an initial investigation of u.s and vietnamese cultures in contrast through everyday conversations = bước đầu nghiên cứu đối chiếu văn hóa mỹ-việt thông qua các cuộc đối thoại hàng ngày

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST – GRADUATE STUDIES
************

NGUYÊ
̃
N THI
̣
HOA
̀
NG MY


AN INITIAL INVESTIGATION OF
U.S AND VIETNAMESE CULTURES IN CONTRAST
THROUGH EVERYDAY CONVERSATIONS

(BƯỚC ĐẦU NGHIÊN CỨU ĐỐI CHIẾU VĂN HÓA MỸ - VIỆT THÔNG QUA
CÁC CUỘC ĐỐI THOẠI HÀNG NGÀY)

M.A. MINOR THESIS
Field: English Linguistics
Code: 60 22 15


Hanoi, 2012
iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
ABSTRACT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLE AND FIGURES
PART I: INTRODUCTION 1
1. Rationale of the study 1
2. Research questions 2
3. Aims and Objectives of the study 2
4. Scope of the study 2
5. Methodology of the study 3
6. Design of the study 3
PART II: DEVELOPMENT 5
CHAPTER I: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 5
1.1 A brief overview on Contrastive Analysis 5
1.1.1 Definition 5
1.1.2 Macro-linguistic Contrastive Analysis 6
1.2 A brief overview on Conversation Analysis 6
1.2.1 Conversation 6
1.2.2 Conversation analysis 7
1.3 Language and Culture 8
1.3.1 What is Language? 8
1.3.2 What is culture? 9
1.3.3 The relationship between language and culture 10
1.4 An overview on Friendship 12
1.4.1 Definition 12
v

1.4.2 Types of friendships 12
1.4.3 Friendship in the U.S culture 14

1.4.4 Friendship in Vietnam culture 15
CHAPTER II: METHODOLOGY 16
2.1 Data collection instruments 16
2.1.1 Survey questionnaire 16
2.1.2 Audio taping 17
2.2 Participants 17
2.2.1 Survey questionnaire 17
2.2.2 Audio taping 18
2.3 The procedure of data collection and analysis 18
2.3.1 Survey questionnaire 18
2.3.2 Audio tapes 18
CHAPTER III: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 20
3.1 Data analysis of the survey questionnaire 20
3.1.1 Question 1 20
3.1.2 Question 2 22
3.1.3 Question 3 23
3.1.4 Question 4 25
3.2 Data analysis of the audio tapes 26
3.2.1 Situation 1 26
3.2.2 Situation 2 27
3.2.3 Situation 3 28
vi

3.2.4 Situation 4 29
3.3 Discussions 31
CHAPTER III: CONCLUSION 33
1. Recapitulation 33
2. Major findings 34
2.1 Differences 34
2.2 Similarities 35

3. Limitations of the study 35
4. Suggestions for further study 36
REFERENCES
APPENDICES





vii

LIST OF TABLE AND FIGURES


TABLES
Table 1: Answers for question1 of Vietnamese students and American students
Table 2: Answers for question 2 of Vietnamese students and American students
Table 3: Answers for question 3 of Vietnamese students and American students
Table 4: Answers for question 4 of Vietnamese students and American students
Table 5: Analysis of conversations for situation 1
Table 6: Analysis of conversations for situation 2
Table 7: Analysis of conversations for situation 3
Table 8: Analysis of conversations for situation 4
Table 9: Summary of Vietnamese-American contrasts
FIGURES
Figure 1: Iceberg model of Culture
Figure 2: Answers for question 1 of Vietnamese students and American students
Figure 3: Answers for question 2 of Vietnamese students and American students
Figure 4: Answers for question 3 of Vietnamese students and American students
Figure 5: Answers for question 4 of Vietnamese students and American students

1

PART I: INTRODUCTION

1. RATIONALE OF THE STUDY
Human beings have been endued with a powerful engine to assist them in the process
of expressing their thoughts, feelings and transmitting emotions as well as information
to others: language. However, there is a question remaining: “Why are
misinterpretation, communication breakdown and cultural conflicts still inevitable?”
Hymes, D. (1966) coined those in one term: “communicative competence” which
literally denotes the capability of using one language appropriately under any
circumstances. The fact is that language and culture are so closely interlaced, which
means the impossibility of separating them.

The focus of the study is on conversations upon everyday topics, which will, to some
extent, raise an awareness of cultural similarities as well as differences among
speakers, aiming for a successful and fruitful interplay, or at least a reduction in the
effect of discrepant socio-cultural factors.

The study on everyday conversations, specifically the topic of friendship, made by
American and Vietnamese students, has been selected to investigate as it was one of
the great interests to the researcher and of great help to language insiders and outsiders.
It is undeniable that how American native speakers react on friendship-related
situations in everyday life is far different from how Vietnamese people, second-
language speakers, do. Thereupon, a contrastive analysis of the ways American and
Vietnamese deal with disparate cases is regarded practical, necessary and worthy for a
mutual understanding.


2

2. RESEARCH QUESTIONS
The present study focused on the contrast of American and Vietnamese cultures
through everyday conversations, particularly the topic of friendship, within the
framework of contrastive analysis, conversation analysis as well as the looks at the
relationship between culture and language. Therefore, the study was aimed at pointing
out the answers for the two questions:
(1) What are the similarities between American culture and Vietnamese culture
reflected through the topic “Friendship” in daily conversations?
(2) What are the differences between American culture and Vietnamese culture
reflected through the topic “Friendship” in daily conversations?

3. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
This study was aimed at promoting communicative competence through everyday
conversations between the U.S and Vietnamese cultures, which was done based on the
theoretical background of contrastive analysis, conversation analysis and the points of
view of language-culture tie. Thereupon, the main objective of this study was to
analyze and reflect the similarities as well as differences between the two targeted
cultures.

4. SCOPE OF THE STUDY
Since theoretical background is vital to the processes of data analysis, the writer
expected to deal with a variety of sets of theories concerning contrastive analysis,
conversation analysis and viewpoints on culture-language relationship, etc.

Due to the constraint of time and personal ability, the writer had no ambition for
covering a wide range of everyday conversations; instead, some featured situations
related to Friendship were chosen to take into consideration. This study was intended
3

to discover how university students of American and Vietnamese cultures reacted to
the same circumstances.

The database of this study consisted of elicited written questionnaires and audio-tapes
of natural conversations.

5. METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY
The study has been carried out based on a combination of different methods of
quantitative and qualitative approach which are as follows:
- Document;
- Synthesize;
- Analyze and contrast.

Questionnaires and audio tapes of native American and of Vietnamese university
students were adopted to collect the data for analysis and discussion.

6. DESIGN OF THE STUDY
The study is comprised of three parts:

Part I, “Introduction”, includes the rationale, objectives of the study, research
questions, research methods, the scope and the design of the study.

Part II, “Development”, consists three chapters:
- Chapter 1 – Theoretical background - presents the preliminary knowledge of
some basic theories and a review of related literature to the study.
- Chapter 2 - Methodology - describes the research method, data collection
instruments, and detailed information about the research procedures.
4

- Chapter 3 - Findings and Discussions - analyzes the initial data collected and

interviews. The chapter mainly focuses on contrasting the similarities and
differences between the two mentioned cultures through the analysis of
conversations made by American and Vietnamese university students.

Part III, “Conclusion”, a recapitulation of the research including the theoretical
frameworks, methodology and major findings, together with the limitations and
suggestions for further study.
5

PART II: DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

1.1 A brief overview on Contrastive Analysis
1.1.1 Definition
In an attempt to minimize the problems that foreign language learners encounter on
their acquisition process, linguists proposed the conceptual theory of contrastive
analysis. The term „Contrastive Linguistics‟ was first suggested by Whorf (1941),
meaning of „a comparative study which emphasizes on linguistic differences‟.
However, not until the publication of „Linguistics Across Cultures‟ by Lado, R. (1957)
was the in-depth excavation into this field commenced. Later on, the original term
changed to „Contrastive Analysis‟ (CA) as we know it today.

As Fisiak (1981:1)‟s redefinition, CA is „a sub discipline of linguistics concerned with
the comparison of two or more languages or subsystems of languages in order to
determine both the differences and similarities between them.‟ In other words, CA is
the systematic study of a pair or more of languages with a view to identifying their
structural differences and similarities.

The goal of CA is to find out the differences between the first language and the target
language; simultaneously, via contrastive analysis, problems can be predicted and

considered.

Robert Lado (1957) noted:
„Individuals tend to transfer the forms and meanings and the distribution of forms
and meanings of their native language and culture to the foreign language and
6

culture- both productively and when attempting to speak the language and to act in
the culture and receptively when attempting to grasp and understand the language
and culture as practiced by natives.‟

1.1.2 Macro-linguistic Contrastive Analysis
In a way, CA can be perceived from different perspectives: micro-linguistically or
macro-linguistically. While micro-linguistic CA lays emphasis on describing the
language elements without any recourse to external factors, macro-linguistic CA is a
field of study concerned with language in its broadest sense. Macro-linguistic CA is a
formal description of how people communicate, including cultural and behavioral
features associated with languages based on the interrelationships.

Macrolinguistics in CA can be characterized by:
(i) A concern for communicative competence rather than linguistic
competence.
(ii) An attempt to describe linguistic events within their extra-linguistic
settings.
(iii) The search for units of linguistic organization larger than the single
sentence.
(James, C. 1980:98)
Also, James, C. (1980:101) paraphrased six variables first mentioned by Hymes (1974)
into „who says what to whom, where and when, how and why.‟

It can be interpreted that macro-linguistic CA looks at discourse analysis, the study of
text and conversational interaction, as one of its concerning disciplines. Therefore, the
theory of conversation analysis is closely related to macro-linguistic CA in particular
and in this contrastive study in general.
7

1.2 An brief overview on Conversation Analysis
1.2.1 Conversation
Making conversations is one of the daily bases activities of human beings. It is
apparent that all of us get involved in conversational interaction, also, on which living
human societies depend to function properly. According to C. Goodwin and Heritage
(1990:283), social interaction was elucidated as „the primordial means through which
the business of the social world is transacted, the identities of its participants are
affirmed or denied, and its cultures are transmitted, renewed and modified.‟
Undoubtedly, like an indispensable part, conversations help people socialize and
develop and nourish their mutual relationships.

1.2.2 Conversation Analysis
Studies have shown that when people converse, their communication is more than just
the systematic use of linguistic items; that is, something else other than language itself.

„Conversation Analysis‟ is seen as a unique way of analyzing language and social
interaction. This kind of study on talk-in-interaction has long been a phenomenon of
great interest for researchers of a wide range of fields. Conversation analytic approach
has become most influential for its contributions to provide deep insights that can
unravel many linguistic problems (Levinson 1983: 364). It takes, as one of its subjects,
the study of mundane social interaction in naturally occurring settings on the basis of
rigorous and systematic methods. The assumption that social actions are meaningful,
and are produced and interpreted as such, leads to the desire to discover, describe and
analyze their natural organization or order, which constitutes and constructs this

orderliness. Conversation analysis, therefore, licitly investigates all areas of socially
motivated talk. (Liddicoat, J. A. 2007:17) Its primary concern is the discovery,
description, and analysis of how conversation is produced and understood.
8

In order to provide real-life data from different subjects, audio taping technologies
have been employed to record naturally occurring actions in real-world settings,
combined with direct observation and notes by researchers. This gives rise to an
extensive analysis of the rules and orders of talk. New approaches to the study of
language and communication with respect to culture focusing on meanings-in-context,
natural classification systems by members of a culture, their perceptions and
conventions also brought about changes in conversation analysis.

1.3 Language and Culture
1.3.1 What is „language‟?
Kramsch, C. (2004) defined language as „the principal means whereby we conduct our
social group‟. Another view from Sapir (1921) was that „language is a purely human
and non-instinctive method of communicating ideas, emotions and desire by means of
voluntarily produced symbols.‟ Language is a part of culture and a part of human
behavior.

Fulfilling many other tasks, language was denoted with three major functions as stated
by Krech (1962). Firstly, language plays a role of the primary vehicle of
communication, such as expressing thoughts, greeting, conducting religious services
and so on. Secondly, it reflects the personality of an individual and his cultural
properties and also forms the shape of personality and culture in return. Last but not
least, language enables the growth and transmission of culture, the continuity of
societies, and the effective functioning and control of social group.

It is undeniable that language plays a paramount role in developing, elaborating and

transmitting culture and language, allowing us to provide everything needed to
facilitate communication.
9

1.3.2 What is „culture‟?
The term „culture‟ has a wide range of definitions. Culture can refer to a process, a way
of life and also a product.

Tylor, E. (1871) first gave the definition of culture which has been widely quoted:
„Culture… is that complex whole which includes knowledge, beliefs, arts, morals, law,
custom and any other capacities and habits acquired by man as a member of society.‟

According to Clifford Geertz, however, culture was viewed as a symbolic meaning
system. It literally served fully as a semiotic system in which symbols function to
communicate the meanings from one mind to another.

Goodenough proposed that „A society‟s culture consists of whatever it is one has to
know or believe in order to operate in a manner acceptable to its members, and to do
so in any role that they can accept for any of themselves‟ (as cited in Wardhaugh,
1992:216).

From Banks‟s point of view (1988:126), it was „a cluster of attributes such as values,
beliefs, behavior patterns and symbols unique to a particular human group.‟

Hall (1976) developed the theory of culture by analogizing the iceberg model. He
believed that culture was divided into two parts: one part was obvious enough for us to
see; the other more obscure with tangible aspects.
10

Figure 1. Iceberg model of Culture

It is Nguyen, Q. (1998) who defined the term „culture‟ was “a shared background
resulting from a common language and communication style, customs, beliefs, attitudes
and values.‟ In other words, culture is the heritage from generation to generation.

The term 'culture' is seen as whatever a person must have in order to function and live
in a particular society.

1.3.3 The relationship between language and culture
It is obvious that the relationship between language and culture is deeply rooted. They
are regarded as two back-to-back sides of a paper and both cannot exist outside the
social contexts.

Language is employed to maintain and convey culture and cultural ties. Different ideas
stem from differing language use within one‟s culture and their interconnection
commence at one‟s birth. When an infant is born, regardless of his or her origin,
compared to any other infant born, in fact, is quite similar. This idea has been around
for thousands of years and was discussed by Confucius. However, not until the child is
11

exposed to their surroundings do they become individuals belonging to their own
cultural group.

It is such a definite assertion that language is one part of culture and under the impact
of culture. To be more precise, language is a major component and supporter of culture
as well as a vital instrument for transferring messages, a cultural-bound duty. That is
not to mention about the fact that language is influenced, shaped by culture and reflects
culture. Without language, culture would not be possible.

A significant point was brought up by Emmitt and Pollock (1997), who stated that even
though people are brought up under similar behavioral backgrounds or cultural
situations but, nevertheless, speak different languages, their world view may be very
different. Everyone‟s views are dependent on the culture which has influenced them, as
well as being described using the language which has been shaped by that culture. The
understanding of a culture and its people can be enhanced by the knowledge of their
language. Different thoughts are brought about by the utilization of different forms of
language. Different languages will create different limitations; therefore, a person who
shares a culture but speaks different languages, will have different world views.




LANGUAGE
CULTURE
Language to talk
Culture of talking
CULTURE OF
COMMUNICATION
12

1.4 An overview on Friendship
1.4.1 Definition
„Friendship is a relationship between two people
who hold mutual affection for each other.‟
(Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
In real life, friendship can be established by any reasons, anywhere and anytime, such
as on starting a new job, moving from place to place and so on. Friendship is of the
voluntary relationship which includes the practices of starting up, sustaining and
ruining, together with the expectations that friends have for each other. Most of us take

this kind of relationship for granted and see them as a law of nature; while others do
not. In any case, it is globally agreed that friends ought to have shared commitment,
priority to the other‟s request and supporting assistance.

Linguistically speaking, there is no doubt that the word „friendship‟ exists in every
language of the world; however, somehow this term is too broad for us to understand
fully. In the attempt to translate the original word into our own mother tongue, we
encounter an enormous problem: there are a huge number of corresponding
connotations. That leads to a way to uncover cultural differences: review the
philological roots of those various verbal equivalents and trace their implications.

1.4.2 Types of friendships
In the old Greeks‟ time, the great philosopher Aristotle initiated the very first
classification of friendships in his book Nicomachean Ethics. As he proposed, there
were three types of friendships.
- Friendship of utility: This kind of friendship based on the usefulness that
people see in each other that they think they can take advantage of. Therefore,
13

it is not expected to last very long because as soon as the practical purpose is
no longer present, the link between those friends for benefits ends.
- Friendship of pleasure: The name suggests the key factor for the existence of
friendship: pleasure. It depends on the amount of pleasure, informally „fun‟,
that the involvers get from the relationship. In other words, they enjoy each
other‟s companionship. However, this friendship is still of danger zone if the
participants no longer find the other person pleasant to be with.
- Friendship of the good: also known as Friendship of Virtue. This friendship is
based on the respect and admiration that the participants have for each other.
The compatible values, goals, perspectives and visions on both people‟s lives
is required to assure a powerful and long-lasting relationship. That is the

reason why it takes much longer time to build; simultaneously, it is harder to
break.
Whereas friendships of utility and pleasure exist for the utility and pleasure for oneself,
the friendship of virtue is for the friend.

At present, the concept of „friendship‟ can vary across a different, new scale.
Wikipedia, for example, provides the following levels of friendships:
- Acquaintance: not a true friend; sharing of emotional ties is absent. Normally,
acquaintances are the ones we see once in a while after a long time.
- Best friend (or close friend): The kind of friendship owns the strongest ties
between the participants.
- Bromance: A mixed term of „brother‟ and „romance‟ is newly established to
denote the close relationship (non-sexual) between men.
- Casual relationship: Two people sticking together for the purpose of sexual or
near-sexual affinity, not for the demand of sharing a formal relationship. This
can also refer to a "hook-up".
14

- Comrade: A very common term in military service or political connotation.


- Internet relationship: A form of friendship or romance which takes place
over the Internet. These friendships are also based on the thought that they may
never meet in real life, they know each other for who they are, instead of the
mask they may use in real life.
- Open relationship a relationship, usually between two people, that agree each
partner is free to have sexual intercourse with others outside the relationship.
- Pen pal: People who have a relationship via postal correspondence. They may
or may not have met each other in person and may share either love,
friendship, or simply an association between each other.

The classification of friendship was identified on the basis of a number of factors, such
as how close the involvers were and how the relationship was formed, which shared
both similarities as well as differences between cultures.

1.4.3 Friendship in the U.S culture
A study done by Miller McPherson, Lynn Smith-Lovin, and Matthew E. Brashears
(American Sociological Review, 2006) suggested that American society was believed
to be witnessing a significant reduction in the quantity and quality of close friendships.
Causes were varied but the three most commonly blamed were gender confusion,
divorce and technological development of mass media communications.

Diep, T.X. (US and Vietnamese cultures in contrast through everyday conversations,
2009) pointed out some features of American people towards making friends.
- Firstly, Americans respect other people‟s privacy and hope those people do the
same thing for them. They hesitate to make questions that may invade others‟
personal issues. Thus, it is much more difficult for American people to have
close friends. Nevertheless, once they can get rid of their reluctance and
15

understand each other thoroughly, they will certainly become best friends and
cherish their friendship.
- Secondly, Americans are often quite initiative in striking up a conversation
with strangers, which creates an intimate atmosphere. They are prone to keep
the conversations at savoir-vivre level with topics on traffic, weather or news
on public media.
- Thirdly, in spite of being open in starting a talk-in-interaction, Americans are
rather critical towards the politeness. For example, they will not be happy if
you visit them at home without a phone call in advance; or, you open the door
without knocking.
- Fourthly, despite being widely known for their sociality and friendly

appearance, American people only consider their relationships as a circle of
acquaintances.

1.4.4 Friendship in Vietnamese culture
Diep, T.X (2009) also asserted that Vietnamese people easily open their heart to other
people as soon as they can overcome their reservation and find the interlocutor
trustworthy. In spite of the fact that there may not many clearly-stated taboo topics for
conversations, the Vietnamese people are usually careful about the choice of
conversation contents. Moreover, in contrary to the U.S culture, in Vietnamese culture,
it may be easier for two Vietnamese people to become close even if they only share a
few interests or characteristics in common. Gradually, their friendship will be
nourished and gain better mutual understanding.

16

CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY

This chapter features the research method, data collection instruments as well as data
analysis from the survey and tape recording.

Research approach
This study has made use of the methods, as in a mixed research, in order to collect,
process and analyze the data.

The study was based on a mixed model paradigm. It was because the paradigm owned
appropriate nature and characteristics for the research topic, questions and context. As
Johnson and Christensen (2004) defined it, both qualitative and quantitative research
was adopted within a stage in the research process. Therefore, the employment of both
the two research methods in this sort of study has proved to uphold validity and
reliability of the findings.

2.1 Data collection instruments
2.1.1 Survey questionnaire
The questionnaire was designed with four real-life situations with suggested solutions.
The purposes of the survey questionnaire are 1) to explore how American and
Vietnamese people with the different cultures react to the same situations, 2) to
compare the data collected from audio tape to enhance the reliability of the study.

2.1.2 Audio taping
Audio taping of naturally occurring talks is the main instrument in the process of data
collection as the study emphasized on interactive conversations. The purpose of these
tapes is to re-confirm the results obtained from the survey questionnaire.
17

2.2 Participants
Apart from the direct informants, since the study was intended to investigate two
cultures, the writer called for the help from six assistants (two in two disparate states of
the U.S: Georgia and Indiana, and four in Hanoi). Assistants in the U.S included one
Vietnamese student studying in Wesleyan College (Macon, Georgia) and the other in
Wabash College (Crawfordville, Indiana). Assistants in Hanoi were four students
enrolling in two universities: National Economics University and Thang Long
University.

2.2.1 Survey questionnaire
Copies of the survey questionnaire were delivered to 80 informants: 40 American and
40 Vietnamese college students whose age ranged from 17 to 25. All informants in the
U.S were native American, and in Hanoi were native Vietnamese. American
informants from different departments selected were joining same classes with the
writer‟s assistants. Meanwhile, Vietnamese informants were students from two
different universities; 20 of whom also were attending same classes with each of the

writer‟s assistants.

2.2.2 Audio taping
Among 80 informants, the six assistants observed and randomly recorded their natural
conversations in real-life on four mentioned situations. Each assistant in the U.S was in
charge of recording two situations; each assistant in Hanoi took care of one situation.

2.3 The procedure of data collection and analysis
2.3.1 Survey questionnaire
In the U.S, due to the strict school regulations, in both colleges, an online version of
the survey questionnaire was sent via a mass email to the selected informants. After
18

getting replies from informants, assistants were to work out the numbers of answers for
every question, then sent via email to the writer.

In Hanoi, a hardcopy of the questionnaire was given to informants during their recess
by their classmates (assistants). Next, the four assistants collected the answered
questionnaire papers and did the same work as the U.S assistants. Lastly, they sent the
calculation via email to the writer.

2.3.2 Audio tapes
The data were collected from mundane talk occurring in natural settings in 2012, in
Georgia and Indiana (the U.S) and in Hanoi (Vietnam). In the U.S, the assistants
decided the situations of which they were in charge of recording corresponding real-
life conversations. Each situation was observed and recorded without the notice of the
informants. In Hanoi, the assistants took care of their own recordings of assigned
situation in which the recordings were also unknown.

The collected audio tapes, then, were sent to the writer to transcribe analyze. However,

due to the spontaneousness in occurring of the talks and time constraint, each assistant
could only tape one conversation for one situation. That made, in total, two recordings
for each case, one in English language and one in Vietnamese language.

The Vietnamese corpus was from 08 native speakers of Vietnamese living and
studying two different institutions in Hanoi. The corpus contained four conversations,
each of which was approximately more or less than one minute. The first conversation
was between a twenty-year-old girl, sharing room with the writer‟s assistant and a
young man neighbor them on the same floor in a rented house. The setting was that the
man had a habit of turning up the music at midnight or later, which often woke the girls
19

up. The assistant‟s roommate decided to approach the neighbor‟s room to „negotiate‟.
The second tape was a conversation among two students, one female and one male,
who were supposed to be classmates or in the same department at college. The girl was
standing in front of the school gate, coincidentally next to the assistant, waiting for the
boy. Unexpectedly and luckily, the conversation was recorded on that day. The third
conversation was between two quite close classmates attending the International
Finance class (National University of Economics) five people. One of them asked the
other to let him copy the homework which, for some reasons, he did not do before
going to class. The last conversation was recorded between the writer‟s assistant and
her roommate. This situation was quite similar to what the assistant had to suffer in real
life; therefore, it was rather easy for her to get it in tape.

The English corpus consisted of four tapes, all of which were recorded in the U.S
(including Georgia and Indiana). All informants were native speakers of English from
North America and studying as undergraduates. The first tape contained a conversation
between a girl, roommate of the writer‟s assistant, and the landlord. The girl sought for
the intervention of the land-owner to reinforce her already-sent-out warning previously.
The second tape was made with the help of the assistant‟s close friend and his

Photography (Wabash College) classmate 4. They met each other in a small private
party in a friend‟s house. The setting of the third conversation was in the History of
Arts (Wabash College) between two classmates of the assistant. One of them was
spending the whole night playing computer games, without studying. Therefore, in the
next morning, he begged his classmate, a relatively good student, to let him „borrow‟
the homework. The final conversation was rather authentic as it happened between one
of the assistant and his roommate. He said that they have been sharing room for almost
two semesters now and disputes are inevitable. What they normally did was just similar
to the tape.
20

These data were claimed to come from actual interactions between native speakers of
English in natural everyday settings. Generally, they were transcribed on the basis of
the conventions used in conversation analysis. This, according to Psathas (1995: 45),
was appropriate and allowable in conversation analysis, as „Data may be obtained from
any available source, the only requirement being that these should be naturally
occurring, rather than produced for the purpose of study.‟ By and large, the data could
be assumed to consist of naturally occurring interactions, and were very much similar
to those happen in everyday exchanges between native speakers.