Xây dựng tài liệu giảng dạy bổ trợ môn Giao tiếp giao văn hóa cho sinh viên chuyên ngữ Trường Đại học Hàng Hải Việt Nam

Xây dựng tài liệu giảng dạy bổ trợ môn Giao tiếp giao văn hóa cho sinh viên chuyên ngữ Trường Đại học Hàng Hải Việt NamXây dựng tài liệu giảng dạy bổ trợ môn Giao tiếp giao văn hóa cho sinh viên chuyên ngữ Trường Đại học Hàng Hải Việt NamXây dựng tài liệu giảng dạy bổ trợ môn Giao tiếp giao văn hóa cho sinh viên chuyên ngữ Trường Đại học Hàng Hải Việt NamXây dựng tài liệu giảng dạy bổ trợ môn Giao tiếp giao văn hóa cho sinh viên chuyên ngữ Trường Đại học Hàng Hải Việt NamXây dựng tài liệu giảng dạy bổ trợ môn Giao tiếp giao văn hóa cho sinh viên chuyên ngữ Trường Đại học Hàng Hải Việt Nam

TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC HÀNG HẢI VIỆT NAM KHOA NGOẠI NGỮ THUYẾT MINH ĐỀ TÀI NCKH CẤP TRƯỜNG ĐỀ TÀI COMPILING TEACHING SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS FOR CROSS – CULTURAL COMMUNICATION COURSE FOR ENGLISH MAJOR STUDENTS AT VIETNAM MARITIME UNIVERSITY (Xây dựng tài liệu giảng dạy bổ trợ môn Giao tiếp giao văn hóa cho sinh viên chuyên ngữ trường Đại học Hàng Hải Việt Nam) Chủ nhiệm đề tài: Ths Nguyễn Thị Thúy Thu Hải Phòng, tháng 5/2016 CONTENT INTRODUCTION 1 Rationale Aims of the study Significance of the study Methodology of the study Scope of the study Design of the study DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER 1: UNDERSTANDING CROSS – CULTURAL COMMUNICATION 1.1 Definition of culture 1.1.1 Language 1.1.2 Culture 1.1.3 The components of culture 1.2 Definition of Communication 1.3 Communication competence (CC) 1.4 The definition of cross-cultural communication 1.5 Culture shock and how to avoid culture shock? 10 1.5.1 Culture schock? Why culture shock? 10 1.5.2 Main factors creating culture shock 12 1.5.3 How culture - shock: From honey moon to Culture shock to integration 12 1.5.4 How to cope with culture shock? 14 1.6 Practice 15 CHAPTER 2: CULTURE IMPACTS ON NON – VERBAL COMMUNICATION 20 2.1 Understanding non-verbal communication 20 2.2 The importance of nonverbal communication 21 2.3 Types of nonverbal communication 22 2.3.1 Gestures 22 2.3.2 Postures 29 2.4 Cross-cultural nonverbal communication and culture shock 31 CHAPTER 3:CULTURE IMPACTS ON VERBAL COMMUNICATION 33 3.1 Addressing forms in Vietnamese language and culture 33 3.1.1 Circular Relationship 34 3.1.2 Horizontal Relationship- Type 34 3.1.4 Dynamic Relationships 36 3.1.5 The dynamic relationship-type II 38 3.1.6.The variant of circular relationship 39 3.2 Addressing forms in English - American language and culture 40 3.2.1 Addressing forms in English - American 40 3.2.2 Terms of affection 42 3.3 Objectiveness and Subjectiveness 43 3.3.1 Definition of objectiveness and subjective 43 3.3.2 Objectiveness and Subjectiveness in defining the space 43 3.3.3 Subjective and objective in pragmatics 44 3.4 Directness and indirectness 45 3.4.1 Directness 45 3.4.2 Indirectness 46 3.5 Politeness 49 3.5.1.What is politeness? 49 3.5.2.What is FTA? 50 3.5.3 Speech atcs 51 3.5.4 Politeness principles 52 3.5.5 Politeness strategies 53 3.5.6 Bald on record – without redressive action 54 3.5.7 Positive politeness strategies 55 3.5.8 Negative politeness strategies 57 CONCLUSION 61 Major findings 61 Implications for English language teaching 61 Limitations 64 Further study 64 REFERENCES 65 In English 65 In Vietnamese 66 Website 67 LIST OF FIGURES IN THE STUDY LIST OF FIGURES PAGE Figure 1: Levine and adalman’s iceburg of culture Figure 2: Classification of Communication Figure 3: W-shaped diagram of culture shock 13 Figure 4: Circular Relationship 34 Figure 5: Horizontal Relationship- Type Nguyen 36 Quang (1999:165) Figure 6: Dynamic relationship type-I 37 Figure 7: Dynamic relationship type-II 38 Figure 8: Dynamic relationship type-II cited in Nguyen 39 Quang (1999:175) Figure 9: Variant of circular relationship 40 Figure 10: Possible strategies for doing FTAs (Brown 53 and Levinson, 1987) Figure 11: Strategies to minimize risk of losing face (Nguyen Quang, 1999:130) 54 INTRODUCTION Rationale As stated by Nguyen Quang (1998)“ in communication, only language is not enough, behind and deep under it, following many tacit rules, are culture, belief, attitude, norms, values, etc Each country has its own culture” Cross- cultural communication (CCC) is not a new subject in most universities nationwide; and it is an interesting and challenging subject Materials for this subject are various; however, choosing one course book seems to be not enough for students to understand well many differences and similarities between the two cultures and two countries Therefore, the author decided to a research on compiling teaching supplementary materials for Cross-cultural communication course for English major students at Vietnam Maritime University (VMU) Aims of the study The aims of this study are to: - Research and summarize the information from many cross- cultural communication books to compile teaching supplementary materials for English major students at VMU - Collect and arrange some cross- cultural communication exercises to help students deal with the new theory actively Significance of the study It is impossible to separate language from culture when communicating and teaching a foreign language especially at higher level as well That is the reason why culture learning should always go hand in hand with language learning In the world, studying about cross culture communication is varied and abundant Many books written about crosscultural studies, each of these supplies huge knowledge about culture definitions, culture shock, cross-culture communication, and many other aspects of this field, can be Politeness of Brown and Levinson; Intercultural communication of R Scollon, SW Scollon, 1; or Languages and Gestures of McNeill, David; Gestures: the do's and taboos of body language around the world of Axtell, Roger E In Vietnam, cross-cultural studies are recognized well enough with a lot of books such as Intercultural communication and Cross –culture communication for ELT written by Nguyen Quang, Doing business in Vietnam: a cultural guide by Esmond D Smith Jr and Cuong Pham The cross- cultural communication course book for English major students at VMU is Beyond Language Intercultural Communication for English as a Second Language written by Deena R Levine & Mara B Adelman, Prentice Hall Regents (1982) This book indicates the main aspects of cross – cultural communication but it does not include the comparing and contrasting analysis between English culture and Vietnamese culture Moreover, according to the syllabus of Cross-cultural communication subject (see the appendix), students have to self-study at home to deeply understand what they have learnt in class Therefore, the author would like to compile teaching supplementary materials to give more information about culture differences and similarities between English and Vietnamese to help students master the language they are learning and be aware of its cultural background Methodology of the study The method of this study is: - The main method of this study is the contrastive methodology - Researching relevant materials - Consulting with Professors of cross-cultural studies - Discussing with English and Vietnamese colleagues Scope of the study The author will investigate a number of references materials to build teaching supplementary materials for cross cultural communication course for English major students at Vietnam Maritime University Design of the study The study is divided into parts: Part I - Introduction includes rationale, aims of the study, methodology of the study, the significant and the organization of the study Part II – Development is the main and covers the following aspects: Chapter 1: Understanding cross-cultural communication; Chapter 2: Non-Verbal communication in the light of cross-cultural communication; Chapter 3: Verbal communication in the light of cross-cultural communication Part III- Conclusion is the summary of the study, and the suggestions for further research DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER 1: UNDERSTANDING CROSS – CULTURAL COMMUNICATION 1.1 Definition of culture 1.1.1 Language Language is considered to be a mean of human communication formed from such linguistic units as morphemes, words, sentences Supporting that point of view, Crystal (1992: 212) states, language is “the systematic, conventional use of sounds, signs, or written symbols in a human society for communication and self-expression” Therefore, people use language to communicate, to pass their achievements from generation to generation, language is a tool by which people are most frequently judged, and through which they may make or lose friends It is "the vehicle par-excellence of social solidarity, of social ranking, of professional advancement and of business" (M Bygate, 1987: 3) 1.1.2 Culture Unlike language, culture does not contain fixed rules It is different from society to society and even from individual to individual What is right in one culture may not be right in another culture Culture, in Moore’s words (1985:4), is “the whole of the knowledge, ideas and habits of society that are transmitted from one generation to the next.” It is more powerful than instinct Apte (1994), writing in the ten volume Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistic, propose the following definition: “Culture is a fuzzy set of attitudes, beliefs, behavioral conventions, and basic assumptions and values that are shared by a group of people, and that influence each member’s behavior and his/her interpretations of the ‘meaning’ of the other people’s behavior.” Moore (1985:4) also claims the following components of culture, which are “beliefs, values, norms, roles, role conflict, and status.” R.A.Hudson (1982:81) regards culture as “the kind of knowledge” involving cultural knowledge, shared-non-cultural knowledge, and non-shared-knowledge “which we learn from other people, either by direct instruction or by watching their behavior.” In other words, culture is the set of values and ways of acting that mark a particular society Culture, as stated by Nguyen Quang (1998: 3), is “a share background (for example, national, ethnic, religious) resulting from a common language and communication style, custom, beliefs, attitudes, and values Culture in this text does not refer to art, music, literature, food, clothing styles, and so on It refers to the informal and often hidden patterns of human interactions, expressions, and viewpoints that people in one culture share The hidden nature of culture has been compared to an iceberg, most of which is hidden underwater! Like the iceberg most of the influence of culture on an individual cannot be seen The part of culture that is exposed is not always that which creates cross-cultural difficulties; the hidden aspects of culture have significant effects on behavior and on interactions with others” No culture is good or bad, cultures are equal but different There is a famous quote of Mahatma Gandhi that goes “no culture can live if it attempts to be exclusive.” Culture does not belong to any single person but to all people Nguyen Quang in his “Lectures-notes on cross-cultural communication” (2004: 31) also describes culture as “a complex whole of tangible and intangle expressions that are created and adapted by a society or a social group as well as that ways it functions and reacts in given situations.” What can be seen from these points of view is that the language of a community is a part or a manifestation of its culture as Goodenogh’s word “the relationship of language to culture is that of part to whole.” Language and communication modality (verbal, gesture, written) are statements are in some way favorable to hearer, while impolite statements are unfavorable” (Eelen, 2001:8) 3.5.5 Politeness strategies Brown and Levinson (1987:60) not raise rules or principles but suggest five strategies (put in figure below) to deal with FTAs They also number these five strategies to mean that the greater the face threat is, the greater-numbered strategy should be employed Figure 10: Possible strategies for doing FTAs (Brown & Levinson, 1987) The diagram shows that when encountering an FTA, the speaker can choose one of the five possibilities Brown and Levinson (1987) imply by numbering the possibilities that negative politeness is “more polite” than positive politeness This can be seen in the diagram where they number the former and the latter and respectively For universal validity, Nguyen Quang (1999:129-130) proposes another one 53 FTA encounter Don’t the FTA Do the FTA Off record On record With redressive action Positive Negative politeness politeness Without redressive action Figure 11: Strategies to minimize risk of losing face Ways to reduce FTAs or enhance face wants, or even bring benefit to hearer are Positive and negative politeness strategies and Bald on record– without redressive action 3.5.6 Bald on record – without redressive action Bald on record, in G.Yule’s words, is utterances directly addressed to another where illocutionary force is made explicit Eg Give me your car Being preferred as follows: - In cases of urgency or desperation For example: Help! - When there is channel noise or where communication difficulties exert pressure to speak with maximum efficiency - When the focus of task –orientation can make face redress be irrelevant ( in classroom, instruction, in military ) - In some cases of teasing or joking Eg: Do it or die - When Bald – on record is used for H’s benefit Eg: Get out Fire! 54 3.5.7 Positive politeness strategies “Positive politeness is redress directed to the addressee’s positive face, his perennial desire that his wants (or the actions/acquisitions/ values resulting from them) should be thought of as desirable Redress consists in partially satisfying that desire by communicating that one’s own wants (or some of them) are in some respects similar to the addressee’s wants” (Brown and Levinson, 1978:101) Those positive politeness expressions may involve some “ getting to know you” talk, or establish the necessary common ground between the hearer and the speaker by using such phrases as let’s, why don’t, we , or address forms with I to soften the FTAs Yule (1996:62) defines positive politeness as a face saving act tending to show solidarity, emphasizing that both S and H want the same thing and that they share the same goal In simple word, positive politeness shows concern to others Nguyen Quang (2005:24), based on the functions of positive politeness in communication, defines positive politeness as “any communicative act (verbal and nonverbal) which is appropriately and intentionally meant S’s concern to H, thus, enhancing the sense of solidarity between them.” Positive politeness can be understood as the ways to shorten the distance between S and H There are three main positive politeness mechanisms: claim on common ground; convey that S and H are cooperators; fulfill H’s want for some objects” According to Brown and Levinson (1987), there are 15 strategies of positive politeness used to maintain positive face Group 1: Claim on common ground Notice, attend to hearer (H) (his interests, wants, needs) Eg: Goodness, a beautiful hairstyle! (after a while) Oh, by the way, can I borrow your bike? 55 Exxaggerate (interest, approval, sympathy with H) Eg: -My God! Your work? It’s absolutely incredible! ( Trời ơi! Tác phẩm cậu à? Thật tuyệt vời) - Cậu trang điểm đẹp mơ Ra đường khối anh chết, nhiều anh bị thương Thôi cho tớ mượn son (Nguyen Quang,2004:26) Intensify interest to H Use in-group identity markers Seek agreement Avoid disagreement Presuppose/raise/assert common ground Joke Group 2: Convey that S and H are cooperators Assert or presuppose S’s knowledge of and concern for H’s wants 10.Offer, promise 11.Be optimistic 12.Include both S and H in the activity 13.Give (or ask for) reasons 14.Assume or assert reciprocity Group 3: Fulfil H’s want for someone 15.Give gifts to H (goods, sympathy, understanding, cooperation) Nguyen Quang (2004) added two more strategies: 16.Comford and encourage H 17.Ask personal question “Positive politeness utterances are used as a kind of metaphorical extension of intimacy, to imply common ground or sharing of wants to limited extension even between strangers who perceive themselves, for the purposes of interaction For the same reason, positive politeness strategies are usable not only for FTA redress, but in general as a kind of 56 social accelarator, where S, in using them, indicates that s/he wants to ‘come closer’ to H” (Brown and Levinson, 1987: 103) 3.5.8 Negative politeness strategies Negative politeness, according to Brown and Levinson (1987:70), “is oriented mainly toward partially satisfying (redressing) H’s negative face, his basic want to maintain claims of territory and self-determination.” They further state that negative politeness: “is the heart of respect behavior, just as positive politeness is the kernel of ‘familiar’ and ‘joking’ behavior Negative politeness corresponds to ‘negative rites’ Where positive politeness is free-ranging, negative politeness is specific and focused; it performs the function of minimizing the particular imposition that the FTA unavoidably effects.” In Brown and Levinson’s opinion, “when we think of politeness in Western cultures, it is negative politeness behavior that springs to mind In our culture, negative politeness is the most elaborate and the most conventionalized set of linguistic strategies for FTA redress” (1987:130) Nguyen Quang (2005:87), based on the functions of negative politeness in communication, defines negative politeness as “any communicative acts (verbal and nonverbal) which is intentionally and approprately meant to show that S does not want to impinge on H’s privacy, thus enhancing the sense of distance between them.” In Bentahila and Davies’ words (1989:101), “negative politeness is understood as a concern not to impose upon others or restrict their freedom, but remain distance” While positive politeness narrows the distance between interlocutors, negative politeness keeps a distance between them As informed by Nguyen Quang (2005:89), positive politeness can be called “Intimate politeness”, “Close politeness”, “Warm politeness” while negative politeness can be differently named as “Deference politeness”, or “Distancing politeness”, “Cold politeness” 57 Negative politeness, thus, is essentially avoidance-based, and the realization of negative politeness strategies consists in assurances that S recognizes and respects H’s negative face wants and will not or only minimally interfere with H’s freedom of action There are five main positive politeness mechanisms: - Be direct - Don’t presume/assume - Don’t coerse H - Communicate S’s want to not impinge on H - Redress other wants of H’s, derivative from negative face According to Nguyen Quang (2004), there are 11 strategies of negative politeness: Be conventinally indirect Eg: I wonder if you could posibly lend me the book? Question, hedge Eg: If you don’t mind/ if you can/ if it is possible/ if you want to help me…… Could you possibly by any chance lend me your car for just a few minutes?- Dạ phiền anh cho tơi mượn xe phút không ạ? Be pestimistic Eg: Will you open the door please? Minimise the imposition Eg: Could you lend me a little paper? Give deference Eg: I think I must be absolutely stupid but I simply not know how to open this box Apologise Eg: I’m sorry to bother you but could you change your seat with me? Impersonalise S and H Eg: It is necessary to give your opinion State the FTA as a general rule Eg: Passengers will please refrain from flushing toilets on the train Nominalise Eg: We urgently request your cooperation 58 10 Go on record as incurring a debt or not indebting H Eg: I’d be very grateful if you would put in a good word for me Nếu anh chị giúp đỡ tơi khơng dám qn ơn (anh/chị) 11 Avoid asking personal questions Eg: How are you? ( health) How are things? (job) In sum negative politeness is understood as a concern not to impose upon others or restrict their freedom, but remain distant While positive politeness narrows the distance between interlocutors, negative politeness keeps a distance between them This is also known as the “formal politeness strategy”or “Deference politness”, or “Distancing politeness” In Brown and Levinson’s opinion, negative politeness is considered more polite and formal than positive politeness In a whole, according to Brown and Levinson (1987:15-17), “ three sociological factors are crucial in determining the level of politeness which a speaker (S) will use to an addressee (H): these are relative power (P) of H over S, the social distance (D) between S and H, and the ranking of the imposition (R) involved in doing the FTA” And “for cross cultural comparison these three (P,D,R) compounded of culturally specific dimension of hierarchy, social distance, and and ranking of imposition, seem to a remarkably adequate job in predicting politeness assessments” Furthermore, according to Nguyen Quang (2004:186), in Vietnamese language and culture, sometimes it is difficult to clearly distinguish between this and that strategy in positive or negative politeness, or even in both of them Look at the following example: - Em xin lỗi phiền bác xin cho cháu vào học lớp bác dạy gia đình em biết ơn bác lắm 59 + Positive politeness strategies used in this statement: Use in-group identity markers, addressing form (danymic relationship type III): bácem + Negative politeness strategies used in this statement: - Give deference: vào học lớp bác dạy - Apologise: xin lỗi phiền bác - Go on record as incurring a debt or not indebting H: biết ơn In one statement, Vietnamese people can use both positive and negative politeness strategies to reach to the goal of communication Politeness is a large and complicating field which need to be studied more and more to deeply understand all aspects of its 60 CONCLUSION Major findings Traditionally, in teaching and learning languages, grammaratical structures were of primary concern Today, communication and communicative competence are of the first priority Due to crosslinguistic and cross-cultural differences, the English and the Vietnamese have different ways of expressing themselves, communicating and moreover they differ from art, religion, belief, etc Therefore, in order to avoid culture shock and communication breakdown cross-cultural interactants should be equipped with more and more awareness of not only cross-linguistic, but also cross-cultural differences In this study, the author compiles teaching supplementary materials for cross-cultural communication for English major students at VMU This study gives the definitions of culture, communication, cross-cultural communication; the differences and similarities in verbal and non-verbal communication between the two countries as well as some practical exercises These teaching supplementary materials can be used for students’ self-study because learner-centered orientation has become more and more popular in the new teaching methodology Implications for English language teaching It is imperative that the learning and teaching of a language concentrate on communication with an emphasis on communicative competence rather than on linguistic competence only Good techniques and methods for teaching culture as well as applying it to foreign language teaching are not easy to be found and applied effectively To help students (SS) use the language they learn accurately and natively, teachers (Ts) should provide them with both linguistic and cultural input during the teaching and learning process “ If we teach language without teaching at the same 61 time the culture in which it operates, we are teaching meaningless symbols or symbols to which the SS attach the wrong meaning; for unless he is warned, he receives cultural instruction, he will associate American concepts or objects with the foreign symbols.”(R.Polizer, 1959) Conclusively, the role of language teachers is essentially important because they are the ones help the learners get the second language by instructing, encouraging, guiding, and explaining, etc There are some useful techniques for teaching cultural awareness which can be described as follows: Role-play: Being an actor or actress This technique is especially useful for directly involving SS in crosscultural misunderstandings by having selected members to act out in a series of short scenes to aware misinterpretation of something happening in the target culture Activty: MAKING REQUESTS Aim: to raise SS’ awareness of different levels of politeness in making requests Material: flash card Level: Intermediate or above Time: 10 to 15 minutes Instruction: SS work in pairs, decide the best way of making request in each situation, using the card given by Ts The card used could be: 62 A: You are customer You have just B: You are waiter finished a meal Request for the bill A: You are in the street You want to get B: You are the driver a lift A: You are the robber in a bank You B: You are the bank want 50000$ officer Cultural assimilators Situation-base (Karin's ESL party land/ www.eslpartyland.com ) This is a brief description of a critical incident of cross cutural interaction that would probably be understood by the SS Ts can provide SS with some cultural situations (involving some solutions) SS have to work out the solutions which are appropriate Aim: To increase awareness of appropriate behaviors in English-speaking cultures; to compare and contrast these behavior patterns with those in the SS’ own cultures Materials: A task sheet for each student Level: Elementary to Intermediate or above Time: 15 to 20 minutes You’ve got a doctor’s appointment You have got a question about and need to leave class early What something the teacher has just said in would you do? class What would you do? Your neighbour has a dog barking Your neighbours are very noisy They all night You have to go to work in play loud music late at nigh and often early moring It drives you up the hold late night party You have asked wall What will you say to your them to be quieter, but they are neighbour always very rude What should you now? 63 The culture island Through the use of posters, picture cues, projector, Ts can attract SS’attention to the target culture; elicit questions and comments (George H Hughes, 1986:167/8) Limitations Because of the curriculum of cross-cultural communication course, the author has not had a chance to apply these teaching supplementary materials to English major students at VMU Hence, the author is not able to assess the effectiveness of these materials Due to the constraints time, reference resources and especially the researcher’s ability, mistakes are unavoidable Constructive comments, suggestions and recommendations are most welcome Further study The author hopes that she would go further with her research on analysis and assessment of effectiveness of these materials 64 REFERENCES In English Austin,J.L (1962) How to things with words New York: Oxford University Press Bach, K and Harnish, R (1984) Linguistic Communication and Speech Acts England: The MIT Press Berko R M et al, (1989) Communicating Houghton Mifflin Comapany, Boston Blum-Kulka, S (1987) Indirectness and politeness in requests: Same or Different? Journal of Pragmatics, ii, 131-14-6 Blum-Kulka, J House, & G Kasper (Eds.) (1989) Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corperation Bryam, M (1997), Teaching and Assessing Intercultural Communicative Competence Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd Clyne M., (1996) Inter-Cultural Communication at Work.Cambridge University Press Crowther, J (1999) Oxford Guide to British and American Culture for Learners of English Oxford University Press Crystal, D (1992) The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language USA: Cambridge University Press 10.Do Mai Thanh (2000) Some English- Vietnamese Cross - Cultural Differences in Requestings M.A Thesis Hanoi: VNU-CFL 11.Ellis, C (1997) Culture Shock! Vietnam Times Editions pte ltd 12.Green, G M (1989) Pragmatics and natural language understanding some English –Vietnamese Cross-cultural Oxford University Press 13.Hinkel, E (1999) Culture in Second Language Teaching and Learning Cambridge University Press 65 14.Holliday A et al (2004), Intercultural Communication Routledge 15.Hybels S et al , (1992), Communicating Effectively McGraw-ill, Inc 16.Kramsch, C (1998), Language and Culture Oxford: OUP 17.Lado, R, (1957) Linguistics across cultures.The University of Michigan Press 18.Lustig M W., et al., (1996) Intercultural Competence HarperCollins College Publishers 19.Nguyen Quang.(1994) Intercultural Communication CFL Vietnam National University - Hanoi 20.Nguyen Quang (1998) Cross-cultural Communication CFL Vietnam National University - Hanoi 21.Richards, J C., Platt, J., Platt, H (1992) Dictionary of language teaching & Applied Linguistics 22.Samovar, L.A and Porter, R.E (1991), Communication between Cultures California: Wadworth, Inc 23.Searl, J.R (1976) The classification of illocutionary acts Language in Society, 5,1-23 24.Searl, J.R (1969) Speech Acts: An essay in the Philosophy of Language Cambridge: CUP 25.Searl, J.R (1979) Expression and Meaning Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 26.Tomalin B & Stempleski S.(1993) Cultural Awareness Oxford University Press In Vietnamese Nguyễn Văn Độ (2004) Tìm hiểu mối liên hệ Ngơn ngữ-Văn hóa Nhà xuất Đại học Quốc gia Hà Nội Nguyễn Quang (2002) Giao tiếp giao tiếp giao văn hoá Nhà xuất Đại học Quốc gia Hà Nội 66 Nguyễn Quang (2004) Một số vấn giao tiếp nội văn hoá giao văn hoá Nhà xuất Đại học quốc gia Hà Nội Nguyễn Quang (2004) Có ®iĨn dơng häc Anh – ViƯt Nhà xuất bn Từ Điển Bách Khoa H Ni Website www.assertbh.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Body-Language www.buzzle.com/articles/hand-gestures-in-different-cultures.html www.capitaleap.org/ body-language-what-were-reallysaying www.eslpartyland.com www.ESLvideo.com www.insightings.wordpress.com/2009/01/14/directness-speechacts www.web2.uvcs.uvic.ca/elc/studyzone/490/wchild/wchild21.htm 67