CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1. Rationale of the study
English is nowadays spoken and learnt by people of all ages, classes, nationalities,
etc with different purposes and of course, English writing is part of their learning.
However, previous studies by Nguyen and Helen (2010) found out that non-native
speakers’ (NNS) criticisms were influenced by their own cultures and Nguyen (2006)
even statistically proved that less competent learners were more heavily influenced by
their cultures than higher competent ones. This is because higher competent learners of
English paid more attention to the cultural differences and they were taught as well.
Thanks to the development of technology and changes in the attitudes towards
teaching and learning method, communicative language teaching (CLT) is now widely
used in teaching English in general and writing in particular and CLT includes giving
peer comments (or constructive criticisms). Giving peer comments in writing is quite
similar to giving advice on personal objects which is not friendly welcome in most
English-speaking cultures (Houck, 2010 as cited in Nguyen et al, 2010). This signifies
that NNS may encounter difficulties in giving peer comments because the way of
giving comments in this culture (especially Asia) is not always appropriate in others
and even peer comments are often tricky with native speakers (NS) (Houck, 2010 as
cited in Nguyen et al, 2010). Nevertheless, it seems that some teachers ask their
students to mainly find out the errors of their peers and then suggest improvements
rather than teach the students ways to give comments like what native speakers do,
which will possibly cause cultural shocks for natives in societies of English-speaking
countries. Therefore, a nearly-Standard English style in giving comments (or
constructive criticisms) should be the model for learners to avoid possible offences in
communications. It should be noticed that a Standard English style is very hard to be
found.
The above analysis of the relationship between native culture and giving
comments in English has inspired the researcher to spend time and efforts to observe
1
the peer comments in writing skill of freshmen at ULIS-VNU. It can be said that
freshmen’s peer comments are still influenced by native culture and to some extent

university, if students have the chance to work with English native speakers, the
suggested ways of giving comments may be useful for them in their working
environment.
As for lecturers, they may reconsider the degree of the influence of some
Vietnamese cultural factors on peer comments of their students. The researcher hopes
that the lecturers will pay attention to teach their students to give comments like what
native speakers actually do in writing. In fact, freshmen are not taught the detailed way
to give comments with appropriate choice of words and expressions, which may make
their comments less effective.
1.5. Scope of the study
Due to limitation of time, knowledge and materials, the researcher only focused on
some Vietnamese cultural factors having influence on peer comments by freshmen and
suggesting some ways to help lecturers deal with this negative language transfer. The
researcher will analyze comments by freshmen on their peers’ essays and exploit
interviews with both students and lecturers.
1.6. Organization of the study
As can be seen, apart from chapter 1 which gives readers an overview of the study,
there are four other main parts.
Chapter 2 is the theoretical background which reviews some concepts used in the
present study: culture and language and their relation, peer comments and some key
categorical dimensions having influence on freshmen’s comments.
The methodology exploited will be presented in chapter 3 and information about
subjects, procedure of data collection and analysis will be given clearly as well.
3
Chapter 4 shows findings of the study by answering research questions. Moreover,
the researcher will also discuss the pedagogical implications which can help lecturers
teach their students how to give comments.
The summary and limitation of the study will be shown in chapter 5, the last part of
the study.
4

cross-cultural difficulties. The hidden aspects of culture exercise a strong influence on
behaviour and interactions with others.
6
Culture is illustrated as follow:

Figure 2: Levine and Adelma’s iceberg of culture
Another definition of culture was given by UNESCO in 1996 which emphasized
that culture involved both the materials and spirituals of human beings. That can be
exemplified as follow:
7

Figure 3: UNESCO’s definition of culture
In terms of the relationship between language and culture, Kramsch (1983)
supposed that language is “the principle means whereby we conduct our social lives”.
As can be seen, language is now the mirror reflecting the culture. Saville-Troike (1982;
35) also shared this viewpoint in their book titled “The Ethnography of
Communication: An Introduction”: “there is a correlation between the norm and
content of a language and the beliefs, values and needs present in the culture of its
speaker”.
In addition, two terms “language” and “culture” are used interchangeably. When
saying about one culture, people will immediately say about its language and vice
versa. Language was once used to indicate the social status involving culture of the
speaker. In ancient Greece, language was used to distinguish between civilized people
and “barbatos” those who spoke unintelligible languages. Even, in modern England,
dialect (a subcomponent of language) is still used to indicate the social classes of the
speaker.
2.2. Peer comments
First, “peer” is understood as the friend of the same age or the same social status
with a person. “Comment”, according to Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary
(2005:301), is “something that you say or write which gives an opinion on or explains

6. Abstractness - Rationality
7. Sentimentality - Equality
8. Hierarchy - Equality
9. Introversion - Extroversion
9
10. Deduction - Induction
11. Group Orientation - Individual Orientation
12. High context - Low context
13. Redundancy - Economically
14. Statically - Dynamically
Actually, these categories exist in every language. However, it is not true to say
that one culture only uses this category and refuses the other. There is a preference in
one culture to each category. For example, English native speakers prefer direct style
of speaking whereas Asian people, i.e. Chinese, Vietnamese or Japanese prefer indirect
style.
While giving comments, students will evaluate the work of one’s of their peers, as
a result, it can be predicted that subjectivity will be used most of the time, which makes
it nonsense to overview Subjectivity-Objectivity.
After analyzing data from subjects of the study, the researcher found that there
were two categories which had influence on peer comments. They are: Directness-
Indirectness and Positive politeness - Negative politeness.
2.3.1. Directness - Indirectness
Kaplan (1972) observed hundreds of essays of students studying in the United
States and concluded that there were differences in expressing ideas among people of
different cultures. He found out what he called “cultural thought patterns” illustrated as
follow:
Figure 4: Kaplan “cultural thought patterns”
As can be seen, in Anglicist direct expressions are preferred and there are some
famous expressions to illustrate this such as “Don’t go round the bush”, or “Get to the
10

- Guest: No, thanks. It’s delicious but I’ve really had enough.
- Host: OK. Why don’t we leave in the table and sit in the living room?
(cited in Do et al)
In this example, it can be seen that the host only offers once and when the guest
refuses for the very first time, he/she no longer asks more but suggests going to the
living room. The pattern of the conversation can be illustrated as follow:
Inviting (Host)

Refusing (Guest)
Going to the living room (Host & Guest)
Figure 6: A direct pattern in communication
In addition, one more thing that needs to be taken into consideration is the location
of information. It can be said that Vietnamese people will give “small talk” first and
then lead to “the main purpose” because of their being indirect but NSs do the
opposite, which can be exemplified as follow:
- In Vietnamese:

- In English
12
Small talk
By the way
Main purpose
Main purpose By the way Small talk
However, as in this study the students give written comments on their peer’s work so
it is essential to judge which evaluation belongs to direct style or indirect style
according to the words used by students. This is adapted from Blum-Kulka (1987:133).
Type Characteristics Examples
1. Direct comments
a. Negative
evaluation

you with some points (.)
about the conclusion’’ (L),
‘‘I don’t really agree with
you as you put it here’’
(NS).
- ‘‘And there are some
incorrect words, for
example ‘‘nowadays’’
(L),‘‘You had a few spelling
mistakes’’ (NS).
13
e. Statement of
difficulty
f. Consequences
Usually expressed by means of
such structures as “I find it
difficult to understand…”,
“It’s difficult to understand…”
Warning about negative
consequences or negative
effects of writer’s choice, etc
for writer himself or herself or
for the public.
- “I can’t understand” (L),
“I find it difficult to
understand your idea” (L)”
- “Someone who doesn’t
agree with you would
straight away read that and
turn off”. (NS)

alternatives to writer’s choices,
etc.
Using stated sentences as a
collective obligation rather
than an obligation for writer
personally or as a rule which
commentator thinks commonly
agreed upon and applied to all.
Usually expressed via such
structures as “you have to”,
“you must”, “it is obligatory
that” or “you are required”,
“you need”, “it’s necessary
that”, etc.
Usually expressed via the
performative “I advise you …”
or structures with “should”
with or without modality.
Usually expressed via
structures such as “you can”,
“you could”, “it would be
better if”, “why don’t you?”,
etc.
put “their” I think t-h-e-r-e.
- “Theoretically, a
conclusion needs to be
some sort of summary”.(L)
- “You must pay attention
to grammar” (L), “You
have to talk about your

- “Did you read your
writing again after you
finish it?” (L)
- “I prefer a writing style
which is not too personal.”
(L)
2.3.2. Positive politeness - Negative politeness
As written above, after analyzing peer comments by freshmen, the researcher found
that they exploited both positive politeness and negative politeness. In fact, Nguyen
Quang (2005:25) supposed that there were 17 positive politeness strategies and 11
negative politeness strategies used by users of the English language. However, there
were only 3 positive politeness strategies and 3 negative politeness strategies used by
freshmen at ULIS-VNU, which was found by the researcher.
In this part, the researcher will review the theories of both positive politeness and
negative politeness, which will shed light on the analysis of freshmen’s comments in
the finding section. There will be examples written by freshmen in the strategies
exploited by them.
16
It is first and foremost to understand what is meant by “politeness”? In terms of
cultural aspect, Yule (1996) defined politeness as ““a fixed concept, as in the idea of
‘polite social behavior’, or etiquette, within a culture”. Another definition of
politeness was given by Richards in 1985 which emphasized “the attempt to establish,
maintain, and save face during conversation”. As can be seen politeness is used to
save the face of the H.
2.3.2.1. Positive politeness
According to Brown and Levinson (1990:70), positive politeness “is oriented
toward the positive face of H, the positive self-image that he claims for himself”.
Another way to understand suggested by Nguyen Quang (2005:25) based on “the
concern of the solidarity” is that positive politeness is “any communicative act (verbal
and/ or nonverbal) which is appropriately intended to show the speaker’s concern to

presupposition manipulations.)
A: Oh it’s too hot.
B: Honey, it’s terribly hot, I know.
Strategy 8: Joke
How about lending me this old heap of junk? (H’s new Cadillac)
Strategy 9: Assert or presuppose S’s knowledge of and concern for H’s wants
I know you can’t bear parties, but this one will really be good- do come!
Strategy 10: Offer, promise
Này, hôm nào ra Hải Xồm lai rai đi. (We will have a drink at Hai Xom
someday.)
Strategy 11: Be optimistic
I’m borrowing your bike for a sec, OK?
Strategy 12: Include both S and H in the activity
Let’s stop for dinner?
18
Strategy 13: Give (or ask for) reasons
Why don’t we go to the sea-shore?
Strategy 14: Assume or assert reciprocity
I’ve done the cooking; you make the table, OK?
Strategy 15: Give gifts to H (goods, sympathy, understanding, cooperation)
Nguyen Quang (2003: 78-85), adds two more strategies, namely:
Strategy 16: Comfort and encourage
It’ll all turn out OK.
Strategy 17: Ask personal questions
Anh chị được mấy cháu rồi ạ? (How many children do you have?)
2.3.2.2. Negative politeness
Brown and Levinson (1990: 70) suppose that “Negative politeness, is oriented
mainly toward partially satisfying (redressing) H’s negative face, his basic want to
maintain claims of territory and self-determination. Negative politeness, thus, is
essentially avoidance-based, and realizations of negative-politeness strategies consist

Strategy 7: Impersonalize S and H
Student’s comment: It is worth noting that the essay contains some errors.
Strategy 8: State the Face Threatening Act (FTA) as a general rule (S doesn’t want to
impinge but is merely forced to by circumstances, is to state the FTA as an instance of
some general social rule, regulation, or obligation)
You are requested to fasten your seat belts while seated.
Strategy 9: Nominalize (the facts of syntax suggest a ‘continuum’ from verb
through adjective to noun (Ross, 1972). Degrees of negative politeness run hand in
hand with degrees of nounness.)
Sự có mặt của anh trong bữa tiệc làm chúng tôi thấy rất vinh dự.
(Your appearance at the party gives us a sense of pride.)
Strategy 10: Say explicitly as if S is thankful to H or H is not thankful to S
I’d very grateful if you put it in a good word for me.
20
Strategy 11: Avoid asking personal questions
This strategy proves to be effective in the positive politeness strategy- oriented
communities, because it shows concern to H. However, it also interferes with H’s
privacy to some extent. Therefore, avoiding asking such private questions as: “How
much do you earn a month?”, etc is another negative politeness strategy.
17 positive politeness strategies and 11 negative politeness strategies, which are
mainly used in communication, have been mentioned. However, it should be noted that
making a clear distinction in use between them is very difficult. In fact, in real-life
communication, one can see both strategies being used at the same time. For example:
Honey, wait for me for just a second? (‘positive politeness’: in group identity
marker- honey- and ‘negative politeness’: minimizing the imposition- just a second-)
21
CHAPTER 03: METHODOLOGY
After the theoretical background was presented, the researcher continues
mentioning the methodology used in the study. In this chapter, the participants,
research instruments, data collection procedures and analysis will be clearly presented.

research question just after the researcher collected commented essays.
3.4. Procedures of data analysis
The study has to answer four research questions. In terms of the first question, the
interview with students and teachers at Division 1 and comments analysis were
exploited to answer and the cultural differences will be analyzed deeply in the third
research question.
Furthermore, all comments from students were analyzed to find out the Vietnamese
cultural factors having influence on them. In addition, basing on the results of the
study, the researcher will suggest some ways that teachers can teach their students to
give comments on their peers’ essays like what English native speakers use.
23
CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
4.1. FINDINGS
4.1.1. The first research question
As written in the previous chapter, in order to answer the first research question
the researcher analyzed written comments of freshmen and carried out interviews with
students and lecturers to make sure of the reliability of the finding. Basing on the
information by those subjects, it could be concluded that freshmen knew to give
comments signifying that they identified the problem(s) in the first step and then gave
advice about some “don’t” and “do” in the second step.
However, in the researcher’s opinion it is words and sentence structures exploited
that counted the most. It was calculated that up to 48% of students only focused on
finding errors of their peers (N=50, the total number of subjects). They did not give
any external modification, i.e. compliments, and bald sentence structure, i.e. structures
without subject, and strong modal verbs such as “should” were exploited. On being
asked if English native speakers used “should”, one female student said:
“…Có lẽ là không. Tại vì em có nghe, em không hiểu nghe ai nói là should người
ta thông thường dùng như kiểu must…”
(English: Perhaps they don’t. I heard one said that with native speakers, should meant
must…)

similarity of ways of giving comments by Vietnamese freshmen and native speakers.
That is they exploit two strategies (or two steps) in peer commenting. In the first step,
they identify the problem(s) and then in the second step, they suggest ways of solving
it (them). It can be concluded that Vietnamese freshmen and natives have the same way
of peer commenting.
However, word choice and sentence structure exploitation make comments by
Vietnamese freshmen and natives different. Researches by Nguyen show that natives
25