Response Differences between DCT and Role Plays for NS-C-EM

For NS-C-EM, Table 9 summarizes the number and percentage frequency differences between DCT and role play of 8 main apology strategies. Similarities as well as

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

NS-C EFL

Percentage of Response

EM/High NEM/Low

differences were found when written and oral data were compared. For both DCT and role play, the overall use of the three most common strategies for NS-C-EM are Direct Apology, Offer of Repair, and Acknowledge Responsibility (Table 9). However, they differed in actual distribution of these three strategies as Figure 5 indicates. On the oral data, the most frequently used strategy was Direct Apology, while on the written data, Offer of Repair was most favored. The result supports the findings in previous studies on apology in that giving a direct apology, acknowledging the responsibilities, and offering repairs have been found to be more commonly used than the other strategies (Bataineh and Bataineh, 2006; Bergman & Kasper, 1993; Cohen & Olshtain, 1981; Holmes, 1990; Olshtain, 1989; Shih, 2006). Since results from both DCT and role play confirmed those in previous studies, DCT and role plays are valid methods for eliciting strategies commonly used by native speakers and non-naitve speakers.

Table 9 Frequency of the eight main apology strategies used by NS-C-EM on DCT

Acknowledge Responsibility 54 0.45 81 1.69

Subtotal 226 1.88 339 7.06

Direct Apology Offer of Repair Acknowledge Responsibility

DCT Role play

Figure 5 Distribution of the three most common strategies on DCT and role play for NS-C-EM

In addition, participants tended to use more Opt Out and Evasive Strategy in face-to-face conversations than in written questionnaire (Figure 6). Some of the

subjects and interlocutors had known each other before participating in roleplays and some of them were good friends. Among those subjects, they have mentioned that their responses would be influenced by the relationship between with the interlocutors.

That is, if the interlocutor was their close friend in real-life then they might be more

“impolite” because they thought that their friend should not be angry and their relationship would not break for the trivial things. As (4.4) shows, the role-players were close friends. In this situation, the apologizer accidentally dropped his classmate’s wedding ring. According to (4.4), the apologizer used two Evasive Strategies and one Opt Out in this situation because he thought that his friend would understand him and their relationship would still be maintained after he broke the social rules.

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

Opt Out Evasive Strategy

DCT Role play

Figure 6 Frequency differences of Opt Out and Evasive Strategy for NS-C-EM

(4.4) Response from role play

Situation 3: One of your classmates is getting married. All of the classmates ask to see her wedding ring. When it’s your turn, you accidentally drop it and can’t find it anywhere.

(1) HM3： ㄟ！借我看一下。借我看一下。

(15) HM3： Yiu la! Yaoshi zhao bu dao de hua, zai qu, aiya! Liaobuqi jiu zai qu

(13) HM3： I still will search that long time (14) HF3： you see how do LA

(12) HM3：Hurry up! Find it!

(13) HF3： I am still looking for it.

(14) HM3： How will you make up for it?

(15) HF3： I’ll find it! If I can’t, I’ll buy you one. That’s all.

(16) HM3： Do you think you can afford it?

(17) HF3： Hey, I’m a rich guy, ok?

The result contradicted findings found in Rintell and Mitchell’s (1989) study which has revealed that both native and non-native speakers tended to employ No Expression of Responsibility more on written questionnaire than in role plays.

However, they did not provide the reason why written task elicited more Opt Out than oral task. Moreover, Harford and Bardovi-Harlig (1992) has specified that written questionnaires allow participants to be less polite than does the face-to-face interaction because of anonymity of the DCT. Beebe and Cummings (1996: 78) also mentioned that subjects appeared to be less polite on DCT because “it wasn’t seen as necessary to express empathy toward a fictional character on paper”. On the other hand, the results of the present study suggest that native speakers of Chinese might perceive written task as a formal activities so they might use more formal language, thus choosing strategies that would sound more polite.

On DCT, only one subject of NS-C-EM used Opt Out strategy and it was only used for one time. This strategy occurred in the situation of ten minutes late for lunch with a male friend, and the sub-strategy chosen was Attacking Someone Else. (4.5) below is the response from DCT data.

(4.5) Strategy of Opt Out: Attacking Someone Else

Situation: Ten minutes late for lunch with a male friend.

NS-C-EM:

你們 在 吃 啦？ 怎麼 不 等 我？

Nimen zai chi la？ Zenme bu deng wo ？ you DUR eat LA how no wait me

‘You are having your lunch? Why don’t you wait for me?’

In role plays, Opt Out appeared throughout the four situations, and was used most frequently in the situation of ten minutes late for lunch with a male friend. And Justification is the most common sub-strategy of Opt Out in the role play for NS-C-EM. (4.6) illustrates that in oral tasks, apologizer provided some arguments in order to persuade the complainer that there was no blame can be attached to him/her.

More examples of Strategy of Opt Out in role plays are provided in (4.7). The results suggest that although Strategy of Opt Out was more commonly used by NS-C-EM in role plays than in DCT, substrategy Justification was most preferred. This implies that instead of attacking the complainer or someone else, or denying their responsibility, native speakers of Chinese tended to give some arguments hoping that their offensive acts can be forgiven.

(4.6) Response from role-play:

Strategy of Opt Out: Justification

Situation 4: Ten minutes late for lunch with a male classmate.

A. 啊吃 飯 時間 就 那 時候。要 不然 你 問 我 室友，我 真得 A chi fan shijian jiu na shihou。Yao buran ni wen wo shiyou，wo zhende 早上 起 來 就 準備 要 出門 了。真得啦！

zaoshang qi lai jiu zhunbei yao chumen le。Zhende la！ 不要 生氣 啦！

Buyao shengqi la！

A eat meal time that moment want otherwise you ask my roommate I real morning rise then prepare want go out LE real DE PRT not want angry PRT

‘That was the meal time. You can ask my roommate. I prepared for going

out this morning! It’s true. Don’t be angry!’

B. ㄟ，我 挑 太陽眼鏡 就 挑 了 十五 分鐘 ㄝ！ 你 看 我 快 Ei，wo tiao taiyangyanjing jiu tiao le shiwu fenzhong e！Ni kan wo kuai 遲到 了， 還 想著 太陽眼鏡！

chidao le，hai xiangzhe taiyangyanjing！

Hey I pick sun glasses just pick LE fifteen minute you look me almost late still think DUR sunglasses

‘Hey, it took me fifteen minutes to pick the sunglasses! You see? I was almost late but still thought of the sunglasses!’

C. 那 你 就 先 吃。幹麻 一定 要 看 到 我的 臉 才 吃 啊！

Na ni jiu xian chi。Ganma yiding yao kan dao wode lian cai chi a！ then you then first eat why must want look arrive I DE face only eat PRT

‘You can eat first. Why do you have to see my face before you eat?’

(4.7) Response from role-play: Strategy of Opt Out A. 我剛沒動啊！

Wo, wo gang mei dong a!

I I just then not move PRT

‘I didn’t move!’

(Explicit denial of responsibility)

B. 開機都還正常。唉唷！真得很不好意思吔！

Kai ji dou hai zhengchang. Yiyiu! Zhen de hen buhaoyisi ye!

Open machine all still normal AIYIU really DE very sorry PRT

‘It still works normally. I’m really sorry.’

(Implicit denial of responsibility)

C. 我，我， 我，我弄完手都沒洗就直接騎過來了。

Wo, wo, wo, wo nong wan shou dou mei xi jiu zhijie qi guolai le.

I I I I do finish hand all not wash then straight ride come LE

‘After finishing it I rode here directly without washing my hands.’

(Justification)

D. ㄟ！在哪啊？妳那那那很小吔！

Ei! Zai na a? Ni na na na hen xiao ye

EI at where A you that that that very small PRT

‘Where is it? It’s very small.’

(Blaming someone/something else)

E. 我正在找了嘛！生什麼氣！一定有的，一定

Wo zheng zai zhao le ma! Sheng sheme qi! Yiding yiu de, yiding I exactly DUR search LE PRT make what anger must have must

有的。

yiu de.

have DE

‘I am looking for it! Don’t go nuts! It must be right around here.’

(Attacking the complainer)