Speech Acts Bibliography

Al-Issa, A. (2003). Sociocultural transfer in L2 speech behaviors: Evidence and motivating factors. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 27, 581-601.

This article examines the phenomenon of sociocultural transfer and its motivating factors within the realization patterns of the speech act of refusals by Jordanian EFL learners. EFL refusal data were collected using a discourse completion test (DCT), which was designed and further developed based on observational field note data. The DCT was then followed by semi-structured interviews. Using semantic formulas as units of analysis, EFL refusal responses were compared with similar data elicited from native speakers of English responding in English and native speakers of Arabic responding in Arabic. The results showed three areas in which sociocultural transfer appeared to influence the EFL learners' selection of semantic formulas, the length of their responses, and the content of the semantic formulas. The cases of transfer were seen to reflect cultural values transferred from Arabic to English. On the basis of the interview data, it was determined that the learners pride in their LI, their perceptions of the L2, and their religious values all played a role in the sociocultural transfer that was found.

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.

The authors administered a discourse completion test with 60 participants (20 Japanese-speaking in Japanese, 20 Japanese-speaking in English, and 20 Americans speaking in English) to investigate pragmatic transfer in refusals to requests, invitations, offers, and suggestions directed at higher-, equal-, and lower-status interlocutors. The data were analyzed in terms of the sequence, frequency, and content of semantic formulas. The evidence of pragmatic transfer was found at least on three levels: the sequence, frequency, and the intrinsic content (or tone) of the semantic formulas used in the refusals. This is an often cited paper in the study of refusals.

Beebe, L. & Cumming, M. C. (1996). Natural speech act data versus written questionnaire data: How data collection method affects speech act performance. In S. M. Gass & J. Neu (Eds.), Speech acts across cultures (pp. 65-86). Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin.

Compares refusals in spontaneous speech and written discourse completion tests. Eleven E1 female ESL teachers filled out a questionnaire item while eleven others were called on the phone and asked the same question. It was a genuine request to help out at the TESOL'85 Convention in NY, and 20 of those approached agreed to do so. The findings revealed that discourse completion tests are an effective means of gathering a large amount of data quickly, creating an initial classification of semantic formulas, and ascertaining the structure of refusals. In only 5 out of 27 formulas, strategies, or subcategories was there a difference of three or more tokens between the oral and written data. However, the tests did not elicit natural speech with respect to actual wording, range of formulas and strategies, length of responses (4 times as many words and sentences over the phone) or number of turns necessary to fulfill a function. Nor did they adequately represent the depth of emotion and general psycho-social dynamics of naturally occurring speech.

Bresnahan, M. J., Ohashi, R, Liu, W. Y., Nebashi, R. & Liao, C. (1999). A comparison of response styles in Singapore and Taiwan. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 30, 342-358.

This study examined whether Chinese from Singapore and Taiwan responded differently to requests made by friends and whether male and female students had different preferences for response tactics. A total of 300 Chinese students at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore and 297 Chinese students at Feng Chia University in Taiwan were recruited to fill out discourse completion questionnaires, containing one of three scenarios, representing different levels of imposition. A questionnaire assessing self-construal scale and manipulation checks was also administered. The response types were coded and divided into compliance with and refusal of the request. The independent variables included national grouping, self-construal, gender, and the level of imposition whereas the dependent variables were the number of strategies and the degree of directness in the refusals as associated with the strategy favoring collective good vs. individuals’ needs.

The results indicate that although independent self-construal was associated with more explicit refusal and more concern with clarity, interdependent self-construal was not associated with compliance and greater concern for others’ feelings. Differences in the level of imposition in a request were related to the type of response. Responses to lower-imposition requests tended to comply; responses to higher-imposition requests tended to refuse the requests. Overall, men were more compliant than women. Singapore Chinese indicated a greater preference for complying with the request from a friend than Chinese in Taiwan, but Taiwan Chinese used more indirect refusal strategies and embedded structures to soften the tone of voice. When Singapore participants used refusals, they were more direct and used fewer strategies to refuse than their Taiwanese counterparts. The study concluded that the response styles of Chinese in Singapore and Taiwan were distinctive.

Chen, X., Ye, L., & Zhang, Y. (1995). Refusing in Chinese. In G. Kasper (Ed.), Pragmatics of Chinese as a native and target language (pp. 119-163). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai'i Press.

Discusses the act of refusal in Chinese as it relates to the concept of maintaining mianzi and lian -- ones face and public image. According to the authors, Chinese perceive it as imperative to "'liu mianzi' -- preserve face for the refusee," and "'liu houlu' -- leave oneself a way out for the refuser." In Chinese culture, refusal is seen as having a potentially negative impact on future interaction, therefore great care is taken to follow implicit rules of appropriate behavior that shows respect for each person's role in the interaction. The authors carried out a study to examine the way both substantive and ritual refusal are handled by native speakers of Chinese in a variety of interactive relationships. The subjects were 50 male and 50 female speakers of Mandarin Chinese who had lived in the U.S. for an average of 2.4 years at the time of the study. Data were collected by means of a 16-item questionnaire designed to elicit responses to four types of initiating acts: requests, suggestions, invitations, and offers. The first part of the study involved substantive refusals, and each item specified the speaker's social status relative to the interlocutor. A detailed analysis of the frequency with which each form was used and some examples of each were given. The second part of the study involved ritual refusal as a commissive-directive act, and the authors described the strategies used by the subjects to interpret and respond to offers.

García, C. (1992). Refusing an invitation: A case study of Peruvian style. Hispanic Linguistics, 5 (1-2), 207-243.

Intends to compare the politeness strategies used by male and female speakers in a role-play situation: refusing an invitation. The respondents were 10 male and 10 female Peruvians with an age range from the 20s to the 70s and with three different classes represented. Both groups went through distinctly marked stages: (1) invitation-response, and (2) insistence-response. In the first stage both genders used deference politeness strategies as the head act, while in the second stage they adopted solidarity politeness strategies for head acts. In the first stage both genders expressed their respect toward their interlocutor and their friendship with her. However in the second stage, males tended to refuse, while females generally responded affirmatively, though vaguely.

García, C. (2007) "Ché, mirá, vos sabés que no no voy a poder": How Argentineans refuse an invitation. Hispania, 90(3), 551-564.

This paper analyzes the strategies used by a group of Argentinean participants when refusing an invitation. It identifies their preferred politeness strategies, and attempts to uncover the underlying perspectives that make up their culture within the context examined. The analysis incorporates Brown and Levinson's (1987) model of politeness and Blum-Kulka et ails (1989) distinction between head acts and supporting moves. More importantly, it takes into account "the discourse context [...] discourse organization and conversational management [...]" (Kasper 2000: 201) to describe the overall politeness system expressed. Results show invitees preferring to balance their expression of respect and friendliness when refusing. They used strategies that threatened their own face with more strength than the interlocutor's (i.e., the inviter), specifically their negative face. All these strategies contributed to the maintenance of their vínculo (Fitch 1998) with the interlocutor.

Gass, S. M. & Houck, N. (1999). Interlanguage refusals. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

The book has as its main goal the study and description of refusal sequences as exemplified through the verbal and nonverbal performance of a group of L2 speakers, namely, Japanese learners of English. First, the study is situated within a general framework of refusals and analytic schemata used in previous studies is considered. Then they discuss different methodologies for collecting data. They offer a unit of analysis for extended refusal interactions (the episode) and the analysis of a complex refusal interaction sequence. They also look at the management of back channel type utterances and nonverbal behavior by nonnatives.

Ikoma, T., & Shimura, A. (1993). Eigo kara nihongoeno pragmatic transfer: "Kotowari" toiu hatsuwa kouinitsuite (‘Pragmatic transfer from English to Japanese: The speech act of refusals’). Nihongokyouiku (Journal of Japanese Language Teaching), 79, 41-52.

This study investigates pragmatic transfer among advanced-level American learners of Japanese (fourth-year students at the University of Hawaii). Ten Japanese native speakers and ten American learners of Japanese performed refusals to requests, invitations, offers, and suggestions based on Beebe et al. (1990) elicited through discourse completion tasks. Three instances of negative transfer identified were that learners: 1) did not provide alternatives as often as native speakers, 2) tended to inappropriately use kekkoudesu ‘no, thank you’ in interactions with friends possibly due to its similarity to an English expression, "No, thank you," and 3) did not use incomplete sentences fully, which would have assisted in presenting oneself hesitantly and politely especially with those of higher status.

Kanemoto, M. (1993). A comparative study of refusal assertion in the United States and Japan. Ryudai Review of Language and Literature, 38, 199-212.

The author investigates five popular publications regarding refusals in American English and Japanese to examine the refusal strategies recommended by the writers from the two cultures and underlying values behind such refusal strategies. The three formal characteristics in Japanese refusals were: 1) avoiding a clear refusal, 2) mentioning a third party as a reason for the refusal, and 3) using a fictitious reason for the refusal. The author contends that in Japanese culture, refusal means not only a "no" to a request but also to personal relationships and that fictitious reasons and other strategies were employed as a social lubricant to reduce the impact of the refusal assertion. Two characteristics of recommended refusals in American English were that the clear and constructive refusal must be articulated and that reasons for a refusal do not necessarily have to be offered.

Kawate-Mierzejewska, M. (2002). Request-refusal interactions in telephone conversation. Unpublished manuscript. Fourth Annual Conference of the Japanese Society for Language Sciences, Nagoya University, Japan.

This study investigated request-refusal interaction between Japanese speakers speaking Japanese (10 M, 10 F JJs - never having lived in English-speaking country) and North American English speakers speaking Japanese (10 M, 10 F AJs — living in Japan for over 10 years) in telephone conversations, focusing on the differences and similarities between native and nonnative speakers in 40 conversations (JJ-JJ and JJ- AJ) with two requests in each (10-15 minutes per conversation). The nature of refusal sequences was examined by four coders. JJs tended to employ delay as their immediate response to the implicative request types, while AJs were found to have a wider variety of refusal types (delay, avoidance, acceptance, positive indication but excuse, excuse). They didn't use formulaic patterns as often as JJs. The AJ variety was attributed to lack of sociocultural and pragmalinguistic ability. The JJs had six types of refusal sequences: excuse, delay-excuse, delay-excuse-alternative, delay-excuse-apology, delay-apology, and delay-promise. AJs had seven: excuse, delay-excuse, delay-avoidance by postponement, avoidance-delay-excuse, avoidance-avoidance, acceptance-delay-excuse, positive indication with excuse-avoidance. Appendix B gives a classification of refusal realization strategies.

King, K. A. & Silver, R. E. (1993). "Sticking points": Effects of instruction on NNS refusal strategies. Working Papers in Educational Linguistics, 9 (1), 47-82.

Reports on a group of three intermediate ESL students who received 70 minutes of training in refusal strategies in a conversation class (which they admit may have been too little), while three others just received conversation on getting to know Americans. Pre and post consisted of a written discourse questionnaire on refusals -- without rejoinders. Two weeks after instruction the participants were telephoned and asked to perform a burdensome activity known to conflict with their schedule so as to elicit a refusal (to give a talk when they had a class and to set up an info booth on an exam day). Results from the questionnaire indicated little effect of instruction, and the telephone interview indicated no effect. They found a large disparity between the written and spoken refusal strategies. The paper is short on subjects but long on details -- such as the treatment used (59), which included saying something to make the person feel good before refusing, using a starter ("let me see"), using "that's too bad" instead of "I'm sorry" (which nonnatives overuse), and using specific not general excuses. The researchers were surprised to find that the telephone conversation had many fewer strategies than in the discourse completion task.

Kitao, S. K. (1996). Communicative competence, preference organization, and refusals in British English. Sougou Bunka Kenkyujo Kiyou, 13, 47-58.

The researcher administered a discourse completion test (based on Beebe et al., 1990), with 12 items on refusals to requests given to 40 British English speakers. The magnitude of the request (large and small request), status of the interlocutors (higher, equal, and lower than the speaker), and the closeness of the interlocutors (close or distant) was manipulated in the DCT instrument. The most common strategy was an expression of regret followed by an excuse or reason (30% of the responses). Another 20% of the responses either reversed the order or added another element (such as promising future compliance of the request, or negative willingness). As it is in American English, giving a reason seemed to be central, and the reasons were found to be generally concrete and specific. Expression of regret occurred in more than half of the refusals (especially refusing a small request by those of equal status), although apologies were more often offered in response to a larger request.

Laohaburanakit, K. (1995). Refusal in Japanese: A comparison of Japanese textbooks and actual conversation data. Nihongo Kyouiku (Journal of Japanese Language Teaching), 87, 25-39.

Focusing on the refusal itself and the statement of the reasons as core strategies of refusals, the author compares refusals for requests and invitations in ten Japanese language textbooks with those in authentic telephone conversation by native speakers. Most of the textbooks did not carry sufficient information regarding the refusing context (i.e., relationship of the interlocutors, whether the refuser is able to comply with the request/invitation in terms of time and ability, and the degree of importance for acceptance of the request/invitation in the requester’s perspective), although the authentic data showed the refusing context influenced the selection of the refusal strategy or the combination of the refusal strategies. Authentic data found cases where the speakers made refusals even thought they were able to comply with the request/invitation, and several strategies used by the speakers in such a case.

Laohaburanakit, K. (1997). Forms of refusals: A comparison of refusal forms used by learners of Japanese and Japanese native speakers. Japanese-Language Education around the Globe, 7.

The author uses authentic telephone conversation including refusals from 15 native speakers of Japanese and 11 nonnative speakers of Japanese. The analysis focuses on the refusal itself and the statement of the reasons. Learners’ overall use of sentence-final particles following an excuse (e.g. noda/kara/node/te/shi) approximated that by native speakers. However, conversation analysis of the data also revealed that learners generally did not use sentence-final particles (e.g., kna, na(a), wa) which serve to soften the refusal assertion and refusal markers (e.g., chotto, yappari, uun) which precede a refusal and prepare the hearer for the upcoming refusal. The author contends that these are missing aspects in Japanese language textbooks and research that require more attention.

Liao, C. & Bresnahan, M. J. (1996). A contrastive pragmatic study on American English and Mandarin refusal strategies. Language Sciences, 18, (3-4), 703-727.

This study contrasted responses made by American and Chinese university students to six requests. The scenarios ranged from (1) a teacher’s request for help preparing for a reception, (2) a tardy classmate’s request to borrow class notes, (3) a longtime friend’s request for help with moving, (4) a friend’s request to borrow a car for a vacation, (5) a friend’s request to borrow a small amount of money to buy a textbook, and (6) a family member’s request to borrow a substantial amount of money. The subjects comprised of 570 undergraduate students at Feng Chia University in Taiwan and 516 at the University of Michigan. The subjects were asked to respond to one of the six request scenarios by filling in their responses. The responses were coded according the number of strategies used in each response to examine ethnicity and gender differences. The refusal patterns indicated that both groups refused requests from a teacher more easily than from either a friend or a family member, but Chinese gave more specific reasons than Americans. Women tended to use more strategies than men to refuse someone of higher status. It was common for Americans to begin a refusal with a positive response, followed by a refusal, such as I’d love to, but…; however, it was rare for Chinese to use this strategy. Chinese students found requests from family members hard to turn down whereas American students found friends’ requests were hardest to refuse. When refusing to lend class notes to a friend, American students were more likely than Chinese students to add a comment on the inappropriateness of the request. Americans were more willing to lend a small amount of money to his/her friend, while Chinese students found it hard to refuse a request from a family member for a large amount of money. Compared with Chinese students, American students, especially male, were less likely to turn down a request for help someone move. But in cases where Americans refused to lend their cars to their friends, they provided a ‘statement of principle’ as an excuse, whereas Chinese students were more economical at using strategies in such refusals, following a principle of dian-dao-wei-zhi ‘marginally touching the point’.

Moriyama, T. (1990). ‘Kotowari’ no houryaku: Taijin kankei chouseito komunikeishon (‘Strategies of refusals: Interpersonal adjustments and communication’). Gengo (Language), 19 (8), 59-66.

This article analyzes the speech act of refusals in terms of benefits and imposition, strategies, and reasons behind using particular strategies. The author administered a questionnaire to 51 male and 40 female Japanese college students, eliciting the refusal strategies that they would use in one refusal situation. The refusal strategies fell into four categories: 1) direct refusal, 2) telling a white lie, saying tsugouga tsukanai ‘I have a prior engagement that cannot be changed,’ 3) postponing response, saying kangaete oku ‘I’ll think about it,’ and 4) making an indefinite response by smiling. The response strategies were also analyzed in terms of closeness, social status, age, and gender of the interlocutors. The direct refusal (Type 1 above) was found to be often directed to close friends (approximately 70%) as the respondents probably perceived no need to conceal true feelings in such a relationship. Telling a white lie (Type 2 above) was perhaps used in consideration for the hearer, behaving as if the hearer’s intentions were more important than the speaker’s or as if the refusal was beyond the speaker’s control. The postponement (Type 3) by a close friend was interpreted as cause for hope by 60% of the participants while only about 30% did so if uttered by someone not very close. The postponing strategy was seldom used with someone of higher status, since it presupposed the importance of the speaker’s intention rather than the hearer’s. With regard to the second refusal in response to the friend’s repeated request, males were likely to make a direct refusal while females tended to tell a white lie.

Morrow, C. K. (1995). The pragmatic effects of instruction on ESL learners' production of complaint and refusal speech acts. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of New York at Buffalo, Amherst, NY. UMI Microform, UMI Number: 9603629.

Studies 20 students enrolled in two spoken English classes in an intensive ESL program in the U.S. A 3_ hour intervention using model dialogues, prescribed speech-act formulae, and various types of performance activities (games and role playing) about refusals and complaints was used. Oral data were collected prior to, following, and six months after the intervention by means of seven semi-structured role-play tasks which prompted subjects to perform three direct complaints and four refusals with peer interlocutors. The data were analyzed using: a) holistic ratings of clarity and politeness, and b) comparisons of the pretest and posttest distributions of discourse features with those of native English speaking controls (N=14). T-tests comparing the pooled pretest and posttest holistic scores revealed improvements in subjects' levels of clarity and politeness which were significant at p<.0005. Similar comparisons of the posttest and delayed posttest scores did not attain statistical significance. The refusal analysis of discourse features (semantic formulae) revealed increases in the use of politeness strategies, especially of negative politeness strategies. Frequently these developmental changes appeared pragmatically appropriate even when they failed to converge toward the native speaker frequencies. Analysis of propositions and modifiers in the complaint data revealed gains in pragmatic competence which were indicated by such changes as increased indirectness, more complete explanations, and fewer explicit statements of dissatisfaction. These results, which corroborated the findings from the holistic ratings, suggested that speech act instruction helped the subjects to perform complaints and refusals which were clearer, more polite, and, to a limited extent, more native-like. Additional intra-task comparisons found that higher levels of pragmatic competence were achieved when the interlocutor's level of social distance was lower (i.e., friends as opposed to acquaintances).

Nelson, G. L., Carson, J., Al Batal, M., & El Bakary, W. (2002). Cross-cultural pragmatics: Strategy use in Egyptian Arabic and American English refusals. Applied Linguistics, 23 (2), 163-189.

This study investigated similarities and differences between Egyptian Arabic and American English refusals using a modified version of the discourse completion test (DCT) developed by Beebe et al. (1990). Refusals were selected because they were considered more of a face-threatening act in Arabic because the Egyptians are more status conscious than Americans. There were 10 situations calling for a refusal -- 2 requests, 3 invitations, 3 offers, and 2 suggestions. Thirty US interviews resulted in 298 refusals and 25 Egyptian interviews resulted in 250 refusals. An interviewer read each situation aloud to the subjects and asked them to respond verbally on audiotape. Also, oral data were seen as more consistent with Arab behavior with the distinction between spoken and literary Arabic. Each refusal was divided into its component strategies (see p. 171 for the chart). Data were analyzed to compare the average frequencies of direct and indirect strategies (reason, consideration of interlocutor's feelings, suggestions of willingness, letting interlocutor off the hook, statement of regret, hedging, statement of principle, criticizing the request/requester, repetition of part of the request), the average frequencies of specific indirect strategies, and the effect of interlocutor status on strategy use across groups. Two situations were eliminated -- asked employer for a pay increase and a student making a request to a teacher. Results indicated that both groups use similar strategies with similar frequency in making refusals, counter to Al-Issa's findings where Jordanians used more indirect strategies than Americans. The findings, however, suggest that although methods such as the DCT may be appropriate for collecting pragmalinguistic data, they fail to reveal the sociopragmatic complexities of face-threatening acts such as refusals. The Egyptians indicated that they would not make refusals in some of these situations, like refusing an invitation from the boss.

Naitou, M. (1997). Nihongono taiguu hyougen "irai" "kotowari": Nihongo bogowashato nihongo gakushuushatono koodono sai (‘Japanese politeness in requests and refusals: Differences in code between native speakers and learners of Japanese’). In M. Hubbard, T. Sakamoto, & J. Davis (Eds.), Nihongo kyouiku ibunkano kakehashi: Miura Akira Sensei Koki Kinen Ronbunshuu (Progress in Japanese Linguistics and pedagogy: A collection in honor of Professor Akira Miura’s 70^th birthday) (pp. 101-115). Tokyo: Arc.

This paper contains a report dealing with three questionnaires investigating native and nonnative Japanese speakers’ 1) politeness judgment of request expressions in six situations, 2) judgment of the speaker’s intent in two hints, and 3) feelings experienced by the speaker who once again refuses a second invitation made to him/her. The author also lists useful request and refusal expressions that can be taught to learners of Japanese.

Robinson, M. (1992). Introspective methodology in interlanguage pragmatics research. In G. Kasper (Ed.), Pragmatics of Japanese as native and target language. Technical Report #3 (pp. 27-82). Honolulu, HI: Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center, U. of Hawaii.

This study involved elicited refusals in written form from 12 native Japanese speaking females in US for 3 months to 3 years. There was no interaction with an interlocutor. It was called a DCT, but was not interactive with rejoinders from the interlocutor, simply one-shot responses of 6 refusals. Respondents were instructed to think aloud while filling out their response. Then their tape was played back so they could hear their think-aloud data to get more on their think-aloud utterances. This lasted from 25-75 minutes. Then, there were 20-30 minute sessions with the researcher in which the respondents were to provide verbal report in the form of think aloud. After responding, the respondents were interviewed for 20-30 minutes (49). Result that the report had more on their personality and reaction to the situation. The investigator did not speak Japanese and all verbal reports were in English. Some respondents indicated not having experience with the situation (66), as in Cohen & Olshtain (1993). One methodological problem was that respondents accepted the request rather than refusing it. It was positive about verbal reports. Verbal report revealed a pragmatic problem that Japanese girls are brought up to say "yes," or at least not say "no" (59). It found that intermediate students generally reported the effects of training while advanced subjects remarked on inductive learning from experience, if they remarked at all.

Sadler, R. W. & Eröz, B. (2001). "I refuse you!" An examination of English refusals by native speakers of English, Lao, and Turkish. Arizona Working Papers in SLAT, 9, 53-80.

Thirty respondents fill out a refusals DCT in English -- 10 Americans, 10 Lao, and 10 Turkish -- constructed by Beebe et al. (1990). It included 12 situations designed to elicit refusals for requests, invitations, offers, and suggestions (in lower, equal, or higher status situations). All respondents tended to use excuses, explanations, or reasons, with a statement of regret preceding or following the reasons or excuses. The Turkish and Americans used pause fillers and then statements of gratitude and appreciation, while the Lao respondents used statements of regret, followed by adjuncts. The Turkish refused a bit less than the others. Interestingly transfer from L1 language and culture patterns did not seem to be that prevalent. The four different kinds of refusal situations did get different kinds of responses. Requests were refused by an excuse or explanation, with a statement of regret. Regarding an invitation, regret was expressed when refusing someone of higher status. Gratitude and appreciation were used along with an excuse or reason in refusing an offer. For suggestions, a reason, explanation, or excuse was

Sameshima, S. (1998). Communication task ni okeru nihongo gakusyusha no tenkei hyougen/bunmatsu hyougen no syuutokukatei: Chuugokugo washa no "ira" "kotowari" "shazai" no baai (‘The acquisition of fixed expressions and sentence-ending expressions by learners of Japanese’). Nihongo Kyouiku (Journal of Japanese Language Teaching), 98, 73-84.

This paper examines speech act performance in requests, refusals, and apologies by Chinese speakers of Japanese in Taiwan. Three levels of learners, high-beginners, low-intermediate, and high-intermediate, took a discourse completion test that included 3 situations, eliciting performance on the three speech acts. The results were analyzed in terms of the linguistic form of each core speech act and the language use in the opening and closing of the dialogue. The author also compared the learners’ performance with the expressions included in their textbooks. The learners’ general linguistic performance approximated that of native speakers as their levels became more advanced, although all level learners tended to oversimplify opening and closing statements.

Shigeta, M. (1974). Ambiguity in declining requests and apologizing. In J. C. Condon & M. Saito (Eds.), Intercultural encounters with Japan: Communication -- contact and conflict (pp. 193-195). Tokyo: Simul Press.

The study compared responses by Japanese and Americans at International Christian University in Tokyo in six situations, 2 apologies, 2 requests, and 2 refusals — in each case, once to a higher status person and once to a person of equal status. While the Japanese were concerned about relative status, the Americans paid more attention to the personal relations or closeness with the person. The Japanese were more ambiguous in their responses. While this is a very short report with no details, the study constitutes a pioneering effort, some seven years before the appearance of what were considered the "initial" empirical studies.

Shimura, A. (1995). "Kotowari" toiu hatsuwa kouiniokeru taiguu hyougentoshiteno syouryakuno hindo, kinou, kouzouni kansuru chuukanngengo goyouron kenkyu (‘Frequency, function, and structure of omissions as politeness expressions in the speech act of refusal’). Keiougijyuku Daigaku Hiyoshi Kiyou (Keio University at Hiyoshi, Language, Culture, Communication), 15, 41-62.

This paper focuses on the use of incomplete sentences in performing refusals in Japanese. Native speakers often use incomplete sentences especially with those of higher status in order to avoid making direct refusals and appear hesitant, which is considered a polite gesture. Based on the same data used in Ikoma and Shimura (1993), learners’ and native speakers’ use of incomplete sentences were analyzed in terms of the syntactic and semantic structures, frequency, correlation with interlocutors of various status. Approximately 24% of the refusal sentences made by native speakers were left incomplete and over half of them (54%) were used with someone of higher status than the speakers. Over half of the incomplete sentences used by natives (61%) and learners (72%) were when providing a reason for a refusal (e.g., …te/de, …node/kara), as well as in responding negatively, providing an alternative, and responding positively. More than half of the incomplete sentences (61%) appeared at the end of the refusal sequences. The learners’ use of incomplete sentences was similar to that of natives except that the learners used incomplete sentences less frequently (15%) and more often with someone of lower status, rather than with higher status interlocutors.

Takahashi, T. & Beebe, L. M. (1986). ESL teachers' evaluation of pragmatic vs. grammatical errors. CUNY Forum, 12, 172-203.

Studies ESL teachers' reactions to pragmatic errors as compared with their corrections of grammatical errors -- specifically, how they reacted to refusals that contained grammatical and pragmatic errors. A questionnaire was prepared to elicit ESL teachers' reactions to 18 refusals -- 6 made by intermediate ESL students, 6 by advanced, and 6 from native American English data. Half were refusals of invitations, the other half refusals of requests. They varied as to the nature of the mistake(s). The AE responses were doctored to include grammatical errors. 15 teachers graded according to classifications for grammar, style, spelling/punctuation, and pragmatics. This study did not yield clear indications as to whether grammatical or pragmatic errors were attended to more. So, a second study was conducted where the number of grammatical mistakes was controlled for in each item -- one per item. The sequence and content of pragmatic features in each refusal was left unchanged. A new group of 15 teachers responded. Here they found an increase in attention to the pragmatic level, with each higher proficiency level of student rated higher, because grammar errors were controlled. The first study had more corrections and comments per item. In the first study teachers were unable to provide many comments on sociolinguistic appropriateness due, they argue, to preoccupation with grammatical errors. In the second study when minimum attention to grammar was required, ESL teachers' awareness of sociolinguistic appropriateness became well manifested.

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

Reports on a study to examine the development pragmatic competence of Japanese learners of English as compared with native Americans. Their pragmatic competence was analyzed qualitatively in terms of the tone and content of their refusals. Qualitative assessments of transfer strategies were also given. The data were based on the written refusals of 80 subjects -- 20 native speakers using Japanese and 20 native speakers using English, as compared with 40 Japanese students speaking English (20 EFL and 20 ESL). Within the ESL and EFL categories, 10 students were at the grad level and 10 UG. They found evidence that transfer existed in both the EFL and ESL contexts, and that native language influence was generally stronger in the EFL context [makes sense]. They also found transfer to exist at both the lower and higher proficiency levels. Interestingly, they found that negative pragmatic transfer occurred more at the more advanced levels of ESL (not EFL). The interpretation was that precisely their greater ease at speaking English allowed them to express notions that seemed typically Japanese (e.g., being "deeply honored" to receive a simple invitation).

Ueda, K. (1974). Sixteen ways to avoid saying "no" in Japan. In J. C. Condon & M. Saito (Eds.), Intercultural encounters with Japan: Communication -- contact and conflict (pp. 185-192). Tokyo: Simul Press.

The chapter is about not wanting to say no to a boss so as not to hurt the superior's feelings and not to endanger own position at work. A "no" may suggest the junior person is selfish and unfriendly, so this person may have not choice but to accept. The flat "no," ie, is avoided in speaking. A vague "no" is preferred or an expression that could be either yes or no. Silence is also used. Other possibilities: a counter question, a tangential response, leaving the scene, lying, criticizing the question, refusing to answer the question, giving a conditional "no," using "yes, but...," delaying the answer, declining but without giving a direct "no" but rather an expression involving both apology and regret, expressing "I will accept" (to a superior) but with some excuse which warns of likely failure to carry out the request, an apology. An empirical study found that lying was the preferred approach. Younger respondents preferred apologies. The older generation preferred tangential responses and delayed answers. Men used a flat "no" more than women which women avoided.

Widjaja, C. S. (1997). A study of date refusals: Taiwanese females vs. American females. University of Hawai'i Working Papers in ESL, 15 (2), 1-43.

Looks at a special case of refusals, namely, dating, since it involves both explicitness and politeness. In the study, 10 Taiwanese and 10 American female college students performed three different dating role plays (classmate, stranger, and boyfriend contexts) in English as a second vs. native language, with retrospective interviews to get at thought processes and negative and positive politeness strategy formulation. Negative politeness strategies included: a direct refusal, a refusal, an indirect refusal, an expression of regret, an excuse, an objection, and a hedge. Positive politeness strategies included: offering an alternative (e.g., "Can I bring my friend?"), a vague future acceptance, a future acceptance, an acceptance, a postponement, solidarity, a positive remark (e.g., "I'm flattered"), a positive opinion, and thanking. Results showed that both groups preferred negative politeness strategies. The Taiwanese preferred higher directness in refusing dates. Overgeneralization from Chinese patterns, L1 pragmatic knowledge, and lack of pragmatic knowledge in L2 were factors, along with social distance.

Speech Acts Bibliography: Refusals

Speech Acts Bibliography:
Refusals