Thực Hiện Hành Động Từ Chối Trong Tiếng Ả Rập Ai Cập Bởi Người Học Tiếng Ả Rập

Nghiên cứu hành động từ chối trong tiếng Ả Rập Ai Cập, khám phá cách thức và ngữ cảnh thực hiện từ chối trong giao tiếp hàng ngày.

Trường đại học

University of South Florida

Chuyên ngành

American Studies

Người đăng

Ẩn danh

Thể loại

dissertation

2009

408
1
0

Phí lưu trữ

75 Point

Mục lục chi tiết

List of Tables

List of Figures

Abstract

1. Chapter One: Introduction

1.1. Speech Act Research

1.2. Arabic Speech Act Studies

1.3. Rationale and Statement of the Problem

1.4. Purpose of the Study and Research Questions

1.5. Design of the Study: Data Collection and Analysis

1.6. Significance of the Study

1.7. Delimitations and Limitations of the Study

1.8. Organization of the Dissertation

1.9. Definition of Terms

2. Chapter Two: Literature Review

2.1. Introduction

2.2. Speech Act Theory

2.3. Communicative Competence

2.4. Pragmatic Competence

2.5. Pragmatic Transfer

2.6. Politeness

2.7. Brown and Levinson’s Theory of Politeness

2.8. Speech Act Research

2.9. Arabic Speech Act Studies

2.10. Arabic Refusal Studies

2.11. Other Relevant Refusal Studies

2.12. Data Collection Methods in Speech Act Research

2.12.1. Observation of Authentic Speech

2.12.2. Discourse Completion Task/Test (DCT)

2.12.3. Role Plays

2.13. Chapter Summary

3. Chapter Three: Research Method

3.1. Introduction

3.2. Participants

3.2.1. American Learners of Arabic

3.2.2. Native Speakers of American English

3.2.3. Native Speakers of Egyptian Arabic

3.3. Data Collection Instrument

3.3.1. Enhanced Open-Ended Role Plays

3.3.2. Design of the Role Plays

3.3.3. Role Plays and the Pilot Study

3.3.4. Translating the Role Plays

3.3.5. Background Questionnaires

3.3.6. Equipment, Props, and Space

3.4. Data Collection Procedures

3.5. Determining the Arabic Proficiency of the American Learners

3.6. Conducting the Role Plays

3.6.1. American Learners of Arabic

3.6.2. Native Speakers of American English

3.6.3. Native Speakers of Egyptian Arabic

3.7. Data Analysis

3.7.1. Introduction

3.7.2. Quantitative Analysis

3.7.3. Qualitative Analysis

3.7.4. Answering the Research Questions

3.7.5. Data Transcription and Coding

3.7.6. Classification Scheme of Refusal Strategies

3.7.6.1. Direct Refusals
3.7.6.2. Indirect Refusals
3.7.6.3. Adjuncts to Refusals

3.8. Pilot Study

3.8.1. Participants

3.8.2. Elicitation Instrument

3.8.3. Data Collection Procedures

3.8.4. Data Analysis Procedures

3.9. Chapter Summary

4. Chapter Four: Results

4.1. Quantitative Findings

4.2. Total Number of Words

4.3. Number of Turns and Turn length

4.4. Strategy Use by Role Play

4.5. Role Play 1

4.6. Role Play 2

4.7. Role Play 3

4.8. Role Play 4

4.9. Role Play 5

4.10. Role Play 6

4.11. Direct Strategies

4.11.1. Direct Strategies by Role Play

4.11.2. Direct Strategies by Status

4.11.3. Flat No

4.11.4. Flat No by Role Play

4.11.5. Flat No by Status

4.12. Indirect Strategies

4.12.1. Indirect Strategies by Role Play

4.12.2. Indirect Strategies by Status

4.12.3. Selected Indirect Strategies by Status

4.12.4. Indirect Strategies by Refusal Type

4.13. Adjuncts to Refusal

4.13.1. Adjuncts to Refusal by Status

4.13.2. Adjuncts to Refusal by Refusal Type

4.14. Qualitative Findings

4.14.1. Content of Excuses and Reasons

4.14.2. Role Play 1

4.14.3. Role Play 2

4.14.4. Role Play 3

4.14.5. Role Play 4

4.14.6. Role Play 5

4.14.7. Role Play 6

4.14.8. Refusal Stages I & II

4.14.9. Role Play 1

4.14.10. Role Play 2

4.14.11. Role Play 3

4.14.12. Role Play 4

4.14.13. Role Play 5

4.14.14. Role Play 6

4.14.15. Discourse Analysis of Selected Interactions

4.14.16. Strategy Selection

4.14.17. Individual Differences

4.14.18. Language Proficiency and Pragmatic Competence

4.14.19. Direct and Indirect Strategies in Higher Status Situations

5. Chapter Five: Discussion

5.1. Discussion of Quantitative Findings

5.2. Total Number of Words

5.3. Number of Turns and Turn Length

5.4. Strategy Use

5.5. Strategy Use and Language Proficiency

5.6. Frequency of Strategies and Strategy Selection

5.7. Direct Strategies

5.8. Indirect Strategies

5.9. Adjuncts to Refusal

5.10. Discussion of Qualitative Findings

5.11. Types of Excuses

5.12. Stages of Refusal

5.13. Discussion of Findings from the Selected Interactions

5.14. Strategy Selection

5.15. Individual Differences

5.16. Language Proficiency and Pragmatic Competence

5.17. Direct and Indirect Strategies in Higher Status Situations

5.18. Research Question I: Discussion of Findings

5.18.1. Discussion of Quantitative Findings

5.18.2. Discussion of Qualitative Findings

5.19. Research Question II: Discussion of Findings

5.19.1. Discussion of Quantitative Findings

5.19.2. Discussion of Qualitative Findings

5.20. Comparing the Findings of the Study to Other Refusal Study

5.21. Comparing the Findings of the Study to Arabic Refusal Studies

5.22. Pedagogical Implications

5.23. Directions for Future Research

References

Appendices

Appendix A: Background Questionnaire A

Appendix B: Background Questionnaire B

Appendix C: Background Questionnaire C

Appendix D: Background Questionnaire C (Arabic Version)

Appendix E: Enhanced Open-Ended Role Plays

Appendix F: Enhanced Open-Ended Role Plays (Arabic Version)

Appendix G: Role Play Evaluation

Appendix H: Consent Form

Appendix I: Number of Words, Turns, and Turn Length: NNSI Group

Appendix J: Number of Words, Turns, and Turn Length: NNSA Group

Appendix K: Number of Words, Turns, and Turn Length: NSA Group

Appendix L: Number of Words, Turns, and Turn Length: NSE Group

Appendix M: Overall Strategy Use by Group: Role Play 1

Appendix N: Overall Strategy Use by Group: Role Play 2

Appendix O: Overall Strategy Use by Group: Role Play 3

Appendix P: Overall Strategy Use by Group: Role Play 4

Appendix Q: Overall Strategy Use by Group: Role Play 5

Appendix R: Overall Strategy Use by Group: Role Play 6

Appendix S: Participants’ Demographic Information: NNSI Group

Appendix T: Participants’ Demographic Information: NNSA Group

Appendix U: Participants’ Demographic Information: NSA Group

Appendix V: Participants’ Demographic Information: NSE Group

About the Author

Tóm tắt

I. Khám Phá Hành Động Từ Chối Trong Tiếng Ả Rập Ai Cập

Hành động từ chối là một phần quan trọng trong giao tiếp hàng ngày. Trong tiếng Ả Rập Ai Cập, cách thể hiện hành động này có nhiều sắc thái và phong cách khác nhau. Việc hiểu rõ về cách diễn đạt từ chối không chỉ giúp người học ngôn ngữ mà còn giúp họ giao tiếp hiệu quả hơn trong các tình huống xã hội.

1.1. Tổng Quan Về Hành Động Từ Chối

Hành động từ chối trong tiếng Ả Rập Ai Cập không chỉ đơn thuần là nói 'không'. Nó bao gồm nhiều cách diễn đạt khác nhau, từ trực tiếp đến gián tiếp, và phụ thuộc vào ngữ cảnh giao tiếp.

1.2. Ý Nghĩa Của Hành Động Từ Chối

Ngữ nghĩa của từ chối trong tiếng Ả Rập Ai Cập có thể thay đổi tùy thuộc vào tình huống. Việc hiểu rõ ngữ nghĩa này giúp người học tránh được những hiểu lầm trong giao tiếp.

II. Những Thách Thức Khi Thể Hiện Hành Động Từ Chối

Người học tiếng Ả Rập Ai Cập thường gặp khó khăn trong việc thể hiện hành động từ chối một cách tự nhiên. Những thách thức này có thể đến từ sự khác biệt văn hóa và ngữ pháp giữa tiếng mẹ đẻ và tiếng Ả Rập.

2.1. Khác Biệt Văn Hóa

Sự khác biệt trong cách thể hiện hành động từ chối giữa các nền văn hóa có thể dẫn đến hiểu lầm. Người học cần nhận thức rõ về các quy tắc xã hội trong văn hóa Ả Rập.

2.2. Ngữ Pháp Và Cách Diễn Đạt

Ngữ pháp tiếng Ả Rập có những quy tắc riêng biệt mà người học cần nắm vững để diễn đạt hành động từ chối một cách chính xác và tự nhiên.

III. Phương Pháp Thể Hiện Hành Động Từ Chối Hiệu Quả

Có nhiều phương pháp để thể hiện hành động từ chối trong tiếng Ả Rập Ai Cập. Việc lựa chọn phương pháp phù hợp sẽ giúp người học giao tiếp hiệu quả hơn.

3.1. Sử Dụng Câu Trực Tiếp

Cách diễn đạt trực tiếp là một trong những phương pháp phổ biến nhất. Người học cần biết cách sử dụng các cụm từ từ chối một cách tự nhiên.

3.2. Cách Diễn Đạt Gián Tiếp

Diễn đạt gián tiếp có thể giúp giảm thiểu sự thô lỗ trong giao tiếp. Người học nên tìm hiểu các cách diễn đạt này để sử dụng trong các tình huống nhạy cảm.

IV. Ứng Dụng Thực Tiễn Của Hành Động Từ Chối

Việc hiểu và áp dụng hành động từ chối trong tiếng Ả Rập Ai Cập có thể mang lại nhiều lợi ích trong giao tiếp hàng ngày. Điều này không chỉ giúp người học tự tin hơn mà còn cải thiện mối quan hệ xã hội.

4.1. Giao Tiếp Trong Công Việc

Trong môi trường làm việc, việc từ chối một cách khéo léo có thể giúp duy trì mối quan hệ tốt với đồng nghiệp và cấp trên.

4.2. Giao Tiếp Trong Cuộc Sống Hàng Ngày

Trong cuộc sống hàng ngày, việc biết cách từ chối một cách lịch sự sẽ giúp người học tránh được những tình huống khó xử.

V. Kết Luận Về Hành Động Từ Chối Trong Tiếng Ả Rập Ai Cập

Hành động từ chối trong tiếng Ả Rập Ai Cập là một khía cạnh quan trọng trong giao tiếp. Việc nắm vững cách thể hiện hành động này sẽ giúp người học giao tiếp hiệu quả hơn và hòa nhập tốt hơn vào văn hóa Ả Rập.

5.1. Tương Lai Của Nghiên Cứu Về Hành Động Từ Chối

Nghiên cứu về hành động từ chối trong tiếng Ả Rập Ai Cập cần được mở rộng để giúp người học hiểu rõ hơn về ngữ cảnh và cách sử dụng.

5.2. Khuyến Khích Nghiên Cứu Thêm

Khuyến khích các nghiên cứu tiếp theo để tìm hiểu sâu hơn về các chiến lược từ chối trong các ngữ cảnh khác nhau.

25/07/2025

Trích đoạn nội dung tài liệu

University of South Florida Scholar Commons Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate School 2009 The realization of the speech act of refusal in Egyptian Arabic by American learners of Arabic as a foreign language Nader Morkus University of South Florida Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarcommons.edu/etd Part of the American Studies Commons Scholar Commons Citation Morkus, Nader, "The realization of the speech act of refusal in Egyptian Arabic by American learners of Arabic as a foreign language" (2009). Graduate Theses and Dissertations.edu/etd/2114 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact scholarcommons@usf.

The Realization of the Speech Act of Refusal in Egyptian Arabic by American Learners of Arabic as a Foreign Language Nader Morkus A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Secondary Education College of Education and Department of World Language Education College of Arts and Sciences University of South Florida Major Professor: Camilla Vasquez, Ph. Wei Zhu, Ph. Marcela van Olphen, Ph. Usama Soltan, Ph.

Date of Approval: November 13, 2009 Keywords: pragmatic competence, pragmatic transfer, role plays, politeness, cross- cultural communication © Copyright 2009, Nader Morkus To my parents and to Laura with love Acknowledgements I would like to express my genuine gratitude and sincere appreciation to my major professor, Dr. Camilla Vasquez, for her unyielding support, timely guidance, generosity with her time, and constant encouragement. I appreciate her graciousness and patience, and I admire her commitment to academic excellence and her impressive knowledge of the field. I also would like to express my heart-felt gratitude and appreciation to my committee members, Dr.

Wei Zhu, Dr. Marcela van Olphen, and Dr. Usama Soltan for their valuable advice, enlightening comments, and encouraging words. I also would like to express my sincere gratitude to Maria Paul for encouraging me to finish my dissertation, and for always getting out of her way to help me.

I am very grateful to Dr. Mahmoud Abdalla, the Director of the Arabic School of Middlebury College, for being extraordinarily helpful in facilitating my data collection at the Arabic School, and for being exceptionally supportive and encouraging. I am also very thankful to Robert Wright for his invaluable assistance in data collection. I would like to express my thanks, too, to my colleagues at the Arabic School for their invaluable help in facilitating my data collection, and for their encouragement and good wishes.

I am also very grateful to Dr. Larry Yarbrough for his encouragement and unfailing support, as well as for his kindness and graciousness. I am very thankful to my cousin, Joseph, for his invaluable assistance in facilitating my data collection in Jersey City, New Jersey. Last but not least, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to all the Americans and Egyptians who participated in the study.

Table of Contents List of Tables ix List of Figures x Abstract xii Chapter One: Introduction 1 Speech Act Research 3 Arabic Speech Act Studies 6 Rationale and Statement of the Problem 7 Purpose of the Study and Research Questions 10 Design of the Study: Data Collection and Analysis 12 Significance of the Study 13 Delimitations and Limitations of the Study 14 Organization of the Dissertation 15 Definition of Terms 17 Chapter Two: Literature Review 23 Introduction 23 Speech Act Theory 24 Communicative Competence 26 Pragmatic Competence 28 Pragmatic Transfer 29 Politeness 30 Brown and Levinson’s Theory of Politeness 31 i Speech Act Research 34 Arabic Speech Act Studies 41 Arabic Refusal Studies 54 Other Relevant Refusal Studies 70 Data Collection Methods in Speech Act Research 84 Observation of Authentic Speech 84 Discourse Completion Task/Test (DCT) 86 Role Plays 88 Chapter Summary 91 Chapter Three: Research Method 93 Introduction 93 Participants 95 American Learners of Arabic 95 Native Speakers of American English 96 Native Speakers of Egyptian Arabic 97 Data Collection Instrument 98 Enhanced Open-Ended Role Plays 98 Design of the Role Plays 99 Role Plays and the Pilot Study 108 Translating the Role Plays 108 Background Questionnaires 109 Equipment, Props, and Space 110 Data Collection Procedures 110 ii Determining the Arabic Proficiency of the American Learners 114 Conducting the Role Plays 115 American Learners of Arabic 115 Native Speakers of American English 116 Native Speakers of Egyptian Arabic 117 Data Analysis 119 Introduction 119 Quantitative Analysis 119 Qualitative Analysis 120 Answering the Research Questions 123 Data Transcription and Coding 125 Classification Scheme of Refusal Strategies 126 Direct Refusals 128 Indirect Refusals 129 Adjuncts to Refusals 147 Pilot Study 150 Participants 151 Elicitation Instrument 152 Data Collection Procedures 152 Data Analysis Procedures 153 Chapter Summary 153 Chapter Four: Results 155 Quantitative Findings 155 iii Total Number of Words 156 Number of Turns and Turn length 161 Strategy Use by Role Play 171 Role Play 1 180 Role Play 2 184 Role Play 3 189 Role Play 4 194 Role Play 5 199 Role Play 6 204 Direct Strategies 210 Direct Strategies by Role Play 210 Direct Strategies by Status 212 Flat No 214 Flat No by Role Play 214 Flat No by Status 217 Indirect Strategies 219 Indirect Strategies by Role Play 219 Indirect Strategies by Status 221 Selected Indirect Strategies by Status 223 Indirect Strategies by Refusal Type 226 Adjuncts to Refusal 227 Adjuncts to Refusal by Status 227 Adjuncts to Refusal by Refusal Type 230 iv Qualitative Findings 231 Content of Excuses and Reasons 231 Role Play 1 232 Role Play 2 234 Role Play 3 237 Role Play 4 237 Role Play 5 240 Role Play 6 242 Refusal Stages I & II 244 Role Play 1 245 Role Play 2 246 Role Play 3 247 Role Play 4 248 Role Play 5 249 Role Play 6 250 Discourse Analysis of Selected Interactions 251 Strategy Selection 253 Individual Differences 263 Language Proficiency and Pragmatic Competence 270 Direct and Indirect Strategies in Higher Status Situations 277 Chapter Five: Discussion 289 Discussion of Quantitative Findings 289 Total Number of Words 289 v Number of Turns and Turn Length 291 Strategy Use 292 Strategy Use and Language Proficiency 293 Frequency of Strategies and Strategy Selection 294 Direct Strategies 298 Indirect Strategies 299 Adjuncts to Refusal 301 Discussion of Qualitative Findings 302 Types of Excuses 302 Stages of Refusal 306 Discussion of Findings from the Selected Interactions 309 Strategy Selection 309 Individual Differences 311 Language Proficiency and Pragmatic Competence 314 Direct and Indirect Strategies in Higher Status Situations 315 Research Question I: Discussion of Findings 317 Discussion of Quantitative Findings 317 Discussion of Qualitative Findings 320 Research Question II: Discussion of Findings 322 Discussion of Quantitative Findings 322 Discussion of Qualitative Findings 324 Comparing the Findings of the Study to Other Refusal Study 326 Comparing the Findings of the Study to Arabic Refusal Studies 330 vi Pedagogical Implications 333 Directions for Future Research 336 References 338 Appendices 353 Appendix A: Background Questionnaire A 354 Appendix B: Background Questionnaire B 356 Appendix C: Background Questionnaire C 358 Appendix D: Background Questionnaire C (Arabic Version) 360 Appendix E: Enhanced Open-Ended Role Plays 362 Appendix F: Enhanced Open-Ended Role Plays (Arabic Version) 364 Appendix G: Role Play Evaluation 366 Appendix H: Consent Form 368 Appendix I: Number of Words, Turns, and Turn Length: NNSI Group 370 Appendix J: Number of Words, Turns, and Turn Length: NNSA Group 371 Appendix K: Number of Words, Turns, and Turn Length: NSA Group 372 Appendix L: Number of Words, Turns, and Turn Length: NSE Group 373 Appendix M: Overall Strategy Use by Group: Role Play 1 374 Appendix N: Overall Strategy Use by Group: Role Play 2 376 Appendix O: Overall Strategy Use by Group: Role Play 3 378 Appendix P: Overall Strategy Use by Group: Role Play 4 380 Appendix Q: Overall Strategy Use by Group: Role Play 5 382 Appendix R: Overall Strategy Use by Group: Role Play 6 384 Appendix S: Participants’ Demographic Information: NNSI Group 386 vii Appendix T: Participants’ Demographic Information: NNSA Group 387 Appendix U: Participants’ Demographic Information: NSA Group 388 Appendix V: Participants’ Demographic Information: NSE Group 389 About the Author End Page viii List of Tables Table 2-1 Arabic Studies Investigating the Speech Act of Refusal 67 Table 2-2 Possible Responses and Outcomes 80 Table 3-1 Refusal Role Play Situations 103 Table 3-2 Summary of Data Collection Process 118 Table 3-3 Refusal Strategies Found in the Data 127 Table 4-1 Total Number of Words and Individual Variation 157 Table 4-2 Total Number of Words by Group 158 Table 4-3 Total Number of Turns and Average Turn Length by Role Play 166 Table 4-4 Overall Strategy Use by Group 174 Table 4-5 Most Frequently Used Indirect Strategies by Group 177 Table 4-6 Most Frequently Used Adjuncts by Group 179 Table 4-7 Most Frequently Used Indirect Strategies by Group in Role Play 1 183 Table 4-8 Most Frequently Used Indirect Strategies by Group in Role Play 2 187 Table 4-9 Most Frequently Used Indirect Strategies by Group in Role Play 3 192 Table 4-10 Most Frequently Used Indirect Strategies by Group in Role Play 4 198 Table 4-11 Most Frequently Used Indirect Strategies by Group in Role Play 5 202 Table 4-12 Most Frequently Used Indirect Strategies by Group in Role Play 6 208 Table 4-13 Direct Strategies by Role Play 211 Table 4-14 Flat No by Role Play 215 Table 4-15 Indirect Strategies by Role Play 219 ix List of Figures Figure 4-1 Total Number of Words by Refusal Type 160 Figure 4-2 Total Number of Words by Status 161 Figure 4-3 Total Number of Turns by Role Play 162 Figure 4-4 Average Turn Length by Role Play 164 Figure 4-5 Number of Turns by Refusal Type 167 Figure 4-6 Average Turn Length by Refusal Type 168 Figure 4-7 Number of Turns by Status 169 Figure 4-8 Average Turn Length by Status 170 Figure 4-9 Overall Use of Direct and Indirect Strategies and Adjuncts by Group 172 Figure 4-10 Direct and Indirect Strategies and Adjuncts by Group in Role Play 1 181 Figure 4-11 Direct and Indirect Strategies and Adjuncts by Group in Role Play 2 185 Figure 4-12 Direct and Indirect Strategies and Adjuncts by Group in Role Play 3 189 Figure 4-13 Direct and Indirect Strategies and Adjuncts by Group in Role Play 4 195 Figure 4-14 Direct and Indirect Strategies and Adjuncts by Group in Role Play 5 200 Figure 4-15 Direct and Indirect Strategies and Adjuncts by Group in Role Play 6 205 Figure 4-16 Direct Strategies by Role Play 212 Figure 4-17 Direct Strategies by Status 213 Figure 4-18 Flat No by Role Play 216 Figure 4-19 Flat No by Status 218 Figure 4-20 Indirect Strategies by Role Play 220 Figure 4-21 Indirect Strategies by Status 222 x Figure 4-22 Excuse/Reason by Status 224 Figure 4-23 Statement of Regret by Status 225 Figure 4-24 Indirect Strategies by Refusal Type 226 Figure 4-25 Adjuncts to Refusal by Status 228 Figure 4-26 Adjuncts to Refusal by Refusal Type 230 xi The Realization of the Speech Act of Refusal in Egyptian Arabic by American Learners of Arabic as a Foreign Language Nader Morkus ABSTRACT This study investigated how the speech act of refusal is realized in Egyptian Arabic by intermediate and advanced American learners of Arabic as a foreign language. It also compared the performance of the learners to that of native speakers of Egyptian Arabic and native speakers of American English. The study aimed to investigate the relationship between the learners’ language proficiency and their pragmatic competence. In addition, it examined the extent of pragmatic transfer from L1 and whether there was a relationship between the degree of pragmatic transfer and the level of L2 proficiency.

The study also examined how refusals are structured and organized at the discourse level.

Nội dung được bảo vệ bản quyền — Tải xuống đầy đủ