Apology Strategies in Hindko: An Explanatory Intercultural Research
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54183/jssr.v3i2.228Keywords:
Apology Strategies, Hindko, Turkish, Social, Cultural, Inter and Cross-Cultural, PragmaticsAbstract
Intercultural and cross-cultural studies play a significant role in understanding the influence of culture on communication, especially pragmatic communication in any language. The current study aims to explore the phenomenon of apology strategies used by Hindko speakers enrolled at the University of Kotli and the University of AJK Muzaffarabad. The data were collected through a Discourse Completion Test from 10 speakers of Hindko enrolled in various departments at the University of Kotli and UAJK Muzaffarabad. The Turkish language data were adopted as a reference from a research study conducted by Cetinavei (2012). The Hindko data were analyzed using the theoretical framework presented by Blum-Kulka et.al (1984). The findings of the research show that Hindko speakers show variation in using apology strategies. Hindko speakers use more direct explanation and denial strategies, whereas Turkish speakers use indirect responsibility and explanation strategies. Moreover, the analysis also shows that Hindko speakers use forgiveness strategies more frequently than other strategies like intensifying or taking responsibility. The research opens doors for future researchers to dig into the comparative aspects of the languages with other European languages.
References
Bergman, M. and Kasper, G. (1993). Perception and Performance in Native and Non-Native Apology. In: Gabrielle, K. and Shohona, B., Eds., Interlanguage Pragmatics, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 82-117.
Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G. (1989). Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Blum-Kulka, S. (1983). Interpreting and performing speech acts in a second language: A cross-cultural study of Hebrew and English. In N. Wolfson & E. Judd (Eds.), Sociolinguistics and language acquisition (pp. 36-55). New York, NY: Newbury House.
Brown, P., Levinson, S. C., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge University Press.
Beebe, L. M., & Waring, H. Z. (2004). The linguistic encoding of pragmatic tone: Adverbials as words that work. Studying speaking to inform second language learning, 228-249.
Cohen, A. (1996). Developing the Ability to Perform Speech Acts. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18(2), 253-267. https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226310001490X
Cohen, Andrew A. (1996). Developing the ability to perform speech acts. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 18 (2): 253-267.
Cetinavci. U. (2012). Apologizing in Turkish Language: An Intracultural and Intercultural Exploratory study. Contemporary Online Language Education Journal, 2012, 1, 72-104.
D.A. Cruse (2018). Meaning in language: an introduction to semantics and pragmatics. OUP, Oxford.
Derakhshan, A., & Eslami, Z. R. (2019). Second language pragmatics: From theory to research. Intercultural Pragmatics, 16(5), 611-617. https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2019-0030
Gow, J. N. (2021). Reworking race, nation, and diaspora on the margins. Diaspora: A Journal of Transnational Studies, 21(2), 209-230. https://doi.org/10.3138/diaspora.21.2.2021.05.04
Hussain, M., & Aziz, A. (2020). Cross-cultural pragmatic study of apology strategies in Balochi with reference to Chinese language. Journal of Nusantara Studies, 5(2), 152-169. http://dx.doi.org/10.24200/jonus.vol5iss2pp152-169
Holmes, J. (1989). Sex differences and apologies: One aspect of communicative Competence1. Applied Linguistics, 10(2), 194-213. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/10.2.194
Holman, D. (n.d.). Call centres. The New Workplace, 115-134. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470713365.ch7
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, Behaviours, Institutions and Organizations across Nations. CA: Thousand Oaks, Sage.
Jucker, A. H. (2019). Speech act attenuation in the history of English: The case of apologies. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.878
Jordà, M. P. (2005). Pragmatic production of third language learners of English: A focus on request acts modifiers. International Journal of Multilingualism, 2(2), 84-104. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790710508668378
Leech. G. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. Longman, London.
Matsuoka, K., Kotani, I., & Yamasato, M. (2012). Correct information unit analysis for determining the characteristics of narrative discourse in individuals with chronic traumatic brain injury. Brain Injury, 26(13-14), 1723-1730. https://doi.org/10.3109/02699052.2012.698789
Mir, S.H., Ahmed. S. L., & Kamran, M. (2022). Corona Humourism: A Corpus Based Sociolinguistic Study of WhatsApp Messages of Pakistani English Teachers. Periodics. Journal of Social Sciences, 2(2), 197-214
Nureddeen, F. A. (2008). Cross cultural pragmatics: Apology strategies in Sudanese Arabic. Journal of Pragmatics, 40(2), 279-306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2007.11.001
Saleem, T., & Azam, S. (2015). A socio-pragmatic Analysis of appropriateness in a speech act of apology in English. Journal of Literature, Languages and Linguistics, 6(1), 4-13.
Taguchi, N., & Ishihara, N. (2018). The pragmatics of English as a Lingua Franca: Research and pedagogy in the era of globalization. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 38, 80-101. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0267190518000028
Trosborg, A. (2003). The teaching of business pragmatics. Pragmatic competence and foreign language teaching, 247-281.
Tanck, S. (2002). Speech Act sets of refusal and complaint: A comparison of native and nonnative English speakers’ production. TESOL Working Papers, Series 2.
Trosborg, A. (1987). Apology strategies in natives/non-natives. Journal of Pragmatics, 11(2), 147-167. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(87)90193-7
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Copyright in the Journal of Social Sciences Review is retained by the author(s). Authors also grant any third party the right to use the article freely as long as its integrity is maintained and its original authors, citation details and publisher are identified.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
SSR's Editorial Board shares the vision of providing free access to information, education, and science for everyone, thus promoting its content through an OPEN ACCESS POLICY, fulfilling the DOAJ definition of open access. The JSSR adheres to an Open Access and Copyright Licensing Policy based on the belief that making research freely accessible to the public promotes greater global knowledge sharing.
The JSSR uses the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. The authors who apply and publish in JSSR consent to abide by the copyright policy set out in the Creative Commons 4.0 license (Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International license).
- Copyright in the Journal of Social Sciences Review is retained by the author(s).
- Authors also grant any third party the right to use the article freely as long as its integrity is maintained and its original authors, citation details and publisher are identified.
While "By 'open access' to this literature, we mean its free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself."
