Phát triển khả năng hiểu tính hài hước trong các truyện cười tiếng anh của sinh viên ngành hướng dẫn du lịch qua tài liệu nguyên gốc

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
________________________

TRẦN THỊ ÁI HOA

DEVELOPING TOUR GUIDE STUDENTS’ ABILITY TO MAKE SENSE
OF HUMOUR IN ENGLISH JOKES THROUGH
AUTHENTIC MATERIALS
Phát triển khả năng hiểu tính hài hước trong các truyện cười tiếng Anh của
sinh viên ngành Hướng dẫn du lịch qua tài liệu nguyên gốc

A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree
of Doctor of Philosophy

Major: English Language Teaching Methodology
Code: 62140111
Supervisors: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Nguyễn Phương Nga
Dr. Tô Thị Thu Hương

HÀ NỘI-2018


STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP

I, the undersigned, certify my authority of the dissertation entitled
―Developing Tour Guide Students‘ Ability To Make Sense Of Humour In English
Jokes through Authentic Materials‖ in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
Doctor of Philosophy.
Except where the reference is indicated, no other person‘s work has been
used without due acknowledgement in the text of the dissertation.

TRAN THI AI HOA

i


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
On the very outset of this report, I would like to extend my sincere and
heartfelt obligation towards all the personages who have helped me in this
endeavour. Without their active guidance, help, cooperation and encouragement, I
would not have made headway in the project.
First of all, I wish to thank my supervisor Assoc. Prof. Dr. Nguyen Phuong Nga
for her tolerant perseverance with me in the world of combustion research. It was only
due to her initial valuable guidance and accurate judgement that I received to be able to
drive my research work in a respectable manner.I am eternally grateful to my associate
supervisor, Dr. To Thi Thu Huong for her extensive expertise and her generosity in
steering me through the research. She has always been in a cheerful, enthusiastic and
ever-friendly nature that inspires me to administer and complete this research. They both
have made my research possible by providing me with precious lessons and giving me
the chance to gain access to every stage of research.
My warm and sincere thanks are also merits to Prof. Nguyen Hoa, Dr. Huynh Anh
Tuan, Assoc. Prof. Le Van Canh, Assoc. Prof. Pham Thi Hong Nhung, Assoc. Prof. Le
Hung Tien, Dr. Hoang Thi Xuan Hoa and Dr. Dương Thi Thu Mai for their valuable
suggestions and assistance.
I would like to acknowledge the contribution of all the tour guides, foreign
tourists, teachers and tour guide undergraduates who participated in the survey in Khanh
Hoa Travel Agency and at college and university in Nha Trang City. I am thankful for
the teachers and tour guide undergraduates at Nha Trang College of Art, Culture and
Tourism (now renamed Khanh Hoa University) for verifying the proposed authentic
materials. Particularly, I am grateful for the 20 students at Khanh Hoa University who

were so enthusiastically participatory and hard-working in the intervention course.
Last but not least, I am deeply and forever indebted to my beloved family,
specifically my husband for their unconditional love, and my supportive foreign and
Vietnamese friends, especially my best friends in Nha Trang City for their precious
friendship and strong faith in me through all the fluctuations of my study.

ii


ABSTRACT

Using humour in tourism by telling English jokes to English-speaking
tourists in guided trips is a much needed capacity for Vietnamese tour guides.
Vietnamese EFL tour guide students, therefore, need to be trained and qualified
with this capacity for their tour guiding job. This study is an attempt to help develop
Vietnamese EFL tour guide students‘ ability to make sense of humour in English
jokes (defined as being able to understand and retell jokes in English to appropriate
audience in appropriate situations) through the use of authentic materials to enable
them to appropriately use humour in their tourguiding with particular reference to
English-speaking tourists.
An explanatory sequential mixed methods design was used for collection of
both quantitative and qualitative data to enhance validity and reliability of the
findings. The research was designed with two phases: one for authentic materials
selection and related competency-based experimental intervention course design
and the other for the implementation of the course to help develop tour guide
students‘ ability to make sense of humour.
After 8-week extra-curricular intervention, post test results presented a
significant rise compared with pre-test. Nearly all the students were able to
comprehend the humour in the introduced English jokes and two-thirds of the
students could retell suitable English jokes to appropriate audience in appropriate

situations. The findings have offered a considerable contribution not only to the
field of language education but also to the one of humour research. Thus, it can be
stated that EFL tour guide students could make sense of humour in English jokes
when properly trained and humour can be taught, a confirmation of the finding in
Pham‘s (2014) study. The contribution of the study is that it helps to provide the
tour guiding community in Viet Nam with a high-quality workforce to promote the
tourism industry development in Nha Trang City, Khanh Hoa Province.

iii


TABLE OF CONTENTS

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP ............................................................................ i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................................... ii
ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................. iii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .....................................................................................x
LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................... xi
LIST OF FIGURES.................................................................................................. xii
INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................1
1. Rationale .................................................................................................................1
2. Significance of the study .........................................................................................5
3. Aims and objectives of the study ............................................................................6
4. Scope of the study ...................................................................................................7
5. Research context .....................................................................................................8
6. Research questions ..................................................................................................9
7. Key terms and definitions .......................................................................................9
7.1. Humour ............................................................................................................9
7.2. Sense of humour ..............................................................................................9
7.3. Cognitive-perceptual processes in humour ....................................................10

7.4. Humour comprehension, humour appreciation and humour competence .....10
7.5. (Canned) jokes ...............................................................................................10
7.6. Pragmatic competence ...................................................................................10
7.7. ―Make sense of‖ and ―Tour guide students‘ ability to make sense of humour
in English jokes‖ ...................................................................................................11
7.8. Authentic materials, authentic texts, authentic English jokes .......................11
8. Study componential schema ..................................................................................11
9. Structure of the study ............................................................................................12
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW ..................................................................13
1.1. Humour and its importance in tourism ..............................................................13

iv


1.1.1. Sense of humour .........................................................................................13
1.1.2. Classification of humour .............................................................................14
1.1.3. Theories of humour .....................................................................................18
1.1.4. Humour research and the field of the present study ...................................20
1.1.5. Humour in English jokes ............................................................................23
1.1.5.1. English (canned) jokes ........................................................................23
1.1.5.2. Integration of the three traditional theories of humour in a joke ........24
1.1.5.3. The ambiguity in jokes ........................................................................27
1.1.5.4. Pragmatic perspective of jokes ............................................................31
1.1.5.5. Cultural elements in English jokes ......................................................34
1.1.6. ELT tour guide students‘s ability to make sense of humour in English jokes ...35
1.1.6.1. Humour competence ............................................................................36
1.1.6.2. Pragmatic competence and its interface with humour competence ....40
1.1.6.3. Obstacles for EFL tour guide students to make sense of humour in English
jokes ..................................................................................................................44
1.1.6.4. Conditions for ELT TG students to interpret humour in English jokes .....47

1.2. Authentic materials for developing EFL students‘ ability to make sense of
humour in English jokes............................................................................................48
1.2.1. Authenticity and authentic materials ..........................................................48
1.2.2.Competency-based approach to syllabus/ materials design/ selection ........49
1.2.2.1. An overview of approaches to syllabus/ materials design/ selection ..49
1.2.2.2. Competency-based language teaching ................................................51
1.2.2.3. Process of establishing competencies to guide the selection of AM and
the design of relating course .............................................................................54
1.2.3. Criteria for selection of authentic materials................................................56
1.2.4. Cognitive theory to guide the teaching and learning process .....................58
1.2.4.1. Questions and tasks .............................................................................59
1.2.4.2. Using scripts and learners‘ experience ................................................60
1.2.4.3. Simulation (Role play) ........................................................................61

v


1.2.5. Syllabus design and materials evaluation ...................................................61
1.3. Review of previous studies on humour competence ..........................................63
1.3.1. Review of previous studies in other countries ............................................63
1.3.2. Review of previous studies in Viet Nam ....................................................68
1.4. Chapter conclusion and theoretical framework .................................................69
CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY ............................................................................71
2.1. Research design ..................................................................................................71
2.2. Phase 1 –Materials selection ..............................................................................77
2.2.1. Stage 1 - Needs analysis .............................................................................77
2.2.1.1. Participants and sampling ....................................................................77
2.2.1.2. Data collection instruments .................................................................80
2.2.1.3. Data collection procedure ....................................................................83
2.2.1.4. Data analysis ........................................................................................84

2.2.2. Stage 2 - Materials verification and piloting ..............................................85
2.2.2.1. Participants and sampling ....................................................................85
2.2.2.2. Data collection instruments .................................................................86
2.2.2.3. Data collection procedure ....................................................................87
2.2.2.4. Data analysis ........................................................................................87
2.3. Phase 2: Intervention ..........................................................................................88
2.3.1. Participants and sampling ...........................................................................88
2.3.2. Data collection instruments ........................................................................89
2.3.2.1. Tests .....................................................................................................89
2.3.2.2. Interview ..............................................................................................92
2.3.3. Data collection procedure ...........................................................................93
2.3.4. Data analysis ...............................................................................................93
2.4. Significance of quantitative data and qualitative data integration .....................94
2.4.1. Validity .......................................................................................................95
2.4.2. Reliability....................................................................................................95
2.5. Chapter conclusion .............................................................................................96

vi


CHAPTER 3: RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS......................................................97
3.1. Phase 1 –Materials selection ..............................................................................97
3.1.1. Stage 1- Results from needs analysis ..........................................................97
3.1.1.1. Results from survey questionnaire ......................................................97
3.1.1.2. Results from interviews .....................................................................104
3.1.1.3. Results from observation data ...........................................................108
3.1.2. Summary of findings from Phase 1, Stage 1 ............................................109
3.1.2.1. Target situation and learning needs ...................................................110
3.1.2.2. Criteria and strategies for authentic materials selection and teaching......112
3.1.2.3. Teaching methodology guideline for the proposed authentic materials ..113

3.1.3. The Proposed Authentic Materials ...........................................................115
3.1.4. Materials verification and piloting ............................................................119
3.1.4.1. Result from questionnaires (Teachers‘ assessment) ..........................119
3.1.4.2. Results from the interview (Students‘ opinions) ...............................119
3.1.4.3. Adjustments after the materials verification and piloting .................121
3.2. Phase two – Intervention ..................................................................................122
3.2.1. Results of pre-post tests of humour interpretation in English jokes .........122
3.2.1.1. Description of the process of learning ...............................................122
3.2.1.2. Pre-post test data results ....................................................................124
3.2.1.3. Interview data ....................................................................................130
3.2.2. Pre-post test about difficulties ..................................................................135
3.2.3. Results of test of performing jokes ...........................................................140
3.3. Discussions .......................................................................................................141
3.3.1. Application of the authentic materials: benefits and challenges ..............141
3.3.2. Application of humour competence model...............................................144
3.3.3. Role of pragmatic competence .................................................................146
3.3.4. Role of teaching methods to the proposed authentic materials ................148
3.4. Chapter conclusion ...........................................................................................150
CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................151

vii


1. Recapitulation .....................................................................................................151
1.1. Answer to sub-question 1 .................................................................................151
1.2. Answer to sub-question 2 .................................................................................152
1.3. Answer to sub-question 3 .................................................................................152
2. Implications .........................................................................................................155
2.1. Methodological implications ............................................................................155
2.2. Theoretical implication ....................................................................................155

2.3. Pedagogical implication ...................................................................................156
3. Limitations ..........................................................................................................158
4. Suggestions for further studies ............................................................................158
REFERENCES ........................................................................................................159
APPENDIX 1: SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE FOR TOUR GUIDES ...................... I
APPENDIX 2: SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE FOR TOURISTS ........................... VI
APPENDIX 3: SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE FOR TEACHERS ....................... VIII
APPENDIX 4: SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE FOR STUDENTS ........................... X
APPENDIX 5: A. INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR TOUR GUIDES ............... XIV
APPENDIX 6: QUESTIONNAIRE FOR TEACHERS OF ENGLISH FOR
TOURISM .............................................................................................................. XV
APPENDIX

7:

INTERVIEW

QUESTIONS

FOR

TOUR

GUIDE

UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS .................................................................... XVII
APPENDIX 8: PRETEST FOR 20 TOUR GUIDE UNDERGRADUATE
STUDENTS ........................................................................................................ XVIII
APPENDIX 9: POST TEST FOR 20 TOUR GUIDE UNDERGRADUATE
STUDENTS .......................................................................................................... XXI

APPENDIX 10: THE INTERPRETATION OF HUMOUR IN ENGLISH
JOKES ................................................................................................................XXIV
APPENDIX

11:

INTERVIEW

QUESTIONS

FOR

10

TOUR

GUIDE

UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS ................................................................. XXVII

viii


APPENDIX 12: EVALUATION CHECKLIST FOR 20 TOUR GUIDE
UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS ................................................................ XXVIII
APPENDIX 13: RESULTS OF QUESTIONNAIRES ON NEEDS ANALYSIS ... XXX
APPENDIX 14:RESULTS OF OBSERVATIONS ON BUS TOURIST TRIPSXXXVIII
APPENDIX

15:

RESULTS

OF

QUESTIONNAIRE

ON

MATERIALS

VERIFICATION ...................................................................................................XLII
APPENDIX 16: T-TEST OUTPUT .................................................................... XLIII
APPENDIX 17: RESULTS OF JOKE-TELLING CONTEST .......................... XLIV
APPENDIX 18: PARTICIPANTS‘ BRIEF PROFILE ........................................ XLV
APPENDIX 19: STUDENTS' BOOK ............................................................. XLVIII
APPENDIX 20: TEACHER'S BOOK .......................................................... LXXXIX
APPENDIX 21: SUPPLEMENTARY AUTHENTIC MATERIALS ............. CXVIII
APPENDIX

22:

TEACHING

METHODOLOGY

GUIDLINE

FOR

THE

SUGGESTED MATERIALS.............................................................................. CXLI
APPENDIX 23: LESSON PLAN .................................................................... CXLVI

ix


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AM

Authentic materials

EFL

English as a foreign language

ESL

English as a second language

EG

Experimental group

FL

Foreign language

FT

Foreign tourist

GTVH

General Theory of Verbal Humour

HA

Humour appreciation

HC

Humour competence

L1

First language

L2

Second language

MoET

Ministry of Education and Training

MoCST

Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism

MSOH

Making sense of hunour

MV

Materials verification

NA

Needs analysis

NNS

Non-native speaker

NS

Native speaker

NVB

Non-verbal humour

PC

Pragmatic competence

S

Student/ Subject

SOH

Sense of humour

SSTH

Semantic Script Theory of Humour

TEFT

Teacher of English for tourism

TG

Tour guide

TGS

Tour guide student

TGU

Tour guide undergraduate

VB

Verbal humour

x


LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1. Classification of humour ..........................................................................17
Table 1.2: Ambiguities of English jokes ...................................................................28
Table 1.3: Humour competence and the interaction of three systems ......................39
Table 1.4: Interface of humour competence and pragmatic competence .................42
Table 1.5: EFL TG Sts‘ ability to make sense of humour in English jokes .............43
Table 1.6. Descriptions of steps in competency-based materials (Sujana, 2005) .....54
Table 1.7.Equality of the Target Situation Needs and Learning Needs....................55
Table 1.8: Criteria for selection of authentic materials .............................................58
Table 1.9. Summary of the previous studies on humour competence ......................63
Table 2.1. Summary of information and data needed for research questions ...........76
Table 2.2: Participant groups ....................................................................................78
Table 2.3. Description of joke test ............................................................................91
Table 3.1: Categories of TGUs‘ difficulties in interpreting humour in English jokes ...107
Table 3.2: Needs of learning humour ......................................................................110
Table 3.3: Criteria for selecting the authentic materials .........................................112
Table 3.4: Strategies for selecting the authentic materials......................................112
Table 3.5: Task procedure .......................................................................................114
Table 3.6: The proposed syllabus............................................................................116
Table 3.7: Summary of the students‘ opinions .......................................................120
Table 3.8: Percentage of the scores of the subjects.................................................127
Table 3.9: Results of the post test ...........................................................................130
Table 3.10: Results of the interviews ......................................................................133
Table 3.11. Achievement of competencies .............................................................134

xi

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Research Componential Schema ...............................................................12
Figure 1.1. Multidisciplinary and Interdisciplinary research of humour ..................21
Figure 1.2. Research field of the present study .........................................................23
Figure 1.3: The integration of the three humour theories .........................................25
Figure 1.4. Incongruity-resolution model (Suls, 1972) .............................................26
Figure 1.5. Linguistic humour structure spectrum(Obrst, 2012) ..............................27
Figure 1.6. Non-bona fide communication in verbal humour ..................................33
Figure 1.7.a. Hay‘s scalar implicature of unqualified humour support. ...................37
Figure 1.7. b. Hay‘s scalar implicature of unqualified humour support. ..................38
Figure 1.8. Theoretical framework for developing tour guide students‘ ability to
make sense of humour in English jokes ....................................................................70
Figure 2.1. Explanatory Sequential Design (Creswell, 2011) ..................................72
Figure 2.2: Visual research design ............................................................................73
Figure 2.3. Data collection procedure of the study ...................................................74
Figure 3.1.Tour guide undergraduates' difficulties in telling jokes ..........................98
Figure 3.2. Tour guides' difficulties in telling jokes .................................................99
Figure 3.3. Agreement on the need to learn and teach jokes ..................................101
Figure 3.4. Tourists' favourite types of jokes ..........................................................102
Figure 3.5. Tourists' favourite topics of jokes .........................................................103
Figure 3.6. Appropriate time and place for jokes ...................................................104
Figure 3.7: Merging findings for authentic materials collection ............................109
Figure 3.8. Illustrating the mean of each joke in T1 and T2 ...................................126
Figure 3.9. Statistically Significant Difference between T1 and T2 .......................126
Figure 3.10. Difficulty in identifying the ambiguities ............................................135
Figure 3.11. Difficulty in finding meaning of words ..............................................136
Figure 3.12. Difficulty in clarifying joke structure .................................................137
Figure 3.13. Difficulty in word pronunciation ........................................................137

Figure 3.14. Length of jokes causes difficulty for comprehension .........................138

xii


Figure 3.15. Difficulty in being aware of culture ...................................................139
Figure 3.16. Difficulty in defining the joke context ...............................................139
Figure 3.17. The fun degree of the TGU students‘ performance ............................140
Figure 3.18. The quality degree of the TGU students‘ performance ......................140

xiii


INTRODUCTION
1. Rationale
Being able to make sense of humour in any jokes at any communicative events
keeps one feeling joyful. Reading or hearing a joke and laughing when
comprehending and interpreting not only draws one out of the state of being
stressful but also establishes or restores a positive emotional climate and a sense of
connection among people, making them take pleasure in the company of others. As
Provine (2000) says that laughter is not primary about humour, but about social
relationships and McGhee (2002) stresses the importance of humour using his own
words in an interesting way that laughter is the shortest distance between two
people. Also, Moran et al (2014) found out people who have a good sense of
humour are perceived to have more socially-desirable traits than those with less of a
sense of humour. Funny people may make a good impression on others by reducing
the social distance during interactions perhaps conveying greater social warmth,
individuals who have a sense of humour may also gain health benefits, with humour
acting as an important mechanism for life's tribulations, decreasing stress and
improving performance in the workplace.

The benefits of humour in the workplace are that a happy work environment will make
employees to be more loyal and productive. For instance, tactful jokes may create
healthy working environment increasing people‘s enjoymen of work. The turnover
may increase as employees feel content and loyal to the company. And the cost
associated with illness may decrease as people experience the positive physiological
and psychological effects of laughter (Pham, 2014). This is true with some previous
studies that people who have fun on the job are more creative, more productive, better
decision-makers, and get along better with co-workers.
Likewise, in the field of tourism, humour is necessary, especially in the job of tour
guides where humour is essentially delivered and appreciated, the relationship is
accordingly improved and there comes a nice trip. Actually, one of the most

1


common rhetorical devices for successful tour guides during their practice is to use
humour (Meged, 2010). Tour guides can use jokes in communication with tourists
and run a successful tour: Tourists laugh or feel amused and have a good trip as a
result. As Howard, Twitches and Smith (2001: 34) confirm, "humour was also used
as a means to ―wake-up‖ people, to change the pace of the tour, to renew people's
interest in their surroundings and to ensure an enjoyable experience". Woodside et
al. (2007) reminds that, during the travel phase, the tourists may experience
informal humour when sharing a joke with their travelling companions, with the
tourism employees or the local people they encounter because it is important to use
humour to create a friendly and cooperative atmosphere among tour participants:
tourists and tour guides. The kind of humour for tourism is named informal humour
which is "the spontaneous creation and sharing of jokes during the travel situations"
(Pearce & Pabel, 2015: 55). Tour guides open humorous conversations with tourists
helping them to become directly involved in producing and co-creating their own
humour based on social interactions (Anderson, 2007; Edersor, 2001), cope with a

range of stressful, awkward or frustrating travel situations (Frew, 2006a) and more
specifically, gain control of a situation by making it appear less threatening,
difficult or embarrassing (Solomon, 1996).
In reality, there are many cases for the effectiveness of using humour in tour guiding
practice. Meged (2010) observed indigenous tour guides at work on tour guiding
capacity in Australia and concluded thathumour enhanced group cohesion. The guide
had a very interactive style and direct, racy humour, which worked well with the tourist
group on the day. On a tourist website (2017), a foreign tourist expressed his pleasure
in an eight-hour tour which was filled with laughter because the Vietnamese tour guide
ambushed them with jokes in a stop in Ho Chi Minh City. Likewise, in NhaTrang in an
observation of a city tour in the preliminary study of this study, experienced tour guides
told interesting jokes that made foreign tourists happy and their guided tours were very
successful. Travel agents in Khanh Hoa Travel Company agreed that it was necessary

2


to use humour during the trips because humour-oriented trips made more profits than
the ones without humour.
However, Vietnamese tour guides (TG) could use little humour when communicating
with foreign tourists (FT) who speak English during their trips. In an interview of
scanning the humour use with a TG who had six-year of tour guiding experience, it was
found that humour-oriented tours were essential but Vietnamese TGs neglected them as
they were not competent at telling jokes in English and had little knowledge about
humour and that their most interest was tourists‘ safety during the trip. That was because
they did not have any lessons of making sense ofhumour or telling jokes in English at
college or university. The humour they made in their trip came from their own
experience and creation and the jokes they told were collected from the internet by
themselves. Reality shows that college English language programs for tour guides
have mostly focused on improving the quality of training with good curriculum,

syllabus and materials of English and American cultures, tourism geography, cross
culture and English language skills. Moreover, most students at provincial colleges
are not much competent at English or self-confident to communicate with foreign
tourists in English since they do not have opportunity to contact with foreigners and
they are quite timid.
Actually, it is not usually easy for Vietnamese learners of English as their foreign
language (EFL) to appreciate English humour let alone producing it because they are
not to be absolutely competent at humour and humour mechanism (Raskin, 1985,
Attardo, 1994; Ritchie, 2004). As being seen, when a native speaker reads or hears a
joke in their language, he/she unconsciously and effortlessly makes the judgments
(Freud, 1905) about the appropriacy of the humour they use, which means they
naturally mention the formation of the surprise element or the rule or the context of
the joke but for the issue that they quickly or slowly understand it. Foreign language
(EFL) learners, on the contrary, must learn how to understand the joke in different
social contexts in which the addressers are from different cultures. Moreover, while
native speakers (NS) within their own native context usually have no problems

3


discerning whether or not a remark is to be taken humorously, non-native speakers
(NNS) find it much more difficult to recognize such a remark or sometimes they fail
to notice (Banitz, 2005). Thus they have to achieve competence involving socioculture (Hymes, 1972), knowledge of textual conventions (Haliday and Hassan,
1976), conventional rules (Van Dijk, 1977), and language usage (Widdowson, 1978).
Also, in order to understand the English speaking joke tellers, an EFL learner has to
be equipped with such knowledge to interpret EFL humorous utterances. That means
he/she has to be taught about EFL humour and has lessons to practice it.
Nevertheless, humour is not a rarity in the field of tourism for EFL learners in Viet
Nam‘s education and policies. There have been changes in the teaching methods of
English and in the English syllabus and textbooks used in colleges and universities‘

curricula. Firstly, the application of the Communicative Language Teaching
approach and the learner-centered approach has opened a new perspective for
teaching English, supplying learners with pleasure. Secondly, this can be seen
through the decisions of the Ministry of Education and Training (MoET) that the
communicative approach has been

introduced to many English language

classrooms and any syllabuses and curriculum at any schools, colleges and
university where a large number of people are trained for the country‘s work force
(MoET, 2010; Pham, 2014). Specifically, according to the Curriculum Guidelines
for English Training in Tourism Vocational Training in Viet Nam (2009: 9) the
English proficiency for Tour Guideis required from low standard at 625 to high
standard at 700 points which is equivalent to the level between B1 and B2 of the
CEFR (Common European Framework of Reference, 2011) and says that at C1
learners ―can use language flexibly and effectively, including emotional, allusive
and joking usage.‖ Moreover, professional regulations of English levels for
international tour guides (MoCST, 2009) decide that tour guides are supposed to be
able to tellfunny stories or quizzes for foreign tourists in the long journey. Thus, this
study has been carried out to meet such requirements and help tour guide students
be well-prepared for their future job.

4


One last but not least to pave the way for the present study is that two studies
concluding humour can be taught and developed for EFL learners and humour is
closely related with tourism. Pham (2014) has a systematic investigation on the use
of humour in the EFL classroom at universities in the context of Viet Nam. His
findings reveal that humour can be trained and integrated in language syllabi

althrough there needs to be consideration on how to apply a scientific and
systematic method. In parallel, Fabel (2014) has comprehensive examinations of
humour in the field of tourism in Australia. Fabel (2014) explored the multifaceted
construct of humour in a naturalistic way and among multiple tourism audience.
Humour plays important role in creating enjoyable and engaging tourism
experiences.
Thus, for the above justifiable reasons, the present study has been carried out to help tour
guide students have chance of access to humour and well-prepared for their future job.
2. Significance of the study
This study is significant in many aspects as it endeavours to make following
contributions.
(1) As a contribution to the EFL teaching and learning methodologies, this
study discovers the extent to which authentic materials (AM) can help develop TG
students‘ ability to make sense of humour in English jokes in the light of the
theories of humour, pragmatic competence (PC) and humour competence (HC).
(2) The findings of this study contribute to the process of promoting a
workforce of professional tour guides for Khanh Hoa province who not only have a
good sense of L2 humour but also can use it in communication via English with
foreign tourists visiting the province.
(3) This study brings benefits to EFL students in improving their
communicative competence by raising their awareness of the importance of
understanding English jokes and providing them with strategies and methods to
enhance their ability to interpret humour in English jokes.

5


(4) The results of the study are beneficial to English language instructors in
introducing English jokes into their English language classroom, providing them
with methods of integrating teaching humour in English jokes into other syllabi

such as cross-culture, designing authenticity into the teaching materials and
adapting authentic materials to suit their students‘ needs in making sense of English
humor. This is a new contribution of the present study as an evidence to confirm the
fact that humour can be trained.
(5) Personally, the study has enriched the researcher profoundly in terms of humour
competence such that she has gradually developed into a more cheerful personality. Her
knowledge of humour theories has enabled her to perceive the humorous subtleties not
only in the English language but also in the Vietnamese language, her mother tongue.
This, in turns, grows her love of the two languages intensively.
3. Aims and objectives of the study
The overall goal of the study is to help improve Vietnamese student‘s ability to
make sense of humor in English jokes through the use of authentic English
materials. The study elicits aims and objectives.
Aims
(1) To develop the students‘ ability to make sense of humour in English jokes.
(2) To explore the extent to which the students' ability to understand,
interpret the humour and recite authentic English jokes for use in subsequent future
jobs as international tour guides.
Objectives
(1) To attain the opinions of tour guides, tour guide students, teachers and tourists
about needs of learning humour in English jokes via authentic materials.
(2) To grasp criteria and strategies for selecting and using the authentic
materials appropriate for the experimental course on making sense of humour in
English jokes as an intervention.

6


(3) To deal with the internal and external difficulties that tour guide students
encounter in understanding and interpreting humour in English jokes in the

suggested authentic materials.
(4) To pursue methods/ strategies to help develop students' ability in making
sense of humour in English jokes through authentic materials alongside the
instructional aim of developing students‘ communicative competence.
(5) To demonstrate the students' ability to make sense of humour before and
after taking the intervention course as evidence of the intervention effectiveness.
4. Scope of the study
Based on such goal, aims and objectives, the study was conducted under the
following scopes. First, the target population comprised the students whose major
was English for tourism and whose future professional jobs are tour guides, the tour
guides and tourists, teacher of English for tourism in NhaTrang so that the results of
the study may be applicable to the groups of subjects and disciplinesthatshare the
same needs, interest and enthusiasm in humour. Second, the research samples were
limited to college undergraduates who were at the third year since they already
reached similar level of English proficiency and were able to catch up with the level
of linguistic competence for English humour comprehension. Third, with the
limitation of teaching time and resources, the proposed authentic materials only
focused on verbal humour, an important element of the work of an international tour
guide, to help students be ready for their real life job after graduation. Finally, the
focus of the study was on making sense of humour (i.e humour comprehension and
interpretation) in English canned (ready-made) jokes, not on humour production or
creation. However, reciting of a canned joke, a low level of humour production, was
included in the intervention because it is well understood that impromptu partially
makes up the excellent tour guides.

7


5. Research context
Tourism has been developing for ages and thousands of foreign tourists from

different countries are welcomed every year. It is an important and thiving industry
in Viet Nam and the workforce of tour guides is considered to be energetic and
well-trained. Punctually, universities and colleges in Khanh Hoa province have
trained and supplied a large workforce of tour guides for this industry. English is
thus a major for tour guide graduates who will use English at workplace very
frequently and who will work at travel agencies as tour guides in guided tours for
English-speaking tourists from the UK, America, Australia, New Zealand and other
nations. Therefore, the first requirement is that tour guide students have to be
competent at English speaking in order to work in the professional field with
necessary knowledge of culture, society and communication in English. The second
is the sense of humour which is indispensable for their future job since foreign
tourists do not just hope to know much about the place they are visiting but to enjoy
their trips with fun. However, up to now, at the universities and colleges, there have
not been any particular programs or syllabus to help the tour guide students at least
to develop their ability to make sense of humour in English jokes. The tour guide
training program is a load with major subjects mainly for training English language
skills but with almost no element in helping students to develop their sense of
humour in English for their future job as an international tour guide. According to
the training program outcome, the TGUs are supposed to get B2 English proficiency
under the National Framework of Reference for Six-level Foreign Language
Competencies (NFRSFLC, MoET, 2014). Accordingly, there has been a tendency
towards increasingly teaching how to speak English well and engaging in
professional subjects of Tourist presentation, Translation and Cross-culture without
any course on humour. This fact remains that tour guide students are largely short of
the most powerful professional capacity of humour which they should be helped to
develop (MoET, 2009). Thus, the ability to make sense of humour in English jokes
is timely developed for tour guide students at university and colledge.

8

6. Research questions
One research question that the present study sought to answer is as follows.
To what extent do the EFL tour guide students make sense of humour in English
jokes through authentic materials?
On the focus of the overarching question, there are three sub-questions.
1. What are the criteria and strategies for selecting appropriate authentic
materials to help develop EFL tour guide students‘ ability to make sense of
humour in English jokes?
2. What problems do the tour guide students face in comprehending and telling
English jokes?
3. How much can the EFL tour guide students interpret humour in English
jokes and tell English jokes?
7. Key terms and definitions
7.1. Humour
Humour is the (i) ―quality of being amusing or comic‖; and (ii) ―ability to
appreciate things, situations or people that are comic, ability to be amused‖ (Oxford
Advanced Learner‘s Encyclopedia, 1992: 442). It is partially one element of the
comic – as wit, fun, nonsense, sarcasm, ridicule, satire, or irony – and basically
denotes a smiling attitude toward life and its imperfections: an understanding of the
incongruities of existence (Ruch, 1998).
7.2. Sense of humour
Sense of humour is understood with reference to both humour creation and humour
appreciation (Eysenck, 1972). It is regarded as a mood, a frame of mind, a virtue, a
talent and personality trait (Ruch, 1998).

9


7.3. Cognitive-perceptual processes in humour

Cognition is a particular characteristic of humour. To produce humour, an
individual needs to mentally process information coming from the environment or
from memory, playing with ideas, words, or actions in a creative way, and thereby
generating a witty verbal utterance or a comical nonverbal action that is perceived
by others to be funny. In the reception of humour, we take in information
(something someone says or does, or something we read) through our eyes and ears,
process the meaning of this information, and appraise it as nonserious, playful, and
humorous. Cognitive processes underly the perception and appreciation of humour
(Martin, 2007).
7.4. Humour comprehension, humour appreciation and humour competence
- Humor comprehension is the ability to perceive relationships or ideas in
incongruous ways (Ziv, 1984).
- Humour appreciation is the ability to understand and get pleasure from humorous
messages (Ziv, 1984).
- Humour competence is the ability of the native speaker to pass judgements as to
the funniness of a text (Raskin, 1985).
7.5. (Canned) jokes
A canned joke is ―a humorous short text repeated (almost) verbatim whose content
is usually irrelevant to, and dissociated from, the conversation and is geared towards
amusement‖ (Dynel, 2009: 11).
7.6. Pragmatic competence
Pragmatic competence (PC) is the ability to understand language in context or to
interpret the message of interlocutor as it was intended. PC is seen as a
subcomponent to the more level of communicative competence (Chomsky, 1980;
Canale & Swain, 1980; Bachman, 1990).

10


7.7. “Make sense of” and “Tour guide students’ ability to make sense of

humour in English jokes”
- ―Make sense of‖ means understand, appreciate and comprehend (Colin dictionary,
2016, HarperCollins Publisher).
- ―Tour guide students‘ ability to make sense of humour in English jokes‖ refers to
two main competencies: (1) Interpreting the humour in English jokes (recognizing,
comprehending and appreciating) & (2) Reciting English jokes (agreeing and
reciting – the lowest level of humour production).
7.8. Authentic materials, authentic texts, authentic English jokes
- ―Authentic materials are any texts written by native English speakers for native
English speakers.‖ (Heitler, 2005: 5)
- ―An authentic text is a stretch of real language, produced by a real speaker or
writer for a real audience and design to convey a real message of some sort.‖
(Morrow, 1977: 98)
- Authentic English jokesare the original joke texts produced by and for native
English-speaking people since ―they can only meet grammatically well-formed and
syntactically complete sentences‖ (Euler, 1991: 63, cited in Mukherjee, 2001) .
8. Study componential schema
A componential schema proposed for the study (Figure 1) was built from the
literature review of humour interpretation and recitation through authentic materials
such as training needs analysis, materials assessment, intervention and training
evaluation. The schema consists of two main components or phases:
(1) Phase 1: A materials selection process conducted in two stages namely Stage 1 –
Needs analysis andproblem specification; Stage 2 – proposed authentic materials
verification and pilotting. The findings from Phase 1 address sub-research questions
1 and 2.

11