TYLA: Comparing English and Vietnamese request actions (from a polite perspective)

Author name:Nguyen Van Khanh

Thesis title: Comparing English and Vietnamese request actions (from a polite perspective)

Dissertation field: Linguistics

Major: Comparative Linguistics Code: 62 22 02 41

Name of the postgraduate training unit: University of Social Sciences and Humanities - Vietnam National University, Hanoi.

1. Purpose and research objects of the thesis

1.1. Research purpose of the thesis: Our research aims to achieve the basic purpose of discovering similarities and differences in English and Vietnamese idioms in the light of politeness theory (based on the politeness model developed and modified by Leech).

1.2. Thesis research object: Requesting actions (RE) in English and Vietnamese from a politeness perspective.

2. Research methods and techniques used

- Descriptive method

- Pragmatic analysis method

- Comparison method

- Statistical techniques

3. Main results and conclusions

3.1. Main results

3.1.1. Identify a theoretical framework. Specifically, Leech's model or theory of requests and politeness with the Loss-Benefit kernel, leaving the choice open, along with means of reducing the pressure of requests aimed at minimizing the loss for the listener (Hearer = H or Others = O, abbreviated asCOUGH). Other factors are also of particular interest, which have a significant influence not only on determining the politeness of the request within the group of requests, but also on indicating different levels of politeness of the request.

3.1.2. With data of more than 250 English and Vietnamese imperative utterances (searched in English-Vietnamese bilingual literary works), we based on Leech's criteria for determining requests, classified 4 groups of imperative utterances: (1), Imperative utterances are legitimate imperative utterances; (2), Imperative utterances are not legitimate imperative utterances because they do not meet criterion (ii); (3), Imperative utterances are not legitimate imperative utterances when considered in context; and (4), Speech acts in the imperative group are essentially requesting acts (according to context). The author of the thesis has succeeded in identifying legitimate imperative utterances and illegitimate imperative utterances. The author has also discovered changes not only on the structural level but also in the accompanying means to reduce pressure, minimizing the damage to theCOUGHonce S's desire is satisfied.

3.1.3. The author has identified the structure of the request action in English and Vietnamese, including the cerebral part and the peripheral part. The cerebral part is often categorized into direct or indirect actions with convention. It can operate independently or go together with a series of other supporting actions thanks to various types of complements. The peripheral part or the auxiliary part plays the role of reducing the illocutionary force of the LYC. These elements can come before or after the cerebral part. They include diverse elements such as wordsforms of address, names, titles, suggestive elements, giving reasons, indicating hesitation...However, it is worth mentioning that the success of the thesis does not lie in the formal identification, but in the discovery of similarities and differences in the areas that mitigate the illocutionary force of requests. Specifically: (a) there is no equivalence in the illocutionary force of requests when they are examined in bilingual data: in English, an imperative is a command, but in Vietnamese it is a request. The reason is that the accompanying devices in Vietnamese have transformed this command into a request; (b) there are some differences between the two languages ​​related to the pragmatic complements of requests.

3.1.4. The strategies in making requests between the two languages ​​under discussion have also been described, compared, and contrasted in detail and carefully. The results of the comparison allow us to conclude that it is difficult to affirm with certainty that while the British prefer to use indirect requests in the form of questions, the Vietnamese tend to use requests with imperative structures accompanied by diverse pragmatic complements. Our research found that in many cases, especially in administrative and diplomatic contexts, there is no significant difference in the use of requests with interrogative structures between the British and the Vietnamese. In fact, if we pay close attention, we can easily see that in the daily communication of many Vietnamese people today, the use of requests with interrogative structures like the British appears with increasing frequency.

3.1.5. The issue of politeness in LYC between English and Vietnamese (on bilingual corpus) has been described, compared, and contrasted carefully and thoroughly by the author of the thesis. The results of the comparison and contrast show that, in general, there are many points of coincidence with the results related to politeness in LYC in English and Vietnamese that have been published. For example, the British prefer to use negative politeness in LYC (requests) with interrogative structures than LYC with imperative structures and positive politeness, or only politeness 'please', when used, especially with a rising intonation at the end of the sentence, has the potential to make the LYC more polite. LYC when accompanied by modifiers (internal or external) often helps to relieve the pressure of LYC. In English, grammatical devices [mood, aspect, and tense] play a very important role in helping to relieve the pressure of LYC, which means making LYC more polite … However, there are some differences between what is newly discovered and what has been previously published from the perspective ofnegative politeness(negative politeness) andpositive politeness(positive politeness) according to B&L's model of politeness (also note the difference betweennegative politeness, positive politenessandneg-politeness, pos-politeness) when making LYC. That is, it is difficult to overgeneralize (as is often claimed) that Vietnamese people prefer positive politeness while British people prefer negative politeness to make LYC. In fact, in some specific areas, such as in administrative and diplomatic situations, Vietnamese and British people share similar types of LYC. Moreover, our research is based on Leech's model with some differences on many levels (the concept of politeness, the pragmatic factors, and the most important point - the core of politeness LYC; for B&L, face threat affects the politeness level of LYC, but for Leech,realwill be the main cause of the influence of politeness levels in the production of LYC). Therefore, when applying different research models to the same research subjects, it is natural to produce different results. For example, our findings do not support the view that British people prefer to usestrategic courtesyVietnamese people prioritize calendarstandardwhen making a request.

3.1.6. Our research results also reveal some equally interesting points on some aspects related to the Vietnamese's use of lexical means (various types of complements) to convey the politeness that the British express by grammatical means (modality, aspect, and tense) in LYC; or in the British's exploitation of tag questions to increase the tentative level of LYC and the corresponding means that the Vietnamese use to increase the politeness level of LYC.

3.2. Conclusion

Comparing and contrasting English-Vietnamese requesting acts has been of interest and discussed by many previous researchers. However, comparing and contrasting English-Vietnamese requesting acts (from the perspective of politeness) systematically and deeply, this is the first study. Moreover, based on the corpus of LYCs extracted from bilingual literary works, with the theoretical framework of HDYC and Politeness of Leech, the thesis has discovered some new things that help to identify more deeply and comprehensively the issue that the thesis is interested in.

                                                          SUMMARY OF DOCTORAL THESIS

The author's name: NGUYEN VAN KHANH

Thesis title: A contrastive study on requests in English and Vietnamese (in the light of politeness)

Scientific branch of the thesis: Linguistics

Major: Comparative – Contrastive Linguistics Code: 62 22 02 41

The name of postgraduate training institution: VNU University of Social Sciences and Humanities

1. Thesis purpose and subject of the study

1.1. Thesis aims: This research is conducted to find out similarities and differences of requests in English and Vietnamese in the light of politeness theory developed and modified by Leech (1983, 2014).

1.2. The subject of the study:Requests in English and Vietnamese in the light of politeness

2. Research methods

- Descriptive method

- Pragmatics analysis method

- Comparative and contrastive method

- Statistical technique

3. Major results and conclusions

3.1.The major results

3.1.1. Established a theoretical framework for the study. Namely, theories on requests and politeness with its kernel – Cost-Benefit, options together with numerous means to minimize the cost forCOUGHwhich was developed by Leech were chosen. Other factors which heavily influence not only on identifying requests among directives but also on showing different levels of politeness manifested in requests were also received particular attention.

3.1.2. More than 250 English and Vietnamese directives (taken from bilingual English – Vietnamese literature works) were divided into 4 groups based on criteria to identify requests by Leech: (1), Requests proper; (2), Non-requests proper for not having satisfied the criterion ii; 3), Non-requests proper when considered in context; and (4) Utterances expressed directive force turned to be requests if considered through the context. The author successfully identified requests proper and those not proper. The author also found changes not only in structures but also in complementary means to minimize the costsCOUGHonce theS's want is satisfied.

3.1.3. The writer identifies the structure of a request in both English and Vietnamese requests which consists of two parts: the head act and the modification. The head act is often categorized into the direct or conventional indirect act. It can function independently or together with a number of various modifiers. The modification part plays the role of softening the illocutionary force of a request. These elements can stand before or after the head act. They are vocatives, personal names, titles, openers, grounders, hesitators… However, the success of the thesis does not lie in these formal identifications, but the finding of similarities and differences in the above mentioned areas of the request. For example, (a) there is no similarity in terms of the illocutionary force of the bilingual requests when they are compared and contrasted. To be more exact, while in the English language, the directives, by the criteria developed by Leech, are orders but in Vietnamese they are no longer orders anymore; they are perfect requests! The reason is, the Vietnamese complementary means in turn these orders into requests; (b) there are also differences between the two languages ​​in terms of the modifier of the request.

3.1.4. Strategies for requests in English and Vietnamese are also described, compared and contrasted in detail. The results allow to make a remark that, it is not easy to state firmly that English people prefer indirect requests in the form of a question and the Vietnamese favor direct requests in the form of an order together with various pragmatic modifiers. Our research revealed, in many cases, particularly in formal and diplomatic situations, there are not really many differences in the use of requests in the form of question between the English and Vietnamese. Even, if we observe when people make requests in everyday life, it is not difficult to find that more and more Vietnamese use indirect requests exactly like English.

3.1.5. Regarding politeness in requests in English and Vietnamese (based on bilingual data), the author has carefully described, compared and contrasted. In general, the results of the comparison and contrast show that new findings share a lot of similarity with what have been stated in terms of politeness in requests in the two languages. For example, the English people prefer making indirect requests which have interrogative form and negative politeness while the Vietnamese favor direct requests which have imperative form and positive politeness, or politeness marker “please", when being used, especially with rising tone in the end of the sentence, has capability in making a request more polite. Requests can be softened when being complemented by various kinds of internal and external modifiers. In English, grammatical means (moods, aspects, and tenses) play an important role in reducing the imposition derived from the request, equally making the request more polite… However, differences can be detected between new findings and what have been declared by previous researches in terms ofnegativeandpositive politeness(notice also the differences betweennegative, positive politenessandneg-politeness, pos-politeness) in making requests. It is not easy to say in an overgeneralization way that Vietnamese favor positive politeness in making requests and the English prefer negative politeness when doing so. In fact, in certain areas, specifically in official and diplomatic situations… both English and Vietnamese share the same kinds of requests. Moreover, our study was carried out based on Leech model, which is not quite the same as the model developed by B&L in a number of aspects (the concepts of politeness, pragmatic factors, and the most important point – the core of polite request; for B&L, face threatening influence the degree of politeness in a request, but for Leech,costwill be the main reason to affect the level of politeness in asking other(s) to do things). Thus, differences in applying not same research models for the same subject of study seem to be natural. For example, our findings in terms of the levels of politeness both in strategies for requests and modifiers in requests do not support the claim that English preferstrategic politenessand Vietnamese favornormative politenesswhen making requests.

3.1.6. The findings of our research also revealed some more not less interesting points in the aspects of using lexical means (various kinds of modifiers) by Vietnamese to express politeness shown by grammatical means (moods, aspects, and tenses) in English to make requests, or in exploiting tag-questions to increase the level of tentativeness in the act of requesting in English and its Vietnamese corresponding means used in improving politeness in requests.

3.2. Conclusions

Comparing and contrasting requests in English and Vietnamese has been dealt with by many scholars, but comparing and contrasting this speech event in the light of politeness is the first time to be realized. Furthermore, data to be described and analyzed are taken from bilingual literally works together with the help of new models in dealing with the same subject matter, new findings offer more opportunities in understanding requests in English and Vietnamese.