AN ENGLISH VIETNAMESE CROSS CULTURAL STUDY OF BOASTING

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

Hà THị TUYếT
NHUNG

[
ơ

AN ENGLISH VIETNAMESE CROSS CULTURAL
STUDY OF BOASTING
NGHIÊN CứU GIAO VĂN HOá VIệT ANH TRONG CáCH KHOE KHOANG

M.A MINOR THESIS

Field: English Linguistics
Code: 602215

Hanoi, 2010


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

Hà THị TUYếT

NHUNG

[
ơ

AN ENGLISH -VIETNAMESE CROSS - CULTURAL
STUDY OF BOASTING
NGHIÊN CứU GIAO VĂN HOá VIệT ANH TRONG CáCH KHOE KHOANG

M.A MINOR THESIS

Field: English Linguistics
Code: 602215
Supervisor: Đào Thị Thu Trang,
M.A

Hanoi, 2010


1

CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY OF
STUDY PROJECT REPORT

I certify my authority of the Study Project Report submitted entitled

AN ENGLISH – VIETNAMESE CROSS–CULTURAL
STUDY OF BOASTING
in fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree Master of Arts

Hµ ThÞ TuyÕt Nhung

Hanoi - 2010


2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to take this opportunity to express my gratitude to my supervisor, Ms
§µo ThÞ Thu Trang, for her clear guidance, insightful comments, dutiful supervision
and kind support. If not for her help, my thesis would not have been accomplished.
My special thanks go to all my lecturers in Vietnam National University, Hanoi,
Department of Post Graduate Studies, especially Ms. §ç ThÞ Mai Thanh who
introduced me to Cross-Cultural Communication and inspired me to do
this research.
Last but not least, I would like to show my deep gratitude to my family and my
friends for their support and encouragement without which my assignment would not
have been accomplished.

Hµ ThÞ TuyÕt Nhung


3

ABSTRACT
This study examines the similarities and differences in how Anglicist and
Vietnamese native speakers boast of themselves, a face threatening act, with a focus on
the utilization of politeness strategies. Being conducted in the light of cross-cultural
analysis and based on the collection of quantitative method with the use of survey
questionnaires, the study is carried out with the special emphasis given to:

 Linguistic realization of boasting in English and Vietnamese.
 Strategies in boasting employed by two particular cultural groups:
Anglicist and Vietnamese.
Collected data from survey questionnaires are cross-culturally compared and
contrasted. The findings of the study provide the evidence that people from both cultures
employ politeness strategies in their expressions with different preference. This hopefully
contribute to helping interlocutors avoid communication breakdowns in VietnameseAnglicist cross-cultural communication and helping teachers improve their process of
English teaching.


4

TABLE OF CONTENTS


5

* Certificate of originality of study project
report.............................................

ac i

*Acknowledgements..........................................................................................
.............

*Abstract...............................................................................................................
.............

*Table of
contents...........................................................................................................

*Abbreviations....................................................................................................
.............

* List of

tables...................................................................................................................
* List of

figures.................................................................................................................
1. Rationale
..........................................................................................................

2. Scope of the study
........................................................................................

3. Aims of the
study...........................................................................................
...................................................................................................

of

the

study

PART

......................................................................................

II:

DEVELOPMENT...................................................................................
CHAPTER

1:

THEORETICAL

BACKGROUND.......................................
1.1. Language, culture and cross-cultural
communication...............
1.1.1. Language, culture in
communication.......................................
1.1.2. Language and culture in cross-cultural
communication.....
1.2. Speech
act......................................................................................................
1.2.1. What is a speech
act?......................................................................
1.2.2. Classification of speech

1.
B i
as ai
sp
ac v
.......v

..............
........i

1. v
P
ii
enes
s.........
vi
.... ii

1. 3
Wh3
po
s? 5

4. Methodology
Design

ii

...........
...........
1
...
... 1
...........
2
...........
...
... 2

PART I: INTRODUCTION

5.

.........
ii
.........
...

.........
... 5
..... 5
......

5
6
7
7
8
1
0
1
1
1
1


6

1.3.2. Face and Politeness..........................................................................

12

1.3.3. Politeness strategies.........................................................................

14

CHAPTER 2: DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS...................................

16

2.1. Advisable topics to boast..........................................................................

16

2.2. Politeness strategies realized in boasting..........................................

18

2.3. Use of strategies in boasting as seen from communicating......

20

partners' parameters..........................................................................................
2.3.1. Data analysis......................................................................................

20

2.3.2 Major similarities and differences...............................................

28

2.4. Use of strategies in boasting as seen from informants'

28

parameters..............................................................................................................
2.4.1. Data analysis......................................................................................

29

2.4.2 Major similarities and differences...............................................

31

PART III: CONCLUSION .....................................................................................

33

1. Review of the findings..................................................................................

33

2. Implications for cross – cultural communication ............................

33

3. Suggestions for further research.............................................................

33

REFERENCES
APPENDICES

35


7

ABBREVIATIONS

DCT: Discourse Completion Task
FTA: Face Threatening Act
H: the Hearer
S: the Speaker


8

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: The five general functions of speech acts (following Searle, 1969)
Table 2: Favourable topics of boasting
Table 3: Politeness strategies according to the parameter of age
Table 4: Politeness strategies according to the parameter of gender
Table 5: Politeness strategies according to the parameter of marital status
Table 6: Politeness strategies according to the parameter of living place


9

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Politeness strategies in boasting to Close friend
Figure 2: Politeness strategies in boasting to a person you dislike
Figure 3: Politeness strategies in boasting to Colleague (same age, same sex)
Figure 4: Politeness strategies in boasting to Colleague (same age, opposite sex)
Figure 5: Politeness strategies in boasting to Acquaintance (older than you)
Figure 6: Politeness strategies in boasting to Acquaintance (younger than you)
Figure 7: Politeness strategies in boasting to Brother/sister
Figure 8: Politeness strategies in boasting to Aunt/uncle
Figure 9: Politeness strategies in boasting to Boss (older than you)
Figure 10: Politeness strategies in boasting to Boss (younger than you)


10

PART I: INTRODUCTION

1. RATIONALE
Nowadays, as English becomes an international language in many fields, the
number of Vietnamese learners of English has increased. However, it is recognized that
many Vietnamese – English interactions have experienced communication breakdown
due to misinterpretations and misunderstandings.
Language plays an important role in our life. Language is not only for
communication but also for cultural exchange among nations. It is difficult to imagine
what our lives would be like without language. Language is a sign that makes human
different from all other species in the animal kingdom. People use it to communicate their
ideas and thoughts to express their feelings such as anger, love, hate… and to convey
their hopes and dreams.

Cross – cultural communication is an interesting and attractive field for us to find
out the similar and different language when studying speech acts such as greeting,
advising, promising among countries in the world. Comparisons of speech acts from
different cultures have revealed that the same speech acts may be realized differently
across cultures, following social norms of usage which are specific to the given speech
community.
In real – life conversations, people show different aspects of lives through
diversified formal and informal speech. Among them, lots of people can’t wait to tell us
all how fantastic they are, how they are good at this and even better than that. They claim
all manner of wild and outrageous things. They may claim to be enlightened, wise, highly
intellectual and they might tell you that they are so popular that you should be honored
they chose you to spend their day with. This is the way people boast and big themselves
up.
In the process of learning a foreign language, learners of English have to get to
know a different culture. They sooner or later realize the presence of cross – cultural


11

differences between English and Vietnamese. There were many studies about how
English and Vietnamese differ from each other in the ways of expressing sympathy,
promise, excitement, enjoyment… However, the study of boasting has not been paid
much attention to. With the hope of contributing a little to successful cross – cultural
communication, this paper with a limited scope of research on English and Vietnamese
similarities and differences in boasting has been written to help speakers of English
observe the nature of boasting, how to boast, when to boast in real – life situations.

2. SCOPE OF THE STUDY
Although paralinguistic (speed, loudness, pitch…) and extralinguistic (facial
expressions, postures, proximity…) factors, to some extent, play a decisive role in

interpersonal communication, they are beyond the scope of this study. The study only
focuses on the verbal aspects of the act of boasting.
The study is limited to the data obtained from the survey questionnaire on ways of
boasting in three socially differentiated situations. The questionnaires were given to 50
Vietnamese and 50 English native speakers. Basing on their completion of the
questionnaires, the author used the utterances for contrastive analysis. Among the various
participants’ social relationship, the author only examines the relationship between close
friends, colleagues, bosses-employees, and the people they dislike.

3. AIMS OF THE STUDY
The research is intended to investigate major similarities and differences in the
ways of boasting by the Vietnamese and English in given situations. Its goal is to provide
a deep insight into cross – cultural communication between two languages and cultures,
thus help to avoid communication breakdown in English – Vietnamese cross-cultural
interaction.
In order to gain this overall target, the study will:


discover the acts of boasting based on the theories of speech acts and politeness.



investigate advisable topics that the English and Vietnamese prefer to boast about.



investigate the use of politeness strategies in boasting through relationship with
certain partners and under certain variables (age, gender, marital status, living
place…) through some specific situations.

12



find out major similarities and differences in how the English and Vietnamese
boast of themselves verbally.



raise teachers’ and learners’ cross – cultural awareness of boasting in cross –
cultural communication in order to avoid potential conflicts.

4. METHODOLOGY
The study is mainly conducted by the quantitative method with the use of survey
questionnaires. The questionnaires are designed with both close-ended and open-ended
questions. In the open-ended part, DCT (Discourse Completion Task) questions are
designed and used. DCT is regarded as an effective method to collect a wide range of
similarities and differences between Vietnamese and English, and more importantly
between the two cultures in showing objection within the scope of the study.
In general, all the considerations, comments and remarks in this thesis are based on:
 Relevant publication
 Survey questionnaires
 Statistics, description and analysis of the collected data
 Consultation with supervisor
 Discussion with Vietnamese and English native colleagues
 Personal observation

5. DESIGN OF THE STUDY
The thesis consists of three parts:

PART I: INTRODUCTION
This part includes the rationale, aims, scope of the study, methodology and design
of the study.
PART II: DEVELOPMENT
This part is divided into two chapters:
Chapter 1: Theoretical background
In this chapter, theories of language, culture and communication are mentioned. A
theory of speech act is also mentioned with the view of boasting as a speech act. The
definition of politeness, politeness strategies are critically discussed.
Chapter 2: Data analysis and findings


13

In this chapter, data analysis and findings of the study are presented with the
illustrations of tables and charts. The similarities and differences of boasting between
Vietnamese and English languages and cultures are drawn from detailed and critical
analysis of data.
PART III: CONCLUSION
Summary of the major findings, implications for cross-cultural communication
and suggestions for further research are presented in this part.


14

PART II: DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

1.1. LANGUAGE, CULTURE AND CROSS-CULTURAL COMMUNICATION
1.1.1. Language, culture in communication

A language is a system of signs for encoding and decoding information. Many
animals or even plant species communicate with each other. Humans are not unique in
this capability. However, human language is unique in having a symbolic communication
system that is learned instead of biologically inherited. Language distinguishes us so
clearly from other animals. Delahunty and Garvey (1994:15) share this idea when stating
that language is distinctively human. Yet, it is not all that language functions. As a human
product, language is used as a means of cognition and communication.
It is a common need for all beings to communicate with each other but we-as
human beings-conduct our communication through our own wonderful and powerful
means, language. Known as “a defining characteristic of being human”, language is the
most convincing criterion to justify human might. We create the means to communicate
in that we distinguish man from beast. We communicate with an exclusive emphasis on
verbal forms through words and words accompanied by a system of non-verbal cues like
eye contact, facial expressions, etc.
Mc Arthurs (1996: 523) views language as a system of communication which uses
structured vocal sounds and its embodiments in other media are writing, print, and
physical signs.
Supporting this point of view, Verderber goes on to perform the use of language
and views language as the medium through which a culture is manifested.
“Through language we create, maintain, and alter our environments. We can
choose or seek information or we can choose to avoid doing so. Through language we
can be clear or be ambiguous-we can disclose what we are thinking or feeling or we can


15

hide those thoughts or feelings. And perhaps most importantly, through language we can
affect every aspect of our relationship.” (Verderber, 1990:62)
Born for the function of communicating, language is closely linked to the culture
it serves. Culture provides land for language to develop and, in its turn, language operates

to serve culture. They are clearly interrelated and interdependent.
Thus, language and culture are interwoven, and their correlation accounts for an
important part in communication. This correlation is also of great importance in crosscultural communication and foreign language teaching and learning. This will be further
discussed in the part which follows.
1.1.2. Language and culture in cross-cultural communication
Communication is culture bound. The way an individual communicates emanates
from his or her culture. Of course, a person may know more than one culture or may be
competent in a combination of cultures. According to Richards (1985: 92), “cross-cultural
communication is an exchange of ideas, information, etc…between persons from
different backgrounds. There are more problems in cross-cultural communication than in
communication between people of the same cultural background. Each participant may
interpret the

other’s speech according to his or her own cultural conventions and

expectations. If the cultural conventions and misunderstandings can easily arise, even
resulting in a total break down of communication. This has been shown by research into
real life situations, such as job interviews, doctor-patient encounters and legal
communication”.
Cross-cultural communication is considered a study of a particular idea or concept
within several cultures that compares one culture to another on the aspect of interest. One
factor that is believed to contribute to successful communication in general and crosscultural communication in particular is communicative competence.
Canale and Swain proposed a modular framework of four components for
describing communicative competence:
a) Grammatical competence: including vocabulary, word formation, sentence
formation, pronunciation, spelling and linguistic semantics;
b) Sociolinguistic competence: addressing the extent to which utterances are
produced and understood appropriately in different sociolinguistic contexts depending on

16

contextual factors such as status of participants, purposes of the interaction, and norms or
conventions of interaction;
c) Discourse competence: concerning mastery of how to combine grammatical
forms and meanings to achieve a unified spoken or written text in different genres;
d) Strategic competence: composed of mastery of verbal and non-verbal
communication strategies that may be called into action to compensate for breakdowns in
communication due to limiting conditions in actual situations or to insufficient
competence in one or more of the other areas of communicative competence and to
enhance the effectiveness of communication.
This theory contributes a lot to the study of cross-cultural communication. It can
not be denied that communicative competence is shaped by the social and cultural life of
a particular speech community. However, only some components of communicative
competence are more or less related to culture.
According to Thomas (1995), there are two types of pragmatic failures in crosscultural communication due to a break in the mutual communicative competence. The
sociopragmatic failures mean an inappropriate type of communication pattern chosen – an
inappropriate politeness strategies (positive instead of negative, or vice versa), or an
inappropriate type of speech act (criticizing instead of complaining), or misunderstanding
the real meaning of a speech act (declining invitation in attempt to be polite which is
understood as unwillingness to come). The linguapragmatic failures mean choosing some
linguistic devices appropriate for carrying out a given strategy in one language/culture
and inappropriate in another.
1.2. SPEECH ACT
1.2.1. What is a speech act?
When people attempt to express themselves they do not only produce utterances
containing grammatical structures and lexical factors, but also perform actions through
these utterances. According to Yule, G. (1996:47), actions performed via utterances are
generally called speech acts and, in English, are given more specific labels, such as
apology, complaint, compliment, invitation, promise, request, offer etc.

Making a statement may be the paradigmatic use of language, but there are sort of
other things we can do with words. We can make requests, ask questions, give orders,


17

make promises, give thanks, offer, apology, boast about something and so on. Moreover,
almost any speech act is really the perform of several acts at once, distinguished by
different aspects of the speakers’ intention.
John Austin (1962) defines speech acts as

the actions performed in saying

something. When people produce utterances, they often perform actions via those
utterances. These actions are called speech acts. A speech act is part of a speech event.
The speech act performed by producing an utterance, consists of three related acts,
namely locutionary act, illocutionary act and perlocutionary act.


Locutionary act is the basic act of producing a meaningful linguistic
expression. The locutionary act is performed with some purposes or
functions in mind.



Illocutionary act is an act performed via the communicative force of an
utterance. We generally also perform illocutionary acts such as informing,
advising, offer, promise, boasting, ect.



Perlocutionary act is what we bring about or achieve by saying something,
such as convincing, persuading, deterring perlocutionary acts are
performed only on the assumption that the hearer will recognize the effect
you intended.

1.2.2. Classification of speech act
Yule, G. (1996:49) argues that, of these three dimensions, the most discussed one
is illocutionary force. Indeed the term “speech act” is generally interpreted quite narrowly
to mean only the illocutionary force of an utterance. For instance, the utterance “I will
come back” can represent different illocutionary forces such as a promise, a prediction, a
warning…However, which illocutionary act is performed depends on how the utterance
fits into the particular circumstance.
There are thousands of possible illocutionary acts and several attempts have been
made to classify them into a small number of types. Such classifications are difficult
because Speaker’s intentions are not always clear.


18

According to Searle (1969) there are five types of speech acts based on the
Speaker’s intentions. They are declarations, representatives, expressives, directives and
commissives.
Declarations are those kinds of speech acts that change the world via their
utterance. For instance, “I resign”. “War is hereby declared”.
Representatives are those kinds of speech acts that state what the speaker believes
to be the case or not. Statements of fact, assertions, conclusions and descriptions are
examples of the speaker representing the world as he or she believes it is. For example,
“The earth is flat”, “Today is a sunny day”.
Expressives are those kinds of speech acts that state what the speaker feels. They

express psychological states and can be statements of pleasure, pain, likes, dislikes, joy
and sorrow. For example, “I am terribly sorry”, “Oh! That’s great.”
Directives are those kinds of speech acts that the speaker use to get the Hearer to
do something. They express what the speaker wants. They are commands, orders,
requests, suggestions ect. For example, “Could you lend me your book?”, “Don’t come to
class late!”
Commissives are those kinds of speech acts that speakers use to commit
themselves to some future action. They express what the Speaker intends. They are
promises, threats, refusals, ect. For example, “I’ll give you a lift”, “I won’t do it again”.
These five general functions of speech acts with their key features may be
summarized as follows:
Speech act type

Direction of fit

S = Speaker / X = Situation


19
Declarations

words change the world

S causes X

Representatives

words fit the world

S believes X

Expressives

words fit the world

S feels X

Directives

the world fits words

S wants X

Commissives

the world fits words

S intends X

Table 1: The five general functions of speech acts (following Searle, 1969)
Another approach to distinguish different types of speech acts is based on the
relationship between structure and functions. Yule, G. (1996:54) claims that there is an
easily recognized relationship between the three structural forms (declarative,


interrogative, imperative) and the three general communicative functions (statement,
question, command/request)
Eg:

You are late. (declarative)

Are you late? (interrogative)
Don’t be late! (imperative)

Whenever there is a direct relationship between a structure and a function, we
have direct speech act. Whenever there is an indirect relationship between a structure and
a function, we have an indirect speech act. Thus, a declarative used to make a statement is
a direct speech act whereas a declarative used to make a request is an indirect speech act.
For example, the utterance “It’s cold outside” is a declarative. When it is used to make a
statement as paraphrased in “I hereby tell you about the weather”, it is functioning as a
direct speech act. When it is used to make a command or a request, as paraphrased in “I
hereby request of you that you close the door”, it is functioning as an indirect speech act.
1.2.3. Boasting as a speech act
In everyday conversation, people perform different types of speech acts and
boasting is one of those. Boasting always involves saying good things about oneself, with
the purpose of impressing other people. To impress them, one has to say something about
oneself that is not only good but that is unusually good; it must be something good that
cannot be said about at least some other people that the speaker is comparing himself
with. The way people extend and respond to the act of boasting is more or less guided by
their beliefs, customs, personality etc, so the strategies the Westerners choose to perform
this speech act can not be the same as those chosen by the Easterners.
According to Anna Wierzbicka (1987, p.202) boasting has the following meaning:


I say: something good (X) can be said about me.



I assume that this cannot be said about some other people.



I feel something good because of that.



I want people to feel something because of that.



I say this because I want to cause people to think of me as someone about whom
good things can be said that cannot be said about some other people and to feel
something because of that.


In boasting, the speaker’s primary objective is not so much to express his feelings
as to cause the addressee to feel something. The feeling sought in the addressee is not
necessarily a “good feeling”, such as admiration, it could also be a “bad feeling”, such as
envy.
Basing on Searle’s speech act classification, it can be seen that showing boasting
tends to belong to different kinds of speech acts. It should be noted that the “good thing”
which is being said about the speaker has to be said directly and not merely implied. This
means that a boast has to have a declarative form and thus it conveys the declaration act.
For instance, when someone wants to boast of himself towards his close friend he can
say: “Yes, I recently bought a new house. It is a big purchase!” or “Yah! I got it! I have
my new house.”
Boasting is also a directive act in which the speaker tries to make the hearer
perform an action. (“I bought a house recently. Could you come and see it?”)
However, boasting also appears to be a commissive act, in which the speaker uses
to commit himself to some future action. “I am a homeowner. Come and see and we’ll
have a housewarming party.”

In the reality of social interactions, boasting has proven to be a speech act which
has a great potentiality of causing face saving acts, and therefore needs to be investigated
thoroughly so that appropriate strategies for boasting could be introduced to help crosscultural communicators succeed in their interactions.
1.3. POLITENESS
Politeness is something that is very abstract, but it plays an important role in
interaction and has a great effect on the use of speech acts in human communication.
Politeness has been suggested that the principle of politeness governs all of the
communicative behave. The definitions of politeness will be dealt with in I.3.1, its
relation with Face will be dealt with in I.3.2, and politeness strategies will be dealt with in
I.3.3.
1.3.1. What is politeness
In language study, politeness is defined as: “(a) how languages express the social
distance between speakers and their different role relationships; (b) how face work, that


is, the attempt to establish, maintain, and save face during conversation, is carried out in
a speech community.” (Richards, J.C. et al., 1985:281).
Culturally, politeness is viewed as “a fixed concept, as in the idea of ‘polite social
behaviour’, or etiquette, within a culture” (Yule, 1996:60). Yule further states that such
different general principles for being polite in social interaction within a particular culture
as being tactful, generous, modest, and sympathetic toward others can be specified. And
as polite social behaviours may be different from one culture to another, what is
considered to be “politeness” varies in different cultures.
Cross-culturally, politeness in communication is seen as “any communicative act
(verbal and/or nonverbal) which is appropriately intended to make others feel better or
less bad” (Nguyen Quang, 2005:185)
1.3.2. Face and Politeness
As a human nature, every single man on the earth always tries to show to others
that they are good and worthy regardless of cultures, religions, or regions. They all try to
protect their “face”, a sense of positive identity and public self-esteem. However, in

everyday interactions, people have to deal with the situations of stress, disagreement,
conflict, ect. And face threatening acts (FTAs) happened in these situations are inevitable,
which include criticisms, objections, disagreements, asking favors, requesting information
or goods, giving orders, apologizing, boasting of something, ect. Politeness used to show
social consideration, therefore is a crucial element of interpersonal communication in all
human cultures.
The term Face was first adopted by Goffman (1967) to describe people’s need to
maintain a positive image of themselves in the presence of others. And he also points out
that individuals tend to avoid threats to other people’s self images. In daily
communication, face can be developed and maintained with the cooperation of others.
Incorporating the notion of face into politeness theory, Yule (1996:60) defines
face as “the public self-image of a person. It refers to that emotional and social sense of
self that everyone has and expects everyone else to recognize”.
There are two different components of face: freedom to act without being impeded
by others, termed negative face; and the desire to be approved of, respected and
appreciated by others, termed positive face (Brown & Levinson, 1987, p62). In other


words, while the negative face is the need to be independent, the positive face is the need
to be accepted (Yule, 1996, p62).
Almost any social interactions involve acts that are potentially threatening to
either or both of these aspects of face. Such acts are labeled FTAs in Brown & Levinson
terminology. They state that acts constituting a threat to the hearer’s negative face include
requests,

orders,

promises

and

compliments.

Criticism,

disagreement

and

misidentification are classified as threats to the hearer’s positive face. The speaker’s
negative face is threatened by the speaker’s expressing or accepting thanks and making
excuse while apologies, admitting guilt, responsibility or ignorance threaten the speaker’s
positive face. But complaints, threats and interruptions are cited as examples of FTAs that
pose a threat to both positive and negative face.
From the pragmatic perspective, when a speech act is considered threatening face
or not, the linguistic form, the context of the utterance and the relationship between the
speaker and the hearer must be taken into account simultaneously (Thomas, 1995, p157).
Consider the following examples below:
You must come and have dinner with us.
You should come and have dinner with us.
You may come and have dinner with us.
Obviously, the deontic modal “must” contained in the first sentence is an
expression of obligation. Similarly “should” and “may” in the second and third examples
are also deontic modals signifying desirability and permission respectively. In terms of
the degree of imposition, “must” is the most imposing and “may” the least. But why is it
considered polite for an English speaker to invite someone to dinner using the first
sentence and why it is rude for him/her to use the third sentence for the same purpose? In
fact, the first shows strong commitment on the part of the speaker to providing the dinner
while the use of “may” in the third example shows the contrary and the hearer may decide
not to come.

Apart from these above factors, there are certain cultural values and social
expectations in every society that determine particular acts. For example, some certain
topics in conversations are inherently face-threatening in one culture, but not in the other.
Vietnamese people usually ask questions about personal details, age, marital status with
strangers, which are considered highly private to Englishmen.