5.1 Summary
Researches in cross-cultural pragmatics, especially the speech act of apology, found behavorial-universality in politeness and speech acts among cultures. Cultural and cross-cultural researches also concluded that different cultural-traits are rooted in individual races. That is also what the study have found. This study provided the results in chapter four and below are the summaried answers to the research questions.
Our first research question investigated the differences between Chinese and English native speakers’ responses to the apology generating situations (the severity of the offense, the likelihood to apologize, difficulty of the apology and self predictions of the acceptability of the apology). The study found similar results with other researches because the universality of apology. However, significant differences between the two cultures, which echoes the common belief of distintive cultural traits, were also found. The Chinese demonstrated the eastern politeness “liamo” in the results (Gu, 1990; Mao,1994). Chinese L1s rated the offenses more severe and the apology more difficult. English L1s also demonstrated western politeness, they were more likely to apologize.
The study’s second reserch question aimed to know how contextual factors such as gender, status and distance affect Chinese L1 vs. English L1 speakers’ perceptions of the apology generating situations. The results vary with different contextual factors. Speaker gender was a significant factor between Chinese L1 male and female only in their likelihood to apologize;
however, speaker gender in English L1s was a significantly factor in rating their likelihood to
apologize, the difficulty of the apolgoy and in apology acceptability ratings. It was also a significant factor between the two cultural groups’likelihood to apologize.
Interlocutors’ gender invoked more differences between cultures and genders. When the interlocutors’ genders differed, both cultural groups differentiated the severity of the offense and the difficulty of the apology. Moreover, the two cultural groups’ likelihood to apologize and the difficulty of the apology differed within male and female interlocutors.
Social status is a significant factor for Chinese L1 speakers only in the likelihood to apologize. It is, however, a significant factor for English L1 speakers in their likelihood and difficlty to apologize and in the acceptability of their apology. As to the differences between the two cultural groups, they only differed in rating their likelihood to apologize to different interlocutors’ status. Chinese L1s were less likely to apologize to interlocutors of all three status (high / equal / low).
Chinese vs. English speakers’ views of social distance were rather different, especially toward friends or acquaintances. The differences existed in their severity of the offense ratings, likelihood to apololize and the acceptability of the apology. In general, it seemed that Chinese L1s do not wish to offend an acquaintance since they considered it more severe and their apology less likely to be accpeted.
The third research question discussed about the influence of interlocutors’ ethnicity. It seemed that ethnicity is not an obvious factor to Chinese speakers in general. However, when we take a closer look regarding the second language exposure of the participants, the results revealed that ethnicity did influenced certain groups of people under certain situations. For example, high exposure group’s and low exposure group’s perceptions of American interlocutors differed when they rated the severity of the offense and their likeihood to apologize. Furthermore, high exposure group’s rating of the difficulty of the apology was different when facing different cultural groups. Low exposure group also noticed cultural
difference in their acceptability of the apology rating. This also answered the research question number five on the influence of exposure to the target language and culture.
The fourth research question asked if language used in the questionnaire affects Chinese EFL learners’ perception responses. The differences revealed in their severity ratings and the ratings on the acceptability of their apology. This was even more obvious between different exposure groups. Moreover, using Chinese L1 or English L2 affected low exposure group’s ratings in the seveirty of the offense and difficulty of the apology ratings. This was also true in the likelihood to apologize for high exposure group. The last research question is on the effects of exposure to the target language which is answered in the above discussions and proved exposure to be a factor affecting judgements on perceptions of offense and apology.
5.2 Implications and Suggestions
The purpose of the study was to provide a perceptual base for interlanguage pragmatic researches that usually emphasize the productions (usually DCT) of the language users. The results demonstrated that percuptual data may be as useful as the classical written data.
Furthermore, two of the factors in this study, ethnicity and langauge, aroused significant results in learners. For example, high and low exposure groups are similar in their backgrounds but differ in their majors or exposures (English vs. Non-English) and their ratings of their perceptions towards Chinese showed significant differences in the likelihood to apologize and the difficulty of their apology. Thus, further researches can make use of this research design or data of the study to discuss further into similar studies.
5.3 Limitation of the Study
The use of perception method rather than production DCT was neglected in the study of pragmatics. The factors concerning language use and ethnicity was an attempt to broaden the themes for completeness in interlanguage pragmatics. However, due to time and space limit, only the initial results were discussed. There was no cross-sectional discussions of two or more factors together. Nor was there much discussions on the relationships between the SRQ perceptions and the DCT productions. Therefore, the study only provided limited discussions and further studies are needed for more indepth discussions and conclusions.
REFERENCES
Aijmer, K. (1996). Conversational Routines in English. London: Longman.
Al-Zumor, A. W. (2003). Apologies in Arabic and English: An inter-language and cross-cultural study. Retrieved January 15, 2006, from
http://www.lboro.ac.uk/departments/ea/politeness/apologiesinarabicandenglish.htm Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Banerjee, J., & Carrell, P. L. (1988). Tuck in your shirt, you squid: Suggestions in ESL.
Language Learning, 38, 313-364.
Bardovi-Harlig, K. and Dörnyei, Z. (1998). Do language learners recognize pragmatic violations? Pragmatic versus grammatical awareness in instructed L2 learning. TESOL Quarterly, 32 (2), 233-262.
Barron, A. (2003). Acquisition in Interlanguage Pragmatics: Learning How To Do Things With Words in A Study Abroad Context. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Beebe, S. A., Beebe, S. J. & Redmond, M. V. (2005). Interpersonal communication: Relating to others. 4th Edition, Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Bergman, M. L. & Kasper, G. (1993). Perception and performance in native and nonnative apology. In G. Kasper & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics (pp. 82-107).
New York: Oxford University Press.
Bharuthram S. (2003). Politeness phenomena in the Hindu sector of the South African Indian English speaking community. Journal of Pragmatics, 35 (10-11), 1523-1544.
Blum-Kulka, S. (1982). Learning how to say what you mean in a second language: A study of the speech act performance of learners of Hebrew as a second language. Applied Linguistics, 3, 29-59.
Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G. (1989). Cross-cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies. Norwood, NJ: Alblex Publishing Corporation.
Blum-Kulka, S. & Olshtain, E. (1984). Request and apologies: Across-cultural study of speech act realization patterns (CCSARP). Applied Linguistics 5(3), 196-213.
Blum-Kulka, S., & Olshtain, E. (1986). Too many words: Length of utterance and pragmatic failure. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 8(2), 165-79.
Bond, M. H. (1991). Beyond the Chinese face. Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.
Boxer, D., & Pickering, L. (1995). Problems in the presentation of speech acts in ELT materials: The case of complaints. ELT Journal, 49, 44-58.
Brown, P. & Levinson, S. (1978) Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. In Goody, E. (ed.) Questions and Politeness: Strategies in Social Interaction (pp56-311).
Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, P. & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage.
Cambridge. University Press, Cambridge.
Cohen, A. D., & Olshtain, E. (1981). Developing a measure of sociocultural competence: The case of apology. Language Learning, 31(1), 113-134.
Cohen, A.D., & Olshtain, E. (1993). The production of speech acts by EFL learners. TESOL Quarterly, 27 (1), 33-56.
Cohen, A. D., Olshtain, E., & Rosenstein, D. S. (1986). Advanced EFL apologies: What remains to be learned. International Journal of the sociology of language 62: 51-74
Corder, S. P. (1981). Error analysis and interlanguage. London: Oxford University Press Coulmas, F. (1981). "Poison to your soul": Thanks and apologies contrastively viewed. In F.
Coulmas (Ed.), Conversational routine: Explorations in standardized communication and prepatterned speech. (pp. 69-91). The Hague: Mouton.
Crystal, D. (1997). English as a global language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Deutschmann, M. (2003). Apologising in British English. University of Ume Sweden.
Retrieved January 15, 2005, from http: //lingo. lancs. ac. uk/devoted/corpora/refrence. htm, 2003.
Du, J.S. (1995). Performance of face-threatening acts in Chinese: Complaining, giving bad news, and disagreeing. In Kasper, G. (Ed.), Pragmatics of Chinese as native and target Language (pp.165-206). Honolulu: University of Hawaii.
Ellis, R. (1994). The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (2003). The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Elwood, K. (2003). An exploration of difficulties concerning illocutionary coding in cross-cultural and interlanguage pragmatics research. (Waseda University) Cultural Studies 23: 171-198
Faerch, C., & Kasper, G. (1989). Internal and external modification in interlanguage request realization. In S. Blum-Kulka, J. House& G. Kasper (Eds.), Cross-cultural Pragmatics:
Requests and Apologies (pp. 221-247). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.
Fraser, B. (1980). On apologizing. In F. Coulmas (Ed.), Conversational routine: Explorations in standardized communication situations and prepatterned speech. (pp. 259-270). The Hague, etc.: Mouton.
Fraser, B. (1981). On apologizing. In F. Coulmas (Ed.), Conversational Routine. The Hague:
Mouton.
Fraser, B. (1990). Perspectives on politeness. Journal of Pragmatics, 14(2), 219-216.
Gao, G. & Ting-Toomey, S. (1998). Communicating effectively with the Chinese. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
García, C. (1989). Disagreeing and requesting by Americans and Venezuelans. Linguistics and Education, 1, 299-322.
Social Science Research Center.
Goffman, E. (1967). Interactional ritual: Essays of face-to-face behavior. New York: Anchor Books.
Goffman, E. (1971). Relations in public: Microstudies of the public order. Harmondsworth:
Penguin.
Grice, P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole, & J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and Semantics (Vol.3): Speech acts (pp. 41-58). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Gries, P. & Peng, K. (2002). Cultural clash: Apologies East and West. Journal of Contemporary China, 11, 173-178.
Gu, Y. (1990). Politeness phenomena in modern Chinese. Journal of Pragmatic, 14, 237-257 Gu, Y. (1992). Politeness, pragmatics and culture. Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and
Research, 4, 10-17. Retrieved June 15, 2006, from
http://ling.cass.cn/dangdai/gu_papers/POLITE-chinese.PDF
Gudykunst, W. B., Matsumoto, Y., Ting-Toomey, S., Nishida, T., Kim, K., & Heyman, S.
(1996). The influence of cultural individualism-collectivism, self construals, and individual values on communication styles across cultures. Human Communication Research, 22, 510-543.
Gudykunst, W. B. (2003). Cross-cultural and intercultural communication. Thousand Oaks , CA : Sage.
Haarmann, H. (1991). Basic aspects of language in human relations: toward a general theoretical framework. Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter
Hill B., Ide S., Ikuta S., Kawasaki A., Ogino T. (1986). Universals of Linguistic Politeness.
Quantitative Evidence from Japanese and American English. Journal of Pragmatics, 36(1):
347-371.
Hofstede, G. (1997). Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. London:
McGraw-Hill.
Holmes, J. (1989). Sex differences and apologies: One aspect of communicative competence.
Applied Linguistics 10, 194-213.
Holmes, J. (1990). Apologies in New Zealand English. Language in Society, 19 (2), 155-99 Holmes, J. (1993). New Zealand Women Are Good to Talk To: An Analysis of Politeness
Strategies in Interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(2): 91-116.
Holmes, J. (1995). Women, Men and Politeness, New York: Longman.
Holmes, J. (1998). Apologies in New Zealand English. In J. Cheshire & P. Trudgill (Eds.), The Sociolinguistics Reader. (pp.201-239). London: Edward Arnold.
House, J. & Kasper, G. (1981). Politeness markers in English and German. In F. Coulmas (Ed.), Conversational routine: Explorations in standardized communication situations and prepatterned speech. (pp. 157-185). New York: Mouton.
House, J. & Kasper, G. (1987). Interlanguage pragmatics: Requesting in a foreign language.
In W. Löscher & R. Schulze (Eds.), Perspectives on language in performance. Festschrift for Werner Hüllen on occasion of his 60th birthday. (pp.1250-1288). Tübingen, West Germany: Narr.
Huang M. C. (2004). The study of Chinese EFL Learners’speech act production of apologies.
(Rep. No. CYUT93-P-003). Taipei, Taiwan: Chaoyang University of Technology, Applied foreign Languages Department.
Ide, S. (1989). Formal forms and discernment: Two neglected aspects of universals of linguistic politeness. Multilingua, 8, 223-248.
Ide, S. et al (1992) "The Concept of Politeness". In: Watts et al (Hrsg.) Politeness in language.
Studies in its history, theory and practice. (Trends in Linguistics Studies and Monographs 59). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 281-297.
Janney, R.W. & Arndt, H. (1993). Universality and relativity in cross-cultural politeness research: A historical perspective. In S. Ide (Ed.), Politeness III: Special issue of
Jiang, W. Q. (2003). A dang dai yu yong xue (contemporary pragmatics). Beijing: Beijing University Press
Kasper, G. (2001). Classroom research on interlanguage pragmatics. In K. R. Rose & G.
Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 33-60). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kasper, G., & Blum-Kulka, S. (1993). Interlanguage pragmatics: An introduction. In S.
Blum-Kulka, & G. Kasper (Eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics (pp. 3-17). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kasper, G., & Dahl, M. (1991). Research methods in interlanguage pragmatics. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13, 213-247.
Kasper, G., & Schmidt, R. W. (1996). Developmental issues in interlanguage pragmatics.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition., 18, 149-169.
Kim, D. (2001). A descriptive analysis of Korean and English apologies with implication for interlanguage pragmatics. Doctoral dissertation, University of Florida.
Kim, D. (2003). What's new in academia: A new research trend Interlanguage Pragmatics in SLA: Focusing on Data Collection Methods. ALAK Newsletter, 17th
Kramer-Moore, D. & Moore, M. (2003). Pardon Me for Breathing: Seven Types of Apology.
et Cetera, 60, 160-169.
Krashen, S. (1997). The comprehension hypothesis: Recent evidence. English Teachers' Journal (Israel), 51, 17-29
Lakoff, R. (1971). If’s, and’s and but’s about conjunction. In C. Fillmore and D.T.
Langendoen (eds.) Studies in linguistic semantics, 114-149. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Leech, G.N. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. London and New York: Longman.
Li, D. (2000). The pragmatics of making requests in the L2 workplace: A case study of language socialization. Canadian Modern Language Review, 57 (1), 58-87.
Liao, C. C., & Bresnahan, M. I. (1996). A contrastive pragmatics study on EL1 English and Mandarin refusal strategies. Language Sciences, 18, 703-727.
Lin, Y. H. (2005). Gender differences in the speech act of complaining in Mandarin Chinese.
Paper presented at AILA 2005 (The 14th World Congress of Applied Linguistics), July 24-29, 2005, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Lin, Yuh-Huey & Shi, Hsiang-Yi. (2006). Interlanguage apology realization— Cross- cultural variations and effect of exposure to the target language. Paper presented at the 5th Pacific Second Language Research Forum (PacSLRF 2006), July, 4-6, Brisbane, Australia.
Lipson, M. (1994): Apologizing in Italian and English. IRAL 32, 19–39.
Liu, S. Z.: Interlanguage pragmatics: the state of the art and its revelation to research in China.
Modern Foreign Languages (Guangzhou), 3: 74~81.
Maeshiba, N., Yoshinaga, N., Kasper, G. & Ross, S. (1996). Transfer and proficiency in interlanguage apologizing. In S. Gass and J. New (Eds.). Speech Acts across Cultures:
Challenge to communication in a second language (pp.155-187). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Mandelbaum, J. (2005). Language and Communication. Retrieved April 6, 2005 from http://find.galegroup.com/gvrl/infomark.do?&type=retrieve&tabID=T001&prodId=GVRL
&docId=CX3402900148&source=gale&userGroupName=gvrl_asia&version=1.0
Mao, L.R. (1994). Beyond politeness theory: Face revisited and renewed. Journal of Pragmatics, 21(5), 451-486.
Matsumoto, Y. (1988). Reexamination of the universality of face Journal of Pragmatics, 12, 403-426.
Mey, J. (2001). Pragmatics: An Introduction. Second edition. Oxford: Blackwell
Mey, J. (2004). Between Culture and Pragmatics: Scylla and Charybdis? The Precarious Condition of Intercultural Pragmatics. In: Intercultural Pragmatics 1(1): 27-48
Obeng, S. G. (1999). Apologies in Akan discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 31, 709-734
Olshtain, Elite and A.D. Cohen (1983). "Apology: a speech act set". In: Nessa Wolfson and E.
Judd (eds.), Sociolinguistics and language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House, pp.
18-35.
Olshtain, E., & Cohen, A. (1989). Speech act behavior across languages. In H. Dechert & M.
Raupach (Eds.), Transfer in language production (pp. 53-68). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Olshtain, E. & Weinbach, L. (1987). Complaints: A study of speech act behavior among native and non-native speakers of Hebrew. In J. Verschueren & M. Bertucelli-Papi (Eds.), The pragmatic perspective (pp. 195-208). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Peirce, C. S. (1960): How To Make Our Ideas Clear. In Charles Hartshorne and Paul Weiss (Eds.), The Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, Vol. 5. (pp. 248-271). Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press (First published in: Popular Science Monthly, vol. 12, January 1878, pp. 286-302).
Pohl, G. (2004). Cross-cultural pragmatic failure and implications for language teaching.
Second Language Learning and Teaching, 4.
Power, C. (2005). Not the Queen’s English. Newsweek International Edition. March 7 issue.
Retrieved April 15, 2006, from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7038031/site/newsweek/
Rintell, E. M., & Mitchell, C. J. (1989). Studying requests and apologies: An inquiry into method. In S. Blum-Kulka, J. House, & G. Kasper (Eds.), Cross-cultural Pragmatics:
Requests and Apologies (pp. 248-272). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Rojo, L. (2005). “Te quería comentar un problemilla… ” The speech act of apologies in Peninsular Spanish: A pilot study. Retrieved May 15, 2006, from http://scholar.google.com.tw/scholar?hl=zh-TW&lr=&q=cache:BC8fHTrQ0WwJ:www.pa nam.edu/dept/modlang/Hiper1Rojo.pdf+%22The+Speech+Act+of+Apologies+in+Peninsul ar+Spanish%22
Ruhil, A. (1998). “I lost the bus: Can you give me a ride home?” Native and nonnative
English speakers’ speech act production and metapragmatic judgments: A study on apology, complaints, and requests. Dissertation Abstract International, 59(08), DAI-A (UMI No.9901766).
Sbisà, M. (1999), The room for negotiation in apologizing : evidence from the Italian speech act of scusarsi. Paper read at the International Conference Pragma99 “Pragmatics and Negotiation”, Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, 13-16 June 1999. Retrieved on March 15, 2006 from http://www.univ.trieste.it/~dipfilo/sbisa/scuspap.html
Scollon, R., & Scollon, S. W. (1995). Intercultural communication: A discourse approach.
Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Searle, J. R. (1975). Indirect speech acts. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics, 3: Speech acts (pp.58-82). New York: Academic Press.
Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 10, 209-231 Shih, X. (2006). An interlanguage study of the speech act of apology made by EFL learners
in Taiwan. Mater’s thesis, National Sun-yat Sen University.
Skjåk, K.K. and Harkness, J.(2003). Data Collection Methods. In: Harkness, Janet; Van de Vijver, Fons; Mohler, Peter Ph. (Hrsg.): Cross-cultural survey methods (pp. 179-193).
Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, S.
Spencer-Oatey, H. (2000). Rapport management: A framework for analysis. In Culturally Speaking: Managing Rapport Through Talk Across Cultures (pp. 11-46). London:
Continuum
Sugimoto, N. (1998). Norms of apology depicted in US American and Japanese literature on manners and etiquette. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 22, 251–276.
Suszczyńska, M. (1999). Apologizing in English, Polish and Hungarian: Different languages,
Takahashi, T., & Beebe, L. (1987). The development of pragmatic competence by Japanese learners of English. JALT Journal, 8, 131-155
Takahashi, S., & Beebe, L. M. (1993). Cross-linguistic influence in the speech act of correction. In G. Kasper & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlanguage Pragmatics (pp. 138-157).
New York: Oxford University Press.
Thomas, J. (1995). Meaning in Interaction: An Introduction to Pragmatics. New York:
Longman.
Triandis, H.C. (1988). Collectivism vs. individualis: A reconceptualization of basic contcept in cross-cultural psychology. In G. Verma & C. Bagley (Eds.), Cross-cultural studies of personality, attitudes, and cognition, (pp 60 – 95). London: Macmillan.
Trosborg, A. (1987). Apology strategies in native/non-natives. Journal of Pragmatics 11:
147-167
Trosborg, A. (1995). Interlanguage Pragmatics: Requests, complaints, and apologies.
NewYork: Mouton de Gruyter.
Vollmer, H. J. & Olshtain, E. (1989). The language of apologies in German. In S. Blum-Kilka, J. House, & G. Kasper (Eds.), Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies (pp.155-173). Norwood, NJ:Ablex.
Wolfson, N. (1989). Perspectives: Sociolinguistics and TESOL. Cambridge: Newbury House.
Yu, M. C. (1997). Interlanguage pragmatics: cross-cultural investigation of the requestive behavior of Chinese learners of English. Unpublished paper, Harvard University, Cambridge.
Yu, M. C. (1999a). Cross-cultural and Interlanguage Pragmatics: Developing Communicative Competence in a Second Language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge.
Yu, M. C. (1999). Universalistic and culture-specific perspectives on variation in the acquisition of pragmatic competence in a second language. Pragmatics, 9(2), 281-312.
pragmatic competence in a second language. Pragmatics 9 (2), 281–312.
Yu, M. C. (2003). On the universality of face: evidence from Chinese compliment response behavior. Journal of Pragmatics 35, 1679-1710
Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
APPENDIX
II. Chinese SRQ + DCT Questions (Order 1)
----低--狀況 3: 你的超級好朋友剛從非洲旅行回來，她和你家的感情很好，因為離開台灣很久 了，所以很想念你們，沒先回家就先來拜訪了，她拿出一個據說有神奇力量的神祕水晶 球，你很喜歡所以接過來看看，一不小心就掉到地上破了。
這個狀況的嚴重程度很 ---高--- 5 4 3 2 1 你會為此道歉的機率很 ---高--- 5 4 3 2 1 ----低--這時你會說：
這種要道歉的情況，對我來說難度很 ---高--- 5 4 3 2 1 這種情況下，我的道歉被接受的機率很 ---高--- 5 4 3 2 1
----低--狀況 4: 你到一家很有名的咖啡廳喝咖啡，正當你一邊看風景，一邊拿起桌上的咖啡時，
不小心翻倒了，咖啡不但燙到站在一旁的小姐，還把她的白外套弄髒了。
不小心翻倒了，咖啡不但燙到站在一旁的小姐，還把她的白外套弄髒了。