VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POST GRADUATE STUDIES LƯƠNG THANH HỒNG POLITENESS STRATEGIES IN REQUESTS IN THE MOVIE SERIES “HARRY POTT[.]
VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POST- GRADUATE STUDIES LƯƠNG THANH HỒNG POLITENESS STRATEGIES IN REQUESTS IN THE MOVIE SERIES “HARRY POTTER” (Chiến lược Lịch Lời Thỉnh cầu tập phim “Harry Potter”) MINOR M.A THESIS Field: English Linguistics Code: 60.22.15 Hanoi – 2012 VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POST- GRADUATE STUDIES LƯƠNG THANH HỒNG POLITENESS STRATEGIES IN REQUESTS IN THE MOVIE SERIES “HARRY POTTER” (Chiến lược Lịch Lời Thỉnh cầu tập phim “Harry Potter”) MINOR M.A THESIS Field: English Linguistics Code: 60.22.15 Supervisor: Assoc.Prof.Dr Nguyễn Văn Đô ̣ Hanoi – 2012 iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Declaration …………………………………………………………………………… i Acknowledgements ………………………………………………………………… ii Abstract ……………………………………………………………………………… iii Abbreviations ………………………………………………………………………… vi PART 1: INTRODUCTION Rationale ………………………………………………………………………… Aims of the study ………………………………………………………………… Research questions of the study …………………………………………………… Scope of the study ………………………………………………………………… Overview of the movie …………………………………………………………… Methods of the study ……………………………………………………………… Design of the study ……………………………………………………………… PART 2: DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND Speech Acts ………………………………………………………………… 1.1.1 Speech act theory …………………………………………………………… 1.1.2 Speech act of requesting …………………………………………………… Politeness …………………………………………………………………… 1.2.1 Definition of politeness ………………………………………… 1.1 1.2 1.2.2 Social factors affecting politeness strategies …………………… 13 1.2.3 Politeness and indirectness …………………………………………………… 14 1.2.4 Politeness strategies ………………………………………………………… 15 1.2.4.1 Positive politeness strategies ……………………………………………… 16 1.2.4.2 Negative politeness strategies ……………………………………………… 16 1.3 Previous studies on request and politeness strategies …………………………… 16 1.4 Summary ………………………………………………………………………… 18 v CHAPTER 2: POLITENESS STRATEGIES IN REQUESTS IN THE MOVIE SERIES “HARRY POTTER” 2.1 Politeness strategies in requests in the movie series “Harry Potter” …………… 2.2 The frequency of Politeness strategies in Requests in the movie series “Harry Potter” ……………………………………………………………………………… 2.2.1 Sampling process ……………………………………………………………… 19 19 19 2.2.2 The frequency of politeness strategies in requests …………………………… 19 2.2.2.1 Positive politeness strategies ………………………………………………… 20 2.2.2.2 Negative politeness strategies ……………………………………………… 28 2.3 Politeness strategies in requests in the movie series Harry Potter and S-H relationship 2.3.1 Positive politeness strategies and S- H relationships …………… 35 2.3.2 Negative politeness strategies and S- H relationships ………………………… 37 2.4 Summary ………………………………………………………………………… 39 PART 3: CONCLUSION 3.1 Recapitulation ……………………………………………………………… 41 3.2 Implications for teaching politeness strategies in requests ……………………… 42 3.3 Limitations of the study ………………………………………………………… 42 3.4 Suggestions for further research ……………………………………………… 43 REFERENCES vi ABBREVIATIONS FTA: Face Threatening Act H: Hearer/ Addressee S: Speaker/ Addresser S.A: Speech Acts D: Distance P: Power R: Rank of Imposition PPS: Positive Politeness Strategy NPS: Negative Politeness Strategy E.g.: For example M.A.: Master of Arts PART 1: INTRODUCTION Rationale As it can be seen clearly, politeness plays an of great importance role in human daily communication It has a great influence in phenomena, rules and structures of languages Therefore, the effectiveness of communication is affected considerably During the development of civilized society, human beings have been founding standards and values describing appropriate behaviors as well as communicative strategies and language structures which are considered being polite in specific situations and specific cultures There are a number of studies on politeness issue because of its significance in communication However, each researcher has a different point of view For example, Lakoff and Leech study politeness under communicative strategies, Brown and Levinson consider politeness as behaviors saving face Although politeness seems to be quite familiar and very old, in fact it still develops nonstop and actually offers me many interests, which inspires me to carry out a research on such issue However, to achieve politeness in communication, it is necessary to give out suitable politeness strategies for each certain context Thus, the study on politeness as well as politeness strategies is of great importance and essential to enhance the effectiveness of our daily communication Moreover, what are the other reasons why I would like to investigate politeness strategies in requests in the movie series Harry Potter? Firstly, according to many scholars not only is requesting one of the most popular activities in human daily communication but also is the most threatening act to the human face Thus, choosing appropriate politeness strategies when making requests need to be taken into due consideration, which actually brings me good opportunities to research on politeness strategies often used in daily requests Secondly, I choose the requests in the movie series Harry Potter as the data for my study because watching movies is one of my biggest hobbies and offers me much interest Especially, the movie series recently have been the best ones produced by Warner Bros - a very famous movie producer in the United States, so I believe that the reliability of the content quality is much relevant to my study 2 Finally, I would expect the result of my research: Politeness Strategies in Requests in the Movie Series “Harry Potter” will have a great meaning to teaching and learning as well as using politeness strategies in requests appropriately and effectively In addition, it will be much easier for people to choose and employ politeness strategies, which actually offers effectiveness in daily communication Aims of the study To study the performance of positive and negative politeness strategies in the requests by the characters in the three episodes of the movie Harry Potter To study the effects of S-H relationship on the choices of politeness strategies in the requests of the characters in the three episodes of the movie Harry Potter Research questions What are the positive and negative politeness strategies in the requests by the characters in the three episodes of the movie Harry Potter? How does S-H relationship affect the choices of positive and negative politeness strategies in making requests of the characters in the three episodes of the movie Harry Potter? Scope of the study Due to the time and limitation of a minor thesis, it is impossible for me to investigate politeness strategies in requests in all their aspects So, I would like to focus on verbal communication, but other important factors such as non-linguistic factors (facial expression, gestures, eye contact, etc.), paralinguistic factors such as intonation, pause, speed of speech, etc are not taken into consideration in my study Moreover, positive and negative politeness strategies based on the theoretical framework of Brown and Levinson (1987) are under the investigation of all the requests in three episodes: Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, and Harry Potter and the Half- Blood Prince of the movie Harry Potter Overview of the movie The Harry Potter movie series are British- American one based on the Harry Potter novels by the British author J.K Rowling The series are distributed by Warner Bros and consist of eight episodes beginning with Harry Potter and the Philosopher‟s Stone (2001) and culminating with Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows- Part (2011) They are the highest movie series of all- time in inflation unadjusted dollars, with $7.7 billion in worldwide receipts The movie series are also a critical success and noted by audiences for growing visually darker and more mature as each episode was released The movie series revolve around Harry Potter, an orphan who discovers that he is a wizard Wizard ability is inborn, but children are sent to wizarding school to learn the magical skills necessary to succeed in the wizarding world Harry is invited to attend the boarding school called Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry Each movie episode chronicles one year in Harry's life, and most of the events take place at Hogwarts As he struggles through adolescence, Harry learns to overcome many magical, social and emotional hurdles Methods of the study This study employs the Quantitative method which focuses much more on the collection and analysis of numerical data and statistics Counting and measuring are common forms of quantitative methods The result of the research is a number or series of number presented in tables and charts Design of the study The thesis consists of three main parts: PART 1: INTRODUCTION This part of the thesis presents the rationale, aims, research questions, scope, method and design of the study PART 2: DEVELOPMENT This is the nuclear part of the thesis containing two chapters: Chapter 1: Theoretical Background This chapter establishes an overview of the theories on Speech Acts, Speech act of Request and Politeness theory which are the basis for the following analysis in the next chapter Chapter 2: Politeness strategies in requests in the series of movies Harry Potter This chapter studies how the characters in the movie series use the politeness strategies in their requests and how S-H relationship affects their choices of politeness strategies when making requests PART 3: CONCLUSION In this part, the author recapitulates the study, offers implication, limitations and suggestions for further research 5 PART 2: DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 1.1 Speech Acts 1.1.1 Speech act theory Many actions are carried out by using languages during human communication Although they are expressed variously, they are all called speech acts Speech act is one of the most issues that interests researchers most It has been investigated seriously by different theorists such as Austin (1962), Grice (1957, 1975), Hymes (1964), Searle (1969), Levinson (1983), Brown and Yule (1983), Yule (1996), etc so that human communication can be carried out in the most effective way Austin’s theory Speech act theory is originally developed by Austin in his famous book entitled “How to things with words” He presented a new picture of analyzing meaning in relationship among linguistics conventions correlated with words/ sentences, the situation where the speaker actually says something to the hearer, and associated intentions of the speaker Austin (1962) defines speech acts as the actions performed in saying something Actions performed through utterance production are called speech acts such as requesting, apologizing, complaining, promising, etc Speech acts consist of three related acts, namely locutionary act, illocutionary act and perlocutionary act Locutionary act, a basic act of producing a meaningful linguistic expression, includes phonetic acts, phatic acts and rhetic acts Phonetic acts are acts of pronouncing sound, phatic acts are acts of uttering words or sentences in accordance with the phonological and syntactic rules of the language to which they belong, and rhetic acts are one of uttering a sentence with sense and more or less definite reference Illocutionary act is an act performed via the communicative force of an utterance such as requesting, advising, promising, inviting, etc 6 Perlocutionary act is “what we bring about or achieve by saying something such as convincing, persuading, deterring and even, say, surprising or misleading” (1962: 109) Austin also focuses on illocutionary acts where we might find the force of the statement and demonstrate its performative nature He classified illocutionary acts into categories based on performative verbs: Verdictives are typified by the giving of verdict by a jury, arbitrator or umpire (e.g grade, estimate, diagnose) Exercitives are the exercising of power, rights or influence (e.g appoint, order, warn) Commissives refer to the amusing of obligation or giving of an undertaking (e.g promise, undertake) Behabitives relate to attitudes and social behaviors (e.g apologize, compliment, congratulate) Expositives address the clarifying of reasons, arguments or expressing viewpoints (e.g assume, concede, suggest) Searle’s theory According to Searle (1969:24), language is a part of theory of action and speech acts such as promising, threatening, requesting, etc are often performed during human communication There are three different types of speech acts: Utterance acts consist of units of expression such as words and sentences Propositional acts are those matters having to with referring and predicting Illocutionary acts have to with the intents of speakers such as requesting, promising, commanding, etc He also classified illocutionary acts into five clear and useful categories: Representatives: speaker is committed to the truth of a proposition: affirm, conclude, believe, deny, report Directives: speaker tries to get the hearer to something: ask, command, request, insist 7 Commissives: speaker is committed to a course of action: guarantee, pledge, promise, swear, vow Expressives: speaker expresses an attitude about a state of affairs: apologize, congratulate, regret, thank, welcome Declarations: speaker alters the external status or condition of an object or situation, solely by making the utterance: I announce you husband and wife 1.2 The Speech act of Requesting According to Searle (1969: 66), a request is defined as “a directive speech act which counts as an attempt to get H (the hearer) to an act which S (the speaker) wants H to do, and which S believes that H is able to do; and which it is not obvious that H will in the normal course of events or of H‟s own accord.” From this point, it is very clear that the speech act of request consists of three basic elements: the speaker (S), the hearer (H) and the Act itself Thus, in order to make a successful request, it is believed that the hearer is able and willing to the act intended by the speaker Searle (1975: 71) continued to develop Austin‟s notion of felicity condition that holds for a successful speech act by proposing the conditions for requesting as follows: Preparatory condition: H is able to perform A Sincerity condition: S wants H to A Propositional condition: S predicates a future act A of H Essential condition: count as an attempt by S to get H to A In the view of Blum- Kulka et.al (1989), the realization of request can be seen from four aspects: Hearer dominance: Can you open the door? Speaker dominance: Do you think I could borrow your car? Speaker and Hearer dominance: Could we talk now? Impersonal or the use of unspecific agent such as people, anyone, they, etc.: Can anyone help me? Although a request is realized in any perspectives, it possesses similar basic characteristics Firstly, it gives us an idea about the expectations of the S and the H with regard to verbal or non-verbal action (Blum-Kulka et al 1989: 11) Secondly, like other speech acts such as refusal, apology, requesting is inherently face-threatening in that it allows the Hs to interpret it as an intrusive act towards their freedom of action (Brown and Levinson 1978) Thirdly, it indicates the power of the interlocutors: the superior tends to produce more direct requests while the inferior tends to produce more indirect requests Finally, Brown and Levinson 1987 also pointed out that the conventionalized realizations of requests, as well as its frequency, are vivid indicators of whether a society is a positively or negatively oriented society “A positive society” is a society in which speakers‟ need for approval and belonging (in groupness) are emphasized whereas showing of deference and keeping distance are emphasized in “negatively-oriented society” 1.2 Issues of Politeness 1.2.1 Definition of Politeness Politeness is one of the most noticeable issues in the research of intercultural communication and cross-cultural communication of human beings According to the foreword of Gumperz (cited in Brown and Levinson, 1987: xiii), “politeness is basic to the production of social order, and a precondition of human cooperation, so that any theory which provides an understanding of this phenomenon at the same time goes to the foundations of human social life.” During the vast development of linguistics, many researchers have been interested in the field of politeness with various points of view and from different aspects However, according to Nguyen Quang (2004: 10), three main important approaches to politeness are mentioned: Set the ideal standard for polite acts to refer such as Grice Propose the principles of politeness in communication in the form of do‟s and don‟ts like Lakoff, Leech Specify the necessary strategies to encounter Face Threatening Acts (FTAs) in communication as in Brown and Levinson, 1987 Thus, what is the definition of politeness? There is a variety of different points of view Yule (1996: 60) mentioned concept of politeness together with the concept of face: “Politeness, is in an interaction, can be defined as the means employed to show awareness of another person‟s face.” Moreover, politeness is recognized as “the idea of polite social behavior, or etiquette, within a culture.” Specifically, politeness is “a number of different general principles for being polite, in social interaction within a particular culture.” Lakoff (1975:64), who took an attention on politeness from the very beginning, considered politeness as consisting of forms of behaving which have been “developed in societies in order to reduce friction in personal interaction” Politeness is defined as “a system of interpersonal relations designed to facilitate interaction by minimizing the potential for conflict and confrontation inherent in all human interchange” She also pointed out three different rules that a speaker should follow to be polite: Rule 1: Do not impose It is the most formal politeness rule It is appropriately employed when there is difference in power and status between the participants such as between a student and a dean, an employee and a boss A speaker who is considered polite regarding this rule will avoid, or ask permission or apologize for making the addressee anything which he does not want to Rule 2: Offer options It is a more informal politeness rule and appropriate to situations in which the interlocutors have quite equal status and power, but are not socially close such as a businessman and a client Offering options means expressing oneself in such way that one‟s opinion or request can be ignored without being contracted or rejected Rule 3: Encourage feelings of camaraderie The participants are intimate or close friends Leech (1983) formulates a more comprehension framework in comparison with Lakoff‟s rules with a number of maxims which stand in the same relationship to the Politeness principle by Grice (1967) basing on the concepts of “cost” and “benefit” Tact maxim: “minimize the expression of beliefs which imply cost to other; maximize the expression of beliefs which imply benefit to other” 10 Generosity maxim: “minimize the expression of benefit to self; maximize the expression of cost to self” Approbation maxim: “minimize the expression of beliefs which express dispraise of other; maximize the expression of beliefs which express approval of other” Modesty maxim: “minimize the expression of praise of self; maximize the expression of dispraise of self” Agreement maxim: “minimize the expression of disagreement between self and other; maximize the expression of agreement between self and other” Sympathy maxim: “minimize antipathy between self and other; maximize sympathy between self and other” Leech considers the Tact maxim as the most important kind of politeness in the English-speaking societies He believes that his model could be applied universally across cultures But in reality, it might be best applied to English culture where social distance is given higher value, especially in formal situations It shows that it is inappropriate for all situations and societies where social intimacy is highly valued The most influential theory of politeness was originated by Brown and Levinson (1978 and revised in 1987) The significant point of their theory of politeness is the concept of “face” The term “face” in the sense of “reputation”, or “good name” was developed from Goffman‟s concept of “face” (1955) to explain the use of politeness phenomena According to Brown and Levinson (1987:66), face refers to the public self-image that every member (of a society) wants to claim for himself consisting of two related aspects: Negative face: the basic claim to territories, personal preserves, rights to nondistraction, i.e to freedom of action and freedom from imposition Positive face: the positive consistent self-image or personality (crucially including the desire that this self-image be appreciated) In other words, negative face is the need to be independent and positive face is the need to be connected Moreover, face is something that is emotionally invested, and that can be lost, maintained or enhanced, and must be constantly attended to in interaction In general, people 11 cooperate (and assume each other‟s cooperation) in maintaining face in interaction, such cooperation being based on the mutual vulnerability of face That is, normally everyone‟s face depends on everyone else‟s being maintained, and since people can be expected to defend their face if threatened, and in defending their own to threaten others‟ faces, it is in general in every participant‟s best interest to maintain each other‟s face (Brown and Levinson, 1987) Concerned with “positive face” and “negative face”, the concepts of positive and negative politeness are developed According to Yule (1996:69), negative politeness is a face saving act which oriented to the person‟s negative face will tend to show deference, emphasize the importance of the other‟s time or concerns, and even include an apology for the imposition or interruption Brown and Levinson state that “negative politeness is redressive action address to the addressee‟s negative face: his want to have his freedom of action unhindered and his attention unimpeded” (Brown and Levinson, 1987: 129) Thus, negative politeness focuses on individualism and avoids intruding others‟ privacy It is also the most preferred in English culture Unlike negative politeness, positive politeness a face saving act which is concerned with the person‟s positive face will tend to show solidarity, emphasize that both Ss and Hs want the same thing, and that they have a common goal (Yule, 1996:69) According to Brown and Levinson (1987:101), positive politeness is redress directed to the addressee‟s positive face, his perennial desire that his wants should be thought of as desirable They also mentioned four kinds of Face Threatening Acts (FTAs) so that people could respect others‟ face, feelings and avoid FTAs Acts threatening to the hearer‟s negative face by indicating that the speaker does not intend to avoid impeding the hearer‟s freedom of action E.g.: ordering, suggesting, threatening, requesting, promising, etc Acts threatening to the hearer‟s positive face by indicating that the speaker does not care about the addressee‟s feelings and wants E.g.: disapproving, contempting, complaining, criticizing, disagreeing 12 Acts threatening to the speaker‟s negative face E.g accepting an offer, excusing, promising unwillingly Acts threatening to the speaker‟s positive face E.g.: apologizing, confessing Brown and Levinson also point out five macrostrategies that speakers can seek to avoid these above Face Threatening Acts Circumstance determining choice of strategy In the context of the mutual vulnerability of face, the speaker has two choices: he may seek to avoid the FTA (Don‟t the FTA) or decide to Do the FTA The speaker goes on record in doing an act A, if his statement is directly addressed to the hearer Doing an act on record consists of doing it: - without redressive (baldly) - the most clear, unobsecure possible way For example: in requesting, we say “Do it!” - or with redressive action - giving “Face” to the hearer to prevent from the face damage of the FTA with some alternations and additions There are two forms of action which rely on which aspect of face (positive or negative) emphasized On the other hand, the speaker goes off in doing an act of A, if there is “more than one unambiguous attributable intention” or the speaker avoids imposition on the hearer Speaker is usually recommended to use the strategy marked by the employ of metaphor, irony, rhetorical questions, understatements, tautologies and all kinds of hints 13 1.2.2 Social factors affecting politeness strategies Brown and Levinson (1987:15) propose that three sociological factors are crucial in determining the level of politeness which a speaker (S) will use to an addressee (H); they are relative power (P) of H over S, the social distance (D) between S and H, and the ranking of the imposition (R) involving in doing the face- threatening act (FTA) P which is an asymmetric social dimension of relative power is the degree to which H can impose his own plans and his own self-evaluation (face) at the expense of S‟s plans and self-evaluation In general there are two sources of pragmatics, either of which may be authorized and authorized-material control (over economy distribution and physical force) and metaphysical control (over the actions of others, by virtue of metaphysical forces subscribed to by those others) D is a symmetric social dimension of similarity/difference within which S and H stand for the purposes of this act In some situations, D is based on an assessment of the frequency of interaction and the kinds of material or non-material goods (including face) exchanged between S and H (or parties or representing S or H, or for whom S and H are representative) An important part of the assessment of D will usually be measures of social distance based on stable social attributes The reflex of social closeness is, generally, the reciprocal giving and receiving of positive face R is a culturally and situationally defined ranking of impositions by the degree to which they are considered to interfere with an agent‟s wants of self-determination or of approval (his negative and positive face wants) In general, there are probably two such scales or ranks that are identifiable for negative-face FTAs: a ranking of impositions in proportion to the expenditure of services (including the time provision) and good (including non-material goods such as information, regard expression and other face payments) As for positive-face FTA, the ranking of imposition embraces an assessment of the amount of “pain” given to H‟s face, based on the differences between H‟s desired self-image and that presented in FTA Cultural ranking of facets of positive face (like success, niceness, beauty, etc.) can be reranked in specific circumstances, so the negative face rankings Besides, that there are also 14 personal rankings can be explained why some people object to certain kinds of FTAs and some not As it can be seen obviously, all three dimensions P, D, and R have a great contribution to the seriousness of the FTA which will determine the appropriate type of strategy to be used 1.2.3 Politeness and Indirectness The notions of indirectness and politeness play an important role in the negotiation of face during the realization of speech acts In fact, there are many studies on the relationship between politeness and indirectness such as Leech (1983), Brown and Levinson (1987), BlumKulka (1987), LoCastro (2003) Leech (1983) states that “indirect illocutions tend to be more polite because they increase the degree of optionality and because the more indirect an illocution is, the more diminished and tentative its force tends to be.” It means that the degree of politeness depends on the frequency of using more indirect kind of illocution and relates closely to that of optionality speaker gives to the hearers Brown and Levinson show that there is a close relationship between the use of indirect speech acts and politeness The degree of indirectness relates to the degree of face threatening Moreover, negative politeness is more polite than positive politeness because the speaker puts more effort in face- preserving work of the hearer in the use of more indirect speech acts LoCastro (2003) points out the link between indirectness and politeness further supported by Searle‟s observation that “politeness is the most prominent motivation for indirectness in requests, and certain forms tend to become the conventionally polite ways of making indirect requests” (cited in Dung, 2008) However, Blum- Kulka (1987) has a different view on the relationship between politeness and indirectness when studying perception of politeness and indirectness in requests in Hebrew and English She shows that indirectness does not necessarily imply politeness She also argues that too much indirectness may be perceived as lack of clarity which is a marker of impoliteness 15 Although there may be different views on the relationship between politeness and indirectness in different cultures, in this study I believe there exists a positive correlation between politeness and indirectness 1.2.4 Politeness strategies Brown and Levinson propose 15 strategies for achieving positive politeness and 10 for negative strategies: 1.2.4.1 Positive Politeness Strategies Notice, attend to H You must be hungry, it‟s a long time since breakfast How about some lunch? Exaggerate What a fantastic garden you have! Intensify interest to H There were a million people in the Co-op tonight Use in-group identity markers Come here, honey Seek agreement A: John went to London this weekend! B: To London! Avoid disagreement Positive Politeness Strategies A: Can you hear me? B: Barely Presuppose, assert common ground I had a really hard time learning to drive, didn‟t I? Joke Ok if I tackle those cookies now? Assert or presuppose people‟s knowledge and concern for H‟s wants I know you can‟t bear parties, but this one will really be good- come! 10 Offer, promise I‟ll drop by sometime next week 11 Be optimistic Look, I‟m sure you won‟t mind if I borrow your typewriter 12 Include both S and H in the activity Let‟s have a cookie, then 13 Give reasons Why don‟t I help you with that suitcase? 14 Assume or assert reciprocity I‟ll X for you if you Y for me 15 Give gifts I‟m really sorry to hear about that ... STRATEGIES IN REQUESTS IN THE MOVIE SERIES “HARRY POTTER” 2.1 Politeness strategies in requests in the movie series “Harry Potter” …………… 2.2 The frequency of Politeness strategies in Requests in the movie. .. AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POST- GRADUATE STUDIES LƯƠNG THANH HỒNG POLITENESS STRATEGIES IN REQUESTS IN THE MOVIE SERIES “HARRY POTTER” (Chiến lược Lịch Lời Thỉnh cầu tập phim “Harry Potter”) ... expect the result of my research: Politeness Strategies in Requests in the Movie Series “Harry Potter” will have a great meaning to teaching and learning as well as using politeness strategies in requests