Luận văn A study of the use of addressing terms in English and Vietnamese families

lso called “cha vợ, mẹ vợ, anh vợ, chị vợ”. Son’s wife is called “con dâu”, in contrast daughter’s husband addressed “con rể”. In Vietnam, hierarchy has been on a person’s relationship to other members of the family in terms of age, sex, maternal, marriage, etc. Older siblings are addressed as anh (older brother) or chị (older sister). Younger siblings are referred to as em or more definitively em trai (younger brother) or em gái (younger sister). Older siblings of the parents and their spouses are often called bác. The father’s younger siblings are called chú for males and cô for female. In some regions of Vietnam, the wives of the father’s brothers are usually addressed as thím. On the Mother’s side, younger siblings are called cậu for males and dì for females; the wives of the mother’s younger brothers can sometimes be called mợ. According to the dialectal regions, kinship is widely used. It is the reason why Vietnam kinship terms are so common. For example, apart from “bố”, “cha”, “mẹ” we have so many expressions such as “thầy”, “thày”, “ba”, “tía”, “mạ”, “mệ”, “bầm”, “bu”, “u”, “má”, “mế”, and so on. Kinship terms in Vietnam are plentiful and complicated which causes many difficulties for foreigners learning Vietnamese, for instance, pronoun “I” can be translated “chú, cháu, bác, em, anh” *In spousal relationship: There are many ways to address between husband and wife, for example, “anh – em”, “mình – tớ”, “mình – tôi”, “đằng ấy – đằng này”, “ông xã – bà xã”, “vợ - chồng”. 27 Example 1: English Vietnamese Nothing in the head Không có cái gì trong đầu A scholar was preparing to take the exam. His wife was very puzzled by his constant worrying. “Look at you, you worthless wretch,” she said: “You probably think that it’s more difficult for a man to write an essay than for a woman to give birth to a child.” “It is easy for you women to give birth to children,” the scholar sighed. “How is that?” she asked. “You can bear children easily because you carry the child in your stomach,” the scholar said: “But I have nothing in my head, so how do you expect me to think of something to write?” Một anh học trò sắp sửa tham dự kỳ thi Vợ anh ta rất lo lắng khi thấy anh ta căng thẳng triền miên. “Nhìn mình kìa, trông mình thật khốn khổ. Chắc là mình nghĩ rằng đàn ông viết văn khó hơn đàn bà sinh con à.” Anh học trò thở dài: “Người phụ nữ sinh con thì dễ dàng hơn nhiều.” Cô vợ hỏi: “Dễ như thế nào?” “Mình có thể sinh con dễ dàng vì mình có đứa con trong bụng. Còn tôi chẳng có gì trong đầu, vì vậy làm sao mà mình mong tôi nghĩ ra điều gì đó để viết chứ?” In this example, the address forms of this couple is “mình – tôi”. We can see that pronouns “I and me” are translated “Tôi” to refer to husband. Pronoun “You” is translated “mình” but “Mình” refers to both husband and wife. 28 “Look at you, you worthless wretch” → “Nhìn mình kìa, trông mình thật khốn khổ” (In this sentence, “Mình” refers to husband) “You can bear children easily because you carry the child in your stomach” → “Mình có thể sinh con dễ dàng vì mình có đứa con trong bụng” (In this sentence, “Mình” refers to wife) When they are happy and they love one another: “anh – em, em – mình, tôi – mình, cậu – tớ, bố nó – mẹ nó, thầy nó – bu nó”. Example 2: Thế nào? Thầy em có mệt lắm không? Sao chậm về thế? Trán đã nóng lên đây mà! (Tắt đèn, Ngô Tất Tố) How? Are you tired? Why do you come so late? Your forehead is so hot! In this example, Mrs. Dau called her husband with “thầy em”, it show her respect, intimacy with him, showing her care to her husband when he borrows money. Example 3: Tôi đã bảo cậu mà! Thì tôi đã muốn im đi, sao mợ còn cứ xui tra tấn. (Mất cái ví – Nguyễn Công Hoan) I said to you so! I want to keep silent, why do you say that? In this situation, “you” is translated into both “cậu – mợ”, it means “chồng – vợ” in old society. These addressing terms are very popular. Sometimes, social titles used in family: 29 Example 4: Vợ ơi, anh về đây nè! (Wife, I come home) Sếp đi đâu đấy? (Where do you go) – wife says to husband, husband looks like boss. Giáo sư, nghỉ ăn cơm thôi. (Professor, have a break) – wife says to husband, he is considered as professor. Example 5: -Hay là mình sang đây ở với tớ một nhà cho vui.. -Đằng ấy còn nhớ gì hôm qua không? (Chí Phèo – Nam Cao) -Do you want to live with me? -Did you remember yesterday? This is dialogue between Chi Pheo and Thi No. This is beginning of relationship, Chi Pheo calls “đằng ấy”, uses “mình – tớ”, it show his love with her. The gentle addressing form to show intimacy, friendly saying, soft tone. But in English, Chi Pheo’s lover is translated into one pronoun “you”. There was quarrell between the couple, the wife and husband will change their address terms such as: tôi nói cho cô rõ; tao nói cho mẹ mày biết; thằng này sẽ; đây sẽ cho mẹ mày biết tay; v.v.v or tôi nói cho anh rõ; tao cũng nói cho bố mày biết; bà mày cũng chẳng chịu thua; mày giỏi thì đi kiếm con khác về nó hầu.. Example 6: Mày cứ đánh chết bà đi! Mày đánh chết bà xem nào! Mày không đánh chết được bà thì.. (Con mèo – Nam Cao) Beat me! Beat me! If you do not beat me. 30 In this situation, this is quarrel between a wife and a husband. The wife calls “mày”, it shows her angry attitude. “bà” is kinship and superior addressing term, means the powerful position in family. When the wife addresses “bà” with her husband, she challenges her husband to beat her to show her disrespectful attitude with her husband. Meanwhile, in any circumstances, pronoun “you” is always used. Example 7: -À, mày đã khỏe to họng, ông đốt nhà mày cho mày xem. -Anh đốt nhà thì hàng xóm bắt vạ anh. -Thì ông đi ngồi tù, cho chúng mày đi ăn mày cả lượt. (Tuyển tập Tô Hoài) -Ah, how fine you are, I will burn your house. -If you burn house, the neighbor will punish you. -I will go to prison, all of you are beggars. The husband addresses “ông”, calls his wife “mày”, he is threatening to burn house. It is impolite address. It is very easy to understand because Vietnamese has high power distance index. In this situation, the husband considers himself higher, more powerful than his wife. It may be said that Vietnamese culture is centered on the family. Therefore, address terms used in communicating are very complicated and often indicate the family relationship. However, addressing terms in English are much simpler and everyone can be addressed in the same way. Those forms of address often do not imply the status of either person in the exchange because family does not determine one’s status but rather by personal achievement. 31 In conclusion, the chapter has briefly described and examined related studies on the same field. Some basic points of culture – language – communication relationship, family and its basement: members in the families, ATs and their typical features and English together with Vietnamese addressing systems have been made clear of. The chapter is hoped to have properly provided the background knowledge of the subject matter, on the basis of which data collection instruments are constructed and described in more details in next chapter. 2.4 Previous study According to “Personal Pronouns in Vietnamese and American English (from cultural perspective)” by Nguyễn Thị Thu Hà in 2009, the author studied on personal pronouns in Vietnam and America. The author only focused on personal pronouns, kinship terms and status terms which used between colleagues in the office. In this MA minor thesis, firstly, Vietnamese people appreciated “age” when having conservation because factor “age” plays the most important role in the way they address colleagues. By contrast, the American informants do not mind much about “age” factor because individualism is highly considered in their culture. In communication, everyone seems to have the same power so that individual characteristic can be expressed the most clearly. Secondly, 100% informants say that they never use last name, full name and title + last name, title without last name while communicating colleagues. Mostly Vietnamese informants use kinship terms to address the colleagues often (97%). The result from American informants is a little bit different from that of Vietnamese ones. American informants, about 95 % chooses “first name” to 32 address higher position. 100% says they never use last name, full name, title and last name and kinship terms. According to “Use of addressing forms to express informality in English and Vietnamese” by Trinh Viet Huong (2011). The author studied major similarities and differences in addressing forms to express informality in English and Vietnamese, particularly in the company. In this MA thesis, the majority of Vietnamese people use Pronouns to express informality, this is followed by “bare kinship term” and “first name terms”. “Manner of communication” is the most dominanat factors affecting the choice of addressing terms. The other facotrs that have impact on the choice of addressing terms are “social status”, “financial power”. Three other factors seem to have little influence on the choice of addressing forms, namely “financial power”, “education”, and “social status”. With English addressing terms, “pronouns” are the most popular used addressing forms, next come “standard short form of name”, “term of endearment”, “bare title”, “slang”, “nicknames” are less favoured. This MA thesis concentrates on “friend- friend”, “student – teacher”, “staff worker – boss”, “boss – staff worker” relationship. Addressing forms are more commonly used in English are “public settings” and “home”. “Workplace”, “library” are less likely to be suitable settings for informality” “Age” is the settings that do not affect much on the choice of addressing forms of English native speakers respondents. In both English and Vietnamese languages “first name terms” are used to address people. In Vietnamese, “first name terms” do not only signal familarity but also some kind of respect. Vietnamese never use names to address superior persons, such as parents or older people, when in English 33 speaking cultures people often call their family members names such as “John, Kate”. In “A Cross – cultural study on using kinship terms as address forms in English and Vietnamese” by Ha Hai Hong (2003), the author focused on studying kinship and kinship terminologies. The number of Vietnamese kin terms is 89, including 45 terms in consangiunal relationship (ông ngoại, bà nội, bố, mẹ, con, etc) and 34 terms reffering to affinal relationship and 12 terms showing afflicitve kin. 34 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY 3.1 Research question revisited At this point, the three research questions are: 1.What are the possible addressing terms that members in families call each other in English and Vietnamese? 2. What are the possible factors that affect the choice of ATs between members in the family in the two cultures? 3. What are the similarities and differences between English and Vietnamese in ATs used in the families? 3.2 Selection of participants The study was carried out with the participation of 200 respondents in total. By “English native participants” here, the MA thesis aims at people from three English speaking countries, which are America, Australia and England. All these 200 participants were chosen randomly. By choosing participants randomly, the level of reliability of the findings could be assured. 3.3 Data collection instrument As the objects of the study were two groups: Vietnamese and English, two forms of questionnaires were designed and delivered, each of which was written in one language. The questionnaire was designed with open – ended questions to seek information on: -Possible addressing terms and categories that are used between members in the families in the two cultures. 35 -Possible factors that affect the choice of ATs in the families. 3.4 Data collection procedures The data collection procedures were conducted in three phases described as follow Phase 1: designing questionnaires As stated above, there were two forms of questionnaires, which were Vietnamese and English versions. Both of these were constructed with a set of information. Then, the two forms were piloted among a group of 200 participants, 100 from Vietnam and the other 100 from English. At the end of the first phase, the final versions of the questionnaires were designed before actually used. Phase 2: delivering questionnaires This phase consists of two stages Stage 1: printed Vietnamese versions of the questionnaire were spread out to 100 people chosen randomly and willing to cooperate with the researcher in the study. These people were asked to complete the survey on the spot, any point unclear were accounted for right away by the researcher. Stage 2: in fact, this stage was conducted simultaneously with stage 1. In the first place, the researcher contacted with friends/ acquaintances that are living or studying in the three targeted countries and presented to them the researcher as well as asked for their help. Phase 3: collecting questionnaires As for Vietnamese version, after the survey was accomplished on the spot, the researcher must guarantee that all sections of the questionnaire were 36 completed and no questions or space were left unanswered before collecting the questionnaires. For English version, the 100 replies to the questionnaire were gathered and made full use of. Again, all these questionnaires had to be accomplished completed before exploited. The two forms of the questionnaires (200 in total), then, were brought to the next step – data analysis. Chapter 3, with the focus on describing the questionnaires for the study, has also made clear the procedures of selecting participants and collecting data. All responses have been decoded and examined. In next chapter, all findings will be analyzed in detail and present explicitly. 37 CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 4.1 Results of the study 4.1.1 Vietnamese responses About the participants’ background information As clearly shown in the chart, the majority of Vietnamese participants were women with 65% of the total population, 40% were single women and the rest was 25 % of married women. Meanwhile, the number of single men was 22%, 13% was married men. The figures have shown that although the number of participants in four groups was not really equal due to the random selection of participants, all required groups of participants did get involved in the study, which would partly assure the reliability and validity level of the collected data. 13% 22% 25% 40% Figure 1: Vietnamese participants' information married men single men married women single women 38 Question 1: ATs that may be used in the family This question was designed in the form of an open – ended question which allowed participants to freely express their opinions. ATs categories Participants’ response sum rank Single men’s Single’s women Married men’s Married women’s Title 0 0 0 0 0 5 Title proper names 0 0 0 0 0 5 Kinship terms with first name 4 15 10 14 43 1 Middle and first name 0 0 0 0 0 5 Nicknames 3 15 5 3 24 3 Terms of endearments 7 10 2 15 34 2 Demonstrative words 0 10 2 2 14 4 (Table 2: Different ATs are used in the families) The figures in the table show that of the total 7 forms responded, the most popular ATs which was agreed by the majority of participants is the kinship forms (43/100), closely followed by “terms of endearments” with 34/100 answer. The two forms “nicknames” and “demonstrative words” ranked next. Among different terms responded by participants, the three least commonly used were “title”, “title proper name” and “middle and first name”. These ATs were considered as too formal and often used in the first meeting, thus these terms were not used commonly. 39 Question 2: How often are these ATs used in the families? This question asked participants to evaluate the frequency of different addressing terms in the families. The answers of the participants would not be presented in accordance with four participants’ groups any longer but with level of frequency as follows: ATs categories Frequency Very often Often Sometimes Rarely Never Title 0 0 0 3 97 Title proper names 0 0 0 3 97 Kinship terms with first name 82 18 0 0 0 Middle and first name 0 0 10 5 85 Nicknames 70 20 10 0 0 Terms of endearments 89 11 0 0 0 Demonstrative words 56 40 4 0 0 (Table 3: Frequency of different ATs used in Vietnamese families) With the figure demonstrated in the table, it is easy to realize that the two most often used in the families are “terms of endearments” and “kinship terms with first name”. This means that “kinship terms with first name” and “terms of endearments” are mainly chosen. Less often used than “kinship terms with first name” and “terms of endearments” are “nicknames” and “demonstrative words”. The figures in the table also reveal the fact that “title” does not appear in Vietnamese families, as a result, “title with proper name” and “middle and 40 first name” were chosen by the majority of participants as never used. They are often used in formal situation and first meeting. As can be seen from table 3, “nicknames” are used 70 responses. 70/ 100 members in the family use “nicknames” very often to call each other. The participants reckoned that this addressing term is used with a quite high frequency. To wrap it up, regarding addressing terms and addressing categories, the result of the first 2 questions have demonstrated that “kinship terms with first names”, “nicknames” and “terms of endearments” are the most popular used in Vietnamese families. Question 3: In your opinion, which of factor affect the choice of ATs in the families? Factors Influence degree Much Not much Little Age gap (between 2 persons) 68 22 10 Education 10 43 47 Financial power 80 20 0 Mood 50 30 20 Occasion 5 5 90 Occupation 76 20 4 Personality 90 9 1 Position 92 8 0 (Table 4: Degree of influence of possible factors on the choice of addressing terms used in Vietnamese families) 41 According to the figures in the table, the majority of participants agreed that the term they chose to address their partner depended on position. Vietnam is an oriented country, “husband” or “father” is the highest position in the family. Receiving the support of 90/100 respondent, “personality” ranks second in the list of the most influential factors. “Financial power” and “occupation” were considered as much impact on which forms of addressing used in family. Vietnam is a developing country, finance is one of the difficult problems. Meanwhile, “age gap” was considered as one of factors which affect to use ATs. When having conversation, Vietnamese always appreciate “age”, it shows respect to each other especially the old. Many participants share the same viewpoint that normally Vietnamese people do pay little attention to “education” and “occasion” factors when selecting an appropriate AT to address each other. The culture of Vietnam that is the agricultural civilization based on the wet rice culture, which requires community society to be developed so that its members can support each other. In other words, society is considered as an extended family household functioning, well – integrated unit hierarchically structured in which elders are highly respected. To conclude, the most common addressing terms are used between members in Vietnamese families are “terms of endearments” and “kinship terms with first name”. Vietnam is Asian country people always respect the old, when having conservation, Vietnamese usually appreciate “age” so “position” is the most influential factor on the choice of ATs. 42 4.1.2 English responses About the participants’ background information 28% 14% 58% Figure 2: English participants' division Australia American English 22% 40% 13% 25% Figure 3: English participants' information Single men single women married men married women 43 The figures in the two charts indicate the number of English native participants of the study as well as their features in terms of gender and marital status. The figure 3 illustrates that of 100 English native participants, single women were active to join in the MA thesis and occupied the highest proportion (40%). The total percentage of married people joining the study was 38% with 25% women and 13% were men. Interestingly and coincidentally, the figures shows in the figure 3 are almost the same as those in figure 1 about the information of Vietnamese participants. This has assured that all possible conclusions especially on the similarities and differences between the two cultures would be highly convincing and precise. Question 1: ATs that may be used in the families AFs categories Participants’ response sum rank Single men’s Single’s women Married men’s Married women’s Baby/ babe 20 28 15 25 88 1 Sweetheart 18 14 10 22 64 2 Dear 17 10 15 17 59 4 Darling 2 11 2 3 18 6 Nicknames 3 15 5 3 24 5 My love 18 10 10 22 60 3 Sweetie 13 20 18 13 64 2 (Table 5: Different ATs are used in the families) 44 The figures in table 5 have clearly demonstrated that of about 13 different ATs by the participants, the endearing “baby/ babe” was chosen by 88/ 100 of participants. Many members in the families also love to address each other by “sweetheart” or “sweetie” ranked second in the table. Another form of endearment was accepted by “my love” and “dear”. Question 2: How often are these ATs used in the families? ATs categories Frequency Very often Often Sometimes Rarely Never Title alone 0 0 4 76 20 Title + last name 0 15 10 70 5 Last name (LN) 82 18 0 0 0 First name (FN) 76 12 10 2 0 Nicknames 80 10 10 0 0 Terms of endearments 70 14 16 0 0 Short name (diminutive name) 84 12 4 0 0 Pet name 30 30 20 15 5 Kinship terms 0 0 5 80 15 (Table 6: Frequency of different addressing categories used in English families) The figures in table 6 show the frequency level of different addressing categories from the perception of English participants. According table 6, it is easy to realize that “short name”, “nicknames”; “last name” or “terms of endearments” were used most often, then came “first 45 name”. “Pet name” was claimed to be used but less often than the mentioned categories. The rest of the given categories, as demonstrated through the table, were chosen by different participants differently. Some people reckoned that these categories are “sometimes” used while other agreed upon “rarely” or “never used”. However, generally speaking, the “never” used section tends to comprise “title alone” and “kinship terms”. In short, “short name”, “nicknames”; “last name” are the most commonly used addressing categories appearing between members in English families. Other categories, especially “title alone” and “kinship terms” are found uncommon. Question 3: In your opinion, which of factor affect the choice of ATs in the families? Factors Influence degree Much Not much Little Age gap (between 2 persons) 5 20 75 Education 10 43 47 Financial power 7 13 80 Mood 70 18 12 Occasion 85 5 10 Occupation 10 10 80 Personality 90 9 1 Position 5 5 90 (Table 7: Degree of influence of possible factors on the choice of addressing terms used in English families) 46 Because the study is to focus on the influential factors towards the choice and use of ATs in the families, it is not the detailed statistics but the specific remarks revealed from the responses of participants that should be paid much attention to. 100% of participants evaluated “mood”, “personality”, “occasion” to be the most dominant factors of the 8 given ones. In this group of most determined factors, “personality” plays the most core role which is examined by members in the families before selecting appropriate ATs to address. English are equal in families, so “position” and “age gap” that have certain impacts on the choice of ATs but its influence degree is “not much”. The figures in the table have additionally indicated that three factors considered to have few impacts on the choice and use of ATs within members in the family “education”, “position”, “financial power” in particular. In short, like Vietnamese families, members in English families like to use “terms of endearments” to call each other. In addition, they always use “short names”, “nicknames”, “last name” on the choice of ATs. England are equal country, English people do not appreciate “age gap” or “position” when having conservation. “Personality” is the most influential factors on the choice of ATs. 4.2. Summary of the findings The previous section has presented in detail the results of two forms of questionnaires of the study. At this section, all findings that have been generalized previously should be once again stressed and collected in a clearer and more logical way. 47 4.2.1 About the results collected from Vietnamese participants There are two outstanding features of ATs used between members in Vietnamese language and culture. Firstly, “kinship terms” are used most often in this relationship. Besides, Vietnamese people used “terms of endearments”, “demonstrative words” mainly. “Title”, “title with proper name” and “middle and first name” are regarded as unpopular, so it was used in the first meeting or in the special/ formal occasion. Secondly, the choice of ATs between members in Vietnamese families is affected by five major factors namely “position”, “personality”, “financial power”, “occupation” and “age gap”. Additionally, a Vietnamese member may also pay attention to “mood” to find appropriate terms to address each other. Two factors seem to have little influence on the choice of ATs made by members in families are “education” and “occasion”. 4.2.2 About the results collected from English participants In terms of most popular ATs used between member in the family, the dyad of neutral “I – YOU” show the invincible power in English, which is effectively supported by “short name”, “last name” , “nicknames” and such name – related categories as “first name”, “terms of endearments”, “pet name”. The terms and categories appear to be unpopular in English addressing between members in the family are “title alone”, “title + last name” and “kinship terms”. 48 Regarding the factors that possibly affect the choice of ATs of members in the families, English people tend to take notice of factors of “personality”, “occasion”, “mood”, whereas “position”, “age gap” and “financial power” do have little influence on the choice of ATs. All in all, above are the main findings of the study about the subject matter. This, together with details of the results presented in the section before have, hopefully, which altogether would construct a firm basement for the next section where the similarities and differences of members in families between two culture – Vietnamese and English be explored comprehensively. 4.3 Major similarities and differences addressing terms between members in English and Vietnamese in the families. The detailed analysis of the findings presented in 4.1 has shown that the addressing system used between members in Vietnamese is quite different from that used in English, though they still share a thing or two in common. This section will shed light on those similarities and differences of the two cultures regarding three criteria: number of ATs, popular ATs and categories, and factors affecting the choice of ATs. In addition, in some parts about the differences between the two cultures, tables of information would be of great help to present the findings. Below is the detail presentation on the major similarities and differences between members in families in Vietnamese and English languages and cultures in ATs. 49 a. In terms of number of ATs In Vietnamese family, all of the members often use “kinship terms with first name” to call each other, for instance, ba Cải, thím Luật, dì Gấm,,,, to show intimacy. Meanwhile, English often tend to use “terms of endearments”, for example, “honey”, “dear”, “sweetie” can be used by both husband and wife, parents and children. In Vietnamese, there is a tendency that ATs should go in pairs, that is, if the husband uses a term, the wife will use the other term that makes up and addressing pair with the term chosen by the husband and so parents and children. This addressing pair “bố - mẹ” is an illustration of this. b. In terms of popular ATs and categories To begin with, the most commonly used pair of ATs in two cultures should be mentioned. In English, the dyad of neutral “I – YOU” shows its supremacy, and in Vietnamese this respect goes to the pair “anh – em”, “bố - con”, “mẹ - con”. These pairs are used by husband – wife, parents – children every day, in almost all situations, hence, to a large extent, “I – YOU” in English can be treated as “anh – em”, “bố - con”, “mẹ - con” in Vietnamese and vice versa. Except for the similarities in these addressing categories, Vietnamese and English share no common ground on the other addressing terms. The following table would help to elaborate on this remark. 50 Addressing terms/ categories Vietnamese English Name – related First name Less used often Used more often by members in the family Nick name Use – dependent Very often used in both addressing directions Kinship terms Showing the supreme power over others, especially the pair “anh – em”, “bố - con”, “mẹ - con” Used by very few people Terms of endearments Not often used by husband – wife. Used more often between parents – children Very often used with a high frequency regardless the users Table 8: Major differences between Vietnamese and English with regards to popular addressing terms and categories. c.In terms of influential factors on the choice of ATs The similarities of the two cultures are illustrated through the agreement on the three most influential factors namely “personality”, “occasion”, “mood”, “financial power” and “age gap”. Besides, when the characteristic of the situations change, both English and Vietnamese members in the family tend to remain their common and preferred ATs in communicating with the partner. As for other factors, there is a gap between Vietnamese and English, which is demonstrated through the table below. 51 Factors Vietnamese English Age gap One of the most decisive factors, especially between members in the family Showing few impacts Position Much influential factor Not much influential Occasion User – dependent One of the most influential factors (Table 9: Major differences between Vietnamese and English with regards to influential factors on the choice ATs between members in the families) In conclusion, what have mentioned above the major similarities and differences between the two cultures in ATs used between members in the families, answering to the fourth research question. By “major” here, the researcher puts an emphasis on the points that are evident and considerable. Other details on this comparison and contrast may expectedly be dug deep into in future studies. 52 CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION 5.1 Recapitulation On the whole, the paper explores the area of ATs used between members in families in Vietnamese and English language and culture from two major perspectives namely the common terms and the affecting factors on the choice of the terms. The study has pointed out that in Vietnamese, the ATs used with the highest frequency in the mentioned relationship is “kinship terms”. Chapter 2 has briefly described and examined related studies on the same field. Some basic points of culture – language - communication relationship, family and its basement: members in the families, Ats and their typical features and English together with Vietnamese addressing systems have been made clear of. Chapter 3, with the focus on describing the questionnaires for the study, has also made clear the procedures of selecting participants and collecting data. All responses have been decoded and examined. The decision on a really appropriate and effective terms to address the partner is made by both Vietnamese and English on the basis of three determinants: “personality”, “occasion” and “mood”. Additionally, “age gap” and “position” is also considered by the Vietnamese while the English pay attention to the “personality”, “occasion” and “mood” to select a proper AT. The most common addressing terms are used between members in Vietnames families are “terms of endearments” and “kinship terms with first name”. Vietnam is Asian country people always respect the old, when having 53 conservation, Vietnamese usually appreciate “age” so “position” is the most influential factor on the choice of Ats. Mmembers in English families like to use “terms of endearments” to call each other. In addition, they always use “short names”, “nicknames”, “last name” on the choice of Ats. England are equal country, English people do not appreciate “age gap” or “position” when having conservation. “Personality” is the most influential factors on the choice of Ats. The similarities of the two cultures are illustrated through the agreement on the three most influential factors namely “personality”, “occasion”, “mood”, “financial power” and “age gap”. Besides, when the charactersitic of situation change, both English and Vietnamese members in the families tend to remain their common and preferred Ats in communicating with the partner. In brief, these findings have proved that when the cultural basements are different, language and the use of language, accordingly, cannot avoid differences. However major or minor these differences are, the nature of such a special relationship as wife and husband, children and parents are always revealed either explicitly or implicitly across cultures through expressive mediums, one of which is the addressing term. 5.2 Concluding remarks The aim of the thesis is to find out the use of addressing terms between members in Vietnamese and English families. In order to collect the data from a large number of people, a survey questionnaire and interviews were used for the purpose of this thesis. 54 The survey showed that the most factor which affects the choice of using addressing terms. The results of the research also indicate that the “position” and “financial power” are the most common affecting in Vietnamese families. In contrast, “personality” is the most popular affecting choice in English families. In Vietnamese family, members often use kinship terms to call each other, meanwhile, “last name”, “short name” and “nicknames” are frequently used. In conclusion, I would like to state that investigating the use of addressing terms in Vietnamese and English families in this thesis had made great contributions to my professional development as a teacher of English. I hope that this study will also be useful for other teachers in teaching English more and more effectively. 5.3 Implications It is undeniable that ATs used between members in the family are merely a modestly narrow in language and language teaching particularly. Fully aware of this, the researcher would propose some pedagogical implications for teaching English in a broader sense, covering not only the field of ATs between members in the families but also their superordinate’s domain, which is ATs in general. To make it short and simple, this section is to make some suggestions, especially for teaching translation with regards to ATs in general and ATs used between members in the families. The first and foremost point to make clear herein is the current state of English teaching in Vietnam. Many previous studies as well as the teaching and learning reality revealed through the textbook and the general curriculum have pointed out a fact that in Vietnam, what to be taught and learnt are purely the linguistics competence, that is to say, Vietnam English teaching 55 puts too much focus on improving such linguistic aspects as lexis and syntax, with the support of the tradition grammar – based teaching approach. As a result, Vietnamese students of English may show a high linguistic competence. At the same time, they appear greatly hesitated at communicating in English and awkward at translating naturally a conversation from English to Vietnamese and vice versa. There are two reasons that can account for this. Firstly, the Vietnamese teaching and learning environment is non – native and the learners do not have urgent communicative needs, which does not permit language learners to expose with real life communication. Secondly, the materials being in use mainly are self – adapted to suit Vietnamese belief and values, which sometimes causes cultural biases. In fact, many communicative behaviors illustrated in the current textbooks are found strange or uncommon to English native speakers. The result of the two facts is that several Vietnamese learners of English are called “bookish language learners” who speak English “well” but “not well enough”. The question arising is “what actually are Vietnamese learners of English lacking in?”. That is the so – called “cultural competence”, which Hymes (1972) calls the knowledge of when and how to use specific language items in each culture. Let’s move to the specific field of ATs at this point. As commented before, ATs are the first and foremost effective tool to initiate, maintain and end a conversation, thus, if touched upon superficially like “I” refers to the 1st 56 person, “you” are the 2nd person, ATs sooner or later are a big puzzle to the language learners. Take the following sentence as an example: -I call you. This sentence or utterance can be made by English native speakers in any situations to any interlocutors, however, when translated into Vietnamese, it is not easy at all for the language learners to find the appropriate equivalents to the terms “I” and “you” here, In fact, the language learners have to be equipped fully with certain settings given beforehand so as to understand the progress of the conversation and to express the ideas exactly. Supposing that this utterance is of a grandchild to the grandmother, the Vietnamese translation should be: - Cháu yêu bà. of a male to his lover: -Anh yêu em. of a female to her beloved: -Em yêu anh. And so on. Another example is the greeting “Good afternoon” said by Anh to her husband. As for the English, the greeting is quite common and no way does it show any negative connotation. Nevertheless, when this utterance is translated into Vietnamese as “Xin chào anh”, “em chào bố ạ” or “Anh yêu đi đâu đấy”, it turns out to be unacceptable. This is because in Vietnamese culture, hierarchy and order are of great account. A child is not permitted to 57 greet parents without “the involvement of any addressing forms. So, instead of merely “xin chào” or “chào”, the appropriate way is: -Con chào bố/ mẹ. Or at least: -Chào bố mẹ. The two examples above hopefully have helped to point out the important role of cultural context in improving cultural competence, from then, bettering linguistic competence of the language learners. So, in order to provide learners with a panorama of ATs in general and ATs between members in the families in particular so that they can employ these terms naturally in real conversation, three suggestions are proposed. Firstly, lessons on ATs should present the different forms of address incorporated with their pragmatic meaning and usage. For example, “honey” is an AT showing affection of the speaker towards the hearer (→ feature). It can be used to address a person one likes or loves (→ usage). It appears most often between wife and husband, children and parents relationship (→usage). Next, the teaching materials as well as tasks and texts should be adapted to be authentic or near authentic, in which real life situations are demonstrated and can effectively present the focused language items. In addition, socio – cultural factors must also be noticed in teaching ATs. These factors assist learners to explain reasonably the selection of a specific form in a specific situation or make clear how to understand the interlocutors concerning feelings, attitudes, emotion and the like. 58 In short, teaching language, specifically teaching English as a foreign language – not only in the field of ATs but also in any language field in general – must go hand – in – hand with teaching cultures. This enables language learners to compare and contrast the source language to the target language, hence, they can raise consciousness about the language in use. 5.4 Limitations and suggestions for further studies The area of ATs used between members in the families may and should be regarded as a very interesting one that can cover many aspects not only of language and culture but also of social studies. Hopefully, all attempts to operate and solve the issue have been acknowledged through the entire study, and the findings of the study have partly satisfied scientific requirements towards the subject issue. However, due to time restrain and a restriction in experience of the researcher, the study cannot avoid certain limitations. First is the small population of the study which results in the fact that the corresponding conclusions can, to some extent, only represent for the two grandiose and long – established cultures. Second, though all research questions have been made clear, the answers, especially about affecting factors, have just been given out in the form of listing (the “what”), not in detail analysis (the “how” and “why”). Third, it is the complicated nature of the topic that prevents the study from operating the subject from the view of different groups of participants but from the angle of the whole of participants. To put it another way, the topic has been dealt with merely horizontally, not yet vertically. Finally, being one of the very first one on the subject, the study cannot deny clumsiness and the ambition to cover many related points, which forces the researcher to 59 admit that some of the points herein have not yet been touched as thoroughly as expected. As said before, there have been few studies on the same field, which leaves large room for further studies, which are hoped to fill up all gaps and improve all shortcomings of this specific paper, more importantly, to investigate the subject in a deeper level. Other researchers can refer to some suggestions described as follows for future papers. -Connotative meanings of addressing terms between members in the families and the specific level of affection connoted through these terms. - Detail explanations on the decisive factors (affecting the choice of members in the families addressing terms) with regards to the origins and meanings, from the perspective culture. - More comprehensive comparison and contrast between two (or more than two) cultures in terms of ATs used between members in the families (considering from the basic units to the general elements). 60 REFERENCES Foreign authors Brown, R & Gilman, A. (1960). The Pronouns of Power and Solidarity. American Anthropologists. Cooke, J. (1968). The Pronominal Reference in Thai, Burmese, and Vietnamese, Brekley: University of California Press. (p. 125) Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s Consequence: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and Organization Across Nations. 2nd Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication. (p. 10). Hymes, Dell H. (1967). Models of interaction of language and social setting. Journal of Social Issues 23/2. Koul, O. N. (1995). Personal Names in Kashmiri. In: Koul, O. N Sociolinguistics. South Asian Perspectives. New Delhi. Oyetade, Solomon Oluwole (1995). A Sociolinguistic Analysis of Address Forms in Yoruba, Language in Society, 515 – 535. Poynton, C. (1989). Terms of address in Australian English, Australian English, ed. By Peter Collins and David Blair, St. Lucia: University of Queensland Press. Pride, J. B. (1971). Formal and Informal Language. An inaugural address. Wellington. Richards, J.C., Platt, J. and Platt, H (1999). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistic, Longman, London. Samovar, L.A (2007). Communication Between Cultures. 6th ed. Belmont: Thomson Wadsworth, 16, 23, 40. 61 Wardhaugh, R (1986). An introduction to Sociolinguistic. Brasil Blackwell Oxford. Vietnamese authors Dương Thị Nụ. Ngữ nghĩa nhóm từ chỉ quan hệ thân tộc trong tiếng Anh và tiếng Việt. Luận án tiến sỹ. Hà Hải Hồng (2003). A cross – cultural study on using kinship terms as address forms in English and Vietnamese. Khóa luận tốt nghiệp Nguyễn Thị Thu Hà (2009). Personal pronouns in Vietnamese and American English (from cultural perspective). Luận văn thạc sỹ Nguyễn Phương Sửu (1990). Across – cultural study of greeting and address terms in English and Vietnamese. Luận văn thạc sỹ Nguyễn Quang (1998). Intercultural Communication. Hanoi: VNU press. 3,9 Nguyễn Quang (2002). Giao tiếp và giao tiếp giao văn hóa. Nxb Đại học Quốc Gia Hà Nội, 146. Nguyễn Văn Khang (1996). Ứng xử Ngôn ngữ trong Giao tiếp Gia đình Người Việt. Nxb Văn hóa thông tin. Nguyễn Văn Khang (1999). Ngôn ngữ học xã hội những vấn đề cơ bản. NXB Khoa học xã hội I APPENDIX 1 SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE The contents of this form are absolutely confidential and are used for scientific purpose only. It is intended to investigate how members in family address each other in English. Any information you give be appreciated and will be treated confidentially so that you will not be identified. My name is Nguyen Thuy Linh, from English Department, GASS. I am conducting a research survey for the MA thesis entitle: “The study on the Use of Addressing Terms in English and Vietnamese families”. Your completion of the survey is highly appreciated. Please feel free to express your opinion as they are what the paper really stresses on. Thank you for your co – operation. Please fill in the blanks and put a tick(√) where appropriate: Age: Gender: Male Female Occupation: . 1.Please specify at least 5 different addressing terms (ATs) that you may use in the families? . . . . . . . . . . II 2.There are 07 addressing terms below. According to you, how often are those addressing terms be used? ATs categories Frequency Very often Often Sometimes Rarely Never Title Title proper names Kinship terms with first name Middle and first name Nicknames Terms of endearments Demonstrative words III 3. According to you, which of factors affect the choice of ATs in the family? Factors Influence degree Much Not much Little Age gap (between 2 persons) Education Financial power Mood Occasion Occupation Personality Purposes Position THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION! IV APPENDIX 2 BẢN ĐIỀU TRA Nội dung của bản câu hỏi này được bảo mật tuyệt đối và chỉ được sử dụng cho mục đích nghiên cứu, mọi thông tin về người tham gia sẽ không được tiết lộ dưới bất kỳ hình thức nào. Tôi là Nguyễn Thùy Linh, đến từ khoa Ngôn ngữ Anh, Học viện khoa học xã hội, tôi đang thực hiện bản câu hỏi khảo sát cho luận văn tốt nghiệp có tiêu đề “Nghiên cứu về cách sử dụng từ xưng hô trong gia đình Việt – Anh”. Tôi rất mong nhận được sự hợp tác của quý vị bằng cách hoàn thành bản câu hỏi này. Đừng ngại đưa ra những quan điểm riêng của quý vị vì đó cũng là điều mà nghiên cứu của tôi quan tâm. Vui lòng điền vào chỗ trống và đánh dấu tích (√) thích hợp Tuổi: Giới tính: Nam Nữ Nghề nghiệp: . 1. Hãy liệt kê ít nhất 5 từ xưng hô mà anh/ chị sử dụng trong gia đình? . . . . . . . . . . V 2. Có 7 loại từ xưng hô trong bảng dưới đây. Theo anh/ chị mức độ sử dụng thường xuyên của từng loại như thế nào? Danh mục Mức độ thường xuyên Rất thường xuyên Thường xuyên Thỉnh thoảng Hiếm Không bao giờ Chức danh Chức danh kèm tên riêng Từ thân tộc Tên kèm tên đệm Biệt danh Từ âu yếm Đại từ chỉ định VI 3. Theo anh/ chị những yếu tố nào sau đây ảnh hưởng đến việc lựa chọn từ xưng hô trong gia đình? Yếu tố Mức độ ảnh hưởng Nhiều Không nhiều Hầu như không Chênh lệch độ tuổi Trình độ Năng lực tài chính Tâm trạng Dịp Nghề nghiệp Tính cách Mục đích Địa vị xã hội CẢM ƠN VÌ SỰ HỢP TÁC!