Refusal strategies
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Refusal strategies

on

  • 2,480 views

The act of speech can be performed by understanding the language, such as refusing someone or requesting for something. In many cultures and regions, the refusing strategies are different. According ...

The act of speech can be performed by understanding the language, such as refusing someone or requesting for something. In many cultures and regions, the refusing strategies are different. According to Austin (1962) cited in (Al-Kahtani, 2005), “speech act is defined as functional element of any interaction or communication”.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
2,480
Views on SlideShare
2,480
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
3
Downloads
81
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft Word

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Refusal strategies Refusal strategies Document Transcript

    • 12 Refusal Strategies between Arabic and English
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and English Chapter One: Introduction1.1. OverviewThe act of speech can be performed by understanding the language, such as refusing someoneor requesting for something. In many cultures and regions, the refusing strategies are different.According to Austin (1962) cited in (Al-Kahtani, 2005), “speech act is defined as functionalelement of any interaction or communication”. This act is performed by the speaker whenmaking any utterance. It is seen that when a person refuses someone straightaway, that personfeel awkward because it sometimes seems as an insult of that person. In many cultural contexts,the refusing strategies are different and based on this there are certain ways for refusingsomeone so that other person who has been refused does not feel bad (Al-Kahtani, 2005).Utterance is the part of conversation that is bounded by the silence. However, sometimes it isthe way of refusing or showdisconnectedness towards any situation. In language, it is importantto understand pragmatic features that mostly native speakers adopt to communicate in certainsituations. In many cases, speakers make some mistakes while using pragmatics in theirconversation. They make errors in communication and this loses their control over thesituation. There are many examples where the speaker makes general mistakes of paragma-lingiustic errors. For example, guests on dinner inquires, “How much your house cost?” which isknown as socio-pragmatic error considered in US context (Nelson et al., 2002).In language and communication, refusal is referred to as a face-threatening act in the speechacts. These are the sensitive situation in the communication process, which might create apositive or a negative affect over the communication. The positive affect occurs when thespeaker handles the refusal situation with sensitivity, whereas the negative situation occurswhen the speaker follow straightaway or rude behaviour without giving importance to one’snon-native pragmatic aptitude (Nelson et al., 2002).
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and EnglishThe refusal methods vary from culture to culture. However, the conflict occurs when the peopleof two different cultures try to communicate with each other without knowing the appropriatetechniques of refusal strategies or even common pragmatic indicators. The conversationchanges from culture to culture. The speech act between English to English, English to Chinese,English to Japanese, English to American, English to Russian, English to Arabic or English toIndian is different because of difference in cultural orientation. Therefore, for a speaker, it isimportant to know the cross-cultural methods of communication and the avoidance of commonerrors (Al-Kahtani, 2005).To understand the refusal strategies, it is important to learn the request strategies becauserequest is one of the effective ways to reduce the error in communication especially whilerefusing for something. Even if the hearer refuses for something, s/he should give theimpression that they cares for whatever the speaker feels and should show contented towardshim/her. Studying the cross-cultural methods and techniques of different face-threatening actshelps in contributing a successful communication. It brings the speaker and hearer into thecomfortable communication where they can judge each other by their facial expressions.However, many speech acts turn out to be failure because of the gap in request and refusaltechniques (Nelson et al., 2002).Many authors studied the refusal strategies of two different culturally oriented individuals byusing the method of DCT. Saeki and O’keefe in 1994 studied the Japanese and America refusalstrategies through DCT. DCT is said to be the Discourse Completion Test that elicits pragma-linguistic studies. Al-Issa’s used DCT to study the Jordanians Arabic refusals (Nelson et al.,2002).Four major factors were analysed and presented by the authors in these studies. It includes [1]the refusal strategies vary from culture to culture. [2] The status affects the directness of aperson while using or making any refusal. [3] Arabic speakers use indirect strategies to softenthe refusal situation. [4]Writing is used to collect data based on refusal strategies. The latter
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and Englishchapters of this research will help in understanding and focusing on the refusal strategiesbetween two major languages or cultures (Nelson et al., 2002).1.2. Research QuestionsThis research is mainly focusing on the refusal strategies of two different cultures: English andArabic. The questions are designed based on the idea of understanding that how refusaltechniques vary from one culture to another. These will help in narrowing down the researchspecifically to know few important things. Following are the questions of this research: 1. Are there differences or/and similarities between native and non-native English refusal patterns? This question will present the idea of differences and similarities of non-natives refusal patterns who visit to UK or Saudi Arabia for seeking education. They face difficulties in communication, but they need to follow some tactics to manage communication challenges. 2. Do Saudis and British use direct or indirect refusal strategies? If they are using indirect refusals, are they different or similar? This question aims to understand indirect refusal methods because they are of different types that are used in different situations. 3. Given that indirect refusal patterns are usually associated with politeness, how is this affected by the interlocutor status? This question will give the idea that how indirect refusal patterns affect the people who are involved in the dialogue or conversation and how politeness is maintained in it.1.3. Aims and objectivesThe aim of this research is to understand the importance of referral strategies in the cross-cultural communication. This will help in providing a valid justification that how much
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and Englishimportant it is for the natives and non-natives to understand the basic of pragmatics inlinguistics. Following are the objectives of this research: 1. To explore the basic difference in the refusal strategies of Arabic and English 2. To understand the behaviour of non-natives while making refusal 3. To understand the indirect refusal patterns in speech acts 4. Examining the basic difference in direct and indirect methods of refusal in the communication or speech acts1.4. Focus of the researchThe focus of this research is towards the Arabic and English refusal strategies. This created thelimitation on this research and narrowed down the focus as well. The researcher will onlyexplore the facts based on the given objects. However, there is little chance of expanding theresearch to those variables that are not included in this research. For example, requeststrategies, sociolinguistic errors, mannersetc.1.5. Structure of the researchThe research is usually divided into five major chapters. These chapters give the systematicinformation over the issue or topic. Chapter one of this research is based on introduction. Thischapter gives the overview on the research and the questions that will give the direction to thereaders as well as experts to know what is mentioned or discussed in further chapters.Chapter two is based on the literature review. This chapter will help in presenting thetheoretical framework over the research issue and the discussion of various authors in differenttime. It will give direction to select suitable tool for data collection, which is mostly used by theauthors whose sources are mentioned in the literature.
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and EnglishChapter three is based on the methods of the research. it will help in knowing that what methodis appropriate to use for the research based on the nature and the convenience of theresearcher. In this chapter, the researcher identifies the targeted sample for the data collection.Chapter four of the research is based on the analysis and results. The analysis highlights theinformation that is collected. It interprets the information and make it easier by illustrating it inthe form of figures and data so that readers can gain the understanding. This chapter gives theanalytical projection over the research.Chapter five – Conclusion, which is the last chapter summarises the whole research and theconcepts of it. It outlines the research main idea and the comparison of that idea with theproposed or identified issue. This chapter helps the readers to know the solution of the issuediscussed.
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and EnglishIn today’s global economic system, increasing communication or pragmatic trend indifferent cultures have seen. Communications across cultures are difficult, especially forthose cultures, which shares symbolic meaning and have complex learning system.There are two ways to understand the cultures universalistic and particularisticapproaches. According to Morand (1996) approach that investigates and understandsthe universal dimensions by using constructs, which are generalized in all humancultures, is known as Etic approach. This approach shows that some elements areuniversal in human interaction like conceptions of time and interpersonal proximity butthese variables vary from culture to culture. Interpersonal distance is the averagedistance one partner maintain from another one. Different cultures have differentdegrees of distance; it depends upon culture to culture. In some cultures, it is very smalland measured in inches while others have large degrees of distance (Morand, 1996).Same goes with conception of time, some cultures give high importance to time andothers treat time oppositely, which is very frustrating for others. Another approach funderstanding a culture in emic approach, which studies a cultures socials andhistorical context for example Saudi Arabia’s customs, gestures, language, symbols,religion etc all comes under emic approach. Both studies have different way of studyingcultures, both have valid points and study a culture from different points (Morand,1996).The term speech act is a basic means of communication. Speech act includes responding,complimenting, apologizing, leaving and giving refusals etc. According to Nelson et al(2002), the goal of speech act research is to study how NS and NNS do communicationto achieve their goals. Pragmatic competency is the ability to use the language in orderto accomplish the goals. There are two different concepts one is pragmalinguistic and
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and Englishsociopragmatic competence. Pragmalinguistic is use to fulfil the speech act andsociopragmatic is used to refer speech act in a particular context. Nelson et al (2002) hasnotice that Egyptians are more conscious than the Americans are. Refusals are facethreatening that why face saving strategies are used, especially for high status people. Itis very difficult to maintain each participates face in the interaction such acts are knownas face threatening. Some threats also occur on hearer’s face. In order to protect the faceof another person it is important to use refusal strategies so that no other person feelsface threatening. These strategies are more important in cross-cultural communications(Nelson et al., 2002).Speech act is an action done by language mode of communication, which includesrequesting, refusing and complaining something. Speech act is the functional unit ofcommunication, which is performed by speaker while making an utterance. Whiletalking on phone speaker does utterance, which is a speech of unit used to ignoresilence. Sometimes utterance is only use to refer as speech in studies. Term utterance isused by linguistic to distinguish from a traditional word sentence. Term utterance weuse have three meanings, first is the literal meaning of utterance which is prepositionalcontent, simple example of this kind is that a person utters a word or sentence and hemeans to say exactly and literally what he said. However, not all time cases are assimpler. Most of the time what speaker says is not the real or exact intension in whichhe/she have said. What speaker wants to say, sometimes come out in a different contextdue to which misunderstandings occur between parties. This is also called asmiscommunication. Second is the functions of utterance used in social context this iscalled illusionary meaning and the third one is perlocutionary meaning which tells theeffects of utterance in that context (Al-kathani, 2005).
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and EnglishIn the framework of speech, act interlanguage pragmatics has been conducted. Theminimum use of communication in speaking anything is the performance of linguisticact. All languages have their own means of performing speech act. The form of speechact may differ from culture to culture. It depend that how speech act of a person effecton the interpretation by a NS, it is known as the cross-cultural differences on secondlanguage. The main components of pragmatics is the abilities of a learner that howmuch appropriate speech act person can use according to the event, situation or incontext. Pragmatic competence is the knowledge that determines what speaker issaying and how it is interpreted by the other person; the differences occur especiallywhen one person or party is NS and other is NNS. It is also pointed out in some studiesthat pragmatic is the study of speech acts. It also depends that how a learner producesthe utterance in large audience and how they interpret their intentions, which theyconveyed through utterance. Abed (2011) study has shown that there is no doubt thatspeech act is a universal behavior but it varies largely from culture to culture, languageto language and from countries to countries.It also depends upon the learner that which strategies they have chosen even though ifthey are provided with the same strategies as the NS have. In order to make learnerspragmatic competent they must be aware of socio cultural constrains of speech acts. It isnatural thing that difficulties arise when a second language learner speaks to NSbecause of their lacking in that language. They make mistakes in conversational normsinvolved in that speech act, these norms can be very important for NS and they give highvalue to those norms so they do not accept it when second language learners or NNSmake those mistakes. These kinds of conversations can also leads towards severebreakdowns in interethnic communication. Risk is also involved when NS violate speech
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and Englishacts such risks are called as perennial risk. Communication difficulties occur whenknowledge is not transfer in proper way and by following rules are regulation or byinterpreting them wrongly or not in the context. Abed (2011) noticed that NNS useconversational rules of their native language into their second language, which also notappropriate for the conversations.Pragmatic transfer occurs when a person use rules of its native language while talkingnon-native language or second language. Top down processing shows that what secondlanguage learners should know for successful speech act performance. Learners mustfirst recognize the cultural constrains and the context and then use appropriate speechacts. They must know how to use speech act properly not to violate any socio culturalnorm, this is also known as socio cultural knowledge. Socio cultural knowledge is theability of speakers to determine the acceptability of speech act in the given situation (Al-Eryani, 2007).2.1. Strategies for refusalsAs in all other languages, speech act of refusal is present. However, all languages have adifferent way of refusing and use various strategies while refusing in order to makethemselves and others comfortable. Refusal occurs when a person says no directly orindirectly to other person for any invitation or for any work. Refusal is a FTA becauselisteners expectations are contradict. Refusals are done in an indirect way also in orderto protect listener from FTA. Refusal requires a high level of pragmatic competence.Semantic formulas are used to analyze refusal speech acts. Al-Eryani (2007) analysisshows that no one uses the direct refusal method, which says no, until and unless it is in
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and Englishthe background. For example, in America expression of regret was created by Chinese,they created an unpleasant feeling between Americans. It is not necessary that a personwho is good in second language and have good vocabulary and grammar but they canstill lack pragmatic competence. In order word, they can be unable to communicate inappropriate social and cultural language.Refusals are also known as striking point for NNS. Refusals are very tricky speech actbecause while refusing you has to make sure that other person is not offended or notfeel like FTA. If you fail to refuse in an appropriate manner, you can destroy yourinterpersonal relations with that person. That is why refusal uses refusing strategies toavoid offending the person. These strategies may differ from language to language andfrom culture to culture. For example in American suggestions are made while refusingbut not in Egyptian Arabic speakers. Therefore, strategies are different from culture toculture. Another example is of Chinese, they are used to give positive opinions whilerefusing. However, this strategy is very uncommon in American English (Al-Eryani,2007).The strategy used to protect the person from FTA also depends upon speaker’s statusand relationship with that person. Refusal is not only FTA for listener but also forspeaker because it imposes threats on face of listener and change positive face ofspeaker. To maintain this face situation face saving strategies are used to protect theirrelationship and harmony. According to Umale inappropriate replies are also because ofsocio cultural influences. These replies create problems because NS fells rude and thinkthat reply is very harsh. In Arab culture, they use different strategies while talking,sometimes they do not speak and those things are of high importance and what is saidby them is not that important. Umale study shows that they do not openly disclose what
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and Englishthey mean by their saying. These strategies depends upon their socio cultural normsbecause they are very family and friends focus they give high importance on greeting ina formal way and by giving sincere hospitality. They are polite in their culture, but as itis said that things vary from culture to culture therefore, for them they are very politeand following their socio cultural norm. However, it is not necessary that the otherperson also feel the same because they may be having different culture and backgroundand different socio cultural norms, which can be completely different from them(Umale).2.2 Reasons of NNS Un-influential RefusalsEslami-Rasekh (2005) Study of pragmatic competency shows that grammaticaldevelopment does not only guarantee the second language learners. They must knowthe intentions and politeness value of those culture and socio cultural norms of thatsociety in order to become perfect in second language. It is teachers’ responsibility toteach pragmatic competence to students of second language learners otherwise it iscounted the fault of teachers. Teacher also faces certain problem of trainings andmaterial or resource on pragmatic competence in order to teach them to students. Themost important thing seen here is that less emphasize is done on pragmatic competencewhen a student is learning second language. In order to make students learn aboutthose pragmatic competence to minimize the level of miss communication and badresults of their communication with NS, pragmatic competence must be added into theircourse and special emphasize must be done so that they can avoid face threateningsituations. Not only pragmatic competence should be added in course theoretically butalso practically. Students must be given practical example to make them learn properlyand try to make them practice by giving practical problem and making them do it
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and Englishpractically so they can become perfect in speaking second language (Eslami-Rasekh,2005).According to Austin (1955) study, sometimes when remarks are felt very dangerous isbecause of the obvious act that uttering has been done in a wrong way or interpreted ina wrong way. It is important that utterance is done in an appropriate way and is takenor interpreted in the following way in which it is said. If the speaker is not good insecond language then they must do their action of what they are saying or what theirintention is. By acting in that way they can show their intentions and other person caneasily understand in the same manner as it is delivered (Austin, 1955).Austin (1955) study shows that the chances of miscommunication drop down andconversation is done successfully. It is not necessary that the act is of exactly samewords, which are uttered but their meaning, must be same and conveying the samemessage they wanted to convey by utterance. Other than acts are the expressions,expression of a person must be same and supporting the utterance otherwise listenercan feel face threatening because of negative impressions. For example if a personwanted to say “I seriously…..” and if he is not serious or not giving serious impressionthan the listener can feel something bad and disagree because utterance andimpressions are not matching (Austin, 1955).Suggesting someone is a direct speech act, in which speaker’s purpose is to commit thelistener for any future course of action. Martínez-Flor (2005) study has shown thatwhile speaker is performing utterance the action of hearer’s are result of the NNSattitude and intention. Another relevant feature of directives is opposing to otherspeech acts. In order to do the interaction speaker and hearer must be performingspeech acts. Because whatever NS does is because of the NNS’s speech act and their
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and Englishintentions and attitudes, which force listeners to perform such actions. While dealingwith directive speech it is necessary that speaker’s intentions must be fully accepted bythe listener otherwise speech act cannot be done successfully (Martínez-Flor, 2005).To distinguish any sort of illocutionary act from another is called taxonomical effort. Inorder to do anything further one must know the species of predicting, reporting etc.there many different ways of distinction. Most commonly, there are three differentways, which force utterance different from source of other utterance. This is because ofthe expressions are misleading. That is why it is suggested that while utterance actionsand expressions must be conveying the same message as the utterance is conveying. Itis also because of the verbs use in utterance; many verbs can be having differentmeaning so there is more chance of miscommunication because it is not necessary thatthe way in which speaker is using that verb is exactly the same way which listener isusing to interpret. Illocutions are always part of the language no matter what languageit is. There are differences in illocutionary verbs, which are a good, guide but not perfectfor the illocutionary acts. There are twelve kinds of differences in the illocutionary act,which includes differences in point, direction of fit between word and world, differencesin between psychological state of acts, strength of illocutionary acts etc are some of thedifferences (Searle, 1976).Many researchers have been done on the modes of discourse, which includes metaphor,references and indirect speech acts. Researches also represent rational taxonomy as atype of speech acts. Researchers have explored the relationship between context inwhich utterance has been done and the meaning of utterance. More difference these twohave there are more chances of miscommunication or misunderstanding which aresometimes very dangerous and can destroy relationships. The relationship between
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and Englishutterance and sentence meaning must be same in order to convey the message properly.There are also other factors in speech act which create problems are intentionality ofmind and philosophy of language connection with the philosophy of mind (Searle,1979).The analytical way of thinking is very fruitful especially in the field of philosophy oflanguage. Many researchers have done work on the philosophy of language it has beenalmost three decades that researches have been done in this field. Many newapproaches and frameworks have been designed for language. There is also criticismdone on these researches, according to some researchers there is no impact of talking incontext to the situation the only thing that matters is what speaker is saying. However,any do not agree they believe is that whatever you are saying it must be in the context tothe situation otherwise, there is no use of utterance. Utterance and the meaning orcontext must be supporting each other and conveying the same message (Searle, 1991).The corresponding notion of illocution is locutionary act. They are very unhelpful andare forced to adopt different distinctions between propositional acts and illocutionaryacts. This difference is more than taxonomical issues and includes high philosophicalissues. Philosophical issues include truth and falsehood of statements, meaning ofstatements and their context in which they have been spoken. There is a relationshipbetween utterance and the meaning of sentences. Originally, the distinction is supposedto be between utterance and the description or meaning of sentence. Utterance issupposed to be an act of apologies, promises, warning, bets etc. There is a differencebetween what utterance is saying and what utterance is doing (forgusan, 1973).
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and EnglishThere is certain subclass of nonconventional implications, which are also known asconversational implications. There are some characteristics, which have degrees ofcooperative efforts, which are recognized by each participant. The purpose anddirections are set or fixes from start or it can be done during the exchange. It has tomeans fairly definite or indefinite to show the considerable latitudes of the participants.However, it is not necessary that all conversations are kept at the end; at each stage, theunsuitable conversations are excluded. A rough principle can also be made according todo expectations of the participants. Conversations must be made according to thecriteria’s and requirements. At each stage of conversation, the requirement changes andso, the unsuitable conversations must be excluded in order to stay connected and makeyour conversation relevant and successful. The direction of conversation must be samefrom the start of conversation to the end (Grice, 1975).The model of brown and levinson on politeness aims for the phenomena of politenessand the utterance which a person chose to use to express themselves in an unrelatedlanguage. There are underlying modes of communications that are universal for allhuman interactions. These modes are reflected in the speech act by showing theinferences and assumptions made in the planning of speech. The expression on face canbe managed by the use of politeness in the conversation. Politeness help to prevent thenegative face of the listener and speaker both and by being polite hearer are speciallyprevented from the FTA (Gilks, 2009).
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and English RESAEARCH METHODOLOGYIn this chapter, it will be focused on the data collection and sampling. This chapter willinclude research design and instrument evaluation on eliciting refusal patterns used inthis study. This study first describes the information about their background and theresearch context for selecting them as the information for each group. The validation fordetermining DCT questionnaire as the core material employed in the current study isprovided. Moreover, the interpreter reliability and pilot testing are also presented. Toexemplify and discuss the study in detail, the instrument is also discussed.SubjectThe numbers of participants selected for this study are 20. The purpose of choosing thelimited number of participants is that the narrower the research is, the more convenientit is to study the similarities and differences in the refusal strategies of Arabic andEnglish.The DCT questionnaire prepared for this research is adopted from the article of Nelsonet al., (2002). The study done in the article of Nelson was based on the comparison ofEgyptian Arabic and American English refusal. This research is quite comparable to thecurrent research. Therefore, the questionnaire of Nelson article will be helpful in orderto evaluate and to understand the refusal strategies of Arabic and English (British). Thetwo questionnaires are prepared for this research. One questionnaire is for the nativespeakers and the other is for non-native speakers. This will help in knowing thesimilarities and differences in the refusal strategies of both the speakers. The DCT isespecially helpful to understand the speech acts. It helps in evaluating the differences
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and Englishand similarities in the speech in very convenient manner. It is one of the reliable andvalid methods to study the refusal strategies of two different cultures.The subjects of the research are the native and non-native speakers of English (BEn)and Arabic (SAr). This will help in evaluating their similarities and differences inconvenient manner. There were few questions asked from the respondents based ontheir demographics. Some extra questions were asked from the non-native speakersbased on their level of understanding of English at different places. They were askedabout the IELTS level. They are also inquired about the time they have spent in the UK.They were also inquired that how often they speak English for the communicationpurpose. Few options were given to them for their ease. The common demographicquestions include their age. They need to specify their age so that it gets easier toevaluate the survey. Their current educational level is also asked. The gender was alsoinquired, which will help in knowing that either males feel difficulty to communicate orfemales feel difficulties to speak English. After the basic questions on demographics, theDCT questions are asked from the respondents.InstrumentAs DCT is considered one of the most effective and frequent method in pragmatics toextract respondent utterance, so data in this research is collected via open-ended DCTquestionnaire (Ogiermann, 2009). In this instrument, different contextual situations arefollowed by a blank. The participants had to provide the appropriate responses to fill inthe blank. In DCT, the questionnaire is considered by number of occurrence and word“directives” is not used in the specified situational description to avoid biasingparticipants choices of responsiveness (Beebe & Takahashi, 1989).
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and EnglishDCT is one of the instruments to collect data. There are three reasons to choose thisinstrument. Firstly, the respondents in various researches like this vary their refusalsbased on the status of the interlocutors. The situations that are developed in DCT arebased on the status embedded in given situations. Secondly, by using this method forboth the respondents, Arabic and English, native and non-native, it is easier to comparethey way and method adopted by them for the refusal strategies. This will help inknowing the differences and similarities in the refusal strategies of Arabic and English.It will also help in knowing the directive and indirect strategies and the strategicrelationship used for the status of interlocutors. Thirdly, it yields to the larger numberof refusal that is opposed in the natural-occurring data (Nelson et al., 2002).With its several benefits, there are certain criticalities in the DCT questionnaire. There isa lack of contextual variation and there is complex interaction too because thesituations are because either the respondent had ever faced it or they have not faced ityet. Moreover, the hypothetical situations are based on the assumptions. Therespondents usually mention that whatever they say in a hypothetical or supposingsituation cannot be applied or predicted on actual situation. The response may varybased on the situation to situation. Moreover, it is also argued that in DCT, as it is thestudy based on the cross-cultural refusal strategies therefore, there are issues in thecomparison of the respondents of different cultures (Nelson et al, 2002).The instrument, which is the open-ended questions are based on 10 situations. Thesesituations are based on four major factors. It includes requests, invitations, offer andsuggestion. Two questions are based on request, three questions are based oninvitations, three are based on offers and two questions are based on suggestions.Request is defined as the demand that is made by the individual in polite manner. This
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and Englishdemand is for something. It is based on the favour that a requester asks from the otherperson (e.g., to borrow notes, pen or book). Invitation is the type of request in which theindividual instead of asking for a favour invites a person. It is usually attempting to bekind and thoughtful (e.g., Inviting a friend on dinner or on party). Offer refers to thestate where an individual asks or wants something. The individual offers other personsomething in this state (e.g., offering a friend for a chocolate or a piece of cake).Suggestion is the state where one person gives advice to the other person so that s/hecan work in effective manner in order to be facilitated with some benefit. It is the ideathat a person put forward for the other person (e.g., to try new colour of dress, to try thecuisine of any particular restaurant). In this research, the DCT presents the situationsbased on status level. There are two situation types that are offer and invitation, whichincludes the refusal of the person at higher status, the person at equal status and theperson at lower status. Two situation types that are invitation and offer include therefusal of person at higher status and the equal status. The purpose of studying thedifferent status level is to understand the refusal situation at different levels. Thesesituations have open-ended answers in which the respondent will propose his or herrefusal strategy. This will help in knowing that how they will respond to the givensituation and what strategy they going to adopt so that the other person who has beenrefused does not feel awkward.Each situation involves the refusal of a particular group or person. For example, insituation one, the group discussed is of classmates, the second situation is based onpresident and salespersons; the third situation is of executive person and boss, and soon. These situations however revolve around friends, bosses, office, home or university.Each situation involves two or more people where the respondents have to refuse in
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and Englishsuitable manner. Few situations are there that are designed to evaluate the level offormality in a parallel relationship. Some are based on informal relationships that areunparallel. Some are unparallel and formal relationship and some are parallel andinformal relationship. However, it depends upon the situation and level of the status ofeach individual.The DCT was originally conducted and designed by Blum-Kulka (1982) and since then itis widely used in many studies. It was used by Saeki and O’keefe in 1994, Al-Issa’s in1998 and Beebe et al. in 1990 (Nelson et al., 2002). The respondents of both the groupswere asked to fill the DCT questionnaire. The situations are based on real-life discourse.It states the situation or scenarios that any individual might encounter in his/her dailyroutine (See Appendix C).Pilot TestingTo elicit the directives of the DCT, it is piloted on three non-natives and one nativespeaker of English (BEn) and Saudi Arabic (SAr) and the demographic information waschanged accordingly. Special consideration is given on the words of the questions sothat it could be accepted in cross-cultural terms. The situations were discussed beforethe testing in order to reduce the chances of errors. The pilot testing ensures that thequestionnaire is well prepared and acceptable for the native and non-native speakers.The words used in the questionnaire are lucid to understand. After assuring few basicthings, the questionnaire was employed for the testing purpose. The material wasreviewed thoroughly to make it error-free. This was done to rule out the complexity andambiguity.Validity
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and EnglishThe validity of the written DCT questionnaire has been a debate. In this questionnaire,there is a lack of authenticity and arbitration because it is insufficient and conflicting tocollect oral responses in a written questionnaire to imitate the real speech actbehaviour. Studies done by Beebe & Cummings in 1996, Turnbull in 1997 and Bodman&Eisenstein in 1988) have noted that the response of participants in DCT areshorter inlength, less face maintaining, easier in wording and interactive. As the comparison of theDCT for the native and non-native is complex therefore, it is expected that the responsesgiven by the respondents will be complex. Therefore, to reduce the complexity; the DCTis prepared in order to evaluate the stereotypical response of the participants. Blum-Kulka et al. in 1989 indicated that to study the cross-cultural studies in speech act; it isrequired to use the stereotypical language. Therefore, it helps in reducing the level ofcomplexity and assures the response in authentic manner.
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and English Consent FormAims of the project: This questionnaire aims at finding the difference betweenrefusal patterns (saying: No) between native speakers of British English and non-nativespeakers of English (speakers of Saudi Arabic).What you will be asked to do: refuse in all hypothetical situationsHow the data collected will be used: The data will be analysed and usedanonymously for an MA dissertation project.You are asked to participate in a research project on an MA dissertation project. I willkeep all personal information completely confidential and though I may describe andanalyse the data, all data will be presented with complete anonymity. Additionally youare free to withdraw from participation at any time with no need for explanation.Please tickI confirm that I have read and understand the information above study and have had the opportunity to ask questions.I understand that my participation is voluntary and that I am free to withdraw at any time, without giving any reason.I agree to take part in the above-named survey. Finally, if you would like a copy of a paper that presents preliminary results from thisstudy (based on other participants’ data/responses), please email Musha’alAlBugami :mushaaluk”gmail.com and I will send that to you.Thank you for your help!
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and EnglishPlease select your answer:1. Gender Male Female2. Age : _______________________3. Current Educational Level: Bachelors Masters or equivalent Post-Graduate Any other (Please Specify): _________________________________4. Level of IELTS _____________________________ band5. I have taken IELTS __________________ times.
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and EnglishAppendix Three:This questionnaire adopted from Nelson’s DCT. This questionnaire is prepared inthe research conducted by Nelson et al., 2002 “Cross-Cultural Pragmatics:Strategy use in Egyptian Arabic and American English Refusals”.The research questions are: 4. Are there differences or/and similarities between native and non-native English refusal patterns? 5. Do Saudis and British use direct or indirect refusal strategies? If they are using indirect refusals, are they different or similar? 6. Given that indirect refusal patterns are usually associated with politeness, how is this affected by the interlocutor status?The research aims at finding the differences or similarities between Saudi Arabspeakers of English (non-native) And British Speakers (native).
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and English
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and English Consent FormAims of the project: This questionnaire aims at finding the difference betweenrefusal patterns (saying: No) between native speakers of British English and non-nativespeakers of English (speakers of Saudi Arabic).What you will be asked to do: refuse in all hypothetical situationsHow the data collected will be used: The data will be analysed and usedanonymously for an MA dissertation project.You are asked to participate in a research project on an MA dissertation project. I willkeep all personal information completely confidential and though I may describe andanalyse the data, all data will be presented with complete anonymity. Additionally youare free to withdraw from participation at any time with no need for explanation.Please tickI confirm that I have read and understand the information above study and have had the opportunity to ask questions.I understand that my participation is voluntary and that I am free to withdraw at any time, without giving any reason.I agree to take part in the above-named survey. Finally, if you would like a copy of a paper that presents preliminary results from thisstudy (based on other participants’ data/responses), please email Musha’alAlBugami :mushaaluk”gmail.com and I will send that to you.Thank you for your help!
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and EnglishPlease select your answer:6. Gender Male Female7. Age : _______________________8. Current Educational Level: Bachelors Masters or equivalent Post-Graduate Any other (Please Specify): _________________________________9. Level of IELTS _____________________________ band10. I have taken IELTS __________________ times.11. How many years have you been in the UK? 6 months or less 6 months – 12 months 18 months 24 months or above Any other (Please Specify): _________________________________
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and English12. How often do you speak English with British people? Once a week More than twice a week Once a month Never13. If yes, than where? At the restaurant/shop/post office Only in university with teachers and classmates I have a British friend
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and EnglishAppendix Three:This questionnaire adopted from Nelson’s DCT. This questionnaire is prepared inthe research conducted by Nelson et al., 2002 “Cross-Cultural Pragmatics:Strategy use in Egyptian Arabic and American English Refusals”.The research questions are: 7. Are there differences or/and similarities between native and non-native English refusal patterns? 8. Do Saudis and British use direct or indirect refusal strategies? If they are using indirect refusals, are they different or similar? 9. Given that indirect refusal patterns are usually associated with politeness, how is this affected by the interlocutor status?The research aims at finding the differences or similarities between Saudi Arabspeakers of English (non-native) And British Speakers (native).
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and English
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and EnglishBibliography: Al-Issa, A. (1998) Sociopragmatic Transfer in the Performance of Refusals by Jordanian EFL Learners: Evidence and Motivating Factors. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Indiana: Indiana University of Pennsylvania. Al-Kahtani, S. A. (2005) Refusal Realizations in three different Cultures: A Speech Act Theoretically-Based Cross-Cultural Study. J. King Saud University. Austin, J. L. (1962) How to do Things with Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Abed, A. Q. (2011) Pragmatic Transfer in Iraqi EFL Learners Refusals. International Journal of English Linguistics, 1 (2), pp.166. Al-Eryani, A. A. (2007) Refusal Strategies by Yemeni EFL Learners.The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, 9 (2). Al-Kahtani,S.A.W. (2005) Refusals Realizations in Three Different Cultures: A Speech Act Theoretically-based Cross-cultural Study , 18, pp. 35-57. Austin, J. (1962), How to do things with words. Harvard University Press, Cambridge. Beebe, L.M and Takahashi, T. (1989) Sociallinguistic Variation in face- threathening speech acts: Chastisement and disagreement . In M.R. Eisentein (Ed.), The dynamic interlanguage: Empricial studies in second language variation (pp.199-218) NY: Plenum. Eslami-Rasekh, Z. (2005) Raising the pragmatic awareness of language learners.ELT Journal, 59 (3). Forguson, L. (1973) Locutionary and illocutionary acts. Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp. 160–185. Gilks, K. (2009). Is the Brown and Levinson (1987) Model of politeness as useful and influential as originally claimed? An assessment of the revised Brown and Levinson (1987) Model. Innervate leading undergraduate work in English studies, 2, pp. 94-102. Grice, H. P. (1975) Logic and Conversation. Syntax and Semantics, 3, pp.41-58. Martínez-Flor, A. (2005) A Theoretical Review of the Speech Act of Suggesting: Towards Taxonomy for its Use in FLT1. RevistaAlicantina de EstudiosIngleses, 18, pp. 167-187. Morand, D. (1996) Politeness as a universal variable in cross-cultural managerial
    • Refusal Strategies between Arabic and Englishcommunication, International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 4, pp. 52-74.Nelson, G.L., Batal, M.A and Bakary,W.E. (2002) Cross-Cultural Pragmatics:Strategy Use in Egyptian Arabic and American English Refusals. AppliedLinguistics, 23/2, pp. 163-189.Nelson, G L., Carson, J., AL Batal, M., and EL Bakary.W. (2002).Cross-culturalpragmatics: strategy use in Egyptian Arabic and American English refusals.Applied Linguistics, 23 (2), 163-189.Ogiermann, E. (2009) On Apologising in Negative and Positive PolitenessCultures. John Benjamins Publishing Company.Searle, J. (1976) The classification of illocutionary acts. Language in Society.5 (1),pp. 1-24.Searle, J. (1979) Expression and meaning: Studies in the theory of speech acts.Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Searle, J. (1991) Response: meaning, intentionality, and speech acts. UniversityCornell Press.Umale, J. Pragmatic Failure in Refusal Strategies: British versus OmaniInterlocutors Arab. World English Journal, 2 (1), pp. 18-46.