The effect of gender on refusal of suggestion in formal and informal situations among Iranian learners

Article Sidebar

PDF
Published Nov 16, 2015
DOI https://doi.org/10.18844/gjs.v5i1.52

Main Article Content

Behzad Rahbar Mohammad Reza Oroji Fariba Hedayatnejad

Abstract

The knowledge of the speech acts of refusals has crucial role in our daily communication, because of the interlocutor’s face, politeness, and face threatening act. This study aims to investigate the gender differences in realization of the usage of proper strategies of refusal of suggestion in formal and informal situations.  The participants consisted of 60 (30 females and 30 males) in intermediate level of language proficiency, in Zaban Negar institute of Tehran, Iran as EFL context. The instrument which is used in eliciting the data is Discourse Completion Test (DCT) that is in open ended form and composed of 18 situations that included refusal to a person of acquaintance, intimacy, and stranger among female and male learners. In this study, there are two DCT which are designed separately for female and male groups, and participants should put themselves in each situation and answer the question up to 20 minutes. Data was analyzed due to the frequency types of refusals which are applied to interlocutor's social distance by calculating the frequency statistics and in order to find any significant difference and to compare the differences chi-square was computed. The findings revealed that the frequency of applied refusals of suggestion was different among the learners to people with different levels of social distance. According to chi square analysis, the realization of applied strategies of the refusal of suggestion depends on the different social distances. The frequency of realized and applied strategies in formal and informal situation in refusal of suggestion is not statistically different between the female and male participants.

Keywords: speech acts of refusals, suggestion, gender, formal and informal situation, refusal strategies

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

Issue
Vol 5 No 1 (2015): April
Section
Articles
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).

References

Austin, J.L. (1962). How to do things with words. London: Oxford University Press.

Azizi Abarghoui, M (2012). A Comparative Study of Refusal Strategies Used by Iranians and Australians. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2439-2445.

Beebe, S. J., Øyen, O., Sandberg, M., Frøysa, A., Hansson, V., & Jahnsen, T. (1990). Molecular cloning of a tissue-specific protein kinase (Cγ) from human testis—representing a third isoform for the catalytic subunit of cAMP-dependent protein kinase. Molecular Endocrinology, 4(3), 465-475.

Boxer, D. (1993). Social distance and speech behavior: The case of indirect complaints. Journal of Pragmatics, 19, 103-125.

Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1978). Universals in Language Usage: Politeness phenomena. In E. Goody (Ed.), Questions on politeness: Strategies in social interaction (pp. 56-289). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Brown, P., & Levinson, S.C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Che Lah, S., Qusay Abdul Sattar, H., & Raja Suleimanr, R. (2011). Refusal Strategies in English By Malay University Students. GEMA Online™ Journal of Language Studies 69 Volume 11(3).

Felix-Brasdefer, J. C. (2006). Linguistic politeness in Mexico: Refusal strategies among male speakers of Mexican Spanish. Journal of Pragmatics, 38, 2158-2187.

Fioramonte, A., & Vásquez, C. (2011). Integrating pragmatics into the MA-TESL program: Perspectives from Former Students. TESL-EJ 15 (2): 1-22.
Gass, S., M., & Houck, N. (1999). Interlanguage refusals: A cross-cultural study of Japanese-English. New York: Mouton de Gruyter 2.

Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face behavior. New York: Pantheon Books.

Guo, Y. (2012). Chinese and American Refusal Strategy: A Cross-cultural Approach. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, © 2012 ACADEMY PUBLISHER Manufactured in Finland.

Holmes, J. (1995). Women, men and politeness. London: Longman.

Kasper, G. (2006). Beyond repair, conversation analysis as an approach to SLA. In K. Bardovi- Harling, and Z. Dörnyei (eds), Themes in SLA research. AILTA. Review 19: 83-99. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Lakoff, R. (1975). Language and woman’s place. New York. Harper and Row.

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

Nelson, G. L. Al Batal, M. & El Bakary, W. (2002). Directness vs. indirectness: Egyptian Arabic and US English communication style, International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 26, 39-57.

Ramos, J. (1991). No…Because..: A study of pragmatic transfer in refusals among Puerto Rican teenagers speaking English, PhD diss. Columbia University

Richards, J.C., & Schmidt, R. (2002). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics (3rd ed.). London: Longman (Pearson Education).

Sahragard. R., & Javanmardi. F. (2011). English Speech Act Realization of “Refusals” among Iranian EFL Learners Cross-Cultural Communıcatıon, 7(2), 181-198.

Sanders, R., E. (2005). Testing "observations": The methodological relevance of attention to cognition in discourse studies. In H. te Molder & J. Potter (Eds.), Discourse and cognition (pp. 57‐78). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Takahashi, T., & Beebe, L.M. (1987).The development of pragmatic competence by Japanese learners of English. JALT Journal, 8, 131-55.

Tanck, S. (2002). Speech Act Set of Refusal and Comparison of Native and Non-Native English Speakers' Production. Retrieved August 19th, 2009 from: http://www1.american.edu/tesol/wptanck.pdf

Tannen, D. (1990). You just don’t understand: Men and women in conversation. New York: William Morrow & Company.

Vaezi, R. (2011). A Contrastive Study of the Speech Act of Refusal Between Iranian EFL Learners and Persian Native Speakers. Cross - Cultural Communication, 7(2), 213-218. Retrieved from: http://proxy2.lib.umanitoba.ca/login?urlhttp://search.proquest.com.proxy2.lib. umanitoba.ca/docview/1019052851?accountid=14569

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

Zheng, L., & Huang, J. (2010). A Study of Chinese EFL Learners’ Pragmatic Failure and the Implications for College English Teaching. Polyglossia, 18, 41-54.