Đang tải... (xem toàn văn)
Hành động ngôn ngữ trách trong tiếng Việt và việc sử dụng của giáo viên ở môi trường sư phạm.Hành động ngôn ngữ trách trong tiếng Việt và việc sử dụng của giáo viên ở môi trường sư phạm.Hành động ngôn ngữ trách trong tiếng Việt và việc sử dụng của giáo viên ở môi trường sư phạm.Hành động ngôn ngữ trách trong tiếng Việt và việc sử dụng của giáo viên ở môi trường sư phạm.Hành động ngôn ngữ trách trong tiếng Việt và việc sử dụng của giáo viên ở môi trường sư phạm.Hành động ngôn ngữ trách trong tiếng Việt và việc sử dụng của giáo viên ở môi trường sư phạm.Hành động ngôn ngữ trách trong tiếng Việt và việc sử dụng của giáo viên ở môi trường sư phạm.Hành động ngôn ngữ trách trong tiếng Việt và việc sử dụng của giáo viên ở môi trường sư phạm.Hành động ngôn ngữ trách trong tiếng Việt và việc sử dụng của giáo viên ở môi trường sư phạm.
MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING HANOI NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION NGUYEN THU HANH REPROACHING ACT IN VIETNAMESE AND TEACHERS’ USING IN PEDAGOGICAL ENVIRONMENT Major: Linguistics Code: 9.22.90.20 SUMMARY OF PHD THESIS IN LINGUISTICS HANOI - 2022 Thesis was completed in Hanoi Advisor: Prof Dr Do Viet Hung Reviewer 1: Prof Dr Nguyen Van Khang Institute of Linguistics Reviewer 2: Assoc Prof Dr Trinh Cam Lan University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vietnam National University Hanoi Reviewer 3: Assoc Prof Dr Tran Kim Phuong Hanoi National University of Education The thesis will be defended in front of the Thesis Judging Committee of University meeting at Hanoi National University of Education on … hour… date… 2022 The thesis can be found at the library: National Library, Hanoi or the Library of Hanoi National University of Education LIST OF RESEARCH WORKS OF THE AUTHOR Nguyen Thu Hanh (2020), Indirect reproaching act in Vietnamese, HNUE Journal of science, Social Sciences, 2020, Volume 65, Issue 8, pp 119-128 Nguyen Thu Hanh (2020), Teachers’ reproach in cases students made mistakes, Hnue Journal of science, Educational Sciences, 2020, Volume 65, Issue 12, pp 53-63 Nguyen Thu Hanh (2022), Teachers’ direct reproaching act, Linguistics, Vol.3 - 2022, pp.56-61 PREAMBLE Reason for choosing research topic We choose the research topic “Reproaching act in Vietnamese and teachers’ using in pedagogical environment” for the following reasons: Firstly, when a person makes a mistake, the person with related rights, obligations or obligations, can react by some speech acts such as: reminding, explaining, advising, suggesting, belittling, reproaching, scolding, criticizing, Among the nagative speech acts which aim at others’ mistake, the reproaching act might bring the relaxed feeling and mitigate the face-threatening level than belittling, scolding, criticizing, critiquing, etc Second, the reproaching is an act that threatens the face of the listener (H), occurs regularly in daily communication surroundings, include communication between teachers and students at schools When being used in a negative way, reproaching will threaten the face of the communication participants, violate politeness standards, and affect interpersonal relationships and vice versa So study of reproaching act as a perspective is necessary in order to find out the manners of performing it in positive and negative sides, and to put forward the polited using signs and avoiding the negative Third, in recent years, the Ministry of Education and Training has had programs to enhance the values that bring happiness to students and teachers In 2019, Circular No: 06/2019/TT-BGDĐT is issued, stipulating the Code of Conduct in schools Clause 1, Article prescribes how to behave with learners, including behavior in language: “Behavior to learners: Standard language, easy to understand, praise or criticize appropriate to the audience and the situation; exemplary, tolerant, responsible, loving; respecting differences, treating fairly, advising, listening and motivating and encouraging learners;…” Therefore, the study of reproaching acts contributes to teachers' identification and use of language in an appropriate way more practical Fourth, the study provides insights into the act of contributing to the research and teaching of Vietnamese language activities Research purpose and tasks 2.1 Research purposes Fingding out the characteristics of the reproaching act in Vietnamese, typical in using the reproaching act of teachers in the pedagogical environment Then, make recommendations on how to use reproach in positive ways, avoiding negative ones 2.2 Research tasks Overview of the research cases on the theory of speech act, politeness, and the studies on reproaching act; Collecting research data about reproaching acts from groups of users: teachers, characters in Vietnamese literary works and dramas (abbreviated as NV), and users in everyday conversations in any situations (abbreviated as NDHH); Processing research materials; Statistics, classification and analysis of corpus sources to find out the characteristics of the reproaching act in Vietnamese; Synthesize, analyze, compare statistics and point out the characteristics of the reproaching that teachers use in cases students made mistakes Research object and scope 3.1 Research object Vietnamese reproaching act used in compositions (Vietnamese literature and TV series), in daily communication and teachers’ reproach in cases students made mistakes in secondary schools and high schools 3.2 Research scope The research scope is reproaching act in Vietnamese; and teachers’ reproach in cases students made mistakes in secondary schools and high schools Research method A number of methods and techniques are used to conduct research such as: analytical method, descriptive method; technique of collecting research data; technique of statistics, classification; technique of comparison Scientific contributions of the thesis - In terms of theory, the thesis has built the concept of reproaching act, the using conditions of reproaching act, performative expressions of the reproaching and typical models of the reproaching act in Vietnamese - In practical terms, the results of the research are contributed some politeness ways, positive and negative sides in using the reproaching act in order to achieve in effective communication Research results can also be applied in everyday communication and between teachers and students when students made mistakes, contributing to the polite communication in the school environment Besides, the researches on the structure, characteristics, types of reproach, and especially the corpus collected from the teacher's speech of the thesis can become a source of research and learning materials on pragmatics and Vietnamese speech act New points of the thesis The act of reproaching in Vietnamese was first collected from corpus sources in different contexts, and was studied for the first time in the communication between teachers and students in case students made mistakes Structure of the thesis The main structure of the thesis consists of chapters: Chapter 1: Overview of research issue and theoretical basis Chapter 2: Reproaching act in Vietnamese Chapter 3: Teachers’ reproaching act in pedagogical environment CHAPTER OVERVIEW OF RESEARCH ISSUE AND THEORETICAL BASIS 1.1 OVERVIEW OF RESEARCH ISSUE 1.1.1 Studies on the theory of speech acts Austin, J L (1962) was the first to study, mention and distinguish some core concepts related to speech act such as: performative utterance; performative expression; performative verb,…; He distinguished speech acts into: locutionary act, perlocutionary act and illocutionary act Within these acts, the illocutionary act is the research center of pragmatics He also indentified illocutionary verbs into five categories: Verdictives, Exercitives, Commissives, Expositives, Behabitives Searle, J R (1969, 1975) developed criteria to classify speech acts into fives classes different from Austin: Representatives, Directives, Commissives, Expressive, Declartion; And he also introduced the concept of indirect speech act Bach, K and Harnish, R M (1979), A Wierzbicka (1987) have all made remarkable studies on the classification of speech acts Nguyen Duc Dan (1998) introduced some basic contents of pragmatics Do Huu Chau (2001) also introduced, explained and pointed out the basic issues of pragmatics theory, and at the same time clarified the corresponding issues in Vietnamese Nguyen Thien Giap (2020) summarizes the theory of speech act with lean analysis, refinement and flexible chaining between knowledge of grammar, semantics, and pragmatics 1.1.2 Applied studies on the theory of speech act The applied studies are quite diverse in the world and in Vietnam, based on the speech act theory, conversation analysis theory, discourse analysis theory and oliteness theory, etc * The speech acts that are interested in researching in English can be found such as: Request, suggestion, complaint, compliment/praise, disagreeing, invitation, reproach, refusal, criticism, apology, etc * In Vietnam, the research on applying the theory of speech acts in the country mainly focuses on master theses, doctoral theses and scientific articles Briefly, it can be seen that the speech acts in Vietnamese have been studied according to the following: Study the group of performative verbs; Study an act in dialogue pairs or exchange answer pairs; Studying an act in speech events; Studying speech acts in literary works; Studying an act in Vietnamese in comparison with another language; Doing research on a speech act At the same time, many speech acts have also been studied in relation to issues of politeness, gender, communication culture, regional characteristics, and communication between teachers and students, etc 1.1.3 Studies on reproaching act, some acts in the Expressive class, and speech acts of teachers at school 1.1.3.1 Studies on reproaching act Compared with other acts, the act of reproaching has not been studied much The act of reproach was studied by: Dang Thi Mai Hong (2001) with the topic The act of reproach in the folk songs of Quang Binh; Nguyen Thu Hanh (2004) with the reproach and reproaching event; Phan Thi Viet Anh (2009) with the topic of Vietnamese people's reproaching act in lyrical folk songs; P Margutti (2011) Teachers’ reproaches and managing discipline in the classroom: When teachers tell students what they “wrong” 1.1.3.2 Studies on group acts in the Expressive class Some acts in the same class of expressions with reproaching such as belittling, scolding, criticizing should be considered (Particularly scolding is not studied independently, only mentioned when studying the act of criticizing and belittling) The belittling act was studied by Nguyen Thi Hoang Yen, (2000, 2006); Tran Kim Hang, (2009) The scolding act was studied by: Nguyen, T T M (2005, 2008, 2017); N S Lee (2009); Z M Don and A Izadi (2013); Y Chen and V Rau (2015); Truong Van Dinh (2015); C Tang (2016) 1.1.3.3 Studies on speech acts of teachers at school There are studies by: Hyland, F and Hyland, K (2001); Chen, I J (2017); Vu Thi Thanh Huong (2003, 2004, 2005, 2014); Hughes, M and Westgate, D (1998); Bui Ngoc Anh (2002); Dao Tan (2002); Tran Thi Phuong (2015) The studies summarized above all have survey subjects (associated with the use of an act) and research objects, and apply different research theories that are different from our thesis topic 1.2 THEORETICAL BASIS 1.2.1 Theory of speech act 1.2.1.1 Speech act and speech act classification a Speech act Austin (1962) argues that speech act is an act of language performed when speaking Speech acts divided into: locutionary act, perlocutionary act and illocutionary act The illocutionary act is the research object of pragmatics When an illocutionary act is performed, it will change the obligations and interests of the communication participants compared to themselves in previous, constrainting S and H in the exchange - response relationship The illocutionary act has a illocutionary point, illocutionary force, is conventional, and institutional b Classification of speech acts Austin categorized illocutionary verbs into five categories: Verdictives, Exercitives, Commissives, Expositives, Behabitives However, his classification has certain limitations Searle (1969, 1975) pointed out the inadequacy in Austin's classification and then established 12 criteria to classify illocutionary acts into five large categories: Representatives, Directives, Commissives, Expressive, Declartion Bach and Harnish (1979) employed Searle's classification criteria, except direction of fit between words and the world They replaced by S's psychological state criterion, and identified six classes: Constatives, Directives, Commissives, Acknowledgements, Effectives, Verdictives Classify the speech acts of Austin, Searle, Bach and Harnish in the table below (see Lamarque, P V (1997), p.450 for an extended table of Allan K.) Austin Searle Bach Harnish Expositives Representatives or Assertives Assertives Commissives Commissives Commissives Behabitives Expressives Acknowledgments Exercitives Directives Directives Verdictives Declarations Verdictives Effectives Table 1.1 Classification of speech acts by Austin, Searle, Bach and Harnish - Wierzbicka collects 270 speech act verbs in English and divides them into 37 groups, on the basis of groups having similar meanings The act of reproach study in our thesis belongs to the category of Austin’s Behabitives, Searle's Expressive class and Bach and Harnish's Acknowledgments class, and Wierzbicka's classification of The reproach group 1.2.1.2 Performative utterance, performative expression and performative verb a Performative utterance According to Do Huu Chau (2001) performative utterances are extensible, modelable performative expressions: performative utterance = (extension) + performative expression + (extension) E.g: Lam Anh, go to the board to correct lesson performative expression Searle argues that the performative expression of many illocutionary acts has the general form F(p) (F is the illocutionary force indicating devices – IFIDs), and (p) is the propositional content) The meaning of the utterance includes the synthesis of two components of meaning: the illocutionary force and the propositional content The illocutionary force is indicated by the IFIDs Researchers all believe that performative utterances include form and content (meaning) The form contains the performative expression of a detail act The content consists: the information content which is conveyed in the PC and the illocutionary force - indicating the speaker's purpose and attitude (expressed through IFIDs) b Performative expression Performative expression is a structure representing an illocutionary act There are two types: the explicit performative that contains the performative verb in the language function and the primary performative or implicit performative which does not contain the performative verb in the language function The illocutionary acts are identified by performative expressions A performative expression is distinguished from another by its IFIDs (i.e order of words/sentence structure; specific words; intonation; relationships between factors in the subject-predicate structure that make up the propositional content in the linguistic expression with the elements of the context; performative verb) 11 morality, behavior, actions and words of teachers, and respectful behavior of Vietnamese students towards teachers from past to present The thesis's point of view on politeness in the school environment: Actively reduce as much as possible value D, P, R of speech acts which ared used in communication with students such as: Avoid using FTAs; Find ways to reduce the face-threatening level of FTAs (such as: using hedge factors, face-flattering factors, face-redressing factors, modelity factors, ; Using appropriate indirect speech acts; Using properly and friendly addressing; Skillful, empathetic, creating sympathy for students; Avoid using impolite manners in communication Conclusion of chapter In this chapter, the thesis has reviewed the research issues in the related research fields of the thesis and presented the theoretical basis selected as the research direction These two contents are the basis for us to determine: the position and scope of our research topic in the general research picture of speech act, the theoretical basis for implementing the research contents CHAPTER REPROACHING ACT IN VIETNAMESE 2.1 REPROACHING 2.1.1 The thesis's view on reproaching act The thesis's view on reproach is considered and drawn from the following aspects: semantics, pragmatics and politeness Reproaching is an act of expressing S's displeasure with H's A action when realizing that A is not right/not good and detrimental to H The expression of S's attitude is to want H to realize A's disadvantage to modify/don't repeat in the future This act shows S's negative evaluation attitude towards H's positive face, and S's desire also infringes on H's negative face Therefore, it is a face-threatening act - FTA * Distinguishing reproaching from belittling, scolding, criticizing The reproaching and belittling, scolding, criticizing acts are distinguished in the following aspects: Lexical meaning; Propositional content and the object of reproach and belittle, scold, criticize; The goal of each act and the strength and weakness with which the goal is expressed; Attitude, psychological state of S when performing each act; The benefit of performing each act towards S or H; The interpersonal relationship between S and H and the degree of influence 12 on that relationship when each act is performed; The negative effects of each act on H; Intonation when performing each act; Weighting of polite expression when S performs each act The purpose of the distinction is to clarify the "borderline" of the reproaching with the other speech acts which have the same purpose - hearer’s fault-oriented to express attitudes in the expressions class 2.1.2 Conditions for using reproach (i) Propositional content: exist an action A that H has performed previously; (ii) Preparatory condition: S knows about A and has evidence that A is not true/not good; If S does not perform reproaching, H is not aware that A is not good/wrong and A can lead to adverse consequences for H; (iii) Sincerity condition: S thinks it is necessary to express his displeasure about A in order for H to know; (iv) Essential condition: Aiming for H to realize A is not beneficial and have to adjust/not repeat 2.2 THE PERFORMATIVE EXPRESSIONS OF REPROACHING 2.2.1 The explicit performative expression of reproaching S + Vreproach + H + Propositional content The general structure explicit performative expression of reproach: Within the factors of explicit performative expression of reproach, the V (reproach) rarely occurs Eg: … And there is one thing that you, the thing is partly about the children, but partly I quite reproach you, that is when the first, second, and third time has been informed you need to check… It is noteworthy that there are some of words/phrases/combinations that mark the presence of reproaching act It means in some appropriate contexts, some Vietnamese words/phrases/combinations can contribute to clarifying the illocutionary force of reproaching act, such as: Lại rồi, Lại nữa, Thế chết, Thế mà , Tại sao/Sao… thế?, Thế sao/sao… không…?, … quắt lắm!/quá quắt thật đấy! quá! E.g: I don't talk to you anymore You are too intolerable! 2.2.2 The implicit performative expression of reproaching Most of the offenses listed take the form of a primary performative expression of reproach: H + Propositional content E.g: Said to lend me a book but didn’t give it (Bảo cho mượn sát mà chả thấy đâu) 2.2.3 Set of criteria for identifying reproaching 13 The thesis proposes a set of criteria consisting of criteria to identify reproach: Some types of structured (interrogation and exclamation) and linguistic signs (often appearing in PC reproach: phrase with regretted meaning like might be, it might be, maybe… adverb expressing unintelligible towards H’s unworthy error such as: … why, why not…, or expressing reproach such as: how, how do…; negative words like no, not yet; adverbs expressing continuous, repeating states such as: again, still, still not…); PC is action A that is not right/wrong; The benefits of action towards H; S’s attitude when expressing dissatisfaction about A, wants to: draw attention so that H should pay attention to S’s opinion and let H realize that he should not have done A, but need to adjust A; The intonation when speaking can be raised, accented but not harsh; Communication context 2.3 INDIRECT REPROACH Of the 1380 utterances containing reproaching surveyed, a total of 904 times reproach appeared in indirect form, more than 65,5% of the total number of act This also proves that indirect reproach is preferred to direct reproach 2.3.1 Indirect reproaching is performed through the Directives According to the statistics of Directives class, there are 10 acts used to perform indirect reproaching act such as: asking, reminding, requesting, warning, controlling, commenting, calling, suggesting, persuading, This group accounted for 440 time, is 48,67% In which, the act of asking has the most frequency with 31,75% of all state activities used to carry out indirect reproach Reminding, commenting, requesting are also often used E.g: Why did you go away when I sometimes visited you, Huong? Or you think I am not deserved? 2.3.2 Indirect reproaching is performed through the Expressive According to statistics, there are 13 acts in the Expression class that can perform indirect reproaching act: complaining, criticizing, sarcasming, ridiculing, exclaiming, ) This group is the second largest, occuring 285 times, accounting for 31,53% In which, the act of complaining has the most frequency of use, accounting for 6,31% of the acts that used to perform indirect reproaching act E.g: Besides, if both of you just think that I and Bao are going there to dark things, then that's your dark mind 2.3.3 Indirect reproaching is performed through the Representatives 14 In the Representatives class, there are 13 acts that can cause indirect reproach These are actions: narrating, affirming, describing, explaining, announcing, commenting, arguing,… This class occurs for the smallest number with 177 times, accounting for 20.7% In which, reporting and affirming have the most frequency of use with 4,64% 4,42% are used to perform indirect reproaching act E.g: Whenever our class can be orderly, we will watch If you are orderly, watch it, if not, stop The above statement is announcing act, that directed the student to the information: if the class is in order, then watch it (i.e continue to listen to the teacher's lecture) otherwise stop The teacher hid his displeasure at the student's disorderly behavior in class under the guise of an announcement Among the 38 acts in the three groups above, there are some acts when being used to carry out indirect reproach, which have the effect of reducing the negative level of reproaching (describing, announcing, reporting, commenting, ), but there are also acts that increase the level of negativity (criticising, sarcasming, warning, ) So the application should be exploited for those that have the ability to reduce the negative level of reproaching act 2.4 REPROACHING UTTERANCE AND RELATED COMPONENTS 2.4.1 The reproaching utterance has an extension of dressing elements The dressing element in the reproach statement usually appears before the performative expression, which is assumed by proper nouns or address words, with the function of attracting H's attention, preparing for the transmission of the reproaching content E.g: M., M, how many times that I said, M! 2.4.2 The reproaching utterance has an extension of exclamation elements Exclamation elements may appear before or after the performative expression of reproach such as: Oh my God, oh dear, oh, oh snap… The exclamation elements often not participate in the propositional content, but they still represent S’s attitudes The exclamation elements always signify negative meaning, because they express S’s dissatisfaction E.g: Oh my god Mrs Tu shouted loudly - how sick you are but you still go to the hospital gate to buy alcohol 2.4.3 The reproaching utterance has an extension of elements of politeness 2.4.3.1 Hedge factors: Belonging to this group are phrases that are outside of performative expression, which have the responsibility to be explicit and 15 original, and have the function of pushing and blocking before giving performative expression reproaches: H (yes) sympathize / ignore /forgive… then S will say ; Say H forgive, forgive, don't be angry/don't be sad/don't be sad/don't be proud/don't think it's too many words, etc E.g: I told you not to be angry, you know how bad you are? 2.4.3.2 Group of face-flattering factors: usually expressions of apologying, justificating, praising, positive evaluating, given before the reproach, with the aim of appeasing H, giving H a positive attitude to respect E.g: I'm sorry - Thien Ngoc feels offended - I didn't anything to seduce Hoang Quan 2.4.3.3 Group of face-redressing factors: Structures such as: (S) want to be good for H, so (S) said…; or (S) considers/regards H as a child/relative, etc., S said…; or an intimate place S telling the truth was given before S perform the reproaching, in order to compensate for H's face E.g: Considering you as my sister so I said, it was not so charming when you yelled at me like that 2.4.3.4 Modality factors * The group of conjective modality: they are often fictitious words indicating uncertain evaluation such as: seemingly, probably, maybe, etc which signifies S's uncertain assessment about the PC These factors has the effect of mitigating the face-threatening level of reproaching E.g: Seemingly, you didn't tell me all about your fault in class today, right? * The group of modal particles at the end of the sentence: The modal elements that show the polite attitude of S in the reproach include (some of Vietnames modal particles have no equivalent in English): ah, my, okay, yeah, which often appears at the end of a utterance, has the effect of reducing the effectiveness of the reproach, and S's attitude is not too tense so it helps H reduce the feeling of being criticized E.g: Where are you, H? Your study habits is very bad! 2.4.4 Statements with reproaching act associated with other acts Accompanying acts can appear before or after the reproaching act, have two possibilities: have the function of clarifying the meaning, further explaining for the reproaching act or emphasizing the reproaching act; The reproaching complements or enhances the effect of the accompanying act E.g: Dad: Phu, let go home right now, there is something I want to discuss with you Son: What is it that you can’t talk me on the phone, still ask me to go home? My company has a lot of work at the end of the year In the son’s turn-talking, the first clause is the indirect reproaching act, the son shows the son’s reprimind attitude to his father, because of asking him 16 to go home to “discuss job”, can’t speak out on the phone The second one is the annoucing act, on one side it explains more information to the reproaching act, on the other side it implies information to his father that it’s difficult for him to go home In short, studying the extended components, which is associated with a reproach utterances, is an attempt to find the values that can modulate the reproaching act towards the politeness or impoliteness direction Conclusion of chapter In chapter 2, the thesis has built a general "picture" of the reproach including: the concept, the structure, and the pragmatic features of the reproaching act, indirect reproaching act, reproaching utterance and extended components that determine the meaning of the utterance CHAPTER TEACHERS’ REPROACHING ACT IN PEDAGOGICAL ENVIRONMENT 3.1 THE SITUATIONS OF MAKING MISTAKES OF STUDENTS AND THE LANGUAGE OF TEACHERS' FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS' MISTAKES 3.1.1 The situation of making mistakes of students The thesis collects 454 situations where students made mistakes, and groups of mistakes are listed: Group 1: Disorderly, talking freely in class This is also the most common mistake students make; Group 2: Unable to answer the knowledge of the lesson content; Group 3: Not paying attention during class time; Group 4: Do not homework, not take notes; Group 5: Do not bring books and school supplies; Group 6: Being late to school; Group 7: Swearing, cheating, dishonesty; Group 8: Disobeying school regulations or class rules 3.1.2 General picture of teachers’ speech acts in cases students made mistakes In 454 situations where students made mistakes, we counted 648 using times of speech acts used by teachers, which could be gathered to 46 acts/group act (*) 3.1.2.1 Speech acts teachers use when students made mistakes: Teachers use many speech acts to communicate with students when they made mistakes There are 46 acts respond to students’ mistakes, mainly in groups: Directives, 17 Expression and Representatives Within the three groups there are the FFAs (complimenting, encouraging, thanking, inviting); FSAs (advising, suggesting, responding, announcing, reporting, ); and there are a few FTAs (criticizing, scolding, reproaching, punishing, shouting, threatening, lamenting, etc) 3.1.2.2 Frequency of using speech acts: The frequency of using an FTA is many times greater than that of an FFA or FSA E.g: Asking 427 times, criticizing 65 times, scolding 60 times, but thanking times, praising times, 3.1.2.3 Number of FTAs in a turn-talking: There is a phenomenon that in a turn-talking teachers use some speech acts, but they are almost FTAs For example: Your hand-writing is getting worse to the end, isn't it T (belittling) Look at your own words, if these two words are different (critiqueing → reproaching) Why can't it be written like this? (voice louder and interrupt) (asking → scold) In the exam if your handwriting is bad like it won't be graded Know it yet (threateneing) 3.1.2.4 FFAs and FSAs used as a strategy: One or more FFAs and FSAs are used in certain error situations: invitation, suggestion, thank are used in group 2; recommendations/suggestions in groups and 9; or praising and encouragement in error groups and In some situations when students give incorrect or incomplete answers, teachers often say thank you, invite students to sit down or invite other students to supplement or suggest and encourage students to give more complete answers, or praise the positive points in their answers There are two differences that govern the way in which the indirect reproaching is performed by each user group, namely: the communication context and the purpose of using the acts 3.2 TEACHERS’ REPROACHING IN CASES STUDENTS MADE MISTAKES 3.2.1 The teacher's reproaching act in relation to the reproaching act of the characters and daily communicated users 3.2.1.1 Similarities and differences between three user groups on how to use reproaching act: All three groups of users tend to use reproaching act in both direct and indirect forms, but different in frequency of use The teacher group used less direct reproaching act than the NV and NDHH group, 114 : 163 : 199, respectively, but used indirect reproach more than the NV and NDHH group, respectively 346 : 297 : 261 18 3.2.1.2 Similarities and differences between user groups in using other speech acts to perform indirect reproaching act: All three groups used 38 acts to create 904 times of indirect reproaching act, but only 14 acts are preferred by all three groups: asking, reminding, complaining, reporting, etc The teacher group uses a variety of actions to create more indirect reproachs, in which asking and prompting are preferred All three groups used a lot of FTAs to perform the reproach, the group of teachers used the most In short, there are two differences that govern the way in which indirect reproach are performed by each group of users, namely: the context of communication and the purpose of using the action For example, the school context and the purpose of using acts to communicate are situations where students made mistakes that satisfy the essential condition Therefore, teachers often use asking and prompting to perform the indirect reproach than the other two groups Or the group of characters is created by the author to convey a certain intention or purpose in certain communication contexts, so the characters often use acts to express attitudes such as: disagreeing, protesting to perform indirect reproach 3.2.2 Teachers’ direct reproaching acts 3.2.2.1 The teacher as a subject of reproaching As the subject of the reproaching act, teacher has the following characteristics: a high position of power (through age and teacher position), addressing (calling and addressing in both polite and impolite way) In some situations, the teacher puts himself in a high power and high position, but his words are not really standard, but insult the students In the remaining situations, the teachers communicate with the students naturally in comfortable language, closing the gap between the teachers and the students 3.2.2.2 Verb of reproach in teachers’ reproaching performative expression The V-reproach is often missing in the teacher's reproaching performative expression But there is a phenomenon that is easily misunderstood that is when students made mistakes, does the teacher use the act of reproach or criticism? Criticism is usually the default act that the teacher will use whenever the student makes a mistake In fact, reproach is commonly used whenever students made mistakes The same mistake and the same context, but if S uses reproaching to convey, the severity of S's attitude 19 towards H will be significantly reduced compared to using criticisming That is, reproaching can "soften" serious mistakes On the other hand, as mentioned, teachers tend to use close language, drawing closer the teacher-student gap So it is appropriate for the reproach act to appear in communication between teachers and students whenever students make mistakes 3.2.2.3 Recipient of the act of reproach – Students The students - the recipient reproaching act - have the following characteristics: has a low communication position, directly bear the teacher's reproach, is threatened positive face; being called by the teacher with both positive and negative dressing forms (some addressing words have no equivalent in English: em, con, bạn, anh, chị, con, ả,… or nouns indicating a proper name, or guy, big brother,) 3.2.2.4 Teacher's reproaching propositional content In the teacher's reproaching propositional content, there are often a number of valuable linguistic signs that mark the presence of direct reproach as follows: Reproaching propositional content accompanied by phrases with the regretted meaning: …should have been ; Reproaching propositional content has words expressing unintelligible towards H’s unworthy error such as: why, why don’t, why not…, why…no…, or expressing reproach such as: how, how do…; Reproaching propositional content has the form of interrogation containing words/pairs of words such as: why, why…so?, why… no…?; Reproaching propositional content has negative words like no, not yet accompanied by adverbs expressing continuous those are consider as students’ mistakes such as: again, still; Using adverbs that express continuous state, repeating in reproaching propositional content in order to confirm the student's mistake, such as: again, still, still not…; ; To refer directly to students' mistakes The linguistic signs that mark the presence of the teacher's direct reproaching act are also formal signs of the direct reproaching in Vietnamese 3.2.3 Teachers’ indirect reproaching acts Teachers use 32 acts belonging to the Directives, Expressive, Representatives class to perform indirect reproach E.g: I’ve just said above but you didn’t didn't understand (critique → reproach) In this case, the 20 teacher critiqued the students for not understanding the lesson, but the critiqueing implies that the student has not focused on the lesson, leading to not understand the lesson Teacher's indirect reproach has the following characteristics: First, of the 32 acts used to effectively carry out the reproach, the teacher only uses a few acts with a lighter face-threatening level than the reproach: asking and remindering; Second, teachers use 13/32 FTAs to perform indirect reproach such as warning, shouting, criticising, complaining, threatening,… but the frequency of use using these actions only accounted for 14.3% Recommendation: Teachers should avoid using acts such as sarcasm, warning, exclamation or shouting to perform indirect reproach 3.3 POLITENESS IN TEACHERS’ REPROACHING UTTERANCES Politeness in the teachers’ reproaching utterances is considered from two sides: the factors that reduce the face-threatening level of the reproach act and the factors that increase the face-threatening level of the reproach act 3.3.1 Vocative 3.3.1.1 Polite addressing: teachers call and speak to students in a friendly manner, without offending the student's face Polite addressing words have the effect of reducing the negative level of teachers' reproach, reducing pressure and tension for students, maintaining a closed relationship between teachers and students 3.3.1.2 Impolite addressing: is when the teacher addresses “tôi” and calls the student as guy, brother, sister, uncle, big brother These words insult the face of students, creating a big gap in the teacher-student relationship Survey data shows that situations in which teachers address politely are more than situations in which teachers address impolitely But teachers still need to avoid negative pronouns 3.3.2 Exclamation words and phrases Exclamation words/phrases in the teachers’ reproaching utterances often show the teacher's dissatisfied and disappointed attitude: Oh my god, oh my god, oh my god, if I die, I'll die like this, etc E.g: Oh my god, what rhetorical is studying here? Because it denotes a negative meaning, it is not recommended to use in the reproaching utterances 3.3.3 Modal particles 21 The modal particles in the teachers’ reproaching utterances contain both positive and negative attitudes According to statistics, there are 18 modal particles used by teachers (most of them has no equivalent in English): (ah), á, ạ, ấy, đây, đấy, đi, hả, nhá, nhé, nhỉ, nhờ, nhở, rồi, thế, E.g: Chưa trả lời mà ngồi xuống à? (Still can't answer but sit down, ah?) In this example, the teacher used asking form to express her dissatisfaction about the student who still didn’t anwser the teacher’s question but sat down, so the students had to anwser the question first The particle "ah" in this utterance indicates the attitude of waiting for the student's feedback and follow-up to that reproach So, this particle denotes a positive attitude 3.3.4 Downtoners The downtoners in the reproach utterances such as: maybe, perhaps, possible, probably, surely, likely, indicate the teacher's uncertain assessment of the accuracy of the students’ mistakes Therefore, they have the effect of mitigating the face-threatening level of the reproaching acts, and are considered an expression of politeness, and are encouraged to use E.g: Chắc nói chuyện nhiều hiểu nói khơng? (Perhaps you talked a lot it means that you could understand the lesson, right?) 3.3.5 Some other polite and impolite expressions 3.3.5.1 Polite expression - When students have not mastered the knowledge of old lessons, teachers have strategies to correct and remind students to standardize their knowledge by giving suggested questions for students to recall Along with that, when commenting on students' answers, teachers praise first and then criticize E.g: À, Nói chung bạn hiểu diễn tả chưa tốt (Ah, yes In general, you understand it, but the description is not very good.) - When students gave the wrong answer, instead of a clean denial, the teacher gave a way of avoiding words, showing respect for students' opinions E.g: Thầy không quan điểm với em việc DXCE hình bình hành (I don't agree with you about the fact that DXCE is a parallelogram here.) - When students made mistakes, the teacher actively asks questions, then advises, even jokes, so that students can focus again instead of reproaching and criticizing 22 - Teachers actively discuss with students privately when they made mistakes, this shows the sense of preserving face for students in front of the class members 3.3.5.2 Impolite expression - Teachers used the strategy of fake politeness, that is, using words that originally meant polite but did not actually mean it E.g: Anh Tr không? Con tên Tr khơng? Cả Vật lí, Cơng nghệ vinh danh (ý nói điểm HS thấp) (Are you Tr? You are Tr, right? You are honored with both Physics and Technology (meaning that this HS score is very low) - Practice impolite white speech E.g: Save the test and get the outline Take it with your hands, not with your mouth - Performing negative impoliteness when intentionally attaching students to the negative aspect openly VD: Come on, it's pretty, it's really pretty, but… I suggest you take it out a bit, don't let the pink face paint it, have you heard? (saying that the female student is having a close relationship with two boys) 3.4 SOME SOLUTIONS AND PROPOSES OF THE THESIS 3.4.1 Solution about using the reproaching act 3.4.1.1 Use the act of reproach instead of some FTAs with strong negative nuances in the Expressives such as: criticizing, criticizing, criticizing, scolding, punishing, shouting, threatening, sarcastic, 3.4.1.2 Use some FSAs to create indirect reproaching acts such as: announce, report, describe, explain 3.4.1.3 Use informal address in the statement 3.4.1.4 Using modal particles a Modal particles expressing positive ideas such as: (ah), á, ạ, ấy, đây, đấy, đi, hả, nhá, nhé, nhỉ, nhờ, nhở, rồi, thế, if used properly, will reduce the negative meaning of the reproach utterance b The downtoners in the reproach utterances such as: maybe, perhaps, possible, probably, surely, likely which effectively reduce the level of certainty in the reproaching propositional content and reduce the facethreatening level of the reproach 3.4.1.5 Using the polite addressing words in the the reproach utterance to show intimacy, to compensate for the face of students 23 3.4.1.6 Using some strategies to save face, compensate for face accompanied with reproach utterance; Using expressions such as praise, positive evaluation before giving reproach; Strategies to encourage and share; Strategies for communicating privately with students about their mistakes; Strategies to reduce "conflict" by being funny or changing the subject abruptly 3.4.1.7 Avoid using signs that increase the level of negativity in the reproach utterance In addition, not use signs that increase the level of negativity, avoid some impolite expressions in the reproach utterance 3.4.2 Solutions to limit students’ mistakes - Teachers guide and work with students to develop a class set of rules, specifying the forms of praise and punishment, and regularly remind students to follow the set rules - Building attractive lesson content, paying attention to teaching methods which suitable for students to attract students to participate in the lesson 3.4.3 Thesis proposal Firstly, from a social perspective, the awareness of teachers' roles and responsibilities through language communication activities must be seriously recognized and implemented by teachers themselves Secondly, from a linguistic perspective, teachers need to be aware of and equipped with knowledge of effective communication strategies in order to both ensure the quality of teaching - learning and ensure respect for students according to the regulations of the Ministry of Education (Regulation No: 06/2019/TT-BGDĐT, 2019) Third, teacher training and cultivating activities from training institutions should be considered on the basis of teachers' limitations Conclusion of chapter The thesis applies the speech act theory, politeness theory and the understanding of reproaching act that is presented in above chapters to consider the reproaching act of teachers On the basis of the presentation of the research results, the thesis has evaluated the positive and negative sides in using the teachers’ reproaching acts, and then providing solutions and suggestions to use the reproaching act effectively 24 CONCLUSION The thesis applied the speech act theory, politeness theory to carry out the research tasks and gave the following summary results: On the basis of overview of research issue in Vietnam and abroad the thesis has established its own research scope The thesis has built the concept of the reproaching act based on semantics, pragmatics and politeness; determine the conditions for taking action; provide the explicit and implicit performative expression of reproaching, and some formal signs to recognize reproaching act; develop a set of criteria to identify reproaching act; established grounds for identifying indirect reproaching act; shows the extended components that are closely related to politeness in the reproaching utterances The thesis researched and showed ways to use positive and negative reproachs These are the basis for making suggestions for use When researching about indirect reproaching acts, 38 acts have been counted belonging to the groups (according to Searle's classification) of Expressive, Directives, Representatives, Commissives that can be used to perform the illocutionary force of reproaching act Among those 38 acts, there are acts in the group of FTAs, FSAs and FFAs that can increase or decrease the level of face threat to the communicating parties Research on teacher's reproach act in cases students made mistakes are shown: diverse in types of both direct and indirect forms, there are expressions of politeness and impoliteness when using, there are differences governed by the context of communication and the intended using in the pedagogical environment The signs of politeness and impoliteness in the teacher's reproach utterances are pointed out, that become the basis for giving suggestions to use the act effectively and ensure politeness in communication The thesis proposes some solutions related to the use of reproach politely and pedagogical issues The thesis gave proposes corresponding to the research contents, emphasizing on three subjects: Individual teachers need to improve their sense of communication based on the Circular No: 06/2019/ TT-BGDDT on Code of Conduct in schools and pay attention to improve pragmatic knowledge for better in communication; Teachers training institutions should pay attention to building training content equipped with certain knowledge and skills in language, especially pragmatics; High schools and secondary schools should pay attention to develop plans to foster teachers with pragmatic knowledge to best serve the purposes of education and training ... avoiding words, showing respect for students' opinions E.g: Thầy không quan điểm với em việc DXCE hình bình hành (I don't agree with you about the fact that DXCE is a parallelogram here.) - When... of them has no equivalent in English): (ah), á, ạ, ấy, đây, đấy, đi, hả, nhá, nhé, nhỉ, nhờ, nhở, rồi, thế, E.g: Chưa trả lời mà ngồi xuống à? (Still can't answer but sit down, ah?) In this... Solution about using the reproaching act 3.4.1.1 Use the act of reproach instead of some FTAs with strong negative nuances in the Expressives such as: criticizing, criticizing, criticizing, scolding,