Speech Acts Bibliography:
Disagreement
Beebe, L. M. & Takahashi, T. (1989a). Do You have a bag?: Social status and pattern variation in second language acquisition. In S. Gass et al. (Eds.), Variation in second language acquisition: Discourse, pragmatics and communication (pp. 103-125). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Looks at American and Japanese performance on two face threatening acts -- disagreement and giving embarrassing information. The study combined ethnographic data (notebook of naturally occurring instances of face-threatening acts) and discourse completion tests (12 situations and allowed to opt out). There were 30 participants -- 15 Americans and 15 advanced Japanese ESL speakers. Surprising data resulted. The study found that Americans were not always more direct nor more explicit than Japanese; that Japanese did not always avoid disagreement, nor critical remarks (especially when talking to lower status person). Japanese and Americans used questions to function as a warning, for the purpose of correction, to indicate disagreement, for chastisement and delivery of embarrassing information but the utterances from the two groups were significantly different in tone and content. Americans using positive remarks more frequently and in more places than Japanese. Both Japanese and Americans used style shifting in English according to the status of the interlocutor. Japanese were more outspoken if they didn't like the boss' plan. The question was why the Japanese were more outspoken, and one interpretation was that the Japanese speakers were influenced by their native language in their efforts in their ESL. Perhaps their outspokenness can be attributed to overshooting the mark in their effort to conform to the new, more direct speech patterns of American English -- i.e., overgeneralizing a perceived American directness. The DCT was inadequate in its range of possible formulas, length of response, depth of emotion, amount of repetition, and degree of elaboration. But there were also problems with natural data: biased by the linguistic preferences of friends, relatives, and associates. Also, the data was biased in favor of short exchanges because they could not record long ones in the notebook.
Beebe, L. M. & Takahashi, T. (1989b). Sociolinguistic variation in face-threatening speech acts: Chastisement and disagreement. In M. R. Eisenstein (Ed.), The dynamic interlanguage: Empirical studies in second language variation (pp. 199-218). NY: Plenum.
Studies data collected on disagreement and chastisement in American and Japanese performance -- both natural speech collected in notebooks and through a discourse completion test/written role-play questionnaire (15 Americans, 15 Japanese intermediate ESL students). The study arrived at seven conclusions, many of which are contrary to cross-cultural expectations: Americans are not always more direct or explicit than Japanese, Japanese are not always avoiding disagreement or critical remarks (especially to lower status person) or apologizing more. Both groups used questions to function as a warning, in order to correct, to indicate disagreement, to chastise, and to convey embarrassing information, but questions by Americans and Japanese were seen to be significantly different in tone and content. Americans used positive remarks more frequently and in more places than did the Japanese.
Cordella, M. (1996). Confrontational style in Spanish arguments: Pragmatics and teaching outlook. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 9, 148-62.
This report examines the confrontational style of distinct groups of advanced learners of Spanish. Group 1 (G1) consisted of four students with Latin American backgrounds. Group 2 (G2) was made up of five students who had all lived abroad in a Spanish-speaking country for at least one year and Group 3 (G3) consisted of four students who had never lived abroad. All had advanced grammatical proficiency in the language itself. Each group’s debate of the role of women in society was recorded and transcribed for analysis. The results demonstrate a marked difference between G1/G2 conversational style and that of G3. G1 & G2 included the presence of challenge questions as well as consistent cooperative overlap. These strategies were used to maintain friendship, interest, and involvement in the discussion (as opposed to being face-threatening). G3 demonstrated a very different confrontational style that was brief in comparison to the other two groups. In Group 3, conflict was handled with orderly turn-taking and very little overlap. Thus, the author concludes that since all participants had equivalent linguistic abilities, confrontational style is primarily acquired when learners are in contact with native speakers (e.g., Hispanic families, living abroad, etc.).
Du, J. S. (1995). Performance of face-threatening acts in Chinese: Complaining, giving bad news, and disagreeing. In G. Kasper (Ed.), Pragmatics of Chinese as a native and target language (pp. 165-206). Manoa, Hawai'i: University of Hawai'i Press.
Gives a definition of three face-threatening acts, complaining, giving bad news, and disagreeing, and discusses the illocutionary verbs which denote these acts and the semantics of face in Chinese culture. According to Du, in Chinese culture face is socially oriented and reciprocal, and as such requires some method of maintaining "face balance." The act of giving bad news may in some cases be face-saving, depending on the relationship between the interlocutors and the nature of the message. However, complaining (which indicates that the person's behavior is not approved or accepted by other social members) and disagreeing (which indicates a contradiction or negative evaluation of a person's face) are in most cases, clearly face-threatening. Therefore these acts require some strategy for preserving the lian/mianzi (face) of both interlocutors. Du conducted a study with thirty students (male and female) from Beijing Normal University ranging from 19 to 30 years old. Du explored the three speech acts listed above using a 19-item questionnaire that described face-threatening situations and asked each subject to contemplate the situation and write his/her response. The results showed that strategy choice varied according to the referential goal and the nature of the interlocutor relationship, but a general pattern could be noted: face-threatening acts in Chinese tend to be performed "in a cooperative rather than confrontational manner. By emphasizing common ground and constructive problem solutions, attention is paid to both participants' lian and mianzi."
Edstrom, A. (2004). Expressions of disagreement by Venezuelans in conversation: Reconsidering the influence of culture. Journal of Pragmatics, 36(8), 1499-1518.
It has been asserted that native speakers (NS) of Venezuelan Spanish tend to be confrontational when expressing disagreement and tend to enjoy contradiction because it demonstrates sincere involvement. This study investigates this idea further by examining how females of Venezuelan Spanish present disagreement in casual conversation. Disagreement is studied in six, naturally-occurring conversations between NS of Spanish and NS of English who live in Venezuela. All participants are mothers of children at a bilingual Spanish/English school. There was one English control group, one Spanish control group, and four mixed groups. Results show that direct strategies (36 instances) were used over indirect strategies (26 instances). However, the author points out the fact that indirectness was used in this context. Thus, confrontation is preferred, but not exclusive. Furthermore, the nature of the topic has an influence on the directness and confrontational nature of the expression of disagreement and that the social variables are very influential in strategy choice.
Forbes, K. & Cordella, M. (1999). The role of gender in Chilean argumentative discourse. IRAL, 37, 277-89.
The role of gender has been shown to have an influence on a number of discourse features. In this study, the influence of gender on argumentative discourse is analyzed. Three groups (G1--n= 3 males, 1 female, G2--n=3 females, 1 male; G3--n=2 females, 2 males) discussed discrimination that women experience in society. The argumentative discourse of these conversations was analyzed. Results show that gender did not completely determine role in participant style. Gender preferences were noted, but most strategies were used by both genders. The most influential factor on gender variation was the balance ratio of gender. Females tended to favor overlap, latching, back channeling, supportive moves, and repetition of others, except when there was a balanced ratio of gender. When the group composition was balanced, females tended to accommodate to male strategy balance, demonstrating sensitivity to group dynamics and a need for harmony and cooperation. Male strategy choice varied more when they were the majority and seemed to be exercising power.
García, C. (1989). Disagreeing and requesting by Americans and Venezuelans. Linguistics and Education, 1(3), 299-322.
The study compared the stylistic devices used by ten native English-speaking Americans and ten female Venezuelans (in the US for from 3 months to 3 years) in two different English language role-play situations: disagreeing and requesting. In the L1, speakers preferred nonconfrontational stylistic devices when they disagreed with an L1 interlocutor and impersonal stylistic devices when they requested a service. L2 speakers used more confrontational devices when disagreeing and more personal devices when requesting a service.
Salsbury, T. & Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2000). Oppositional talk and the acquisition of modality in L2 English. In B. Swierzbin, F. Morris, M. E. Anderson, C. A. Klee, & E. Tarone (Eds.), Social and cognitive factors in second language acquisition: Selected proceedings of the 1999 Second Language Research Forum (pp. 57-76). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Reports on a one-year longitudinal study of the relationship between grammatical development in the form of modality and pragmatic development as represented by oppositional talk (i.e., when speakers express opposing views -- disagreements, challenges, denials, accusation, threats, and insults). The subjects were eight beginning level ESL learners, interviewed every month. They were from differing language and cultural backgrounds (Arabic, Korean, Japanese, Spanish, French/Bambara). They found that the appearance of the linguistic form does not mean the learner has the pragmatic functions. The learners resort to lexical choices to mitigate their messages. They found evidence of late emergence of would and could.
Takahashi, T. & Beebe, L. M. (1993). Cross-linguistic influence in the speech act of correction. In G. Kasper & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics (pp. 138-152). NY: Oxford University Press.
Looks at American and Japanese performance on the speech act of correction in status unequal (professor-student: low to high, high to low) situations where one knows the other has made a factual error. The study had 55 subjects -- 15 Americans, 15 Japanese responding in English, and 25 Japanese responding in Japanese (in Tokyo) -- fill out a 12-situation discourse completion task. The average age of respondents was 32-33. It found that positive remarks are an important adjunct to face threatening acts in English -- "I agree with you, but..." 64% of Americans did this while only 13% of the Japanese in Japanese did so (AE>JE>JJ). All groups used softeners, "I believe," "I think," questions, "Did you say...?" and expressions to lighten the gravity of the mistake or defend the interlocutor, "You made one small error in the date." Japanese also used softeners but not as frequently in ESL (50% of time vs. 71% of time for E1 group). Both groups used verbal indications of correction in English more than in Japanese (only 26%) (professor to student: AE>JE>JJ, student to professor: JJ>JE>AE). The reason was that in Japanese paralinguistic means such as facial expressions, tone of voice, sighs, hesitating serve that function. Japanese are more overt in their consciousness of status and in not covering it up in their use of language. Americans harbor a polite fiction that you and I are equals.