|
|
Post by ayudewilestari on Nov 29, 2013 16:12:08 GMT
I will comment the journal of “POLITENESS IN REQUESTS: SOME RESEARCH FINDINGS RELEVANT FOR INTERCULTURAL ENCOUNTERS”.
Well, firstly, it talks about the politeness and indirectness are viewed mutually excluding categories by Romanians compared to other nationalities, such as the British and the Hebre.
If we differentiate between Romanian to other country, Romanian will more encounter conventional indirect strategies of politeness which is compared in Hebrew and Engish.
And that is the answer from this journal, Romanian likely to use indirect strategies than other nationalities. Second politeness is from Hebrew. But the similarities of Romanian and Hebrew will be researched in details in the future.
Your answer is too simple...and pay attention to the structural error (underlined)
Dear Mr. Akmal, I would like to say thank you for correcting my last comment about the journal that became our disscussion. Well, I will correct the mistaken of the words I made in my comment and also add some of sentences.
I will comment the journal of “POLITENESS IN REQUESTS: SOME RESEARCH FINDINGS RELEVANT FOR INTERCULTURAL ENCOUNTERS”.
Well, firstly, it talks about the politeness and indirectness are viewed mutually excluding categories by Romanians compared to other nationalities, such as the British and the Hebrew.
If we differentiate between Romanian to other country, Romanian will more encounter conventional indirect strategies of politeness which is compared in Hebrew and English.
And that is the answer from this journal, Romanian likely to use indirect strategies than other nationalities. Second politeness is from Hebrew. But the similarities of Romanian and Hebrew will be researched in details in the future.
What is conventional indirect strategies? Based from the journal, conventional indirect strategies is about the perception of what things that must be conveyed. That is why, Romanian and Hebrew are in sixth ranked.
Again, this journal suggests us that there are two views of the study. Firstly, focus on the relation between the behavior of politeness in certain condition and the politeness in every personalities. In short, it must be focused on the differences or similarity in every personalities/ individual, and also the social and linguistics norm that they get in school, or outside places from house.
Secondly, for the next study must draw comparison with Blum Kulka’s findings about the British’ and Jews’ usage of conventional indirect polite strategies.
Now, let me try to apply this study with the culture in Indonesia. Well, the politeness in Indonesia has high rate. For example, Indonesian people always bowed their head when they pass in front of older persons. This way is different with other country, or in Bahasa Indonesia we call it “bule” because they do not tdo the same way.
But not all “bule” like that. As I have written above, that the politeness is depends in every personalities/ individual, and also the social and linguistics norm that they get in school, or outside places from house.
I think that’s all about my re-comment writing. I hope Mr. Akmal will at least read it, maybe correct it too. Thank you, Sir.
Ayu Dewi Lestari / 7E / 10420123
|
|
Talisa Diah Ayu 10420027 7E
Guest
|
Post by Talisa Diah Ayu 10420027 7E on Nov 29, 2013 16:16:05 GMT
I think this article is good enough especially for the students of university. this article explain about politeness in requests and this article provide things that can help the people asked more polite. There are some comparison between the answer of other respondents that can be looked in the table in page 132 about politeness scale and directness scale. the factor are same like mood, derivable, obligation, statement, suggestory, formulae, want statement, hedget performative, query prepartory and hints.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pipit Ambarsari on Nov 29, 2013 17:04:59 GMT
I think the journal, it is very important to show politeness through indirect conversation in intercultural situation. the politeness is inflected by the using of language and the choosing of the words will be used. We can know that expressions of requesting in every language are different. As English department student, we have to understand that culture will be influence our language. Thank you  |
|
|
|
Post by Pipit Ambarsari on Nov 29, 2013 17:06:28 GMT
I think the journal, it is very important to show politeness through indirect conversation in intercultural situation. The politeness is inflected by the using of language and the choosing of the words will be used. We can know that expressions of requesting in every language are different. As English department student, we have to understand that culture will be influence our language. Thank you |
|
|
|
Post by anikpujilestari on Nov 30, 2013 2:04:12 GMT
I have been joining this forum sir, thanks for the lesson you given.
|
|
lovia
New Member
Posts: 3 
|
Post by lovia on Nov 30, 2013 5:34:44 GMT
Good afternoon sir. I'm going to revise my comment :-D The journal is about the comparison of inderectness and politness in request between Romanian, English, and Hebrew. The researcher tries to find out which one has the most polite way in making request. In this journal, the researcher tries to analyze the relationship between inderectness and politeness in request. In order to find the relationship between that two aspects, the researcher used the discourse completion test (DCT) which consisted of a situation that would be done by the respondents. The weakness of this jounal are the limited respondents and situations given by the researcher. I think it would be better for the researcher to find more respondents to get the more effective result. Moreover, the respondents are not the native Romanians. We can conclude if the respondents are not the native speakers, the result will not be valid. Next, I think the answers provided by the respondents were somewhat similar to the previous choices. Inspite of its weakness, of course it has some good aspects. First, the researcher used the appropriate method (DCT). It's very appropriate because it can be applied directly to the participants from different cultural background. Next, the researcher also gives the the situation that can make the respondents easier to answer the questions. The conclusion is Romanian is pretty close to Hebrew in terms of the linguistics strategies employed. It used indirect strategy. I think Indonesian use the same strategy (indirect strategy) in making requests. Now we can conclude that every places has their own level of politeness. We can't judge that Indonesia is more polite than the others. thank you  |
|
|
|
Post by lelimuktiariani on Nov 30, 2013 6:22:36 GMT
I’am Sorry sir Last but Not least I have sent my assignment twice , But I need to revise it and I will try till I can prove it to be better . Some people says If you want to be success, Never Give up in every parts of your Life !!! Based on the Journal Article which entitled “ POLITENESS IN REQUESTS: SOME RESEARCH FINDINGS RELEVANT FOR INTERCULTURAL ENCOUNTERS" by Aura Codreanu, PhD, MA, MSc, Regional Department of Defense Resources Management Studies, Brasov, Romania and Alina Debu, MA, Teacher of Romanian language, Fagaras, Romania which I read. This journal analyze about the relationship between indirectness and politeness in requests. Not only that, it has also diferencess betwenn Rumania and other country such as British and Hebrew. Which will be the most polite one in indirect and politeness ? The advantages of this Journal is every people has their own characteristic of social culture in politeness and indirectness. Sometimes when we make polite request to someone, Not in necessarily someone else have the same way like what we are thinking and what we are doing . And then the researcher gives an table of discourse completion test (DCT) in this problem sittuation, so that the viewer can understand who is the most polite one from the Rumanian, Hebrew , and England. It will makes the respondents easier to answer the questions which has given by the researcher. The weakness or dissadvantages of this project is there were only seven Romanians students respondents shows that they were not native Romanians. So How came we can know whether the result will be Implicit or not. Because the respondent are not truely nattive speaker of Rome. It would be more effective if a Romanians students have to choose one of the questionaire, so that there’s no blank question or there’s no Romanians students which has choosed more than 2 possible answer. In this research, the researcher uses discourse completion test DCT to examine who is the polite one? It is creating a certain situation, where respondents are asked to engage in a conversation about a certain ordinary problem. The researcher makes 10 person to face the problem which The researcher gives the participants the first part of the conversation along with a description of the situation and asks the informant to complete this situation. After the researcher are getting the examination. First it was only 7 participant; query preparatory, which are equally polite and indirect, they were categorized as query preparatory category it was the same category. Beside there were 2 participant who were opposite with the 7 participants they were categorized as want statement category. Finally , there were only 1 respondent who was categorized as the hedged performatives and hints. As the result , we could draw if Romanian is pretty close to Hebrew used indirect strategy relatively polite request. In fact that Romanians are more likely to encounter conventional. Whereas not in British, they were quite polite in requests with such direct strategy. As we know that every place has different culture. But, we can’t judge. We cannot claim if Indonesia is more polite than another because every places has their own culture. For example Indonesia has a diversity of life but they still respect to each other. That’s we call it a nice culture of Indonesia. LELI MUKTI 10420238 /7A |
|
|
|
Post by lailatulfitriyah on Nov 30, 2013 12:58:38 GMT
I have read the journal, the title is “Politeness in Requests: Some Research Findings Relevant for Intercultural Encounters Politeness in Requests: Some Research Findings Relevant for Intercultural Encounters”. The context of this journal is very complete and easy to understand. We as no English speaker can understand it clearly. I think the writer tells the problems why he or she research it and she give many resources that make this journal better. As journal as usual the writer makes research first, so we can know that the research it’s true. And in this journal the writer using questionnaire to make the research fact and the reader can trust it.
The strength of this journal are the writer using factual data in this research this because the writer make observation to many respondents from Rumanian, English, Hebrew people. Second is the questionnaire are easy to answer. When we are seeing the questionnaire in the appendix, we can know that it’s very easy to understand and to answer. Third is in this journal the writer have many resources and many arguments from the expert of this material.
On the other side, there is a weakness from this journal. First there just three country that investigate. In this journal told about politeness in request: research findings relevant for intercultural encounters, so i think there must many countries to investigate. And some of the information are uncompleted like the table, I get a little bit confuse to read the table.
According to our country Indonesia that Indonesian people have a culture that they always say something but have another meaning at the same time. Many of Indonesian people using politeness in their words because they think its not polite to told their purpose directly.
(Lailatul Fitriyah/ 10420388/ 7B)
|
|
|
|
Post by mukhamadsubchan 7C on Nov 30, 2013 13:34:02 GMT
This is my comment about, journal.dresmara.ro/issues/volume2_issue2/14_codreanu_debu.pdf,
Based on the journal that I read , I found this journal gives a lot of
knowledge that we may not understand it right . Maybe all this we learn
English , expressions such as demand in the conversation was limited to
basic understanding . After reading this journal , I became better
understand that the language used in a conversation must be adapted to
the cultural background of each individual , so there is no miss
communication . In the journal explained that to reveal the expression
of both requests and polite will make more people appreciate our request
and will respond according to what we expect . Sometimes, we forget to
talk if it is an outsider and often forget about the culture of the
people . This journal is very useful for me in particular and all the
students taking English language courses in general . I personally ,
highly recommend this journal to be read by all students , in order to
gain a deeper understanding of the query expression to be more polite .
>>Mukhamad Subchan 7C
|
|
|
|
Post by taufiksetiawan on Nov 30, 2013 16:45:29 GMT
Good night Sir. I want to comment about the journal, Sir The journal is about the comparison of indirectness and politeness in request between Romanian, English, and Hebrew. The writer used the discourse completion test(DCT) which consisted of a situation that would be done by the respondents. The writer compares this kind of indirectness and politeness in requests between Romanians to British and Hebrew. The writer wants to know the relationship between indirectness and politeness in requests. In spite of weakness, of course it has some good aspects. The writer used the appropriate method(DCT). It's very appropriate because it can be applied directly to the participants from different background. The weakness of the journal are the limited respondents and situations given by the writer. I think it would be better for the writer to find more respondents to get more effective results. Moreover, the respondents are not the native Romanians. The conclusion is Romanian more likely to encounter conventional indirect polite strategies compared to Hebrew and English.
|
|
|
|
Post by anikpujilestari on Nov 30, 2013 17:26:24 GMT
I'd like to comment the journal that had you given.
I have read an article entitled "POLITENESS IN REQUESTS: SOME RESEARCH FINDINGS RELEVANT FOR INTERCULTURAL ENCOUNTERS" by Aura Codreanu, PhD, MA, MSc, Regional Department of Defense Resources Management Studies, Brasov, Romania and Alina Debu, MA, Teacher of Romanian language, Fagaras, Romania.
The paper tells about the analysis between the relationship of indirectness and politeness in requests. The project was done to find out to what extent politeness and indirectness are viewed as overlapping or mutually excluding categories by Romanians compared to other nationalities, such as the British and the Hebrew.
The researcher tried to identify if there are any similarities between the answers of the Romanians respondents and those of Blum Kulka's respondents. This identification is applied by designing a situation and the respondents have to answer the question by choosing the eight-descriptive category(utterances). The eight categories were typed randomly. The respondents were asked to rate each utterances on a one to eight point scale for either "directness" or "politeness".
The weakness of this project is there were only seven Romanians respondents that showed they were students not the native Romanians. We do not know whether or not the respondents are the native Romanians. It is not effective when seven respondents have to choose the eight utterances and typed them in the directness and politeness ordered. They may choose or make more than one result. In terms of directness and indirectness, and politeness, the answers provided by the respondents were somewhat similar to the previous choices. The singularity answer was not taken into account. However, the survey is to be carried out on a larger group of respondents.
The comparison among the Romanians respondents' answer, the English respondents' answer, and the Hebrew respondents' answer, proposes two possible directions of investigations. The first direction is focused on the relationship between what the person believes to be polite in a certain situation and what the same person perceive as polite. The second direction is focused on checking the findings of the current research against a larger group of Romanian respondents.
The good things of the journal are that we can know if the level of politeness can not be the same. we think that our way to request is polite, but probably not for the others. also the researcher gives some tables as the measurements, so it seems that result can be considered as a high quality of research. in addition, the researcher also provides the situation which is simple and useful. that will make the respondents easier to answer the questions given by the researcher.
The slight differences among Romanian, Hebrew, and English appear when it comes to politeness. The three languages place the utterances on different position. In this respect, Romanian seems again to overlap with Hebrew in which the respondents place the utterances in similar position.
The conclusion is Romanian is pretty close to Hebrew in terms of the linguistics strategies employed. However, Romanian more likely to encounter conventional indirect polite strategies compared to Hebrew and English.
Thank you sir
Anik Puji Lestari/10420061/7E
|
|
|
|
Post by indahsariputri on Nov 30, 2013 18:53:49 GMT
First of all, I'm so happy for joining this forum. Thank you so much Mr. Akmal, but sorry I'm late to send the comment because I was hospitalize. I have asked permission to you about it, Sir. And you permit me to send this.
I have read the journal, Politeness in Requests: Some Research Findings Relevant for Intercultural Encounters, that discuss about the relationship between indirectness and politeness in requests. Especially comparing Romanians to other nationalities, such as the British and Hebrew. It also provide an example of the sociolinguistics instruments that can be employed in the investigation of the differences and similarities likely to emerge intercultural encounters. Methodology used by the researcher is Discourse Completion Test (DCT) that is consists in creating a certain situation, where respondents are asked to engage n a conversation about a certain ordinary problem. In terms of query preparatory utterances in all three languages the latter are viewed á conventional indirect polite strategies and are ranked in the first two positions.
In this research, the seven respondents choose the same strategy as an individual manner of a self-expression, as well as a strategy perceived equally polite and indirect, the other two respondents seem to contradict themselves.
In my view, both of two theoretical background by Leech and Blum-Kulka used in this research, Blum-Kuka's modifying theory of Leech is good. Because politeness represents the interactional balance achieved between two needs: the need for pragmatic clarity and the need to avoid coerciveness.
I think that's all my comment. |
|
|
|
Post by RahajengHR on Nov 30, 2013 23:42:25 GMT
I’d like to comment the article entitle “POLITENESS IN REQUESTS: SOME RESEARCH FINDINGS RELEVANT FOR INTERCULTURAL ENCOUNTERS.
I think the article is about the relationship between indirectness and politeness in requests. The researchers want to compared politeness and indirectness by Romanians to the other nationalities, such as the British and the Hebrew. They use a method called “the discourse completion test” (DCT) where respondents are asked to engage in a conversation about a certain ordinary problem.
From the survey findings, we can see that Romanians are more likely to use conventional indirect strategies than other nationalities. Hedged performatives as polite strategies are ranked second in Hebrew, and first or second in Romanian. Unlike these two languages, English ranks them on the fourth position. Romanian and Hebrew rank these utterances as to their directness/ indirectness on the sixth position, whereas English on the fifth. Thus, Romanian places such utterances on the third or fourth position; Hebrew on the fourth or fifth position and English on the second or third position. in my opinion, every country has their own way to express politeness.
Rahajeng HR/7A/10420163
|
|
|
|
Post by faridaizatul on Dec 1, 2013 5:08:46 GMT
morning all. finally I can join this forum. I really try hard to join this forum because of the internet connection is too slow.. hehehe
I already read the journal. The topic is about politeness in request.
I think this journal give us knowledge about politeness and indirectness are viewed as overlapping or mutually excluding catgories by Romanians compared to other nationalities, such as British and the Hebrew. Not only about that, by reading this journal we can also know about the socio linguistics instruments that can be employed in the investigation of the differences and similarities likely to emerge in intercultural encounters.
There are many assumptions about degree of politeness. Based on Leech(1983:108) "to increase the degree of politeness by using more and more indirect kind of illocution. illocution tend to be more polite because they increase the degree of optionality and because the more indirect an illocution is, the more diminished and tentative it force tend to be". From the statement above we can get the point is, politeness can be increased by using more indirect kind of illocution. But I still think much about what is illocution because I can not find the meaning of it in the dictionary. Based on this journal we know that there are two kinds of indirectness: conventional and non-conventional. In the research questions, the researcher tried to find out whether Romanians associate politeness with conventional indirectness or they consider non-conventional as more polite. This journal shows us the clear steps and real example of the data by making it in the table form, so we can now the directness scale and politenss scale. From the research conclution we know that some respondents choose the same strategy and Romanian is pretty close to Hebrew in terms of the linguistic strategies employed. As we know that each countries or area has their own way to convey their politeness and indirectness.
We can compare our country with the other country in terms of conveying the polite request. Because I live in Java, so I will give the example in Javanese culture. In Javanese language we have level to whom we talk. When we talk to the young people we can use "ngoko", but it is different from if we talk to the older people, we must use "krama" and even "krama inggil". So if we talk to the older people using "ngoko" it means that we are impolite people. They will judge us as the people who have bad manner because we impolite with the older people. But in the other countries may be have diffrent way and may be there is no level to whom we talk. So we can use the same language when we talk to the older or younger people.
Izatul Farida
10420053
from 7B
|
|
|
|
Post by indahizzatuttahiyah on Dec 1, 2013 12:31:06 GMT
I have read the journal, the title is “Politeness in Requests: Some Research Findings Relevant for Intercultural Encounters Politeness in Requests: Some Research Findings Relevant for Intercultural Encounters”. The context of this journal is very complete and easy to understand. I think the writer tells the problems why reseacher research it and he give many resources that make this journal better. As journal as usual the writer makes research first, so we can know that the research it’s true. And in this journal the writer using questionnaire to make the research fact and the reader can trust it. this journal give us knowledge about politeness and indirectness are viewed as overlapping or mutually excluding catgories by Romanians compared to other nationalities, such as British and the Hebrew. Not only about that, by reading this journal we can also know about the socio linguistics instruments that can be employed in the investigation of the differences and similarities likely to emerge in intercultural encounters.
There are many assumptions about degree of politeness. Based on Leech(1983:108) "to increase the degree of politeness by using more and more indirect kind of illocution. illocution tend to be more polite because they increase the degree of optionality and because the more indirect an illocution is, the more diminished and tentative it force tend to be".The comparison among the Romanians respondents' answer, the English respondents' answer, and the Hebrew respondents' answer, proposes two possible directions of investigations. The first direction is focused on the relationship between what the person believes to be polite in a certain situation and what the same person perceive as polite. The second direction is focused on checking the findings of the current research against a larger group of Romanian respondents. From the survey findings, we can see that Romanians are more likely to use conventional indirect strategies than other nationalities. Hedged performatives as polite strategies are ranked second in Hebrew, and first or second in Romanian. Unlike these two languages, English ranks them on the fourth position. Romanian and Hebrew rank these utterances as to their directness/ indirectness on the sixth position, whereas English on the fifth. Thus, Romanian places such utterances on the third or fourth position; Hebrew on the fourth or fifth position and English on the second or third position. in my opinion, every country has their own way to politeness.
indah izzatut tahiyah
10420203
from 7C
|
|
|
|
Post by TiaraRizqiAmaliaPutri on Dec 1, 2013 12:46:08 GMT
I have read the journal, the title is "POLITENESS IN REQUESTS: SOME RESEARCH FINDINGS RELEVANT FOR INTERCULTURAL ENCOUNTERS" by Aura Codreanu, PhD, MA, MSc, Regional Department of Defense Resources Management Studies, Brasov, Romania and Alina Debu, MA, Teacher of Romanian language, Fagaras, Romania.
The journal has several weaknesses. Firstly, the authenticity of the situations is limited. Here, the researcher only used seven students of Romanians’ students. I think is not effective because they were not the native Romanians. This research should be taken many respondents to get effective result. Then, the hypothetical nature of the situations simplifies the complexity of interaction in real conversation. Moreover, what people claim that would say in hypothetical situation is not necessarily what they actually say in real situations.
Comparation between Romania, English and Hebrew. However the current research also point out to the fact that in romanias are more likely to encounter conventional indirect polite strategy compared another countries. Every places have their own culture. We can’t judge.
Thank's Mr. Akmal and I think that's all my comment.
( Tiara Rizqi Amalia Putri / 10420345 / 7B )
|
|
|
|
Post by nuursyaikha on Dec 2, 2013 5:47:21 GMT
I would like to give my comment from the journal I have read.
From the journal, we can know the politeness in requests. Moreover, the article emphasize the importance of taking such a specific approach when it comes to understand intercultural relationship from sociolinguistic perspective, so we can get information and assumptions contributing to a better approach to intercultural encounters between Romanian and other nations. From the article we also can conclude that we could draw that Romanian is pretty close to Hebrew in terms of the linguistic strategies employed. However,the current research also points out to the fact that in Romanian the writer more likely to encounter conventional indirect polite strategies compared to Hebrew and English.
That's my comment about the journal. Thank you, Sir..
Nuur Syaikha Afiyati (10420202) - 7B
|
|
|
|
Post by fitriyaniagustina on Dec 2, 2013 7:30:11 GMT
This article is about indirectness and politeness in requests in Romanian, and it is a kind of useful research. As we know that politeness in each country is different. It is similar when we study Cross Cultural Understanding subject, we learn about culture language. And I think It is good to know how people do requesting to others in their country, so that we can know how to do conversation with others from abroad, especially in requesting. But, the main problem, it is not easy to apply the politeness like that in our country because people are not accustomed with that. From the article we can know that Rumanian has the most politeness and directness language to express requesting. The researcher has compared the study with Hebrew and British. In conclusion the research findings is good, but it is still have to develope again because I think the research still has the weakness. It is clear that it can not be accepted just like that. The respondents as the samples from the research just ten people. It should has more respondents to prove the research and a research can be done many times to make the research will be valid. Thank you
Fitriyani Agustina/10420072/7A
|
|
|
|
Post by anaclaristi on Dec 2, 2013 12:32:42 GMT
I have read the journal which titled “Politeness in Requests: Some Research Findings Relevant for Intercultural Encounters. This journal contains about analysis of the relationship between indirectness and politeness in requests. From the journal we can get some informations about politeness and indirectness are viewed as overlapping or mutually excluding categories by Romanians compared to other nationalities, such as the British and the Hebrew. In this journal the researcher tries to identify if there are any similarities between the answers of the Romanians respondents, the British, and the Hebrew in requesting in terms of indirectness and politeness. The researchers provided such discourse completion test (DCT) which consisted of a situation that would be done by respondents (imaginary situation). The researchers only took 10 respondents who mastery in each of languages to complete the test given. As the result, the researchers found that there were 7 respondents who chose the same strategy; query preparatory, which are equally polite and indirect, they were categorized as query preparatory category. On the other hand, there were 2 respondents who were contrast with 7 respondents, they were categorized as want statement category. At last, there was only 1 respondent who was categorized as the hedged performative and hints.
However, this research has disadvantages because there were only seven Romanians students respondents shows that they were not native Romanians. So we can’t know whether the result will be effective or not, because the respondent are not native speaker of Rome. It will be more effective if a Romanians students have to choose one of the questionnaire, so that there’s no blank question or there’s no Romanians students which has chosen more than 2 possible answer. If it is compared with Indonesian, the major of Indonesian uses politeness in requests; using indirect strategy (conventional and non-conventional). Because Indonesian has been taught to be a polite person.
Name: Ana Claristi R. S. K
NPM: 10420177
Class: 7A
|
|
|
|
Post by atiklestari on Dec 2, 2013 12:54:36 GMT
For the first I say thank you sir,
I already read The paper entitled “POLITENESS IN REQUEST: SOME RESEARCH FINDINGS RELEVANT FOR INTERCULTULAR ENCOUNTERS” by Aura Codreanu, PhD, MA, MSc, Regional Department of Defense Resources Management Studies, Brasov, Romania and Alina Debu, MA, Teacher of Romanian language, Fagaras, Romania is analyze the relationship between indirectness and politeness in requests in Romanians compared to British and Hebrew. Another inherent goal of the paper is to provide an example of the socio linguistics instruments that can be employed in the investigation of the differences and similarities likely to emerge in intercultural encounter.
The researchers write down that the issues of major concern when it comes to intercultural emcounters is the socio linguistic discourse of politness. Before the researchers project supporting the aim(s) of this paper, the researchers undertaking needs some background to the issue of politeness in requests through indirect strategies. This research uses “ the discourse completion test” (DCT) as a method. This metod basically consists in creating a certain situation, where respondents are asked to engege in a conversation about a certain ordinary problem.
in this paper explain that there are 8 types of request strategies that the researchers used such as, 1. Mood derivable, 2. Performative, 3. Hedged Performative, 4. Obligation Statement, 5. Want Statement, 6. Suggestory Formulae, 7. Query Preparatory, 8. Hints. Moreover, Romanians are likely to use conventional indirect strategies that other nationalities such as the British and the Hebrew.
The subject of the research are ten people aged between 20-40. After the researchers took the research, they got the survey finding that the query preparatory category chosen by seven respondents, to want statement category chosen by two erespondents and to the hedged performatives and hints by one respondents. It is worth underliying that only one respondent chosed hedged performatives and hints as the answers favored.
The conclusion to be drawn is that while most respondents choose the same strategy (query preparatory) as an individual manner of self expression.
Romanians are more likely to use conventional indirect strategies than other nationalities. Hedged performatives as polite strategies are ranked second in Hebrew, and first in Romanian. Hints being perceived as the most indirect strategies.
The final conclusion is that Romanian is pretty close to Hebrew in terms of linguistic strategies employed. However, the current research also points out to the fact that in Romanian we are more likely to encounter conventional indirect polite strategies compared to Hebrew and English.
|
|
|
|
Post by ummymahyati on Dec 2, 2013 13:00:13 GMT
After reading the journal entitled " POLITENESS IN REQUEST: SOME RESEARCH FINDINGS RELEVANT FOR INTERCULTURAL ENCOUNTERS" by Aura Condreanu, PhD, MA, MSc, Regional Department of Defense Resources Management Studies, Brasov, Romania and Alina Debu, MA, Teacher of Romanian language, Fagaras, Romania. The journal analyze the relationship between indirectness and politeness in request in Romanian that compared to the other nationalities such as the British and the Hebrew. The another goal of this paper or journal is to provide an example of socio linguistics instruments that can be employed in the investigation of the differences and similarities likely to emerge in intercultural encounters.In this research, the researchers found that the major issue concern when it comes to intercultural encounters is the sociolingiustic discourse of politeness.
For supporting the aim(s) of this article, the researchers undertaking needs some background of the issue of the politeness in requests through indirect strategies.The researchers tried to find out whether Romanians associate politeness with conventional indirectness, as Blum Kulka asserts, or they consider non-conventional indirectness as more polite. The method that is used in this research is called discourse completion tes (DTC) that basically consist in creating a certain situation that given by the researchers.
Based on this paper, there are 8 types of request strategies that the researchers used such as, 1. Mood derivable, 2. Performative, 3. Hedged Performative, 4. Obligation Statement, 5. Want Statement, 6. Suggestory Formulae, 7. Query Preparatory, 8. Hints. Moreover, Romanians are likely to use conventional indirect strategies that other nationalities such as the British and the Hebrew.
The researchers took ten people aged 20-40 as subject. Theywere asked to rate each utterance on a one to eight points scale foe either “directness” or “politeness”. The results are out of the eight utterences four were ponted out as the most preffered, namely those belonging to the query preparatory category chosen by seven respondents, statement category chosen by two studens and the hedged performatives and hints by one respondent.
The final conclusion is that Romanian is pretty closw to Hebrew in terms of linguistic strategies employed. However, the current research also points out to the fact that in Romanian we are more likely to encounter conventional indirect polite strategies compared to Hebrew and English.
|
|
|
|
Post by umielisty on Dec 2, 2013 15:20:12 GMT
I have read this journal which entitled “ POLITENESS IN REQUESTS: SOME RESEARCH FINDINGS RELEVANT FOR INTERCULTURAL ENCOUNTERS" by Aura Codreanu, PhD, MA, MSc, Regional Department of Defense Resources Management Studies, Brasov, Romania and Alina Debu, MA, Teacher of Romanian language, Fagaras, Romania.
The context of this journal is very complete and systematics. First of all like an journal in general, the researchers explain the purpose of writing this journal. Then write an introduction, Theoretical Background, Research Question, Methodology, Survey Question and Sample Description, Survey Findings, Data Analysis, Research Conclusions, Polite Request in Romanian, English and Hebrew, and Final Conclusions.
This journal discussed about the comparison of languages between Rumanians, hebrew and british which one the most polite of them applied in asking politeness in request. Beside that, the journal also discussed about directness and indirectness, conventional and non-conventional.
The strength of this journal that make it better are the researcher used Discourse Complete Test ( DCT) method which consist in creating a certain situation. The researcher asked to the respondents to engage in certain problem, then gives the participants the first part of conversation with a description of the situation and asks the informant to complete the situasion. Second, there is a questionare that simple and very easy to answer. We as no English speaker can know that it’s very easy to understand and to answer when we are seeing the questionaire on the appendix.
In addition, there is a weakness from this journal. First, the limited respondents and situation. There were only 7 respondents that they were not native Romanians, so how can we know that the result will be comprehensive or not. Second is the limited references. The researcher made this journal just from 4 references and it’s not enough. The researcher need more and more references to make this journal better because with a lot of references, a researcher can get the information more widely.
As the result , we could draw if Romanian is pretty close to Hebrew used indirect strategy relatively polite request. But, in fact Romanians are more likely to encounter conventional indirect polite strategies compared to Hebrew and English. Nevertheless we can’t claim though too much originality of the finding from this journal. As we know that every country has different culture and we can’t judge also that our country is more polite than another because every places has their own culture.
Umie Listiyorini / 10420347/ 7B
|
|
|
|
Post by Noviana on Dec 3, 2013 5:40:24 GMT
thanks sir... |
|
|
|
Post by harkisanti on Dec 3, 2013 11:53:18 GMT
The paper tells about the analysis between the relationship of indirectness and politeness in requests. The project was done to find out to what extent politeness and indirectness are viewed as overlapping or mutually excluding categories by Romanians compared to other nationalities, such as the British and the Hebrew.
The researcher tried to identify if there are any similarities between the answers of the Romanians respondents and those of Blum Kulka's respondents. This identification is applied by designing a situation and the respondents have to answer the question by choosing the eight-descriptive category(utterances). The eight categories were typed randomly. The respondents were asked to rate each utterances on a one to eight point scale for either "directness" or "politeness".
The weakness of this project is there were only seven Romanians respondents that showed they were students not the native Romanians. We do not know whether or not the respondents are the native Romanians. It is not effective when seven respondents have to choose the eight utterances and typed them in the directness and politeness ordered. They may choose or make more than one result. In terms of directness and indirectness, and politeness, the answers provided by the respondents were somewhat similar to the previous choices. The singularity answer was not taken into account. However, the survey is to be carried out on a larger group of respondents.
The comparison among the Romanians respondents' answer, the English respondents' answer, and the Hebrew respondents' answer, proposes two possible directions of investigations. The first direction is focused on the relationship between what the person believes to be polite in a certain situation and what the same person perceive as polite. The second direction is focused on checking the findings of the current research against a larger group of Romanian respondents.
The slight differences among Romanian, Hebrew, and English appear when it comes to politeness. The three languages place the utterances on different position. In this respect, Romanian seems again to overlap with Hebrew in which the respondents place the utterances in similar position.
The conclusion is Romanian is pretty closer to Hebrew in terms of the linguistics strategies employed. However, Romanian more likely to encounter conventional indirect polite strategies compared to Hebrew and English.
|
|
|
|
Post by harkisanti on Dec 3, 2013 12:24:48 GMT
The strength of this paper is that the researcher shows the eight utterances which commonly used by people to express their requests. Those utterances are placed in a table randomly and the instruction are given clearly so that the respondents can answer what the researcher asked to do.
The comparison between Romanian and Indonesian is when people have to express requests, Romanians express it directly but lack of politeness for another people, whether or not the people close to them. It completely different in Indonesia, because when Indonesian express requests, they will consider to whom they are talking to. If the people are older than them, they will express requests in direct and polite ways, whereas the people are younger or in the same age of them, they usually express requests both direct and indirect ways and lack of politeness.
That's all my comment about the Journal.
Thanks and see you.
HARKI SANTI_10420052_7A_ENGLISH FOR HOTEL
|
|
|
|
Post by harkisanti on Dec 3, 2013 12:35:06 GMT
The paper tells about the analysis between the relationship of indirectness and politeness in requests. The project was done to find out to what extent politeness and indirectness are viewed as overlapping or mutually excluding categories by Romanians compared to other nationalities, such as the British and the Hebrew.
The researcher tried to identify if there are any similarities between the answers of the Romanians respondents and those of Blum Kulka's respondents. This identification is applied by designing a situation and the respondents have to answer the question by choosing the eight-descriptive category(utterances). The eight categories were typed randomly. The respondents were asked to rate each utterances on a one to eight point scale for either "directness" or "politeness".
The weakness of this project is there were only seven Romanians respondents that showed they were students not the native Romanians. We do not know whether or not the respondents are the native Romanians. It is not effective when seven respondents have to choose the eight utterances and typed them in the directness and politeness ordered. They may choose or make more than one result. In terms of directness and indirectness, and politeness, the answers provided by the respondents were somewhat similar to the previous choices. The singularity answer was not taken into account. However, the survey is to be carried out on a larger group of respondents.
The comparison among the Romanians respondents' answer, the English respondents' answer, and the Hebrew respondents' answer, proposes two possible directions of investigations. The first direction is focused on the relationship between what the person believes to be polite in a certain situation and what the same person perceive as polite. The second direction is focused on checking the findings of the current research against a larger group of Romanian respondents.
The slight differences among Romanian, Hebrew, and English appear when it comes to politeness. The three languages place the utterances on different position. In this respect, Romanian seems again to overlap with Hebrew in which the respondents place the utterances in similar position.
The conclusion is Romanian is pretty closer to Hebrew in terms of the linguistics strategies employed. However, Romanian more likely to encounter conventional indirect polite strategies compared to Hebrew and English.
The strength of this paper is that the researcher shows the eight utterances which commonly used by people to express their requests. Those utterances are placed in a table randomly and the instruction are given clearly so that the respondents can answer what the researcher asked to do.
The comparison between Romanian and Indonesian is when people have to express requests, Romanians express it directly but lack of politeness for another people, whether or not the people close to them. It completely different in Indonesia, because when Indonesian express requests, they will consider to whom they are talking to. If the people are older than them, they will express requests in direct and polite ways, whereas the people are younger or in the same age of them, they usually express requests both direct and indirect ways and lack of politeness.
That's all my comment about the Journal.
Thanks and see you.
Sincerely,
HARKI SANTI_10420052_7A_ENGLISH FOR HOTEL
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 5, 2013 4:33:03 GMT
Oke sir, Thank you very much for giving me new knowledge about the material that we discussed yesterday. From this article, the reader knew which one of the countries is more polite and the the reader also get the information especially about the politeness and indirectness of those countries. So that, people can take a position if they are in that country. The good things of the journal are that we can know if the level of politeness can not be the same. we think that our way to request is polite, but probably not for the others. also the researcher gives some tables as the measurements, so it seems that result can be considered as a high quality of research. in addition, the researcher also provides the situation which is simple and useful. that will make the respondents easier to answer the questions given by the researcher. The weakness of the journal is about the limited information in research question. It makes the reader not too understand about the content of the journal. The weakness also about the sampling of the research.It is not effective if the researcher just use seven students of Romanians' students. it also not efficient for a research. Different with our country (Indonesia) Politeness Request in Indonesia have already be used since we were born. Our country (Indonesia) always show good polite and kind. Especially in java, java is polite culture. As the conclusion of the research, the researchers concluded that Romanian and Hebrew were relatively polite in requests and used indirect strategy. Whereas British was concluded that they were quite polite in requests with such direct strategy. If it is compared with Indonesian, the major of Indonesian uses such politeness in requests; using indirect strategy (conventional and non-conventional). Because Indonesian has been taught to be a polite person in a manner. Thank you sir, Be a good lecturer and have nice day By : Jihan Haqqi Rais ( 10420234 ) 7B Ok Mr.Jihan.You have made such a great progress. You deserve A score for this task.All the best. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 5, 2013 4:35:49 GMT
sir, we (wahyu tri r, nuur syaikha, oney setyawati, martina fika, najmie, umi mufl, lailatul husna, rini aji) have found the software that can change the speaker. but the size is too large. so we can not upload it to this forum.. so we miss the chance to be fist ten to get A, aren't we.hehe or we can give it to you directly, is it too late?? Hi Ms.Wahyu and friends, Thanks for your hard work.Almost all students have got the software from their previous class.It is called Media Pembelajaran.Sorry then, I can't give you A grade and exemption from the class is canceled hehhhh. :D |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 5, 2013 4:42:19 GMT
Good afternoon sir. I'm going to revise my comment :-D The journal is about the comparison of inderectness and politness in request between Romanian, English, and Hebrew. The researcher tries to find out which one has the most polite way in making request. In this journal, the researcher tries to analyze the relationship between i nderectness and politeness in request. In order to find the relationship between that two aspects, the researcher used the discourse completion test (DCT) which consisted of a situation that would be done by the respondents. The weakness of this jounal are the limited respondents and situations given by the researcher. I think it would be better for the researcher to find more respondents to get the more effective result. Moreover, the respondents are not the native Romanians. We can conclude if the respondents are not the native speakers, the result will not be valid. Next, I think the answers provided by the respondents were somewhat similar to the previous choices. Inspite of its weakness, of course it has some good aspects. First, the researcher used the appropriate method (DCT). It's very appropriate because it can be applied directly to the participants from different cultural background. Next, the researcher also gives the the situation that can make the respondents easier to answer the questions. The conclusion is Romanian is pretty close to Hebrew in terms of the linguistics strategies employed. It used indirect strategy. I think Indonesian uses the same strategy (indirect strategy) in making requests. Now we can conclude that every places has their own level of politeness. We can't judge that Indonesia is more polite than the others. thank you :D Ok,it seems to me you only have spelling problem.I appreciate your work with the score of A.Good luck.Do the spelling check next time. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 5, 2013 4:47:10 GMT
The paper tells about the analysis between the relationship of indirectness and politeness in requests. The project was done to find out to what extent politeness and indirectness are viewed as overlapping or mutually excluding categories by Romanians compared to other nationalities, such as the British and the Hebrew. The researcher tried to identify if there are any similarities between the answers of the Romanians respondents and those of Blum Kulka's respondents. This identification is applied by designing a situation and the respondents have to answer the question by choosing the eight-descriptive category(utterances). The eight categories were typed randomly. The respondents were asked to rate each utterances on a one to eight point scale for either "directness" or "politeness". The weakness of this project is there were only seven Romanians respondents that showed they were students not the native Romanians. We do not know whether or not the respondents are the native Romanians. It is not effective when seven respondents have to choose the eight utterances and typed them in the directness and politeness ordered. They may choose or make more than one result. In terms of directness and indirectness, and politeness, the answers provided by the respondents were somewhat similar to the previous choices. The singularity answer was not taken into account. However, the survey is to be carried out on a larger group of respondents. The comparison among the Romanians respondents' answer, the English respondents' answer, and the Hebrew respondents' answer, proposes two possible directions of investigations. The first direction is focused on the relationship between what the person believes to be polite in a certain situation and what the same person perceive as polite. The second direction is focused on checking the findings of the current research against a larger group of Romanian respondents. The slight differences among Romanian, Hebrew, and English appear when it comes to politeness. The three languages place the utterances on different position. In this respect, Romanian seems again to overlap with Hebrew in which the respondents place the utterances in similar position. The conclusion is Romanian is pretty closer to Hebrew in terms of the linguistics strategies employed. However, Romanian more likely to encounter conventional indirect polite strategies compared to Hebrew and English. The strength of this paper is that the researcher shows the eight utterances which commonly used by people to express their requests. Those utterances are placed in a table randomly and the instruction are given clearly so that the respondents can answer what the researcher asked to do. The comparison between Romanian and Indonesian is when people have to express requests, Romanians express it directly but lack of politeness for another people, whether or not the people close to them. It is completely different in Indonesia, because when Indonesian express requests, they will consider to whom they are talking to. If the people are older than them, they will express requests in direct and polite ways, whereas the people are younger or in the same age of them, they usually express requests both direct and indirect ways and lack of politeness. That's all my comment about the Journal. Thanks and see you. Sincerely, HARKI SANTI_10420052_7A_ENGLISH FOR HOTEL Ok Harki, you need to be careful with spelling and prepositional phrase.You fulfill the A score rubrics but its due date is over,so your max score is B. Hehhhhhh |
|
