淡江大學覺生紀念圖書館 (TKU Library)
進階搜尋


下載電子全文限經由淡江IP使用) 
系統識別號 U0002-2807201220515800
中文論文名稱 跨文化與外語語用學:以拒絕語為例
英文論文名稱 How to Say “No”: Cross-cultural and Interlanguage Perceptual Variations in the Refusal Behavior
校院名稱 淡江大學
系所名稱(中) 英文學系碩士班
系所名稱(英) Department of English
學年度 100
學期 2
出版年 101
研究生中文姓名 翁宗翰
研究生英文姓名 Tsung-han Weng
電子信箱 kmttg@hotmail.com
學號 698110565
學位類別 碩士
語文別 英文
口試日期 2012-06-21
論文頁數 103頁
口試委員 指導教授-余明忠
委員-林啟一
委員-謝顥音
中文關鍵字 跨文化語用學  外語語用學  拒絕語  感知 
英文關鍵字 cross-cultural pragmatics  interlanguage pragmatics  refusals  perception 
學科別分類 學科別人文學語言文學
中文摘要 本研究主在從跨文化與外語語用學的觀點來探討「拒絕語」言語行為。藉由比較台灣英語學習者與英語及中文為母語者之拒絕感知行為,本研究之目的為三。一為從跨文化的角度來看,以中文為母語者其拒絕語之感知行為是否與英文為母語者有所相同或差異。二為社會文化因素,即社會低位高低與熟悉程度,是否影響三組語言使用者在拒絕策略用語的選擇。三為從外語語用學的角度來說,台灣英語學習者之語用轉移現象是否存在於感知層面呢?
「接受度判斷問卷」為本研究主要工具,藉此探索不同語言使用者對拒絕語感知之差異。藉由現存文獻所提供之「言談完成任務」資料,本研究提供參與者在十六個情境下,評估四種拒絕策略用語之禮貌程度。在資料收集完之後,研究者使用重複測量變異數分析法來分析三組語言使用者之拒絕感知情形。
研究結果顯示,以英語為母語之使用者其拒絕語之感知差異與中文為母語者有顯著之差異。更精確地來說,拒絕策略在中英文化間存在著感知之差異。再者,社會文化因素,即社會低位高低與熟悉程度,的確影響語言使用者在選擇適當的拒絕策略。最後,台灣英語學習者的語用行為在感知層面上,反映出了對母語及對目標語轉移的現象。本研究成果,希望能使語用研究者對拒絕言語行為能有更進一步的了解。再者,對語言教師與學習者而言,此研究希望能對語用教學與語言習得能有些許貢獻。
英文摘要 This study investigated the speech act of refusals from the perspectives of cross-cultural and interlanguage pragmatics. By comparing Taiwanese EFL learners’ refusal perception with that of both native Chinese and English speakers, this study aimed to find 1) whether there were similarities and differences in their refusal perception between native speakers of Chinese and English, 2) whether the two social variables (i.e. status and distance) may influence the speakers’ refusal perception, and 3) if learners’ pragmatic transfer existed in perceptual level.
An acceptability judgment questionnaire was used to probe participants’ perception towards the refusal speech act behavior. With the production materials generated by the discourse completion task (DCT), the current study elicited participants to evaluate four refusal strategies on a five-point politeness Likert scale in sixteen situations. The repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to detach the pragmatic perception among the speakers of English, Chinese, and Taiwanese EFL learners.
The results showed that there were significant differences in the perception of refusal strategies between native speakers of Chinese and English. These findings therefore corroborate that cross-cultural differences in the refusal behavior exist in the perceptual level. Furthermore, the social factors (i.e. social status and distance) did have an influence on speakers’ selection of the appropriate strategies. Finally, Taiwanese EFL learners’ pragmatic perception reflected both their native and target socio-cultural norms. It is hoped this study can make some contributions to the understanding of the refusal speech act; and more importantly, these findings have practical implications for L2 teaching and learning.
論文目次 TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .............................................................................................. i
CHINESE ABSTRACT ................................................................................................. ii
ENELISH ABSTRACT ................................................................................................ iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................... v
LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................... viii
LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................... ix
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION ........................................................................... 1
CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................... 6
Pragmatics ............................................................................................................... 6
What is Pragmatics? ............................................................................................. 6
Cross-cultural and Interlanguage Pragmatics ......................................................... 7
Pragmatic Competence ............................................................................................ 8
Communicative Competence .................................................................................. 8
Pragmatic Competence ......................................................................................... 10
Speech Act Theory ............................................................................................... 11
Politeness Theory .................................................................................................... 14
Western Concepts of Politeness ........................................................................... 15
Grice’s Cooperative Principle ........................................................................ 15
Leech’s Politeness Principle ........................................................................... 16
Brown and Levinson’s Politeness Principle ................................................... 18
Chinese Concepts of Politeness ............................................................................ 22
Refusal Speech Act ................................................................................................. 23
Definition & Refusal Strategies ............................................................................ 23
Previous Studies on the Act of Refusals ............................................................... 25
Cross-cultural Studies on Refusals ................................................................. 25
Interlanguage Studies on Refusals.................................................................. 27
Summary of the Chapter ....................................................................................... 28
CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY ................................................................... 30
Research Questions ................................................................................................ 30
Participants ............................................................................................................. 30
Instrumentation ...................................................................................................... 33
Pilot Study ............................................................................................................... 38
Data Collection Procedure ..................................................................................... 39
Data Analysis .......................................................................................................... 40
CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS ................................................................................... 43
Overall Perceptions of Refusal Strategies ............................................................ 43
Separate Perceptions of Refusal Strategies .......................................................... 45
Direct Bald-On-Record Strategy without Redress ............................................... 45
Indirect On-Record Strategy with Redress ........................................................... 48
Indirect Off-Record Strategy ................................................................................ 50
Opt-Out Strategy .................................................................................................. 52
Summary of the Chapter ....................................................................................... 53
CHAPTER FIVE DISCUSSION ............................................................................... 55
Comparisons with the Previous Findings ............................................................. 55
Cultural Influences on the Perceptions of Refusals ............................................ 58
Universality versus Culture-Specificity ............................................................... 58
Leech’s Politeness Principle ................................................................................. 63
Taiwanese EFL Learners’ Pragmatic Perceptions in Refusal Acts ................... 65
Overgeneralization ............................................................................................... 65
Teaching-induced Errors ...................................................................................... 67
Pragmatic Transfer ............................................................................................... 69
CHAPTER SIX CONCLUSION ............................................................................... 70
Summary of the Main Findings ............................................................................ 70
Educational Implications ....................................................................................... 71
Limitations of the Study ........................................................................................ 74
Suggestions for Further Study .............................................................................. 75
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................... 76
APPENDIX ................................................................................................................ 86
Appendix A: Refusal Strategies Taxonomy ......................................................... 86
Appendix B: Background Questionnaire of English Version ............................ 88
Appendix C: Background Questionnaire of Chinese Version ........................... 89
Appendix D: Acceptability Judgment Questionnaire of English Version ........ 90
Appendix E: Acceptability Judgment Questionnaire of Chinese Version ........ 97

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Demographic characteristics of participants .................................................. 33
Table 2 Description of the acceptability judgment questionnaire ............................... 37
Table 3 Mean (M) and Standard deviation (SD) of four refusal strategies for each
group ............................................................................................................................ 43
Table 4 ANOVA table for the use of Direct Bald-On-Record Strategy without
Redress by the three groups ......................................................................................... 45
Table 5 Summary table of the status by distance effect on the differences of the three
groups’ choice of Direct Bald-On-Record Strategy without Redress .......................... 47
Table 6 ANOVA table for the use of Indirect On-Record with Redress Strategy by
speaker groups ............................................................................................................. 48
Table 7 Summary table of the status by distance effect on the differences of the three
groups’ choice of Indirect On-Record with Redress Strategy ..................................... 49
Table 8 ANOVA table for the use of Indirect Off-Record Strategy by three groups . 50
Table 9 Summary table of the status by distance effect on the differences of the three
groups’ choice of Indirect Off-Record Strategy .......................................................... 51
Table 10 ANOVA table for the use of Opt-Out Strategy by the three groups ............ 52
Table 11 Summary table of the status by distance effect on the differences of the
three groups’ choice of Opt-Out Strategy .................................................................... 53

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Possible strategies for doing FTAs ............................................................... 23
Figure 2 Graphic representation of three groups’ overall perceptions of the four
refusal strategies ........................................................................................................... 44
Figure 3 Rate of choice of Direct On-Record without Redress Strategy by group and
speaker-listener attributes ............................................................................................ 47
Figure 4 Rate of choice of Indirect On-Record with Redress Strategy by group and
speaker-listener attributes ............................................................................................ 50
Figure 5 Rate of choice of Indirect Off-Record Strategy by group and speaker-listener
attributes ....................................................................................................................... 52
Figure 6 Rate of choice of Opt-Out Strategy by group and speaker-listener attributes
..................................................................................................................................... 53
參考文獻 REFERENCES
Al-Eryani, A. (2007). Refusal strategies by Yemeni EFL learners. The Asian EFL Journal, 9, 19-34.
Al-Issa, A. (2003). Sociocultural transfer in L2 speech behaviors: Evidence and motivating factors. International Journal of Intercultural Relation, 27, 581-601.
Allami, H., & Naeimi, A. (2011). A cross-linguistic study of refusals: An analysis of pragmatic competence development in Iranian EFL learners. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 385-406.
Austin, J. (1962). How to do things with words. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press
Bachman, L. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Hartford, B.S. (1991), Saying 'no' in English: Native and non-native rejections. In L.F. Bouton, & Y. Kachru (Eds.), Pragmatics and language learning, vol. 2 (pp. 41-57). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Division of English as an International Language.
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2010). Exploring the pragmatics of interlanguage pragmatics: Definition by design. In A. Trosborg (Eds.), Pragmatics across languages and cultures (pp. 219-260). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Becker, J. A., Kimmel, H. D., & Bevill, M. J. (1989). The interactive effects of request form and speaker status on judgments of requests. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 18, 521-531.
Beebe, L. M., & Takahashi, T. (1989). Sociolinguistic variation in face-threatening speech acts: Chastisement and disagreement. In M. R. Eisenstein (Eds.), The dynamic interlanguage: Empirical studies in second language variation (pp. 199-218). New York: Plenum Press.
Beebe, L., Takahashi, T., & Uliss-Weltz, R. (1990). Pragmatic transfer in ESL refusals. In R. Scarcella, E. Anderson, & S. Krashen (Eds.), Developing communication competence in a second language (pp. 55-73). Newbury House, New York.
Bella, S. (2011). Mitigation and politeness in Greek invitation refusals: Effects of length of residence in the target community and intensity of interaction on non-native speakers’ performance. Journal of pragmatics, 43, 1718-1740
Bergman, M. L., & Kasper, G. (1993). Perception and performance in native and nonnative apology. In G. Kasper & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics (pp. 82-107). New York: Oxford University Press.
Blum-Kulka, S., & Olshtain, E. (1986). Too many words: Length of utterance and pragmatic failure. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 8, 47-61.
Blum-Kulka, S. (1987). Indirectness and politeness in requests: Same or different? Journal of Pragmatics, 11, 131-146.
Blum-Kulka, S., & House, J. (1989). Cross-cultural and situational variation in requesting behavior. In S. Blum-Kulka, J. House, & G. Kasper (Eds.), Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies (pp. 123-154). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G. (1989a). Investigating cross-cultural pragmatics: An introductory overview. In S. Blum-Kulka, J. House, & G. Kasper (Eds.), Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies (pp. 1-34). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G. (1989b). Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Boxer, D., & Pickering, L. (1995). Problems in the presentation of speech acts in ELT materials: the case of complaints. ELT Journal, 49, 44-58.
Brislin, R. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-cultural psychology, 1, 185-216.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1978). Universals of language usage: politeness phenomena. In E. Goody (Eds.), Questions and politeness (pp. 56–234). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching. White Plains, N.Y.: Pearson Longman.
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1-47.
Canale, M. (1983). From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy. In J. Richards, & R. Schimdt (Eds.), Language and Communication (pp. 51-73). London: Longman.
Chang, Y. (2009). How to say no: An analysis of cross-cultural difference and pragmatic transfer. Language Sciences, 31, 477-493.
Chang, W., & Haugh, M. (2011). Evaluations of im/politeness of an intercultural apology. Intercultural Pragmatics, 8, 411-442.
Chen, H. (1996). Cross-cultural comparison of English and Chinese metapragmatics in refusal. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington.
Chen, R. (1993). Responding to complements: A contrasive study of politeness b strategies between American English and Chinese speakers. Journal of pragmatics, 20, 49-75.
Chen, S. (2008). Interlanguage Refusals: A Cross-Cultural Study of EFL Learners in Taiwan and Native Speakers of American English. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, National Chengchi Univesity, Taipei.
Chen, X., Ye, L., & Zhang, Y. (1995). Refusing in Chinese. In G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics of Chinese as a native and target language (pp. 119–163). University of Hawaii, Hawaii.
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Clyne, M., Ball, M., & Neil, D. (1991). Intercultural communication at work in Australia: Complaints and apologies. Multilingua, 10, 251-273.
Crystal, D. (2008). An introduction of linguistics and phonetics. Malden, Mass: Blackwell Publishing.
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dörnyei, Z. (2010). Questionnaires in second language research (2nd Edition). London: Routledge.
Economidou-Kogetsidis, M. (2010). Cross-cultural and situational variation in requesting behaviour: Perceptions of social situations and strategic usage of request patterns. Journal of Pragmatics, 42, 2262-2281.
Eisenstein, M., Bodman, J., & Carpenter, M. (1996). Cross-cultural realization of greetings in American English. In S. Gass, & J. Neu (Eds.), Speech acts across cultures: Challenges to communication in a second (pp. 89-107). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Eisenstein, M., & Kodama, N. (2011). The pragmatics of refusals in English and Japanese: Alternative approaches to negotiation. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 208, 95-117.
Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Faerch, C., & Kasper. G.. (1987). Introspection in second language research. Clevedon, Avon, England: Multilingual Matters.
Félix-Brasdefer, J. (2004). Interlanguage refusals: Linguistic politeness and length of residence in the target community. Language Learning, 54, 587-653.
Félix-Brasdefer, J. (2008). Politeness in Mexico and the United States: A contrastive study of the realization and perception of refusals. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Félix-Brasdefer, J., & Bardovi-Harlig, (2010). “I’m sorry. Can I think about it?” The negotiation of refusals in academic and non-academic contexts. In D. Tatsuki, & N. Houck (Eds.), Pragmatics: Teaching Speech Acts (pp. 163-180). Alexandria, VA: TESOL.
Fraser, B. (1985). On the universality of speech act strategies. In S. George (Eds.), From the Linguistic to the Social Context (pp. 43– 49). Bologna: CLUEB.
Fraser, B. (1990). Perspectives on politeness. Journal of Pragmatics, 14, 219-236.
Gao, G., & Ting-Toomey, S. (1998). Communicating effectively with the Chinese. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Gass, S. M., & Houck, N. (1999). Interlanguage refusals: A cross-cultural study of Japaneses-English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Gass, S., & Mackey, A. (2000). Stimulated recall methodology in second language research. London: Routledge.
Genc, Z., & Tekyildiz, O. (2009). Use of refusal strategies by Turkish EFL learners and native speakers of English in urban and rural areas. Asian EFL Journal, 11, 299-328.
Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face behavior. Anchor Books, New York.
Green, G. (1975). How to get people to do thing with words. In P. Cole, & J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts (pp. 107-142). New York: Academic Press.
Green, P., Tull, D., & Albaum, G. (1988). Research for marketing decisions. London: Prentice-Hall International, 1988
Grice, P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole, & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts (pp. 41-58). New York: Academic Press.
Gu, Y. (1990). Politeness phenomena in modern Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics, 14, 237-257.
Gudykunst, W., Ting-Toomey, S., & Chua, E. (1988). Culture and interpersonal communication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Gudykunst, W. (2003). Cross-cultural and intercultural communication. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.
Gumperz, J. (1982). Discourse strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Haugh, M. (2007). The discursive challenge to politeness research: An interactional alternative. Journal of Politeness Research, 3, 295-317.
Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. London: McGraw-Hill.
Holmes, J., & Brown, D. (1987). Teachers and students learning about compliments. TESOL Quarterly, 21, 523-546.
Hu, H. (1944). The Chinese concept of ‘face’. American Anthropologist, 46, 45–64.
Hu, W., Cornelius, G., & Zhuang, E. (2010). Encountering the Chinese: a modern country, an ancient culture. Boston: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.
Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. Pride, & J. Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics (pp. 119-163). Harmondsworth, England: Penguin Books.
Ide, S., Hill, B., Carnes, Y. M., Ogino, T., & Kawasaki, A. (2005). The concept of politeness: An empirical study of American English and Japanese. In R. Watts, S. Ide, & K. Ehlich (Eds.), Politeness in language: Studies in its history, theory and practice (pp. 281-297). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter
Ikoma, S., & Shimura, A. (1994). Pragmatic transfer in the speech act of refusal in Japanese as a second language. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication, 5, 105-129.
Ishihara, N., & Cohen, A. (2010). Teaching and learning pragmatics: Where language and culture meet. Harlow, England: Pearson Longman.
Jenney, R., & Arndt, H. (1993). Universality and relativity in cross-cultural politeness research: A historical perspective. Multilingua, 12, 13-50.
Jiang, X. (2006). Suggestions: What should ESL students know? System, 34, 36-54
Kasper, G. (1990). Linguistic politeness: Current research issues. Journal of
Pragmatics, 14, 193-218.
Kasper, G., & Dahl, M. (1991). Research methods in interlanguage pragmatics. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13, 215-247.
Kasper, G., & Blum-Kulka, S. (1993). Interlanguage pragmatics: An introduction. In G. Kasper, & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics (pp. 3-17). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kasper, G. (1997). Can pragmatic competence be taught? Honolulu: University of Hawai’i, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center. Retrieved May 29, 2012, from http://www.nflrc.hawaii.edu/NetWorks/NW06/.
Kasper, G., & Rose, K. (2002). Pragmatic development in a second language. Michigan: Blackwell.
Keshavarz, M., Eslami, Z., & Ghahraman, V. (2006). Pragmatic transfer and Iranian EFL refusals: A cross-cultural perspective of Persian and English. In K. Bardovi-Harlig, J. Felix-Brasdefer, & A. Omar (Eds.), Pragmatics and Language Learning (pp. 359-402). Manoa, HI: Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center University of Hawai’i.
Kinjo, H. (1987). Oral refusals of invitations and requests in English and Japanese. Journal of Asian Culture, 11, 85-106.
Kwon, J. (2004). Expressing refusals in Korean and in American English. Multilingua, 23, 339-364.
Lee, J., & McChesney, B. (2000). Discourse completion tasks: A teaching tool for
developing sociocultural competence. ELT Journal, 54, 161-168.
Leech, G. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. London: Longman.
Levinson, S. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
Liao, C. (1994). A study on the strategies, maxims, and development of refusal in Mandarin Chinese. Crane, Taipei.
Liao, C., & Bresnahan, M. (1996). A comparative pragmatic study on American English and Mandarin refusal strategies. Language Sciences, 18, 703-727.
Light, R. J., Singer, J. D., & Willett, J. B. (1990). By design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Mackey, A., & Gass, S. (2012). Research methods in second language acquisition: A practical guide. Malden, Mass: Wiley-Blackwell.
Mao, L. (1994). Beyond politeness theory: ‘face’ revisited and reviewed. Journal of Pragmatics, 21, 451-486.
Matsuura, H. (1998). Japanese EFL learners' perception of politeness in low imposition requests. JALT, 20, 33-48.
Matsumura, S. (2001). Learning the rules for offering advice: A quantitative approach
to second language socialization. Language Learning, 51, 635-679.
McKay, S. (2009). Introspective techniques. In J. Heigham, & R. Croker (Eds.), Qualitative research in applied linguistics (pp. 220-241). New York: PalgraveMacmillan
Mey, J. (2001). Pragmatics: An introduction. Malden, Mass: Blackwell Publishers
Morris, C. (1938). Foundations of the theory of signs. In O. Neurath, R. Carnap, & C. Morris (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of Unified Science (pp. 77-138). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Nelson G., Carson, J., Batal, M. & Bakary, W. (2002). Cross-cultural pragmatics: Strategy use in Egyptian Arabic and American English refusals. Applied Linguistics, 23, 163-189.
Nguyen, T., Pham, T., & Pham, M. (2012). The relative effects of explicit and implicit form-focused instruction on the development of L2 pragmatic competence. Journal of pragmatics, 44, 416-434.
Olshtain, E., & Blum-Kulka, S. (1985). Degree of approximation: Nonnative reactions to native speech act behavior. In S. M. Gass, & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in
second language acquisition (pp. 303-325). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Omaggio Hadley, A. (2001). Teaching language in context. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Osgood, C., Suci, G. & Tannenbaum, P. (1957). The measurement of meaning. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Rintell, E., & Mitchell, C. J. (1989). Studying requests and apologies: An inquiry into method. In S. Blum-Kulka, J. House, & G. Kasper (Eds.), Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies (pp. 248-273). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Robinson, M.A. (1992). Introspective methodology in interlanguage pragmatics research. In G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics of Japanese as native and target language (pp. 27-82). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai'i at Manoa, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
Rose, K., & Kasper, G. (2001). Pragmatics in language teaching. New York : Cambridge University Press.
Rubin, J. (1983). How to tell: When someone is saying “no” revisited. In N.Wolfson, & E. Judd (Eds.), Sociolinguistics and language acquisition (pp. 10-17). Rowley, Mass: Newbury House.
Samovar, L., Porter, R. & McDaniel, E. (2010). Communication between cultures. Belmont, Calif: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Savignon, S. (1972). Communicative competence: An experiment in foreign language teaching. Philadelphia: Center for Curriculum Development.
Savignon, S. (1997). Communicative competence: Theory and classroom practice (2nd edition). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Schauer, G. (2009). Interlanguage pragmatic development: The study abroad context. London: Continuum.
Schmidt, R. (1993). Consciousness, learning and interlanguage pragmatics. In G. Kasper, & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics (pp. 21-42). Oxford: Oxford University Press
Scollon, R., & Wong-Scollon, S. (1991). Topic confusion in English-Asian discourse. World Englishes, 10, 113-125.
Scollon, R., & Wong-Scollon, S. (2001). Intercultural communication: A discourse approach. Malden, Mass: Blackwell Publishers
Searle, J. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. London: Cambridge University Press.
Searle, J. (1975). Indirect speech act. In P. Cole, & J. Morgan (Eds,), Syntax and semantics (vol. 3): Speech acts (pp. 59-82). New York: Academic Press.
Searle, J. (1976). A classification of illocutionary acts. Language in Society, 5, 1-23.
Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 10, 209-231.
Shih, Y. (1999). Conversational politeness and foreign language teaching. Taipei: The Crane Publishing Co., Ltd.
Spencer-Oatey, H. (1993). Conceptions of social relations and pragmatics research. Journal of Pragmatics, 20, 27-47.
Spencer-Oatey, H., Ng, P., & Dong, L. (2000). Responding to compliments: British and Chinese evaluative judgments. In H. Spencer-Oatey (Eds.), Culturally speaking: Managing rapport through talk across cultures (pp.98-120). New York: Continuum.
Spencer-Oatey, H., & Ng, P. (2002). Reconsidering Chinese modesty Hong Kong and mainland Chinese evaluative judgments of compliment responses. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication, 11, 181-201.
Suh, J. (1999). Pragmatic perception of politeness in requests by Korean learners of English as a second language. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 37, 195-214.
Taguchi, N. (2006). Analysis of appropriateness in a speech act of request in L2 English. Pragmatics, 16, 513-533.
Takahashi, S. (1996). Pragmatic transferability. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 189-223.
Takahashi, T., & Beebe, L. (1987). The development of pragmatic competence by Japanese learners of English. JALT, 18, 131-155.
Tanaka, S., & Kawade, S. (1982). Politeness strategies and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 5, 18-33.
Thomas, J. (1983). Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Applied Linguistics, 4, 91-112.
Thomas, J. (1995). Meaning in interaction: An introduction to pragmatics. London: Longman.
Trosborg, A. (1987). Apology strategies in natives/non-natives. Journal of Pragmatics, 11, 147-167.
Walters, J. (1979). The perception of politeness in English and Spanish. In J. Schacter, K. Perkins, & C. Yorio (Eds.), On TESOL '79: The Learner in Focus (pp. 288-296). Washington, D.C.
Wannaruk, A. (2008). Pragmatic transfer in Thai EFL refusals. RELC, 39, 318-337.
Wierzbicka, A. (2003). Cross-cultural pragmatics: The semantics of human interaction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Widjaja, C.S. (1997). A study of date refusal: Taiwanese females vs. American females. University of Hawai'i Working Papers in ESL, 15, 1-43.
Wolfson, N. (1989). Perspectives: Sociolinguistics and TESOL. New York: Newbury House.
Yu, M. (1999a). Universalistic and culture-specific perspectives on variation in the acquisition of pragmatic competence in a second language. Pragmatics, 9, 281-312.
Yu, M. (1999b). Cross-cultural and interlanguage pragmatics: Developing communicative competence in a second language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge.
Yu, M. (2003). On the universality of face: Evidence from Chinese compliment response behavior. Journal of Pragmatics, 35, 1679-1710.
Yu, M. (2004). Interlinguistic variation and similarity in second language speech act behavior. The Modern Language Journal, 88, 102-119.
Yu, M. (2005). Sociolinguistic competence in the complimenting act of native Chinese and American English speakers: A mirror of cultural value. Language and Speech, 48, 91-119.
Yu, M. (2008). Teaching and learning sociolinguistic skills in university EFL classes in Taiwan. TESOL Quarterly, 42, 31-53.
Yu, M. (2011). Learning how to read situations and know what is the right thing to say or do in an L2: A study of socio-cultural competence and language transfer. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 1127-1147.
論文使用權限
  • 同意紙本無償授權給館內讀者為學術之目的重製使用,於2014-09-04公開。
  • 同意授權瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2014-09-04起公開。


  • 若您有任何疑問,請與我們聯絡!
    圖書館: 請來電 (02)2621-5656 轉 2281 或 來信