Pragmatics 23:4.

685-714 (2013)
International Pragmatics Association
DOI: 10.1075/prag.23.4.05ngu

REQUESTS AND POLITENESS IN VIETNAMESE AS A NATIVE

LANGUAGE

Thi Thuy Minh Nguyen and Gia Anh Le Ho

Abstract

This study examines requests in Vietnamese, a much under-researched language, with a view to
expanding the range of languages under inquiry. Open role-plays in six scenarios with differing social
power and perceived imposition levels were used to elicit requests from nine Vietnamese native speakers.
Data were analyzed with reference to the categorization of Blum-Kulka, House and Kasper (1989) for
level of directness, choice of request strategy and use of modification.
The findings suggested that unlike requests in some European languages reported in the
literature, requests in Vietnamese as a native language were realized predominantly by means of
imperatives in equal power situations and query preparatories in low-to-high power situations, regardless
of imposition levels. Requests were modified preferably by means of supportive moves such as steers and
grounders, and lexical means such as address terms, honorifics, modal particles, and appealers. These
findings are discussed with implications for cross-cultural communication and the teaching and learning
of Vietnamese as a second language.

Keywords: Requests; Vietnamese; Politeness; Cross-cultural communication; Pragmatic strategies.

1. Requests across cultures

A request is a directive act performed to get the hearer to do something that is to the
speaker’s benefit and at the cost of the hearer. From the speaker’s point of view, the
hearer is able to do this act but it is not obvious that the hearer will do it in the normal
course of events or of the hearer’s own accord (Searle 1969). Requests have been the
most researched speech act to date in cross-cultural, variational and interlanguage
pragmatics (e.g. recently by Barron 2008; Byon 2006; Felix-Brasdefer 2007;
Ogiermann 2009; Rue and Zhang 2008; Shively 2011; Upadhyay 2003; Woodfield 2008;
Yu 2011) as well as in Conversation Analysis research (e.g. Al-Gahtani and Röver 2012;
Taleghani-Nikazm 2005; 2006; Taleghani-Nikazm and Huth 2010). Among the pioneer
studies on requests was Blum-Kulka and Olshtain’s (1984) Cross-cultural Speech Act
Realization Project (CCSARP). It aimed to provide a typology of realization strategies
for requests in eight languages or varieties: Australian English, American English,
British English, Canadian French, Danish, German, Hebrew, and Russian. This
686 Thi Thuy Minh Nguyen and Gia Anh Le Ho

typology has been adopted in many later studies on requests (e.g. recently by
Biesenbach-Lucas 2007; Chen 2006; Cohen and Shively 2007; Felix-Brasdefer 2007;
Hendriks 2008; Octu and Zeyrek 2006; 2008; Ogiermann 2009; Schauer 2007; 2008;
2009; Shively 2011; Woodfield 2008; Yu 2011), making the CCSARP the most
influential research study on this speech act to date.
The findings of the CCSARP have suggested that requests pose a threat to the
hearer’s negative face, i.e. the freedom of action and freedom from imposition (Brown
and Levinson 1987). Therefore, the speaker has to employ appropriate linguistic means
in order to minimize the degree of imposition that his or her requests may impinge on
the hearer and protect the hearer’s negative face. One way in which the speaker can
minimize the imposition is by selecting an indirect strategy instead of a direct one
(Blum-Kulka and Olshtain 1984). This is because indirectness implies tentativeness on
the part of the speaker and optionality for the hearer (Leech 1983: 108). The speaker
may also use syntactic modification such as negative or modal structures as distancing
elements and hedging devices (Blum-Kulka and Olshtain 1984).
In a later study on native speakers’ perceptions of politeness and indirectness in
English and Hebrew, Blum-Kulka (1987) further pointed out that conventional
indirectness is preferred over non-conventional indirectness (i.e. strong or mild hints) in
requests in these languages. According to this study, politeness refers to the balance
between two needs: Pragmatic clarity and avoidance of coerciveness. This balance is
achieved only in the case of conventional indirectness but not in the case of non-
conventional indirectness or directness. Preference for either pragmatic clarity or non-
coerciveness will result in a decrease in politeness. Therefore, directness is often
equated to impoliteness because it shows a lack of consideration for face. At the same
time, nonconventional indirectness also implies impoliteness because it lacks pragmatic
clarity. Many other empirical studies on requests in English have supported the findings
of Blum-Kulka (1987), documenting that native speakers prefer conventional
indirectness, particularly the query preparatory strategy while dispreferring directness in
requests (e.g. Barron 2008; Billmyer and Varghese 2000; Hendriks 2008; House and
Kasper 1987; Octu and Zeyrek 2008; Ogiermann 2009; Trosborg 1995; Woodfield
2008).
However, findings from research on other languages do not necessarily concord
with the claim that conventionally indirect request strategies represent the highest
degree of politeness (Byon 2006; Hassall 1999; Lee-Wong 1994; Matsumoto 1988;
Ogiermann 2009; Rue and Zhang 2008; Upadhyay 2003; Vu 1997, 1999; Wierzbicka
1985; Yu 2011). Disagreeing with Searle (1975: 64) who claims that “[i]n directives,
politeness is the chief motivation for indirectness”, Wierzbicka (1985) maintains that
this rule applies only to the English language and the Anglo-Saxon cultures. Ogiermann
(2009) argues that some cultures prefer pragmatic clarity, often associating directness
with honesty while interpreting indirectness as increasing the imposition on the hearer.
This is because indirect strategies, particularly off-record requests, not only increase the
interpretive demands on the hearer but also put the hearer in a position where they have
to take the initiative to offer what the speaker is too reluctant to ask for. Therefore, more
than often, indirectness may lead to communicative failure in those cultures. Studies on
Russian requests indicate that unlike in English, imperative constructions are frequently
used as a request realization strategy in Russian (Berger 1997; Betsch; 2003; Brehmer
2000; Larina 2003, all cited in Ogiermann 2009; Mills 1992; Ogiermann 2009).
Similarly, studies on Polish requests show that imperatives can serve as polite requests
 Requests and politeness in Vietnamese as a native language 687

especially when accompanied by mitigating devices such as intonation, the use of

appropriate address forms, personal pronouns or modal particles (Lubecka 2000;
Marcjanik 1997, all cited in Ogiermann 2009; Wierzbicka 1985).
Research on requests in Asian languages, such as Bahasa Indonesia, Korean,
Nepali, Mandarin Chinese and Vietnamese has also challenged the claimed direct link
between indirectness and politeness (e.g. Byon 2006; Hassall 1999; Lee-Wong 1994;
Rue and Zhang 2008; Upadhyay 2003; Vu 1997; 1999; Yu 2011). For example,
although conventionally indirect requests constitute the most frequently used realization
strategies in Bahasa Indonesia (51%), direct requests also make up a large proportion in
this language (42.7%) (Hassall 1999). Similarly, politeness in Korean requests can be
expressed by means of direct strategies coupled with honorifics (Byon 2006).
Conventional indirectness, on the other hand, is not significantly correlated with
politeness in this language (Yu 2011). The most frequently used form of requests in
Nepali is the basic imperative construction and politeness can be conveyed by means of
honorifics rather than by changing the directness level of sentences (Upadhyay 2003).
Speakers of Mandarin Chinese also demonstrate an overwhelming preference for bald-
on record strategies as they tend to associate directness with sincerity while regarding
conventionally indirect requests as inappropriate (Lee-Wong 1994; Rue and Zhang
2008). Generally, these findings do not endorse the direct relationship between
politeness and linguistic indirectness, suggesting that this relationship is interpreted
differently across cultures.
To date, speech acts in general and requests in particular in Vietnamese have
been under-represented in pragmatics literature. Among the few available studies, Vu
(1997, 1999) has offered a valuable insight into requests and politeness in Vietnamese.
She collected naturally occurring requests by a group of Vietnamese native speakers as
they were communicating in various social contexts. Her studies show that Vietnamese
speakers prefer a high level of directness in making requests and rely more considerably
on supportive elements with politeness effects rather than on indirectness for expressing
politeness. Indirectness is also considered a politeness device; however, it does not rank
as high as mitigated directness on the politeness continuum.
Overall, despite a growing interest in requests in the last few decades, earlier
studies have focused on a fairly limited range of languages, thus inadequately shedding
light on our understanding of how this speech act is manifested in various contexts of
cultures. Most of the existing studies focus on a European language and only a
relatively small number of studies investigate an Asian language. Therefore, it is
important to further this line of research in order to understand how requests are
performed across a wider range of languages, and hence to what extent strategies for
performing requests are common across languages. Our study sets out to investigate the
politeness strategies that a group of Vietnamese native speakers employ when
requesting in everyday situations. By looking at this under-researched language, we aim
to expand the range of languages under inquiry and contribute to furthering our
knowledge of politeness phenomena in a wider variety of discourse communities.
Another purpose in conducting this study is to inform cross-cultural communication
between Vietnamese people and speakers of other languages as well as the teaching of
Vietnamese as a heritage or second language.
688 Thi Thuy Minh Nguyen and Gia Anh Le Ho

2. Politeness in modern Vietnamese

Since one of the aims of our paper is to examine politeness in Vietnamese requests,
particularly whether the claimed link between indirectness and politeness by Brown and
Levinson (1978, 1987) is supported by Vietnamese data, in this section we will first
recapitulate the key concepts of Brown and Levinson’s theory. Within the broader
critiques of their theory, we will then review the extent to which Vietnamese politeness
can be explained within their framework, particulary in relation to their
conceptualization of face, negative politeness and their face-saving view of politeness.
Fundamental to Brown and Levinson’s works are the concept of face which they
define as public self-image and the two accompanying types of face wants, namely
positive (i.e. desire to be accepted) and negative face (i.e. desire to be free from
imposition), which, in their view, operate pan-culturally. Associated with these two
types of face are positive and negative politeness strategies. Positive politeness is
analogous with directness, including verbal strategies such as expressions of solidarity,
informality and familiarity while negative politeness is equated to indirectness,
comprising of expressions of restraint, formality and distancing. Between the two,
negative politeness is considered more face redressive. A speaker decides between
positive and negative politeness strategies when performing a speech act by considering
the social and contextual variables involved. These variables include the social distance
and relative power between the speaker and the hearer, and the degree of imposition of
the given speech act as perceived within the given culture. As such, politeness is viewed
as a tool for saving face.
Brown and Levinson’s claim for politeness universals, however, has been
challenged by the amounting evidence from non-Western politeness research. First, it
has been shown that the act of face-saving in some cultures is not necessarily to do with
satisfying an individual’s psychological wants as asserted by Brown and Levinson. Mao
(1994), for example, indicates that individualistic and self-oriented face is not
characteristic of the Chinese culture. Rather, Chinese face emphasizes “the harmony of
individual conduct with the views and judgement of the community” (Mao 1994: 460).
In other words, face is related to social expectations and must be endorsed by the
community; therefore, politeness is the conformity to these expected norms rather than
attending to individual face wants (also see Gu 1990). Likewise, Wierzbicka (1985)
argues that given the preference for involvement and sincerity over personal distance in
Polish culture, negative face seems to be of little importance and does not adequately
account for verbal interaction by Polish speakers. Face-saving may not also be the main
driving factor that explains an individual’s social behaviour in cultures where emphasis
is placed more on marking social standing in relation to others in the community (Ide
1989; Matsumoto 1988). Based on her study of the honorific system in Japanese, Ide
(1989) has shown that politeness is achieved not so much on the basis of volitional use
of verbal strategies as on discernment (i.e. finding one’s place) in this culture (also see
Hill et al. 1986). More recent critics have challenged Brown and Levinson’s
conceptualization of face as an individual phenomenon and argued that face should be
reframed within a relational and interactional framework within which face is seen as
being interactionally achieved in relationships with others (see Arundale 2006).
When it comes to explaining Vietnamese politeness, Brown and Levinson’s
notions of face as an individualistic, self-oriented image and its concomitant negative
face’s claim to personal space also appear to hardly apply (N. Pham 2008). This is
 Requests and politeness in Vietnamese as a native language 689

because Vietnamese politeness behavior tends to be group-oriented rather than self-

oriented and consequently negative face wants seem to play a negligible role (Vu 1997).
Traditionally, the two key elements that underlie the notion of politeness and drive
interactants’ behavior in the Vietnamese culture include lễ (‘rules of propriety’, ‘rites’,
‘morals’, ‘proper conducts’) and tình cảm (‘sentiments’) (Chew 2011). Lễ is rooted in
Confucian ideology and values, which deeply influence the cultural life of Vietnamese
people, reflecting their emphasis on social indexing and serving to preserve relational
and social order. In its essence, lễ involves lễ phép (i.e. ‘respectfulness’ or showing
respect to people of higher power) and đúng mực (i.e. ‘propriety’ or showing proper
respect to people of equal and lower power) (Vu 1997, 1999). From a young age,
Vietnamese children are taught basic moral lessons such as tiên học lễ, hậu học văn
(literally translated as ‘first study lễ; later study knowledge’ or ‘one needs to acquire the
rules of lễ before acquiring academic/ scholarly knowledge’) (N. Pham 2008). In
interpersonal communication the Vietnamese must act in compliance with such social
rules as biết trên biết dưới (literally translated as ‘knowing above, knowing below’ or
‘one must know one’s social standing in relation to others’), trên ra trên dưới ra dưới
(literally translated as ‘above has to be above; beneath has to be beneath’ or ‘one has to
act according to one’s social standing in relation to others), and kính trên nhường dưới
(literally translated as ‘respect the superior; yield to the subordinate’, or ‘show respect
to the superior; show proper respect to the subordinate’) (B. Pham 1999; Vu 1997).
Apparently, in the Vietnamese culture one’s social behavior is guided by how one
positions himself or herself in social relationships. The second component of
Vietnamese politeness, tình cảm, is manifested in such behaviors as ‘care’, ‘intimacy’,
‘bond’, and ‘mutual help’ (see Tran 1995, 2001), serving to maintain social harmony
(Chew 2011). The Vietnamese promote lối sống tình cảm (‘a sentiment way of life’)
and highly value tình làng nghĩa xóm (translated as ‘love among people in a
community’) (Tran 1995, 2001). Their everyday courses of action and lifestyle are
based on this value, which is evident in their proverb một trăm cái lý không bằng một tí
cái tình (literally translated as ‘a hundred rational thought does not weigh as much as
one sentimental thought’ or ‘one should put compassion above logical thinking’). Lễ,
working alongside tình cảm, shapes the notion of face in the Vietnamese culture as
social face, or to quote Mao (1994: 453), as “a public image that is on loan to
individuals from society” rather than “a private or an internalized property” belonging
to an individual as asserted by Brown and Levinson. Lễ also necessarily sets itself apart
from ‘giving deference’ (belonging to the superstrategy of negative politeness in Brown
and Levinson’s model) since it underscores hierarchical social structure rather than an
individual’s desire for freedom of will and autonomy (a behavior that is of least
importance in a culture that favors involvement and interdependence such as Vietnam)
(see Matsumoto 1988 for a similar discussion).
Based on her investigation of politeness perceptions by Vietnamese speakers,
Vu (1997) also points out that Brown and Levinson’s face-saving view of politeness
does not capture all the aspects of Vietnamese politeness. More specifically, she has
found that when asked what is meant by politeness in speech, Vietnamese speakers
identify four major behaviors, namely lễ phép (‘respectfulness’), đúng mực (‘propriety’),
khéo léo (‘tact/ artful speech’) and tế nhị (‘delicacy/ subtlety’). According to Vu, this
shows that Vietnamese verbal interaction necessarily incorporates two important types
of politeness, including ‘respectful politeness’ (lịch sự lễ độ) and ‘strategic politeness’
690 Thi Thuy Minh Nguyen and Gia Anh Le Ho

(lịch sự chiến lược) in her terms. While the former serves to index social relationships,
showing respect to status and solidarity, the latter is bound within specific speech events,
serving immediate communicative goals and intents. Linguistic devices that help to
convey the former type of politeness, according to Vu, comprise of address terms using
fictive kinship terms, honorifics or lexical means with a similar function. Speakers
make these linguistic choices to display lễ phép/ đúng mực to their interlocutors while
keeping distance vs. solidarity in conformity with the nature of the given speaker-hearer
relationship. In comparison, linguistic means that display khéo léo/ tế nhị (i.e. ‘strategic
politeness’) help to minimize the disadvantages and maximize the advantages of the
situation so that one can achieve their communicative goal. These means may include
such verbal strategies as indirectness and lexical items with mitigation function. Vu
claims that due to a strong emphasis on the conformity of individuals’ behavior to social
expectations, ‘respectfulness’ politeness seems more prominent in Vietnamese social
interaction than ‘strategic’ politeness. She also argues that while Brown and Levinson’s
model can describe the ‘strategic’ dimension of Vietnamese politeness, ‘respectful
politeness’ is not identified with their politeness strategies:

[R]espectfulness politeness (…) is clearly differentiated from Brown and Levinson’s

negative or positive strategies in terms of its functions: respectfulness politeness is
behavior in conformity to the norms and conventions of society, and it does not
necessarily entail individual strategies aimed at certain communicative goals (p. 88).

An example is the address term usage. According to Brown and Levinson, a speaker can
make choice of address terms either to mark group identity (e.g. mate, buddy, brother,
sister) (1978: 112-113) or to ‘give deference’ (e.g. Sir) to the hearer (1978: 187-189).
That is, in Brown and Levinson’s model, address terms are only strategically used to
attend to the hearer’s positive or negative face wants, based on the speaker’s calculation
of cost to the hearer; in other words, the usage is merely influenced by the speaker’s
intentions. In contrast, in the Vietnamese language address terms are an indispensable
index of social relationships and expresses respect for and conformity to power and the
social hierarchy. Their usage is constrained by the speaker’s social role and obligations
rather than by his or her intention. This is evidenced by that a ‘no-naming’ style (nói
trống không) could severly violate social norms, especially when one communicates
with his or her superiors in the formal context. Vu concludes that the co-existence of
‘respectful politeness’ and ‘strategic politeness’ in Vietnamese culture “attest[s] to the
hypothesis suggested by Hill et al. (1986) on the existence of discernment and volition”
(p. 331) (also see Ide 1989 for a similar discussion) and that rather than based only on a
‘strategic’ view of politeness, there is a need to consider both ‘normative’ and ‘strategic’
aspects when explaining how politeness operates in the Vietnamese culture.

3. The study

3.1. Participants

Nine native speakers of Vietnamese who responded to the researchers’ advertisement

for recruitment of research participants were invited to participate in this study. They
were full time English language major students of a university in Hanoi where the
second author once taught them English. Eight of them were female and one was male,
 Requests and politeness in Vietnamese as a native language 691

whose ages ranged between 21 and 22. They were originally from various parts in
Northern Vietnam.

3.2. Data collection

Six role-play scenarios were designed to elicit requests (see Appendices A and B) and
the informants’ performance was audio recorded. Some of the scenarios were adapted
from Blum-Kulka and Olshtain (1984) and Hassall (2003). The role-play was selected
because it allows for impromptu speech production in conversational sequences, thus
sharing a number of similarities with natural speech production (Kasper 2008; Kasper
and Rose 2002). On the other hand, unlike naturally occurring discourse, it allows us to
observe how context factors such as power, distance and imposition (see Brown and
Levinson 1987) affect the speaker’s choice of pragmatic strategies. Its other strength is
that it can yield a large corpus of data in a relatively short time. We acknowledge,
however, that role-plays are fundamentally different activities from natural interaction,
among others because role-plays are pretence without consequences for the participants.
However, Okada (2010) argues that in role-plays participants draw on their interactional
competencies by default. This justifies the use of role-plays in teaching/training and
testing, and cautious use in research.
The six scenarios varied in the relative power between the speaker and the
hearer but not in the social distance between them. They include: (1) borrowing a
computer from a friend, (2) borrowing lecture notes from a classmate, (3) asking a
roommate to return a book to the library, (4) asking a teacher to write a letter of
recommendation, (5) asking a teacher for a deadline extension, and (6) asking a
supervisor to change the date of an upcoming meeting. Scenarios 1 through 3 described
an equal power relationship (request directed at a friend), while the relationship
described in Scenarios 4 through 6 is characteristic of an unequal power (request
directed at a lecturer/ supervisor). The social distance, however, was kept constant: All
the scenarios described a close relationship between the speaker and the hearer.
In order to avoid the researcher’s subjectivity as far as possible, before the role
play took place the scenarios were given for the participants to rate the degree of
imposition exerted on the hearer, using a Likert 5-point scale. Results showed that the
degree of imposition was rated ‘low’ in Scenarios 1 (Computer) and 2 (Lecture Notes)
(means falling below 3.0). This was rated ‘medium’ in Scenarios 3 (Library), 4 (Letter
of Reference), 5 (Assignment) and 6 (Meeting) (means between 3.0 and 3.5) (see Table
1).
Before being used for the present study, the role-plays were piloted with another
group of native speakers of Vietnamese. Adjustments were then made to the instruction
and scenario descriptions to enhance their comprehensibility. Also, because participants
may find it difficult to perform in a role-play if the tasks are not realistic (see
Bonikowska 1988; Kasper 2008), before the role-play took place, the participants were
asked to rate the extent to which they felt they were able to imagine themselves in each
scenario, using a Likert 5-point scale. Results indicated that the informants scored quite
high on all scenarios (means varying from 4.4 to 5.0), suggesting that they were familiar
enough with the scenarios. Based on this result, all scenarios were kept for data
collection. Each informant then role-played in Vietnamese for approximately one hour
692 Thi Thuy Minh Nguyen and Gia Anh Le Ho

with the second author. As a result, 54 role-play conversations including 164 requests
were yielded.

Table 1: The role-play scenarios

Scenario Social distance Relative power Degree of

imposition
1. Computer Close Equal Low
2. Lecture notes Close Equal Low
3. Library Close Equal Medium
4. Letter of reference Close Low to High Medium
5. Assignment Close Low to High Medium
6. Meeting Close Low to High Medium

3.3. Data analysis

The role-play conversations were transcribed and data were then coded, using Blum-
Kulka, House and Kasper’s (1989) taxonomy with slight adaptations to cater for the
specific features of politeness in Vietnamese (see section 2). Following this framework,
requests were coded according to their (1) levels of directness, (2) strategy types, and (3)
modifiers. The level of directness refers to the extent to which S (speaker)’s intent is
made transparent (see Blum-Kulka 1987). A strategy is a semantic formula by which
the request is expressed (see Blum-Kulka et al. 1989, Takahashi 1996). Modifiers are
illocutionary force mitigating devices and include both external and internal types.
External modifiers are supportive moves that occur before or after the head act, whereas
internal modifiers occur within the head act and form an integral part of it (Kasper
1981). The two authors coded the data independently and then cross-checked their
coding until a full agreement was achieved.

4. Findings

4.1. A typology of request strategies in Vietnamese

The following types of request strategy types were identified in the data. Note that the
participants often combined different strategies in a single turn. In the following
examples the strategy under discussion is underlined. ‘P’ refers to the participant and ‘I’
refers to the interlocutor.
DIRECT STRATEGIES

a. Imperatives: Mood derivable structures in full or elliptical form.

(1) Scenario 3
P3: Mày ơi tao bảo này
Address term (casual) vocative I (casual) tell alignment marker
Hey, let me tell you this

Hôm nay tao không có tiết ở trường.

Today I (casual) not have class at school
 Requests and politeness in Vietnamese as a native language 693

I don’t have a class today.

Tao có quyển sách hôm nay

I (casual) have classifier book today
I have a book

đến hạn trả ở thư viện.

due return at library
due today

Mày cầm đi trả hộ tao nhớ.

You (casual) hold go return help me (casual) alignment marker
Help me to return it!

b. Performative: Containing performative verbs that denote the request such as đề

nghị [request], bảo [tell], nhờ [ask for help], xin [beg], etc. with or without
hedges (e.g. muốn [would like/ want]).

(2) Scenario 5

P8: Cô ơi hôm nay là đến ngày em nộp cho cô

Teacher vocative today be due I (student) submit for teacher
Today I am supposed to submit to you

chương 2 của khóa luận ạ

chapter two of thesis honorific
chapter 2 of my thesis

mà tuần trước em ốm quá

but (casual) week before I (student) sick so
but I was so sick last week

nên em vẫn chưa viết xong ạ

so I (student) still not yet write finish honorific
so I haven’t finished it yet

em vẫn còn phần về data analysis.

I (studentstill remain part about data analysis.
I haven’t written the data analysis section yet.

Em xin cô để tuần sau em nộp,

I (student) beg teacher let week after I (student) submit
I’m asking you to allow me to submit it next week
được không ạ?
possible no honorific
is that possible?

c. Obligation & necessity: Containing verbs that denote obligation and necessity
such as nên [should], cần (phải) [need to], phải [have to]. Note that this strategy
was absent in the data.

d. Want statement: Containing verbs that denote S’s needs, wishes and desires such
as muốn [want], cần [need] phải [have to].
694 Thi Thuy Minh Nguyen and Gia Anh Le Ho

(3) Scenario 2

P9: Biết ngay mà

Know immediately stance marker
I know it

mọi lần toàn thấy ghi đầy đủ

every time always see write fully
you always take careful notes

thì tớ mới mượn chứ.

then I (intimate) stance marker borrow stance marker.
that’s why I only borrow your notes.

Tớ hỏi chứ
I (intimate) ask stance marker
That’s the reason why I ask you

tớ muốn mượn vở của bà.

I (intimate) want borrow notes of you (playful)
I want to borrow your notes.

CONVENTIONALLY INDIRECT STRATEGIES

e. Suggestory formula: Utterances beginning with Thế thì [So], Không thì or Hay
là [Or] and pronounced in a rising intonation. Suggestions often come after an
initial failure to get the hearer (H) to perform the act.
(4) Scenario 1

P4: thế thì chuyển sang dùng điện thoại đi

so transfer to use telephone alignment marker
How about using telephone instead?

rồi tôi tặng cái thẻ điện thoại.

then I (playful) give classifier card telephone
I will give you a telephone card.

f. Query preparatory: The speaker refers to the preparatory condition for the
realization of a request, for example, the speaker checks the hearer’s ability/
willingness to perform the act, or asks for permission to perform the act. Very
often, the utterance takes the form of a question1.

(5) Scenario 4

P7: Cô ơi,
Teacher vocative
Teacher,

1
Note that the Vietnamese language has the modal verb có thể, which denotes ability, possibility
and permission (equivalent to can, could, may, might in English) but this verb is only optional in ability/
permission requests. Vietnamese ability/ permission requests are more often expressed via the structure
“S + V … được không?” [possible-no, is is ok …?]. Có thể in this case only functions as a modifier.
 Requests and politeness in Vietnamese as a native language 695

em chuẩn bị nộp cho

I (student) prepare apply for
I’m applying for

1 cái học bổng ấy ạ

one classifier scholarship affirmative marker honorific
a scholarship

mà rất cần sự giới thiệu của giáo viên

that very need introduction of teacher
I really need a recommendation letter from a teacher

trong trường ấy ạ.
at school affirmative marker honorific
of our school.

Mà cô đã dạy tiếng Anh

That teacher past marker teach English
And you have taught me English

được 2 - 3 kì rồi ấy ạ.
for two three semester already affirmative marker honorific
for two or three semesters.

Em có thể nhờ cô viết thư giới thiệu

I (student) can ask for help teacher write letter introduce
Can I ask you to write a letter of recommendation

giúp em được không ạ?

help me (student) possible no honorific?
for me please?

NON-CONVENTIONALLY INDIRECT STRATEGIES

g. Hints: The speaker’s intent can be inferred thanks to his/ her reference to the
precondition for the realization of the request (e.g. the hearer’s availability) or to
the reason for the request. Unlike a query preparatory, a hint is not
conventionalized2.

(6) Scenario 6

I: Chào em. Ơ sao em đến sớm thế?

Hello you (student). Suprise marker why you (student) come early so?
Hello, why are you here so early?

P6: À. Cô ơi em đang chạy

Ah. Teacher vocative I (student) progressive marker run

2
Note that an utterance can be coded as a ‘hint’ only when it occurs alone in an exchange (not
together with another strategy type). Otherwise, it would be more suitably coded as a supportive move
rather than the head act.
696 Thi Thuy Minh Nguyen and Gia Anh Le Ho

Ah I’m rushing to

đến lớp học môn nghiên cứu

to class learn subject research
the Research Methods class

I: Thế à?
So question marker?
Are you?

P6: Tại vì tự dưng hôm nay bọn em có xác định

Because suddenly today plural markers I (student) have confirm
Because suddently we’ve been told to

học bù vào đúng cái giờ

study compensate at exactly classifier hour
have a make up class at exactly the same time

mà em có thể gặp cô ạ
that I (student) can meet teacher honorific
that I’m supposed to meet you.

I: Ừ
Yes
Okay

P6: Cô ơi có lúc nào khác buổi chiều không?

Teacher vocative have time which other afternoon no?
Do you have any other time in the afternoon?

4.2. Distribution of strategy types

Results show that direct requests accounted for a large percentage (53% or 87 out of
164 requests). Among direct strategies, imperatives were used most frequently (33.5%
or 55/164), followed by performatives (11.6% or 19/164 requests). Want statements
made up of only 8% (13/164). No statements of obligation and necessity were found in
the data. Conventionally indirect strategies were used 46.3% of the time (76/164). The
most frequently used indirect strategy was query prepartories (26.8% or 44/ 164),
followed by suggestory formulas (19.5% or 32/ 164). Non-conventionally indirect
requests were almost absent (0.6% or 1/164) (see Table 2).
An analysis of distribution of strategies according to situational variations
indicates that the power difference between the speaker and the hearer affected the
speaker’s pragmatic choice [χ2 (5, N =164) = 39.06, p <.001]. In particular, the
informants tended to prefer imperatives in equal power scenarios (49%) (see example 1
above) whereas they liked to opt for query preparatories in low-to-high power scenarios
(40%) (example 5).
However, imposition levels did not affect the informants’ strategy use [χ2 (5, N
=164) = 4.46, p >.05]. This was probably because from the learners’ point of view, the
scenarios did not differ greatly in this aspect. Indeed, their scores on the degrees of
imposition in six scenarios did not show much discrimination (ranging between 2.0 and
3.4).
 Requests and politeness in Vietnamese as a native language 697

Table 2: Frequency of use of request strategies

Strategy Raw counts Percentage
Direct 87 53
imperative 55 33.5
performative 19 11.6
obligation 0 0
want statement 13 8
Conventionally indirect 76 46.3
suggestion 32 19.5
query 44 26.8
Non-conventionally indirect 1 0.6
Total 164 100

4.3. A typology of request modifiers in Vietnamese

Data analysis indicates the following category of modifiers. Note that the participants
often combined different types of modifiers in a single request. In the following
examples the modifier type under discussion is underlined.

EXTERNAL MODIFIERS: Supportive moves that occur before or after the head act.

a. Steers: Phrases that are used to prepare the hearer for the request. The speaker
may do so by checking if the hearer is available to perform the request. Steers
are used to avoid being abrupt and inconsiderate.

(7) Scenario 1

P1: Linh ơi, mày đang chát với ai đấy?

Name vocative you (casual) progressive marker chat with who that?
Linh, who are you chatting with?

I: À, tao đang chát với lại bạn trai tao.

Ah I (casual) progressive marker chat with boyfriend me
I’m chatting with my boyfriend.

P1: Thế à, quan trọng không?

So question marker important no
Are you? Is it important?

I: Ờ. Quan trọng lắm.

Yes. Important very
Yes, it is.

Tại vì cũng lâu lắm rồi không nói chuyện với anh ấy.
Because also long very already no talk with him
Because I haven’t talked to him for a while.
698 Thi Thuy Minh Nguyen and Gia Anh Le Ho

b. Pre-sequences: The speaker announces that they are going to make a request or checks if the
hearer is willing to hear the request.
(8) Scenario 4

P4: Cô ơi có việc này

Teacher vocative have matter this
Teacher, I have something

em nhờ cô một tý.

I (casual) ask for help teacher one bit
that I need your help with.

c. Grounders: Excuses, reasons or explanations that the speaker uses to justify their
request and thus to appear reasonable.

(9) Scenario 5

P2: Cô ơi,
Teacher vocative
Teacher,

hôm nay em có hẹn với cô

today I (student) have appointment with teacher
I have an appointment with you today

nhưng mà tuần trước em không được khỏe lắm

but week before I (student) no passive marker well very
but I wasn’t feeling very well last week

nên em vẫn chưa viết xong cô ạ.

so I (student) still not yet write finish teacher honorific
so I haven’t completed my chapter yet.

d. Disarmers: Utterances that the speaker uses to show their awareness of the
pressure that the request may place on the hearer. The speaker might want to
acknowledge the pressure and/ or apologize.

(10) Scenario 5

P3: Em thưa cô
I (student) honorific teacher
Teacher

vì là thời tiết nó thay đổi

because weather it change
because of the weather change

cho nên đợt vừa rồi em ốm quá ạ.

so recently I (student) sick very honorific
I’ve been really sick recently.

Thế là em chưa
So I (student) not yet
So I haven’t
 Requests and politeness in Vietnamese as a native language 699

em biết cô vẫn rất là bận.

I (student) know teacher still very be busy
I know you are very busy

Nhưng mà em chưa xong được

But I (student) not yet finish possible
But I haven’t finished my chapter yet

e. Imposition minimizers: Utterances that the speaker uses to free the hearer from
the imposition of the request.

(11) Scenario 4

P6: Thế lúc nào mà cô thấy không bất tiện quá

So when that teacher see not inconvenient very
So when it’s not too inconvenient to you

thì cô nhớ giúp em cô nhá?

then teacher remember help me teacher alignment marker
please remember to help me!

f. Committers: The speaker may want to minimize the cost for the hearer by
expressing their compromise with the hearer’s conditions or offering to make it
easier for the hearer to perform the act.

(12) Scenario 5

P9: em sẽ cố gắng viết trong tuần này

I (student) will try write in week this
I will try to write it this week

và em nộp cho cô
and I (student) submit for teacher
to submit it to you

tại vì tuần vừa rồi em bị ốm quá

because week last I (student) passive marker sick very
because I was really sick last week

em chưa viết được,

I (student) not yet write possible
I haven’t been able to do it

trong tuần này em sẽ cố gắng

in week this I (student) will try
I will try this week

gửi cho cô để cô comment ạ.

send for teacher for teacher comment honorific
and send it to you for your comments.

g. Understatement: The speaker may want to understate the request so as to

convince the hearer of the minimal cost of the act. Understatements normally
occur when the hearer shows hesitation to help.
700 Thi Thuy Minh Nguyen and Gia Anh Le Ho

(13) Scenario 1

P2: Này Huyền cho tao mượn máy tính cái.

Attention seeker name let me (casual) borrow computer imperative marker
Hey, Huyen, let me borrow your computer.

I: Ơ, nhưng bây giờ tao đang dùng mà.

Suprise marker but now I (casual) progressive marker use stance marker
But I’m using it now

P2: Tao chỉ viết 3 trang thôi.

I (casual) just write three pages only
I only need it to write just three pages.

Sau đấy mày dùng tiếp được không?

After that you (casual) use continue possible no
After that you can use it. Is that possible?

h. Offers of compensation: The speaker may also reduce the cost for the hearer by
offering the hearer compensation or a reward.

(14) Scenario 1

P3: Thôi thì chịu khó giúp tớ.

So bear difficulty help me (intimate)
So take trouble to help me

Có gì tớ sẽ giúp cậu sau

Have what (intimate) will help you (intimate) later
I will help you later

i. Sympathy seekers: The speaker may want to appeal for the hearer’s sympathy so
as to increase the chance of success of the request. This category is absent in
Blum-Kulka et al. (1989) but has been added to fit data of this study.

(15) Scenario 3

P9: B4 thì chạy ra thư viện cũng nhanh mà.

B4 (location) emphasis marker run to library also quick stance marker
B4 is so close to the library

Hộ tớ tý
Help me (intimate) bit
Help me

để lâu thư viện nó… cô thư viện cô ý

keep long library it classifier librarian her
If I don’t return it, the librarian

lại tính tiền thêm

again count money more
will ask me to pay more fine

thì tớ chết mất

 Requests and politeness in Vietnamese as a native language 701

then I (intimate) die lose

I will sure die

tớ đã để lâu rồi
I (intimate) past marker keep long already
It’s already overdue

j. Smoothers: The speaker may want to appeal for the hearer’s willingness to
perform the act by offering the hearer a compliment/ appreciation or
emphasising the hearer’s role.

(16) Scenario 1

P3: Mày ơi
You (casua) vocative
Hey

Mày là bạn tốt của tao mà.

you (casual) be friend good of me (casual) stance marker
You’re my good friend.

Đồng ý đi, giúp tao đi.

Agree imperative marker, help me (casual) imperative marker
Agree to help me, okay?

k. Thanking: The speaker may want to increase the benefit for the hearer by
expressing their gratitude to the hearer for the act, e.g. “Cảm ơn nhé!” (Thanks!)
or “Em cảm ơn cô ạ” (Thank you, teacher!)

INTERNAL MODIFIERS: Occur within and form part of the head act

a. Address terms: Address terms in the Vietnamese language include kinship terms,
titles, personal pronouns, and proper names occurring in alerters, subjects or
other places in the utterances (Vu 1997). Address terms are important in the
Vietnamese language because a ‘no-naming’ style (i.e. “nói trống không”)
violates social norms, particularly when communicating with superiors and in
formal contexts. Interlocutors make choices of address terms depending on the
relative power and social distance between themselves and the wrong choice of
address terms may threat H’s face. This means politeness is determined not only
by the use or non-use of address terms, but also by the appropriate choice in
conformity to social norms and speaker-hearer role relationships (Vu, ibid: 170).

Note that Blum-Kulka et al. (1989) do not categorise address terms as request
modifiers but since these linguistic features function as markers of ‘respectful’
politeness in Vietnamese, we classify them as a type of internal modifiers.

Our data show that 95% (156/ 164) of the head acts included address terms.
Although the other 5% (8/ 164) of head acts without address terms only occurred
in equal power scenarios (i.e. Scenarios 1, 2 and 3), politeness was still
maintained via the use of other modifier types. Our data also show that all the
702 Thi Thuy Minh Nguyen and Gia Anh Le Ho

address terms were used appropriately across scenarios. For example, in status
equal scenarios address terms were used to index solidarity and intimacy (e.g. tớ
- cậu; tao – mày; mình –bạn, see examples 1, 3, 13, 14 and 16 above). Some
participants even chose seemingly formal address terms such as tôi – bà to
display a playful tone, thus demonstrating an intimate relationship between them
and their interlocutors. In lower-to-higher status scenarios the participants
unanimously chose em to address themselves and cô to address their female
teachers, emphasizing hierarchy, formal solidarity and respect (see examples 2,
5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 above). This behavior is expected in student-teacher role
relationships in the Vietnamese culture.

It is our view that the frequency count of occurrence of address terms may not
be as important as the analysis of whether they are used appropriately or not.
Therefore, we decided not to include address terms when counting the number
of internal modifiers in our data.

b. Honorifics: Particles, honorifics, and verbs that express respect to H, e.g. vâng,
dạ, ạ [honorifics], làm ơn [do favour], xin [beg], cho [give], hộ [help], etc. This
category is absent in Blum-Kulka & Olshtain (1984) but has been added to fit
our data.

c. Downgraders: Adverbial modifiers that help S to downgrade the act, e.g. một
chút, một tý [one bit], etc.

d. Downtoner: Verbs and sentence modifiers that S uses to reduce the pressure his/
her request may place on H such as có lẽ, có thể, chắc là [perhaps, possibly,
maybe/ may, probably), etc.

e. Appealers: Particles or phrases S uses to call for H’s understanding and

sympathy, e.g. nhé, với, đi, cái [alignment markers], được không? [possible
no?]3 This category is absent in Blum-Kulka et al. (1989) but has been added to
fit our data.

4.3. Distribution of modifiers

Results show that the informants modified their requests with a relatively high
frequency (3.29 modifiers per request). They relied on external modifiers to soften their
utterances for 60.6% of the time (see Table 3). In particular, they preferred grounders
(37% or 119/ 319), steers (18% or 58/ 319), thanking (12% or 35/ 319), committers and
understatements (11% or 34/ 319). Other types of external modifiers such as disarmers
(8/ 319), imposition minimizers (3/ 319) and compensations (8/ 319) were almost absent.

3
Note that được không is coded as an appealer only when it is not part of the syntactic structure
of the request but is an independent element that functions as an agreement seeker, such as in example 2
in the manuscript. If được không is compulsory for the syntactical structure of the sentence as in the case
of ability/ permission requests, it is not coded as an appealer.
 Requests and politeness in Vietnamese as a native language 703

Except for address terms which occurred in 95% of the head acts, the most frequently
used types of internal modifiers were honorifics (47.4% or 99/ 218) and appealers (i.e.
modal particles) (28.7% or 62/ 218). Downgraders (17.2% or 43/ 218) and downtoners
(6.7% or 14/ 218) were employed far less often.

Table 3: Mean number of modifiers produced per request

Types Raw counts Mean SD Percentage
External modifiers 319 2.00 .36 60.6
Internal modifiers 218 1.29 .27 39.4
Total 537 3.29 .49 100

5. Discussion

5.1. Universality and culture-specificity in request strategy and modifications

Similarly to previous studies (e.g. Byon 2006; Hassall 1999; Lee-Wong 1994;
Matsumoto 1988; Ogiermann 2009; Rue and Zhang 2008; Upadhyay 2003; Vu 1997;
1999; Wierzbicka 1985), the findings of this study support the existence of universal
strategies for making requests but indicates culture-specific differences in the preference
for certain strategies. For example, although the Vietnamese speakers had all the
strategies at their disposal, they tended to rely predominantly on imperatives and query
preparatories for expressing their requests. Other strategies such as statements of
obligation and necessity and hints were hardly used.
The analysis of request modification used by the Vietnamese participants
highlighted some noteworthy culture-specific features. First, disarmers and imposition
minimizers were scarcely used. Perhaps this can be explained by the lack of concern for
personal space in the Vietnamese culture 4 (Nguyen 2008, 2011). The Vietnamese

4
One anonymous journal reviewer commented that the role-play data might have been affected
by the prior social familiarity between the researchers and their subjects. In particular, the high level of
directness and low incidence of disarmers as well as imposition minimizers shown in the data might
simply reflect the lack of social distance between the speakers rather than the lack of concern for personal
space in the Vietnamese culture. We would not necessarily agree with this interpretation, however, even
if we assumed that the participants’ acting might have been affected by their real-life roles. First, although
the participants had been taught by the second author for one academic year, they were no longer in her
class at the time of data collection as she had relocated to another institution. Their lack of continual
contact may lower the degree of closeness between them. Second and more importantly, under the
influence of Confucian values, the Vietnamese people are characterized by the tradition of tôn sư trọng
đạo (literally translated as ‘respecting the teacher and morality’). The teacher is held in utmost respect in
the Vietnamese culture and it is a moral obligation for Vietnamese students to closely observe this norm
of behavior. As often seen in the classroom context, students address their teachers respectfully using
titles and honorifics, for example Thưa thầy/ thưa cô (translated as ‘Respectfully, Teacher’). Therefore,
we would argue that it is due to such a high level of power asymmetry between students and teachers in
the Vietnamese culture that hardly any degree of social familiarity between them can be interpreted as a
lisence for the former to speak to the latter as if they were equal partners. Recalling that Vu (1997, 1999)
also reported a strikingly high level of directness in naturally occurring requests by Vietnamese speakers
as they were interacting in various social scenrios (+ power, - power, + distance, - distance), we would
argue that directness is not necessarily an indicator of a lack of social distance between the speakers.
704 Thi Thuy Minh Nguyen and Gia Anh Le Ho

culture is characterized by a collective orientation which emphasizes involvement,

interference, interdependence and a strong sense of familial duties (see Tran 1995,
2001). Therefore, in this culture the act of requesting may not necessarily be seen as
‘imposing’’. Indeed, these cultural characteristics are clearly reflected in the participants’
use of sympathy seekers as a means of convincing their interlocutors to fulfil their
requests. This finding emerges as particularly salient because sympathy seekers have
not been reported in previous studies (e.g. Barron 2008; Hassall 2003; Hendriks 2008;
Octu and Zeyrek; 2008; Ogiermann 2009; Shively 2011).
Another interesting observation is that Vietnamese requests are typically
internally modified by lexical means such as address terms, honorifics and modal
particles (see Vu 1997, 1999 for similar findings). This is different from English
requests which are often mitigated by syntactic means (see Blum-Kulka and Olshtain
1984; Blum-Kulka et al. 1989; Hendriks 2008; Trosborg 1995). The reliance on lexical
means by Vietnamese speakers is attributed to both linguistic and cultural features of
this language. Linguistically, the Vietnamese language is based primarily on semantic
rather than formal properties for expressing both grammatical and pragmatic meanings.
Culturally, address terms indicate social roles and status in relation to other people,
which is an important aspect of a collectivism-oriented society. Honorifics reflect the
high value that the Vietnamese people place on modesty, humility and respect (T. Pham
1995). Modal particles that are alignment markers are an important means for solidarity
building (Vu 1997, 1999). Indeed, Vu (1997, 1999) points out that these modifier types
rank high on the politeness continuum in Vietnamese.

5.2. Indirectness and politeness

In pragmatic theories indirectness is often associated with politeness (e. g. Brown and
Levinson 1987; Grice 1975; Leech 1983). This link is often claimed to be universal
(Blum-Kulka and Olshtain 1984). Nonetheless, research on non-English languages has
provided contrary evidence (e.g. Byon 2006; Hassall 1999; Lee-Wong 1994;
Matsumoto 1988; Ogiermann 2009; Rue and Zhang 2008; Upadhyay 2003; Vu 1997;
1999; Wierzbicka 1985; Yu 2011). Findings from the present study add further evidence
that perceptions of this link are coloured by cultural norms and expectations. Thus, the
indirectness-politeness association must be interpreted from a language and culture
specific perspective.
The participants of the present study demonstrated a strong preference for
directness, particularly imperatives when making requests (see also requests in Chinese,
Korean, Russian and Polish in Byon 2006; Hassall 1999; Lee-Wong 1994; Matsumoto
1988; Ogiermann 2009; Upadhyay 2003; Vu 1997; 1999; Wierzbicka 1985). These
findings were congruent with those from Vu (1997, 1999), suggesting that imperatives
do not necessarily imply impoliteness in Vietnamese. Indeed, when asked, 76.7% of the
Vietnamese respondents in Vu’s (1997, 1999) studies did not consider barely mitigated
imperatives inappropriate while 64% deemed mitigated ‘imperatives’ to be polite.
The above findings may be explained by that Vietnamese verbal interaction
tends to prefer ‘involvement’ and ‘sincerity’ over personal space. For example, Vu

Rather, it would be more plausible to link it to the lack of an individualistic orientation in the Vietnamese
culture where perhaps personal space is the least important concern and in contrast values such as ‘bond’,
‘intimacy’, ‘interdependence’ and ‘involvement’ are more emphasized (see Tran 1995, 2001).
 Requests and politeness in Vietnamese as a native language 705

(1999: 41) has pointed out that in Vietnamese an invitation that implies a high level of
obligation such as ‘Bà phải ở đây chơi đến tối đã’ (literally translated as ‘You must stay
to be my guest til the end of the day’) can be even more polite than one with a lower
level of obligation such as ‘Sao bà không ở đây chơi đến tối đã?’ (literally translated as
‘Why don’t you stay to be my guest til the end of the day?’) because the former
expresses the speaker’s care and sincerity to a greater extent than the latter.
The present study also found power effects on the participants’ requesting
behavior. That is direct requests were used more often in equal power relationships
whereas indirect requests were used more often in lower-to-higher power scenarios.
This difference seems to exemplify the two aspects of ‘respectful politeness’ (‘lịch sự lễ
độ’) in Vietnamese: ‘respectfulness’ (‘lễ phép’) and ‘propriety’ (‘đúng mực’). A speaker
of Vietnamese has to make a choice between these two aspects depending on the
relationship with their interlocutor. ‘Respectfulness’ is enacted to show respect to
people of higher power. ‘Propriety’ is exercised to show proper respect to people of
equal and lower power.
Related to this finding, however, there exist certain differences between the
present study and Vu (1997, 1999). That is the participants in this study used
imperatives much less frequently than those in Vu (1997, 1999) (cf. 33.5% vs. 90%),
particularly in lower-to-higher power social relationships. Presumably, this could be
explained by the differences in data collection methods and participants of the two
studies. While this study employed role-plays, the other one collected naturally
occurring data. The participants of this study were more homogenous in terms of age,
gender and education background. They were all young people studying English. Their
foreign language acquisition and exposure to another culture may have influenced their
pragmatic behaviour. On the other hand, Vu’s (ibid.) participants were more
heterogeneous, hence being more representative of the Vietnamese population.
Overall, on the basis of the above discussion, it is apparent that pragmatic
perceptions and performance are affected by not only inter-cultural but also intra-
cultural (situational and individual) variability. Therefore, for effective communication
an understanding of both pragmatic universals and pragmatic variability at different
levels is equally important.

6. Conclusion

The present study offers some implications for cross-cultural communication between
Vietnamese people and speakers of other languages as well as the teaching and learning
of Vietnamese as a heritage and second/ foreign language. Unlike native speakers of
some European languages such as English and German (see House and Kasper 1987),
native speakers of Vietnamese tend to prefer a high level of directness in making
requests and rely more considerably on supportive elements with politeness effects such
as address terms, honorifics and modal particles rather than on indirectness for
expressing politeness. Therefore, speakers of Vietnamese as second language should be
made aware of these politeness strategies so that they can make informed pragmatic
decisions that do not break down communication while allowing them to maintain their
cultural identities. The present study also adds further evidence to support Vu’s claim
that besides ‘strategic politeness’ that allows the speaker’s intention to influence his or
706 Thi Thuy Minh Nguyen and Gia Anh Le Ho

her linguistic behavior, ‘respectful politeness’ that requires the speaker to conform to
socially accepted behaviors is another important feature characteristic of Vietnamese
pragmatics. Pragmatic instruction, therefore, may focus on this culture-specific aspect
of politeness, which may pose challenges to learners, particularly those from an English
speaking background.
The first limitation of the present study lies in the use of elicited rather than
naturally occurring data. Although role-play data involve extended and real time
discourse and therefore, share many similarities with authentic discourse, they are not
shortcoming-free. Role plays are pretence without real consequences for the participants
and hence, their use must be cautioned in research. Future research making use of
authentic discourse, therefore, would be desirable. This is because recently there has
been a call for a move away from speech act coding of elicted data and greater reliance
on authentic data and conversation analytic method of data analysis (Kasper 2006).
Another limitation includes a small, non-randomized, gender-biased and
homogeneous sample size. To enhance the representativeness of the data, future
research should recruit a larger gender-mixed group of participants from various socio-
economic backgrounds and age groups who speak different dialects of Vietnamese.
Future research may also benefit from an analysis of gender and age effects on
requestive behaviour in different Vietnamese dialects.

Appendix A ROLE PLAY CARDS FOR PARTICIPANTS

English translation

INSTRUCTION SHEET FOR PARTICIPANTS

You will talk with the researcher in the following role-play scenarios. Use Vietnamese when you talk.
Take some minutes to read the descriptions of the scenarios. There are two questions for each scenario
that you need to answer before role-playing. Try to imagine yourself in the scenarios and respond to them
as you would do in the real life.

It is important that you understand these scenarios completely, so before you start you are encouraged to
ask questions if you find something you do not understand.

Your role-play conversations will be tape-recorded with your consent. Thank you for your cooperation.

Scenario 1:

You are typing up a three-page essay for your lecturer. It is due today. You have just finished the first
paragraph when suddenly, your computer stops working. You see your flatmate chatting online at the
moment. You two are good friends. So you ask her to lend you her computer so that you can finish your
work. It is important that you get her to agree to lend you the computer.

Question 1: Can you imagine yourself in this situation?

Circle the score that best fits you.
1 2 3 4 5
Definitely NO Definitely YES
 Requests and politeness in Vietnamese as a native language 707

Question 2: How much pressure do you think your request might exert on your friend to say
"Yes"?
Circle the score that best fits you.
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very much
Now start your role-play in Vietnamese. The researcher will be your flatmate.

Scenario 2:

You were sick and missed an important class last week. Now you are reading the class materials but it is
difficult to understand them by yourself. Luckily, your friend attended the class and took careful notes.
You two are good friends. So you believe she would not mind lending you her notes. You approach your
friend and ask for the favour. It is important that you get her to agree to lend you the notes.

Question 1: Can you imagine yourself in this situation?

Circle the score that best fits you.
1 2 3 4 5
Definitely NO Definitely YES

Question 2: How much pressure do you think your request might exert on your friend to say
"Yes"?
Circle the score that best fits you.
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very much
Now start your role-play in Vietnamese. The researcher will be your flatmate.

Scenario 3:

You have to return a book to the library by today. You were still using it until last night. You go to school
only on the day you have a class because you live quite far. Today you do not have a class. Your flatmate
is having a class this morning, so you ask her to drop the book for you. It is important that you get her
to agree to help you. You two are good friends.
Question 1: Can you imagine yourself in this situation?

Circle the score that best fits you.

1 2 3 4 5
Definitely NO Definitely YES

Question 2: How much pressure do you think your request might exert on your friend to say
"Yes"?
Circle the score that best fits you.
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very much
Now start your role-play in Vietnamese. The researcher will be your flatmate.

Scenario 4:

You have just learned about a scholarship, which you would like to apply for. You need a reference letter
from your lecturer urgently because the application closes in a few days' time. There is a lecturer who has
been teaching you for quite a few semesters and you have always been one of the best students in her
class. You know she is very busy but believe she would be supportive enough to write you a reference
letter. So after class you approach her and ask for the favour. You really want the scholarship so it is
important that you get her to agree to help you.

Question 1: Can you imagine yourself in this situation?

Circle the score that best fits you.
708 Thi Thuy Minh Nguyen and Gia Anh Le Ho

1 2 3 4 5
Definitely NO Definitely YES

Question 2: How much pressure do you think your request might exert on your friend to say
"Yes"?
Circle the score that best fits you.
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very much
Now start your role-play in Vietnamese. The researcher will be your flatmate.

Scenario 5:

You are writing your thesis. You are having a meeting with your supervisor today and you are supposed
to give her a chapter draft. However, last week you were sick and not able to complete the chapter. You
would need some more time. At the meeting you ask your supervisor for an extension. You want to have
her feedback as soon as possible so you will try to finish the chapter in the soonest time possible. It is
important that you get her to agree to give you the extension.

Question 1: Can you imagine yourself in this situation?

Circle the score that best fits you.
1 2 3 4 5
Definitely NO Definitely YES

Question 2: How much pressure do you think your request might exert on your friend to say
"Yes"?
Circle the score that best fits you.
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very much
Now start your role-play in Vietnamese. The researcher will be your flatmate.

Scenario 6:

Today is Monday. You have had an appointment with your supervisor at 10:30 a.m. Friday this week.
You want to show her your revised thesis. However, another lecturer wants to make up for his missed
class last week and unluckily, 10-12 a.m. this Friday is the only time slot that is suited to most students in
the class. You do not want to miss this class because it is going to cover a difficult and important topic.
So you drop in your supervisor's office and ask if she can move the appointment to another date or time.
It is important that you get your supervisor to agree to see you as soon as she can because the
deadline for submission of your thesis is coming in a few weeks’ time.

Question 1: Can you imagine yourself in this situation?

Circle the score that best fits you.
1 2 3 4 5
Definitely NO Definitely YES

Question 2: How much pressure do you think your request might exert on your friend to say
"Yes"?
Circle the score that best fits you.
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very much
Now start your role-play in Vietnamese. The researcher will be your flatmate.
 Requests and politeness in Vietnamese as a native language 709

Appendix B: ROLE PLAY CARDS FOR INTERLOCUTOR

English translation

INSTRUCTION SHEET FOR INTERLOCUTOR:

You will converse in Vietnamese with each student in six role-play situations, which are described in
each card. Read the descriptions of the situations carefully and act accordingly.
It is important that you understand the situations completely; therefore, you are encouraged to ask
questions if you find something you do not understand.

Your conversations with the students will be tape-recorded with your consent for the purpose of the study.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Scenario 1:

Your flatmate is typing a three-page essay for her/ his lecturer. Suddenly her/ his computer stops working
and s/he asks you to lend her/ him your computer. You are chatting online with your boyfriend, who is in
another town at the moment. Today is your boyfriend's birthday. But if it is urgent and your friend is not
going to use the computer for an hour, you are willing to lend it to her/ him. You two are good friends.

Scenario 2:

Your friend was sick and missed an important class last week. You attended the class and took careful
notes. So s/he approaches you and asks if you mind lending her/ him your notes. You are working on
your assignments right now and need the notes at hand. However, if s/he can make a quick photocopy and
give you back within an hour, you are willing to lend her/ him the notes. You two are good friends.

Scenario 3:

Your flatmate has a book to return to the library. You are going to school today. So your flatmate asks
you to drop the book for her. You are having a class from 9am to 12pm in a building quite far from the
library. After that you have a part-time job on another campus. Your job starts at 12:30pm, so you will be
in a hurry. But if the book is due today, you can go to school some minutes earlier and drop the book for
your flatmate first thing in the morning.

Scenario 4:

You are a university lecturer. A student in your class is applying for a scholarship and wants you to write
her/ him a reference letter. You have been teaching this student for quite a few semesters and know s/he is
one of your best students. You would be happy to write her/ him a reference letter but you are having
some deadlines at the moment. So if it is not urgent, you will write it next week.

Scenario 5:

You are a university lecturer and supervising a student’s thesis. The student that you are supervising is
supposed to submit a chapter draft to you when you two have a meeting today. However, s/he was sick
and not able to complete it. At the meeting s/he asks for an extension. You can give her/ him as much
time as s/he needs. However, you are taking a sabbatical leave in two weeks’ time. If s/he can give you
the chapter within the next week, you can read it and give your comments before you go. If not, it may
take a longer while for you to get back to her/ him because you have other commitments.

Scenario 6:
710 Thi Thuy Minh Nguyen and Gia Anh Le Ho

You are a university lecturer. You have an appointment with your student at 10:30 a.m. Friday this week.
S/he wants to show you her/ his revised thesis. You are her/ his supervisor. However, today s/he drops in
your office and asks if you can move the appointment to another date or time because s/he has an urgent
class. You are fully booked until two weeks after but if the student can come after your office hour
tomorrow, you are willing to see her/ him then.

References

Al-Gahtani, Sadd, and Carsten Röver (2012) Proficiency and sequential organization of L2 requests.
Applied Linguistics 33: 42-65.

Arundale, Robert (2006) Face as relational and interactional: A communication framework for research
on face, facework, and politeness. Journal of Politeness Research 2: 193-216.

Barron, Anne (2008) Contrasting requests in Inner Circle Englishes. A study in variational pragmatics. In
M. Puetz, and J. Neff van Aertselaer (eds.), Developing contrastive pragmatics: Interlanguage and cross-
cultural perspectives. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp.355-402.

Biesenbach-Lucas, Sigrun (2007) Students writing emails to faculty: An examination of e-politeness

among native and non-native speakers of English. Language learning and Technology 11: 59-81.

Billmyer, Kristine, and Manka Varghese (2000) Investigating instrument-based pragmatic variability:
Effects of enhancing discourse completion tests. Applied Linguistics 21: 517-552.

Blum-Kulka, Shoshana (1987) Indirectness and politeness in requests: Same or different? Journal of
Pragmatics 11: 131-146.

Blum-Kulka, Shoshana, and Elite Olshtain (1984) Requests and apologies: A cross-cultural study of
speech act realisation patterns (CCSARP). Applied Linguistics 5: 196-213.

Blum-Kulka, Shoshana, Juliane House, and Gabriele Kasper (1989) Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests
and apologies. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex.

Bonikowska, Malgorzata (1988) The choice of opting out. Applied Linguistics 9: 169- 181.

Brown, Penelope, and Stephen Levinson (1978) Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. In
E. Goody (ed.), Questions and politeness. Strategies in social interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, pp. 56-289.

Brown, Penelope, and Stephen Levinson (1987) Politeness: Some universals in language usage.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Byon, Andrew Sangpil (2006) The role of linguistic indirectness and honorifics in achieving linguistic
politeness in Korean requests. Journal of Politeness Research 2: 247-276.

Chen, Chi-Fen Emily (2006) The development of e-mail literacy: From writing to peers to writing to
authority figures. Language Learning & Technology 10: 35-55.

Chew, Grace (2011) Politeness in Vietnamese. In D. Kádár, and S. Mills (eds.), Politeness in East Asia.
New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 208-225.
 Requests and politeness in Vietnamese as a native language 711

Cohen, Andrew, and Rachel Shively (2007) Acquisition of requests and apologies in Spanish and French:
Impact of study abroad and strategy building intervention. The Modern Language Journal 91: 189–212.

Félix-Brasdefer, César (2007) Pragmatic development in the Spanish as a FL classroom: A cross-

sectional study of learner requests. Intercultural Pragmatics 4: 253–286.

Grice, Paul (1975) Logic and conversation. In P. Cole, and J. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and semantics Vol. 3:
Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press, pp. 41-58.

Gu, Yueguo (1990) Politeness phenomena in modern Chinese. Pragmatics 14: 237-257.

Hassall, Timothy (1999) Request strategies in Indonesian. Pragmatics 9: 585-606.

Hassall, Timothy (2003) Requests by Australian learners of Indonesian. Journal of Pragmatics 35: 1903-
1928.

Hendriks, Berna (2008) Dutch English requests: A study of request performance by Dutch learners of
English. In M. Puetz, and J. Neff van Aertselaer (eds.), Developing contrastive pragmatics:
Interlanguage and cross-cultural perspectives. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 335–354.

Hill, Beverly, Sachiko Ide, Shoko Ikuta, Akiko Kawasaki, and Tsunao Ogino (1986) Universals of
linguistic politeness: Quantitative evidence from Japanese and American English. Journal of Pragmatics
10: 347-471.

House, Juliane, and Gabriele Kasper (1987) Interlanguage pragmatics: Requesting in a foreign language.
In W. Lörscher, and R. Schulze (eds.), Perspectives on language in performance. Tübingen: Narr, pp.
1250-1288.

Ide, Sachiko (1989) Formal forms and discernment: Two neglected aspects of universals of linguistic
politeness. Multilingua 8: 223-248.

Kasper, Gabriele (1981) Pragmatische Aspekte in der Interimsprache. Tubingen: Narr.

Kasper, Gabriele (2006) Speech acts in interaction: Towards discursive pragmatics. In K. Bardovi-Harlig,
J.C. Felix-Brasdefer, and A. Omar (eds.), Pragmatics and Language Learning (vol. 11). Honolulu, HI:
National Foreign Language Resource Center, University of Hawaii at Manoa, pp. 281–314.

Kasper, Gabriele (2008) Data collection in pragmatic research. In H. Spencer-Oatey (ed.), Culturally
Speaking: Culture, Communication and Politeness Theory (2nd revised edition). New York: Continuum,
pp. 279-303.

Kasper, Gabriele, and Kenneth Rose (2002) Pragmatic development in a second language. Oxford:
Blackwell.

Leech, Geoffrey (1983) Principles of Pragmatics. New York: Longman.

Lee-Wong, Song Mei (1994) Imperatives in requests: Direct or impolite – Observations from Chinese.
Pragmatics 4: 491-515.

Matsumoto, Yoshiko (1988) Reexamination of the universality of face. Journal of Pragmatics 12: 403-
426.

Mao, Luming (1994) Beyond politeness theory: ‘Face’ revisited and renewed. Journal of Pragmatics 21:
451-486.

Mills, Margaret (1992) Conventionalized politeness in Russian requests: A pragmatic view of indirectness.
Russian Linguistics 16: 65-78.
712 Thi Thuy Minh Nguyen and Gia Anh Le Ho

Nguyen, Thi Thuy Minh (2008) Modifying L2 criticisms: How learners do it? Journal of Pragmatics 40:
768-791.

Nguyen, Thi Thuy Minh (2011) Learning to communicate in a globalized world: To what extent do
school textbooks facilitate the development of intercultural pragmatic competence? RELC Journal 42:
17-30.

Ogiermann, Eva (2009) Politeness and indirectness across cultures: A comparison of English, German,
Polish and Russian requests. Journal of Politeness Research 5: 189-216.

Okada, Ysuke (2010) Role play in oral proficiency interviews: Interactive footing and interactional
competencies. Journal of Pragmatics 42: 1647–1668.

Otcu, Bahae, and Deniz Zeyrek (2006) Requesting in L2: Pragmatic development of Turkish learners of
English. In Series A: General & Theoretical Papers, LAUD 2006. Essen: Universitat Duisburg-Essen.

Otcu, Bahae, and Deniz Zeyrek (2008) Development of requests: A study on Turkish learners of English.
In M. Puetz, and J. Neff van Aertselaer (eds.), Developing contrastive pragmatics: Interlanguage and
crosscultural perspectives Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 265–300.

Pham, Thi hong Nhung (2008) Vietnamese politeness in Vietnamese-Anglo culturalinteractions.

Unpublished Ph.D. thesis. Queensland: The University of Queensland.

Pham, Thi Thanh (1995) Nghi thức lời nói tiếng Việt hiện đại qua các phát ngôn chào, cảm ơn, xin lỗi
[Rituals in modern Vietnamese speech acts: Greetings, thanking, apologizing]. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis.
Hà Nội: Đại học Khoa học Xã hội và Nhân văn.

Pham, Van Bich (1999) The Vietnamese family in change. Richmond: Curzon Press.

Rue, Yongju, and Grace Zhang (2008) Request strategies: A comparative study in Mandarin Chinese and
Korean. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Schauer, Gilla (2007) Finding the right words in the study abroad context: The development of German
learners’ use of external modifiers in English. Intercultural Pragmatics 4: 193–220.

Schauer, Gilla (2008) Getting better in getting what you want: Language learners’ pragmatic development
in requests during study abroad sojourns. In M. Puetz, and J. Neff van Aertselaer (eds.), Developing
contrastive pragmatics: Interlanguage and cross-cultural perspectives. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter,
pp.399-426.

Schauer, Gilla (2009) Interlanguage pragmatic development. The study abroad context. London:
Continuum.

Searle, John (1969) Speech acts – An essay in the philosophy of language. London: Cambridge University
Press.

Searle, John (1975) Indirect speech acts. In P. Cole, and J. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and semantics 3: Speech
acts. New York: Academic Press.

Shively, Rachel (2011) L2 pragmatic development in study abroad: A longitudinal study of Spanish
service encounters. Journal of Pragmatics 43: 1818-1835.

Takahashi, Satomi (1996) Pragmatic transferability. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 18: 189-223.

Taleghani-Nikazm, Carmen (2005) Contingent requests: Their sequential organization and turn shape.
Research on Language and Social Interaction 38: 159–177.
 Requests and politeness in Vietnamese as a native language 713

Taleghani-Nikazm, Carmen (2006) Request Sequences: The Intersection of Grammar, Interaction and
Social Context. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Taleghani-Nikazm, Carmen, and Thorsten Huth (2010) L2 requests: Preference structure in talk-in-
interaction. Multilingua 29: 185-202.

Tran, Ngoc Them (1995) Cơ sở văn hóa Việt Nam. TP Hồ Chí Minh: Trường ĐH Tổng hợp TP Hồ Chí
Minh.

Tran, Ngoc Them (2001) Tìm về bản sắc văn hóa Việt Nam. TP Hồ Chí Minh: NXB TP Hồ Chí Minh.

Trosborg, Anna (1995) Interlanguage Pragmatics: Requests, Complaints, and Apologies. Berlin: Mouton
de Gruyter.

Upadhyay, Shiv (2003) Nepali requestive acts: Linguistic indirectness and politeness reconsidered.
Journal of Pragmatics 35: 1651-1677.

Vu, Thi Thanh Huong (1997) Politeness in modern Vietnamese. A sociolinguistic study of a Hanoi
speech community. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Toronto: University of Toronto.

Vu, Thi Thanh Huong (1999) Gián tiếp và lịch sự trong lời cầu khẩn tiếng Việt. Ngôn ngữ 1: 34-43.

Wierzbicka, Anna (1985) Different cultures, different languages, different speech acts. Polish vs. English.
Journal of Pragmatics 9: 145-178.

Woodfield, Helen (2008) Interlanguage requests: A contrastive study. In M. Puetz, and J. Neff van
Aertselaer (eds.), Developing contrastive pragmatics: Interlanguage and cross-cultural perspectives .
Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 231-264.

Yu, Kyong-Ae (2011) Culture-specific concepts of politeness: Indirectness and politeness in English,
Hebrew and Korean requests. Intercultural Pragmatics 8.3: 385-409.

NGUYEN THI THUY MINH is an assistant professor at National Institute of Education, Nanyang
Technological University, Singapore. Her research interests are in pragmatics and language learning,
language pedagogy and language teacher education. She has published in Journal of Pragmatics,
Intercultural Pragmatics, Language Awareness, Multilingua, RELC Journal of Language Teaching and
Research and elsewhere. Her recent book is titled Learning to give and respond to peer-feedback in the
L2: A case of EFL criticisms and responses to criticisms (Lincom Europa, Germany) and recent book
chapters appear in TESOL Classroom Practices series (published by TESOL Inc, VA), Pragmatics and
Language Learning Vol 13 and Pragmatics of Vietnamese as a native and target language (both are
published by National Foreign Language Resource Center, University of Hawai’i).
Address: National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
Corresponding address: 1 Nanyang Walk, Singapore 637616; e-mail: [email protected];
[email protected]
714 Thi Thuy Minh Nguyen and Gia Anh Le Ho

HO GIA ANH LE teaches Vietnamese at the National University of Singapore (NUS). She has received
two Teaching Excellence Awards from the Centre for Language Studies, NUS. Her areas of research
include the use of blogging and social media in pedagogy, second language curriculum development,
Vietnamese pragmatics, second language acquisition, and the characteristics of advanced language
learners. Her forthcoming publication entitled “Apologizing in Vietnamese as a native and target
language” will appear in the edited volume Pragmatics of Vietnamese as a native and target language, to
be published by National Foreign Language Resource Center, University of Hawai’i.
Address: National University of Singapore, Centre for Language Studies, Block AS4 # 05-17, 9 Arts Link,
Singapore, 117570; e-mail: [email protected]