A cross cultural study how native speakers of english and vietnamese speakers of vietnamese decline invitations

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HO CHI MINH CITY UNIVERSITY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES GRADUATE STUDY PROGRAM A CROSS-CULTURAL STUDY: HOW NATIVE SPEAKERS OF ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE SPEAKERS OF VIETNAMESE DECLINE INVITATIONS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF TESOL Supervisor: ĐẶNG THỊ HƯỞNG, EdD Student: TRẦN CÔNG MIÊNG HO CHI MINH CITY April 2005 CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY I certify my authorship of the thesis submitted today entitled: A CROSS-CULTURAL STUDY: HOW NATIVE SPEAKERS OF ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE SPEAKERS OF VIETNAMESE DECLINE INVITATIONS in terms of the statement of Requirements for Theses in Master’s Programmes issued by the Higher Degree Committee Ho Chi Minh City April 10th, 2005 TRẦN CÔNG MIÊNG i RETENTION AND USE OF THE THESIS I hereby state that I, TRẦN CÔNG MIEÂNG, being the candidate for the degree of Master of TESOL, accept the requirements of the University relating to the retention and use of Master’s Theses deposited in the Library In terms of these conditions, I agree that the original of my thesis deposited in the Library should be accessible for purposes of study and research, in accordance with the normal conditions established by the Library for the care, loan, or reproduction of theses Ho Chi Minh City April 10th, 2005 TRẦN CÔNG MIÊNG ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my thesis supervisor, Dr Đặng ThÞ H−ëng, for her whole-hearted guidance, constructive comments, and moral support in the preparation and completion of this thesis I would also like to send my special thanks to the organizers of this master course, Dr Lê Hữu Phớc, Head of the Department of Post Graduate Studies, Mr NguyÔn Huúnh §¹t, M.A., Head of the Department of English Linguistics and Literature, and their staff members, University of Social Sciences and Humanities, National University of Ho Chi Minh City I would take this opportunity to thank some of my colleagues and friends at Vinh Long Teacher Training College, An Giang University, and Vietnamese American Training College (VATC) in Ho Chi Minh City for helping me deliver and collect the questionnaires I am also grateful to all my colleagues and students at Vinh Long Teacher Training College, who carefully completed the questionnaires and, thus provided me with valuable information for this study Last, but not least, my very sincere thanks are expressed to my wife and my family members who have patiently encouraged me to complete my study iii ABSTRACT This study is an attempt to investigate the similarities and differences in the use of refusal strategies by native speakers of English (NSE) and Vietnamese speakers of Vietnamese (VSV) when they decline invitations The results indicated more similarities than differences in the frequency distribution of refusal strategies used by NSE and VSE groups Differences between these two subject groups were identified in the use of the four refusal strategies: offer of alternative, negative ability, positive opinion, and gratitude Pragmatic transfer from Vietnamese to English by Vietnamese speakers of English was found in the frequency of the use of negative ability and offer of alternative Also examined in the study was the effect of social status, age, and gender on the choice of refusal strategies employed by these two subject groups The findings indicated that, for NSE group, social status did not have much effect on the choice of refusal strategies, whereas VSV group used more strategies when they were in a lower social status and fewer strategies when they were in a position of higher social status Native speakers of English used more strategies when they refused invitations issued by people of the same age and employed fewer strategies when they refused invitations made by older people Vietnamese speakers of Vietnamese, on the other hand, tended to use more strategies when they refused invitations issued by older people and employed fewer strategies when they refused invitations made by younger people English and Vietnamese females used more strategies than English and Vietnamese males did in their refusals The most obvious effect of gender on strategy choice was identified in the use of offer of alternative, negative ability, and gratitude where English and Vietnamese males and females used these refusal strategies with different frequencies The results of this study demonstrate that the speech act of declining invitations in a second language is a complex task which requires the acquisition of the sociocultural values of the second language culture What has been learnt from the study suggests that in order to effectively communicate in English, especially in declining invitations, Vietnamese speakers of English need to acquire the sociocultural strategies used most frequently by native speakers of English iv TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.1 Problems of non-native speakers of English ………… …………………… 1.2 Problems of Vietnamese learners of English ………………………………… 1.3 Aims of the study………………………………………………………………… 1.4 Overview of the study ………………………………………………………… CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Speech act theory ………………………………………………………………… 2.1.1 Definitions of speech acts ………………………………………………… 2.1.2 Classification of speech acts …………………………………………… 2.1.3 Direct and indirect speech acts ………………………………………… 10 2.2 The speech act of refusal ……………………………………………………… 11 2.2.1 Features of refusals ………………………………………………… 11 2.2.2 Structure of an invitation refusal ………………………………………… 12 2.2.3 Possible trajectories of an invitation refusal ……………………… 16 2.3 Politeness and interaction ………………………………………………… 18 2.4 Essential factors affecting the choice of politeness strategies ……………… 20 2.4.1 Social status ………………………………………………………… 21 2.4.2 Age ……………………………………………………………… 22 2.4.3 Gender ……………………………………………………………… 22 CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY 3.1 Research questions ……………………………………………………………… 24 3.2 Research Design ………………………………………………………………… 25 3.2.1 Subjects …………………………………………………………………… 25 3.2.1.1 Selection …………………………………………………………… 25 3.2.1.2 Characteristics of the subjects ……………………………… 26 3.2.2 Instruments ………………………………………………………………… v 3.3 Data collection procedure ………………………………………………… 28 CHAPTER IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION OF THE FINDINGS 30 4.1 Results …………………………………………………………………………… 4.1.1 Refusal strategies employed by native speakers of English and 32 Vietnamese speakers of Vietnamese in declining invitations ……… 4.1.1.1 Refusal strategies used by NSE group ……………………… 32 4.1.1.2 Refusal strategies used by VSV group ……………………… 34 4.1.1.3 Similarities and differences of refusal strategies used by NSE 37 and VSV groups ………………………………………………… 4.1.2 Transfer in the use of refusal strategies by Vietnamese speakers of 39 English …………………………………………………………………… 4.1.3 The effect of social status, age, and gender on the choice of refusal 41 strategies …………………………………………………………………… 4.1.3.1 Social status ………………………………………………… 45 4.1.3.2 Age ………………………………………………………………… 46 4.1.3.3 Gender ……………………………………………………… 50 4.2 Discussion of the findings ……………………………………………………… 54 4.3 Summary ………………………………………………………………………… 62 CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 69 5.1 Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………… 5.2 Recommendations ……………………………………………………………… 71 REFERENCES ……………………………………………………………… 73 APPENDICES ……………………………………………………………………… 75 Appendix A Survey questionnaire ………………………………………………… 80 Appendix B Classification of refusals …………………………………………… 80 85 vi LIST OF TABLES 2.1 The five functions of speech acts ……………………… 2.2 Possible responses and outcomes ……………………………… 16 3.1 The first group of subjects (NSE) ………………………………… 27 3.2 The second group of subjects (VSV) ……………………………… 27 3.3 The third group of subjects (VSE) ………………………………… 28 4.1 Frequency distribution of refusal categories employed by NSE and VSV groups ……………………………………………………… 33 4.2 The sequences of refusal strategies used by NSE group …… 36 4.3 The sequences of refusal strategies used by VSV group …… 38 4.4 The sequences of refusal strategies used by both NSE and VSV groups ………………………………………………………………… 4.5 Frequency distribution of refusal strategies employed by three subject groups ………………………………………………………… 4.6 55 Frequency distribution of refusal strategies employed by English male and female subjects …………………………………………… 4.11 51 Frequency distribution of refusal strategies employed by NSE and VSV males and females …………………………………… 4.10 47 Frequency distribution of refusal strategies employed by NSE and VSV groups in three age levels ………………………………… 4.9 44 Frequency distribution of refusal strategies employed by NSE and VSV groups in three status levels ……………………………… 4.8 42 The sequences of refusal strategies employed by three subject groups ………………………………………………………………… 4.7 40 58 Frequency distribution of refusal strategies employed by Vietnamese male and female subjects ……………………………… vii 60 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS EFL English as a foreign language FTA Face-threatening acts L1 First language L2 Second language NSE Native speakers of English TESOL Teaching English to speakers of other languages VSE Vietnamese speakers of English VSV Vietnamese speakers of Vietnamese viii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION None of us can survive in society by ourselves We need other people’s concerns, and they need ours too One of the ways people express their concerns to others is issuing invitations The reason for issuing invitations is that “people enjoy each other’s company (on occasion), and enjoy providing social goods for members whom they like”, as Edmondson and House (1981: 131) claim Therefore, in our everyday life, each of us is the target of invitations from our family members, friends, colleagues, or even strangers who wish to enjoy each other’s company and consolidate their social relationships Sometimes we comply with those invitations, and sometimes we don’t comply with them due to our inability or unwillingness, and then, we choose to refuse However, refusing an invitation is not always an easy course of action as it may cause offense or misunderstanding to both the refuser and the refusee, as Kwon (2004: 340) argues: “Refusals can be a tricky speech act to perform linguistically and psychologically since the possibility of offending the interlocutor is inherent in the act itself.” Therefore, in order to reduce the negative effects of the refusal to the minimum, people usually use a variety of politeness strategies in their refusals, as Kwon (ibid.) comments: “As failure to refuse appropriately can risk the interpersonal relations of the speakers, refusals usually include various strategies to avoid offending one’s interlocutors.” However, the choice of these strategies may vary across languages and cultures because different cultures follow different strategies of communication and patterns of interaction, as Wolfson (1983: 61) states: “Each culture differs not only in the pragmalinguistic repetoire most often used to convey politeness, but also in the rules of speaking and the patterns of interaction.” In order to communicate effectively with people in the target language, specifically to decline invitations, non-native language speakers need to be aware of the selection of the appropriate communicative strategies used by native speakers of the target language 5.2 Recommendations Based on the findings of the study, I would like to present some recommendations on how speech acts, specifically the speech act of refusals to invitations, should be taught and learnt in the Vietnamese context (1) When native speakers of English decline an invitation, they tend to use a variety of refusal strategies These strategies are selected and used in an appropriate sequence In order to perform the speech act of refusing an invitation in a native-like manner, Vietnamese learners of English need to know what sorts of politeness strategies are appropriate to employ in a given situation To achieve this aim, it is recommended that the teacher should make the learners aware of specific politeness strategies and the accompanying linguistic features that are necessary to issue appropriate refusals in English In addition, Vietnamese learners of English should be informed that refusing is a face-threatening act because it contradicts the refusee’s expectations, so direct refusal strategies are not commonly used by either native or non-native English speakers (2) As every culture has its own set of commonly shared values, appropriate use of politeness strategies is closely tied up with cultural values of the language being used To be successful in communication and avoid misunderstanding, it is necessary for Vietnamese learners of English to know about cultural differences in the use of politeness strategies between the English and Vietnamese people (3) As the findings showed, social status, age, and gender had an effect on the choice of refusal strategies It is essential for the teacher to make the learners aware that people of different status, age, and gender employ different refusal strategies so that learners can use appropriate refusal strategies for particular interlocutors 73 (4) Role-play activities are particularly suitable for practising the use of speech act strategies It is recommended that, when teaching English functions in the classroom, the teacher should get the learners to act out a conversation according to a given situation using appropriate politeness strategies (5) Striking differences in certain refusal strategies used by native English speakers and Vietnamese learners of English in the study indicate that what Vietnamese learners of English are learning from textbooks may be grammatically correct, but inauthentic in terms of real language and real interactions with native speakers It is necessary for the learners to be aware that high grammatical proficiency may not show equivalent pragmatic competence (6) In the teaching-learning process, language materials play an important role as they make communicative practice take place in the classroom It is essential that English teaching materials need to be oriented towards developing the learners’ pragmatic competence and sociocultural knowledge In order to facilitate effective communication in the classroom, the teacher should use language materials that provide the learners with communicative contexts and appropriate guidelines for intercultural interaction Authentic materials such as videos, films, or role-play models of native speakers performing certain speech acts need to be exploited in teaching English as they make the language practice more natural and appropriate and raise learners’ awareness of culture and politeness as well 74 REFERENCES Austin, J L (1992) How to things with words Oxford: Oxford University Press Beebe, L M., Takahashi, T., and Uliss-Weltz, R (1990) Pragmatic transfer in ESL refusals In R C Scarcella, E S Andersen, and S D Krashen (eds.), Developing communicative competence in a second language New York: Newbury House, pp 55-73 Blundell, J., Higgens, J., and Middlemiss, N (1982) Function in English Oxford: Oxford University Press Bonvillain, N (1993) Language, culture, and communication: the meaning of messages USA: Prentice-Hall Inc Broughton, G et al (1980) Teaching English as a foreign language UK: T J Press (Padstow) Ltd Brown, P and Levinson, S C (1987) Politeness: Some universals in language usage Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Chen, X., Ye, L., and Zhang, Y (1995) Refusing in Chinese In G Kasper (eds.), Pragmatics of Chinese as a native and target language Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i Press, pp 119-163 Cohen, A D (1996) Speech acts In S L McKay and N H Hornberger (eds.), Sociolinguistics and language teaching Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp 383-420 Cohen, A D and Olshtain, E (1994) Researching the production of second language speech acts In E Tarone, S M Gass, and A D Cohen (eds.), Research methodology in second language acquisition Hillsdale, New York: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp 143-156 Coulthart, M (1985) An introduction to discourse analysis New York: Longman Inc Crystal, D (1997) English as a global language Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Dang, T H (1992) A cross-cultural study on the way in which speakers of 75 Vietnamese and speakers of English issue, accept, and decline spoken invitations Canberra: TESOL Centre, Faculty of Education, University of Canberra Đỗ, H C & Bùi, M T (1993) Đại cơng ngôn ngữ häc - tËp Hμ Néi: Gi¸o Dơc Edmondson, W and House, J (1981) Let’s talk and talk about it Munich: Urban and Schwarzenberg Ellis, R (1994) The study of second language acquisition Oxford: Oxford University Press Feùlix-Brasdefer, C (2001) Refusals in Spanish and English: A cross-cultural study of politeness strategies among speakers of Mexican Spanish and American English, and American learners of Spanish as a foreign language University of Minnesota: NEXO 7, 8, pp 1-3 Feùlix-Brasdefer, C (2003) Declining an invitation: A cross-cultural study of pragmatic strategies in American English and Latin American Spanish Multilingua - Journal of Cross-cultural and Interlanguage Communication 22 Berlin – New York: Water de Gruyter, pp 225-255 Finegan, E (1994) Language - its structure and use Florida, USA: Harcourt Brace College Publishers Gamble, T K and Gamble, M (1999) Communication works USA: McGraw-Hill College Gass, S M and Houck, N (1999) Interlanguage refusals: A cross-cultural study of Japanese-English Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter Geis, M (1995) Speech acts and conversational interaction Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Goffman, E (1967) Interaction ritual: Essays on face to face behavior Garden City, New York: Anchor Books Gumperz, J (1990) The conversational analysis of interethnic communication In 76 R C Scarcella, E S Andersen, and S D Krashen (eds.), Developing communicative competence in a second language: Series on issues in second language research Boston: Heinle and Heinle Publishers, (pp 223-238) Hartley, B and Viney, P (1980) Streamline English Departures Oxford: Oxford University Press Heasley, B and Hurford, J R (1984) Semantics: A course book Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Hymes, D (1972) On communicative competence In J B Pride, and J Homes (eds.), Sociolinguistics Hormondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin, pp 269-293 Kachru, B B (1991) Liberation linguistics and the Quirk concern English today, 7/1 Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Kinjo, H (1987) Oral refusals of invitations and requests in English and Japanese Journal of Asian Culture 11: 83-106 Kumar, R (1996) Research methodology A step-by-step guide for beginners Melbourne: Addison Wesley Longman Australia Pty Limited Kwon, J (2004) Expressing refusals in Korean and in American English Multilingua – Journal of Cross-cultural and Interlanguage Communication 23 (2004) Berlin – New York: Water de Gruyter, pp 339-364 Nelson, G., Carson, J., Al Batal, M., and El Bakary, W (2002) Cross-cultural pragmatics: Strategy use in Egyptian Arabic and American English refusals Applied Linguistics 23 (2) Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp 163-189 Nguyễn, Đ D (1998) Ngữ dơng häc – tËp HCMC: Gi¸o Dơc Ngun, P C (1997) Từ chối hnh vi ngôn ngữ tế nhị Ngôn Ngữ v Đời Sống 11: 12-13 Nguyễn, P C (2003) Một số sở chiến lợc từ chối Ngôn Ngữ 8: 18-28 Nguyễn, T H (2001) Hnh động từ chối tiếng Việt hội thoại Ngôn Ngữ 1: 01-12 Nunan, D (1993) Introducing discourse analysis Penguin English 77 Peccei, J S (1999) Language and age In L Thomas and S Wareing, Language, society and power An introduction London: Routledge, pp 99-115 Richard, J C., Platt, J., and Platt, H (1992) Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics Longman Group UK Limited Saville-Troike, M (1996) The ethnography of communication In S L McKay and N H Hornberger (eds.), Sociolinguistics and language teaching Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp 351-382 Scarcella, R C (1990) Communication difficulties in second language production, development, and instruction In R C Scarcella, E S Andersen, and S D Krashen (eds.), Developing communicative competence in a second language: Series on issues in second language research Boston: Heinle and Heinle Publishers Schiffrin, D (1996) Interactional sociolinguistics In S L McKay and N H Hornberger (eds.), Sociolinguistics and language teaching New York: Cambridge University Press, pp 307-328 Searle, J R (1969) Speech acts Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Tanck, S (2002) Speech act sets of refusal and complaint: A comparison of native and non-native English speakers’ production In S Biesenbach-Lucas, TESL 523 second language acquisition Washington D.C: American University, pp 1-22 Thomas, J (1995) Meaning in interaction: An introduction to pragmatics New York: Addison Wesley Longman Publishing Tillitt, B and Bruder, M N (1985) Speaking naturally New York: Cambridge University Press Tran, X T (1990) Inviting in Vietnamese and Australian English In U Nixon (eds.), Discourse analysis papers Canberra: Canberra University Wareing, S (1999) Language and gender In L Thomas and S Wareing, Language, society and power An introduction London: Routledge, pp 65-81 Widdowson, H G (1979) The teaching of English as communication In C J Brumfit and K Johnson (eds.), The communicative approach to language teaching Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp 117-121 78 Wiersma, W (1995) Research methods in education: An introduction Needham Heights, Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon Wolfson, N (1983) An empirically based analysis of complimenting in American English In N Wolfson and E Judd (eds.), Sociolinguistics and language acquisition Rowley, Mass: Newbury Yule, G (1996) Pragmatics Oxford: Oxford University Press APPENDIX A QUESTIONNAIRE 79 BẢN KHẢO SÁT This survey questionnaire aims to collect data for my study of the similarities and differences of refusal strategies used by speakers of English and speakers of Vietnamese when they decline invitations Your responses will greatly contribute to the success of the study The data collected will be used for research purposes only and not for other purposes The names of the participants will not be identified Your cooperation in this survey will be most appreciated B¶n câu hỏi sau nhằm thu thập liệu cho việc nghiên cứu khoa học đề ti Những điểm tơng đồng v khác biệt chiến lợc tõ chèi lêi mêi tiÕng Anh vμ tiÕng ViÖt.” Câu trả lời anh chị câu hỏi góp phần quan trọng cho thnh công đề ti nghiên cứu ny Dữ liệu thu đợc qua câu hỏi sử dụng cho công việc nghiên cứu v không dùng cho mục đích khác Anh chị không cần phải ghi tên vo câu hỏi Ngời thực đề ti xin chân thnh cảm ơn hợp tác anh chị v bạn Nationality/Quốc tịch: _ Age/Tuæi: _ Gender/Giíi tÝnh: Male/Nam Female/N÷ Occupation/NghỊ nghiƯp: _ Education/Học vị: Bachelor Degree/Cử nhân Master Degree/Thạc sĩ Ph.D Degree/TiÕn sÜ SITUATION 1/ TÌNH HUỐNG You are a teacher in a school This person is your new school director whom 80 you don’t know very well The school director invites you and some other teachers to have dinner at his (her) house next Friday evening What would you say to refuse this invitation? Anh chÞ l giáo viên trờng học Trờng anh chÞ võa cã mét hiƯu tr−ëng míi mμ anh chÞ cha quen biết nhiều Hiệu trởng mời anh chị số giáo viên khác trờng đến dùng cơm nh vo tối thứ sáu cuối tuần Anh chị nói nh no với hiệu trởng để tõ chèi lêi mêi nμy? _ _ _ _ SITUATION 2/ TÌNH HUỐNG You and your cousin both live in the same house Your cousin invites you to a concert next Saturday evening What would you say to refuse this invitation? Anh chÞ vμ mét ng−êi anh/chÞ/em hä cïng sèng chung mét nhμ Ng−êi anh/chÞ/em hä mêi anh chị xem chơng trình ca nhạc vo tối thứ bảy cuối tuần Anh chị nói nh thÕ nμo ®Ĩ tõ chèi lêi mêi nμy? _ _ _ _ SITUATION 3/ TÌNH HUỐNG 81 You and this person are very good friends You both work together in the same office After work, your friend invites you out to have dinner with him (her) What would you say to refuse this invitation? Anh chÞ cã ngời bạn thân Cả hai lm việc văn phòng công ty Sau tan sở, ngời bạn mời anh chị ăn tối Anh chị nói nh no để từ chối lêi mêi nμy? _ _ _ _ SITUATION 4/ TÌNH HUỐNG A person invites you to his (her) birthday party at his (her) house next Friday evening What would you say to refuse to go to the party if the inviter is: Cã mét ng−êi mêi anh chị đến dự buổi tiệc sinh nhật t gia vo tối thứ sáu cuối tuần Anh chị nói nh− thÕ nμo ®Ĩ tõ chèi dù bi tiƯc ®ã nÕu ng−êi mêi anh chÞ lμ: 4a a male friend of your age?/ mét ng−êi b¹n nam cïng ti víi anh chÞ? _ _ _ 4b a female friend of your age?/ ngời bạn nữ tuổi với anh chị? _ _ _ 4c a male friend who is younger than you?/ ngời bạn nam nhỏ tuổi anh chị? 82 _ _ _ 4d a female friend who is younger than you?/ ngời bạn nữ nhỏ tuổi anh chÞ? _ _ _ 4e a male friend who is older than you?/ ngời bạn nam lớn tuổi anh chÞ? _ _ _ 4f a female friend who is older than you?/ ngời bạn nữ lớn tuổi anh chÞ? _ _ _ SITUATION 5/ TÌNH HUỐNG A person in the company where you work invites you to have dinner with him (her) at his (her) house next Sunday evening What would you say to refuse to go for dinner if the inviter is: Anh chị lm việc ë mét c«ng ty Cã mét ng−êi c«ng ty mời anh chị đến dùng cơm nh vo tối chủ nhật cuối tuần Anh chị nói nh no để từ chối đến dùng cơm tối ngời mêi lμ: 5a a male colleague of equal position to you?/ mét nam ®ång nghiƯp cïng chøc vơ víi anh chÞ? 83 _ _ _ 5b a female colleague of equal position to you?/ nữ đồng nghiệp chức vụ víi anh chÞ? _ _ _ 5c one of your male employees?/ nam nhân viên anh chị? _ _ _ 5d one of your female employees?/ nữ nhân viên cđa anh chÞ? _ _ _ 5e your male boss?/ «ng giám đốc anh chị? _ _ _ 5f your female boss?/ b giám đốc anh chị? _ _ _ APPENDIX B 84 CLASSIFICATION OF REFUSALS (Beebe, L., Takahashi, T., and Uliss-Weltz, R 1990) Semantic formulas I Direct A Performative (e.g., "I refuse") B Nonperformative statement "No" Negative willingness/ability ("I can't." "I won't." "I don't think so.") II Indirect A Statement of regret (e.g., "I'm sorry…” "I feel terrible…") B Wish (e.g., "I wish I could help you…") C Excuse, reason, explanation (e.g., "My children will be home that night.” “I have a headache.") D Statement of alternative I can X instead of Y (e.g., "I'd rather…” "I'd prefer…") Why don't you X instead of Y (e.g., "Why don’t you ask someone else?") E Set condition for future or past acceptance (e.g., "If you had asked me earlier, I would have…) F Promise of future acceptance (e.g., "I'll it next time"; "I promise I'll…" or "Next time I’ll…" - using "will" of promise or "promise") G Statement of principle (e.g., "I never business with friends.") H Statement of philosophy (e.g., "One can't be too careful.") I Attempt to dissuade interlocutor Threat or statement of negative consequences to the requester (e.g., "I won't be any fun tonight" to refuse an invitation.) Guilt trip (e.g., waitress to customers who want to sit a while: "I can't make a living off people who just order coffee.") 85 Criticize the request/requester, etc (statement of negative feeling or opinion); insult/attack (e.g., "Who you think you are?” "That's a terrible idea!") Request for help, empathy, and assistance by dropping or holding the request Let interlocutor off the hook (e.g., "Don't worry about it." "That's okay." "You don't have to.") Self-defense (e.g., "I'm trying my best." "I'm doing all I can do." "I no nutting wrong.") J Acceptance that functions as a refusal Unspecific or indefinite reply Lack of enthusiasm K Avoidance Nonverbal a Silence b Hesitation c Do nothing d Physical departure Verbal a Topic switch b Joke c Repetition of part of request, etc (e.g., "Monday?") d Postponement (e.g., "I'll think about it.") e Hedging (e.g., "Gee, I don't know." "I'm not sure.") Adjuncts to Refusals Statement of positive opinion/feeling or agreement ("That's a good idea…” "I'd love to…") 86 Statement of empathy (e.g., "I realize you are in a difficult situation.") Pause fillers (e.g., "uhh"; "well"; "oh"; "uhm") Gratitude/appreciation (e.g., “thanks”; “I really appreciate it”) 87