INTRODUCTION 1 Rationale
Objectives of the study
The objectives of the study are:
This article examines bald-on-record politeness strategies, on-record strategies, and off-record strategies within the typical conversational contexts presented in the "Market Leader, Intermediate" course book.
- To put forward some suggestions for efficient ways of teaching the course book.
Research question
1) What politeness strategies are used in the conversational activities of the course book “Market Leader, Intermediate”?
2) Which politeness strategy is the most commonly used?
Scope of the study
Although there are a lot of important issues in pragmatics, this thesis only focuses on politeness strategies particularly expressed in conversational activities of the course book
“Market Leader, Intermediate” The investigation is based mainly on the theoretical framework suggested by Brown and Levinson [(1978)1987].
Methodology
The author utilizes both quantitative and qualitative methods to analyze data from the book through the theoretical politeness framework established by Brown and Levinson Additional sources are also incorporated to support the findings and conclusions.
Design of the study
The study is divided into three parts:
This part includes the rationale, objectives, research questions, scope, methodology and design of the study.
DEVELOPMENT
This part covers three chapters:
Chapter I: Literature review which focuses on the theoretical background of speech acts, classification of speech acts, politeness theory
Chapter II: Politeness strategies in conversational activities of the coursebook
This chapter examines four politeness strategies identified in the conversational activities of the "Market Leader, Intermediate" course book, focusing on how these strategies manifest in three primary speech acts: disagreement, agreement, and requests.
Chapter III explores the implications of politeness strategies in teaching English as a foreign language at Hanoi University of Business and Technology It offers valuable recommendations for educators on how to effectively utilize the coursebook in their instruction.
Part III: Conclusion which summarizes the main findings, mentions the limitations of the study and give some suggestions for further study
LITERATURE REVIEW
Speech Acts
Speech acts, a concept introduced by Oxford philosopher J.L Austin and further developed by American philosopher John Searle, explore the various functions of utterances According to the Oxford Dictionary, a speech act is defined as "an utterance considered as an action, particularly with regard to its intention, purpose, or effect." This highlights that individuals utilize grammatical and lexical elements not only to convey information but also to imply deeper meanings.
A speech act refers to actions like requesting, commanding, questioning, or informing, and can be defined as the action a speaker performs through their utterance.
If you say, I'll be there at six, you are not just speaking, you seem to be performing the speech act of 'promising.'
A speech act can range from a single word, like "Sorry!" for an apology, to more complex phrases, such as "I’m sorry I forgot your birthday; it just slipped my mind." These acts encompass real-life interactions and necessitate not only linguistic knowledge but also an understanding of cultural context for appropriate usage.
This sentence serves as a statement about the current atmosphere at the location of the utterance, but it also functions as a request directed at the listener, potentially asking them to open a window or turn on the air conditioner Thus, this utterance exemplifies how statements can double as requests Common examples of such speech acts are prevalent in our daily conversations.
Greeting: "Hi, Eric How are things going?"
Request: "Could you pass me the mashed potatoes, please?"
Complaint: "I‟ve already been waiting three weeks for the computer, and I was told it would be delivered within a week."
Invitation : "We‟re having some people over Saturday evening and wanted to know if you‟d like to join us."
Compliment : "Hey, I really like your tie!"
Refusal: "Oh, I‟d love to see that movie with you but this Friday just isn‟t going to work."
Effective communication relies on the listener's ability to interpret the speaker's intentions through inference To accurately deduce these hidden meanings, the listener must consider the surrounding circumstances of the conversation, often referred to as speech events As noted by Yule (1996:57), a speech event is defined as "an activity in which conversational participants interact via language in a conventional way to achieve some outcome." Understanding these elements is crucial for successful dialogue.
In the very influential book written in 1962, Austin claimed that speech acts can be analysed on three levels:
* A locutionary act: is the performance of an actual utterance and its ostensible meaning, comprising phonetic and phatic acts
An illocutionary act is fundamentally linked to the speaker's intention, encompassing various actions such as stating, questioning, promising, commanding, and threatening These acts are central to the theory of speech acts, as they guide how an utterance should be interpreted within a conversation However, identifying the specific illocutionary act can be challenging, necessitating that the listener understands the context in which the speech act takes place to accurately decode the speaker's intention.
The sentence "The door is here" serves as an example of how language can convey multiple meanings It can be interpreted literally, answering questions like "Where is the way out?" or "Where is the door?" Alternatively, it may function as an indirect request for someone to leave This illustrates the concept of illocutionary force, where the sentence embodies both a direct speech act and an indirect speech act.
Perlocutionary acts refer to the psychological effects that speech can have on an audience, including the ability to persuade, convince, scare, enlighten, or inspire individuals These acts highlight how spoken language can lead to specific realizations or actions in others, emphasizing the power of communication in influencing thoughts and behaviors.
E.g: Would you open the door?
The act is successful if the hearer recognizes that he should open the door As a perlocutionary act it succeeds only if the hearer actually opens the door
As another example, consider the following utterance: "By the way, I have a CD of
Westlife's invitation to "borrow it" serves as an offer, aiming to impress the listener and convey a friendly demeanor, while also fostering an interest in their music.
In conclusion, there are three acts or dimensions expressed via an utterance: locution, illocution and perlocution, in which illocutionary act is the main focus of speech act theory
1.1.2 Classification of Speech Acts 1.1.2.1 Function-based Approach
According to Searl (1976:10-16) and Yule (1996:53), there are five categories or five types of general functions performed by speech acts: declarations, representatives, expressives, directives and commissives
Declarations are speech acts that effect change in the world through their utterance, as defined by Yule (1996:53) The speaker's words create a new state of affairs, making the act itself transformative Examples of declarations include ceremonies like baptisms, legal pronouncements of guilt, and the officiation of marriage, where the utterance directly alters the reality of the individuals involved.
Eg: Priest: I now pronounce you husband and wife
Representatives: these speech acts presents a state of affairs The speaker’s intention is to make his words fit the world
Eg: It was a warm sunny day
Expressives: are the speech acts which express certain psychological states or what the speaker feels such as: pleasure, pain, likes, dislikes, etc
Eg: I like fish and chips
Directives: are the speech acts which the speaker uses to get the hearer to carry out a future course of action This class consists of requests, commands and advice, etc
Eg: Could you lend me some money, please?
Commissives: are the speech acts in which the speaker becomes committed to doing some future action, e.g promises, guarantees, oaths, etc
Eg: I‟ll give it back to you tomorrow
Following Searl’s classification of speech acts, Yule (1996:56) summarizes the five general functions of speech acts with their key features in a table:
Speech act type Direction of fit S = speaker
Declarations words change the world S causes X
Representatives make words fit the world S believes X Expressives make words fit the world S feels X
Directives make the world fit words S wants X
Commissives make the world fit words S intends X
Table 1: The five general functions of speech acts (following Searl 1979)
Another approach to distinguish types of speech acts bases on the structure of an utterance
In English, sentence structures can be categorized into three main types: declarative, interrogative, and imperative Yule (1996:55) explains that a direct speech act occurs when there is a clear relationship between a sentence structure and its function, while an indirect speech act arises from an indirect relationship between the two This distinction leads to two types of speech acts: direct and indirect To further illustrate these concepts, we can examine specific examples of both direct and indirect speech acts.
(a) Can you open the window?
The sentence, while structured as an interrogative, serves the speaker's intention of requesting the hearer to open the window rather than inquiring about their ability to do so Typically, commands or requests are conveyed through imperatives rather than interrogatives This illustrates an indirect relationship between the sentence's structure and its function, exemplifying an indirect speech act.
The idea in (a) conveys the same meaning and function as (b), but while (a) is presented in a declarative form, (b) utilizes an imperative structure This illustrates a direct relationship between function and structure, categorizing (b) as a direct speech act.
In summary, indirect speech acts convey meanings beyond their literal expressions, often exhibiting greater politeness compared to direct speech acts This politeness is particularly evident in various speech acts such as requesting, commanding, refusing, and disagreeing.
In social interactions, individuals strategically select their words to foster positive relationships, a behavior known as politeness This pragmatic phenomenon is essential for enhancing communication and understanding the social context of language While the concept of politeness is universal, its expression varies across cultures; what is deemed polite in one culture may be perceived as rude or unusual in another According to Wikipedia, politeness involves the practical application of good manners and etiquette, balancing the need for clear communication with the desire to avoid coercion (Blum-Kulka, 1987:131).
POLITENESS STRATEGIES IN CONVERSATIONAL ACTIVITIES
Methodology
This study has one primary data source which is the course book “Market Leader,
The "Market Leader" series, now in its new edition, is a comprehensive multi-level business English course tailored for professionals and students alike Authored by experienced educators David Falvey, Simon Kent, and David Cotton, the course focuses on English for Specific Purposes (ESP) and English for Business, ensuring practical relevance Developed in collaboration with the Financial Times, this resource equips learners with essential skills for the global business environment.
Times is a premier source of global business information, designed for pre-intermediate to intermediate students The book features 14 engaging units that cover topics relevant to anyone in international business The authors emphasize that it aids students in developing essential communication skills for success and broadening their understanding of the business world.
This study focuses on the third book in the "Market Leader" series, specifically the "Intermediate" edition, which features 76 conversational activities selected from 14 units The analysis and discussions are grounded in the politeness theories proposed by Brown & Levinson and Nguyen Quang.
2.1.2 Research techniques 2.1.2.1 Techniques for data collection
To collect the data, the author observed all conversational activities in the course book
“Market Leader, Intermediate” to find out utterances which contain politeness strategies
In her minor thesis, she aims to examine three prominent speech acts—agreement, disagreement, and request—highlighted in the course book's politeness strategies These strategies are categorized into four types: bald-on-record, positive politeness, negative politeness, and off-record The analysis includes 76 utterances distributed across 14 units, predominantly featured in the "Skills" sections.
The study analyzes 76 utterances categorized by various politeness strategies Each utterance is examined to identify specific types of politeness, leading to a comprehensive evaluation of the samples The findings are discussed in detail, supported by statistical data on the identified politeness strategies.
Data categorizing: All utterances that are collected from the course book mentioned above are categorized into different groups according to the requirements of the study using graphs and tables
Data describing: With different politeness strategies, describe their typical features as well as identified markers of specific types of politeness strategies
There are five steps for data analysis:
1 Examining the course book carefully The researcher examined the course book many times to pick up utterances in 14 units, especially in the Skills parts
2 Setting up the contexts, take roles of participants into consideration and discussing with colleagues and the supervisor to find out whether these statements are “natural” and
3 Classifying the politeness strategies based on the framework proposed by Brown and Levinson (1987:94-227) and Nguyen Quang (2002)
4 Consulting with supervisor, discussing with colleagues
Data Analysis
To address the initial research question, the author analyzes utterances from 14 units of the course book, ultimately selecting 76 utterances for examination after consultations with colleagues and a supervisor The results, summarized in the following table, illustrate the total number and percentage of four types of politeness strategies based on the frameworks established by Brown and Levinson (1978, 1987) and Nguyen Quang (2002).
Bald-on-record Positive politeness Negative politeness Off-record strategy
Table 2: The frequency of occurrence of politeness strategies in conversational activities of the course book “Market Leader, Intermediate”
This statistics is converted into the Pie-chart 1 below
Figure 3: The frequency of occurrence of politeness strategies in conversational activities of the course book “Market Leader, Intermediate”
The pie chart from the course book “Market Leader – Intermediate” illustrates the distribution of politeness strategies in conversations, revealing that negative politeness strategies (NPS) dominate with 57.7% According to Brown and Levinson, NPS respects the hearer's negative face by maintaining distance and avoiding personal topics, which is crucial in business contexts where discussions typically focus on work rather than personal matters In contrast, the off-record strategy accounts for only 4%, reflecting the preference for direct communication in professional settings Additionally, the bald-on-record strategy, at 9%, is less favored among business professionals who prioritize politeness and formality, especially when compared to positive and negative politeness strategies that help preserve face.
The analysis indicates that the course book emphasizes negative and positive politeness strategies over other approaches This suggests that in trading interactions, individuals prioritize showing attention, concern, and deference to others, which helps maintain social harmony.
This study concentrates on three prevalent speech acts—disagreement, agreement, and request—highlighting their associated politeness strategies as outlined in the course book The findings and discussions in this section are specifically tied to these speech acts, and the table below illustrates the statistical analysis of each politeness strategy across the different speech act functions.
Table 3: The frequency of politeness strategies in terms of functions of utterance
We are going to discuss each category carefully in the next parts
2.2.2 Bald-on-record Strategy in Conversational Activities of “Market Leader, Intermediate”
Among the four politeness strategies, the bald-on-record approach is least commonly used due to its potential to threaten the listener's face However, it can be observed in specific situations such as emergencies, military contexts, or intimate interactions This is reflected in pie-chart 1, which shows that the bald-on-record strategy constitutes only 9% of the total politeness strategies To further analyze its application, we can refer to pie-chart 2, which illustrates the contexts in which this strategy is employed most frequently.
Figure 4: The frequency of bald-on-request strategy in terms of functions of utterances
Disagreement constitutes a significant portion of bald-on-record strategies, accounting for 57.1% While expressing disagreement in social interactions can be perceived as offensive and may jeopardize communicative relationships, it is often essential in professional settings In discussions among colleagues, directness is sometimes required to facilitate clear and effective communication.
Paula: We should never have entered the market – it was a mistake We should sell out as soon as possible
Tom: I don‟t agree with that all
(Market leader, intermediate – Unit 11, track 11.7, p.99)
In a recent meeting of a retail group, members addressed the challenges facing their Paris store The focus was strictly on work-related issues, emphasizing the need for direct and honest communication Participants were encouraged to openly share their insights and suggestions to collaboratively find solutions to the problems at hand.
The second highest percentage of speech act using bald-on-record strategy is request with 28.6% In general, requesting means imposition on somebody to make them do something
If one does “request”, it is unavoidable to threaten other face Let’s consider the following examples:
Max: Could I just say something? I don‟t think it works
Carl: Let Stefan finish, please Max
(Market Leader, intermediate – Unit 4, track 4.3, p.35)
Carl produces a request towards Max to interrupt him and of course this utterance threats Max’s self-image However, the requesting seems to be mitigated thanks to the word
“please” In addition, Carl in this situation is the person who is at a higher job position than Max, therefore the imposition of the request seems to be lessened
In another case, we can hear a request on the phone
- Hold on a minute, please I‟ll transfer you to a supervisor
(Market Leader, intermediate – Unit 3, track 3.1, p.23)
In daily communication, we often hear or make that kind of request on the phone
Therefore even though it employs bald-on-record strategy, its imposition is not very strong towards the hearer
The speech act of agreement constitutes only 14.3% of instances using the bald-on-record strategy, indicating that even in non-threatening contexts, this direct approach is rarely favored Notably, there is only a single occurrence of agreement employing this strategy.
Tom: We need more information about where we are going wrong
Susan: I totally agree with you
(Market Leader, intermediate – Unit 12, track 12.4, p.105)
Susan wholeheartedly agrees with Tom on the need to find solutions for the issue at hand Her use of a bald-on-record strategy effectively conveys her commitment to contributing ideas without posing any threats to Tom.
In summary, the bald-on-record strategy, while representing a small percentage among the four strategies, is predominantly used in the speech act of disagreement within the "Market Leader, Intermediate" course book This usage does not indicate that speakers intend to pose significant threats to the listeners' face; rather, in a business context, the application of the bald-on-record strategy appears to be more tempered.
2.2.3 Positive Politeness Strategies in Conversational Activities of “Market Leader, Intermediate”
The course book contains 23 utterances employing positive politeness strategies, representing 29.5% of the total (see Pie Chart 1 and Table 3) Analyzing these strategies based on the functions of the utterances will provide insights into the frequency of positive politeness across various speech acts, as illustrated clearly in the accompanying pie chart.
Figure 5: The frequency of positive politeness strategies in terms of functions of utterances
The chart illustrates that positive politeness strategies predominantly involve agreement, constituting 91.3% of the total This high percentage is attributed to strategies 5 and 6, which specifically express agreement to the hearer Consequently, disagreement represents a mere 8.7% of the positive politeness usage, with no requests made using these strategies.
Nguyen Quang (2002) identifies 17 positive politeness strategies, with 15 originally proposed by Brown and Levinson (1978, 1987) This article explores the application of these strategies across three specific speech acts, analyzing the utterances and detailing the frequency of positive politeness strategies in the accompanying table.
PPS 1 PPS 2 PPS 3 PPS 4 PPS 5 PPS 6 PPS 7 PPS 8
Sum % Sum % Sum % Sum % Sum % Sum % Sum % Sum %
PPS 9 PPS 10 PPS 11 PPS 12 PPS 13 PPS 14 PPS 15 PPS 16 PPS17
Sum % Sum % Sum % Sum % Sum % Sum % Sum % Sum % Sum %
Table 4: Frequency of occurrence of positive politeness strategies in conversations of
These statistics are converted in the following chart
Figure 6: Frequency of occurrence of positive politeness strategies in conversations of
The analysis of conversational activities in "Market Leader, Intermediate" reveals that the most commonly used positive politeness strategy is strategy 5, which seeks agreement, accounting for 65.3% of interactions This strategy involves the speaker establishing common ground with the listener by discussing "safe topics," utilizing repetition, and incorporating minimal encouragers such as "Yeah," "quite," "definitely," "absolutely," "wow," "can't be better," and "oh, no."
“that‟s surprise”, “I can‟t believe it”, “thanks God”, etc
Let’s take the following as examples:
(Market leader, Intermediate – Unit 4, track 4.3 – page 35)
Philippa Knight: We‟ll have plenty to talk about
Maria Bonetti: That‟s for sure
(Market leader, Intermediate – Unit 2, track 2.6 – page 19)
Marcia: Is she the right person for us?
Alain: Definitely In my opinion, she‟s ideal
(Market leader, Intermediate – Unit 1, track 1.5 – page 11)
In various scenarios, it is evident that when Speaker (S) aims to demonstrate agreement and reduce the distance with the Hearer (H), they frequently utilize minimal encouragers This approach serves as the most prevalent method for expressing S's perspective effectively.
The second highest percentage is strategy 2 (Exaggerate: interest, approval, sympathy with
Concluding remarks
Through the data analysis of politeness strategies in the coursebook “Market
Leader, Intermediate”, it is found that the frequency of occurrence of politeness strategies in conversational activities of the material are not always the same
Recent analysis indicates a preference for negative politeness strategies over positive ones, with 57.7% favoring negative politeness compared to 29.5% for bald-on-record, 9% for off-record, and only 4% for positive politeness The bald-on-record strategy is predominantly used in disagreements, accounting for 57.1%, while positive politeness strategies are minimally utilized, with only 2 out of 23 utterances employing them Notably, positive politeness is most prevalent in agreements, reaching 91.3%, with strategy 5 comprising 65.3% of this total Other positive strategies, including 2, 6, 10, 12, and 13, are used infrequently, and some have no usage at all Among negative politeness strategies, strategies 1 (48.9%) and 2 (42.3%) are the most commonly employed, particularly in requests and disagreements.
In conversational activities, negative politeness strategies are utilized more frequently than positive politeness, bald-on-record, and off-record strategies, with the latter being the least common at only 4% Notably, strategies numbered 7 and 10 are rarely observed, and only three disagreements incorporate the off-record approach These findings suggest that in English-speaking cultures, individuals prioritize maintaining distance and demonstrating formality and politeness in workplace interactions.
IMPLICATIONS FOR POLITENESS STRATEGIES IN TEACHING
Understanding politeness strategies is crucial in the language teaching process, as they facilitate smooth and effective conversations Therefore, it is essential to emphasize effective methods for teaching culture, particularly politeness, in foreign language education, especially when using business English course materials.
“Market Leader, Intermediate (New Edition)” at Hanoi University of Business and Technology (HUBT) Here is some advice for teachers of business English
In the book "Market Leader, Intermediate (New Edition)," educators are encouraged to enhance students' understanding of cultural values and awareness of cultural differences It is essential for students to recognize the acceptability of various politeness strategies—positive, negative, bald-on-record, and off-record—in both English and Vietnamese during conversational activities Additionally, students must understand that certain linguistic expressions may be appropriate in English but lack equivalent interpretations in Vietnamese, and vice versa.
Teachers should prioritize teaching language functions and speech acts over mere grammatical structures While students may grasp grammatical correctness, they often lack the cultural awareness necessary for polite and appropriate communication In real-life interactions, demonstrating politeness and respect holds greater significance than simply conveying meaning through words Therefore, educators are encouraged to guide students on how to communicate politely and effectively in various situations in English.
When teaching "Market Leader, Intermediate (New Edition)," educators should facilitate social interactions among students, as engaging in social situations is an effective method for teaching social English By providing specific scenarios and encouraging conversation, teachers can help students identify acceptable and polite expressions in English It's essential to recognize the cultural differences between Western and Eastern communication styles; Western cultures often emphasize negative politeness, while Eastern cultures lean towards positive politeness Therefore, instructors must be aware of these distinctions when teaching politeness strategies to prevent miscommunication Additionally, integrating cross-cultural understanding and politeness into lessons is crucial for helping students navigate real-life interactions and overcome potential culture shock.
In conclusion, effective English language instruction must integrate cultural elements and politeness strategies To enhance students' learning experiences at HUBT, educators should emphasize these strategies while utilizing the "Market Leader, Intermediate (New Edition)" course book.
CONCLUSION 3.1 Summary of the study
Limitations of the study
While the study presents valuable insights, it is limited in scope, addressing only politeness strategies in three common speech acts—disagreement, agreement, and request—within a single coursebook from a series of three This narrow focus excludes other speech acts such as suggestions and responses, which impacts the comprehensiveness of the findings Consequently, the limited selection of utterances may affect the overall validity of the research results.
It is hereby suggested that a further study be carried out in other types of speech acts appeared in this book as well as the other books in this series
1 Austin, J L (1962) How to do things with words New York: Oxford University
2 Blum-Kulka, S (1987) Indirectness and politeness in request: same or different?
3 Brown, P., & Levinson, S (1987) Politeness: some Universal in Language
4 Grice, H P (1975) Logic and conversation in P Cole & J L Morgan (Eds)
Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts (41-58) New York: Academic
5 Hien, T T T (2010) A politeness strategy in expressing sympathy by American and
Vietnamese speakers Luận văn thạc sĩ, Đại học Ngoại ngữ, Đại học Quốc gia Hà Nội
6 Hoat, N D (1995) Politness markers in Vietnamese requests Unpublished Ph D thesis, Monash University
7 Hobb, P (2003) The medium is the message: Politeness Strategies in Men‟s and Women‟s voice mail and message Journal of Pragmatics, 35,
8 Lakoff, R (1973) The logic of Politeness: Or, minding your p‟s and q‟s
Paper from the Ninth Regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society (p.292-305) Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society
9 Leech, G N (1980) Explorations in Semantics and Pragmatics Agency
University of Trier, Series A University of Trier
10 Leech, G N (1983) Principles of Pragmatics London: Longman
11 Lien, P T H (2012) A Study on Politeness Strategies in the Conversational
Activities of the Coursebook “ New English file” (Intermediate) Luận văn thạc sĩ, Đại học Ngoại ngữ, Đại học Quốc gia Hà Nội
12 Maginnis, J (2011) Texting in the presence of others: the use of politeness strategies in conversation University of Kentucky Doctoral
13 Quang, N (2003) Intercultural and Cross-culture Communication VNU Press
14 Searl, J R (1976) A classification of Illocutionary Acts Language in
15 Thomas, J (1995) Meaning in interaction: An introduction to Pragmatics
London and New York: Longman
17 Yule, G (1996) Pragmatics Oxford: Oxford University Press
18 Yule, G (2006) The study of language Cambridge University Press
1 Vũ Thị Thanh Hương (2000) Gián tiếp và lịch sự trong lời cầu khiến tiếng Việt, trong ngôn từ, giới và nhóm xã hội từ thực tiễn tiếng Việt (135-178) NXB KHXH, Hà Nội
2 Nguyễn Quang (2001) Sắc thái quyền lực trong giao tiếp ngôn ngữ Tập san ngoại ngữ số 1
3 Nguyễn Quang (2002) Giao tiếp và giao tiếp văn hóa NXB Đại học Quốc Gia Hà
POLITENESS STRATEGIES IN CONVERSATIONS OF THE COURSE BOOK
“MARKET LEADER, INTERMEDIATE” (NEW EDITION)
Unit Conversational activity Kind of speech act
Politeness strategies On-record strategies
- No I don’t want to give free advertising to companies I hate all the advertising hype around brands
- Ok, we all agree we want to increase our revenue by licensing our
- Is she the right person for us?
- Definitely In my opinion, she’s ideal
- Valerie, what do you think?
- I agree because she’s very good at marketing
- Pietro, can I have a word with you?
- What I really don’t like is the way airlines treat people on the plane
- I like flying but I really don’t enjoy being at the airports I don’t like the attitude of the airlines
- Could you put me through to extension 281, please?
- With new communications technology , do business people need to travel so much?
- Yes, I think they probably do
- Could you make it then?
- Oh yes, that’d be no problem at all What about 2 o’clock?
- Perfect.It’ll be great to see you again
- We’ll have plenty to talk about
- Could she call me back here at the hotel, please?
- Can you e-mail these sales figures through to head offices as soon as possible?
- Can you give me example of how a business changed its organisation and why?
- Can we move on the next point, the open-plan office?
- I like the idea It’s good for communication, people see each other at the office
- I’m not sure I agree with you there With open-plan offices, there’s a problem of privacy
- Stefan, what do you think?
- I agree with Max about privacy
- I suggest we use meeting rooms for private conversations or calls
- Could I just say something? I don’t think it works
- Let Stefan finish, please Max
- Well, I’m not happy about it I don’t think we should have a vote about it now I mean, I think we need a report or an extra survey done about this
- Right, can we move to the next item on the agenda, “hot-desking”, Max?
- Frankly, I was shocked to see the proposal about hot-desking I don’t think hot-desking works in close offices
- OK, how do you feel about it, Nancy?
- I’m pretty sure hot- desking won’t work unless we have an open- plan office I don’t think hot-desking works in closed offices
Unit - Can you give us an Request 1
5 example of a really good business proposal?
- Can you talk us through the typical planning and launch stages of a campaign?
- If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to interrupt me
- If there’s anything you you’re not clear about, go ahead and ask any questions you want
- And can you give us examples of typical cultural mistakes made by people doing business internationally?
- Not for me, thanks I’m not keen on fish
- Can we start, please? Request 1
- How do you feel about offering him a full-time contract?
- I’m not sure we should do it really
- I don’t think that’s too important
- What about his actual Agreement 5 work? In my opinion, it’s fine
- Could you tell me why you want to leave your present job, Mr Passerelli?
- Certainly I’m glad you asked me that
- Could you sumarize why we should offer you this job?
- I think I can offer you a lot
- Could you please tell me why you want to leave your present job?
- Could you please tell me why you want to leave your present job?
- Right I suppose, basically, I need a new motivation
- Could you sumarize why we should offer you this job?
- How about having some lunch now and continuing later this afternoon?
- Yes, let’s continnue after lunch
- Could you give me Request 1 some tips for negotiating?
- Right, let’s try to get ten percent off their list prices
- Can you tell us a little about your customer’s needs and their buying habits?
- How about if we send the first consignment by air to make sure the goods arrive on time?
- Mmm, sounds like a good idea to me
Good, we agree on price, quantity, discounts and method of transport
- OK, I think we've covered everything
- Great That was a good meeting
- Could you give me some details, please?
- Well, the eject mechanism’s not reliable
- Can you bring it in?
Then we can look into the matter and we’ll probably send the machine back to the
- I’m sorry but I’d prefer to exchange it
- I’m afraid it’s not our policy to replace items
- Well, that’s not really good enough
- Can successful businesses always behave ethically?
- On average staff took fourteen days off sick – that’s far too many
- Absolutely, it’s really damaging for us
- Of course, we’d explain why the present policy isn’t working
- Could you have a draft questionnaire ready by next Monday?
- Yes, I think we can manage that
- I thought you might like to know that Someone saw them together at a cinema last Saturday It looked as if they
- Thanks, Bob I’ve heard enough
- I can’t believe what you are saying, Carl I’m really shocked
- Why on earth do you want us to break up?
- It’s well, we’ve had some good times together, I know, but
- I think we talk too much about work sometimes And that’s not good
- I don’t know I think we talk about all kinds of things
- Yes, but I still feel I talked too much about work in the past
- Are you accusing me of using that information to help us designing our can opener?
- I’m not accusing you of anything, but some of my colleagues are sure I leaked information to you
- I think we need to separate for a while; at least until people have forgotten about the DC01 can opener.