a study on politeness strategies in negotiating conversations in market leader = nghiên cứu các chiến lược lịch sự được sử dụng trong các bài hội thoại đàm phán của giáo trình market leade

VIET NAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES DEPARTMENT OF POST-GRADUATES STUDIES --- NGUYỄN THỊ THANH VÂN A STUDY ON POLITENESS STRATEGIES IN

VIET NAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

DEPARTMENT OF POST-GRADUATES STUDIES

-

NGUYỄN THỊ THANH VÂN

A STUDY ON POLITENESS STRATEGIES IN NEGOTIATING CONVERSATIONS IN MARKET LEADER

“NGHIÊN CỨU CÁC CHIẾN LƯỢC LỊCH SỰ ĐƯỢC SỬ DỤNG TRONG CÁC BÀI HỘI

THOẠI ĐÀM PHÁN CỦA GIÁO TRÌNH MARKET LEADER”

(PRE INTERMEDIATE BUSINESS ENGLISH – NEW EDITION)

M.A THESIS (COURSE WORK)

Field : English Linguistics

Code : 60 22 15

HA NOI – 2009

VIET NAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

DEPARTMENT OF POST-GRADUATES STUDIES

-

NGUYỄN THỊ THANH VÂN

M.A THESIS (COURSE WORK)

A STUDY ON POLITENESS STRATEGIES IN NEGOTIATING

CONVERSATIONS IN “MARKET LEADER”

“NGHIÊN CỨU CÁC CHIẾN LƯỢC LỊCH SỰ ĐƯỢC SỬ DỤNG TRONG CÁC BÀI HỘI

THOẠI ĐÀM PHÁN CỦA GIÁO TRÌNH MARKET LEADER”

(PRE INTERMEDIATE BUSINESS ENGLISH – NEW EDITION)

Field : English Linguistics

Code : 60 22 15 Course : 15D

Supervisor: Assoc Prof NGUYỄN QUANG (PH.D)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

 Astract

 Acknowledgements

 Abbreviations

Part 1: Introduction

1 Rationale ……….……… 1

2 Aims of the study……… 1

3.Scope of the study……… 2

4 Methodology……… 2

5 Design of the study……… 2

Part 2: Development Chapter1: Theoretical background……… 3

1.1 Speech Acts ……… 3

1.1.1 What speech acts? ……… 3

1.1.2 Direct speech acts……… 5

1.1.3 Indirect speech acts……… 6

1.2 What politeness? ……….… 7

1.2.1 Face and politeness……… ……… 7

1.2.2 Positive politeness……… 11

1.2.2.1 What positive politeness? 11

1.2.2.2 Positive politeness strategies……… 11

1.2.3 Negative politeness……… 15

1.2.3.1 What negative politeness? 15

1.2.3.2 Negative politeness strategies……… 15

Chapter 2: Politeness strategies in negotiating conversations in Market Leader (new edition) – Pre Intermediate Business English

2.1 Negotiating conversations in the coursebook……… 19

2.2 Politeness strategies in negotiating conversations ……… 19

2.2.1 The frequency of negative politeness and positive politeness strategies used in the negotiating conversations……… ……… 20

2.2.1.1 Sampling process ……….……… 20

2.2.1.2 Balance of positive and negative politeness strategies used in negotiating conversations……… 21

2.2.1 Positive politeness strategies in negotiating conversations ……….…… 22

2.2.2 Negative politeness strategies in negotiating conversations ……….… 26

Chapter 3: Implications for teaching politeness strategies to HUBT second-year students 3.1 Preparation for training politeness strategies……… 32

3.1.1 Preparation for students……… … 32

3.1.2 Making plans……… 32

3.2 Training politeness strategies for the HUBT second - year students……….…… 36

3.2.1 Politeness strategy-awareness training……… 36

3.2.2 One-time politeness strategy training……… 37

3.2.3 Long-term politeness strategy training……….… 37

Part 3: Conclusion 1 Summary……….……… 39

2.Limitations……… 40

3.Suggestions for futher study……… 40

References

PART I: INTRODUCTION

1 Rationale:

It has been convincingly proved and widely accepted nowadays that an emphasis on language as a communication system is really necessary in the age of globalization Not only does it help to uncover principles underlying social interactions, but it also enables us to gain

an access to ways of thinking, belief systems, and world views of people from various cultural backgrounds Investigating issues concerning cross-cultural communication is especially momentous at present when national boundaries are becoming less visible, more and more people are engaged in intercultural communication Understanding social conventions and paying attention to such concepts as politeness and face will certainly enable us to better comprehend the different ways of speaking by people from different cultures, thus helping to eliminate ethnic stereotypes and misunderstandings

Knowledge of Anglophone cultures is obviously an important key for Vietnamese students to succeed in learning English because second language learning is second culture learning In order to acquire the second language - English, it is necessary to learn not only linguistic knowledge and interaction skills but also knowledge of the target culture Cultural factors are included in the course designs in universities and schools today When understanding the cultural factors, students have chances to expose themselves more comfortably and confidently to native speaking environments Normally, Vietnamese students tend to employ English based on their own cultural experience and thus, causing misinterpretations in communication Hence, to communicate well across cultures the students are well advised to be aware of their source culture as well as the target culture, especially hidden parts of the latter including preferences in behaviour in everyday conversations Politeness really plays an important part in all social interactions The author of this study takes

it as her goal to investigate positive and negative politeness strategies in negotiating conversations of the course book “Market Leader – Pre intermediate” by David Cotton, David Falvey and Simon Kent so as to improve the teaching of communication in English to the second year students at Hanoi University of Business and Technology (HUBT)

2 Aims of the study

The study aims at

- Identifying and analyzing positive and negative politeness strategies in the negotiating conversations of “Market Leader – Pre intermediate"

- Offering implications for teaching positive and negative politeness strategies in a more effective way with cross - cultural activities and exercises

3 Scope of the study

This study focuses on the positive and negative politeness strategies found in conversational negotiating activities of "Market Leader – Pre intermediate” It is only intended

for HUBT second year students

4 Methodology

The major method employed is quantitative with due reference to qualitative method as this study is mainly about the practical aspects of cross-cultural communication All the considerations and conclusions are based largely on analysis and reference The main approaches include:

- Reference to publications

- Discussion with supervisor

- Discussion with colleagues

- Discussion with students

- Personal observations

5 Design of the study

The study is divided into three parts:

Part 1: Introduction presents the rationale, aims of the study, scope of the study,

methodology and design of the study

Part II: Development consists of three chapters Chapter 1 provides the theoretical

background on speech acts and politeness strategies Chapter 2 analyzes positive and negative politeness strategies found in the negotiating activities of "Market Leader – Pre intermediate"

in terms of the frequency of occurrences Chapter 3 offers some implications for learning and teaching politeness strategies to HUBT second year students

Part III: Conclusion summarizes the main findings, pointing out the limitations of the

research and giving suggestions for further study

PART II: DEVELPOMENTChapter 1: Theoretical Background

1.1 Speech acts

1.1.1 What speech acts (SA)?

According to Searle (1975), speaking a language is performing speech acts, such as making statements, giving commands, asking questions or making promises Searle states that

“all linguistic communication involves linguistic (speech) acts In other words, speech acts are the basic or minimal units of linguistic communication” (1976, 16) They are not mere

artificial linguistic constructs as it may seem, their understanding together with the acquaintance of context in which they are performed are often essential for decoding the whole utterance and its proper meaning

The term “speech act” was first introduced by Austin (1962) He also comes up with a new category of utterances – the performatives Performatives are historically the first to be examined within the theory of speech acts Austin (1962) defines a performative as an utterance which contains a special type of verb (a performative verb) by force of which it performs an action In other words, in using a performative, a person is not just saying something but is actually doing something (Wardhaugh, 1992: 283) Austin (1962) further states that a performative, unlike a constative, cannot be true or false (it can only be felicitous

or infelicitous) and that it does not describe, report or constate anything

According to Austin (1962), a speech act is an utterance that serves a function in communication He points out that in uttering a sentence we can do things as well as say things In other words, the peculiar thing about the sentences is that “they are not used just to say things, i.e describe states of affairs, but rather actively to do things.” For instance, the sentence “You have a wonderful smile” is more than mere description and statement; it does things on its own This means that it can function depending on contexts as praise, or even asking for money in a certain situation It is clear that speaking a language is performing

speech acts Thus, “all utterances, in addition to meaning whatever they mean, perform specific action (or do things) through having specific forces” (Levinson, Stephen C 1983)

Levinson (1983:236) believes that three kinds of acts are simultaneously performed in making an utterance: locutionary, illocutionary and perlocutionary acts

First, every utterance is represented by a sentence with a grammatical structure and a

linguistic meaning, this is called locution Second, the speaker has some intention in making an

utterance, and what they intend to accomplish is called illocution A third component of a speech act is the effect of the act on the hearer, which is called perlocutionary act

* Locution: the actual form of the utterance

To perform a locutionary act is to produce an utterance with a particular form and more

or less determine the meaning according to the rules of a given language Locutionary acts are divided into three sub-types, and these acts are simultaneous:

Phonic act: Producing an utterance in the phonic medium of sound

Phatic act: constructing a particular sentence in a particular language

Rhetic act: contextualizing a sentence

* Illocution: the communicative force of the utterance, or the intended message of the speaker

Illocutionary act is some kind of intended message that the speaker assigns to his utterance There are different kinds of illocutionary force, because we use language for a variety of purposes: to make promises, to threaten, to demand, etc

What matters in performing an act is whether the act meets certain conditions, known

as felicity and appropriateness Four types of felicity conditions are:

+ Propositional content condition: expresses the content of the act

+ Preparatory condition: expresses the contextual background required for the act + Sincerity condition: requires the speaker to be sincere

+ Essential condition: the speaker intends the utterance to have a certain force

* Perlocution: The communicative effect of the utterance or the hearer's interpretation

of what the speaker says Perlocutionary act is the communicative effect of the utterance

Sharing with Levinson's opinion on SA classification, Searl (1979:240) brings classificatory order to illocutionary acts SA can be grouped into five broad classes of illocutionary points:

+ Declaratives - the speaker brings about some state of affairs by virtue of the utterance

itself The performance of the act brings about a change in the world This class includes endorse, resign, nominate, appoint etc

+ Assertives- the speaker believes that the proposition expressed represents actual states

of affair and has grounds for so doing This class includes accuse, complain, assert, etc

+Expressives - the speaker expresses some psychological state, feelings or attitudes about

a given state of affairs This class includes apologize, compliment, deplore, praise, etc

+ Directives - the speaker attempts to get the hearer to carry out a future course of

action This class includes request, question, order, command, etc

+ Commissives - the speaker becomes committed to doing something at some point

in the future This class includes promise, vow, pledge, guarantee, etc

1.1.2 Direct speech acts

The classification of speech acts into direct and indirect speech acts can be made on the basis of structure Direct speech acts perform their function in a direct and literal manner, or when intended meaning is the same as its literal meaning, we have direct speech acts A direct speech act can be performed by using sentences literally or using performative verb Considering these examples:

(a) “I warn you not to do that”

(b) “I hereby advise you to read the test carefully”

The example (a) is a direct warning and the example (b) is a direct advice According to Yule, when there is a direct relationship between a structure and a function, we have a direct speech act (1996: 55) There are basic types of direct speech acts correspond a special syntax

Speech Act Structure Sentence Function

Assertion Declarative Conveys information; is true or false

Question Interrogative Elicits information

Order and Request Imperative Causes others to behave in certain ways

Considering the following example in case the speaker wants the addressee not to stand in front of television

(a) Move out of the way!

(b) Do you have to stand in front of the TV?

(c) You are standing in front of the TV

(d) You‟d make a better door than a window

As seen in the example, the basic function of all utterances is a command or request, but only the imperative structure in (a) represents a direct speech act In contrast, the interrogative structure in (b) is being used only as a question, so it is not a direct speech act The declarative structure in (c) and (d) are also not direct speech acts Thus, different structures can be used to accomplish the same basic function, but only when there is a direct relationship between a structure and a function, we have a direct speech act

To sum up, the direct-direct exchanges are quite brief, with no implicature involved, with no additional level of meaning The hearer does not have to look for what the speaker might have meant by uttering such and such sentences, everything in their interaction is

expressed explicitly Misunderstandings hardly occur

1.1.3 Indirect speech acts

Indirect speech acts are characterized by the use of language to perform a speech act

without actually using a form appropriate for that speech act According to Wikipedia, “in indirect speech acts the speaker communicates to the hearer more than he actually says by way

of relying on their mutually shared background information, both linguistic and nonlinguistic, together with the general powers of rationality and inference on the part of the hearer”

However, the meaning of linguistic means used may also be different from the content intended to be communicated It may, in appropriate circumstances, be a request or a promise One common way of performing speech acts is to use an expression which indicates one speech act, and indeed to perform this act, but additionally to perform a further speech act, which is not indicated by the expression uttered For instance, to request someone to open the window, the speaker can say “Will you be able to open the window?” thereby asking someone whether he or she will be able to open the window, but at the same time the speaker is requesting him to do so if he can Since the request is performed indirectly, by means of (directly) performing a question, it counts as an indirect speech act

According to Yule, “when there is an indirect relationship between a structure and a function, we have an indirect speech act” (1996: 55) In such cases, a sentence that contains

the illocutionary force indicators for one kind of illocutionary act can be uttered to perform, in addition, another type of illocutionary act (Searle, 1975: 168) Let‟s consider the following example:

“Could you pass the salt?”

The surface form of this utterance is an interrogative one, but is not typically used to ask a question In fact, the speaker does not ask whether the hearer have ability to pass the salt, while expressing his attention which is a request Sentence like that is indirect speech act (Search, 1979)

Moreover indirect speech acts are generally associated with greater politeness in English than direct speech acts Indirectness is a widely used conversational strategy People tend to use indirect speech acts mainly in connection with politeness (Leech, 1983: 108) since they thus diminish the unpleasant message contained in requests and orders for instance Therefore similar utterances as in the following example are often employed:

“It‟s very hot in here.”

In this example the speaker explains or even excuses the reason why he makes a request (Open the window!) Ardissono (2006) argues that speakers often prefer indirect speech acts so that they do not infringe the hearer‟s face, which might be the case here too Ardissono claims that sometimes direct addresses may even appear impolite as in „Would you lend me some money?‟ and „Lend me some money!‟ The latter variant would be absolutely unacceptable in some contexts

However, politeness is not the only motivation for indirectness People also use indirect strategies when they want to make their speech more interesting, when they want to reach goals different from their partners‟ or when they want to increase the force of the message communicated (Thomas, 1995)

1.2 Politeness

1.2.1 Face and Politeness

Politeness is one of the most important aspects of human communication: human beings can only exist in peace together if certain basic conventions of politeness are observed Recently politeness has been seen as a pragmatic phenomenon It holds an extremely significant status in

human interaction since “politeness is interpreted as a strategy (or series of strategies) employed

by a speaker to achieve a variety of goals, such as promoting or maintaining harmonious relation”

(Thomas, 1995:157)

From different view, Brown and Levinson (1987) produce the most comprehensive theory of politeness to date, the basis of which is used for analytical purposes in this study They argue that polite linguistic behavior may show up as a deviation against the rational and efficient nature of talk, but through a consideration of linguistic politeness, the hearer finds reasons for the speaker's apparent irrationality or inefficiency

Brown and Levinson (1987) base their theory on the concept of face (Goffman 1967) Face is defined as “the public self image that all rational adult members have when engaged in spoken interaction, and it must be constantly adhered to” Face consists of two related aspects: positive face and negative face

Positive face refers to "the positive self - image that people have and want to be appreciated and approved by at least some people" (Brown and Levinson, 1987:61) In other words, “positive face is seen as the desire that others like, admire, value or approve of one's wants (material or non-material), or the need to be accepted and liked by others, treated as a member of the group, and to know one's wants shared by others” (Yule, 1996:61)

Negative face, as defined by Brown and Levinson (1987) is "basic claim to territories, personal preserves, right to non-distraction - i.e freedom of action and freedom from imposition" Negative face, therefore, "is reflected in the desire not to be impeded or put upon,

to have the freedom to act as one choosers” (Thomas 1995: 169), and “the need to be independent, to have freedom of action, and not to be imposed on by others” (Yule 1996:61)

In general, participants will co-operate with each other due to the mutual vulnerability

of face However, it is impossible for conversation to flow without a demand or intrusion being made on another person's autonomy Certain illocutionary acts are liable to damage or threaten another person's face Brown and Levinson (1987) define the performance of such utterances

as potential face-threatening acts (FTAs) When confronted with the need to perform an FTA, the speaker needs to decide how it should be uttered

Brown and Levinson (1987) argue that the first choice to be made is whether the FTA

should be performed on record or off record If the on record strategy is chosen, a speaker can

either perform the FTA baldly without repressive action or mitigate the FTA by uttering it with repressive action Performing an act without repressive action involves uttering it in the most

“direct, clear, unambiguous way possible” (1987: 69) Conversely, performing an act with repressive action actually gives face to the addressee, making it clear that no face threat is intended This can be achieved by adopting the strategies of either positive politeness or negative politeness

Furthermore the off record strategy enables the speaker to avoid the responsibility of performing an FTA Following is the figure of possible strategies for doing FTAs by Brown and Levinson (1987):

3 Negative Politeness

Figure 1: Circumstances determining choice of strategy

(Brown and Levinson, 1987: 60)

Although highly appreciating this chart, Nguyen Quang raises his doubt of its universal validity, especially of numbering two and three for positive and negative politeness He proposes another figure:

Figure 2: Strategies to minimize risk of losing face

(Nguyen Quang, 2001)

Politeness strategies are really important in communication and when the speaker employs politeness strategies, both positive and negative, appropriately, he/she may get success in intracultural and cross-cultural communication Therefore, positive and negative politeness strategies are highlighted in this section in particular and in the whole research in general

1 Without redressive action

1.2.2 Positive politeness

1.2.2.1 What positive politeness?

According to Brown & Levinson (1987: 101), "positive politeness is redress directed to the addressee's face, his perennial desire that his wants (or the actions, acquisitions, values resulting from them) should be thought of as desirable In positive politeness the sphere of redress is widened to the appreciation of other's wants in general or to the expression of similarity between ego's and other's wants"

Positive politeness is redressive action directed towards the addressee's positive face, demonstrating that the hearer's wants or needs are thought of as desirable According to Brown

and Levinson (1987), “positive politeness seeks to establish a positive relationship between parties; respects a person's need to be liked and understood”

As Brown and Levinson put it, positive politeness is usually seen in groups of friends,

or where people in the given social situation know each other fairly well It usually tries to minimize the distance between them by expressing friendliness and solid interest in the hearer's need to be respected (minimize the FTA)

1.2.2.2 Positive politeness strategies

Along with Brown and Levinson‟s definition of positive politeness, Nguyen Quang (2003) states that positive politeness is any communicative act which is intentionally and appropriately meant to show the speaker‟s and the addresses, thus, enhancing the sense of

solidarity between them

Viewing that the Vietnamese always want to show their concern to other and give them help whenever needed, Nguyen Quang (2003) suggests seventeen positive politeness strategies,

of which the first fifteen ones are adopted originally from Brown & Levinson (1987) These strategies are:

Strategy 1: Notice, attend to hearer's interest, wants, needs, and goods

This generally means that the speaker should pay attention to the hearer's noticeable changes, remarkable possessions, and other things that the hearer wants the speaker to notice and approve of

E.g Your blouse is very nice Where was it bought?

Strategy 2: Exaggerate interest, approval, sympathy with hearer

This strategy often occurs with many aspects of prosodies, identifying modifiers, and exaggerated intonation, stress, and usually occurs with such adjectives as marvelous, incredible, devastating, fantastic, extraordinary and with such adverbs (plus adjective) as really, absolutely, exactly, truly

E.g What a fantastic garden you have!

Strategy 3: Intensify interest to hearer

The speaker wants the hearer to share some interest with him/her

E.g You always do the dishes! I'll do them this time

Strategy 4: Use in - group identity marker

Using address forms which include the use of second person plural pronoun (you), or such generic names and terms of address as, honey, darling, babe, mom, dad, brother, sister, aunt, sweetheart, etc These forms are used to soften the FTAs These can occur in the forms of questions, of requests, of imperatives

E.g - Come here, mate (honey/buddy)

Strategy 5: Seek agreement

Another way that helps the speaker claim the common ground with the hearer is to seek the agreement between the speaker and the hearer

E.g - John went to London this weekend

- To London!

Strategy 6: Avoid Disagreement

There are different ways to avoid disagreement between speaker and hearer while communicating, i.e., using token agreement, pseudo-agreement, white lies, and hedging opinion

E.g A: What is she, small?

B: Yes, yes, she's small, smallish, um not really small but certainly not very big

Strategy 7: Presuppose/Raise/Assert Common Ground

This strategy is realized through gossip, small talk, personal centre switch, time switch, place switch, avoidance of adjustment of reports to hearer's point of view, presupposition manipulations, presupposition of knowledge of hearer's wants and attitudes, presupposition of hearer's values which are the same as speaker's values, presupposition of familiarity in speaker and hearer relationship, presupposition of hearer's knowledge A good illustration of this strategy

is the use of "You know…”

E.g I had a really hard time learning to drive, you know

Strategy 8: Jokes

Jokes seem to be a very effective strategy for communicating if it is used in the right place and with the right people Typically, this strategy occurs between people who know each other well

E.g.: How about lending me this old heap of junk? ( the hearer's new Cadillac)

Strategy 9: Assert or presuppose speaker's knowledge of and concern for hearer's wants

This strategy is the way to help the speaker communicate with the hearer by indicating that the speaker and the hearer are cooperators and potentially force the hearer to cooperate with the speaker This commonly occurs with the use of "I know" from the speaker

E.g I know you can‟t bear parties, but this one will really be good - do come!

Strategy 10: Offer and promise

The speaker wants to show that he/she will help the hearer obtain the hearer's desire or wants by giving offers and promises which are natural outcome of choosing this strategy Also, the speaker wants to show his/her good intentions towards the hearer's positive face wants

E.g I'll drop by sometime next week

Strategy 11: Be optimistic

The speaker wants to show his/her good intentions of helping the hearer obtain his/her wants by asking the hearer to cooperate with the speaker in carrying out a tacit commitment This means that the speaker not only wants to show his/her intention but also wants the hearer and the speaker him/herself does an action to carry out this commitment

E.g I've come to borrow a cup of flour

Strategy 12: Include both speaker and hearer in the activity

By using “we, us, let's” in the process of communication, the speaker shows that the speaker and the hearer are cooperators, and the speaker wants the hearer to cooperate with him/her in doing something

E.g Let's have a cookie, then

Strategy 13: Give (or ask for reasons)

In Britain, giving or asking for reason seems to be very common and polite This strategy often occurs with such phrases as why not, why don't, why shouldn't

E.g Why don't we go to the seashore?

Strategy 14: Assume or assert reciprocity

Giving evidence of reciprocal rights or obligations obtaining between speaker and hearer may claim the existence of cooperation between speaker and hearer

E.g I did X for you last week so you do Y for me this week

Strategy 15: Give gifts to hearer (goods, sympathy, understanding, cooperation)

Gifts here are not only the material gifts but also the spiritual gifts

E.g I‟ve just been out shopping Here's hot dog for you Like it?

Strategy16: Encourage

By using this strategy 16, the speaker implicitly praises the hearer (as if you can do this) and tries to throw the hearer's fear away, make them concentrate on positive factors, possibilities

E.g Don't worry Everything will be all right

Strategy17: Ask personal questions

This strategy seems very common in oriental cultures where privacy expression may be seen as a sign of trusting each other People will only tell others about their own secret when they trust their contact By making others answer personal questions, the speaker may gain much of trust from the hearers

E.g Are you married?

1.2.3 Negative politeness

1.2.3.1 What negative politeness?

In contrast to positive politeness, negative politeness is repressive action directed to the addressee's negative face, demonstrating the speaker's desire not to impose upon the hearer by restricting their actions Negative politeness makes a request less infringing, such as "If you don't mind " or "If it isn't too much trouble " or respects a person's right to act freely In

other words, deference

( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politeness )

According to Brown & Levinson (1987:129), negative politeness refers to "redressive action addressed to the addressee's negative face: his want to have his freedom of action unhindered and his attention unimpeded" Agreeing with Brown & Levinson on definition of negative politeness, Nguyen Quang (2003) emphasizes that "negative politeness is any communicative act which is appropriately intended to show that the speaker does not want to impinge on the addressee's privacy, thus enhancing the sense of distance between them"

1.2.3.2 Negative politeness strategies

Following are the 11 negative politeness strategies proposed by Brown & Levinson (1987) and Nguyen Quang (2003):

Strategy 1: Be conventionally indirect

The speaker uses this strategy when he/she faces the opposing tensions which can be solved by the compromise of conventional indirectness, and by the use of phrases and

sentences that has contextually unambiguous meanings, such as can you, could you, what on earth, whatever you do, what the hell, why for God's shake

E.g Can you please pass the salt?

Strategy 2: Question and hedge

Using question and hedge makes the hearer feel less threatening, and be more polite This strategy derives from the want not to presume and force on the hearer A hedge can be a particle, a word, a phrase that modifies the degree of membership, such as sort of, kind of, rather, quite, technically, thinks

E.g I suppose (guess/think) that Henry is coming

Strategy 3: Be pessimistic

This strategy is commonly found in redressing the hearer's negative face by the clear expression of the doubt that the conditions for the appropriateness of the speaker's speech act obtain This strategy can be carried out through namely, doing indirect requests with assertions

of felicity conditions like: couldn't possibly, by any chance, etc; or using subjunctives like:

Could (Would, Might) you please ?

E.g Could you jump over that five - foot fence?

Strategy 4: Minimize the imposition

The speaker does not want to impose too much on the hearer, so, the speaker uses this strategy By using this strategy, the speaker lets the hearer understand that there is no imposition or very little imposition on hearer even whether the hearer could do something for

the speaker or not This usually occurs with such sentences as I wonder if , I just want to ask you if ; I am well aware of the trouble when ; I know

E.g I just want to ask you if I can borrow your paper

Strategy 5: Give deference

When using this strategy, the speaker wants to show either he/she humbles and abases him/herself or he/she raises the hearer (by treating the hearer as superior) This occurs between the speaker who has lower social status than the hearer and the hearer who has higher social status than

the speaker Giving deference can be realized through the use of such phrases as excuse me, sir., sorry to bother you but…, please accept my apology, sir…., I must be excused, Miss…

E.g Excuse me, sir, but would you mind if I closed the window?

Strategy 6: Apologise

By using this strategy, the speaker wants to show his/her reluctance to threaten the hearer's negative face and thereby partially redress his/her action This strategy can be realized through the use of hesitation and bumbliness, and such ways to show the regret or reluctance as

I wouldn't normally ask you but…, I don't want to put you in any sort of trouble but…, I am sure that you don't like it but…, I hope this doesn't make you bother too much

E.g.: I'm sorry to bother you

Strategy 7: Impersonalize speaker and hearer

When using this strategy, the speaker means that she/he does not want to put any imposition on the hearer Therefore, the speaker avoids using the pronouns I and you This strategy is realized by the use of performative verbs and impersonal verbs

E.g It's important to finish the work on time

Strategy 8: State the FTA as a general rule

E.g.: Passengers are requested to refrain from flushing toilets on the train

Strategy 9: Nominalise

It is observed that, the more nouns are used the more negatively polite utterances appear

E.g.: It is with much regret that you are not the successful applicant

Strategy 10: Go on record as incurring a debt or as not indebting hearer

The speaker wants to show his/her redress to the hearer by claiming his/her indebtness

to the hearer by means of expressions which are as follows:

- I would be grateful to you

- I would be greatly indebted to you

- I could easily give it to you

- This wouldn't cause me any trouble

- ……

E.g I could easily do it for you

Strategy11: Avoid asking personal questions

With this strategy, the speaker implies that he/ she does not want to “pose his/her nose” into the hearer‟s privacy Such personal questions as: “How old are you?”, “How much do you earn?” “How much is your motorbike?” are avoided

Well aware of the importance of positive and negative politeness strategies in cross - cultural communication, in the next chapter the author will study their realization in the negotiating conversations of the "Market Leader – Pre intermediate "

Chapter 2: Politeness strategies in negotiating conversations in Market Leader (new

edition) – Pre Intermediate Business English

2.1 Negotiating conversations in the course book

"Market Leader” (new edition) is written by David Cotton, David Falvey and Simon Kent and published by Pearson Longman "Market Leader – Pre Intermediate Business English" is ideal for students preparing to work in an international business environment It is the second level the five-level series It draws on the extensive media assets of the Financial Times and other sources, offering a highly authoritative and flexible range of materials for business English learners worldwide The course book includes 12 main units, with 4 review units, a Grammar reference, Writing and Activity Files, Audio scripts and a Glossary of business terms Following on from Market Leader Elementary level, it provides students with the professional communication and language skills necessary for a wide range of business situations such as participating in meetings, telephoning, negotiating, and socializing

"Market Leader – Pre Intermediate” (new edition) is a course book reserved for business people and students of business English With that intention, negotiating skills can not

be missed Negotiation is not persuasion It is getting the best agreement that is possible when agreement must be reached Failure to agree is a failure to negotiate successfully Generally speaking, negotiation means discussions through which relevant parties can reach agreement to satisfy their needs and coordinate relations In international business, everything is negotiable Therefore international business negotiation means cross-cultural communication in the special field of international business, it involves relevant information collection and utilization, and requires good command of language

Be aware of the important role of negotiation in business English, the author focuses on analyzing politeness strategies in the negotiating conversations of the course book Within the scope of this study, only negotiating situations in Market Leader (new edition) – Pre Intermediate are taken into consideration It is estimated that there are about 60 conversations from unit 1 to unit 12 with a wide range of situations Among that number, negotiating conversations make up around 25% These conversations spread from the beginning (unit 2) to

the end (unit 10) of the course book It can be seen that negotiating skill is one of the most essential business communication skills which the course book‟s authors want to emphasize And in order to gain that aim, many strategies in communications have been applied in the

activities and conversations At this point, politeness strategies are indispensable in negotiating conversations of Market Leader – Pre Intermediate Business English

2.2 The politeness strategies in negotiating conversations

It is possible to treat politeness as a fixed concept, as in the idea of “polite social behavior”, or etiquette, within a culture It is also possible to specify a number of different general principles for being polite in social interaction within a particular culture "Polite" is vague, and unpredictable This means what is considered polite in place or one country may be considered "not polite" in other places or other countries This is because of people's different points of view about "polite", as indicated in Brown & Levinson (1987) and Nguyen Quang (2002)

The following sections study how positive and negative politeness strategies are applied by native speakers and the frequency of each strategy Then on the basis of the findings

and discussions some tips in performing politeness strategies will be recommended

2.2.1 The frequency of negative politeness and positive politeness strategies used

in the negotiating conversations

2.2.1.1 Sampling process

In collecting data, all sentences in the negotiating conversations in the book Market Leader are firstly picked up Then, the author sets up the context, takes roles of participants into consideration and discusses with her colleagues, students to find out whether these sentences are "natural" and “polite” All the sentences/utterances which are mostly approved gain a deeper treatment Next the author consults specialists and native speakers with the same procedure Eventually, the collection comes up with 328 utterances which are considered

"natural" and, to some extent, "polite" in two types All statistics in the study are calculated on the basis of total 328 utterances Following is the first categorization of this