clear-cut form, Saville-Troike (1915:22) proposes three

major components of communicative competence as follows:

Linguistic knowledge

Cultural knowledge

Interaction skills

This idea emphasizes not only the learner’s ability to produce

grammatically correct sentences but also the knowledge of what, when and

how to produce these sentences.

17 | P a g e

According to Canale and Swain (1983:4), communicative competence

consists of four elements:

Celce- Murica & Donrnyei (1995:79) attempted to complement to the

communicate competence by adding the final component:

- Actional competence: competence in conveying and understanding

communicative intent, that is, matching actional intent with linguistic

form.

1.2. Speech acts.

First mentioned by Austin in 1962, the term “Speech acts” has become a

topic of sustained investigation in almost every field of English- speaking

world. Blum-Kulka and Kasper (1989:2) emphasize, “The study of speech

acts is to remain a central concern of pragmatics, especially cross-cultural

pragmatics”.

1.2.1. The notion of speech acts.

In producing utterances, people do not only intend to offer linguistic

expressions but also to perform actions through these utterances. An

utterance like “I am hungry”, for example, could probably be interpreted

under appropriate contexts as a remark on the speaker’s appetite, as a

18 | P a g e

request for money, or, as a request for attention from a young child. This

phenomena inspired the British philosopher John Austin to initiate the

speech act theory, which has later been inherited, refined and developed by

a number of philosophers and linguists like Hymes (1964), Searle (1969),

Leech (1983), Schmidt and Richards (1983), Levinson (1983), Green

(1989), Yule (1986) and others.

Speech act, in Richards et al.’s words, is “an utterance as a functional unit

in communication” (1992:342). In his three- fold division of speech acts,

Austin (1962, cited from Levinson, 1983) categorizes them as:

1. Locutionary act: the utterance of a sentence with determinate sense and references

2. Illocutionary act: the making of a statement, offer, promise, etc. in uttering a sentence, by virtue of the conventional force associated with it (or with its explicit performative paraphrase)

3. Perlocutionary act: the bringing about of effects on the audience by means of uttering the sentence, such effects being special to the circumstances of utterance.

Of the three dimensions, in Yule’s opinion, “the most essential act that

counts is illocutionary force because the same utterance can potentially

have quite different illocutionary forces” and that partly explains why Yule

states, “The term ‘speech act’ is generally interpreted quite narrowly to

mean only the illocutionary force of an utterance”.(1996:51)

1.2.2. Classification of Speech Acts

Different philosophers and linguists have classified speech acts in different

ways.

Based on performative verbs, Austin (1962) presents taxonomy consisting

of five categories of speech act verbs: verdictives (e.g.: grade, estimate,

19 | P a g e

diagnose…), exercitives (e.g.: order, advise, warn…), commissives (e.g.:

promise, guarantee, bet…), behabitives (e.g.: apologize, criticize, bless…)

and expositives (e.g.: argue, affirm, concede…).

Raising his criticism against Austin’s taxonomy’s weaknesses, the most

serious of which lies in the lack of consistent principles of classification,

Searle (1979:12) proposes one of the most influential and widely- used

classification of speech act with the focus on the functions performed by

speech acts:

Declarations: change states of affairs, comprising pronouncement at

court, naming, firings, appointments, resignations…

Supporting Searle’s classification, Yule (1996:55) later summarizes the

five types of speech acts with their key features as below:

Speech act type Direction of fit S= speaker X= situation

Declarations Words change the word S causes X

Representatives Makes words fit the world S believes X

Expressives Makes words fit the world S feels X

Directives Makes the world fit words S wants X

Commissives Make the world fit words S intends X

Table 1: The five general functions of speech acts (following Searle 1979)

Representatives: state what the speaker believes to be the case or

not, including assertions, descriptions, reports, statements…

Expressive: denote a speaker’s psychological state or attitude. They

can be complaining, apologies, compliments, greetings…

Directives: attempt to get the hearer to do something and express

what the speaker wants. They are requests, suggestions, orders…

Commissives: commit a speaker to a course of action, expressing

his/ her intention such as promises, pledges, threats, refusals…

20 | P a g e

Bach and Harnish (1979) suggest a systematic, comprehensive and explicit

classification with six general categories of illocutionary acts, two of which

effectives and verdictives – are conventionally not communicative. The

other four major classes, namely constatives, directives, commissives, and

acknowledgement are communicative speech acts.

Verdictives Effectives Acknowledgement Commissives Directives Constative

Communicative

Illocutionary act

Conventional

Figure 3: Bach and Harnish’s classification of speech acts (1979)

The four main communicative classes accords with those of Austin’s

expositives, exercitives, commissives and behabitives respectively and are

somehow closely associated to Searle’s representatives, directives,

commissives and expressives.

Another way to classify speech acts is the one based on the relationship

between the structure and the function. Yule (1996) claims that the three

structural forms are declarative, interrogative, imperative and the three

general communicative functions are statement, question and command/

request. There is always an interrelationship between a form and a function.

In other words, the relationship can be either direct or indirect. “Whenever

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

direct speech act, wherever there is an indirect relationship between a form

and a function, we have an indirect speech act.” (Yule, 1996:55).

Therefore, if a declarative is used not to make a statement but to make a

request, this is an indirect speech act. For example, if someone wants the

21 | P a g e

others to close the door but instead of saying “I hereby request of you that

you close the door”, he says “It’s cold outside”, he performs an indirect

speech act.

In short, an indirect speech act is one performed by “means of another”

(Searle, 1979:60). In an indirect speech act, the speaker actually means

more than what he says.

1.2.3. Expressing satisfaction as a speech act

In accordance with the classification of Speech acts from Searle,

expressing satisfaction belongs to the type of expressives, i.e. “those kinds

of speech act that state what the speaker feels. … And in using an

expressive, the speaker makes words fit the world (of feelings)” (Yule,

1996:53). To be more precise, they are based on psychological states and

relate to the expression of feelings or emotions to the receiver.

In a straightforward way, “satisfaction” found in Oxford Advanced

Learner’s Dictionary (7th edition) is the good feeling that you have when

you achieved something or when something you wanted to happen does

happen. It is often mistaken among those good feelings as happiness, joy,

content or fulfillment. However, when taking a close look, there are some

slight distinctions among them.

Happiness is a state of mind or feeling characterized by

contentment, love, satisfaction, pleasure, joy, etc. It often depicts the

good feelings of a person in general, therefore, “satisfaction” is

meant beyond the shade of “happiness”.

Contentment (rather formal) is a feeling of happiness or

satisfaction with what you have

Fulfillment is a feeling of happiness or satisfaction with what you

do or have done.

22 | P a g e

So on so forth, satisfaction should be concisely identified as “the

gratification you feel after you have fulfilled a need, wish or expectation.”

(From the “Secret society of happy life” (2002:90)).

Lying on such basis, expressing satisfaction is meant to be an act of

showing how happy and content somebody is when he/she have attained

something longing. It is such an amorphous feeling; therefore the

expression of it may vary from person to person. To grasp it briefly, there

are supposed to be two main strategies when expressing satisfaction, that

is:

Non-verbal strategies:

o Body action

o Smiling

o Silence

o Crying

o Others

Verbal strategies:

o Thanking

o Understating

o Seeking agreement

o Using joke

o Being optimistic

o Giving gift

o Asking question

o Raising common ground

However, as stated from the beginning, the purpose of this study is to

investigate expressing satisfaction as a speech act. Therefore, it is to take

the focal point on verbal strategies and explore the differences between two

cultures (Vietnamese and American).

23 | P a g e

1.3. Politeness

1.3.1. Face and politeness

1.3.1.1. Face

The notion of face was proposed and understood by Goffman (1967, in

Thomas, 1995:168) as the positive social value a person effectively claims

for himself in others’ assumptions that he has taken during a particular

interaction. It is an image of self-described in terms of approved social

attributed.

However, the best-known definition of face is that by Brown and Levinson

(1978:61), which is derived from Goffman’s and based on the assumptions

that every competent adult member of a society has (and know each other

to have) face. In their words, face is “the public self-image that every

member wants to claim for himself”, consisting in two related aspects:

Negative face: the basic claim to territories, personal preserves, rights to

non-distraction, and

Positive face: the positive consistent self-image or “personality” claimed by

interactants”.

1.3.1.2. Politeness

Politeness has recently emerged as one of the favorite issues for linguistic

scholars to study on. Therefore, concerning the concept of politeness, there

have been many definitions surrounding. Following are several widely

known ones.

Linguistically, politeness is defined as “the interactional balance achieved

between two needs: the need for pragmatic clarity and the need to avoid

coerciveness”(Blum- Kulla, 1987:131). In this sense, tipping the balance in

the favor of either of the needs may lead to impoliteness.

Culturally, politeness is viewed as “a fixed concept, as in the idea of

“polite social behavior” or “etiquette, within a culture” (Yule, 1996:60).

24 | P a g e

Yule further states that such different general principles for being polite in

social interaction within a particular culture as being tactful, generous,

modest, and sympathetic towards others can be specified (ibid:60). And as

polite behaviors may be different from one culture to another, what is

considered to be “politeness” varies in different cultures.

Cross-culturally, politeness in communication is seen as “a system of

interpersonal relation designed to facilitate interaction by minimizing the

potential for conflict and confrontation inherent in all human interchange”.

As all linguistic actions involve a potential face threat of some kind, it

particularly requires the speaker to choose a proper politeness means so

that the other’s face is respected. As there are negative face and positive

face, there are Negative Politeness (NP) and Positive Politeness (PP),

respectively.

According to Nguyen Quang, NP is any kind of communicative act which

is intentionally and appropriately meant to show that the speaker does not

want to impinge on the addressee’s privacy, thus, maintaining the sense of

distance between them. It includes face saving acts oriented to the hearer’s

negative face and tends to show deference. NP can be best summed up as

“a concern not to impose on others or restrict their freedom, but to

maintain distance” (Bentahila & Davies, 1989).

Similarly, PP includes face saving acts concerned with the hearer’s positive

face and “tends to show solidarity, emphasize that both speakers want the

same thing and that they have a common goal” (Yule, 1996). Nguyen

Quang defines PP as “any kind of communicative act which is

appropriately intended to show the speaker’s concern to the addressee,

thus, enhancing the sense of solidarity”.

In short, NP is to respect others’ privacy while PP is to show one’s concern

to others.

25 | P a g e

To deal with face threatening acts (FTA), Brown and Levinson (1987:60)

suggest five strategies:

Lesser risk

1. Without redressive action, baldly On record

4. Off record Do the FTA

2. Positive politeness

With redressive

action

5. Don’t do the FTA

3. Negative politeness

Greater risk

Figure 4: Possible strategies for doing FTAs

The diagram shows that when encountering a FTA, the speaker (S) can

choose one of the five possibilities:

1. S goes on record: baldly performs the act without apology or mitigation. For example, S may use imperative such as “Pass me the salt”.

2. S goes on record, performing the act with redresses in terms of positive politeness i.e. choosing a positive strategy of making A feel good and feel that A’s value is shared.

3. S goes on record, performing the act with redresses in terms of negative politeness i.e. choosing a negative strategy of hedging, apologizing, offering or asserting a desire to avoid interfering with A’s freedom of action.

4. S goes off record, performing the act by implicature: producing statements that are indirectly addressed to A.

5. S might decide not to do FTA in case the face-threat is great.

26 | P a g e

Brown and Levinson implicitly consider negative politeness to be “more

polite” than positive politeness. This can be seen in the diagram when they

number the former and the latter 3 and 2, respectively. Nguyen Quang

remarks that this point of view by Brown and Levinson more or less

decreases their diagram’s universal value; hence, he proposes another one.

Without redressive action

2. With redressive action

On record

Do the FTA

Positive politeness

Off record

4. Do not do the FTA

FTA encounter

Negative politeness

Figure 5: Nguyen Quang’s diagram of possible strategies for doing FTAs

1.3.2. Positive politeness

Positive politeness, according to Brown and Levinson, “is oriented towards

the positive face of H, the positive self-image that he claims for himself”.

Yule (1996) seems to clarify the notion when he defines positive politeness

as a face saving act tending to show solidarity, emphasizing that both S and

H want the same thing and that they share the same goal. In short, positive

politeness shows concerns for others.

Nguyen Quang, well aware of the sense of solidarity between interactants,

sees positive politeness as “any communicative act (verbal and/or

27 | P a g e

nonverbal) which is appropriately intended to show the speaker’s concern

to the addressee, thus, enhancing the sense of solidarity between them”

(2004:12).

In order for a speaker to minimize the face- threatening aspects of an act,

Brown and Levinson specify the super- strategy of going on record with

positive politeness into 15 positive politeness strategies employed in

communication. What follows is a sketch of these strategies, each

illustrated with example(s).

Strategy 1: Notice, attend to H (his interest, wants, needs, goods)

The teacher highly appreciated your last essay. May I have

through it?

Strategy 2: Exaggerate (interest, approval, sympathy with H)

You count faster than a computer!

Strategy 3: Intensify interest to H

I jump on my bike and off I ride out of the gate, into the road,

straight to school. Do you know what happens next? When I

nearly reach the T- junction, a large dog runs across the road

so suddenly that I respond no reactions. I crash right into it

and land on the ground three meters from the bike. Thank

God, I am alright but the rim of the front wheel is warped…

Can you give me a lift home?

Strategy 4: Use in- group identify markers

Where have you been, darling?

Strategy 5: Seek agreement

A: I’m so tired of staying day and night!

B: So am I.

Strategy 6: Avoid disagreement

A: Do you like the red pullover?

B: It’s really beautiful, in a way.

28 | P a g e

Strategy 7: Presuppose/ Raise/ Assert common ground

How can we, student, afford that rent?

Strategy 8: Joke

OK if I tackle those cookies now?

Strategy 9: Assert or presuppose S’s knowledge of or concern for H’s

wants

I know you have a lot of work to do but it’s a really good film.

Strategy 10: Offer/ promise

Take it easy. I’ll help you.

Strategy 11: Be optimistic

I’m sure you won’t mind if I turn the fan on.

Strategy 12: Include both S and H in the activity

Let’s have some cookies, then.

Strategy 13: Give (or ask for) reasons

Why don’t you phone him now?

Strategy 14: Assume or assert reciprocity

I’ll come with you if you help me with this problem.

Strategy 15: Give gifts to H

I’ve just been out shopping. Here’s hotdog for you. Like it?

Strategy 16: Comfort and encourage

Keep calm. You’re on the right way.

Strategy 17: Ask personal questions

Are you married?

1.3.3. Negative politeness

Negative politeness, according to Brown and Levinson, “is oriented mainly

toward partially satisfying (redressing) H’s negative face, his basic want to

maintain claims of territory and self-determination”. In Bentahila and

Davies’s words, negative politeness is understood as a concern not to

29 | P a g e

impose upon others or restrict their freedom, but remain distance. While

positive politeness narrows the distance between interlocutors, negative

politeness keeps a distance between them. In brief, negative politeness

avoids interfering with others’ personal affairs.

Nguyen Quang, well aware of the sense of distance between interactants,

refers to negative politeness as “any communicative act (verbal and/or

nonverbal) which is appropriately intended to show that the speaker does

not want to impinge on the addressee’s privacy, thus enhancing the sense of

distance between them.”

Brown and Levinson introduce 11 negative politeness strategies used in

communication as follows:

Strategy 1: Be conventionally indirect

I would like to say how deeply grateful I am.

Strategy 2: Question/ hedge

It’s hot here, don’t you think so?

Strategy 3: Be pessimistic

I don’t think you can do me a favor.

Strategy 4: Minimize the imposition

I just want to have a sip of that.

Strategy 5: Give deference

What would you like, madam?

Strategy 6: Apologize

I’m sorry to have to inform you that you have missed the

opportunity.

Strategy 7: Impersonalize S and H

Can one trust such people?

Strategy 8: State the FTA as a general rule

Customers are requested not to smoke in this area of the

restaurant.

30 | P a g e

Strategy 9: Nominalize

It’s my pleasure to be able to inform you that …

Strategy 10: Redress other wants of H’s

I don’t know how I can express my gratitude to you for your

consideration to my mother.

Strategy 11: Avoid asking personal questions

“Asking personal questions” is a positive politeness strategy to

give concern to H, whereas this is considered to interfere with H’s personal

affairs. Thus, avoiding asking such personal questions as “How old are

you?”, “How much do you earn a month?” … is regarded as one negative

politeness strategy.

So far, 17 positive politeness strategies and 11 negative politeness

strategies have been briefly showcased. It should, however to noted that

there is often no clear-cut distinction between positive politeness and

negative politeness strategies in real life communication for sometimes,

people may combine different strategies to attain their communicative

purposes.

31 | P a g e

CHAPTER 2: THE STUDY

2.1. Comments on the survey questionnaire and the informants

2.1.1. Comments on the survey questionnaire

This study is inclined to probe into some noteworthy Vietnamese-American

similarities and differences in expressing satisfaction to others. As

mentioned above, entirely aware of the difficulties in conducting an

elaborate investigation with a lot of research tools, the researcher have

designed and made full use of the questionnaire. As the primary medium in

collecting sufficient data for the contrastive analysis between two

languages and cultures, questionnaire has been divided into two parts

targeting at different aims.

The first part, which is composed of 18 situations in three areas: at home, at

work and in public, is to test their validity. Informants are asked to rank a

five-level scale in order of the possibility of expressing satisfaction with

somebody in each given situation.

At home:

Someone says you are lucky to have such a happy family

Someone says your child is an energetic, curious and playful kid

Someone says your child is a gentle, obedient and well-behaved kid

Someone says your child has got good marks at school

Someone says your husband is such a high income earner

Someone says your husband is very caring and sharing

Someone says your husband always listens to you with an open mind

Someone says your husband is good-looking and attractive

At work:

Someone compliments on your good work

Someone helps by taking over your work when you are unavailable

32 | P a g e

Someone shows your mistakes in your work and suggests the

solutions

Someone helps you out when you are being reprimanded by the boss

You are given a promotion

You are always charged to take the lead in every project

In public:

Someone enthusiastically helps you with your heavy shopping bags

Someone gives positive comments on your attractive appearance

Someone asks for direction in a polite manner

Someone helps to collect the things you have dropped on street

The second part, on the other hand, consists of three case- study situations,

each of which was taken from one area in the first part of the questionnaire.

The reason for choosing those three situations is they are assumed to be

rated highly advisable by both Vietnamese and American informants.

Situation 1: (at home)How would you verbally express your satisfaction to

the following person when someone (another person) says you are lucky

to have such a happy family?

Situation 2: (at work)How would you verbally express your satisfaction to

the following person when someone (another person) shows your

mistakes in your work and suggests the solutions

Situation 3: (in public)How would you verbally express your satisfaction

to the following person when someone (another person) enthusiastically

helps you with your heavy shopping bags

In investigating the verbal reactions of Vietnamese and American in

expressing satisfaction, the communication partners of the informants are

33 | P a g e

particularly important. Hence, after much consideration, the informants

have been intentionally condensed into:

The informants’ best friend

The informants’ nodding acquaintance

The informants’ brother/sister

The informants’ colleague

The informants’ boss

The informants’ subordinate

It is also necessary to notice that some factors likely to affect

communication are not demonstrated in the questionnaire such as:

Paralinguistic factors: rate, pitch, volume, vocal filters, etc.

Extra linguistic factors: gestures, facial expression, body motions,

eye contact, etc.

Communication setting and object language: place, time,

conversational distance, clothes, etc.

Informants’ mood: happiness, confusion, annoyance, etc.

Due to those limitations, the study is only an effort to make a partial

investigation, and the concluding remarks are tentative and suggestive.

2.1.2. Comments on the informants

Of the 43 Vietnamese and 40 American informants, 40 Vietnamese and 40

Americans have been randomly selected to ensure the neutrality and

compatibility for the analysis. The former group are all living in Northern

Vietnam while the latter one are American residents working and studying

in the United States with limited knowledge of Vietnamese culture, thus,

having no bias towards answering the survey questionnaires.

Importantly, the informants were absolutely guaranteed to be unidentified

in any discussion of the data, hence they would feel comfortable and open

to share their own opinions.

34 | P a g e

2.2. Data analysis

2.2.1. Strategies in expressing satisfaction (SES)

In terms of positive politeness, expressing satisfaction is a communicative

erbal, though non-verbal aspects of this act are not

the hearer’s privacy,

tive/ negative politeness remains controversial. An utterance of

t with the hearer. He wants to involve

act (verbal and non-v

covered in the scope of the study) which is appropriately intended to show

the speakers’ concern to the hearer, thus enhancing the sense of solidarity

between them. The concern can be appreciated in the way closeness is built

and emotions/ feelings are shared among each other.

As a matter of fact, communicating partners may employ some positive

politeness strategies such as: seeking agreement, using joke, being

optimistic, exaggerating, giving gifts to the hearers.

On the other hand, in the light of negative politeness, expressing

satisfaction is also a communicative act which is appropriately intended to

show that the speaker does not want to impinge on

thus, enhancing the sense of distance between them. The speaker, in this

way, may appear to be pessimistic or giving deference to the hearer. The

speaker’s concern is likely to be up to common and social habits, through

which they might not want to express their inner feelings or thoughts.

Therefore, they choose to stay indifferent and be polite in their proper

manner.

However given the fact that satisfaction towards every person may be

anticipated variously, the question of whether expressing satisfaction are

more posi

expressing satisfaction may belong to negative viewpoint due to the

conventional formality in deference:

- Thank you, Sir. Your family is a happy one, too.

Yet, the utterance can also be seen as a positive politeness strategy when

the speaker intends to seek agreemen

35 | P a g e

the other one into the conversation, which somehow reduces the

communicating distance and strengthens the solidarity.

With intention of analyzing satisfaction’s expressions in the light of cross

cultural communication in general and of politeness strategy in particular,

Strategy 2: Understating

reement

mon ground

In ach strategy is not clear enough due to an

ove oliteness. Thus, when carrying out

pparently, people rarely apply the same expression when they feel

a lot based on the situations,

the author of this study suggests eight strategies of expressing satisfaction:

Strategy 1: Thanking

Strategy 3: Seeking ag

Strategy 4: Using joke

Strategy 5: Being optimistic

Strategy 6: Giving gift

Strategy 7: Asking question

Strategy 8: Raising com

some case, the boundary of e

rlap between positive and negative p

the data analysis procedure, the author just hope to find out the most

popular strategies utilized by both Vietnamese and American respondents.

2.2.2. Factors affecting the choices of SESs

A

satisfied towards different ones. It may vary

social status and for some time the mood of the speaker, to name just a few.

Condensing all of those considerations, Nguyen Quang (2004) believes that

there are at least 20 social factors which might affect the choice of

strategies in human interactions, namely:

36 | P a g e

age channel

gender

residence

occupation

status power

mood

personality

topic

communicative point

setting

family relation

social distance

time pressure

age power

gender power

intellectual power

physical power

economic power

ith an insightful thought and after some consultation with other well-

er

tatus

u spend most of your time

f other language.

2.2.3. ealization of SESs in American English and Vietnamese

from co-interactants’

ims at discovering the uses of strategies of expressing

satisfaction towards different co-interactants. In the order from best friend

W

versed people in this field, the author suggests 6 factors which may have

impose great impact on the choice of expressing satisfaction strategies:

1. Age

2. Gend

3. Marital s

4. Area where yo

5. Occupation

6. Acquisition o

R

2.2.3.1. Realization of SESs in American English

2.2.3.1.1 Realization of SESs in English as seen

parameters

The study a

37 | P a g e

to subordinate, all of the eight strategies mentioned above will be analyzed

under the frame of three situations (at home, at work and in public).

a. Best friend

Situation 1: At home

Strategy 1 Strategy 3 Strategy 4 Strategy 8

40% 30% 15% 15%

Whe eone comp ts on your h family, it has been proven that

ou are more likely to show your satisfaction. In the case that it is your best

en, followed by strategy 3

ork

n som limen appy

y

friend who makes the comment, there are four strategies being used to

respond: thanking in the formal way (E.g.: “thank you!”, “thanks”), seeking

agreement (E.g.: “Yeah yeah, for sure”, “I can’t agree with you

anymore”,etc.), using joke (E.g.: “Don’t jinx it, dude”, “Haha funny”, etc.),

Raising common ground (E.g.: “You know, you’re part of this family, too”,

“If only you know what it takes to be that way”).

As seen from the table, there is no big gap among the four choices of the

respondents. Strategy 1 (thanking) is highest chos

(seeking agreement) and standing lastly in the list is strategy 4 and 8 with

the equal share.

Situation 2: At w

Strategy 1 Strategy 3 Strategy 4 Strategy 8

65% 10% 10% 15%

In the second situation-at work, Strategy 1 still remains the favored strategy

most respondents. Although the choices of strategies are the same as in of

the first situation, there has been a great increase in the choice of the first

one. This may be reasoned as, the respondents do not want to “take risk” by

38 | P a g e

joking or adding more details when they are still in the office

environments. They choose to be short and polite as possible.

Situation 3: In public

1 Strategy 4 Strategy 8 Strategy

70% 15% 15%

hen it comes to happen in public, strategy 3 no longer stays, instead, it

b. Nodding acquaintance

Sit

W

has added more on the choice of the first strategy. Strategy 4 and 8 are still

in the list, however, they just cover the small number of choices share

among the three ones.

uation1: At home

Strategy 1 Strategy 6 Strategy 8

80% 10% 10%

n addressing the satisfaction towards a nodding acquaintance, most of the

ituation 2: At work

O

respondents once again choose strategy 1 while strategy 6 and strategy 8

are utilized rarely. The thanking strategy is made the greatest use perhaps

owing to the level of kinship among speakers. They tend to use negative

politeness strategy to keep a certain distance towards strangers when it

comes to the topic of their families.

S

1 Strategy 5 Strategy 7 Strategy

80% 10% 10%

39 | P a g e

As clearly seen from the table, the shares in the second situation somehow

resemble the first one. Strategy 1 still remains the first and foremost choice

while the other strategies have been replaced by strategy 5 (“being

optimistic”) and strategy 7 (“asking question”). Comparing to the firs

strategy, they are less utilized; however, they have depicted the variety of

expressing satisfaction strategies to some extent.

For example:

- Strategy 1:

o Oh thank you.

o Thank you for your help.

o Thank you for your suggestions.

o Thank you very much.

o Thank you a lot.

o .....

- Strategy 5:

o Thanks. The next time, I’ll do a much better job, I swear.

- Strategy 7:

o How can you know that?

o Oopps, really? How can you find out?

Situation 3: In public

Strategy 1 Strategy 8

90% 10%

The lion share is still for the first strategy when it comes to expressing

satisfaction in public. It is predictable as for the two reasons. First, the

relationship between speakers is not too intimate. Second, the context is in

the outer space where there are full of strangers surrounding. Therefore, the

safest choice is saying a thank you as a response.

40 | P a g e

c. Brother/ sister

Situation 1: At home

Strategy 1 Strategy 4 Strategy 5 Strategy 7 Strategy 8

25% 10% 15% 20% 30%

With communicating partners who are siblings, the result varies a lot. The

thanking no longer holds its first rank. Instead, “raising common ground”

strategy is used more and strategy 7 (“asking question”) stands right after

strategy 1.

It can be explained by the more intimate level of kinship among speakers.

They tend to open up and feel comfortable with positive politeness.

Situation 2: At work

Strategy 1 Strategy 3 Strategy 7 Strategy 8

55% 25% 10% 10%

In this case, the variety in the choices of strategies does not last long.

Strategy 1 comes back to its first place and followed are strategy 3

(“seeking agreement”). Examples for the choice of strategy 3 are:

- All right. I’ll do that.

- Yeah! I agree! I have been wrong.

The two other strategies, seven and eight appears dispersedly throughout

the results of respondents such as:

- Thanks but how do you know about it? (Strategy 7)

41 | P a g e

Situation 3: In pubic

Strategy 1 Strategy 4 Strategy 8

60% 20% 20%

There are only four main strategies utilized in expressing satisfaction with

siblings when they help the respondents out with the heavy bag. Standing

on top is thanking. And coming next- at the second rank is both strategy 4

and strategy 8.

For example:

- It’s about time you help. (Strategy 8)

- Thanks kid, I love you. (Strategy 4)

There is one thing worth noticing, that is, strategy 4 (“Using joke”) is only

found in situation 1 and situation. It is absent from the situation 2- when the

formal workplace presents and a proper manner is required.

d. Colleague

Situation 1: At home

Strategy 1

100%

It is such a stunting result as there is only one strategy that all of the

respondents resort to. Thanking seems to be the number option and is found

applicable in almost every cases of expressing satisfaction. Colleague is

someone you share most of your office hours with and somehow is the

competitor at work. Therefore, it is easy to comprehend that being too

intimate is not a good way to communicate, especially in the western

countries’ working environment.

From time to time, they use the thanking strategy such as:

- Thank you.

42 | P a g e

- Thanks.

- Thank you a lot.

- Thank you so much for your sincere comments.

Situation 2: At work

Strategy 1 Strategy 8

80% 20%

If in the first situation, the compliment is about the private life of the

respondents, coming to the second one, the context is all at work. As

predictable, strategy 1 is still given the priority. It counts for most of the

choices while strategy 8 (“raising common ground”) only constitutes the

smaller amount.

Situation 3: In public

Strategy 1 Strategy 8

90% 10%

As seen from the data, the next situation is also a splitting image of the

previous one. They are similar in the way that there are only strategy 1 and

8 making up the whole choices. Meanwhile, they are slightly different as

strategy 1 covers almost and leave a very tiny share for strategy 8.

e. Boss

Situation 1: At home

Strategy 1 Strategy 5 Strategy 8

70% 15% 15%

When addressing to boss-who may be older and higher in status, American

informants made greatest use of the first strategy. It does not seem to bear 43 | P a g e

any surprise. However, the thing worth noticing herein is, the second rank

of both strategy 5 and 8.

If in the previous cases, the respondents chose to reply the comments by

formally thanking such as “Thank you.” or just “Thanks.”, in this case,

there has been a slight change in addressing to the higher- status

communicating partner.

E.g.:

- Thank you very much. (Strategy 1)

- Thank you, Sir. (Strategy 1)

- Thank you for noticing, Sir. (Strategy 1)

- I’m very lucky, Sir. (Strategy 5)

- Thank you, Sir. They really help encourage me in my job. (Strategy

8)

Situation 2: At work

Strategy 1 Strategy 2 Strategy 3 Strategy 5 Strategy 8

25% 10% 15% 15% 35%

For most of the time, thanking is the dominant strategy for American

informants to express their satisfaction. However, in this case, the result

does not reflect that norm anymore. The choices have been various among

the 5 strategies and there is not any big gap from one to one.

At top, strategy 8 (“raising common ground”) has been used most

frequently.

E.g.:

- I want to do the right things.

- I appreciate the suggestions. I will work on them.

- Thank you, Sir. I really appreciate what you have said.

44 | P a g e

- Oh, I’m sorry. I will work harder.

Standing in the middle is strategy 1.

Being next to it is the position of strategy 3 and 5.

E.g:

- Oh, yes. I do agree with you, Sir. (Strategy 3)

- You’re right. Your advice is great. (Strategy 3)

- Thank you for pointing that out. I will try hard to change. (Strategy

5)

- Don’t worry, Sir. I will work harder next time. (Strategy 5)

Lastly, strategy 2 is at the bottom of the list.

E.g.:

- If it had not been for your helpful advices, the project would be a

total failure. I just wanna say thank you a lot.

Situation 3: In public

Strategy 1 Strategy 8

80% 20%

However, when it turns to a situation in public, Strategy 1 comes back to be

the most favorable choice, with strategy 8 accompanying in the second

rank. For some time, they choose to add deference to their thanking, such

as:

- Thank you, Sir/ Mad.

- Thank you very much for your help.

f. Subordinate

Situation 1: At home

Strategy 1 Strategy 3 Strategy 5 Strategy 7

60% 10% 20% 10%

45 | P a g e

In responding to a compliment on family stuff from a subordinate, most of

the informants prefer the thanking strategy as the number one option.

Besides, strategy 5 also represents to be considerable.

E.g.:

- Thank you. I hope yours is well, too.

- I’m very lucky, thanks.

Both Strategy 3 and 7 hold the last position in the list though they do not

constitute much of the choices.

Situation 2: At work

Strategy 1 Strategy 3 Strategy 5 Strategy 7 Strategy 8

45% 10% 15% 10% 20%

Apart from the number one position for strategy 1 as usual, in this situation,

there has been a great contribution from strategy 8 to strategy 3 and 7. It

shows that, respondents tend to show their positive politeness towards their

subordinate when it comes to work rather than negative politeness.

E.g:

- Interesting, thank you. I’ll look over it. (Strategy 5)

- You surely helped. (Strategy 3)

- Oops. Guess that it is right, isn’t it? Thank you very much. (Strategy

7)

- You’ve caught my mistakes. I think you’ve done a good job. (Strategy

8)

Situation 3: In public

Strategy 1 Strategy 8

80% 20%

46 | P a g e

It seems that, in public, American respondents are not likely to express

themselves as much at work. Once again, the thanking strategy stands in

the pre-dominant position and outnumbers strategy 8.

E.g.:

- Oh thanks. (Strategy 1)

- Thank you for all the help, I really need it. (Strategy 8)

Overall, the data reveal a hint that level of kinship and power status may

exercise a remarkable influence on the communicative act of expressing

satisfaction. Though the thanking strategy is the most commonly use and is

found applicable in almost any cases, American respondents still make use

of various strategies such as raising, seeking agreement, using joke and

asking question.

2.2.3.1.2 Realization of SESs in English as seen from informants’

parameters Age Gender Marital

status

Residence Occupation Acquisitio

n of FL (s)

Informan

ts’s

paramete

rs

strategy

U30 O30 Ma Fe Sing Mar Ru Ur Soc-

ser

Tech

-sci

Yes No

Str 1 45% 55% 80% 20% 70% 30% 80% 20% 60% 40% 80% 20%

Str 2 40% 60% 10% 90% 55% 45% 35% 65% 80% 20% 90% 10%

Str 3 35% 65% 40% 60% 35% 65% 25% 75% 40% 60% 45% 55%

Str 4 45% 55% 25% 75% 90% 10% 20% 80% 80% 20% 60% 40%

Str 5 45% 55% 25% 75% 65% 35% 25% 75% 45% 55% 55% 45%

Str 6 60% 40% 20% 80% 80% 20% 20% 80% 60% 40% 80% 20%

Str 7 20% 80% 80% 20% 20% 80% 45% 55% 60% 40% 85% 15%

Str 8 15% 85% 40% 60% 65% 35% 35% 65% 55% 45% 55% 45%

Table 2: Use of strategies as seen from American informants’ parameters

47 | P a g e

Age

The chart illustrates the difference in choices of expressing satisfaction

strategies. When comparing the answers between respondents under 30 and

ones over 30, it can be seen that, the older ones seems to be more

enthusiastic in expressing their satisfaction by various strategies. From

Strategy 1 to 8, the percentage of both groups show a norm that, in most

cases the group over 30 outnumbers one under 30. Only in Strategy 6

(Giving gift), there is an exception. And in the last two strategies, the

choices from group over 30 are surprisingly much higher than the other

ones.

The result surely has delivered many stunning implications. Contrary to

what people often assume, people over the age of 30 are the one with more

varied strategies of expressing satisfaction. This can be explained as the

older ones have more experiences than the younger and therefore, they find

themselves comfortable and initiative in choosing the best way to express

their satisfaction.

Str 1 Str 2 Str 3 Str 4 Str 5 Str 6 Str 7 Str 8Under 30

0

50

100

Under 30

Over 30

48 | P a g e

Gender

It is apparently seen from the chart that women outnumber men when it

comes to the variety of strategies in expressing satisfaction. As for the male

respondents, Strategy 1 and 7 (thanking and asking questions) are more

favored than others. Meanwhile women mostly resort to strategy 2, 6 and 8

(understating, giving gift and raising common ground). This difference can

be drawn from the stereotypes of both men and women. If men are viewed

as reticent, short and concise in words, women to the contrary, are talkative

and tend to express themselves more in communication. To some extent,

this trend also illustrates the difference in choice of negative politeness and

positive politeness. The author is strongly convinced that due to the sex

distinction, women are probably keen on wording than men. They seem to

be in favor of positive politeness while men are more inclined towards

negative politeness.

Str 1 Str 2 Str 3 Str 4 Str 5 Str 6 Str 7 Str 8Male

020406080

100

Male

Female

49 | P a g e

Marital status

Of all the strategies employed by these two parameters, the single prefer

using joke than other ones. In contrast, married people are least fond of

strategy 4. Instead, the married show their greatest priority in the strategy

of raising common ground (strategy 8) and asking questions (strategy 7).

This can be traced to the fact that the single seem to be more light-hearted.

Their choices of strategies are varied and in other spectrum, they are not as

tactful as the married. However, speaking of the married, they may own

more experience and therefore they tend to know better ways to express

their satisfaction to different co-interactants.

50 | P a g e

Residence

As seen from the chart, the most striking feature if the choice of strategy 1

(thanking) from the rural dwellers. They resort to it as the number one

option and in most cases; they apply just a “thank you” to the listeners.

This seems strange when comparing with the urban ones as most of the

strategies are distributed relatively equally and people flexibly apply every

strategy to show their satisfaction.

This finding is really surprising for the author often assume that, the rural

dwellers are the one living in the countryside, they may be more likely to

express their solidarity and socialization than the city dwellers.

Nevertheless, the fact is speaking the different words.

51 | P a g e

Occupation

Overall, among the eight strategies being utilized by both people from the

two working groups, strategy 3, 5 and 8 (seeking agreement, being

optimistic and raising common ground) are more favored by tech-sci

informants. This is also a surprising finding as soc-ser informants who

involve their life with a lot of communication and co-interactions to others

are often thought to be more sociable and flexible in expressing

themselves.

However, after this result has come out, the author has already drawn a

different view towards those two groups. The soc-ser, though sociable they

might appear, tend to be more careful in expressing their satisfaction than

the others. Meanwhile, the tech-sci are found to be more optimistic and

open in their verbal expressions.

52 | P a g e

Acquisition of foreign language(s)

Several remarkable differences can be realized between the two

parameters. First, in almost any strategies, the choices from informants

with acquisition of foreign languages are higher the ones without foreign

language. Second, only strategy 8 (raising common ground) and strategy 3

(seeking agreement) are more chosen by the non-foreign language

informants. As the findings seem vague, it is not persuasive enough to

come up with any precise conclusion about the impact of foreign languages

on the way American informants express their satisfaction to others.

2.2.3.2. Realization of SESs in Vietnamese

2.2.3.2.1. Realization of SESs in Vietnamese as seen from co-

interactants’ parameters

a. Best friend

Situation 1:

Str 1 Str 2 Str 3 Str 4 Str 5 Str 7 Str 8

10% 10% 20% 25% 15% 15% 5%

53 | P a g e

For the first situation-at home, the choices of Vietnamese informants in

expressing satisfaction spread out from strategy 1 to 8. No strategy stands

dominantly and the disparity from one to one is not so distinctive. Two

strategies being utilized most are strategy 4 (Using joke) and strategy 5

(being optimistic) while strategy 8 (raising common ground) stands at the

bottom.

It might be the case that Vietnamese informants find it comfortable enough

to express satisfaction in private life with their best friends. They are

inclined to choose the strategies which reflect more on themselves and their

families.

Situation 2:

Str 1 Str 2 Str 3 Str 7 Str 8

20% 15% 40% 10% 15%

In the second situation, there are only 5 strategies employed, which are

thanking, understating, seeking agreement, asking questions and raising

common ground. Although the co-interactant remains the same, the manner

and distance in terms of response are much more different from the first

situation. At work, people resort most to strategy 3 (seeking agreement)

and strategy 1 (thanking), which can be seen in those following examples:

- Ừ cám ơn mày. (strategy 1)

- Đồng ý, tao sẽ sửa. (strategy 3)

- T biết rồi. (strategy 3)

- Thanks mày. (strategy 1)

Meanwhile, strategy 7 (asking questions) and 8 (raising common ground)

are the last things respondents want to deploy. Moreover, the most striking

feature can be viewed from the table is the appearance of strategy 2

54 | P a g e

(understating) while in the responses from American informants, this

strategy disappear.

This can be reasoned by the fact that Vietnamese people are inclined to

“lower” themselves and try to act modest. Some choose to say just a thank-

you, some choose to say sorry and some choose to agree when it comes to

reveal their own mistake. Very few ones choose to examine into the

mistakes and ask for the reasons.

Situation 3:

Str 1 Str 2 Str 3 Str 4 Str 5 Str 6 Str 7 Str 8

15% 5% 5% 25% 5% 15% 5% 25%

When the setting changes into the public, all of the eight strategies have

turned up again. Standing on top is strategy 8 (raising common ground) and

strategy 4 (using joke), in the following are strategy 1 (thanking) and

strategy 6 (giving gift). Ranking last is strategy 7 (asking questions). This

does not seem to be a big surprise to the author as Vietnamese people tend

to show their best friends the satisfaction in such a varied way. There

seems to be no boundary to delineate their responses.

E.g.:

- Thanks mày nhé! (strategy 1)

- Nếu mà không có mày tao chết mất đấy. (strategy 2)

- ừ, vậy cậu cầm hộ tớ nhé. (strategy 3)

- Ôi hôm nay ăn phải cái gì mà lại từ bi hỉ xả thế! (Strategy 4)

- May cho tao quá. (Strategy 5)

- Lát đi làm 1 chầu kem nhá. (Strategy 6)

- Thật là mày muốn giúp tao không? (Strategy 7)

- Cậu thật sự là một người bạn tốt. (Strategy 8)

55 | P a g e

b. Nodding acquaintance

Situation 1:

Str 1 Str 2 Str 4 Str 7

60% 20% 5% 15%

As viewed from the table, there are only 4 strategies being used in the

situation- at home. Furthermore, the disparity between the most chosen one

and the least chosen one is really great. In most times, respondents choose

the quick and safe response, which is strategy 1 (thanking). This can be

easily drawn out and the author has already anticipated. People naturally do

not find it relaxed and comfortable to talk about their families and private

life with a stranger. Therefore, they just take the compliment for granted

and reply in a short and polite way. However, there are some exceptions

besides in which people choose to reply in a cheerful and positive way.

E.g.:

- Em cám ơn ạ. Ôi từ thuở cha sinh mẹ đẻ đến giờ mới có người khen

mình thế này. (strategy 4)

- May mắn gì đâu. Bác cứ quá khen, vẫn còn kém gia đình bên bác

nhiều lắm. (strategy 2)

- Bạn nghĩ vậy thật à? (strategy 7)

Situation 2:

Str 1 Str 8

50% 50%

The results in the second situation are really distinctive. There are only two

strategies being utilized and both of them (thanking and raising) get the

equal share. As mentioned above, when the co-interactant is a stranger,

56 | P a g e

people feel reserved to reveal their satisfaction, especially in the context of

offices, the bond between them is slighter.

E.g.:

- Cám ơn cậu. (strategy 1)

- Lời khuyên của bạn giúp mình rất nhiều. (strategy 8)

Situation 3:

Str 1 Str 5 Str 8

85% 5% 15%

At the first glance, strategy 1 has emerged as the pre-eminent choice among

the three strategies deployed. Also, the gap between strategy 1 (the most

chosen one) and strategy 5 (the least chosen) is really huge. This can be

explained as the bond between the speakers is vulnerable. Their

relationship is distant and therefore, they mostly resort to thanking as the

number one choice.

E.g.:

- Rất cám ơn anh/ chị. (strategy 1)

- Em thật là may mắn vì có anh/ chị giúp đỡ. (strategy 5)

- Anh/ chị quả là người tốt bụng. (strategy 8)

c. Brother/ sister

Situation 1:

Str 1 Str 3 Str 4 Str 5 Str 6 Str 7 Str 8

10% 30% 30% 10% 5% 5% 10%

Coming to this situation, almost all of the strategies are presented and

distributed comparatively equal. The disparity between the most chosen

57 | P a g e

and the least chosen does not count much. To reason for this, there are two

causes. First, the relationship between speakers is intimate; hence they are

likely to expose their satisfaction freely and comfortably. Second, the

setting is at home- where both of the speakers are included in. It gives them

a sense of belonging and therefore, the manner is loose.

E.g.:

- Cám ơn mày. (strategy 1)

- Hì, anh/ chị cũng vậy đấy. (strategy 3)

- Chứ sao, mày nói chuyện xưa như trái đất. (strategy 4)

- Ừ, do nhà mình có phúc mới được vậy. (strategy 5)

- Muốn ăn xúc xích đây mà (strategy 6)

- Thế vợ chồng anh/ chị sao? Chắc lại có chuyện lục đục hả?

(Strategy 7)

- Nhưng mà nhiều lúc cũng có chuyện khó chịu lắm. (strategy 8)

Situation 2

Str 1 Str 3 Str 4 Str 5 Str 7 Str 8

35% 30% 5% 5% 10% 15%

As seen from the table, ranking the highest is strategy 1 (thanking) and

following is strategy 3 (seeking agreement). At the bottom of the list, there

are strategy 4 (using joke) and strategy 5 (being optimistic). It turns out

that, when the setting has changed, the manner in each response is also

changed.

E.g.:

- Ờ, thanks. (strategy 1)

- Nhất chí. (strategy 3)

- Người đâu mà tốt bụng hiền lành như Bụt thế này! (Strategy 4)

58 | P a g e

- Ôi may thật. (strategy 5)

- Thật chứ? Giờ tôi biết làm gì đây? (Strategy 7)

- Thế mà em đã không nghĩ tới đấy. Em hứa là sẽ đi xem lại ngay.

(strategy 8)

Situation 3:

Str 1 Str 2 Str 3 Str 4 Str 5 Str 6 Str 7 Str 8

30% 5% 5% 25% 5% 10% 5% 15%

There has been a gradual distribution in choices of expressing satisfaction

in this situation. All of the eight strategies are utilized in this case at a

relatively equal rate, which constitutes the variety of expressions.

E.g.:

- Thanks. (strategy 1)

- Không có anh/ chị là em chết đấy. (strategy 2)

- Ừ vậy thì cầm đi. (strategy 3)

- Có thế chứ! Đàn ông đàn ang sức dài vai rộng là phải thế. (strategy 4)

- Ôi vui ghê. (Strategy 5)

- Cám ơn nhé, tí tao mua cho gói bim bim. (strategy 6)

- Có thật là khuân được không? (strategy 7)

- Anh/ chị thật là tốt. (strategy 8)

d. Colleague

Situation 1:

Str 1 Str 2 Str 3 Str 5 Str 8

60% 10% 5% 5% 20%

59 | P a g e

Once again, strategy 1 plays the dominant role among the choices of

strategies. In the second rank, it is strategy 8 (raising common ground).

Lastly, strategy 3 (seeking agreement) and 5 (being optimistic) share the

final rank. It can be partly explained that, when talking about private life or

family stuff with other colleagues, Vietnamese respondents are still being

very careful and reserved.

E.g.:

- Cám ơn cậu. (strategy 1)

- Cũng bình thường vậy thôi mà. (strategy 2)

- Ừ, cậu nói đúng đấy. (strategy 3)

- Vâng, mình cũng mong là gia đình mình sẽ mãi được hạnh phúc.

(strategy 5)

- Mình cũng không nghĩ nó hạnh phúc đến thế đâu. Cũng có lúc xô

bát xô đũa đấy. (strategy 8)

Situation 2:

Str 1 Str 8

85% 15%

The most striking feature herein is there are only two strategies used in the

situation- at work. Almost all of the informants resort to thanking strategy

and vary their tones based on the intimacy level towards the co-

interactants. Only the minority choose to add more details in their response

and use strategy 8.

E.g.:

- Cám ơn cậu. (strategy 1)

- Tôi sẽ nghĩ lại và làm theo những lời bạn góp ý. (Strategy 8)

60 | P a g e

Situation 3:

Str 1 Str 4 Str 8

65% 5% 30%

Though the context herein is different from the previous one, the majority

of informants still resort to the thanking strategy. Strategy 4 has presented

itself in the list, yet it amounts to just a small number of choices.

E.g.:

- Cám ơn anh/ chị. (strategy 1)

- Hộ đi, mai mình cho phiếu bé ngoan. (strategy 4)

- Cậu thật là tốt. Lần sau mình lại đi cùng cậu nhé. (strategy 8)

e. Boss

Situation 1:

Str 1 Str 2 Str 3 Str 8

60% 10% 10% 20%

As the number one favored strategy in almost any cases, thanking once

again stands at top when the co-interactant is boss. In the second place is

strategy 8 (raising common ground). The thing noticeable herein is the

turn-up of strategy 2 and 3 (understating and seeking agreement). Though

small amounts they contribute, both of the strategies have added up to the

variety of choices in this first situation.

E.g.:

- Dạ, em cảm ơn. (strategy 1)

- Làm sao mà bằng gia đình sếp ạ. (strategy 2)

- Dạ, cháu cũng nghĩ như vậy. (strategy 3)

61 | P a g e

- Vâng, cũng hạnh phúc, song nhiều khi có xung đột đấy ạ.

(strategy 8)

Situation 2:

Str 1 Str 3 Str 4 Str 8

45% 15% 5% 35%

It seems that, in the second situation, the model is duplicated exactly the

same as in the first one. There are also 4 strategies utilized, strategy 1 and 8

play the dominant role. The only thing to differentiate is the replacement of

strategy 2 by strategy 4 (using joke).

E.g.:

- Cám ơn sếp. (strategy 1)

- Vâng, đúng là em đã làm sai ạ. (strategy 3)

- Sếp tinh cú ghê. (strategy 4)

- Cám ơn sếp. Em chưa có nhiều kinh nghiệm lắm nên mong sếp cứ

chỉ bảo them. Em sẽ cố gắng hơn ạ. (Strategy 8)

Situation 3:

Str 1 Str 2 Str 4 Str 5 Str 6 Str 7 Str 8

35% 5% 5% 15% 5% 5% 30%

Without doubt, the results collected from this situation are the most

surprising among the three. In the two previous situations, it seems that the

same model is in display and the third situation is supposed to be alike.

However, the choices herein are diversified and all of the seven strategies

are deployed to express satisfaction.

62 | P a g e

This can be somehow explained by the fact that, the setting of

communication is in public where there is no strain or working atmosphere.

People are inclined to express themselves more and be free in choices of

responding.

E.g.:

- Dạ vâng, em cảm ơn sếp ạ. (strategy 1)

- Không có sếp giúp chắc em kiệt sức vì xách đồ mất. (strategy 2)

- Sếp khỏe như giai mười tám đôi mươi! (Strategy 4)

- Em tốt số lắm nên được sếp giúp đây mà. (Strategy 5)

- Sếp ơi, hôm nào đi cà phê với em nhé. (Strategy 6)

- Dạ thôi ạ, sếp ơi, sếp có gì để em cầm giúp không? (strategy 7)

- Sếp thật là tốt bụng. (Strategy 8)

f. Subordinate

Situation 1:

Str 1 Str 2 Str 3 Str 4

80% 5% 5% 10%

Subordinate is someone working under your control and therefore, when

choosing to reply their compliments on private life, informants tend to play

it safe and sound by the thanking strategy. There are three other strategies

used in addition but most of them get a small share.

E.g.:

- Cám ơn em. (strategy 1)

- Không may mắn như em nghĩ đâu. Chán nản lắm em ạ. (strategy 2)

- Ừ tôi cũng thấy mình may mắn. (strategy 3)

- Ui chuyện, mình mà lị. (strategy 4)

63 | P a g e

Situation 2:

Str 1 Str 3 Str 4 Str 8

40% 40% 5% 15%

The most remarkable feature in this situation is strategy 1 (thanking) is no

longer the one and only No.1. in the list. It has to share the rank with

strategy 3 (seeking agreement). Following is strategy 8 (raising common

ground) and standing at the bottom is strategy 4 (using joke).

E.g.:

- Cám ơn cậu. (strategy 1)

- Ừ phải rồi. Lần sau cứ nói ngay lại với mình nhé. (strategy 3)

- Dốt nhưng còn tốt đấy. (strategy 4)

- Tôi ghi nhận sự đóng góp này. (strategy 8)

Situation 3:

Str 1 Str 3 Str 4 Str 7 Str 8

65% 5% 10% 10% 10%

Coming to this situation, strategy 1 has already come back to be the most

favored strategy utilized by most of the informants. It seems that, no matter

in which cases, towards which co- interactants, thanking is proved to be

best applicable. In the second rank, there are 3 strategies share this place

altogether, they are strategy 4 (using joke), strategy 7 (asking questions)

and strategy 8 (raising common ground). Finally, it is strategy 3 (with only

5 %) that makes up for the last rank.

E.g.:

- Thanks cậu. (strategy 1)

- Vậy thì cậu cầm đi. (strategy 3)

64 | P a g e

- Đây, còn mấy cái nữa này. Xách nhiệt tình đi rồi anh tang lương

cho. (strategy 4)

- Cậu có thực sự xách được không? (strategy 7)

- Cậu thật tốt vì đã giúp mình. (strategy 8)

2.2.3.2.2. Realization of SESs in Vietnamese as seen from informants’

parameters

Table 3: Use of strategies as seen from Vietnamese informants’ parameters Age Gender Marital

status Residence Occupation Acquisition

of FL (s) Informants’ parameters strategy U30 O30 Ma Fe Sing Mar Ru Ur Soc-

ser Tech-sci

Yes No

Str 1 80% 20% 50% 50% 45% 55% 15% 85% 35% 65% 65% 35%

Str 2 45% 55% 30% 70% 40% 60% 70% 30% 60% 40% 20% 80%

Str 3 55% 45% 80% 20% 20% 80% 30% 70% 25% 75% 40% 60%

Str 4 80% 20% 35% 65% 55% 45% 15% 85% 70% 30% 20% 80%

Str 5 75% 25% 85% 15% 80% 20% 60% 40% 35% 65% 45% 55%

Str 6 80% 20% 10% 90% 35% 65% 55% 45% 70% 30% 70% 30%

Str 7 40% 60% 70% 30% 10% 90% 20% 80% 35% 65% 80% 20%

Str 8 45% 55% 35% 65% 20% 80% 30% 70% 30% 70% 90% 10%

Age

Str 1 Str 2 Str 3 Str 4 Str 5 Str 6 Str 7 Str 8Under 30

0

20

40

60

80

Under 30

Over 30

65 | P a g e

Of all the figures recorded in this parameter, it is apparently observed that

most of the informants under the age of 30 resort to strategy 1 (thanking),

strategy 4 (using joke), strategy 5 (being optimistic) and strategy 6 (giving

gift), most of which reflect on the side of positive politeness strategies.

Meanwhile, the older ones seems to be in favor of strategy 8 (raising

common ground) and for some time, strategy 7 (asking question), which go

into more details in the response and with some seriousness.

Gender

As discussed above, strategy 1(thanking) is the most favored strategy in

expressing satisfaction. However, in the light of sex distinction, there is

hardly a difference between male and female. It turns out that, both of the

sex resort to this “short and concise” strategy equally.

In terms of female’s choices, women tend to outweigh men considerably in

strategy 2 (understating), strategy 6 (giving gift) and strategy 8 (raising

common ground).

66 | P a g e

On the other hand, men’s choices outnumber women’s in strategy 3

(seeking agreement), strategy 7 (asking questions).

The only point that can be drawn out is, women are often seen to be more

talkative than men, and hence they are more likely to express their

satisfaction with many more words, more details and in various tone.

Marital status

At the first glance, it can be viewed that in almost any strategies, the

married ones outnumber the single one greatly. The most noticeable case is

in strategy 7 (asking questions), the married informants make up for nearly

all of the choices while leaving a very small amount to the single ones.

There is one reason that can explain for this trend. Comparing to the ones

who already get married and have their own families, the single ones seem

to be lack of experience and understanding in terms of social

communication. They are still reserved in communicating to fully express

their satisfaction. And in some cases, they just try to be optimistic and be

polite.

67 | P a g e

Residence

In terms of the rural respondents, all of the strategies have been utilized but

there are just two strategies (5-being optimistic and 6-giving gift) being

chosen more than the urban ones. Meanwhile, covering from strategy 1 to

eight, the urban ones outnumber the rural greatly.

It might be the case that, the Vietnamese rural informants are not so good

and flexible at using strategies to express their satisfaction. They may have

a variety of choices but they are all at a modest rate. However, when it

comes to the urban dwellers, the situation is completely different. They can

express their satisfaction in an effective way through a diversity of

strategies and swing from one to one easily to suit the context and co-

interactants.

68 | P a g e

Occupation

In this case, both soc-ser and tech-sci informants get a variety of choices

and there is no great disparity between two groups in choices of each

strategy.

As for the soc-ser informants, they outweigh the other one in strategy 2

(understating), strategy 4 (using joke) and strategy 6 (giving gift) while

leaving the remains being outnumbered by tech-sci informants. Needless to

say, it is as what the author has expected. As the soc-sers’ work is dealing

with social affairs, working together with a lot of people, their

communication skills are also more tactful and flexible than the other ones.

That is the reason why, they choose the loose strategies and try to be

positive in their communication with different types of people. Also, that

makes sense for the tech-sci ones to be more favored of thanking, agreeing

or asking questions to express satisfaction towards others.

69 | P a g e

Acquisition of foreign language (s)

Speaking of the informants with acquisition of a foreign language, they

emerge with higher number of choices in strategy 1 (thanking), strategy 6

(giving gift), strategy 7 (asking questions) and strategy 8 (raising common

ground).

In terms of the ones without a foreign language, their favored choices are a

little different. Four strategies that are utilized most are understating,

seeking agreement, using joke and being optimistic.

The most outstanding feature can be seen in the choices of strategy 4. If

most of the non- foreign language informants choose to add joke as their

expression of satisfaction, very few ones with acquisition of foreign

language resort to using joke.

70 | P a g e

2.2.3.3. Similarities and differences

a. Similarities

After a great detailed discussion of strategies used to express satisfaction of

both Vietnamese and American informants, several common points

between the two groups can be deduced as follows.

Though different in cultures and conception, both of the Vietnamese

and American choose strategy 1 (thanking), strategy 8 (raising

common ground) and strategy 3 (seeking agreement) as the most

favorable ones. That can be easily understood as most of those

strategies are short, easy to say and may not include other

implications or mixed message during the communication process.

Particularly, strategy 1 seems to be the number one option for every

respondent (both in Vietnam and the U.S.). It covers a large share in

the total proportion and can be seen in almost any cases.

In contrast, there is also a coincidence when in both of the groups;

very few informants choose strategy 6 to express their satisfaction. It

stands at the bottom of the list with a tiny share and therefore is

regarded as the least favorable strategies among the eight.

Moreover, there are some noticeable similarities in terms of social

factors affecting the choices of strategies:

o Sex : male < female

It has been drawn out from the comparison between the

Vietnamese and American respondents that male’s choices of

strategies are often outnumbered by female’s. This conclusion

exactly stereotypes the concept that, women are more

talkative, sensible and better at expressing their own feelings

in varied ways.

71 | P a g e

o Marital status: single <married

In this case, the majority is in the side of the married people.

Most informants who have already got married and have their

own families tend to be more flexible with their responses and

expressions than the single ones. They choose among a great

variety of strategies and deftly switch from one to one to

achieve the target of communication.

o Residence: rural <urban

Following the model of the two previous points, the rural

dwellers’ choices of strategies are also outweighed by the

urban ones. It turns out that, people living in the city are

somehow better at conveying their satisfaction by verbal

strategies than the ones living in the countryside.

b. Differences

First and foremost, the thing that can be easily seen from the

responses of the two groups is the length of each utterance. As for

American informants, they choose to express with short and brief

words. They hardly make a long utterance which adds up more

details and reveals more about themselves. Otherwise, the long

utterances seem to be popular among responses from Vietnamese

informants.

If in the previous part, the author has discussed that strategy 1 are

mostly utilized by both of the groups, coming to this one, strategy 1

is also the place where some differences can be figured out. In terms

of the American, when resorting to thanking strategy, they just say

“Thanks” or “Thank you” to almost every co-interactants. However,

to the Vietnamese, the thanking strategy can be varied a lot.

72 | P a g e

E.g.:

- Cám ơn cậu.

- Cám ơn anh/ chị rất nhiều.

- Hihi thanks nhé.

Together with saying a thank you, the Vietnamese people also add

their emotions and their respects into it.

Another place where there is a disparity between the Vietnamese and

American is in strategy 4 (Using joke). Though western people are

often thought to be open-minded, positive more carefree than the

easterners, they actually resort very little to using joke strategy as a

way to express satisfaction. Meanwhile, the Vietnamese utilize the

strategy a lot and it also constitutes a great number of choices

among the eight strategies.

In brief, the difference can be observed in the following table:

American Vietnamese

Strategies % Strategies %

Thanking 31.5% Thanking 20.2%

Raising common ground 26.3% Raising common ground 17.9%

Seeking agreement 10.5% Seeking agreement 13.4%

Being optimistic 10.5% Using joke 13.4%

Asking questions 10.5% Understating 10.1%

Using joke 8.8% Asking questions 10.1%

Understating 1.7% Being optimistic 8.9%

Giving gift 1.7%

Most

preferred

Least

preferred Giving gift 5.6%

Table 4: Comparison of preferences of strategy between American and

Vietnamese informants

73 | P a g e

PART C: CONCLUSION

I. Review of major findings

On the theoretical background of speech act, politeness and in the light of

cross-cultural communication, the author has conducted an investigation

into Vietnamese and American informants’ choice of strategies to express

satisfaction. The investigation shows that the two groups of informants

have similarities and differences in cultural and linguistic behavior towards

expressing satisfaction. The differences result from the specific features of

the two languages and cultures in general, and politeness norms and

communication styles in particular. The similarities illustrate that between

the two, there exist some common things, which lay initial foundation for

cross- cultural communication as well as for cultural exchange and

integration.

With the purpose to explore into those intriguing points, the survey

questionnaire is divided into two parts, each of which serves a certain

function to answer for what research questions have raised from the

beginning. The analysis of data collected from the Part 1 of the

questionnaire helps determine the validity of the act of expressing

satisfaction in some particular situations in three main areas of “at home”,

“at work” and “in public”, whereas that of data collected from Part 2 helps

unravel the politeness strategy patterns used in both groups of the

informants. Also, the effects of informants’ status parameters such as age,

gender, marital status, occupation, living area and acquisition of foreign

language(s) are recorded. Below is a review of major findings.

In terms of politeness strategies

74 | P a g e

- Both groups of informants, especially the Vietnamese, tend to be

more precisely polite when expressing satisfaction to intimates but

more negative politeness- oriented towards those with greater social

distance. This finding supports Holmes’ conception that, “Generally,

people express negative politeness more often to those it is

appropriate to keep at a distance, and more often to friends or

potential friends. [..]. In other words, in many contexts, as social

distance increases so does negative politeness”. (Holmes, 1995). This

can be illustrated below:

Intimate Distant

High solidarity Low solidarity

Figure 6: Solidarity- social distance dimension (Holmes)

POSITIVE POLITENESS

NEGATIVE POLITENESS

- Contrary to the differences in geography, culture and lifestyle, both

of the Vietnamese and American informants decide thanking as the

most favorable strategy in expressing satisfaction. With such a short

response and be applicable in almost any situation and to different

co- interactants, the strategy has revealed more about the

communication styles among Vietnamese informants. That is, due to

globalization, many people are somehow affected by the western

cultures. When facing the need of expressing their satisfaction

towards others, they try to avoid going into details, which can

threaten their privacy instead, they give a short and polite thank as a

response.

75 | P a g e

In terms of informants’ status parameters

The results of data analysis show that all investigated status

parameters, namely age, gender, marital status, occupation, residence

and acquisition of foreign language(s) have different impacts upon

both Vietnamese and American informants in their linguistic

politeness behavior. Generally speaking, it has been shown that, both

of the Vietnamese and American informants at older age; of weaker

sex with social occupation appear to be more open and carefree than

ones in the opposite groups.

II. Suggestions for further study

This study is only a partial investigation into the act of expressing

satisfaction to people with different social distances and of different

relative powers. Many dimensions still remain unanswered, of which the

followings would promise to be interesting:

Formality- informality in expressing satisfaction

Directness- indirectness in expressing satisfaction

Paralinguistic factors in expressing satisfaction (intonation, stress,

pitch, etc.)

Despite her best effort, the author is fully aware that short-comings and

mistakes are inevitable and therefore it is she who stands entirely

accountable for those weaknesses. Every constructive comment and

feedback from readers is highly appreciated.

76 | P a g e

BIBLIOGRAPHY

In English:

Austin, J.L. (1962). How to do things with words. New York: Oxford

University Press.

Bach, K.& Harnish, R. (1984). Linguistic communication and speech acts.

England: The MIT Press.

Banks, J.A. & McGee, C. A. (1989). Multicultural education. Needham

Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Bentahila, A. & Davies, E. (1989). Culture and language use: A problem

for language teaching. In RAL, vol. 27/2, 99-112.

Blum- Kulka, J. House & G. Kasper (eds). (1989). Cross- cultural

pragmatics: requests and apologies. Ablex.

Brembeck, W. (1977). Development and teaching of a college course in

intercultural communication. Readings in intercultural communication.

Pittsburgh: SIETAR Publications, University of Pittsburgh.

Canale, M. & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative

approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics.

Celce- Murcia, M. Z. Dornyei & S, Thurrel. (1995). Communicative

competence: A pedagogically motivated model with content specifications.

Issues in Applied Linguistics, 6: 5-35.

Condon, J.C. & Yousef, F.S. (1975). An introduction to Intercultural

communication. 20th ed. Prentice Hall.

Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books.

Green, G.M. (1989). Pragmatics and natural language understanding.

Lawrence Eribaum Associates, Inc.

Homes, J. (1995). Women, men and politeness. London and New York:

Longman.

Hybels, S. & Waver, R.L. (2001). Communicating effectively. Mc Graw-

Hill, Inc.

Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In: J.B. Pride and J.

Holmes (eds) Sociolinguistics, Harmondsworth

Lakeoff, R. (1977). What Can You Do with Words: Politeness, Pragmatics

and Performatives. In Roger, Andy, Wall, Bob and Murphy, John (eds),

Proceedings of the Texas Conference on Performatives, Presuppositions

and Implicatures, 79-106. Arlington, V.A.: Centre for Applied Linguistics.

Leech, G. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. London and New York:

Longman.

Levin, D.R. & Adelman, M.B. (1993). Beyond language- intercultural

communication for English as a second language. Prentice Hall, Inc.

O’ Neil, D. (2010). http://anthro.palomar.edu/culture/culture_2.htm

Richards, J.C. & Schmitdt, R. W. (1983). Language and communication. In

London and New York: Longman.

Richards, J.C., Platt, J. and Flatt. H. (1992). Longman dictionary of

language teaching and applied linguistics (2nd edition). UK: Longman.

Samovar, L.A. (2007). Communicating between cultures. 6th ed. Belmont:

Thomson Wardsworth.

Saville- Troike, M. (1982). The ethnography of communication: An

introduction. New York: Basil Blackwell.

Searle, J.R. (1969). Speech Acts: An essay in the philosophy of language.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Thomas, J. (1995). Meaning in interaction: An introduction to pragmatics.

London and New York: Longman.

Williams, F. (1989). The new communication. Wardsworth Publishing

Company Inc.

Wood, J.T. (2009). Everyday encounters: An introduction to interpersonal

communication. Toronto. Ont: ITP Nelson.

Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

In Vietnamese:

Nguyễn Quang. (2002). Giao tiếp và giao tiếp giao văn hóa. NXB Đại học

Quốc Gia.

Nguyễn Quang. (2004). Giao tiếp nội văn hóa và giao văn hóa. NXB Đại

học Quốc Gia.

Nguyễn Quang. (1998). Intercultural communication. HULIS- VNU.

.

APPENDICES

Hello ^^,

My name is Nguyen Thi Thuy Linh from Hanoi University of Language

and Internation Studies (HULIS), Vietnam National University. I am

working on my B.A Thesis Paper in Cross-cultural communication.

As the one and only research tool, this questionnaire can be said to be the

springboard for my research to move on. Therefore, I am really grateful if

you can spare some time to help me answer the questions in it.

This survey questionnaire is designed for my research into “A Cross-

Cultural Study on Expressing Satisfaction in American and Vietnamese”.

Your assistance in completing the following items is greatly appreciated.

You can be confident that this questionnaire is for research purpose only

and you will not be identified in any discussion of the data.

Thank you very much for your participation.

Appendix 1- Questionnaire for American

• Your age:

Below 20

21-39

40-59

60 and above

• Your gender:

Male

Female

• Your marital status:

Married

Single

• Your occupation: ...........................................................

• Area where you spend most of your time:

Urban

Rural

• Acquisition of language(s) other than your mother tongue?

Excellent Good Fair Poor

I. Do you think it is advisable to express your satisfaction to

someone you know in the following situations?

Please tick ( ) in one of the following 5 columns:

1. means highly advisable

2. means advisable

3. means yes and no

4. means unadvisable

5. means strongly unadvisable

Situations 1 2 3 4 5

At home:

Someone says you are lucky to

have such a happy family

Someone says your child is an

energetic, curious and playful kid

Someone says your child is a

gentle, obedient and well-behaved

kid

Someone says your child has got

good marks at school

Someone says your husband is

such a high income earner

Someone says your husband is

very caring and sharing

Someone says your husband

always listens to you with an open

mind

Someone says your husband is

good-looking and attractive

At work:

Someone compliments on your

good work

Someone helps by taking over your

work when you are unavailable

Someone shows your mistakes in

your work and suggests the

solutions

Someone helps you out when you

are being reprimanded by the boss

You are given a promotion

You are always charged to take the

lead in every project

In public:

Someone enthusiastically helps

you with your heavy shopping bags

Someone gives positive comments

on your attractive appearance

Someone asks for direction in a

polite manner

Someone helps to collect the things

you have dropped on street

II. Situations

Situation 1: (at home)

How would you verbally express your satisfaction to the following

person when someone (another person) says you are lucky to have

such a happy family?

+ S/he is your best friend:

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

+ S/he is your nodding acquaintance:

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

+ S/he is your brother/sister:

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

+ S/he is your colleague:

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

+ S/he is your boss:

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

+ S/he is your subordinate:

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

Situation 2: (at work)

How would you verbally express your satisfaction to the following

person when someone (another person) shows your mistakes in your

work and suggests the solutions

+ S/he is your best friend:

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

+ S/he is your nodding acquaintance:

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

+ S/he is your brother/sister:

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

+ S/he is your colleague:

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

+ S/he is your boss:

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

+ S/he is your subordinate:

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

Situation 3: (in public)

How would you verbally express your satisfaction to the following

person when someone (another person) enthusiastically helps you

with your heavy shopping bags

+ S/he is your best friend:

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

+ S/he is your nodding acquaintance:

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

+ S/he is your brother/sister:

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

+ S/he is your colleague:

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

+ S/he is your boss:

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

+ S/he is your subordinate:

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

THANK YOU KINDLY FOR YOU COOPERATION

Bản câu hỏi khảo sát

Bản câu hỏi khảo sát này được lập nên với mục đích phục vụ cho đề tài

khóa luận tốt nghiệp của tôi, “Bày tỏ sự hài lòng trong tiếng Anh và tiếng

Việt”.

Tôi rất mong nhận được sự giúp đỡ của quý vị bằng việc trả lời những câu

hỏi dưới đây một cách xác thực. Tôi xin đảm bảo nội dung của bản câu hỏi

này được bảo mật tuyệt đối và chỉ được sử dụng cho mục đích nghiên cứu.

Mọi thông tin về người tham gia sẽ không được tiết lộ dưới bất kỳ hình

thức nào.

Xin chân thành cảm ơn!

Hãy đánh dấu ( ) và điền vào chỗ thích hợp

Appendix 2- Questionnaire for Vietnamese

• Tuổi tác:

Dưới 20

21-39

40-59

Trên 60

• Giới tính:

Nam

Nữ

• Tình trạng hôn nhân:

Chưa có gia đình

Đã có gia đình

• Nghề nghiệp:

………………………………………………………………

• Nơi bạn sống lâu nhất:

Thành thị

Nông thôn

• Mức độ thông thạo của ngoại ngữ thứ hai của bạn (ngoài tiếng mẹ

đẻ):

Giỏi Khá Trung bình Yếu

I. Qúy vị có thể hiện sự hài lòng đối với người mà quý vị quen

biết trong các tình huống sau đây không?

Xin quý vị đánh dấu ( ) vào một trong năm cột sau:

1. Cột 1 là Có

2. Cột 2 là Có thể có

3. Cột 3 là Có thể có hoặc là không

4. Cột 4 là Có thể không

5. Cột 5 là Không

Các tình huống 1 2 3 4 5

Trong gia đình:

Ai đó khen bạn thật là may

mắn khi có một gia đình hạnh

phúc

Ai đó nói con bạn là một đứa

trẻ năng động, hiếu kì và ham

chơi

Ai đó nói con bạn là một đứa

trẻ hiền lành, ngoan ngoãn,

biết nghe lời

Ai đó khen con bạn đạt điểm

cao ở trường

Ai đó nói chồng bạn kiếm

được nhiều tiền

Ai đó nói chồng bạn là một

người biết quan tâm và chia

sẻ

Ai đó nói chồng bạn luôn

luôn lắng nghe bạn

Ai đó nói chồng bạn đẹp trai

và cuốn hút

Trong công việc:

Ai đó khen bạn làm việc tốt

Ai đó làm hộ công việc của

bạn khi bạn không thể

Ai đó chỉ ra lỗi sai và đề ra

vài giải pháp trong công việc

cho bạn

Ai đó nói khó cho bạn khi

bạn bị sếp quỏ trách

Bạn được thăng chức

Bạn luôn luôn được/ bị giao

công việc trưởng nhóm trong

các đề án

Ở nơi công cộng:

Ai đó nhiệt tình giúp bạn

mang mấy túi đồ mua sắm

khá nặng

Ai đó khen bạn đẹp

Ai đó hỏi đường với một

cung cách lịch sự

Ai đó giúp bạn nhặt lại những

thứ đồ bạn để rơi trên phố

II. Tình huống

Tình huống thứ nhất: (trong gia đình)

Qúy vị nói như thế nào để bày tỏ sự hài lòng của mình đối với những người

sau đây khi họ nói rằng bạn thật may mắn khi có một gia đình hạnh phúc?

1. Người ấy là bạn thân:

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

2. Người ấy là bạn xã giao:

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

3. Người ấy là anh/ chị/em:

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

4. Người đó là đồng nghiệp:

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

5. Người đó là sếp:

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

6. Người đó là cấp dưới:

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

Tình huống thứ hai: (trong công việc)

Qúy vị nói như thế nào để bày tỏ sự hài lòng của mình đối với những người

sau đây khi họ chỉ ra lỗi sai và đề ra vài giải pháp trong công việc cho bạn?

1. Người ấy là bạn thân:

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

2. Người ấy là bạn xã giao:

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

3. Người ấy là anh/ chị/em:

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

4. Người đó là đồng nghiệp:

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

5. Người đó là sếp:

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

6. Người đó là cấp dưới:

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

Tình huống thứ ba: (ở nơi công cộng)

Qúy vị nói như thế nào để bày tỏ sự hài lòng của mình đối với những người

sau đây khi họ nhiệt tình giúp bạn mang mấy túi đồ mua sắm khá nặng?

1. Người ấy là bạn thân:

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

2. Người ấy là bạn xã giao:

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

3. Người ấy là anh/ chị/em:

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

4. Người đó là đồng nghiệp:

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

5. Người đó là sếp:

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

6. Người đó là cấp dưới:

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

Xin chân thành cảm ơn sự hợp tác của quý vị!