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

Author's name:Nguyen Van Khanh

Thesis title: Comparing English-Vietnamese requests and 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 scope of the thesis

1.1. Research Objectives of the Thesis: Our research aims to achieve the basic objective of identifying similarities and differences in English and Vietnamese politeness in light of politeness theory (based on the politeness model developed and modified by Leech).

1.2. Research subject of the thesis: Request actions in English and Vietnamese from a polite perspective.

2. Research methods and techniques used

- Descriptive method

- Pragmatic analysis method

- Comparative method

- Statistical techniques

3. Main results and conclusions

3.1. Main results

3.1.1. A theoretical framework has been established. Specifically, Leech's model or theory of requests and politeness, with its core concept of Benefit-Disadvantage, leaving options open, along with means of reducing the pressure of the request aimed at minimizing harm to the listener (Hearer = H or Others = O, abbreviated as H).COUGHOther factors are also of particular interest, as they have a significant influence not only on determining the politeness of requests within the group of requests, but also on indicating different levels of politeness in the request.

3.1.2. With data comprising over 250 English and Vietnamese imperative statements (found in bilingual English-Vietnamese literary works), we, based on Leech's criteria for identifying requests, classified four groups of imperative speech acts: (1) Imperative utterances that are legitimate imperative speech acts; (2) Imperative utterances that are not legitimate imperative speech acts because they do not meet criterion (ii); (3) Imperative utterances that are not legitimate imperative speech acts when considered in context; and (4) Speech acts in the imperative group that are essentially requesting acts (in context). The author of the thesis successfully identified legitimate and illegitimate request utterances. The author also discovered changes not only in structure but also in accompanying means to reduce pressure and minimize harm to the individual.COUGHonce S's desire is satisfied.

3.1.3. The author has identified the structure of request actions in English and Vietnamese as comprising a brain and a peripheral component. The brain is often categorized into conventional direct or indirect actions. It can operate independently or in conjunction with a series of other supporting actions thanks to various complements. The peripheral component, or auxiliary component, plays a role in mitigating the illocutionary force of the request. These elements can precede or follow the brain. They include diverse elements such as words.Addressing terms, names, titles, suggestive elements, giving reasons, indicating hesitation…However, it is worth noting that the success of the thesis lies not in formal identification, but in the discovery of similarities and differences in areas that mitigate the illocutionary force of requests. Specifically: (a) there is no equivalence of the illocutionary force of requests when considered in bilingual data: in English, a request is a command, but in Vietnamese it is a request. The reason is that the accompanying means 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 for making requests in the two languages ​​under discussion have also been described, compared, and contrasted in detail and thoroughly. The results of this comparison allow us to observe that it is difficult to definitively state that while the English prefer indirect requests in the form of interrogative sentences, Vietnamese lean towards requests with imperative structures accompanied by diverse pragmatic complements. Our research finds that, in many cases, especially in administrative and diplomatic contexts, there is no significant difference in the use of interrogative request structures between the English and Vietnamese. In fact, if one observes carefully, it is easy to see that in the daily communication of many Vietnamese people today, the use of interrogative request structures, similar to those used by the English, is appearing with increasing frequency.

3.1.5. The issue of politeness in LYC requests between English and Vietnamese (using bilingual corpus data) has been carefully and thoroughly described, compared, and contrasted by the thesis author. The results of the comparison and contrast show that, in general, there are many points of overlap with previously published results related to politeness in LYC requests in English and Vietnamese. For example, the English prefer negative politeness in LYC requests with interrogative structures over those with imperative and positive politeness structures, or the politeness indicator 'please', when used, especially with a rising intonation at the end of the sentence, has the potential to make LYC more polite. LYC, when accompanied by complements (internal or external), often helps to alleviate the pressure of LYC. In English, grammatical means [mood, aspect, and tense] play a very important role in helping to reduce the pressure of LYC, meaning making LYC more polite… However, there are some differences between what is newly discovered and what has been previously published from a certain perspective.polite negative(negative politeness) andpolite positive(positive politeness) following the B&L model of courtesy (please also note the difference betweennegative politeness, positive politenessandneg-politeness, pos-politeness) when formulating LYC. That is, it is difficult to generalize too much (as is often stated) that Vietnamese people prefer positive politeness while British people prefer negative politeness when formulating LYC. In reality, in some specific areas, such as in administrative and diplomatic situations, Vietnamese and British people share similar types of LYC. Furthermore, our research is based on Leech's model with some differences on many levels (the concept of politeness, pragmatic factors, and most importantly - the core of polite LYC; for B&L, face-threatening situations affect the level of politeness in LYC, but for Leech,lossThis will be the main factor influencing the levels of politeness in the presentation of LYC. Therefore, when applying different research models to the same research subject, it is natural to obtain different results. For example, our findings do not support the view that the British prefer LYC.strategic courtesyVietnamese people, on the other hand, prioritize schedules.standardwhen making a request.

3.1.6. Our research results also reveal some equally interesting points on several levels related to how Vietnamese speakers use lexical means (various types of complements) to convey the politeness that English speakers express through grammatical means (mode, aspect, and tense) in LYC; or in how English speakers exploit tag questions to increase the probing level of LYC and the corresponding means that Vietnamese speakers use to increase the politeness level of LYC.

3.2. Conclusion

Comparing and contrasting English-Vietnamese request actions has been a subject of interest and discussion among many previous researchers. However, this is the first study to systematically and thoroughly compare and contrast English-Vietnamese request actions (from a polite perspective). Furthermore, based on linguistic data derived from bilingual literary works, and within Leech's theoretical framework of request actions and politeness, the thesis has uncovered several new findings that contribute to a deeper and more comprehensive understanding of the issue at hand.

                                                          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

- Practical analysis method

- Comparative and contrastive method

- Strategic 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. Moreover, 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.