A cross cultural study of using hedges in refusing a request in english and vietnamese = nghiên cứu giao thoa văn hóa về cách dùng lối nói vòng vo khi từ chối yêu cầu trong tiếng anh và tiếng việt

VINH UNIVERSITY FOREIGN LANGUAGES DEPARTMENT -*** - A CROSS-CULTURAL STUDY OF USING HEDGES IN REFUSING A REQUEST IN ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE (NGHIÊN CỨU GIAO THOA VĂN HÓA VỀ CÁCH DÙNG LỐI NĨI VỊNG VO KHI TỪ CHỐI U CẦU TRONG TIẾNG ANH VÀ TIẾNG VIỆT) GRADUATION THESIS FIELD: LINGUISTICS Student : LÊ THỊ HƯƠNG Supervisor: LÊ THỊ THÚY HÀ, M.A Vinh, May 2011 Acknowledgements I would like to express my deepest gratitude to MA Lê Thị Thúy Hà, my supervisor, for her insightful instructions, helpful encouragement, invaluable advices as well as her supply of important materials during my course of writing Special thanks also to my teachers in the Department of Foreign Languages of Vinh University, particularly Mr Trần Bá Tiến who helps me choose the name of the thesis I‟m gratefully indebted to all my friends for their help and enthusiasm in the computer design and data collection Finally, my heart –felt thanks are due to my parents and relatives who give me the encouragement to keep writing this study Vinh, May 9th, 2011 Le Thi Huong Page Table of Contents Acknowledges……………………………………………………………………………… List of Tables and Figures………………………………………………………………… Part A: INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………… Rationale……………………………………………………………………………… Aims of the study………………………………………………………………………… Scopes of the study……………………………………………………………………… Methods of the study…………………………………………………………………… Design of the study……………………………………………………………………… Part B: DEVELOPMENT……………………………………………………………… 10 Chapter 1: Theoretical Background…………………………………………………… Language and Culture………………………………………………………………… 10 10 1.1 Culture………………………………………………………………………………… 10 1.1.1 Definition of Culture………………………………………………………………… 10 1.2 Language……………………………………………………………………………… 11 1.2.1 Definition of Language……………………………………………………………… 11 1.3 The relation between Culture and Language……………………………………… 11 1.4 The speech act………………………………………………………………………… 13 1.5 Politeness……………………………………………………………………………… 14 1.5.1 Different ideas of the concepts “politeness”………………………………………… 14 1.5.2 Face and face wants………………………………………………………………… 15 1.6 Directness and indirectness…………………………………………………………… 17 1.6.1 Directness and indirectness…………………………………………………………… 17 1.6.2 Factors affecting directness and indirectness………………………………………… 20 1.7 Hedging in refusing a request in English and Vietnamese………………………… 21 1.7.1 Definition of Hedging……………………………………………………………… 21 1.7.2 Linguistic realizations of hedging in refusing a request…………………………… 22 1.7.3 Hedging seen as politeness…………………………………………………… 23 1.7.3.1 Hedging as a negative politeness strategy………………………………………… 23 1.7.3.2 Grice‟s maxims…………………………………………………………………… 24 1.7.3.3 Hedges addressed to Grice‟s maxims………………………………………… 1.7.4 Hedging as a positive politeness strategy…………………………………………… 25 27 1.7.5 Hedging in refusing a request seen as speech act…………………………………… 28 1.7.5.1 Refusing as a response to a speech act…………………………………………… 28 1.7.5.2 Hedging as speech act…………………………………………………………… 29 Chapter 2: The study……………………………………………………………………… 35 2.1 The survey questionnaires……………………………………………………………… 35 2.2 Description of the subjects…………………………………………………………… 35 2.3 Findings from the data………………………………………………………………… 35 2.3.1 Comments on using hedges to refuse a request offered by the English subjects 35 2.3.1.1 Data on English subjects‟ personal information…………………………………… 35 2.3.1.2 Data on factors affecting the choice of hedges in refusing a request of English 37 subjects………………………………………………………………………………… 2.3.1.3 Data on frequency of using hedges in refusing a request offered by the English 38 subjects…………………………………………………………………………………… 2.3.1.4 Data on need of hedges in refusing a request in communication……………… … 39 2.3.1.5 The number of Vietnamese subjects using hedges to refuse a request when they 39 are angry…………………………………………………………………………………… 2.3.1.6 The number of English subjects using hedges to refuse a request when they are in 40 hurry……………………………………………………………………………………… 2.3.2 Comments on using hedges to refuse a request offered by the Vietnamese 40 subjects…………………………………………………………………………………… 2.3.2.1 Data on Vietnamese subjects‟ personal information……………………………… 41 2.3.2.2 Data on factors affecting the choice of hedges in refusing a request of Vietnamese 42 subjects…………………………………………………………………………………… 2.3.2.3 Data on frequency of using hedges in refusing a request offered by the Vietnamese 43 subjects…………………………………………………………………………………… 2.3.2.4 Data on need of hedges in refusing a request in communication………………… 44 2.3.2.5 The number of Vietnamese subjects using hedges to refuse a request when they 44 are angry…………………………………………………………………………………… 2.3.2.6 The number of Vietnamese subjects using hedges to refuse a request when they 45 are in hurry………………………………………………………………………………… 2.3.3 Similarities and Differences between Vietnamese and English informants in using 46 hedges to refuse a request……………………………………………………… 2.3.3.1 Comparison on hedging factors…………………………………………………… 46 2.3.3.2 Comparison on frequency of using hedges in refusing a request between the 46 English and Vietnamese subjects…………………………………………………………… 2.3.3.3 Comparison on the need of hedges in refusing a request in communication… 47 2.3.3.4 Comparison on the number of English and Vietnamese subjects using hedges to 48 refuse a request when they are angry……………………………………………………… 2.3.3.5 Comparison on the number of English and Vietnamese subjects using hedges to 49 refuse a request when they are in hurry…………………………………………………… 2.3.4 Hedges in refusing a request as seen from communicating partners‟ parameters 50 2.3.5 Hedges in refusing a request as seen from informants‟ parameters……………… … 55 Chapter 3: Implication…………………………………………………………………… 59 3.1 Cultural Awareness…………………………………………………………………… 59 3.2 Implication for Teacher………………………………………………………………… 60 3.2.1 Teachers as a Means of Learning a Second Culture………………………………… 60 3.3 Suggestions for Learners…………………………………………………………… 63 Part C: Conclusion……………………………………………………………………… 65 I.Recapitulation……………………………………………………………………… 65 II.Suggestions for further studies…………………………………………………… 65 References………………………………………………………………………………… 67 Appendixes………………………………………………………………………………… List of Tables and Figures I Tables Page Table 1: English subjects‟ information regarding gender, marital status and age 36 Table 2: English subject‟s information regarding the place they have been living and 36 education level Table 3: The factors affecting on the choice of using hedges in refusing a request of the 37 English subjects Table 4: The frequency of using hedges in refusing a request 38 Table 5: The main purposes of using hedges to refuse a request 39 Table 6: The number of English subjects using hedges to refuse a request when they are 40 angry Table 7: The number of English subjects using hedges to refuse a request when they are in 40 hurry Table 8: English subjects‟ information regarding gender, marital status and age, 41 Table 9: Vietnamese subject‟s information regarding the place they have been living and 41 education level Table 10: The factors affecting on the choice of using hedges in refusing a request of the 42 Vietnamese subjects Table 11: The frequency of using hedges in refusing a request 43 Table 12: The main purposes of using hedges to refuse a request 44 Table 13: The number of Vietnamese subjects using hedges to refuse a request when they 45 are angry Table 14: The number of Vietnamese subjects using hedges to refuse a request when they 45 are in hurry Table 15: Age influence on Hedges 55 Table 16: The percentage of people choosing column sometimes when using hedges in 56 refusing a request Table 17: Influence of local residence on the choice of using hedges 57 II Figures Page Figure 1: Types of Kaplan‟s diagrams 18 Figure 2: The most important factor having affect on the choice of using hedges in 38 refusing a request of the English subjects Figure 3: The most important factor having affect on the choice of using hedges in 43 refusing a request of the Vietnamese subjects Figure 4: The most important factor having affect on the choice of using hedges in 46 refusing a request of the English and Vietnamese subjects Figure 5: Frequency of using hedges in refusing a request between the English and 47 Vietnamese subjects Figure 6: The need of hedges in refusing a request in communication in English and 48 Vietnamese subjects Figure 7: Comparison on the number of English and Vietnamese subjects using hedges to 49 refuse a request when they are angry Figure 8: The number of English and Vietnamese subjects using hedges to refuse a request 49 when they are in hurry Part A: INTRODUCTION I Rationale of the Study When people talk, is it just information that is being exchanged? A traditional view on language saw the exchange of information as the sole purpose of human communication Nowadays, however, it is widely recognized that spoken language performs a variety of other tasks, too These tasks can be divided into two broad categories, one covering the exchange of information and the other interpersonal aspects of communication In other words, our words not only convey meaning but carry interpersonal messages as well One way of conveying interpersonal messages in spoken interaction is hedging Hedging is a communicative strategy which enables speakers to, for example, softens the force of their utterances (Nikula 1997: 188) in order to make them more acceptable to the interlocutor During intercultural communication, apart from such dimensions of language as grammar, lexis, phonetics…many communication illocutionary acts involved in such cross-cultural speech activities as greeting, apologizing, thanking, complaining, refusing and so on have arisen Generally, human beings‟ communication is not arid but glossy Practically, study on the similarities and differences between the two languages and cultures English and Vietnamese has been one of the author‟s concerns when studying English at university It is clear that there are many differences between the two languages of as those in grammar, lexicology, and translation, phonetic and so on However, there still exist plenty of similarities and differences between English and Vietnamese that can be demonstrated through cross- cultural speech activities as greeting, thanking, complimenting, complaining, and refusing and so on Furthermore, in daily life, request plays an important role in social and business communication No one likes to be directly refused because rarely does he find it easy to get partners‟ sympathies, but sometimes even the best and most talented, the speakers are left with no choice Nevertheless, how to refuse a request polite in order to preserve and maintain good social relationship between the speakers of one or more cultures, to keep the relation going on is a difficult question Thus, the term “hedges” is used in a certain context for specific communicative purposes such as: one strategy of politeness, vagueness, mitigation Hedges contribute importantly to form an utterance in communication but each culture use hedges in refusing a request in different ways Therefore, a desire to discover the features of using hedges in refusing a request has simulated the author to the research on cross cultural communication A depth study of hedging in refusing a request will hopefully be of some help to the learners of English in the way that it will improve their interactional skills as well as the cultural knowledge of the language II Aims of the study For all the reasons mentioned above, the study contains with the following aims: First of all, the study help learners know more about the relation between language and culture, some concepts related to the term “hedges” Secondly, the study helps learners know the frequency and needs of the usage of hedges in refusing a request in communication under the influence of social – cultural factors Lastly, the study also gives out implication for English and Vietnamese crossculture communication III Scopes of the study The study is limited within the scope of the study on verbal communication and the analysis of the data on the way the people use hedges on the basis of: - Speech act theory - Politeness - Directness and indirectness of language The study tries to find the answer to the following research question: “What are the similarities and differences between the strategies of using hedges in refusing a request in English and Vietnamese?” Iv Methods of the study To complete this thesis, the author has to search the material from the library and internet for books, magazines The main method of the study is quantitative one All the consideration and conclusions are based on the analysis of the statistic data and references The qualitative method is also used V Design of the study This research consists of three main parts They are: Part A: Introduction This part is divided into: The reasons, aims, scopes, methods and design of the study Part B: Development: is the main and focused one of the study This part refers to three chapters: Chapter 1: Theoretical Background Chapter 2: Data Analysis Chapter 3: Compication Part C: Conclusion: gives the brief summary the main results of the study as well as some suggestions for further study 10 Boss (5 years younger) The percentage of offering excuse is high They may use some structural sentences like: - “Sorry, I think it is not appropriate that you ask me about this”, “sorry, could you ask someone else?” For Vietnamese, if they want to refuse a request of their boss, they will use: - “Tôi có kế hoạch khác” (I have another appointment) - “Lần sau không nhà ốm nặng, phải nhà ngay” ( May I it later, my kid is being sick, I must go home now” 11 Boss (10 years older) English informants seem to respect your boss The percentage of offering excuse is always at highest rate When being asking to fill the survey; the informants said that it is not common to refuse their boss Therefore, some papers have no answer in this case The author thinks it is an interesting cultural feature If having hedges, they may say: - “I’m sorry, I have to pick up my kids”,, - “Sorry but I have to finish some work now, can you ask…” We can see that it is similar with English informants; Vietnamese ones also give out some reasons in refusing a request of their boss Moreover, offering excuse is favored in this answer, it is roughly equal English informants These phrases like: - “Dạ thưa xếp giơ cao đánh khẽ bỏ qua cho em lần không?” (Please forgive me this time) - “Hôm qua em lại mua tủ lạnh rồi” (I have just bought a fridge yesterday) 12 Parents It is clearly seen that most of English informants not use hedges to refuse their parents‟ request It is rude to so Thus, offering excuse is used at the high rate and the rest occupied a little bit - “Sorry I’d love to help you but I have to rush for an interview now” - “Sorry, can you ask my brother, I am in hurry” 53 On contrary to English informants, Vietnamese people think that because they are their parents, so they can find it easy to share express feelings They can refuse directly but polite So, flat refusals makes up much more than offering excuse: - “Con phải vay tiền mẹ thơi, lấy đâu mà cho bố mẹ vay bây giờ” (I‟m always borrowing your money) - “Con thi mẹ à” (I‟m going to have the test, Mom) 2.3.5 Hedges in refusing a request as seen from informants’ parameters Age Age is considered by Nguyen Quang (1988:5) as follows: The old people tend to be more indirect than the young Age 60 English 25% 32.5% 60% 5% Vietnamese 25% 67.5% 5% 2.5% Table 15: Age influence on Hedges Here is the table to distinguish the age of informants But the author cannot collect any influence on hedging to refuse a request Maybe, whenever coping with refusals, people have the same attitude regardless old or young Conversely, the author finds out a small difference in the usage of hedging in Vietnamese culture Among the survey papers filled by informants from under the age of 20 to the age 31-60, we can draw out that hedging is fundamentally similar For example: The young may say more directly than the old Sometimes the young not want to use offering excuse, especially to people who are not familiar with It is only different in the various hedges used Moreover, many survey papers filled by English have made the author here realized that she should give additional factors: relationship between the Speaker and the Hearer for English because their other comments, occupied 6.7% lead that they not want to use hedges in refusing a request with their parents, friends or bosses 54 Gender According to Nguyen Quang, with regard to sex: the female prefers indirect expression that means women hedge more than the men The same conclusion seems to be true in both Vietnamese and English when they are forced to refuse People Sometimes English 65% Vietnamese 82.5% Table 16: The percentage of people choosing column sometimes when using hedges in refusing a request As can be seen from the table, we can see that there are 65% English and 82.5% Vietnamese sometimes hedge to refuse a request Accidentally, those who have chosen this column are women They use hedges in refusing a request to the hearer indirectly, such as: - I’m sorry, I’d love to but… - Sorry but I just have a little now, I need to wait for my new salary Otherwise, when they tick from another column, for example they use hedges before refusing request They not talk as tortuously as women For example, let us look at two sentences picked out from the survey: - Woman: Sorry boss but I think you’re asking a wrong person, I just don’t have enough - Man: I’m sorry I don’t have money Hedging in general and hedging in refusing a request in particular, used as one of the features typical of women‟s speech This finding shares the same result with Preisler‟s (1986) study of linguistic sex roles which also shows that linguistic tentativeness signals are correlates of both sex and interactional role, which is either task-oriented or socio-emotional It is the latter role that correlates with tentativeness As can be expected, Preisler‟s data states that 55 women lead in the use of hedges in general, whereas men lead in linguistic assertiveness Nonetheless, we need to remember that the plain but always pertinent fact is that gender is one of the relevant parameters in any situation and is indeed potentially irrelevant in a particular position Besides, the often very allusive and subtle differences between language of man and women remain a controversial and sensitive issue Or in other words, whether it is general true cross-culturally that “women are more polite than men” Living areas According to Nguyen Quang (1985:5): with regard to residence: the rural population tend to use more indirectness than the urban one Living areas English Vietnamese Countryside 22.5% 27.5% City 77.5% 72.5% Table 17: Influence of local residence on the choice of using hedges The tables shows the percentage of English informants who are living in the city is 77.5% There are more than a half of informants (38.4%) use flat refusals, whereas rural people use offering excuse at a maximum (51,9%) Similarly, in Vietnam, rural people tend to use hedges in refusing a request much more than urban ones If they want to refuse someone else, they have to give out some reasons, then go straight to the refusals - Giờ em mệt anh ạ, em khơng giúp cho anh đâu (I‟m not well now, I can nothing for you) - Vợ em khó tính xếp à, đưa em tiền ăn sáng (My wife is mean, she only gives me spending money) In a nutshell, from the socio- cultural factors affecting the hedging of English and Vietnamese, the factor gender, age and living areas have deep influence on the choice of using hedges 56 In summary, we have just known some characteristics of using hedges in refusing a request in English and Vietnamese through comparing on each feature Basically, we find out some similarities that the time of acquaintance is the most important factor having affect on the choice to refuse a request And the strategies like offering excuse and flat refusals are commonly used in communicating in both Vietnamese and English However, the cultural differences are unavoidable, these can prove that each country has own cultural tradition in using hedges in refusing a request Moreover, frequency of using hedges in refusing a request in Vietnam is much higher than that in English And in English, they seem to refuse more directly in refusing And finally, the rural people tend to use hedges in refusing a request much more than the urban ones 57 Chapter 3: Implication As the above discussion suggests, hedging is an important interactional strategy in spoken communication in general and in refusing a request in particular Nonetheless, the difficulties connected with the concept exist As was shown above, its use originates in logic and semantic, but has lately been developed further in pragmatics and discourse analysis so far that now it extends to areas like meta-communication and to communication strategies like mitigation and politeness With regard to refusing a request, to use hedges is more complicate than ever, otherwise such refusals will certainly cause a sudden shock to hearer In those emotional circumstances, to face threatening acts hardly is more dangerous to hearer Thus to be effective communicators, we should acquire a feel for its appropriate use in deferent communication situations It is therefore no wonder that- in addition to the analysis of hedge and hedging for their own sake- there have been studies of a more applies kind The studies hereby aims at finding way of making communication more effective through providing communicator in different areas of life with both knowledge about hedges and the opportunity to develop their skill in using them For the first place, to gain the knowledge about hedges mean that communicators must have cultural background, be aware of the second culture in English Language Teaching (ELT) and English Language Learning 3.1 Cultural Awareness It is undeniable that language is inextricably bound up with culture As mentioned above language and culture reinforce each other Cultural values are both reflected by and carried through language Therefore, to reach the point in ELT/L, only the acquisition of language is not enough, we need to have knowledge of culture And culture is understood as follows: “Culture is a way of life, the content in which we exists, think, relate to each other Culture acts as the fabric of shared meanings, which exists between different people” (Marie Emit and John Pollock; 1990:39) 58 In terms of cultural awareness, we describe sensitivity to the impact of culturally – induced behavior on language usage and communication This term may cover beliefs and values as well as everyday attitudes and feelings conveyed not only by language but also by paralinguistic and extra –linguistic features of the language we have learnt.To understand aspects of cultural awareness in ELT/L, both teachers and students have to see how much English culture affects the ways of using language they are teaching and learning Similarly, when discussing ELT/L, Nguyen Quang (1997:5) states that: “We can not say about success in ELT without useful knowledge of cross-cultural differences and without a certain extend in acculturation” (English version by Ngo Huu Hoang; 1998:72) Thus, to adapt to a new situation or environment, cultural awareness is valuable help In order to provide students with full knowledge of cultural awareness, we have some implications for teachers in ELT 3.2 Implication for teacher The relationship between learners and teachers supplies an insight into cultural attitudes and assumption about knowledge and learning The skillful uses of hedges in refusing which requires subtlety and sophistication even in mother tongue is evidently part of communication competence which is crucial and essential to EFL/ ELL because lack of which may lead in foreign language use to mistake that are more serious than, for example, grammatical errors 3.2.1 Teacher as a means of learning a second culture With the aim at help students use language appropriately in certain situation and circumstances along with hedging, teacher should be responsible for making their students aware of cultural differences in communication Nevertheless, the awareness has not been put much emphasis on yet by some teachers Rivers had made an argument that: 59 Any authentic use of the language, any reading from original texts ( as apposed to those fabricated for classroom use), any listening to the utterances of native speakers,, will introduce cultural concomitants into the classroom whether the teacher is conscious of them or not By not acknowledging their presence and not making them explicit, the teacher allows misconceptions of the culturally determined based for the reactions and behavior of the foreign people can develop in the students’ contempt for and hostility toward the speaker of the language they are learning To put it in another way, teaching goals should include developing cultural knowledge Rober Polizer suggests: As language teacher, we must be interested in the studies of culture ( in the social scientists’ sense of the word) not because we necessarily want to teach the culture of the other country but because we have to teach it If we teach language without teaching at the same time the culture in which it operates, we are teaching meaningless symbols and symbols to which the students attaches the wrong meaning; for unless he is warned, he receives cultural instruction, he will associate American concepts or objects with the foreign symbols(1959:100-1) This can be obviously applied to the teaching of hedge in general and hedging in refusing a request in particular The teacher of English should acquire not only fluent linguistic but also cultural knowledge The question here is how to incorporate cultural in classroom? The first method is that teachers employ the method of exposition and explanation The teaching of hedges, for example, can be initiated with the exposition of listeners to listening materials including authentic texts There are some inter-language studies that suggest the kind of problems foreign language learners might have in the use of hedges as they only make the foreign language user sound, in the case of hedging, more impolite or aggressive, more tentative or assertive than she/ he intends to be, which then may even lead to a communicative failure (Thomas 1983) Accordingly, in a study on the inter- 60 language of German learner of English, Kasper(1979) suggest that a kind of modality reduction take place in the foreign language learners‟ speech This mean that modality is present at an early stage of the learners‟ speech act planning but does not for some reason occur in its surface realization This reduction, she claims, is a consequence of low awareness of modality as a pragmatic category” (Kasper 1979,274) Other researchers have found another, more concrete, type of reduction in foreign language learners‟ expression of modality: their repertoire of expressions is more limited when compared with that of the native speakers of the language For example, Korkoinen (1990) found that Finnish learners of English user fewer expressions of epistemic modality than native speakers of English They have less variation in the expressions and stick to a few favorite ones like I think Foreign language learners also seem to prefer the more explicit kind of modification to the implicit ones According to, Forch and Kasper (1989), this preference is due to the fact that the explicit expressions(e.g I think) are longer and have their own propositional content and illocution From these problem above, it can be seen that teacher should give student all the talking habits of native English: hedges and modality to help them raise awareness of using hedges and modality as well Next, interaction seems to be more appropriate to social studies lessons Hedges then can be associated with speaking activities, like discussion and role- play Importantly, teachers can deliver some situations, in which students are forced to refuse a request to other in order that learner can use hedges Since then they will know how to use hedge as decrease in fuzziness to be indirect and to lessen a shock to hearer Moreover, the ways Vietnamese learners of English must study how to use hedges refusing a request to avoid increase in fuzziness This responsibility belongs to teachers since they are as a means of learning a second language All the same time, teachers can incorporate cultural knowledge as the language learning In other words, teaching for cultural understanding is fully integrated with the process of assimilation of the language patterns and lexicon The fact is that language is interrelated to and interwoven with every aspect of culture, therefore, it is possible to apply 61 this way Tomalin and Stempleski (1993:8) suggest the following principles to include cultural factor as part of lesson plan:  Access the culture through language being taught  Make the study of cultural behaviors an integral part of each lesson  Aim for student to achieve the socio- economic competence, which they feel they need  Aim for all levels to achieve cross- cultural understanding awareness of their own culture, as well as that of the target language  Recognize that not all teaching about culture implies behaviors change, but merely awareness and tolerance of the cultural influences affecting ones‟ own and other behavior 3.3 Suggestions for learners: What learners of EFL should bear in mind is that: “our culture influences our way of thinking and acting To learn another language, we need to learn to appreciate the culture of which the language is a part We can’t really learn a second language or more precisely, learn the use of that language culture unless we learn about culture because many of the meanings constructed in the language are culture specific” (Pollock,1990:39) Student are recommend to:  Work with authentic materials deriving from the communities/ countries of the target language and especially from link with schools abroad  Come into contact with native speakers in this country and where possible abroad 62  From these materials and contacts, appreciate the similarities and differences between their own cultures of the communities/ countries where the target language is spoken  Use this knowledge to develop more objective view of their own customs and way of thinking (adapted from Byram.M and Flemming.M, 1995:5) With regard to learning hedges and hedging, learner should take into consideration the features of this phenomenon and the appreciate use in conversation as well as writing Reading and listening are not merely receptive skills but also treated as possible source for learning the use of hedges in refusing a request Whereas, writing and speaking skills should be treated as opportunities to enhance and develop the practicing of hedges in general and hedges to refuse a request in particular 63 Part C: Conclusion I Recapitulation To conclude, in learning a second language, besides the necessity of linguistic skills and professional knowledge, cross –cultural awareness is crucial to all language learners In this study, the major characteristics of hedges in general and hedges in refusing a request in particular have been discussed As being investigated above, all of us can realize visibly that hedging is a different way to use since it may cause fuzziness and instead of avoiding FTA, it creates more face threats However, with suggestion from references by various authors and the result from the survey, this paper has reached some skills for learners of English to practicing of hedge in order that they not have to encounter the difficulties when communicating with native speakers, hence the communication break down does not occur The data from survey questionnaire show that there exist many differences in hedging refusing a request between Vietnamese and English, mostly due to the cultural differences Needless to say, cross- cultural awareness plays an extremely important role in the success of teaching and learning English as a foreign language in Viet Nam It is because of the fact that teacher can plan their lesson to help learners attain knowledge of second language, including its culture The aim of learning a foreign language is finally not to write or read well but communicate successfully, so the writer hope that this paper will soon become a guidebook for English learners in refusing a request in both Vietnamese and English Actually, there are many ways of using hedges in refusing a request in Vietnamese and English However, in this study, the author only gives out some characteristics of refusing a request and clarifies the differences and similarities as well The author hopes that it would be analyzed in more detail in another opportunity II Suggestions for further studies 64 In short, this study is hoped to provide a brief finding for a look into hedges in refusing a request in English and Vietnamese We are absolutely aware that this research cannot cover all the problems that are related to the field of hedges Thus, we would like to give out some suggestions for further studies as follows: - A cross-cultural study on hedges in a specific literature work - A cross- cultural study on hedges in a specific film - A cross – cultural study on hedges in giving bad news The author hopes that by the time you, the readers, have reached this part, you will have gained a useful insight into an aspect of cross – cultural communication However, shortcomings are inevitable and should be pleased to hear any comments from the readers 65 References I ENGLISH Edward Barnelt, (1871), Primitive Culture, Oxford University Press Austin, J.L., 1962 How to thing with words CUP London –Oxford- New York Bach, K and harnish, R., 1984 Linguistic Communication and Speech Acts The MIT Press Brown, H.D ,1986 Learning a Second Language in Culture Bound D.M Thanh , 2000 some English-Vietnamese Cross-Culture Differences in Requesting Kaplan.J., 1972 Cutural though Patterns in Intercultural Education –in Language Learning Lakoff, R, 1973 The Logic of Politeness: Minding your P’s and Q’s in Discourse, guy cook, 1990 Nguyen Quang, 1994 Intercultural Communicative Activities Nguyen Quang 1997 Vietnamese- American Cross Culture Differences 10 Yule, G., 1996 Pragmatic.OUP 11 Sinh, Nguyen Quoc (2004), A Vietnamese – English Cross Cultural Study on the Use of Hedges in Dispraising, CUP, Cambridge 12 Markkanen, 1997, Hedging and Discourse, Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in a Academic Texts, Berlin, Newyork 13 Nguyen Tien Manh (2006) Hedging strategies manifested in conversations in film “Sweet home Alabama” Department of Foreign Languages of Vinh University 14 Rivers, W.M 1968 Teaching Foreign Language Skills Chicago: The University of Chicago Press 15 Politzer, R, 1959 Developing Cultural Understanding Through Foreign Language Study In Cultural Bound Joyce Merrie Vadles CUP.USA 16 Emit and Pollock, J, 1990.Language and Learning, OUP 17 Ngo Huu Hoang, 1998.A cross- cultural study of Thanking and Responding toThanks in English and Vietnamese.VNU – CFL, Hanoi 18 Kasper, G Can Pragmatic Competence Be Taught? Transcript of plenary address to the 1997 Annual Meeting of Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL).1997 19 Byram M and Flemming, M – Language Learning in Intercultural PerspectiveCambridge University Press.1998 20 Tsui, A.B.M English Conversation – Oxford University Press.1995 66 21 Wierzbicka, A,.1987.English Speech Act Verbs, A semantic Dictionary, Academic Press Australia 22 Tomalin, B and Stempleski, S., 1993, Oxford University Press II VIETNAMESE Nguyễn Quang, 1996.Trực tiếp Gián tiếp Dụng học giao thoa văn hóa Việt-Mỹ.Tập san “Ngoại Ngữ” 7/96 Tạp chí Sun flower – Nhà xuất Đồng Nai, 1997 Tuyển tập Ca dao Tục ngữ Việt Nam, Nhà xuất Giáo dục,1998 Let‟s go 2, Third Edition, Oxford 67 ... styles of thinking and arguing 1.2 Language 1.2.1 Definition of Language A variety of definitions of language are offered in various linguistic books and websites Literally defined, a language is a. .. Frequency of using hedges in refusing a request between the English and 47 Vietnamese subjects Figure 6: The need of hedges in refusing a request in communication in English and 48 Vietnamese subjects... living and 36 education level Table 3: The factors affecting on the choice of using hedges in refusing a request of the 37 English subjects Table 4: The frequency of using hedges in refusing a request