A Comparative Study of Refusal Speech Acts in Chinese and American English
Abstract
Refusals are frequently performed in our daily lives, and the speech act of refusals is one significant research topic in Pragmatics. Based on the speech act theory of Austin (1962) and Searle (1969), with the theoretical frame of the politeness theory put forward by Brown and Levinson, This paper presents a comparative study of speech acts of refusal in Chinese and American English (AE). The results show that refusals vary in directness with situations and cultures, just like other speech acts, yet there are some similarities between Chinese and AE. On the one hand, both languages employ the three directness types, namely the direct refusal speech act, ability of negation and indirect refusal speech act, and prefer indirect refusals. The situational variability of directness in both languages follows a similar trend. On the other hand, Americans are more direct than Chinese and Chinese sincere refusals are considered as face-threatening acts, which call for politeness strategies to minimize the negative effects on the addressee(s). Furthermore, Chinese shows the lower degree of situational variation in the use of the three directness types. From all these evidence, we maintain that the cross-linguistic differences are due to basic differences in cultural values, i.e., Americans value individualism and equality, while Chinese value collectivism and social hierarchy.
Key words: Refusal Speech Act, Chinese-American, Comparison, Cultural Values
Résumé: Dans la vie quotidienne, il nous arrive souvent de refuser les autres. Les actes de discours de refus est aussi une problématique importante dans les recherches de la pragmatique. Selon la théorie des actes de discours d’Austin et de Searle ainsi que le principe de politesse de Brown et de Levinson, l’article présent exécute une étude comparative des actes de discours de refus des Chinois et des Américains. Il existe des points communs entre eux, par exemple, les mêmes caractéristiques des actes de refus : l’utilisation des trois ordres directs dans les actes de discours, à savoir, actes de discours de refus direct, capacité de refus et actes de disours de refus indirect ; la préférence pour les actes de refus indirect ; la tendance d’aliénation semblable du contexte. Mais il se trouve aussi des différences sous l’influence de la culture. Les Américains sont plus directs que les Chinois dans les actes de refus. Les Chinois s’efforcent de miniment l’impact négatif des actes de refus sur l’interlocuteur en utilisant des stratégies de politess, parce que, d’après eux, le refus direct blessent la face de l’autre partie. D’ailleurs, le niveau d’aliénation du contexte du chinois est inférieur à celui de l’anglais américain. Ces écarts sont dûs aux différentes conceptions de la valeur culturelle des deux pays, les Américains préconisent la personnalité et l’égalité alors que les Chinois insistent sur la collectivité et la hiérarchie sociale.
Mots-Clés: actes de discours de refus, Chine et Etats-Unis, comparaison, conception de la valeur
Full Text:
PDFDOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3968/j.css.1923669720070304.014
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c)
Reminder
- How to do online submission to another Journal?
- If you have already registered in Journal A, then how can you submit another article to Journal B? It takes two steps to make it happen:
1. Register yourself in Journal B as an Author
- Find the journal you want to submit to in CATEGORIES, click on “VIEW JOURNAL”, “Online Submissions”, “GO TO LOGIN” and “Edit My Profile”. Check “Author” on the “Edit Profile” page, then “Save”.
2. Submission
Online Submission: http://cscanada.org/index.php/css/submission/wizard
- Go to “User Home”, and click on “Author” under the name of Journal B. You may start a New Submission by clicking on “CLICK HERE”.
- We only use four mailboxes as follows to deal with issues about paper acceptance, payment and submission of electronic versions of our journals to databases: caooc@hotmail.com; office@cscanada.net; ccc@cscanada.net; ccc@cscanada.org
Articles published in Canadian Social Science are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC-BY).
Canadian Social Science Editorial Office
Address: 1020 Bouvier Street, Suite 400, Quebec City, Quebec, G2K 0K9, Canada.
Telephone: 1-514-558 6138
Website: Http://www.cscanada.net; Http://www.cscanada.org
E-mail:caooc@hotmail.com; office@cscanada.net
Copyright © Canadian Academy of Oriental and Occidental Culture