Apologetic Strategies of ESL Urdu Students: A Study Based on Formal and Informal Socio-Pragmatic Contexts
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.62843/jssr.v5i1.513Keywords:
Apology, Speech Act, Pragmatics, Apologetic StrategiesAbstract
The main concern of this paper is to investigate different apologetic strategies in the English language of ESL students who were natives of the Urdu language (n=30), selected through a purposive sampling technique. How differently an apology can be performed in different socio-pragmatic ESL contexts has been investigated based on the context, level of seriousness, and nature of the offense. For this purpose, 'Speech Act Theory' was employed, as proposed by Langshaw Austin (1962). The methodological procedure was informed by the study of Blum-Kulka (1989), in which data was categorized under Blum-Kulka's taxonomy by considering formal and informal apologetic contexts linguistically. Two instruments have been used: a) a questionnaire to estimate the awareness of respondents' preference for apology in different contexts, and b) a Discourse Completion Task (DCT) based on eight formal and informal situations adopted from the study of Shoshana et al. (1989). It was followed by an interview to see the views of respondents about apologetic strategies in the Urdu language. Quantitative analysis of the data was done with IBM SPSS (V21) to calculate mean values (M) and percentages (%) of different taxonomical categories. Findings reveal the minor difference in apologetic strategies in formal and informal contexts. It highlights the awareness of Urdu ESL speakers of performing an apology with more than one strategy based on the context, level of seriousness, and nature of the offense. The highest percentage was for apologies using Illocutionary Force Indicating Devices (IFIDs). On the other hand, respondents intended to apologize in English rather than Urdu, as per the majority's views. The study signifies the importance of communicative competence, which ensures the appropriateness of utterance as per the need and situation.
References
Al Ali, S. A. (2012). A cross-cultural study of the speech act of apology by Saudi and Australian females [Unpublished master's thesis, University of Melbourne, Australia]. https://www.awej.org/images/Theseanddissertation/shatha100/100%20full%20thesis%20.pdf
Austin, J. L. (1975). How to do things with words. Harvard university press.
Banikalef, A. A., & Maros, M. (2013). Social beliefs for the realization of the speech acts of apology among Jordanian EFL graduate students. English Linguistics Research, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.5430/elr.v2n1p134
Bataineh, R. F., & Bataineh, R. F. (2006). Apology strategies of Jordanian EFL university students. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(11), 1901-1927. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2005.11.004
Blum-Kulka, S. (1989). Playing it Safe: The Role of Conventionality in Indirectness. In S. Blum-Kulka, J. House, & G. Kasper (Eds.), Cross-cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies (pp. 37-70). Norwood: Ablex Publishing.
Cambridge Dictionary. (n.d.). Cambridge University Press https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/apology
Cohen, A. D., & Olshtain, E. (1981). DEVELOPING A MEASURE OF SOCIOCULTURAL COMPETENCE: THE CASE OF APOLOGY. Language Learning, 31(1), 113-134. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1981.tb01375.x
Ghanbaran, S., Rahimi, M., & Rasekh, A. E. (2014). Intensifiers in Persian discourse: Apology and compliment speech acts in focus. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 542-551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.450
Goffman, E. (2009). Relations in public. Transaction Publishers.
Jassim, A. H., & Nimehchisalem, V. (2016). EFL Arab students’ apology strategies in relation to formality and informality of the context. Ampersand, 3, 117-125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amper.2016.06.001
Nasiri, S., & Forutan, A. (2015). On the Iranian EFL teachers apology production. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 110, 1987-1997.
Scher, S. J., & Darley, J. M. (1997). How effective are the things people say to apologize? Effects of the realization of the apology speech act. Journal of psycholinguistic research, 26, 127-140. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025068306386
Shariati, M., & Chamani, F. (2010). Apology strategies in Persian. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(6), 1689-1699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.10.007
Shoshana, B.-K., House, J., & Kasper, G. (1989). Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Grazer Linguistische Studien, 349-357. https://unipub.uni-graz.at/gls/content/titleinfo/4347210/full.pdf
Sugimoto, N. (1997). A Japan-U.S. Comparison of apology styles. Communication Research, 24(4), 349-369. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365097024004002
Swan, M. (1985). A critical look at the Communicative Approach (1). ELT Journal, 39(1), 2–12. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/39.1.2
Vanderveken, D., & Susumu, K. (2002). Essays in speech act theory (Vol. 77). John Benjamins Publishing.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 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."
