伊拉克和马来西亚学习者在求婚时偏爱的拒绝和礼貌策略

Q2 Arts and Humanities Discourse and Interaction Pub Date : 2023-12-20 DOI:10.5817/di2023-2-29
Ali Qassim Tabarek, Abbas Nawal Fadhel, Mei Hooi Chee
{"title":"伊拉克和马来西亚学习者在求婚时偏爱的拒绝和礼貌策略","authors":"Ali Qassim Tabarek, Abbas Nawal Fadhel, Mei Hooi Chee","doi":"10.5817/di2023-2-29","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The study targets exploring the similarities and differences between Iraqi and Malaysian learners of English in refusing marriage proposals. Also, it examines the favored politeness strategies that learners use to protect their interlocutors’ face, heeding both their social distance and status. Data were gathered by a Discourse Completion Task (DCT) which contained six marriage situations. Responses were analyzed based on Beebe et al.’s (1990) refusal taxonomy and Scollon et al.’s (2012) politeness system. The findings indicated that both the Iraqi and Malaysian learners preferred the indirect refusal strategies in marriage proposals, as well as the hierarchical politeness in the form of independence strategies regardless of the social status and distance between interlocutors. However, they differed in the sort of indirect strategies most frequently utilized. The Iraqi learners favored reason, regret, and non-performative statements, whilst the Malaysian learners preferred regret, non-performative statements, and reason.","PeriodicalId":38177,"journal":{"name":"Discourse and Interaction","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Refusal and politeness strategies favoured among Iraqi and Malaysian learners in marriage proposals\",\"authors\":\"Ali Qassim Tabarek, Abbas Nawal Fadhel, Mei Hooi Chee\",\"doi\":\"10.5817/di2023-2-29\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The study targets exploring the similarities and differences between Iraqi and Malaysian learners of English in refusing marriage proposals. Also, it examines the favored politeness strategies that learners use to protect their interlocutors’ face, heeding both their social distance and status. Data were gathered by a Discourse Completion Task (DCT) which contained six marriage situations. Responses were analyzed based on Beebe et al.’s (1990) refusal taxonomy and Scollon et al.’s (2012) politeness system. The findings indicated that both the Iraqi and Malaysian learners preferred the indirect refusal strategies in marriage proposals, as well as the hierarchical politeness in the form of independence strategies regardless of the social status and distance between interlocutors. However, they differed in the sort of indirect strategies most frequently utilized. The Iraqi learners favored reason, regret, and non-performative statements, whilst the Malaysian learners preferred regret, non-performative statements, and reason.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38177,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Discourse and Interaction\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Discourse and Interaction\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5817/di2023-2-29\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Discourse and Interaction","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5817/di2023-2-29","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究旨在探讨伊拉克和马来西亚英语学习者在拒绝求婚方面的异同。此外,本研究还探讨了学习者为保护对话者的面子、顾及其社会距离和地位而采用的礼貌策略。数据通过包含六个婚姻情境的 "话语完成任务"(DCT)收集。研究人员根据 Beebe 等人(1990 年)的拒绝分类法和 Scollon 等人(2012 年)的礼貌系统分析了学生的回答。研究结果表明,无论社会地位和对话者之间的距离如何,伊拉克和马来西亚学习者在求婚时都偏好间接拒绝策略,以及独立策略形式的等级礼貌。但是,他们在最常使用的间接策略种类上有所不同。伊拉克学习者偏爱理由、遗憾和非表态性陈述,而马来西亚学习者偏爱遗憾、非表态性陈述和理由。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Refusal and politeness strategies favoured among Iraqi and Malaysian learners in marriage proposals
The study targets exploring the similarities and differences between Iraqi and Malaysian learners of English in refusing marriage proposals. Also, it examines the favored politeness strategies that learners use to protect their interlocutors’ face, heeding both their social distance and status. Data were gathered by a Discourse Completion Task (DCT) which contained six marriage situations. Responses were analyzed based on Beebe et al.’s (1990) refusal taxonomy and Scollon et al.’s (2012) politeness system. The findings indicated that both the Iraqi and Malaysian learners preferred the indirect refusal strategies in marriage proposals, as well as the hierarchical politeness in the form of independence strategies regardless of the social status and distance between interlocutors. However, they differed in the sort of indirect strategies most frequently utilized. The Iraqi learners favored reason, regret, and non-performative statements, whilst the Malaysian learners preferred regret, non-performative statements, and reason.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Discourse and Interaction
Discourse and Interaction Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
期刊最新文献
First language and second language English editorialists’ use of interactional metadiscourse On the use of rhetorical questions in tweets related to the Russia-Ukrainian war: Podolyak vs Polyanskiy It’s complicated: The relationship between lexis, syntax and proficiency Refusal and politeness strategies favoured among Iraqi and Malaysian learners in marriage proposals The winner takes it all: Stance and engagement markers in successful project proposal abstracts funded by ERC
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1