A contrastive study of tag questions in english with their vietnamese equivalents

THESIS A CONTRASTIVE STUDY OF TAG QUESTIONS IN ENGLISH WITH THEIR VIETNAMESE EQUIVALENTS NGHIÊN CỨU ĐỐI CHIẾU CÂU HỎI ĐUÔI TRONG TIẾNG ANH VỚI NHỮNG TƯƠNG ĐƯƠNG TRONG TIẾNG VIỆT N

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

HANOI OPEN UNIVERSITY

M.A THESIS

A CONTRASTIVE STUDY OF TAG QUESTIONS IN ENGLISH

WITH THEIR VIETNAMESE EQUIVALENTS

(NGHIÊN CỨU ĐỐI CHIẾU CÂU HỎI ĐUÔI

TRONG TIẾNG ANH VỚI NHỮNG TƯƠNG ĐƯƠNG

TRONG TIẾNG VIỆT )

NGUYỄN THỊ NGÂN

Hanoi, 2016

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

HANOI OPEN UNIVERSITY

M.A THESIS

A CONTRASTIVE STUDY OF TAG QUESTION IN ENGLISH

WITH THEIR VIETNAMESE EQUIVALENTS

(NGHIÊN CỨU ĐỐI CHIẾU CÂU HỎI ĐUÔI TRONG TIẾNG ANH VỚI NHỮNG TƯƠNG ĐƯƠNG

TRONG TIẾNG VIỆT )

CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY

I, the undersigned, hereby certify my authority of the study project report

entitled A contrastive study of tag questions in English with their

Vietnamese equivalents, submitted in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree of Master in English Language Except where the reference is indicated, no other person‘s work has been used without due acknowledgement in the text of the thesis

Hanoi, 2016

Nguyen Thi Ngan

Apporoved by SUPERVISOR

Date………

A special word of thanks goes to all my classmates and many others, without whose support and encouragement it would never have been possible for me to have this thesis accomplished I am greatly indebted to all

my knowledge and understanding I got at Ha Noi Open University for their constant support and encouragement

Last but not least, I am greatly indebted to my family, my husband for the sacrifice they have devoted to the fulfillment of this academic work

ABSTRACT

Questions play an important part in communicative process in any languages People are not able to communicate well without making and answering questions In daily life, people make questions in order to seek information as well as exchange their ideas, knowledge and feelings In reality, however, people sometimes make questions not for the above mentioned purposes They make questions for confirmating or checking information It is obvious that questions cannot be missed in communication Therefore, the study is aimed at characteristics of English Tag questions with their equivalents in Vietnamese by using contrastive analysis as the major method In order to help learners get more understanding of Tag questions and be able to use them correctly and fluently, the study is mainly aimed at making a comparison of English Tag questions with Vietnamese equivalents

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

Table 1: Four types of tag questions ……… 11

Table 2: Form of tag questions ……….………12

DEFINITION OF KEY TECHNICAL TERMS

In this thisis, the key technical termsare to be employed in thesense as stated

in the example below:

(i) Semantics = Study of the relationship between language signs and what is denoted by those signs

(ii) Syntactics = Study of the relationship between language forms and what is denoted by those forms

(iii) Equivalents = Study of the relationship between English language forms and what is denoted by Vietnamese forms

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Certificate of originality i

Acknowledgements ii

Abstract iii

List of abbreviations iv

List of table and figures v

Definition of key technical terms vi

Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Rationale for the research 1

1.2 Aims of the research 2

1.3 Objectives of the research 3

1.4 Scope of the research 3

1.5 Significance of the research 3

1.6 Structural organization of the thesis 3

Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 5

2.1 Review of previous studies 5

2.2 Review of theoretical background 7

2.2.1 Definition of tag questions 7

2.2.1.1 Definition of questions 7

2.2.1.2 Definition of tag questions 9

2.2.2 Syntactic features of tag questions 11

2.2.2.1 Syntactic features of tag questions in English 11

2.2.2.2 Syntactic features of tag questions in Vietnamese 14

2.2.3 Semantic features of tag questions 21

2.2.3.1 Semantic features of tag questions in English 21

2.2.3.2 Semantic features of tag questions in Vietnamese 28

2.3 Summary 29

Chapter 3: METHODOLOGY 31

3.1 Research-governing orientations 31

3.1.1 Research questions 31

3.1.2 Research setting 31

3.1.3 Research approach 32

3.1.4 Principles/criteria for intended data collection & data analysis 32

3.2 Research methods 32

3.2.1 Major methods vs supporting methods 32

3.2.2 Data collection techniques 34

3.2.3 Data analysis techniques 34

3.3 Summary 36

Chapter 4: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS 37

4.1 Contrastive analysis of syntactic and semantic features of tag question in English with their Vietnamese equivalents 37

4.1.1 English: S + Operator + Predication, Operator + S? 37

Vietnamese: CN + VN, có phải không? Có phải + CN + VN + không? Form 1: S + Operator (be) + Predication, Operator (be) + S? 40

Form 2: S + Operator (have) + Predication, Operator (have) + S? 43

Form 3: S + Operator (can/ will ) + Predication, Operator (can/ will ) + S? 44

4.1.2 English: S + Ordinary verb + Predication, Auxiliary verb + S? 45

Vietnamese: CN + VN, à/ ạ/ nhỉ/ đấy nhỉ/ ư/ đấy ư/ sao/ hả/ hở/ đúng không …? Form 1: S + Ordinary verb + Predication, do + S? 49

Form 2: S + Ordinary verb + Predication, don‘t + S? 50

Form 3: S + Ordinary verb + Predication, does + S? 51

Form 4: S + Ordinary verb + Predication, doesn‘t + S? 52

Form 5: S + Ordinary verb + Predication, did + S? 52

Form 6: S + Ordinary verb + Predication, didn‘t + S? 53

4.1.3 English: Imperative statement, modal auxiliary? 54

Vietnamese: Chúng ta cùng……… được không/ nhé? Hãy………nhé? Đừng/ Chớ có mà……….…….nhé? ……… … được không (ạ)? Còn không……… đi/ hả? Có giỏi thì……….……….đi? 4.2 The similarities and differences of syntactic and semantic features of

tag questions in English and Vietnamese 58

4.2.1 The similarities 58

4.2.2 The differences 60

4.3 Implications 61

4.4 Summary 64

Chapter 5: CONCLUSION 65

5.1 Recapitulation 65

5.2 Concluding remarks 67

5.3 Limitation of the research 73

5.4 Recommendations/Suggestions for further research 74

REFERENCE 75

APPENDICES 78

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Rationale of the research

Each nation has its own language People naturally speak the language spoken by their forefathers However, English has had worldwide recognition for ages and becomes the most popular language Especially, in open-door period and the trend towards internationalization, English has become an essential tool in international communication and integration Therefore, the need for learning English is increasing not only in quantity but also in quality

Apart from learning practical English for daily communication, for future jobs, for professional advancement, or for knowledge about England - its people, customs and culture - learners study the theory of its language to get

a through insight into the language Thanks to this language, we can belong

to the world as well as to our own country, and especially using tag question

is very important in everyday communication for the following reasons Firstly, questioning - answering, one of the most common communication types, can appear with the high frequency in language communication Questioning and answering are issues of social-culture implied on them In communicative process in English as well as in other languages, questions play an important role in our daily life We are not able to keep communicating going on well without making and answering questions

We make questions in order to exchange our information, ideas, felling and knowledge Therefore, tag questions can also verify information in communicating Learning and understanding tag question let learners translate English into Vietnamese more fluently

Secondly, tag questions play an important part in a language both in written and spoken forms They are an integral part of a language and they make the language more beautiful and dynamic

Thirdly, there have been quite a number of studies on questions in general; such as Radolph Quick, Sydney Green bourn (1973, A university Grammar of English), Vorothy Danielson, Patricia Porter, BebeccaHeyden (1990, Using English) and by Vietnamese researchers such as Le Dong (True questions, 1996), Cao XuanHao (Prelimiraries to functional grammar in Vietnamese, 1991), Vo Dai Quang (True questions, 2000), Nguyen Dang Suu (English questions contrastive to Vietnamese, 2002) We can be seen that many studies have been conducted on English and Vietnamese questions in general, and tag question is one of the question types

Questions are analyzed in those studies mostly in term of semantic and pragmatic factors In fact, questions play the important role in both English and Vietnamese As a popular type of questions, tag questions are easy to be found

in both spoken and written form and it is impossible to carry out a comprehensive study on them So, the study is aimed at finding out the features of tag questions in English with their Vietnamese equivalents interms

of syntactic and semantic features We try to make a comparison of tag questions between English and Vietnamese so as to find out the similarities and differences between the two languages

For the reasons above, the research entitled “A contrastive study of tag

questions in English with their Vietnamese equivalents” with the hope to

help learners to achieve proper comprehension and usage of tag questions

1.2 Aims of the research

The study is aimed at finding out the features of tag questions in English with their Vietnamese equivalents interms of syntactic and semantic features The author tries to make a comparison of tag questions between English and Vietnamese so as to find out the similarities and differences between the two

languages More importantly, the study hopes to provide Vietnamese learners of English with a basic knowledge of the field and enables them to deeply understand, use tag questions in daily life and apply them to teaching and learning English effectively

1.3 Objectives of the research

With a view to achieving the above - mentioned aims, some specific objectives have

been put forward as follows:

1 To find out the semantic and syntactic features of tag questions in English

2 To find out the similarities and differences of tag questions in English and

Vietnamese

3 To suggest some implications for teaching, learning tag questions

in English

1.4 Scope of the research

Tag questions have become an interesting object of several recent studies in various languages Within the scope of this study, we wish to confine ourselves to studying tag questions from some books in English in terms of syntactic and semantic features The similarities and differences will help Vietnamese learners of English learn tag questions in an easier way and use tag questions in daily communication effectively

1.5 Significance of the research

(i) Theoretically, the study helps to find out the characteristics and carry out contrastive analysis of tag questions in English with their Vietnamese equivalents (ii) Practically, in this thesis, Tag question in English with their Vietnamese equivalents are studied in order that the results of this study can be applied

to increase the efficiency of communication and can be of some help to the teaching and learning Tag question in English

1.6 Structural organization of the research

There are five chapters in this research paper

Chapter 1- Introduction- presents a general introduction to the studying

rationale, significance of the study, aims and objectives, the scope of the study, research questions, and structural organization of the study

Chapter 2- Literature Review and Theoretical Background- involves

some of previous studies Also in this chapter, some definitions and features of tag questions are clarified and mentioned

Chapter 3- Methodology- includes the research design, the research

methodology, the description of the tag questions and sample, research procedure including data collection and data analysis, instrument for analysis and the reliability validity of the thesis The study mainly uses the contrastive analysis method to analyze syntactic and semantic features of tag questions

Chapter 4- Findings and Discussion- contrastive analysis is used to find

out the similarities and differences of tag questions in English with their Vietnamese equivalents, gives some suggested implications of teaching and learning tag questions in English

Chapter 5- Conclusion- is concerned with summary of the thesis, a brief

statement of the findings, the limitation of the study and the recommendation for further research

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter provides some reviews of previous works related to the study, dealing with theoretical framework of investigation such as concepts of tag questions in the thesis, as well as the definitions and features of tag questions This research has presented a review of related previous studies on grammatical structures and semantic features relating tag questions and bases its syntactic and semantic analysis on the perspectives of Imad Al-Nabtiti, william Bright, David Crystal, Randolph Quick in English and those of Le Dong, Cao Xuan Hao, Diep Quang Ban, Vo Dai Quang and Nguyen Dang Suu

in Vietnamese

In addition, this chapter also presents the definitions and characteristics of tag questions in English with their Vietnamese equivalents This chapter was carefully mentioned as the foundation for analysis in chapter 4

2.1 Review of previous studies

Relevant previous studies to the current research are presented in this section The previous findings and discussions play as an evidence of contrastive analysis of similarities and differences of English and Vietnamese tag questions in terms of its form and meaning There have been quite a number of studies on questions in general Following are only three of those which are going to be introduced Because, up to now there have been many descriptions

of questions by foreign grammarians such as Radolph Quick, Sydney Green bourn (1973, A university Grammar of English), Vorothy Danielson, Patricia Porter, BebeccaHeyden (1990, Using English) and by Vietnamese researchers such as Le Dong (True questions, 1996), Cao XuanHao (Prelimiraries to functional grammar in Vietnamese, 1991), Vo Dai Quang (True questions, 2000), Nguyen Dang Suu (English questions contrastive to Vietnamese, 2002)

Le Dong (1996) carried out a study on ―true questions‖ on the view of semantic and pragmatics The author provided some theoretical background

about questions and their common characteristics based on different aspects In the main part, the author focused on analysis of various types of questions in which ―true questions‖ is paid due attention Therefore, he found not only the common features of each type of questions but also semantic-pragmatic factors contributing to form unique characteristics of each question kind

Vo Dai Quang (2000) conducted a study to compare and contrast ―true questions‖ on the fields of semantics and pragmatics in English and Vietnamese In the study, the author used both English and Vietnamese as source and target language in order to find out the similarities and differences

of semantic and pragmatic features of English and Vietnamese questions He implemented the study by proving theoretical background of semantically and pragmatically contrastive analysis of true English and Vietnamese questions

He also dealt with the contrast of different types of true questions as well as pragmatic means which is often seen in those questions kinds

Nguyen Dang Suu (2002) carried out a study of English questions in the contrast with Vietnamese ones In details, the author figured out the features of questions in both English and Vietnamese to have a clear understanding about ways to form a question and their equivalent meaning in the two languages Then, the author studied and compared the pragmatic – semantic structure to find out the similarities and differences between questions in English and Vietnamese language He also conducted surveys to investigate the understanding of Vietnamese students of questions the two languages, then came to some conclusions about the student‘ mistakes and suggested solutions

in language teaching Questions in some books are used as illustrated examples and as the source to display the mistakes in question translation in English – Vietnamese

In conclusion, it can be seen that many studies have been conducted on English and Vietnamese questions in general, and tag questions is one of the question types Questions are analyzed in those studies mostly in term of

semantic and pragmatic factors In fact, questions play the important role in both English and Vietnamese As a popular type of questions, tag questions are easy to be found in both spoken and written form and it is impossible to carry out a comprehensive study on them So, the study is aimed at finding out the features of tag questions in English with their Vietnamese equivalents interms of syntactic and semantic features The writer tries to make a comparison of tag questions between English and Vietnamese so as to find out the similarities and differences between the two languages More importantly, the study hopes to provide Vietnamese learners of English with a basic knowledge of the field and enables them to deeply understand, use tag questions in daily life and apply them to teaching and learning English effectively

2.2 Review of theoretical background

2.2.1 Definition of tag questions

2.2.1.1 Definition of question

Question is a category used to classify sentences based on communicative purpose A question is a linguistic expression used to make a request for information, or the request made using such an expression Hoang Trong Phien states in his book ―Vietnamese Grammar: sentence‖ that ―Question is a kind of sentence used to classify sentences toward reality A statement is of true category; however, a question is of possible category‖ (Phien, 1980) Defined

in Oxford Dictionary, question is ―a sentence worded or expressed so as to elicit information‖ In verbal communication, questions can play the roles as communicative functions Question, in both English and Vietnamese, is initially ―used to ask‖ so as to help speakers get the unknown information that they would like to know Additionally, questions are occassionaly considered

as a greeting, suggestion, a negation or affirmation, etc

In English, an interrogative sentence is a type of sentence which usually asks a question and use a question mark They may ask for information or for

confirmation or denial of a statement They typically begin with a question word such as what, who, how….or an auxiliary verb such as do/does, can or could, etc

Examples:

What is your name?

Does he get up at six o’clock?

She is a teacher, isn’t she?

According to Vietnamese linguist Le QuangThiem, a question is also to find the information for what we have not known or not understood yet (p.222) Examples:

Chị đang đọc sách gì vậy?

Bác sống ở đây bao lâu rồi?

However, sometimes, in both English and Vietnamese, people make questions not for seeking information but just for greeting

Example:

Hi! How are you?

Bà mới đi chợ về đấy à?

Or speakers can raise questions some of the time not for bove purposes but to encourage the listener to think about what the obvious answer to the question must be For instance, when a speaker states:

“How much longer must our people endure this injustice?”

There is no formal answer expected Rather, it is a divice used by the speaker

to assert or deny something

In comparison with Vietnamese, speakers use this question without an answer

to criticize themselves or to express their feeling, their wishes of sympathizing from others Consider the following examples:

Tại sao lúc đó mình không giúp cô ấy nhỉ?

Có ai hiểu được lòng mình lúc này không?

There are many different points of view about classifying English as well as Vietnamese questions Based on the opinion of Bui Y and Bui Thanh Phuong (as citied in Le, 2004, p.227), we have four types of questions:

2.2.1.2 Definition of Tag question

The term tag question is used to refer to a special kind of yes – no question which consists of linguistic item (a question tag) attached to declarative, exclamative or imperative clauses (Huddleston 1995:375) to express the speaker‘s attitude towards the addressee or towards the situation spoken about

Example: Those boys love food, don’t they?

This is an example of a tag question in which the first clause “those boys love

food” is the stem clause or the statement and the second clause “don’t they” is

calledtagor question tag.A tag question includes a statement and a question

(or tag, in other word) It can also be noted that tag questions always require

a comma ―,‖ before the tags

Tag question belong to yes – no questions for two reasons Firstly, the syntactic feature of a question tag is similar to that of a yes- no question, that is, Finite precedes Subject Secondly, the response that the speaker would expect to a tag

question is either “yes” or “no”or the interlocutor can respond by means of an utterance whose implicature communicate “yes” or “no”

Example:

- There are thirty-one day in November, aren’t there?

- No, thirty

- You missed a lot, didn’t you?

- Only the first lesson

(Implicature: No – rejection)

According to Huddleston, based on the way the question defines the set of answers and tag question is a special kind of question in English

Example:

You skipped class last week, didn’t you?

Huddleston noted that interrogative clause added as a supplement to the declarative clause is called the tag The declarative clause is referred as an anchor (Huddleston &Pullum, 2002, p.892) A special rule is that a negative tag is attached to a positive anchor or positive tag is attached to a negative anchor

Examples:

She is beautiful, isn’t she?( Cô ấy đẹp, có đúng không?) She isn’t beautiful, is she?( Cô ấy chẳng đẹp chút nào, phải không?)

Tag questions can be used for imperatives or suggestions After imperatives,

won’t you to often used to invite people to do things, and will/would/can’/can’t/could you to tell or ask people to do things (Swan, 2000,

p.480) For examples:

Give me a hand, will you?( Hãy đưa tay cho tôi nào?)

Do sit down, won’t you?( Ngồi xuống đi nào?) Open the door, won’t you?( Hãy mở cửa ra nhé?) Let’s go to the cinema, shall we?(Chúng ta đi tới rạp chiếu phim đi?)

Exclamative tags represent a third group of rather poorly studied tag It seems to be the case though that these are necessarily "positive exclamative stem - negative tag" partterns with falling intonation on the tags

The tag is raised or fell depending on the illocutionary force of the utterance The rising tag expresses doubted or asked for verification Meanwhile, the rising tag expresses acknowledgement that the anchor is true (Huddleston & Pullum, 2002, p.894) The falling tag expresses the listener‘s agreement

2.2.2 Syntactic features of tag questions

2.2.2.1 Syntactic features of tag questions in English

Tag questions are short questions at the end of statements As the examples above illustrate, a tag question includes a statement and a question (or tag,

in other word) It can also be noted that tag questions always require a comma ―,‖ before the tags As a rule, in tag questions, the statements can be positive or negative and the tags will be negative or vice versa So, there are four types of tag questions:

Table 1 Four kinds of tag questions

Tag questions turn a statement into a question with declarative statement, exclamativestatement and imperative statement The statements are made using an auxiliary verb (for example: be, have, will…) or an ordinary verb and a subject pronoun (for example: I, He, She…) in form The tags are at the end of the tag questions with the structure as ―an auxiliary verb/ verb + subject pronoun?‖ (for examples: is he? isn‘t she? can I? will you? Couldn‘t you? Did they? ) a special structure, the statement is an imperative and the tag is a future verb( for examples: win/ shall/ won‘t ) or modal auxiliaries (for examples: can/ could/ would/ can‘t )

In term of structure, this type of question has auxiliary verb, modal verb or main verb ―to be‖, ―to have‖ which are put into the right form and tense and converted to stand after subject in the statements; to stand before subject in the tags The auxiliary verb, modal verb or ―to be‖ here can be called

―operator‖ With convert word – order in the sentence, tag question in

English can be form with the formulas The table below used to illustrate forms of English tag questions

Table 2 Form of tag questions

English tags have been analyzed as expressing certain attitudes of the speakers towards what is being said in the main clause As McGregor (1995:95) states, the effect of tagging a clause is to modalise it in some way The statement clause retains its mood, but with some qualification Thus tagged declaratives remain declaratives, tagged imperatives remains imperatives and tagged exclamatives remain exclamatives

i) Tag questions with declarative statements

Of these, the declarative is by far the most common (Angela Downing, English Grammar: A University Course Taylor & Francis, 2006) Declarative tag questions are the best studied of all types of tags In this description, they are divided into four main types: reverse polarity tag questions with final rising tone, reverse polarity tag questions with final falling tone, constant, polarity tag questions and invariant tag questions Syntactically, reverse and constant polarity tag questions can be called canonical tag questions

Canonical tag questions

(1) A tag to a declarative stem consists of Finite and Subject in that order Finite is always realized by an operator

(2) The operator is the same as the operator of the preceding stem

When the stem clause contains no operator, the appropriate form of the dummy operator ―Do‖ is used, as for question formation in general

(3) The Subject in a question tag is a personal pronoun which is the same as

or ico-referential with the Subject of the statement clause, maintaining concord with it in number, person and gender

(4) The Polarity of a tag question can be classified into two types: reserve polarity and constant polarity

As far as reversed polarity is concerned, a negative tag follows a positive statement and vice versa

Examples:

It broke down, didn't it? (positive statement - negative tag)

It didn't break down, did it? (negative statement - positive tag)

For a constant polarity tag question, both the statement clause and the tag are in positive form or them are in negative form

Examples:

You met him this morning, did you? (positive statement - positive tag)

You didn't meet him this morning, didn't you? (negative

statement - negative tag)

Invariant tag questions

A positive or negative statement with a falling tone is followed by an invariant tag with rising tone Sometimes, the tags are accompanied by

falling intonation to indicate more insistence

Examples:

They forgot to attend the lecture,/am I right?/

They didn't forget to attend the lecture,/am I right/

ii) Tag questions with imperative statements

The implicit subject of an imperative statement can be the second person singular of plural ―you‖ or a third person like ―everybody‖, ―somebody‖

Moreover, the subject of the tag is co-indexed with the subject of the statement clause The question tag, therefore, can take ―you‖, ―anybody‖, or

―somebody‖ as its subject

According to Downing and Locke (1995:204-205) a second person positive imperative can be followed by a positive or negative tag containing one of the modal auxiliaries ―will/won't/can't/would/can/could‖ accompanied, according to the meaning conveyed and the modal chosen, by either rising

or falling intonation

Examples:

Open the door, will you?

Give me a hand, won't somebody?

Negative imperatives are less commonly followed by tag questions The only type that seems possible is ―will you‖ with a falling tone on the tag (Quirk et al 1985: 813)

Example:

Don't make a noise, will you?

First plural imperatives may take ―shall we‖ as a tag question

Example:

Let's play another game, shall we?

iii) Tag questions with exclamative statements

Exclamative tags represent a third group of rather poorly studied tag It seems to be the case though that these are necessarily ―positive exclamative statement - negative tag‖ partterns with falling intonation on the tags

Example:

How cold it is in here, isn't it?

2.2.2.2 Syntactic features of tag questions in Vietnamese

There are quite a few different points of view about tag questions in Vietnamese among which tag are probably used to express the information The questions require answers from the hearers Another schoolar who

believes that tag questions are sometimes used not to require an answer It invites the hearer's agreement with the speaker's exclamatory statement Sometimes, Vietnamese tag questions express certain power upon the hearer Most of authors come to a join conclusion that tag questions, one type of questions, are used to display speaker's information statement for hearer to answer about that statement

As McGregor (1995:95) claims, the type of modalisation that English tag questions convey appears to relate to presuppositions, expressions or evaluation of the truth or falsity of the proposition expressed by the stem Coming after declarative clauses, question tags invoke a verbal response or a change in the addressee's mental state in relation to the proposition On this background, in the following subsections, emphasis is only placed on the description of Vietnamese yes-no questions which indicate the speaker's presuppositions, expressions or evaluation to the truth or falsity of the preposition Questions of this type can be realised by polar interrogative

particles like “có – không” , “Có phải…không?”, “… có phải không?”,

“…đúng không?”, “hả?/ hở?/ à? /á?/ ạ?/ ư?/ sao?” etc

(1) “Có phải…không?” or “…có phải không?”

It means ―is that right or not‖ These particles are used as a question marker to denote the speaker's uncertainty about the truth of the proposition In other words, the speaker presumes the preposition to be correct but is uncertain about it and requests the addressee to indicate whether it is true or not

Syntactically “Có phải…không?” takes a declarative clause in between but

“…có phải không?” is placed in sentence - final position, after a declarative

clause

Examples:

Có phải anh vẽ bức tranh này không?

Anh vẽ bức tranh này có phải không?

In these two examples, the speaker indicates an inclination to believe that the addressee drew the picture but speaker is not sure about the truth of the proposition The speaker therefore expects the addressee to clarify whether the statement is true or not

(2) Tag questions realised by the structure “CN + có + VN + không?”

This structure can be used to ask for things or information, or to ask somebody

Bạn có thể giúp tôi một tay được không?

(4) “CN + không thể + VN + được sao?”

The structures‘ function is a reproach of the speaker on the addressee's unhelpfulness but does not function as a request

Example:

Bạn không thể giúp tôi một tay được sao?

(5) Tag questions realised by polar interrogative particles “à”

The polar interrogative particle ―à‖ is placed in a sentence - final position It can be used in neutral situations regardless of the age relationship between the speaker and the addressee

The tag ―à‖ indicates the speaker's commitment to the truth of the proposition plus a request for the addressee's confirmation

Examples:

Anh gọi điện cho em à?

Cháu tìm chú à?

(6) Tag questions realised by polar interrogative particles “ạ”

A tag questions with ―ạ‖ ending is used by a speaker who is younger than be addressee and wants to show his/her respect to the addressee In this kind of question, the speaker expects the proposition to be correct and ask for the addressee's reaffirmation

Example:

Ngài lấy cuốn sách này ạ?

(7) Tag questions realised by polar interrogative particles “hả/ hở?”

The particles ―hả/ hở‖ can be used after a statement to turn it into a question When a question ends with ―hả/ hở‖, the speaker presumes the proposition top

be correct and expects the addressee's confirmation

Example:

Bạn yêu anh ta hả?

According to Diep Quang Ban ( 2004 : 233), a yes -no question with ―hả/ hở‖ ending is often used by a speaker talking to a person of lower or same status The polar interrogative particle ―hả/ hở‖ is used when the speaker wants to show friendly attitude towards the addressee

(8) Tag questions realised by polar interrogative particles “…đúng không?”

Polar interrogative particle ―đúng không‖ is placed after a declarative statement to turn a statement into a question When is pronounced with emphatic stress on each syllable, ―đúng không‖ means ―Is that true?‖ The question of this kind is used when the speaker has reliable information about the truth of the proposition and is asking for the addressee's confirmation Polar interrogative particle ―đúng không‖ is typically used to force the addressee to assert what the speaker thinks is true In other words, ―đúng không‖ is often used in an accusation

Example:

Con đã làm vỡ kính đúng không?

(9) Tag questions realised by structures “CN + không thấy + VN + à?”

“CN + không biết + VN + à?”

The question realised by the structure ―CN + không thấy + VN + à?‖ or ―CN + không biết + VN + à?‖ can be used in response to a stupid question or complaint Questions of this kind are not meant to be answered because their answers are:

- Sao em chưa nấu cơm?

- Chị không thấy em vừa phải giặt một chậu quần áo à?

(10)Tag questions realised by polar interroqative particles “ư/sao?”

Tag questions ending in ―ư/sao?‖ indicate that the speaker challenges the proposition To put it in another way, the speaker does not think the proposition is true and wants to express his/her surprise at the truth of the proposition

Example:

Cậu đã hoàn thành bài kiểm tra rồi ư?

In this example, the speaker does not believe that the addressee has finished the test The speaker therefore expresses her/his surprise by using polar interrogative particle ―ư/sao‖ to challenge the proposition

In some cases, ―ư/sao‖ can be used in a question when the speaker knows the truth of the proposition and reproaches the addressee for having done what shouldn't have been done Questions of this type may have scolding effect Example:

Em đã không nói sự thật với tôi sao?

In the speaker's opinion, the addressee shouldn't have told that person the truth The speaker feels surprised and disappointed when the addressee has done what shouldn't have been done

(11) Tag questions realised by structure “CN + mà + VN + á?”

The structure ―CN + mà + VN + á?‖ is used to question the validity of the previous claim of the addressee In other words, the speaker now does not believe what the addressee has just said:

Anh mà cũng làm việc chăm chỉ á?

In this example, the speaker does not believe that the person the addressee just talked about is hard - working He therefore challenges the truth of the proposition by using an ironic overtone via ―……mà… á‖ structure

As Diep Quang Ban (2004:235) states, imperative structures in Vietnamese are typically used to express the speaker's wish to ask or to force the hearer to perform the action Syntactically, Vietnamese imperatives are sentences which normally have no overt grammatical subject However, the second person

―you‖ is the implicit subject of these sentences The predicator is the starting point of an imperative structure

Example:

Đưa cho tôi cuốn sách

Vietnamese imperatives can also be realised by some formal characteristics such as imperative markers, modal particles or imperative intonation

(12) Tag questions realised by imperative marker “Hãy…”

―Hãy‖ is placed in initial, pre-verbal position, indicating positive polarity of the imperative

“Đừng"/ “Chớ” (có mà) often precedes a verb or an adjective in an

imperative structure to advise or ask the addressee not to do something

Example:

Đừng có mà đi về khuya nhé?

“Không được” is an imperative particle and placed before a verb ―Không

được‖ is considered as a must for the addressee not to do something It is equal

to ―don't‖ in English ―Không được‖ is somewhat different from đừng/chớ because the former is more formal and can be used in written language whereas the latter are more popular in colloquial language or speech of daily life

(14) Tag questions realised by the structure “CN + VN +được không (ạ)?”

Polar interrogative particles ―được không‖ or ―được không ạ‖ can be used after

an imperative to ask for something or to ask the addressee's permission to do something ―được không‖ is not only entails a concern about the hearer's ability

to perform the action but also shows a weak claim about the occurrence of the state of affairs In Vietnamese, ―được không‖ is used by an older person talking to a younger one or by a person to another of the same age and ―được không ạ‖ by a younger person to an older one

Examples:

Em đưa cho tôi cuốn sách được không?

Cô cho em xin cuốn sách được không ạ? /

(15) Tag questions realised by the structure “CN + VN + nhé?”

―nhé‖ is used to give an instruction or order in a fairly direct way and in fairly informal situation It helps to mitigate an order and indicates a friendly relationship between the speaker and the addressee

Example:

Tắt ti vi giúp mẹ nhé?

(16) Tag questions realised by the structure “Còn không đi hả?”

This structure is used when the addressee has ignored a demand which was issued previously The speaker therefore wants to express certain power upon the addressee This expression indicates anger, frustration or impatience Alternatively, it may be a threat or warning of punishment to come if the command is not complied with

Example:

Còn không im mồm đi hả?

(17) Tag questions realised by the structure “Có giỏi thì đi?”

This structure can be understood as an experession of anger or frustration or as

a warning or threat Moreover, by this utterance, the speaker expresses certain power upon the hearer:

Có giỏi thì uống hết chỗ bia này đi?

(18) Tag questions realised by exclamatory particles like “thật/ quá/ ghê/ thế”

These particles often come in final, post - adjectival position of the exclamatives

Example:

Ô, cô gái đẹp thật

2.2.3 Semantic features of tag questions

2.2.3.1 Semantic features of tag questions in English

i) Tag questions with declarative statements

Reverse polarity tag questions with a final rising tone

According to Anderson (2001:119), a rising tone on the tag constrains the utterance towards a weak epistemic reading in the sense that the speaker is uncertain as to truth of the proposition and presents it as possibly true The tag

of this type behaves like the epistemic adverbial ―possibly‖ Moreover, the speaker assumes the proposition to be a belief shared by both the speaker and the addressee but more salient in the addressee's contextual background The

addressee is, therefore, likely to be able to verify the proposition

Downing and Locke (1995:204) also share the view with Anderson that a rising tone indicates doubt, and expects the hearer to clarify whether the statement is true or not The tag with rising intonation combines with either a positive or a negative assumption, expressed in the statement, to give the

following meanings:

Positive assumption (in the statement) + doubt (in the tag)

You've got a car, /haven’t you? /

Meaning: Tôi nghĩ rằng cậu đã có ô tô, tôi nghĩ vậy có đúng không? Negative assumption (in the statement) + doubt (in the tag)

You haven't got a car, /have you? /

Meaning: Tôi nghĩ cậu không có cái ô tô nào cả, điều này đúng chứ? Reverse polarity tags with rising intonation perform nearly the same yes-no questioning function (Wennerstrom 2001: 163, Alexander 1992:258) For example, the question ―You understand, /don't you?/‖ is equivalent to a genuine yes - no question ―Do you understand?‖ In the former, the speaker presents a positive assumption in the statement and a neutral expectation in the tag In other words, the speaker really does not know the answer to the question The speaker thinks or expects that the addressee understands what is being talked about, but then has doubts and invites that the addressee understands what is being talked about, but then has doubts and invites verification from the addressee The former talked about, but then has doubts and invites verification from the addressee The former and the latter are alike

in that the speakers of these two utterances are prepared for an answer that accepts or one that rejects the proposition at issue

Examples:

A You understand, /don't you?/

Yes, I do

B Well, as a matter of fact, I don't

A': Do you understand?/

- You haven't got a pen, \have you?/

- Yes, here you are

Thomson and Martine (1992:247) state that the pattern ―you couldn't…, \ could you ?/ ‖ can be used to express a not very hopeful request The speaker doesn't really expect a favourable answer

Example:

You couldn't do me a favour, \could you?/

Reverse polarity tag questions with a final falling tone

When a reverse polarity tag question is said with falling intonation on both clauses, it indicates the statement - like intent whereby the speaker is certain as

to the truth of the proposition The tag of this type behaves like the epistemic adverbial probably In addition, the speaker assumes the proposition to be a belief shared by both the speaker and the addressee The speaker therefore wishes the addressee to confirm the proposition or to agree with the statement

(Downing and Locke 1995:204, Andersen 2001:119)

Reverse polarity tag with a rising tone combines with either a positive or a negative assumption, expressed in the statement, to give the following

meanings:

Positive assumption (in the statement) + certainty (in the tag)

You know why, \don't you?\

Meaning: Tôi cho rằng cậu biết lí do tại sao Cậu sẽ xác minh điều đó chứ? Negative assumption (in the statement) + certainty (in the tag)

You don’t know why, \do you?\

Meaning: Tôi tin rằng cậu không biết lí do tại sao Hãy nói những gì có thể Reverse polarity tag questions with final falling intonation often perform the following functions

(1) A coercive device:

Reverse polarity tag questions with final falling intonation are typically used in courtroom examination (cross - examination) to control the responses of

witnesses (Wennerstrom 2001: 161) In this case, tag questions are relatively coercive in their response - eliciting illocutionary force In other words, they are used to force feedback from an uncooperative addressee:

You wanted to take advantage of that, \didn't you?\

Meaning: Bị cáo muốn nhận được sự khoan hồng của pháp luật chứ? You didn't really see a gun in the defendant's hand, \did you?\

Meaning: Có thật là anh không nhìn thấy khẩu súng trong tay bị cáo không?

In these examples, the effect of the tags is to turn the statements into questions whose answers are inherently suggested The tag in (1) has the effect of indicating that the extended answer to the question should be ―Yes, I wanted to take advantage of that‖ In (2), the answer should be ―No, I didn't really see a gun in the defendant's hand‖

Generally speaking, falling intonation on tags not only emphasizes the inllocutionary force of more insistently seeking confirmation of the question's assertion but also produces the perlocutionary effect of communicating the perspective of the attorney to the jury to persuade them of the ―truth‖ of that assertion (Wennerstrom 2001:163)

(2) A facilitative device:

Reverse polarity tag questions with final falling intonation may function as facilitative or positive politeness devices, providing an addressee with an easy entrée in to a conversation (Lakoff cited in Holmes 2001:289) or engaging him/her in the conversation (Andersen 2001:101) For this purpose, tag questions can be understood as a tool to promote solidarity between the parties

by invoking common group membership

For example, Margaret is holding a small party to introduce a new neighbour, Frank, to other people in the street She introduces Frank to an old friend, Andrew:

Margaret: Andrew, this is our new neighbour, Frank, Andrew has just changed jobs, \haven't you?\

Andrew: Yes, I am now a well -paid computer programmer instead of a poorly paid administrative assistant

In this example, Margaret uses the reverse polarity tag question with final falling intonation to invite Andrew to take a conversational turn to comment on her assertion In other words, Margaret gives Andrew a chance to pick up on the topic ―employment‖ and get into the conversation with Frank

- I was in the bath, \wasn't I?\( Lúc đó anh đang ở trong phòng tắm mà.)

The above tag questions are called antagonistic tag questions They carry a sense of resentment and suggest that the speakers think the questions are stupid even if they aren't Antagonistic tag questions are not meant to be answered because their answers are obvious (retrieved from http://forum.wordreference.com)

(4) A softening device:

Reverse polarity tag questions with final falling intonation may be used to soften a criticism or a negative comment (Lakoff cited in Holmes 2001:289) Example:

That was a bit of a daft thing to do, \wasn't it?\

(Phải chăng đó thật sự là một việc làm ngớ ngẩn.)

ii) Tag questions with inperative statements

When used as directives, imperatives on their own do not encode any choise for the recipients They treat the performance of the action as straightforward and unproblematic A tag therefore has some effect on the interpersonal meaning or illocutionary force of an imperative clause

On one hand, it invites the hearer's consent to the performance of the act and this is a persuasive softens the command by leaving it up to the hearer to decide what to do

A tag question with an imperative itself is considered to be an important tool for the realization of politeness because it has a balance between clarity and non - coerciveness It has the qualification of clarity in the sense that the first part of the tag question, the imperative clause, helps the speaker achieve a primary goal, in the most explicit and the shortest way possible In addition it is non-coercive because the second part, the tag, is a hedging tool to avoid hurting the hearer's desired social image and feelings; the tag gives the addressee the possibility to deny performing the requested act

On the other hand, it has also been observed that an imperative tag can be used

to increase the force of directives (Quirk et al 1985:813)

The differences between imperative tag questions are affected by the modal verbs used in the tags After positive imperatives, ―won't you‖ is often used to invite people to do things (especially in British English) (Swan 1995:466) Example:

Take a seat, won't you? (Chỗ ngồi này còn trống phải không bạn ?)

We sometimes add ―won't you‖ when we want people to follow our advice Example:

And do take care, won't you? (Bạn sẽ chăm sóc anh ấy nhỉ?)

The tag ―will you‖ or ―won't you‖ can be used after a positive imperative to make an order

Examples:

Open the door, won't you?/least insistent

( Mở cửa ra đi?)

Open the door, will you?/ polite, anticipates willingness

( Mở cửa ra được không?)

Open the door, will you?\ most insistent, forceful

( Làm ơn mở cửa ra được không?)

In uttering ―will‖, the speaker is questioning the addressee's willingness to perform the act The modal ―will‖ encodes an intermediate degree of likelihood That it to say, ―will‖ indicates that the state of affairs is likely to occur, or the event is probable (BlumKulka, cited in Marquez 2000:192-1193: Richard 2003:192)

When using the tag ―can you‖, the speaker sounds friendly towards the addressee The modal ―can‖ not only entails a concern about the hearer's ability

to perform the action but also shows that the speaker is committed to the possibility of the state of affairs ―Can‖ shows a weak claim about the occurrence of the state of affairs and that the event is possible ( BlumKulka, cited in Marquez 2000:192-193)

Example:

Help me, can you? (Bạn có thể giúp tôi à?)

―Could you‖ creates an impression of less imposition and hence greater politeness, ―Could you‖ is used by a speaker who is less socially familiar with

the addressee

Example:

Give me a hand, could you? (Hãy nắm lấy tay tôi nhé?)

The tag ―can't you‖ can also be used after positive imperative clause to make a forceful or insistent demand but ―can't you‖ is less polite and more impatient than ―will you‖ (Hunddleston 1995:376)

Example:

Shut up, can't you? ( Có thể im lặng chút được không?)

The tag ―would you‖ can be used perfectly correctly after positive imperative clause to give orders, but they are not a polite way of requesting people to do

things (Swan 1995:507)

Example:

Help me, would you? ( Giúp tôi thế này ư?)

The structure ―imperative clause, would you‖ can also be uttered by a parent when a child has done or appears to be intent on doing something s/he has been explicitly instructed not to do This utterance is considered as an expression of anger or frustration or as a warning or threat (McGregor 1995:104) Moreover,

by this utterance, the speaker expresses certain power upon the hearer:

Eat all the chocolates, would you? ( Ăn bằng hết chỗ sôcôla này nhé?)

iii) Tag questions with exclamative statements

According to Quirk (1985:813) exclamative tags invite the hearer's agreement with the speaker's exclamatory statement

Example:

How cold it is in here, isn't it?

(Trời lạnh thế này thì để nó ở lại đây nhé?)

2.2.3.2 Semantic features of tag questions in Vietnamese

Questions tags with modal particles in Vietnamese are tools to express the speaker's attitude towards the addressee of towards the situation spoken about They act as an indicator of the speaker's assumptions, intentions of emotions

As far as reverse polarity tag questions with final rising tone are concerned, they lack the assertiveness of an outright claim They allow the speaker to avoid commitment and conflict with the addressee by giving the impression of not being certain They are realised by polar interrogative particles ―…có phải không?‖ or ―Có phải…không?‖

Reverse polarity tag questions with final falling tone can be used to indicate a speaker's strong commitment to the truth of her/his propositions They are realised by polar interrogative particles ―à/ạ/hả/hở‖; When reverse polarity tag questions with final falling tone function as a coercive device, they are equivalent to Vietnamese yes-no question ending in ―đúng không‖ If the tag of this type convey the speaker's antagonistic attitude as the structure ―Không thấy… à?‖ or ―Không biết…à?‖ has on Vietnamese people