A Contrastive Study of the Speech Act of Refusal between Iranian EFL Learners and Persian Native Speakers

Ramin Vaezi

Abstract


The current study was an attempt to investigate the similarities and differences in using the speech act of refusing between Persian learners of English as a foreign language with some Persian native speakers in Iran. The data of this study was gathered from thirty students in Iran by discourse completion questionnaire, usual interaction, and role play. On the whole, the research findings revealed that Persian native speakers’ refusals were as formulaic in pragmatic structures. These participants were not economical at making excuses and tended to offer different indirect reasons in refusal to avoid annoyance. On the other hand, Iranian EFL learners are more frank and are more likely to refuse their friends’ requests, suggestions, and invitations. Moreover, social distance and power play a vital role in production of refusal among Persian native speakers. More detailed findings and implications are discussed in the paper.
Key words: Speech Act; Refusal; Speech Act Of Refusal; Discourse Completion Test (DCT); Persian Native Speakers; Iranian EFL Learners

Resumé: La présente étude a tenté d'étudier les similitudes et les différences dans l'utilisation de l'acte de discours de refus entre les persans qui apprennent l'anglais comme une langue étrangère et certains locuteurs natifs persans en Iran. Les données de cette étude ont été recueillies à partir d'une trentaine d'étudiants en Iran en utilisant le questionnaire de complétion de discours, l'interaction habituelle, et le jeu de rôle. Dans l'ensemble, les résultats de recherche ont révélé que les refus des locuteurs natifs persans étaient formalisés dans les structures pragmatiques. Ces participants ne sont pas laconiques à faire des excuses et ont tendance à offrir de différentes raisons indirectes comme refus afin d'éviter des désagréments. D'autre part, les apprenants ALE iraniens sont plus francs et plus susceptibles de refuser les demandes, les suggestions et des invitations de leurs amis. Par ailleurs, la distance sociale et le pouvoir jouent un rôle vital dans la fabrication de refus chez les locuteurs natifs persans. Des résultats plus détaillés et des implications sont discutées dans l'article.
Mots-clés: Acte De Discours; Refus; Acte De Discours De Refus; Test De ComplÉTion De Discours (TCD); Locuteurs Natifs Persans; Apprenants ALE Iraniens

Keywords


Speech Act; Refusal; Speech Act Of Refusal; Discourse Completion Test (DCT); Persian Native Speakers; Iranian EFL Learners; Acte De Discours; Refus; Acte De Discours De Refus; Test De ComplÉTion De Discours (TCD); Locuteurs Natifs Persans; Apprenants ALE

References


Al-Eryani, A. (2008). Refusal strategies by Yemeni EFL learners. The Iranian EFL Journal, 1, 84-101.

Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Beebe, L. M., & Takahashi, T. (1989). Do you have a bag? Social status and patterned variation in second language acquisition. In S. Gass, C. Madden, D. Preston & L. Selinker (Eds.), Variation in second language acquisition. UK: Multilingual Matters.

Beebe, L. M., Takahashi, T., & Uliss-Weltz, R. (1990). Pragmatic transfer in ESL refusals. In R. Scarcella, E. Andersen, & S. D. Krashen (Eds.), On the development of communicative competence in a second language (pp. 55-73). New York: Newbury House.

Cohen, A., & Olshtain, E. (1981). Developing a measure of sociocultural competence, the case of apology. Language Learning, 31(1), 113-134.

Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. New York: Oxford University Press.

Holmes, J. (1988). Compliments and compliment responses in New Zealand. Anthropological linguistics, 28(4), 285-508.

Kasper, G. (2000). Data collection in pragmatics research. In H. Spencer-Oatey, (Ed.), Culturally speaking (pp. 316-341). London: Continuum.

Know, J. (2004). Expressing refusals in Korean and in American English. Multilingua, 23, 339-364.

Kumaravadiveleu, B. (2006). Understanding language teaching, from method to postmethod. New York: Routledge.

Manes, J., & Wolfson, N. (1981). The compliment formula. In F. Coulmas (Ed.), Conversational routine: Explorations in standardized communication situations and prepatterned speech (pp. 116-132). The Netherlands: Mouton publishers.

Nunan, D. (2001). Aspects of task-based syllabus design. Retrieved from http://www3.telus.net/linguisticissues/syllabusdesign.htm

Robinson, M. (1991). Introspective methodology in interlanguage pragmatics research. In G. Kasper (Ed.), Pragmatics of Japanese as native and target language (pp. 29-84). Honolulu: Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center, University of Hawaii.

Takahashi, T., & Beebe, L. M. (1987). The development of pragmatic competence by Japanese learners of English. JALT Journal, 8(2), 131-155.

Tickle, A. L. (1991). Japanese refusals in a business setting. Papers in Applied Linguistics, 6(2), 84-108.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3968%2Fj.ccc.1923670020110702.024

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Reminder

If you have already registered in Journal A and plan to submit article(s) to Journal B, please click the CATEGORIES, or JOURNALS A-Z on the right side of the "HOME".


We only use four mailboxes as follows to deal with issues about paper acceptance, payment and submission of electronic versions of our journals to databases: caooc@hotmail.com; office@cscanada.net; ccc@cscanada.net; ccc@cscanada.org

Copyright © Canadian Academy of Oriental and Occidental Culture (CAOOC)
Address:730, 77e AV, Laval, Quebec, H7V 4A8, Canada

Telephone: 1-514-558 6138
Http://www.cscanada.net; Http://www.cscanada.org
E-mail:caooc@hotmail.com; office@cscanada.net