An investigation into syntactic and pragmatic features in the language of negotiation used in english business correspondence

Bạn đang xem bản rút gọn của tài liệu. Xem và tải ngay bản đầy đủ của tài liệu tại đây (1.27 MB, 36 trang )

UNIVERSITY OF DANANG
UNIVERSITY OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE STUDIES
----------

SCIENCE RESEARCH

Topic: AN INVESTIGATION INTO SYNTACTIC AND
PRAGMATIC FEATURES IN THE LANGUAGE OF
NEGOTIATION USED IN
ENGLISH BUSINESS CORRESPONDENCE

Student
: HUỲNH THỊ HỒNG NHUNG
Class
: 17CNATM03
Department of English for Specific Purposes

Danang, May 2021

UNIVERSITY OF DANANG
UNIVERSITY OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE STUDIES

SCIENCE RESEARCH
School year 2020 - 2021

AN INVESTIGATION INTO SYNTACTIC AND
PRAGMATIC FEATURES IN THE LANGUAGE
OF NEGOTIATION USED IN
ENGLISH BUSINESS CORRESPONDENCE

Scientific group : Social science
Student

: Huỳnh Thị Hồng Nhung

Class

: 17CNATM03

Course

: 2017 - 2021

Department of English for Specific Purposes – Business English

Da Nang, May 2021

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................... 5
LIST OF FIGURES .............................................................................................................. 5
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .............................................................................................. 5
ABSTRACT ......................................................................................................................... 8
1.

INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................... 9
1.1.

RATIONALE ........................................................................................................ 9

1.2.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES ................................................................................. 10

1.2.1. Aims ................................................................................................................. 10
1.2.2. Objectives......................................................................................................... 10
1.3.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS ................................................................................. 11

1.4. RESEARCH SCOPE ............................................................................................... 11
2.

LITERATURE REVIEW & THEORETICAL BACKGROUND ............................. 11
2.1. PREVIOUS STUDIES ............................................................................................ 11
2.2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND......................................................................... 13
2.2.1. Definition of negotiation ................................................................................... 13
2.2.2. Definition of business correspondence ............................................................. 13
2.2.3. Syntactic features in the language of negotiation ............................................. 14
2.2.4. Pragmatic features used in the language of negotiation.................................... 15

3. METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES .................................................................... 19
3.1. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ............................................................................ 19
3.2. DATA COLLECTION ............................................................................................ 19
3.3. DATA ANALYSIS.................................................................................................. 19
4. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ................................................................................... 19
4.1. SYNTACTIC FEATURES OF THE LANGUAGE OF NEGOTIATION ............. 19
3

4.1.1. Passive voice ..................................................................................................... 19
4.1.2. Transitional sentences ....................................................................................... 20
4.1.3. Summary of syntactic features .......................................................................... 21
4.2. PRAGMATIC FEATURES OF THE LANGUAGE OF NEGOTIATION ............ 21
4.2.1. Positive politeness strategies ............................................................................. 21
4.2.1.1. Exaggerate (interest, approval or sympathy) with the H ............................ 21
4.2.1.2. Offer & Promise ......................................................................................... 22
4.2.1.3. Give (or ask for) reasons ............................................................................ 23
4.2.1.4. Give gifts to H (goods, sympathy, understanding, cooperation) ................ 23
4.2.2. Negative politeness strategies ........................................................................... 24
4.2.2.1. Hedging words and phrases ........................................................................ 24
4.2.2.2. Plural noun .................................................................................................. 25
4.2.3. Speech act.......................................................................................................... 25
4.2.3.1. Directives .................................................................................................... 25
4.2.3.2. Expressives ................................................................................................. 26
4.2.4. Summary of pragmatic features ........................................................................ 26
5. CONCLUSION – LIMITATIONS – RECOMMENDATION ...................................... 27
5.1. CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................ 27
5.2. IMPLICATION OF THE STUDY .......................................................................... 28
5.3. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY .......................................................................... 28
5.4. RECOMMENDATION ........................................................................................... 29
6. REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 30
APPENDIX ........................................................................................................................ 34

4

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. The synthesis of analysed factors in syntactic features……….………………......14
Table 2. The synthesis of analysed factors in pragmatic features………………………......17
Table 3. The frequency of some factors in syntactic features………………………………20
Table 4. The summary of distribution of pragmatic features……………………………….25

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. The frequency of “exaggeration”(%)..…………………………………………….20
Figure 2. The frequency of “Offer & Promise”(%)………………………………………….21
Figure 3. The frequency of “Give (or ask for) reasons”(%)…..…………….……………….21
Figure 4. The frequency of “Give gifts to H”(%)…………….……………………………...22
Figure 5. The frequency of “hedging words and phrases”(%).....……………………………23
Figure 6. The frequency of “Plural noun” (%)…………………..…………………………...23

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

H

Hearer

FTA

Face Threatening Act

5

ĐẠI HỌC ĐÀ NẴNG
TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC NGOẠI NGỮ
THÔNG TIN KẾT QUẢ NGHIÊN CỨU CỦA ĐỀ TÀI

1. Thông tin chung:
- Tên đề tài: “Nghiên cứu về đặc tính cú pháp và ngữ dụng trong ngôn ngữ đàm
phán được sử dụng trong thư tín thương mại tiếng Anh”
- Sinh viên thực hiện: Huỳnh Thị Hồng Nhung
- Lớp: 17CNATM03
- Khoa: Tiếng Anh chuyên ngành
Năm thứ: 4
- Người hướng dẫn: ThS. Nguyễn Thị Mỹ Phượng
2. Mục tiêu đề tài: Khảo sát và phân tích các đặc tính cú pháp và ngữ dụng của ngơn ngữ
đàm phán được sử dụng trong thư tín thương mại Tiếng Anh.
3. Tính mới và sáng tạo: Kết hợp 2 lý thuyết, thuyết lịch sự của Brown & Levinson
(1987) và thuyết hành vi lời nói của Yule (1998) để làm rõ đặc điểm cú pháp và ngữ dụng
của ngôn ngữ đàm phán trong văn viết từ đó rút ra các đặc điểm cú pháp và ngữ dụng
được sử dụng thường xuyên trong ngôn ngữ đàm phán, và đưa ra các đề xuất phù hợp đối
với việc áp dụng ngôn ngữ đàm phán trong TTTM TA.
4. Kết quả nghiên cứu: Thuyết lịch sự của Brown & Levinson được sử dụng nhiều nhất,
bao gồm các chiến lược “exaggeration (phóng đại)”, “offer & promise (hứa hẹn, đề
nghị)”, “Give (or ask for) reasons (đưa ra lý do)”, “Give gifts to hearer (tặng quà cho
người nghe)”, “Hedging words and phrases (dùng từ nói tránh)”, “Plural noun (đại từ số
nhiều)”. Đa phần người viết biết cách triển khai ngôn ngữ đàm phán trong văn viết, song
vẫn chưa áp dụng tối đa câu bị động để tránh thể hiện sự thô lỗ.
5. Đóng góp về mặt kinh tế – xã hộI, giáo dục và đào tạo, an ninh, quốc phòng và
khả năng áp dụng của đề tài: Đề tài đã nêu lên được các đặc điểm ngôn ngữ của ngơn
ngữ đàm phán trong thư tín kinh doanh tiếng Anh. Từ đó đưa ra đề xuất cho người viết
trong việc áp dụng chuyên nghiệp ngôn ngữ đàm phán trong thư tín thương mại tiếng
Anh.
6. Công bớ khoa học của sinh viên từ kết quả nghiên cứu của đề tài (ghi rõ tên tạp chí
nếu có) hoặc nhận xét, đánh giá của cơ sở đã áp dụng các kết quả nghiên cứu (nếu có):
Đà Nẵng, ngày…tháng… năm 2021
Sinh viên chịu trách nhiệm chính

thực hiện
(ký, họ và tên)
Nhận xét của người hướng dẫn về những đóng góp khoa học của sinh viên thực hiện
đề tài (phần này do người hướng dẫn ghi):
Đà Nẵng, ngày…tháng… năm 2021
Xác nhận của Trường Đại học Ngoại ngữ
Người hướng dẫn
(ký tên và đóng dấu)
(ký, họ và tên)
6

ĐẠI HỌC ĐÀ NẴNG
TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC NGOẠI NGỮ
THÔNG TIN VỀ SINH VIÊN
CHỊU TRÁCH NHIỆM CHÍNH THỰC HIỆN ĐỀ TÀI
I. SƠ LƯỢC VỀ SINH VIÊN:
Họ và tên
:
Huỳnh Thị Hồng Nhung
Sinh ngày
Nơi sinh
Lớp

:
:
:

Ảnh 4x6

24 tháng 03
năm 1999
Sơn Trà, Tp. Đà Nẵng
17CNATM03
Khóa: 2017

Khoa
:
Tiếng Anh Chuyên ngành
Địa chỉ liên hệ :
2 Nại Thịnh 6, quận Sơn Trà, Tp Đà Nẵng
Điện thoại: 0932988491
Email:
II. QUÁ TRÌNH HỌC TẬP (kê khai thành tích của sinh viên từ năm thứ 1 đến năm
đang học):
* Năm thứ 1:
Ngành học: Tiếng Anh Thương mại
Khoa: Tiếng Anh Chuyên ngành
Kết quả xếp loại học tập: Bình thường
Sơ lược thành tích:
* Năm thứ 2:
Ngành học: Tiếng Anh Thương mại
Kết quả xếp loại học tập: Bình thường

Khoa: Tiếng Anh Chuyên ngành

Sơ lược thành tích:
* Năm thứ 3:
Ngành học: Tiếng Anh Thương mại
Kết quả xếp loại học tập: Bình thường

Sơ lược thành tích:

Khoa: Tiếng Anh Chuyên ngành

*Năm thứ 4:
Ngành học: Tiếng Anh Thương mại
Kết quả xếp loại học tập: Bình thường
Sơ lược thành tích:

Khoa: Tiếng Anh Chuyên ngành

Ngày 19 tháng 05 năm 2021
Sinh viên chịu trách nhiệm chính
thực hiện đề tài
(ký tên và đóng dấu)

Xác nhận của Trường Đại học Ngoại ngữ
(ký, họ và tên)
7

TÓM TẮT
Nghiên cứu về đặc điểm cú pháp và ngữ dụng là một trong những vấn đề ngôn ngữ được
quan tâm trong các văn bản xúc tiến. Có nhiều nghiên cứu đã thực hiện phân tích đặc
điểm ngơn ngữ trong các văn bản thương mại, thư tín. Nghiên cứu này đã tìm hiểu về đặc
điểm ngữ dụng và đặc điểm cú pháp trong ngơn ngữ đàm phán của thư tín thương mại
bằng tiếng anh. Thông qua hai phương pháp nghiên cứu là định tính và định lượng, bài
nghiên cứu đã tìm ra được những đặc điểm nổi bật trong ngơn ngữ đàm phán được sử
dụng trong thư tín thương mại tiếng Anh. Trên cơ sở nguyên lý về lịch sự của Brown và
Levinson (1987) và lý thuyết hành vi ngôn ngữ của Yule (1998) nghiên cứu đã tiến hành

phân tích và đánh giá qua 65 thư tín thương mại tiếng anh và tìm ra được các chiến thuật
chính giúp người viết có thể thuyết phục và đàm phán chuyên nghiệp thơng qua thư tín.
Từ đó suy ra các đặc điểm cần chú trọng trong ngơn ngữ đàm phán, qua đó có thể duy trì
và xây dựng được mỗi quan hệ tốt đẹp trong thương mại.
Từ khóa: Đặc điểm cú pháp, đặc điểm ngữ dụng, thư tín thương mại, ngơn ngữ đàm
phán.

ABSTRACT
Scientific research on syntactic and pragmatic features is one of the most popular
linguistic features in business correspondence. Many studies have analyzed the language
characteristics of business correspondence or business negotiation. This study
investigated the pragmatic features and syntactic features in the language of negotiation in
English business correspondence. Through two research methods, qualitative and
quantitative, the research has found the key features in language of negotiation used in
English business correspondence. On the basis of the politeness theory of Brown and
Levinson (1987) and speech act of Yule (1998), the study analyzed and evaluated 65
business correspondence and found linguistic strategies that promote cooperation in
business settings. Therefore, indicating important factors of language of negotiation,
contributing to creating a good relationship in business.
Keywords: Syntactic features, pragmatic features, business correspondence, language of
negotiation.
8

1.

INTRODUCTION

1.1. RATIONALE
With the development of economic globalization, the exchanges of international

trade have grown considerably these days, leading to great demand in cooperation among
businesses all over the world. Therefore, to initiate and maintain the business
relationships between the trade members, communication – “the transfer of thought from
one person to another'' is the backbone of a thriving business. Business correspondence is
an indispensable part of business communication. In fact, negotiation is a vehicle of
communication and business communication is a process through which the parties
involved establish partnerships or relationships, negotiate terms, strike deals, and
complete transactions.
Business English correspondence takes various forms serving the purposes of
inquiring information, offering, giving a reply, negotiating, proposing, claiming and
adjusting, ordering goods, selling products, and also building good relationships, etc.
Such aforementioned forms require the writer's language of negotiation skills which play
a critical role in business activities, in general. Absolutely, the merits of a well-written
business letter are to accelerate the ongoing deal as well as form a trustful relationship
between two parties for potential contracts in the future. While an inappropriate business
letter might cause misunderstanding during a transaction, and this can bring unpredictable
troubles in the following steps or even result in a total failure of the deal. Therefore,
writing decent business correspondence, being aware of the importance and the basic
principle for language of negotiation in written discourse is a must, potentially bringing
high profits and economic benefits for enterprises in the future.
Due to the increasingly fierce competition in the international market economy,
research on business correspondence, and business negotiation in particular, is
thriving. There has been research into the language of negotiation used in face-toface negotiation, technology-mediated negotiation or email negotiation (e.g. Nadler &
Shestowsky, 2006; Astrid Jensen, 2009). Moreover, because of the wake of globalization
and an increase of international trading, the focus of research shifted to the cross-cultural
business negotiation (e.g. Garcez, 1993; Marriott, 1995; Salacuse, 1999; Gimenez, 2001;
9

Grindsted, 2009; Zhu, 2011; Yoon và Yang, 2012; Planken, 2005; Usunier, 2003; Gelfand

& Brett, 2004). Despite the growing attention to the pedagogy of business negotiation,
there is also an astonishing scarcity of serious research on the language of negotiation in
business correspondence. Hence, it is important to figure out the usage of language of
negotiation and how to use it to compose a decent business correspondence. It can be said
that understanding language components, including syntax and pragmatics is one of the
most fundamental keys to breakthrough business success.
Therefore, “An investigation into syntactic and pragmatic features in the
language of negotiation used in English business correspondence” has been chosen as
the topic of this thesis. This study would be beneficial to students in English faculty in
general and Department of English for Specific Purposes in specific, the results will help
students better understand the use of language of negotiation in business letters in terms
of form and function, hence they can apply them in specific communication contexts to
promote business cooperation. Finally, the findings would serve as a useful basis for any
other related fields of study.
1.2. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
1.2.1. Aims
The aim of this research is to oﬀer a succinct overview of language of negotiation in
business correspondence in terms of syntactic and pragmatic features. The researcher
attempts to identify and analyze syntactic and pragmatic features of language of
negotiation in English business correspondence. Thereby indicating profound factors used
in language of negotiation.
1.2.2. Objectives
- To identify language of negotiation in English business correspondence
- To analyze, describe and generalize syntactic, pragmatic aspects of the language of
negotiation in English business correspondence.
- Suggest some ideas for users about the language of negotiation in English business
correspondence to achieve effective communication.

10

1.3. RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1. What are the pragmatic features of language of negotiation in English business
correspondence?
2. What are the syntactic features of language of negotiation in English business
correspondence?
1.4. RESEARCH SCOPE
This paper is limited in analyzing language of negotiation in English business
correspondence in terms of syntactic and pragmatic features. In other words, it intended to
focus merely on the language of negotiation in written discourse, putting aside that in
spoken one.
Due to the lack of time and materials, this study only focuses on 65 business
correspondence, collected from official books and websites.

2.

LITERATURE REVIEW & THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

2.1. PREVIOUS STUDIES
In recent years, an increasing number of people are becoming increasingly aware of
the importance of business correspondence. As its crucial role in business transactions,
considerable researchers and scholars both at home and abroad have conducted research
on business correspondence and various aspects of business letters.
In English, various scholars whose studies are potentially beneficial for the topic of
business correspondence. There are many studies published in various books including
Taylor (2012) who provided specific phrases, expressions and useful structures used in
many different kinds of business letters based on 500 sample documents. With the same
content, Robert G. Insley (2016) and A. Ashley (1992) also discuss writing principles and
the various forms of written business communication and Julia (2015) indicates major
types of business correspondence and provides readers with an insight into effective

business letter writing.
As regards negotiation, the bulk of research on negotiation has been conducted,
contributing to the establishment of a theory of negotiation on the basis of linguistics such
11

as Charles (1996) investigates the organisation and rhetoric of sales negotiations using a
methodology that draws on both discourse analysis and business studies of negotiation,
Mahmoodi (2012) research negotiation strategies and skills in International Business. In
addition, some researchers study deeply in specific fields of negotiation, including Adachi
(2010) studies business relationship between American and Japanese or Astrid Jensen
(2009) studies a case study about relations between use of specific discourse strategies in
their e-mail communication between a Danish Company and its business contact in
Taiwan.
In Vietnam, many significant books majoring in business correspondence for
example “Ngôn ngữ thư tín thương mại tiếng Anh”, “Nghi thức thư tín thương mại Quốc
Tế”, “Giáo trình thư tín thương mại quốc tế” or “Phân tích diễn ngơn thư tín thương mại”
by Nguyễn Trọng Đàn. In such books, he indicated structural characteristics of business
letters and presented proper ways of using

business vocabulary in business

correspondence. Additionally, various books contribute to this aspect, “Giáo trình tiếng
anh thư tín thương mại” that guide users to design a letter and the use of business
vocabulary, “Tuyển chọn 500 mẫu thư thương mại và thông báo tiếng Anh” collected
selected business letters and different documents in business settings. Besides, there have
been many studies on business correspondence including Nguyen Thanh Ngoc (2016)
whose research made to analyzed the structural characteristics of the refusals and
the politeness strategies used or Nguyen Thi My Chau (2004) indicated necessary
features of words used in business correspondence and etc.

Refer to business negotiation, the first author is Nguyễn Xuân Thơm (2001), whose
research is “ Các yếu tố ngôn ngữ trong đàm phán thương mại quốc tế” or Nguyễn Hồng
Nhung (2010) presents the cultural effects on Vietnam and Japan negotiation and a group
of students in Hanoi University (2013) research negotiation strategies in import and
export.
In general, a wide range of books and materials on business letters has thoroughly
provided understanding about the importance of written letters and ways and tips to have
successful business correspondence. In the discussion about language of negotiation in
business correspondence, it is necessary to understand the principles of discourse
12

analysis. However, there is little research focused on language of negotiation in business
correspondence in terms of pragmatic and syntactic analysis. Therefore, this paper will
study the strategies of language of negotiation according to the politeness theory of
Brown and Levinson (1987) and speech act of Yule (1998).
2.2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
2.2.1. Definition of negotiation
According to Fisher et al. (1991), negotiation is a purposeful activity with each party
seeking to achieve an outcome at least as good as might be obtained elsewhere.
Similarly, Fisher, Ury & Patton (1986) state that negotiation is a means of getting what
you want from others, and is a face-to face communication with the intent of reaching
agreement.
In addition, negotiation, according to Putnam & Jones (1982, p. 72), can be defined
as a ‘‘communication process, characterized by the exchange of information, arguments,
and strategic manoeuvres''. Whereby two or more parties engage in a give-and-take
interaction to reach mutually acceptable solutions.
As regard Lampi’s definition of negotiation, it is defined as an interactive activity
between at least two parties who have conflicting interests, at least one mutual problem,
and who are in the process of looking for a solution to the problem(s) and/or resolving

the conflict (Lampi, 1986, p. 9).
2.2.2. Definition of business correspondence
According to Comas et al. (1993), business correspondence is the communication
and negotiation in writing between business people or films to reach an agreement in
deals, often in the forms of enquiry, reply, offer, quotation, order, contract, request,
claim, memorandum of understanding, and all kinds of official documents.
Poe (1988, p. 1) claims that correspondence in business does not only provide a
channel for communication between business houses but also effectively replaces for a
face-to-face visit, attracting, holding customers and building a favourable image for a
company.

13

According to Gartise (1995, p. 1), correspondence covers every conceivable phase
of business activity since through correspondence, enquiries are answered, quotations
are given, orders are placed, complaints are dealt with, transport and insurance are
arranged, and accounts are settled.
2.2.3. Syntactic features in the language of negotiation
According to Chomsky (1965), “Syntactic is the study of the principles and process
by which sentences are constructed in particular languages. Syntactic investigation of
a given language has as its goal the construction of a grammar that can be viewed as
a device of some sort for producing the sentences of the language under analysis”. In
other words, syntactic features involve the rules governing the structure of a language
such as a form of words, the structure of phrases, clauses, sentences and etc. The
meaning of the sentence may be different if the syntax of the sentence varies. This thesis
will investigate the features namely passive voice sentences and transitional sentences.
2.2.3.1. The Passive voice
Understanding is the processing of mind and representation on the level of
consciousness. When threatening the face of the listener, the speaker often avoids

mentioning the name of the recipient. That can build a cognitive context, maintaining the
face of the recipient. In business negotiation, people often use passive sentences to reduce
the loss of the face of the recipient.
For examples: Unless we receive the components within the next five days, the order will
be cancelled and placed elsewhere.
Unless we receive the components within the next five days, we will cancel
your order and place elsewhere.
Compare these two, we can see that the first sentence sounds more distant and polite
as no-one is requested in particular. If the speaker does not use passive voice in this
situation, it might affect both the speaker and hearer FTA.
2.2.3.2. Transitional Sentences
To maintain the recipient’s negative face, when the speaker poses a threat to the face
of the recipient, he needs to imply that he has considered the needs of the recipient.

14

Transitional sentences are a very typical example. When threatening the recipient’s face,
transitional sentences can weaken the face loss of the recipient.
For example: I really don’t want to bother you, but we usually accept your payment by
irrevocable letter of credit payable against shipping documents.
In general, there are various factors belonging to “Syntactic”, however, the author
opts for two specific features based on aspects in the following table.
Table 1. The synthesis of analysed factors in syntactic features
Syntactic features
Passive voice

Examples
Unless we receive the components within the next five days,
the order will be cancelled and placed elsewhere.

Transitional sentences I really don’t want to bother you, but we usually accept your
payment by irrevocable letter of credit payable against
shipping documents.
2.2.4. Pragmatic features used in the language of negotiation
According to Fareed (2018), there are typical pragmatic features affecting the
business negotiation including “speech acts”, “deixis”, “relevance”, “presupposition”,
“politeness”, “7 strategic maneuvering”, “rhetorical”. Generally, all these pragmatic
features are used in the language of negotiation, however, some of them are applied for
oral while this study focuses on written discourse. Therefore, the author chooses to study
the characteristics of negotiation language in written discourse based on the politeness
theory of Brown and Levinson (1987) and the speech act of Yule (1998).
2.2.4.1. Politeness theory by Brown & Levinson (1987)
A. Positive politeness strategies
Positive politeness strategies are adopted to make the listener feel a sense of
closeness and belonging in that the speaker can show something in common with the
hearer to protect his positive face. According to Brown and Levinson (1987), eight
specific strategies have been put forward in negative politeness strategies: notice and
attend to the hearer’s wants, interests and needs, exaggerate their interest, approval or
sympathy in the hearer, be optimistic, include both speaker and hearer in activity, offer or
15

promise, avoid disagreement, give gifts to H (goods, sympathy, understanding,
cooperation). Some of them can be used in the language of negotiation. Therefore, here
are some linguistic strategies concluded from those eight strategies that will help save
faces of the hearers.
a. Exaggerate (interest, approval or sympathy) with the H
“Exaggerate” is used to emphasize the writer’s intention and enhance the strength of
an utterance in language of negotiation. Thereby, the writer can express his emotion and

feelings that help the reader sense his words. It is illustrated through emphatic
words/particles such as for sure, really, exactly, absolutely and etc.
For example: What a fantastic garden you have!

(Brown and Levinson, 1987, p. 104)

b. Offer & Promise
Offer and promises are commonly used in business negotiation. By using these
strategies, the writer may claim that whatever the reader wants, the writer will help to
obtain the reader’s wants. They demonstrate the speaker’s good intentions in satisfying
the hearer’s wants in language of negotiation.
For example: If you wash the dishes. I’ll vacuum the floor
c. Give (or ask for) reasons
Language of negotiation indicates the negotiating process between two parties, so
“give (or ask for) reasons” is inevitable. This strategy is used to help the writer minimize
the FTAs by giving reasons for the action taken. The writer gives reasons in order to
influence the hearer to agree with his/her reasons.
For example: Why not lend me your cottage for the weekend?
(Brown and Levinson, 1987, p. 128)
d. Give gifts to H (goods, sympathy, understanding, cooperation)
As usual, in oral negotiation, the speaker can illustrate his willingness or emotion
through tangible gifts or body language. However, the language of negotiation in business
correspondence relies on word expression. Hence, this strategy, the writer may satisfy the
reader’s positive – face want by actually satisfying some of the reader’s wants by
expressing the wants to be liked, admired, cared about, understood, listened to, etc.
For example: I’m sorry to hear that
16

B. Negative politeness strategies

They are oriented to the hearer’s negative face and emphasize avoiding imposition
on the hearer. According to Brown and Levinson (1987), seven specific strategies have
been proposed in negative politeness strategies: be indirect, use hedges or questions, be
pessimistic, minimize the imposition, use obviating structures like nominalizations,
passives, or statements of general rules, apologetic, and use plural pronouns. Some of
them can be used in the language of negotiation. Therefore, here are some strategies
concluded from those seven strategies that will help save faces of the hearers.
a. Hedging words and phrases
Hedges are words whose job is to make things fuzzy (Zhou, 2001, p. 13). In
business, people often negotiate, so using this strategy can soften the tone of language of
negotiation and avoid being too rude when they want to mention unpleasant things such
as delay in payment of one party based on hedges such as some, sort of, kind of, and etc.
For example: From Our Previous Transactions you will realize that this sort of problem
is quite unusual.
In addition, there are hedges that express attitudes, such as I believe, I suppose, I’m
afraid, etc help to minimize imposition of language of negotiation.
For example: I’m afraid I can’t agree with the price you set

(Tang, 1998, p. 18)

Compared with “I can’t agree with the price you set”, which is rude and imposes on
the hearer, the above example is more soft and polite.
b. Plural pronouns
Speaker’s attitude can be adopted in the language of negotiation in business
correspondence and appropriate personal pronouns can make written language more
polite. Usually, pronouns are used in the context of business discourse to express group
identity. The first person plural personal pronoun “we” applied widely in business
correspondence is a key item, otherwise, “you, I, she and he” are negative pronouns.
For example: We regret to inform you.

(Brown and Levinson, 1987, p. 202)

2.2.4.2. Speech act by Yule (1998)
Besides Yule, there are many scholars including Austin J, Searle JR, Levinson SC,
who have studied speech acts with the same view that Speech act is a unit of
17

communication that performs a certain function, such as complimenting, apologizing,
offering help, etc.
There are many theories of action such as Representatives, Directives, Commissives,
Expressives and Declaratives.
a. Directives
Directives are used to perform a speech act with particular intention of the speaker
to get hearer to do something (Yule, 1996). Directives show “world-to-word” fit. The
context of the utterance eliciting some sort of action on the part of the example: ask, urge,
insist, tell, command, forbid, direct, warn, etc. These such commands, orders, requests,
suggestions can be positive and negative depending on the speaker's intention and
utterance.
For example: Could you lend me a pen, please?

(Yule, 1998, p. 54)

b. Expressives
Expressives are categories in speech act which reveal the speaker’s feelings and
towards a particular proposition. As usual, they express the psychological states or the
truth of the expressed proposition via statements of pleasure, pain, likes, dislikes, joy or
sorrow. The English verbs of expressive that stated by Searle and Vanderveken (1985, p.
211) are apologize, thank, condole, congratulate, complain, lament, protest, deplore,
boast, compliment, praise, welcome, and greet.

For example: I’m really sorry!

(Yule, 1998, p. 54)

In general, the author analyses the pragmatic features based on aspects in the
following table.
Table 2. The synthesis of analysed factors in pragmatic features
Politeness Theory
-

Speech Act

Positive politeness strategies

- Directives

• Exaggerate their interest, approval or sympathy in the - Expressives
hearer
• Offer & Promise
• Give (or ask for) reasons
• Give gifts to H (goods, sympathy, understanding,
18

cooperation)
-

Negative politeness strategies
• Hedging words and phrases
• Plural pronoun

3. METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES
3.1. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The study is based mainly on the qualitative approach. The data is collected and a
description of language of negotiation in business correspondence is given, and then
observation and analysis of the corpus are processed so that the features are drawn out.
Besides, data is analyzed quantitatively by manual counting. The description by statistics
will allow the thesis to prove the linguistic characteristics of language of negotiation in
English business correspondence.
3.2. DATA COLLECTION
The collected data for analysis in the research are selected from 65 English business
letters from both authentic textbooks and correspondence.
3.3. DATA ANALYSIS
After being collected, 65 samples of English business letters will be analyzed in
terms of pragmatic strategies. The data collected for the thesis will be analyzed both
qualitatively and quantitatively. Qualitative information includes pragmatic strategies
used in English business letters and quantitative information is the frequency of pragmatic
strategies appearing in English business letters.

4. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
4.1. SYNTACTIC FEATURES OF THE LANGUAGE OF NEGOTIATION
4.1.1. Passive voice
In daily life, people often like speaking their mind directly. In business negotiations,

19

negotiators can also use active voice to express their opinions directly. Nevertheless,
when demanding, advising, or suggesting, it would be better for negotiators to choose
passive voice because it is always very rude and aggressive to demand or require others

directly. Passive voice can be used to reduce imposition on the hearer by the way of
impersonalization.
For examples: We would not require you to hold large stocks of our products, but a
representative selection of samples, and we can meet orders from the Middle East within
four weeks of receipt. [3]
You would not be required to hold large stocks of our products, but a
representative selection of samples, and we can meet orders from the Middle East within
four weeks of receipt. [3]
In the above set of examples, the speaker shows his requirement, and the listener’s
positive face will be threatened. By using passive form, the speaker can avoid directly
mentioning his party, which can save the hearer’s positive face.
In addition, passive voice can be adopted to remove reference to the hearer, for
example:.
For examples: We give a security period of 14 days after the items are delivered and in
case of damage, they should be returned to our company immediately. [1]
We give a security period of 14 days after the items are delivered and in
case of damage, you should return them to our company immediately.
Such sentences show that second sentence sounds too aggressive and is not
beneficial to cooperative relations in business negotiation.
4.1.2. Transitional sentences
By adding transitional sentences, it will help the speaker possibly avoid imposition
to the hearer. Transitional sentences in language of negotiation are supported by
conjunctive adverbs and conjunctions such as but, still, however, thus, consequently,
meanwhile and etc.
For examples: First, let me say that we can handle an agency of the type you described
and that we agree that the demand for Western goods here is increasing. However, there

20

are some points we would like answered before we make a decision: Payment of
accounts. [6]
We can offer you the quantity discount you asked for which would be off
net prices for orders over V2.000, but the usual allowance for a trade discount in Italy is
15", and we always deal on payment by sight draft, cash against documents. [6]
For above examples, they indicate that the speaker tries to express to the hearer that
he did consider the hearer’s need. Thereby, the hearer will minimize the negativity of
language of negotiation during business transactions.
4.1.3. Summary of syntactic features
The following statistics on the frequency of occurrence of syntactic features used in
language of negotiation of 65 English business correspondence.
Table 3. The frequency of some factors in syntactic features
Syntactic features

Frequency of Occurrence

Percentage (%)

(…/65)
Passive voice

33/65

56.8%

Transitional sentences

28/28

48,27%

4.2. PRAGMATIC FEATURES OF THE LANGUAGE OF NEGOTIATION
4.2.1. Positive politeness strategies
4.2.1.1. Exaggerate (interest, approval or sympathy) with the H
Figure 1. The frequency of “exaggeration” (%)

Figure 1 shows that “appreciate” is commonly used in almost all business
correspondence, accounting for 84,6%. The second one is “really” with 30% of the total,
whereas “absolutely” hardly appears in business letters. By using the word “appreciate”
21

and “really” in an utterance, the writer can express his interest, approval or sympathy to
the hearer, thus, language of negotiation in written discourse will improve the strength of
the speaker’s intention..
For examples: If you wish to cancel the order it would be quite understandable, but we
stress that we will be able to complete delivery by next month and would appreciate it if
you could bear with us till then. [6]
We have made a good selection of patterns and sent them to you today by
post, their fine quality, attractive designs and reasonable prices at which we offer them
will, we hope, convince you that these blinds are really of good value. [4]
4.2.1.2. Offer & Promise
Figure 2. The frequency of “Offer & Promise” (%)

Examples below illustrate what speaker apply in language of negotiation in business
correspondence:
If your goods meet our requirements, and we receive a favourable offer,
we will be able to represent your cameras in Eastern Europe. [1]
If your order is for 4,000 pieces or more, we will give you a discount of
0.3% of the total value of the order. [4]

It would also be helpful if you could send us some samples and if they are
of the standard we require, we will place a substantial order. [1]
As regards the following chart (Figure 2), both “promise” and “offer” are frequently
used with 41% and 46%, respectively. With these above sentences, a speaker chooses to
stress his cooperation with the hearer in another way to redress the potential threat of
22

some FTAs. In other words, the speaker wants to satisfy the hearer by demonstrating his
good intention.
4.2.1.3. Give (or ask for) reasons
Figure 3. The frequency of “Give (or ask for) reasons” (%)

Below examples indicates using reasons to help the hearer persuade the hearer to
agree with the speaker for his action taken:
Because of their low price and the small profit margin we are working on,
we will not be offering any trade discounts on this consignment. [1]
We must stress that this offer is firm for 10 days only because of the heavy
demand jar the limited supply of this cloth in stock. [1]
The figure 3 shows that “Give reason” (27.6%) is used two times more than “Ask for
reason” (8%). It means disagreeing will threaten the client’s face and by providing a
reason for disagreeing, the threat is mitigated to some extent. The FTA here is in the form
of the subject’s request for the client to understand why the speaker has to disagree with
the hope that the understanding will make the client agree with him.
4.2.1.4. Give gifts to H (goods, sympathy, understanding, cooperation)
Figure 4. The frequency of “Give gifts to H”(%)

23

The following chart (Figure 4) depicts that three of elements including “sympathy”
and “understanding” with 27.6% and “cooperation” 23% are widely applied, compared to
8% of “goods”. Thereby, the speaker may save the hearer’s positive face by satisfying
some of the hearer’s wants. This strategy can be done not only by giving goods but also
by giving sympathy, understanding, cooperation etc. The following is an illustration of
this strategy:
We are sorry to learn that through a little negligence on the part of our
packing department, you have received the consignment in a damaged condition. [1]
Thank you for informing us about the damage to our consignment
(Inv.No.1887) [1]
The provided example shows that speaker decides to safe hearer’s positive face by
giving sympathy to the speaker. Therefore, the speaker can minimize the imposition when
he confides the hearer.
4.2.2. Negative politeness strategies
4.2.2.1. Hedging words and phrases
Figure 5. The frequency of “hedging words and phrases” (%)

It is clearly seen that hedges such as we believe, we hope, I’m afraid are frequently
used in language of negotiation in business correspondence (27.6%, 24.6% and 26%,
respectively). Instead of directly expressing attitudes, by using these hedges, the speaker
can minimize imposition to the hearer and it makes the sentence become more polite.

24

For examples: Nevertheless, I am afraid I cannot supply you with the information you
request. [4]
We believe that it represents the best value for money in this type of
goods and we are sure that you will find it sells very well indeed. [4]
4.2.2.2. Plural noun

Figure 6. The frequency of “Plural noun” (%)

The figure 6 indicates that “exclusive we” (49%) is used twice as high as “inclusive
we” (24.6%). Due to the negative vibe that “you, I, she and he” bring to language of
negotiation in business correspondence, the first person plural personal pronoun “we”
applied widely.
For examples: We operate on a 10% commission basis on net list prices, with an
additional 3% del credere commission if required, and we think you could expect an
annual turnover of more than £2,000,000 [6]
From all list prices we allow a trade discount of 3,5% and a further
special discount of 0,5%, making 4% in all, on orders received on or before 31' May [6]
Based on above examples, “we” will be interpreted in different functions including
exclusive personal we or inclusive corporate we. When speakers or hearers use “we”, it
indicates their group, organization, companies.
4.2.3. Speech act
4.2.3.1. Directives
Directives are used to cause the hearer to engage in some action or bring about some
state of affairs (e.g., advising, requesting, commanding). Directives are not true or false
25

An investigation into syntactic and pragmatic features in the language of negotiation used in english business correspondence

Tài liệu liên quan

Tài liệu bạn tìm kiếm đã sẵn sàng tải về