The Study Of Chinese EFL Learners' Interlanguage Refusals

From the beginning of the 1970s,linguists have been paying increasing attention to interlanguage research field, and some scholars have conducted their studies on interlanguage speech acts, integrating the second language acquisition with pragmatics (e.g., Faerch & Kasper, 1989; Beebe, Takahashi, & Uliss-Weltz, 1990; Bergman & Kasper, 1993; Blum-Kulka, 1991; Cohen & Olshtain, 1993; Eisenstein & Bodman, 1995; Gass & Houck, 1999). Most of them have done their empirical researches by means of Discourse Completion Test (DCT) due to its efficiency and reliability, and their studies have contributed greatly to a better understanding of the use of linguistic forms in different languages and cultures and further to avoiding cross-cultural miscommunication. Though, little attention has been paid to interlanguage refusal made by Chinese EFL learners.Therefore, aiming to obtain a better understanding about how Chinese EFL learners differ from English native speakers in their speech act performance of refusal, this study compares the refusals made by four groups of participants: 26 Chinese native speakers (13 males and 13 females), 22 English native speakers (10 males and 12 females), and 52 Chinese EFL learners (23 males and 29 females) at advanced and intermediate English proficiency levels (EFL-Hs and EFL-Ls). This thesis attempts to answer the following questions: (1)How do the four groups refuse respectively in terms of order, frequency and content of the refusal semantic formulas, and does the pragmatic transfer exist in Chinese EFL learners'refusals? (2)If the pragmatic transfer does exist in Chinese English learners'responses, then what are the reasons behind the pragmatic transfer? (3)How does English proficiency affect Chinese EFL learners'ability in expressing refusals? Which group will transfer more native refusal strategies to their English refusals, Chinese EFL learners at advanced English proficiency level or those at intermediate English proficiency level (EFL-Hs or EFL-Ls)?The present study is based on some theories of interlanguage pragmatics, politeness norms and cultural patterns of collectivism and individualism. Data for analysis is obtained from these four groups, consisting of 900 responses collected with the instrument of 9-item Discourse Completion Test (DCT) varied with contextual factors of social distance and status. The scenarios of written DCT questionnaire based on the model of Beebe et al. (1990) and Liao (1996) are modified according to the results of pilot study, including two requests, two suggestions, three invitations and two offers.Participants'refusals are analyzed in terms of the order, frequency and content of the refusal semantic formulas, according to the coding system (classification and judging patterns) proposed by Beebe at el. (1990). Each refusal strategy used by the four groups is marked out to investigate the order of semantic formulas, and there is pragmatic transfer from the native language in the order of semantic formulas that Chinese EFL speakers adopt. The responses of EFL-H/Ls resemble those of Chinese native speakers more than the American subjects'in refusing all four kinds of scenarios. As for the frequency of refusal strategies, the EFL-H/Ls tend to render their native strategies to their English refusals, such as Pos*(i.e., Statement of positive opinion/feeling or agreement), Regret, Wish, Direct, Avoidance and Principle. Regarding the content of semantic formulas, the data show us the preferences of English native speakers, Chinese native speakers and Chinese EFL learners, such as Excuse, Principle, and Dissuade (i.e., Request for empathy), as well as the Chinese EFL learners tend to use native refusal strategies to fill the semantic slots in their English refusals.In addition, further analysis of data illustrates that cultural patterns and politeness norms influence the performance of Chinese EFL learners'refusal behaviors, e.g., due to the distinction of the features of high-context and low-context, the Chinese EFL learners transfer their unspecific and implicit excuses into their English responses. The analysis also confirms the hypothesis of Beebe et al. (1987) that EFL-Hs tend to transfer more from their native language to L2 because of their language competence.The study ends up with some theoretical and practical implications. It is suggested that natural data and other instruments, such as observations, role-plays or following-up interviews, be used in future studies to substantiate findings of the current study.