Tính trực tiếp và gián tiếp trong lời nhận xét của giáo viên nước ngoài và giáo viên việt nam đối với phần trình bày của sinh viên trong luyện tập kĩ năng nói tiếng anh

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHER EDUCATION

GRADUATION PAPER

DIRECTNESS AND INDIRECTNESS IN THE
ANGLICIST AND THE VIETNAMESE
TEACHERS’ ORAL FEEDBACK ON THEIR
STUDENTS’ SPEAKING PERFORMANCES

Supervisor: Lại Thị Thanh Vân (M.A.)
Student: Phạm Thị Thu Thảo
Course: QH2010.F1.E2


HÀ NỘI - 2014

ĐẠI HỌC QUỐC GIA HÀ NỘI
TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC NGOẠI NGỮ
KHOA SƯ PHẠM TIẾNG ANH

KHĨA LUẬN TỐT NGHIỆP

TÍNH TRỰC TIẾP VÀ GIÁN TIẾP TRONG LỜI
NHẬN XÉT CỦA GIÁO VIÊN NƯỚC NGOÀI VÀ
GIÁO VIÊN VIỆT NAM ĐỐI VỚI PHẦN TRÌNH BÀY
CỦA SINH VIÊN TRONG LUYỆN TẬP KĨ NĂNG NĨI
TIẾNG ANH

Giáo viên hướng dẫn: Lại Thị Thanh Vân (M.A.)

Sinh viên: Phạm Thị Thu Thảo
Khóa: QH2010.F1.E2
HÀ NỘI - 2014


ACCEPTANCE

I here by state that, I: Phạm Thị Thu Thảo, QH2010.F.1.E2, being a
candidate for the degree of Bachelor of Arts (TEFL) accept the requirements of the
College relating to the retention and use of Bachelor’s Graduation Paper deposited
in the library.
In terms of these conditions, I agree that the origin of my paper deposited in
the library should be accessible for the purposes of study and research, in
accordance with the normal conditions established by the librarian for the care,
loan or reproduction of the paper.

Phạm Thị Thu Thảo
May 2014

i


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I wish that there is a word which more than ―gratitude‖ to describe my
feelings toward the people who have unconditionally supported and encouraged me
to complete this paper.
First and foremost, I wish to express my deeply gratitude to my supervisor,
Ms. Lại Thị Thanh Vân, for her invaluable patience, wisdom, precious comments
and great encouragement throughout this research. Without her precious help, this
paper would not have been completed.

I would like to thank sincerely all anonymous informant who agreed to
participate in this research. Without their acceptance, this study could not be
conducted.
I would also like to acknowledge the authors of the references for their useful
materials which have served as a foundation for the development of this research.
Last but not least, my heartfelt thanks go to my parents and my boyfriend
without whose patient care, love, understanding, encouragement and support, I
could never have got this far.

i


ABSTRACT

As one of the most significant dimensions in cross-cultural communication,
directness and indirectness are claimed to have a strong connection with speech act
performance in communication. That evokes many studies into the directness and
indirectness in different aspects of reality communication.
This study was conducted with the aims to provide a view in the use of directness
and indirectness expressed through teachers’ oral feedback for their students in
language classroom communication. The data were collected from three Anglicist
teachers and three Vietnamese teachers by recording their oral feedback on
students’ speaking performances. The collected data then are analyzed by
qualitative methods.
Based on the collected data, some results have been found out. Firstly, the extent of
directness in the Anglicist teachers’ feedback and the Vietnamese teachers’
feedback is different. Though the use of strategies are somehow balanced, the
Vietnamese teachers appear to be more indirect due to the frequent use of linguistic
devices in their feedback. It also reveal that the number of strategies as well as the
modifiers are the factors which contribute to the identification of degree of direness

in teachers’ oral feedback. Secondly, the use as well as the choices of strategies and
modifiers of the Anglicist teachers and the Vietnamese teachers are put in
comparison to figure out the similarities and differences.

ii


TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACCEPTANCE......................................................................................................... i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ..................................................................................... i
ABSTRACT.............................................................................................................. ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................... iii
LISTS OF TABLES, FIGURES AND ABBREVIATIONS ..................................... v
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .......................................................................... 1
1.1. Rationale for the study .................................................................................... 1
1.2. Aims of the study and research questions ....................................................... 3
1.3. Significance of the study ................................................................................. 3
1.4. Scope of the study ........................................................................................... 4
1.5. Organization of the study ................................................................................ 5
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW .............................................................. 6
2.1. Feedback ......................................................................................................... 6
2.1.1. Definition of feedback .............................................................................. 6
2.1.2. Classification ............................................................................................ 7
2.1.3. The importance role of feedback in language teaching and learning ...... 9
2.2. Directness and indirectness ............................................................................. 9
2.2.1. Definition ................................................................................................. 9
2.2.2. Directness and indirectness in culture .................................................... 10
2.2.3. Directness and indirectness in language ................................................ 11
2.2.4. Types of directness and indirectness ...................................................... 12

2.2.5. Motives for indirectness ......................................................................... 13
2.2.6. The significance of directness and indirectness ..................................... 14
2.2.7. Factors influencing the use of directness and indirectness .................... 14

iii


2.2.8. Directness and indirectness in teachers’ oral feedback .......................... 15
2.3. Speaking performances ................................................................................. 15
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY ....................................................................... 18
3.1. The research design....................................................................................... 18
3.2. Informants ..................................................................................................... 18
3.3. Research methods ......................................................................................... 19
3.4. Data collection .............................................................................................. 20
3.4.1. Data collection instrument ..................................................................... 20
3.4.2. Data collection procedure....................................................................... 20
3.5. Data analysis ................................................................................................. 20
3.5.1. Data coding. ........................................................................................... 20
3.5.2. Data analysis method ............................................................................. 27
3.5.3. Data analysis procedure ......................................................................... 27
CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS AND DICUSSION .................................................... 28
4.1. Findings ......................................................................................................... 28
4.2. Discussion ..................................................................................................... 39
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION ............................................................................. 43
5.1. Summary of the major findings .................................................................... 43
5.2. Limitations .................................................................................................... 44
5.3. Implications ................................................................................................... 44
5.4. Suggestion for further study.......................................................................... 45
REFERENCES ...................................................................................................... 46
APPENDICES ........................................................................................................ 51

iv


LISTS OF TABLES, FIGURES AND
ABBREVIATIONS
TABLES

PAGE

Table 1: Categorization of criticism strategies

23

Table 2: Categorization of modifiers

26

v


CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1. Rationale for the study
―Individuals with different linguistic and cultural backgrounds think
differently‖ (Tohidian, I., & Mir Tabatabaie, 2010). In other words, Gayle (2002)
also affirms the influence of social environment on human interaction behaviors.
These notions explain why people who come from different countries and speak
different languages behave differently. It also emphasizes the importance of
understanding culture besides learning a language. To be successful in

communicating, especially in intercultural environment, it is necessary to deal with
both language and culture. It means that besides mastering the language, raising the
awareness of cultural background is vital. Therefore, it is advisable that English
language learners understand the cultural backgrounds. For English learners, the
acknowledgement of cultures of English-speaking countries should be noticed.
As for communication, in some circumstances, people do not always speak
out what they really think, especially with negative things. For example, if people
does not find their friend’s joke interesting, they are more likely to say ―Hmm, it’s
not bad‖ rather than ―It’s boring‖. As the human nature drives people to seek for
harmony in the relationship with others, many people opt to respond in the first
way unless they have another purpose, for instance to end up the relationship, or to
embarrass that friend, etc. People, generally, try different ways to mitigate their
unpleasant words. This is known as the adjustment in the degree of directness in
verbal communication, in which the high degree of directness is often known as
―directness‖ and the low degree of directness is considered ―indirectness‖. ―Proper
words in proper place at proper time to the right person will always make a
successful communication‖ (Krauss and Chiu, 1998). The proper degree of
directness is also one important factor which contributes to that success. It could
help to make the conversation go on smoothly, to avoid misunderstanding and
cultural shock and to maintain harmony with others.
1


However, it is hardly to clarify what ―a proper degree‖ is. The valuation of
directness and indirectness in some cultures, especially between Western cultures
and Asia cultures including Vietnam, is considerably disparate. Because of this
distinctive difference, directness is considered not only a cultural dimension but
also a cultural identity. According to Levine and Adelman (1982), ―In American
English using, directness is one of the most essential parts‖. Meanwhile, it is
believed that in Asian countries including Vietnam, indirectness (or the low degree

of directness) is more valued (Curry, 2009). As a result, it can cause some certain
problems in intercultural communication. Therefore, understanding the degree of
directness used in different languages is important to ensure the effectiveness of the
conversation, as well as to avoid the impoliteness or rudeness, especially when
giving feedback or personal opinions about particular problems or persons.
In L2 learning and teaching, giving feedback plays a very important role in
classroom. It is an important part of any learning process (Brawdy& Byra, 1994;
Clariana & Koul, 2006). Tabatabaei & Banitalebi (2011) also agreed that feedback
as a vital part in all learning contexts. Through the feedback, teachers help students
improve their performance, understand how they reach the desire output and learn
more effectively. However, in a language classroom, especially in Vietnam,
intercultural problems in terms of cultural shock or misunderstanding may affect
students’ conceivableness of the feedback. That unsuccessful communication
between teachers and students can lead to shock, disappointment and even anxiety
which may have negative influences on students’ progress.
However, in language classroom, or to be more specific in the scope of this
paper - English language classroom setting where the cross-cultural communication
does happen between students and the Anglicist teachers (who mostly come from
United States, United Kingdom and Autralia), there are high chances that cultural
problems happens, but very little studies, have been done. Meanwhile, with many
Vietnamese students in ULIS and other universities, their limited chance of
exposure with intercultural communication may lead to misunderstanding, shock,

2


disappointment or even anxiety, etc. during interacting process with teachers.
Therefore, understanding the degree of directness in each language, or to be exactly
in each culture, is essential in learning and teaching to ensure successful
communication between teachers and students, better improvement and better

relationship. All of these factors have conditioned a chance for the researcher to
conduct a study on ―directness and indirectness in the Vietnamese and the Anglicist
teachers’ oral feedback on their students’ speaking performances‖.

1.2. Aims of the study and research questions
As the research investigates the way the Anglicist and the Vietnamese
teachers give oral feedback on their students’ speaking performances, it aims to
find out the degree of directness in the Anglicist and the Vietnamese teachers’
comment and to explore the similarities and differences in using directness and
indirectness. It also studies the way teachers employ linguistic properties to realize
the devices used to adjust the degree of directness when the Anglicist and the
Vietnamese teachers give evaluation for their students. Besides, this study can
offers understanding to help avoid cultural shock for students and help teachers
give feedback more effectively to their students.
The study addresses the following questions:
(1) To what extent do the Anglicist and the Vietnamese teachers use
directness and indirectness in their feedback on students’ speaking
performance?
(2) What are the similarities and differences between the Anglicist and the
Vietnamese teachers in the use of directness and indirectness in their
feedback on students’ speaking performances?

1.3. Significance of the study

3


The research is an attempt to examine the degree of directness/indirectness
in the oral feedback given by the Anglicist and Vietnamese teachers about their
students’ performances. Once being completed, the ultimate outcomes can be

beneficial for entities involved (including the Anglicist teachers, the Vietnamese
teachers and students), for researchers and people who are interested in the field.
Some of the benefits can be listed as follows:
- Providing a general view of the way the Anglicist and the Vietnamese teachers
give feedback on their students’ performance.
- Providing a closer and deeper look on the degree of directness in the Anglicist
and the Vietnamese teachers’ feedback from the cross-cultural communication
study. Therefore, the study can help teachers to have a critical view about giving
feedback for students and help students to prepare themselves with teachers’
feedback to avoid misunderstanding and culture shock.
- Offering a source of reference for researchers who are going to conduct related
studies in the future and for people who are interested in the field.

1.4. Scope of the study
The main focus of this paper is the directness and indirectness in verbal
feedback of teachers in language classroom. It means the feedback of teachers
would be the source of data for researching. Only two cultural dimensions include
directness and indirectness will be studies.
Since this is a cross-cultural research on the teachers’ use of directness and
indirectness in their oral feedback, the informants will including teachers who
comes from different cultures. They are the Anglicist and the Vietnamese teachers
who are teaching English Speaking skill in Universtiy of Language and
International Studies (ULIS), Vietnam National University (VNU). The reason for
researcher’s choice is that ULIS, VNU is the university which has many language
classrooms. In those language classrooms, students carry out different kinds of
speaking performances (for e.g. presentation, short speech, skit, etc.) during their

4

learning process and make improvement from teachers’ feedback and support. That
environment is completely suitable for the research to conduct the study. Besides,
the research also is learning in this school, so it would be much convenient for the
process of collecting data. About the informants, three Anglicist teachers will be
studied; they are English native speakers who come from United States, United
Kingdom and Australia. The same number of Vietnamese teachers also be chosen
to be the informants. They must be proficient in English and use English in
teaching. The context is in the English language classrooms of university students
where English is used in teaching and learning.
1.5. Organization of the study
The study contains five parts.
- Chapter 1: Introduction – states the problem and rationale for the study, together
with the aim, significance, scope and organization of the study.
- Chapter 2: Literature review – provides the theoretical background related to the
research issue, including sub-parts which provide understanding and theoretical
knowledge of feedback, the important of feedback in language teaching and
learning, directness and indirectness and their significance in daily communication
as well as in teacher-student interaction.
- Chapter 3: Methodology – states the details of the methods and procedures
applied and implemented in the study to collect the data and analyze the data.
- Chapter 4: Findings and Discussion– presents the results and discusses the main
findings of the study.
- Chapter 5: Conclusion – summarizes the main findings, points out the limitation
and provides suggestions for further studies.

5


CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
Since the research is the graduation paper which is conducted, read and

evaluated by students and teachers who get used with basic knowledge in cultural
issues, including the understanding about basic concepts such as culture,
communication, cross-cultural communication, intercultural communication, etc.,
some of these common concepts would be omitted for the readers’ convenient in
accessing information.
2.1. Feedback
2.1.1. Definition of feedback
Many researchers have attempted to define feedback. According to Gass and
Selinker (2008, p. 329-330), feedback is understood as all the information ―about
the success (or, more likely, lack of success) of their [learners’] utterances and
gives additional opportunities to focus on production and comprehension‖. Sadler
(1989) also explain feedback as the information which is given to evaluate how an
action is being developed in terms of its quality of success. These definitions show
that feedback is the information which tells how good a students’ performance (or
the level of success) is and show how far it is to a desired performance.
In the other hand, Lewis (2002) covers more in her definition. She defines
the act of giving feedback is telling learners about their progress and showing them
errors in order to guide them to the areas of improvement. In her definition, the
purpose of giving feedback is clearly stated for learners’ improvement. However,
Lewis’s definition seems to refer more about the corrective feedback1 rather than
others forms. Since the study focuses on mainly on the evaluation of teacher rather
than the corrective form, the researcher adopts both two definitions of Sadler and
Lewis in this paper. In which, feedback can be known as the information given to
evaluate how the production or the output is well performed in term of its quality of
1

This concept will be discussed later in part 2.1.2 of Chapter 2

6

success and to guide learners to the areas of improvement. Feedback can be given
under written or oral form. However, in the scope of this paper, only oral form is
studied.
2.1.2. Classification
Feedback can be sorted in different categories. It can be either positive
feedback or which ―demonstrates comprehension of learners’ language‖
(Tabatabaei, 2011), or can be negative feedback, which show the non-target points
in his/ her utterance. According to Baron (1993), negative feedback also is known
under another terms called ―criticism‖. It is undeniable that criticism is inevitable in
feedback. In common knowledge, criticism is known as the practice of judging
something or someone in an intelligible way. Whilst, feedback, as stated above,
besides showing the progress and mistakes, also including the information for
improvement. The difference also has mentioned by Tewksbury in ―Skweeze Life!:
Criticism vs. Feedback, Part 2‖ (2001): ―I think that feedback is simply information
that helps people change their behaviour in a positive way. So, it is encouraging,
that helps people to see the facts, move forward. Criticism is usually a dumping of
anger and blame that very rarely encourages anybody to change anything‖. In a nut
shell, it can be seen that feedback is the concepts which is superior the concept
―criticism‖.
Back to the classification, according to Petchprasert (2012), feedback can be
divided in two types which are explicit and implicit feedback. There are different
definitions of explicit feedback, It can be known as ―the process of providing the
learner with direct forms of feedback‖ (Varnosfadrani and Basturkmen, 2009). In
oral performance, teachers can give explicit feedback by pointing out that the
learners’ utterance is wrong. They directly identify their students a specific point of
error (Carroll & Swain, 1993, as cited in Varnosfadrani & Basturkmen, 2009). In
contrast, ―implicit feedback or indirect corrective feedback is defined as furnishing
the type of error that has been made but not providing a correction‖ (Bitchener &
Knoch, 2010; Bitchener, Young, & Cameron, 2005).

7


According to Lyster & Ranta (1997), corrective feedback can be sorted in
six categories which are explicit correction, recast, clarification request, repetition,
metalinguistic feedback and elicitation:
1). Explicit correction: According to Lyster and Ranta (1997), explicit
correction is ―any feedback technique that involves a teacher simply
providing a student with the correct answer‖ (pp. 46-49).
2). Recast: According to Lyster and Ranta (1997), recast is defined as ―a
more implicit feedback technique that involves the teacher’s reformulation
of all or part of a student’s utterance, minus the error‖ (pp. 46-49).
3). Clarification request: According to Lyster and Ranta (1997), clarification
request is a ―feedback type in which the teacher asks a question indicating to
the student that there is a problem with the language utterance‖ (pp. 46-49).
4). Repetition: According to Lyster and Ranta (1997), repetition is ―the type
of the feedback that involves a teacher repeating wrong utterance
highlighting it with intonation‖ (pp. 46-49).
5). Metalinguistic feedback: According to Lyster and Ranta (1997),
metalinguistic feedback ―involves a teacher making comments or indicating
to the student that there is an error in the language output (e.g., Can you find
an error?)‖ (pp. 46-49).
6). Elicitation: Lyster and Ranta (1997) define elicitation as ―a feedback type
when teachers ask for completion of their own sentence by pausing and
allowing students to correct themselves; they may also ask questions to elicit
correct form and help students to reformulate an ill-formed utterance‖ (pp.
46-49).
In this paper, the main type of feedback will be studied is metalinguistic
feedback.

8


2.1.3. The importance role of feedback in language teaching and learning
As mentioned before, feedback is very important in learning and teaching. It
is the key in formative assessment. Successful feedback requires teachers to have
―(1) a clear idea of the process of task resolution, (2) understand the extent to which
the child is capable of dealing with this process and/or its parts, and (3) know the
figure that the child has, distancing itself from its position of knowledge (it is the
teacher role to put himself in the position of another)‖ (Santo & Pinto, 2008). This
practice is not an easy task with teachers. However, the effect that feedback brings
in learning is undeniable. It supports students in controlling and improving their
performance from the strengths and weaknesses. Through the feedback offered,
students can see the differences between their product and desired output, to see
how far they have done and learn from the mistakes which they have made. Raising
students’ awareness of these things can ensure for their better performance in the
future.

2.2. Directness and indirectness
2.2.1. Definition
Though there are many studies which have been done on the directness and
indirectness, not many clear definitions of directness are given.
Directness, in common knowledge, is understood as the quality of being
straightforward and concise about something. Moreover, directness can be
understood as stating a main point early and clearly without embellishments or
understatement. In academic studies, directness is featured by ―the willingness to
bring up a certain topics in certain context‖ (Arthur, 2007). To sum up, through the
explanation above, it can be implied that directness involves speaking out truthfully
thoughts about a certain thing.

9


In contrast, indirectness, according to Searle (1975), involves "those cases in
which one illocutionary act is performed indirectly by ways of performing another"
(as cited in Zhang & You, 2009). Another definition is ―the means in which one
meaning is conveyed indirectly through utterances or non-verbal behaviors in order
to achieve certain goal, or the means in which one's intent is revealed in a
roundabout way‖ (Zhang & You, 2009). Both the explanations describe quite fully
the nature of indirectness. However, to sum it in some short words, the researcher
would like to cite a simpler explanation of indirectness used in an interesting
scientific book named ―That’s not what I meant‖, in which Dorweiler (2005) refers
―the way people mean what they don’t exactly say‖ as indirectness. For example,
instead of giving a demand like ―Go home!‖ which is a direct speech act, a less
aggressive form can be given such as ―Why don’t you go home?‖. This question
can be considered as an indirect expression since the purpose of the speaker is not
waiting for a response or a reason but conveying the implied message that the
listener should go home.
2.2.2. Directness and indirectness in culture
Directness and indirectness are the major cultural dimensions which are
quite familiar in cross-cultural study. These two concepts are popular in
communication of all cultures. A linguist named Deborah Tannen (1994) affirms
that they are the fundamental elements in human communication and also are
among ―the elements which vary the most from one culture to another, […] can
cause confusion and misunderstanding‖. It can be seen that the differences which
make them become a cultural identity lie under variety of the degree of directness
and the manifestation in each culture. There are cultures which highly respect the
direct expression while there are cultures value the indirect ways. This is due to the
term ―cultural thoughts patterns‖ introduced by Kaplan (1972). In his study, Kaplan

research the essays of English students in compare to ones of foreign students in
America to come to the output of five discourse structures illustrated in the diagram
below:

10


a

b

c

d

e

Figure 1. Kaplan’s diagram
a) Figure a: Linearity with ideas expressed straightforward, representing
English
b) Figure b: Parallel construction with the first idea completed in the second
part, representing Semitic
c) Figure c: Circularity with the topic looked at from tangents, representing
Oriental
d) Figure d: Freedom to digest and introduce ―extraneous‖ material,
representing Romance.
e) Figure e: Similar to ―d‖ but with different lengths, parenthetical
amplifications and an abrupt stop of subordinate elements, representing
Russian.
2.2.3. Directness and indirectness in language

―Where directness or indirectness are cultural themes, they are always
language-related‖ (Saville-Troike, 2008). This statement affirms that there is
always a relation between directness and indirectness with language. Direct speech
acts are ―those where surface form matches interactional function‖ (Saville-Troike,
2008). It means that direct speech acts involve the correspondence between
expression meaning and implied meaning. Whilst, indirect speech acts occurs when
there is a mismatch between the expressed meaning and implied meaning, when an

11


individual means more than what he/she says. Yule (1996) also share the same
opinion but with different terms which are structure and function. He states that
―whenever there is a direct relationship between a structure and a function, we have
a direct speech act. Whenever there is indirect relationship between a structure and
a function we have an indirect speech act‖. It can be seen that Yule also based on
the correspondence between structure which, in other words, is what an individual
say (expressed meaning) and function which, in other words, is what he/she means
(implied meaning) to differ the direct and the indirect speech acts.
As stated above, directness and indirectness are the cultural elements which
vary the most from cultures to cultures, which also means that they are various in
languages. The degree and manifestation in each language is the main feature that
make them become a cultural identity. There are cultures which value the direct
way but there are also cultures value the indirect way. That valuation are expressed
partly through language. However, it should be noticed that no language
completely employs one way of expression, the characteristic of being direct or
indirect is identified by the domination of one feature to another. For example,
Western cultures are always considered to prefer direct expression and Asian
cultures prefer indirect ways, however, it does not mean that Western people never
be indirect and Asian people never be direct. It should be understood that directness

takes the advantage in Western while indirectness dominate in Asia.
2.2.4. Types of directness and indirectness
According to Searle (1975), there are basically two types of indirectness
which are conventional indirectness and non-conventional indirectness.
―Conventional indirectness refers to those utterances which are standardized
to perform only those acts conventionally designated for certain functional
purposes which are not assigned to them in their grammatical forms‖ (Searle, 1975).
Blum-Kulka et al. (1989, p.42) share the same idea by stating that conventional
indirectness includes ―propositional content (literal meaning) and pragmalinguistic

12


form used to signal an illocutionary force‖. For example, ―Would you lend me your
notes?‖, both the meaning and the exact wording refer to one illocutionary force.
―The second type of indirectness, non-conventional indirectness, also
referred to as hints, comprises those utterances, which are ambiguous on either
prepositional content or illocutionary force or both‖ (Searle, 1975). For example,
by replying ―I have to study for the exam‖ to an invitation, the speaker indirectly
refuses the invitation. In the non-conventional indirect speech act, tfsimilar
indirectness ties closely to the context. With the conventional indirectness,
individuals need to know and to understand the language to find out the intended
meaning while with non-conventional indirectness, intended meaning can be
figured out from the context.
2.2.5. Motives for indirectness
Motives for the mitigation of degree of directness relates to a so-called ―face
threatening acts‖ and ―face saving acts‖. It is accepted that people in all cultures
have an awareness of self-image which is called ―face‖, as they communicate. In a
conversation, there are speech acts which is considered represent a threat to another
individual’s expectations regarding self-image. They are known as face-threatening

acts. In turn, given the possibility that the behaviors might be interpreted as a threat
to another face, the speaker can make adjustment to lessen the possible threat. That
is known as a face-saving act.
In social interactions, face-threatening acts are at times inevitable based on
the terms of the conversation. Indirect speech act is one of the way to reduce the
threat. It does exist many situations that using indirectness is necessary to avoid
embarrassment, friction or even pain for yourself and your interlocutors. The
motives which lie behind indirectness usage are various. In this paper, the
researcher would like to apply the classification of Searle (1975) in the ―Indirect
speech acts‖ in which motives for indirectness are classified into four categories:
- Indirectness for politeness

13


- Indirectness for self-protection
- Indirectness for humor
- Indirectness for rejection and denial
2.2.6. The significance of directness and indirectness
In communication
Directness and indirectness, to be more exactly, the degree of directness is
very importance in communication in general. Depending on the context that a
conversation takes place, the degree of directness in the conversation could
contribute to a success communicating, exchanging messages and opinions.
Moreover, it could help avoid unexpected situations and misunderstanding due to
the differences in cultures.
In classroom teacher-student interaction
In teacher-communication, teachers’ verbal and nonverbal behaviors have
great influence on students’ learning. Besides, they can affect other factors
including students’ attitude, moods, motivation and classroom atmosphere,

therefore influence students’ progress as well. In cross cultural communication,
teachers and students from different cultures may meet difficulties due to the
culture differences, appropriate degree of directness can ensure for the safe mutual
understanding, avoid culture shock for both teachers and students.
2.2.7. Factors influencing the use of directness and indirectness
There are many factors which attribute to the mitigation of degree of
directness in communication, regardless the cultural issue. Do (2000) introduces
fourteen different factors including age, gender, residence, psychological mood,
occupation, personality, topic, place, communicative environment, relative distance,
time pressure, position, distance, foreign language acquisition. However, in the
scope of the study, only some factors which are considered to be related will be
discussed. They are age, gender and topic.

14


-

Age: the old people tend to be more indirect than the young.

-

Gender: females have the tendency to use indirect expression more than
male.

-

Topic: while referring to a subtle topic or a taboo, etc. people often opt
for indirectness.

2.2.8. Directness and indirectness in teachers’ oral feedback
As mentioned above, feedback plays a vital role in learning and teaching.
Since feedback is featured by teachers giving comments, raising students’
awareness of the mistake or drawback in their products/ performances, it is
considered to bring possible negative effects on the ―face‖ of the interlocutors who,
within the scope of this paper, are students. The situation is more sensitive with
negative feedback (criticism). Besides, language classroom is the place where has a
high risk of cultural shock due to the cultural differences between teachers and
students. Even with Vietnamese teachers, their English proficiency and the
longtime of exposure to the language can affect to the degree of directness in their
illocutionary force. This can lead to the some gap between students and teachers.
Therefore, understand the appropriate degree of directness can make the act of
commenting or giving feedback more effectively, teachers can convey fully their
messages to students without bringing hurt or embarrassment.

2.3. Speaking performances
Speaking is among four skills that learners should master in order to
communicate in a foreign language environment. In language learning, many
different kinds of speaking performances are designed to create a speaking
environment for students to practice. In ULIS where this paper is conducted,
speaking performances are various from presentations, skits, forums, debates, etc.,
but presentations still take the majority in the curriculum of students. There are
various criteria to evaluate a presentation. In a study, Kerby and Romine (2010)
offer many different criteria related to different competences including content,
15


organization, language use, delivery, interactions. In this research, based on the
observation, some related criteria will be presented below. The acknowledgement
of those criteria will help readers have a basic understanding on the content of

teachers’ feedback.
- Organization: In the study of Kerby and Romine (2010), the highest score
is given for the organization that audience can easily follow. It can present and
develop fully and clearly the ideas of speaker(s) in a logical way.
- Content: It is suggested, according to the rubric (Kerby & Romine, 2010, p.
178), that the satisfied content should ―guides audience to new level of
understanding, creatively meets objectives of presentation‖. And if the presentation
is prepared and delivered in group, group members should demonstrate
understanding of other members’ material. Moreover, it must ―consistently
demonstrates awareness of audience’s level of understanding through use of
discipline-related language, content, and examples‖ (Kerby & Romine, 2010, p.
178), or in other words, the use of content and language should be appropriate with
audiences and the speakers should show the awareness of audiences’ level.
- Delivery: It is considered one of the most important parts of a presentation
since the performance of the speakers and the way speakers convey their ideas to
audience will contribute considerably to the success of the presentation. The
delivery is evaluated by sub-criteria, regarding the non-verbal communication
(including eye contact, posture, gestures and appearance), vocal quality and the
visual aid. In which, for the non-verbal communication, eye-contact should be
maintain regularly with audiences to read the audiences’ reaction and check their
comprehension; gesture, posture and appearance should be appropriate, do not
cause distraction and can enhance the content. About the vocal quality, the speakers
are expected to perform accurate grammar, clear pronunciation without pauses and
lack of vocal variety. Besides, the expression of enthusiasm through vocal quality is
highly appreciated. The last is about visual aids, good visual aids, in Kerby and

16


Romine’s study, are expected to use creatively by the speakers to strengthen their

ideas and ―invoke interest‖.
- Question responsiveness: This part refers to presenters’ ability and skill in
handling questions, addressing the problems posed in given question and answering
the questions.

17