vietnamese-australian cross-cultural study on hiding feelings at the workplace = nghiên cứu giao thoa văn hóa về cách che gíấu cảm xúc nơi công sở của người úc và người việt

Vietnam national university, ha noi
College of foreign languages
Post graduate department





Nguyen NHu Trang




A Vietnamese – Australian
cross – cultural study on hiding feelings
at the workplace.

(Nghiên cứu giao thoa văn hóa về cách che dấu cảm xúc
nơi công sở của người Úc và người Việt)


M.A minor thesis





Field: Linguistics
Code: 602215

Ha noi, 2009
Vietnam national university, ha noi
College of foreign languages
Post graduate department





Nguyen NHu Trang




A Vietnamese – Australian
cross – cultural study on hiding
feelings at the workplace.

(Nghiên cứu giao thoa văn hóa về cách che dấu cảm xúc
nơi công sở của người Úc và người Việt)


M.A minor thesis

Field: Linguistics
Code: 602215
Supervisor: Phan Thi Van Quyen, MA







Ha noi, 2009

iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Declaration ……………………………………………………………………………………………… i
Acknowledgements …………………………………………………………………………………… ii
Abstract …………………………………………………………………………………………………iii
Table of content …………………………………………………………………………………………iv
List of tables ……………………………………………………………………………………………v
Abbreviations and Conventions ……………………………………………………………………vi

part I: introduction ………………………………… 1

1 Rationale of the study ………………………………………………………………….……1
2. Aims and objectives of the study. ……………………………………………………….….2
3. Scope of the study……………………………………………………………………….… 3
4. Methodology …………………………………………………………………………….… 3
5.Significance of the study: …………………………………………………………………….3

6. The design of the study: ………………………………………………………………….….4
Part II: development ………………………………… 5
Chapter 1: Literature Review ………………………………………………………5
1.1.Culture…………………………………………………………………………………… 5
1.2. Communication……………………………………………………………………………5
1.2.1. Communication………………………………………………………………………6
1.2.2. Factors affecting human communication …………………………………………… 8
1.3. Culture and Communication ………………………………………………………………9
1.4. Politeness……………………………………………………………………………… 12
v
1.4.1. Notion of politeness……………………………………………………………………12
1.4.2. Notions of face and facework …………………………………………………………13
1.4.3. Politeness strategies ………………………………………………………………… 14
1.5. Hiding feelings in social interaction ……………………………………………… ……16
Chapter II: Methodology ………………………………………………………… 20
2.1. Data collection instrument………………………………………………………………20
2.2. Questionnaire and Participants ………………………………………………………….20
2.3. Administration of the Questionnaires ………………………………………………… 22
Chapter 3: findings and Discussions…………………………………………24
3.1. What are the influential factors on the choice of verbal strategies of hiding feelings in
Australian English and Vietnamese? …………………………………/……………………24
3.2. How often do Vietnamese and Australian people hide their feelings at the workplace? ………………28
3.3. What are the verbal strategies of hiding feelings used by Australian and Vietnamese people? …………29
3.3.1. Verbal strategies used by Australian and Vietnamese people to hide their feelings ………………… 29
3.3.2. Use of strategies by Vietnamese participants in specific situations ……………… …32
3.3.3 Use of strategies by Australian participants in specific situations ……………………35
3.4 Some explanations………………………………………………………………… 37
Part III : conclusion and implications ……………… 40
1. Major findings………………………………………………………………………………40
2. Implication of the study…………………………………………………………………….41

2.1. Implications for intercultural communicators ……………………………………………41
2.2. Implications for EFL teachers ……………………………………………………………41
vi

3. Limitations of the study and Recommendations for future research ………………………42

REFERENCES …………………………………………………………… 44
Appendix 1……………………………………………………………………………………46
Appendix 2……………………………………………………………………………………49
vii
Abbreviations and CONVENTIONS

Dct Discourse completion Task
FTA Face threatening Act
EFL English as a Foreign Language
L2 Second language
S Subject
viii

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Factors governing the choice of strategies in hiding feelings by Vietnamese
people……………………………………………………………………………….23
Table 2: Factors governing the choice of hiding feelings strategies by Australian
people……………………………………………………………………………….24
Table 3: Differences between Australian and Vietnamese participants hiding feelings in
specific situations (by percentage) ………………………………………………26
Table 4: The frequency of hiding feelings by the two groups (by percentage) …………28
Table 5: Differences between Australian and Vietnamese participants hiding feelings in
specific situations (by percentage) ………………………………………….…. 29
Table 6: Strategies used by Australian and Vietnamese people to hide their feelings

(by percentage) …………………………………………………………………….31
Table 7: Summary: Use of strategies by Vietnamese participants …………………………32
Table 8: Summary: Use of strategies by Australian ……………………………………….35




1
part I: introduction

I.1 Rationale of the study
It is undeniable that language is a tool of human communication. Various kinds of
meanings can be conveyed in language which involves the interaction between the
speaker and the hearers. However, successful communication requires not only pure
linguistic competence but also knowledge of social norms, social values and relations
between interactants. As language, to some extend, is part of or a manifestation of its
culture (Davies, 1989 in Nguyen Van Do, 2007). Culture, language, and society are
closely related to each other and interact between themselves. Therefore,
communication breakdown or culture shock may happen in cross – cultural interaction
when interactors are not aware of cultural barrier. In other words, the interpretation of
an utterance should be involved both linguistic pattern and the socio – cultural
background of the speaker.
It is no secret that today‘s workplace is rapidly becoming larger and larger, as the
business environment expands to include various geographic locations and span
numerous cultures. What can be difficult, however, is understanding how to
communicate effective with individuals who speak another language or who rely on
different means to reach a common goal.
The world today is dramatically different from that of twenty or even ten years ago.
The influence of Multinational Corporation, the technological revolution, the
―information superhighway‖ and the movement of the private and public sectors

towards globalization sets the sense. New laws, agreements and regional partnership
from NAFTA to GATT to the European Union or Asian, have contributed to make this
massive change not only possible but also achievable.
Vietnam is a country where intercultural contacts are rapidly increasing, following the
introduction of the renovation process since 1986. Opened door policy allows more
foreign companies and partners to invest in most industries in the country to help boost
the economy. This process has resulted in increasing interactions between Vietnamese
and foreigners, especially from English – speaking countries.

2
We investigate how culture influences the hiding feelings at the workplace by
Australian speakers of English and Vietnamese. We choose hiding feelings to study as
in our daily life we hide our feelings so often to achieve our purposes that we are
sometimes unaware of the fact that we are doing so. Hiding feelings is so important in
communication. Without it communication may be broken-down and our relationships
may be broken, as a result. Hiding feelings is very various across cultures so
misunderstanding can arise if we do not apply pragmatic competence appropriately.
Taking into consideration the importance of pragmatic competence and the social
setting of Vietnam, the study is significant in that it is conducted with the hope of
resolving and simplifying cross- cultural misunderstanding.
For more details:
I. 2. Aims and objectives of the study.
As far as we know, there is a gap in our understanding of how Vs and Aus hide their
feelings at the workplace and how culture influences their use of language patterns at
the workplace. So this study aims to find out:
1. How Australian and Vietnamese hide their feelings at the workplace.
2. How social-cultural factors such as social status, gender, age, … influence the
choice of hiding feeling strategies of both groups.
For more details, this study aims to answer the following questions:
1. What are the influential factors on verbal strategies of hiding feelings in

Australian English and Vietnamese?
2. How often do Vietnamese and Australian people hide their feelings at the
workplace?
3. What are the verbal strategies of hiding feelings used by Australian and
Vietnamese people?
Research hypotheses.
To achieve the aims of the study, the following hypotheses are suggested for
investigation:
a. There are some differences in the frequency and the way of hiding feelings at
the workplace between Vietnamese and Australian

3
b. Some factors such as interlocutor‘s status, age, gender affect the choice of
hiding feeling strategies used by Australian and Vietnamese people.
I. 3. Scope of the study.
Hiding feelings is clearly essential in communication. And to achieve the best result,
speaker usually makes use of both verbal and nonverbal cues. However, in fact, there
are a few nonverbal cues for hiding feelings: some use eyes contact, some use hands
while many verbal cues are available for people to hide their feelings. These verbal
cues are various and different depending on the cultures of communicators, their
backgrounds ect Therefore, in this thesis, we would like to focus mainly on verbal
strategies.
Hiding feelings takes place everywhere: in the family, at school, at the public places…
However, the author choose to study hiding feelings at the workplace because the
world is now globalized, the workplace now is a multicultural place. Amid today‘s
heightened global tensions, success increasingly belongs to people who can work
effectively across cultures and languages. The author should think that the
understanding of how Australian and Vietnamese people hide their feelings may be
helpful for those working in multicultural environment.
The researcher makes an investigation into how Vietnamese and Australian use the

language to hide their true feelings at the workplace
I.4. Methodology
To achieve the aims and objectives mentioned above, the study compare and contrast
the verbal strategies of hiding feelings of the two groups basing on the statistical and
qualitative data collected from a survey questionnaire modified from the Discourse
Completion Task developed by Beebe et al. The survey questionnaires are given to 40
Vietnamese people who are working at offices in Hanoi and 40 Australian people who
are working in Australia. Besides, more information needed for the study are gathered
from researcher‘s observation.
To process the data, quantitative method, contrastive analysis methods are employed.
I. 5. Significance of the study.

4
This study may provide insights into the similarities and differences between
Vietnamese and Australian in the frequency as well as the verbal strategies of hiding
feelings. The author would like to give some cultural explanations for these similarities
and differences. Hopefully, it may help achieve successful communication in an
international working environment.
I. 6. The design of the study:
The study is divided into three parts: the introduction, the development and the
conclusion.
The introduction provides the information such as the rationale, the aims, the scope, the
method and the significance of the study.
The development consists of three chapters. Chapter one, Literature Review, presents
the concepts relevant to the research topic such as different points of view of culture
and communication, politeness
Chapter two deals with specific information of the method, the survey questionnaire
and the respondents. It also presents analysis of the data collected from the survey
questionnaire.
The last chapter presents some major findings.

The conclusion is a review of the study, the limitation of the study and suggestions for
further study.












5
Part II: development

Chapter 1: Literature Review
This chapter reviews the theories and literature within which the research is carried
out. It consists of 3 main sections. The two first sections view the theories of culture
and communication. The third one deals with the other related issues: politeness in
human communication.
1.1.Culture
Culture is ‗ubiquitous, complex and all-pervasive‘ (A. Samorva, 2007:10). Therefore, it
is very difficult to define this term. The term ‗culture‘ has a wide range of meanings
today because it has actually changed in meaning overtime. In fact, there are many
definitions of it ranging from complex and fancy to simple ones.
For some it refers to an appreciation of good literature, music, art, and food. for
anthropologists and other behavioral scientists, culture is the full range of learned
human behavior patterns. Edward B. Tylor (1871 in Heather Bowe and Kelie Martin,

2007) an anthropologist said that culture is "that complex whole which includes
knowledge, belief, art, law, morals, custom, and any other capabilities and habits
acquired by man as a member of society‖(p2)
Here the author would like to use the definition of H. C. Triandis cited in A. Samorva,
2007:20 for the reason that this definition contains the theme under investigation in
this thesis of how culture and communication are linked. ―Culture is a set of human-
made objective and subjective elements that in the past have increased the probability
of survival and resulted in satisfaction for the participants in an ecological niche, and
thus become shared among those who could communicate with each other because they
had a common language and they lived in the same time and place.‖
Subjective elements mentioned in this definition are ―values, attitudes, beliefs,
orientations, and underlying assumptions prevalent among people in a society‖. All of
them influence your interpretation of the world and interactions in it.
1.2. Communication

6
1.2.1. Communication.
People have known that communication is an important part of life, a well-integrated
part of day-to-day existence. ―Communication is powerful; It brings companions to our
sides or scatters our rivals, reassures or alerts children; and forges consensus or battle
lines between us‖ (C. F Keating, 19794 in Larry. A Samorva, 2007: 12). In fact, it is
one of those activities that everyone recognizes but few can define it satisfactorily.
How does one talk so that another person can understand? How does one know if he or
she has been heard or understood? These are all points about communication that have
been analyzed and explained.
Simply, we often define communication as sharing of ideas or feelings with others.
Communication takes place when one person transmits information and understanding
to another person. In other words, there is a communication when you respond or listen
to someone. ―Human communication is the process through which symbols are
transmitted for the purpose of eliciting a response‖ (A. Samorva, 2007: 12).

Fisker (1990 in Heather Bowe and Kelie martin 2007) claims that the most important
definition of communication for present purposes is social interaction through
messages. It is no coincidence that this definition begins with the word ―social‖.
Indeed, the social aspect of communication is important for two reasons according to
Fisker‘s explanation. First, we have recognized that communication takes place in a
social context and that context will often have a very significant bearing on the success
of the communication. Second, it is important to recognize that communication
involves transmitting not only information from one person to another but also in
communicating a relationship. For example, if a person uses patronizing language in
communicating with others, then the use of such demeaning indicates a relationship
bases on a lack of respect. By contrast, person using forms of language associated with
deference will be communicating a relationship based on respecting status and
hierarchy.
Another key word in Fiske‘s definition is ‗interaction‘. It is an important point to
recognize that communication is not only a basic part of our life but an essential one.
However, communication can be highly problematic at times. There can be a

7
communication breakdown between individuals as communication itself is a dynamic
process which is symbolic, systemic and involves making inferences (A Samorva,
2007). The meaning of the message is a complex issue. On one hand, we have meaning
in the sense of intention. When I mean X, for example, this refers to the fact that I
intend X, or I intend to convey X. On the other hand, meaning can refer to
interpretation. A message can be sent or received even if the person communicating
had no intention to do so (Larson, Charles U, 1976 ). For example, if my tone of voice
and non-verbal cues indicate nervousness, then it is likely that I will be communicating
that nervousness even though I may not wish to do so.
There is a question of how to interpret what is communicated. The response will
depend on what the speaker mean and how the listener interpret that response (Larson,
Charles U, 1976 ). In addition, all this takes place in a social context which can

influence the way communication take place and its outcome.
From what have been discussed, we can say that Fiske‘s definition of communication
helps us have an overview of communication which we often take for granted.
Depending on how culture is defined and which discipline one come from, various
terms are used to refer to communication between people who don‘t share the same
nationality, social or ethnic origin. Today people talk much about cross- cutural
communication or intercultural communication. So what does this term mean? For us,
cross-cultural communication occurs when a member of one culture sends a message to
a member of another culture. More precisely, cross-cultural communication ―involves
interaction between people whose cultural perceptions and symbol systems are distinct
enough to alter the communication event‖ (A. Samorva, 2007:10)
Richard et al, (1992:92) shares the same opinion when stating that cross- cultural
communication is ―exchange of ideas, information, ect between persons from different
cultural backgrounds‖. This term suggests that there is a relationship between
communication and culture. This relationship will be discussed in the next part.
To sum up, simply being a member of society engaging with other people on day to
day basis involves communication of various kinds whether we wish those
communications take place or not. If we are aware of the complex nature of

8
communication and try to improve our social skills we will have greater influence on
what we communicate and what we do not communicate.
1.2.2. Factors affecting human communication
There are many factors affecting the choice of communicative strategy in a particular
situation. Brown and Levinson propose three parameters that may affect this choice.
They are power, differential between speaker and interlocutor, social distance between
them and the ranking imposition represented by the face.
N. Quang (1998) proposes 12 factors: Age, Sex, Residence, Mood, Occupation,
Personality, Topic, Place, Communicative environment/setting, Social distance, Time
pressure and Position.

This study is taking hiding feeling at the workplace into consideration, therefore, Age,
Sex, Occupation, Social distance, setting and Position are very important factors
governing the way people communicating at the workplace and thus being chosen for
investigation.
The role of position or social status in communication involves the ability to recognize
each other‘s social position (Brown and Levinson 1987; Holmes 1995). Holmes (1995)
claimed that people with high social status are more prone to receive deferential
behaviour, including linguistic deference and negative politeness. Thus those with
lower social status are inclined to avoid offending those with higher status and show
more respect to them.
Speech behaviors depend on the gender relationship between interlocutors. Gender or
sex and speech behavior are also seen as two interwoven, interrelated variables (Lakoff
1975; Holmes 1995 in Heather Bowe and Kelie martin 2007). To generalize, women
have traditionally been less direct (i.e. more polite and soft) than men in making
request, expressing criticism and offering opinions. They prefer indirect expression.
However, when talking about emotional issues and feelings, women tend to be more
direct than men. In the workplace, women have learnt that in order to compete and
communicate with men, they have to be more direct when making suggestion, giving
criticism or expressing ideas (Nguyen Quang 1998).

9
It is impossible to say that everyone in one culture communicates similarly. Variation
according to age is most noticeable across the time span. As Nguyen Quang explains
the older often communicate according to more traditional norms than young ones.
Occupation has some effect on the speech of individuals. ―every job has a certain
amount of ‗jargon‘ which those not involved in a similar occupation find it difficult to
understand‖ (Nguyen Van Do,2007: 191). Those who study social sciences tend to use
more indirectness than those who study natural sciences.
Discussing about the effect of setting on communication, Nguyen Quang, 1998 states
when in an informal climate, people tend to express themselves in a direct way and

versus. In fact, the way we communicate in our home is different from that in public
places, or at the workplace.
Social distance is one of the factors that determines politeness behaviours (Leech 1983;
Brown and Levinson 1987). The notion of social distance refers to the consideration of
―the roles people are taking in relation to one another in a particular situation as well as
how well they know each other‖ (p.126), which means the degree of intimacy between
interlocutors. Brown and Levinson (1987) claim that politeness increases with social
distance.
Above all others, communication is influenced by culture. Culture decides the
influences of other factors on communication. Why and how it influences
communication will be discussed in the following part.
1.3. Culture and Communication
It is undeniable that culture is very important in communication process. It is
considered as a factor underpinning communication. Bourdieu (2000) claims that
culture is particularly helpful in trying to understand communication because ‗habitus‘
as this author called ‗culture‘ forms a power backdrop to our actions and interactions.
Everyone has a unique of communication but cultures determine a general style for
their member. The relationship of the individual to his culture is ―analogous to an actor
and his director. The actor puts his own personality into his acting but is nevertheless
influenced by the director‖ (Nguyen Quang,1998). In a very real sense, your culture is
part of who you are.

10
So when cultures differ, communication practices also differ as Smith claims: ―In
modern society, different people communicate in different ways, as do people in
different societies around the world; the way people communicate is the way they live.
It is their culture. Who talks to whom? How? And about what? These are questions of
communication and culture. When the elements of communication differ or change,
the elements of culture differ or change. Communication and culture are inseparable‖
(G.Smith, Ed,1966 in A Samorva, 2007: 17)

Culture shock is a term used to describe the anxiety and the feelings (of surprise,
disorientation, confusion, ect. ) felt when people have to operate within an entirely
different cultural and social environment, such as a foreign country. It is ―a common
experience for a person learning a second language in a second culture.‖ (H. Douglas
Brown in J. Merrill Valdes, 1986: 33). It grows out of the difficulties in assimilating
the new culture, causing difficulties in knowing what is appropriate, what is not. So any
adequate account of communication processes must take into consideration of culture.
This is especially important in intercultural communication, the communication
between people who don‘t share the same nationality, social or ethnic origin. As
communication involves deferring perceptions, attitudes, and interpretations. Common
problems can occur among people who do not have benefits of shared experience.
Interculturalists have identified numerous differences in communication styles from
culture to culture. The most important and most studied distinctions are the indirect and
direct styles described below:
In direct communication style both parties, the speaker and listener expect explicit
verbal expression of intention, wishes, hopes, ect. For example, I am hungry or I love
you
In indirect communication styles the speaker expresses his/her thought implicitly, or
using hints or modifiers such as perhaps, maybe The listener is expected to use
contextual cues, or the background knowledge available to read the real meaning.
Although these styles present in all cultures, and the use of different styles varies
depending on the context, one particular style is culturally considered dominant. As
Nguyen Quang (1998) claims that cultures determine the general style for their

11
members. Why so? Because communication styles have been associated with cultural
values. Direct style with individualism and indirect style with collectivism
(www.peacecorps.gov/wws/publications/culture/pdf/chapter3.pdf)
Indirect communication is often used in situations where mutual harmony is considered
important for maintaining good relationships. This is the case in collectivism cultures

where people work closely together and know what everyone else knows. The
overriding goal of the communication exchange is maintaining harmony and saving
face.
The individualist have evolved a more direct communication style. Because in their
heterogeneous society, and in their culture, people prefer independence, self-reliance,
and a greater emotional distance from each other. They cannot depend only on
manipulating context or communicating nonverbally to make themselves understood;
They must rely more on words, and on those words being interpreted literally. Getting
or giving information is the goal of most communication exchanges.
Here we would like to take Richard D. Levis‘s
( diagram to
highlight the differences between Western, Eastern and Middle eastern cultures as an
illustration for what have been discussed.



According to Richard D people from western cultures tend to get directly to the
point. In face-to-face communication people don't beat around the bush, but get

12
right to the point.
Middle eastern people tend to eventually get to the point - after slowly spiraling in,
having prepared the listener for the message. Face-to-face conversations take a long
time before delicately getting to the heart of the matter.
People from eastern cultures tend to not get to the point at all. They will talk
around and around the point, but by constantly circling around it, they will make
clear what they're really talking about. In face-to-face communication people seem
not to say what they really mean
1.4. Politeness.
1.4.1. Notion of politeness.

Politeness in linguistic pragmatics and sociolinguistics has been a feature of the study
of languages for millennia. Existing models of linguistic politeness have generated a
huge amount of empirical research. However, evaluations on it are so varied that
researchers have preferred to abstract away from kinds of cultures, histories. Politeness
then becomes an abstract term referring to ‗a wide variety of social strategies for
constructing and reproducing co-operative social interaction across cultures‘.
Erving Goffman(1967) discusses politeness as the ―appreciation an individual shows to
another through avoidance or presentation of rituals‖. Brown and Levinson (1978) view
politeness as a complex system for softening face-threatening act. That we change our
language based on the hearer and thus our strategies for compliance gaining change
depending on the audience. Politeness consists of attempting to save other‘s face.
Brown and Levinson begin with the idea of ―model persons‖, rational agents who
thinks strategically and are conscious of their language choices. Politeness strategies,
therefore, are developed in order to formulate messages to save hearer‘s face when face
threatening acts are inevitable or desired. This means that the speaker avoids
embarrassing the listener or making him feel uncomfortable.
Leech (1980) defines it as ‗strategic conflict avoidance‘, which ‗can be measured in
terms of the degree of effort to put into the avoidance of a conflict situation and the
establishment and maintenance of comity‘.

13
Although there are many ideas about the issue among linguists and it can not possibly
figure which one is the best model of politeness we can see a common factor that they
all claim, explicitly or implicitly, the universality of the principles for linguistic
politeness. All of them help us have a deep look into this difficultly technical term. The
general idea is to understand various strategies for interactive behaviors bases on the
fact that people engage in reasonable behaviors to achieve their communicative goals.
1.4.2. Notions of face and facework
As it is acknowledged, being polite consists of attempting to save face for another. So
what is ―face‖? Erving Goffman (1963) in his ―On Facework‖ discusses face in

reference to how people present themselves in social situations and that our entire
reality is constructed through our social interactions. He says ―face is a mark that
changes depending on the audience and the social interaction‖
Brown and Levinson (1978:66) claim that ―face‖ is ―something that is emotionally
invested, and that can be lost, maintained or enhanced and must be constantly attended
to in interaction‖. Face, therefore, is precisely the conceptualization each of us make
our―self‖ through interaction. It is a highly changeable, almost unstable entirely,
located in the flow of events in the encounter and dependent on the interpretation of
other participants more than on ourselves.
―One‘s own face and the face of others are constructs of the same order; it is the rules
of the group and the definition of the situation which determine how much feeling one
is to have for face and how this feeling is to be distributed among the faces involved‖
(Goffman, cited from Richard Watts:124 ).
Brown and Levinson assume that every individual has two types of face: positive and
negative. Positive face is defined as the individual‘s desire that her/his wants be
appreciated and approved of in social interaction, whereas negative face is the desire
for freedom of action and freedom from imposition . Positive politeness strategies
server face wants of positive face. And negative politeness strategies server face wants
of negative face.
It is clear that we have an obligation to maintain the faces of the other participants in
the interaction. As Lee Wong (1999) says ―If one loves one‘s face, one should avoid

14
face loss, attempt to maintain one‘s face this can only be done by looking after alter‘s
face‖ (cited from Watt: 120). The term ―facework‖ given by Goffman, therefore, is the
actions taken by a person to make whatever he is doing consistent with face. In other
words, ―the construction of our own concept of self and the work we do in social
interaction to enable others to construct, reproduce and maintain their self concept can
be called ―facework‖ (Richard Watt, 130).
In daily communication, people may give a threat to the face of the interlocutor

involved or create a ―face – threatening act‖. In an attempt to avoid this kind of speech
act, interlocutors may use speech strategies to minimize the threat according to a
rational assessment of the face risk to participants. These strategies will be discussed
later.
Generally speaking, the relationship between politeness and indirectness is still
controversial. It may vary in different cultures and languages. Hiding feelings is
indirect and how it links with politeness will be considered in the following parts.
1.4.3. Politeness strategies
In daily communication, we have to deal with different social situations, different
kinds of interactors which requires us to adjust our use of words to fit the situation.
About politeness strategies, there are many opinions among linguists.
As politeness, in Leech‘s opinion, involves minimizing the cost and maximizing the
benefit to speaker/hearer, he suggests six maxims for the politeness.
+ Tact maxim: Minimize cost to other. Maximize benefit to other.
+ Generosity maxim: Minimize benefit to self. Maximize cost to self.
+ Approbation maxim: Minimize dispraise of other. Maximize dispraise of self.
+ Modesty maxim: Minimize praise of self. Maximize praise of other.
+ Agreement maxim: Minimize disagreement between self and other. Maximize
agreement between self and other.
+ Sympathy maxim: Minimize antipathy between self and other. Maximize sympathy
between self and other.
We agree with Nguyen Quang that the terms in Leech‘s maxims such as ―cost‖,
―minimize‖, ―maximize‖… seem to be abstract and a little bit ambiguous. These

15
maxims tend to be about positive politeness. So it may not govern the politeness as a
whole term.
According to Brown and Levinson, politeness strategies are developed in order to save
the hearer‘s "face." Face refers to the respect that an individual has for him or herself,
and maintaining that "self-esteem" in public or in private situations. Usually you try to

avoid embarrassing the other person, or making them feel uncomfortable. Face
Threatening Acts (FTA's) are acts that infringe on the hearers' need to maintain his/her
self esteem, and be respected. Politeness strategies are developed for the main purpose
of dealing with these FTAs.
They suggest five strategies to deal with FTAs, which are numbered to indicate that the
greater the face act threat is, the greater numbered- strategy is employed
Figure 1. Brown and Levinson‘s politeness strategies

lesser

.


greater
estimated risk of face-loss addressee.
The figure shows that S can decide to do or not to do the FTA. However, when
encounting an FTA, S can choose one of the four possibilities:
First, bald on record strategies do not attempt to minimize the threat to the hearer‘s
face. This strategy is most often utilized by speakers who closely know their audience.
With the bald on record strategies there is a direct possibility that the audience will be
shocked or embarrassed by the strategy. In everyday communication, bald on record
Go on record

[rational
decision 2]

Go off record
(4)
Do the AFT
[rational

decision1]


Don‘t do the
FTA (5)
Do the FTA
baldly with
no redressive
action (1)

[rational
decision 3]

Choose
redressive
action
Do the FTA
baldly with
no redressive
action (1)

[rational
decision 3]

Choose
redressive
action

16
behavior would potentially threaten the other‘s face and therefore, should be avoided.

Avoiding a FTA is accomplished by face saving acts which use positive or negative
politeness strategies.
The positive politeness attempts to minimize the threat to the hearer's positive face.
This strategy is most commonly used in situations where the audience knows each
other fairly well. Quite often hedging and attempts to avoid conflict are used
The third strategy is negative politeness which presumes that the speaker will be
imposing on the listener. The potential for awkwardness or embarrassment is greater
than in bald on record strategies and positive politeness strategies. Negative face is the
desire to remain autonomous.
The final politeness strategy outlined by Brown and Levinson is the indirect strategy;
This strategy uses indirect language and removes the speaker from the potential to
being imposing.
In general, strategies given by Brown and Levinson are clear and universal. We can use
them for different cultures with different styles of politeness.
1.5. Hiding feelings in social interaction
It is hard to say what hiding feeling is and how it is important in communication. As, in
fact, it is not a literary term, or a ‗stable‘ notion. We hardly find any definitions for
hiding feeling in any dictionary. And it is not an issue studied by many researcher or
linguists.
Simply, hiding feelings is understood as not expressing or revealing real feelings. There
are several degrees of hiding feelings: hiding feelings completely, hiding feelings
partly Hiding feeling is not only verbal but also nonverbal. It involves controlling our
facial expressions, hand and body movement, eye contact and more. So listener has to
deduce what speaker implies by basing on context, and nonverbal cues.
When do people hide feelings? We know that feeling is something that is very
complex. There are feelings which help us deal with many difficult tasks. There are
feelings disturbing our working and our relationship as well. In this case, people often
hide their feelings. In other words, hiding feelings occurs in problematic situations.
This is an example: you are very annoyed with your boss because he often shouts at

17
you unreasonably, but for politeness you can not show him directly that you are
annoyed.
Why do people hide their feelings? In daily communication, we sometimes may have
some feelings such as anger, fear, sadness, disappointment ect which hurt a person‘s
feelings and threat their face. Therefore, we would like to hide them in order to avoid
hurting other people‘s feeling, to save the face and to maintain our relationship. In
other words, The purpose of hiding feelings is to save the other‘s face as well as the
speaker‘s own face, from that to maintain good relationship among interlocutors. For
example, in the above situation, if you show your annoyance to the boss, he may feel
that you do not respect him as a boss. As a result, he may hate you, cause you difficulty
in work. Your relationship may be broken up. Generally, we can consider hiding
feelings a face saving act.
Beside negative feelings, people sometimes hide their positive feelings such as
happiness, pride…for modesty, or not making others feel uncomfortable… For
example, you have just been promoted, you are up to the air but if you show your
feelings immoderately in front of your competitors they will think you are self-
important and therefore do not have good impression on you.
In general, what is the importance of hiding feelings? Hiding feelings is so important
due to its effectiveness in communication, as we have just said above, that we need it in
communication. Without it our communication would be broken-down, our
relationships are not as good as our expectation…For example, if you say directly to
your boss that he is wrong you may lose your job. Or if you comment on your
colleague‘s unfashionable clothing style directly she will be unsatisfied. In other words,
hiding feelings helps us maintain our relationship, maintain the harmony with others,
and sometimes helps us achieve our personal goals. In a professional working
environment, success depends on the ability to control feelings.
However, it is necessary to say that hiding feelings is not always positive. In fact, it has
a certain negative points, especially in the offices. First, it may make people stressed
for not being able to release their feelings. Hiding feelings so often may make people

18
become liars as well. In addition, we hide our feelings in order not to displease others,
but this may prevent people from knowing their shortcomings to improve.
How do people hide feelings by verbal cues? There are some common ways people do
to hide their feelings. Firstly, they can say nothing which means they hide their feelings
completely (i.e. hide in such a way that others cannot recognize). At the workplace, this
is one of the most favorable strategies for the result of safety it brings about.
In addition, people can hide feelings in several ways of saying such as Minimizing,
listener can notice partly your feelings ―which leads the requester to appeal to a
common goal‖ (George Yule,1996: 64). Or they can use vague or neutral utterances so
that listener are hard to know exactly what they are thinking such as in the following
example:
A: How do you like my new shirt?
B: I don‘t think I‘ve seen any quite like that.
In some other cases, speaker can find one aspect of the issue being asked about to
compliment. For example, you hate your friend‘s shoes, but the color is not too bad: ―I
like the color‖ is the sentence you can use. Or speaker can find positive aspect of a
person to compliment: ―Well, she seems nice, but I have just known her a few days‖.
Some excuse is another way instead for saying what you are thinking straightforwardly:
―The salad is nice but I‘m starting to get full‖.
Hiding feelings varies under the influence of social status, age , gender …With a
particular encounter, people have a particular way to hide their feelings. The way and
the degree we hide our feelings are different when our communicating partners (e.g.
mother, boss, friends ) are different.
.Moreover, hiding feelings is a term concerning with many aspects of the culture and it
also differ across cultures. Each culture with its own characteristics creates a
communication style and thus, different cultures favor different communication styles,
as we have discussed above. Hiding feelings, therefore, is not the same across cultures.
In collectivism cultures where the self is overwhelmed by the community and people

are in favor of indirect communication style, hiding feelings occurs more often than in
individualism cultures where the self is highly appreciated and direct communication is