VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST – GRADUATE STUDIES
********** ƯNG THỊ THU QUYÊN
A CROSS – CULTURAL STUDY ON
AMERICAN – VIETNAMESE VERBAL EXPRESSIONS IN
OFFERING A GIFT AND RESPONDING TO A GIFT OFFER

NGHIÊN CỨU GIAO THOA VĂN HÓA VIỆT – MỸ VỀ CÁCH
SỬ DỤNG NGÔN TỪ ĐỂ TẶNG QUÀ VÀ NHẬN QUÀ SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR
THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN ENGLISH
Field : ENGLISH LINGUISTICS
Code : 602215
Supervisor : Dr. Hoang Thi Xuan Hoa


I.4.3.4. Off – record 7
I.5. Offering as a speech act 7
I.6. Gift offering. 8
Chapter II. Methodology 10
II.1. Instrument 10
II.2. Procedures 10
II.3. Informants 11
II.4. Coding of the data and mode of data analysis 12
Chapter III. Strategies in gift offering 15
III.1. Communicative strategies used in gift offering. 15
III.2. Similarities and differences of gift offering between American and Vietnamese 21
III.2.1. Data analysis. 21
III. 2. 2. Major similarities and differences 21

vi
III.2.3. Concluding remarks 22
Chapter IV. Strategies in responding to gift offers 24
IV.1. Agreeing to receive a gift 24
IV.1.1. Communicative strategies in receiving a gift 24
IV.1.2. Similarities and differences of gift receiving between American and Vietnamese 28
IV.1.2.1. Data analysis 28
IV.1.2.2. Major similarities and differences. 28
IV.1.3. Concluding remarks 29
IV.2. Refusing a gift. 29
IV.2.1. Communicative strategies used in refusing a gift. 29
IV.2.2. Similarities and differences of gift refusing between American and Vietnamese 33
IV.2.2.1. Data analysis 33
IV.2.2.2. Major similarities and differences 33
IV.2.3. Concluding remarks 34
Part C. Conclusion
1
Part A. Introduction
I. Rationale
Language is very important for international communication nowadays. People from

III. Scope of the study
This study is limited to the verbal aspects of the act of offering gifts. Nonverbal aspects of
the act such as paralanguage, extra-language and the like are not investigated. Conclusions
will be based on the analysis of the data collected from the questionnaires, not spontaneous
discourse. It is said that data obtained from questionnaires about what people might say in
certain situations may not always be the same as what they actually say in real life. It may
be because the answers in written form seem to be more formal than speaking one.
Obviously, it takes longer thinking so the answers are less natural. But it was felt that the
data would indicate possible similarities and differences between American and
Vietnamese ways of giving gifts and responding to the offers. The informants feel free
from time pressure and their names are unknown so the data would be reliable. The
Northern Vietnamese dialect and the English spoken as the first language in the United
States are selected for contrastive analysis. Thus, the study will not go to a fixed
conclusion but based on statistic data, give remarks, comments and assumption on the
frequency of some verbal ways of offering gifts. This study is only confined to one aspect
of language in action: what strategies are most commonly found in association with gift
offering. Moreover, gift offering in this study is simply understood as a nice cultural
behavior in daily life expressing deep gratitude, concern and attention to the Receiver. Of
course, gifts can be offered without saying a word but the non – verbal aspect of gift
offering, as mentioned before, is beyond the scope of this study. Moreover, this is as minor
thesis so what kind of present should be given, to whom (the influence of informants’
parameters on the choice of strategies: age, gender, etc.) and what kind of present should
be avoided are not touched in this study although the author is highly aware of them as a
cultural characteristics of each nation.
IV. Design of the study
Part A: Introduction: All the academic routine required for the study is represented.
Part B: Development: This is the focus of the study and consists of four chapters
Chapter I. Theoretical background.
Chapter II. Methodology
Chapter III. Strategies in gift offering.

character.” People can understand the cultural characteristic of the nation through the
language they use. Different cultures use language differently, even though some cultures
possess the same language such as American culture, British culture, and Australian
culture. Richard et al (1992:94) defines: “Culture is the total set of beliefs, attitudes,
customs, behavior, social habits of the members of a particular society”. This definition not

4
only helps us understand what culture is, but also lists the components of culture.
Obviously, culture is a sort of knowledge, which everyone must possess to function within
a society. Beliefs, attitudes, customs, behaviors and social habits are not innate or born
naturally but they are learnt through the socialization process in which you grow up a full
member of a society. That is why culture does not belong to any single person but to all
people. It is believed that language and culture are interrelated, language contains culture
in itself and culture is expressed via language. Language, as a means of communication, is
also bound up with culture in complex ways. Kramsch (1998:4) views the relationship
between language and culture as follows: language expresses cultural reality. When people
express their ideas, they use a stock of knowledge about the world that they share with one
another; language embodies cultural reality. Members of a community create experience
through language; language symbolizes cultural reality. Language is a system of signs with
cultural values. Language of a group can be viewed as a symbol of their social identity.
It can be obviously seen that language and culture are interrelated and interwoven with
each other. Every cultural reality is expressed, embodied and symbolized by language.
From a broader point of view, Nguyen Van Do (2004:71) mentions the relationship
between language-culture and the society in which human beings are central. According to
his argument, without people, culture and society would not exist. So, it is possible to
interpret and describe a culture in its language. In its turn, culture influences the way in
which language is used. It provides guidelines for our linguistic behavior.
I.3. Communicative competence
When learning a new language, the students must learn its grammatical rules to make a
sentence correctly in grammar. This ability is called “linguistic competence”. If the

achieved in an addressee by a speaker’s utterance; 3. propositional act is a speech act that a
speaker performs when referring or predicating in an utterance; 4. an utterance act is a
speech act that consists of the verbal employment of units of expression such as words and
sentences.
According to Searle (in Levinson 1983:240), there are five broad classes of illocutionary
points: declaratives, representatives, expressives, directives and commissives. In order to
understand the speaker’s intention behind the words, the hearer can rely on some
conventional way to predict, called “speech event”. For instance, when a student comes to
class late, his teacher may ask “What’s the time?” All the students in the class understand
that the teacher is annoyed, but he does not want to know the time of the moment.
I.4.3. Politeness strategies
Politeness strategies are used to formulate messages in order to save the hearer’s face when
face-threatening acts are inevitable or desired. In Brown and Levinson (1987: 180), there

6
are four main types of politeness strategies: bald on-record, negative politeness, positive
politeness, and off-record (indirect).
I.4.3.1. Bald On-record
Bald on-record strategies usually do not attempt to minimize the threat to the hearer’s face,
although there are ways that bald on-record politeness can be used in trying to minimize
FTAs implicitly. Often using such a strategy will shock or embarrass the addressee, and so
this strategy is most often utilized in situations where the speaker has a close relationship
with the audience, such as family or close friends. Brown and Levinson (1987:181) outline
various cases, in which one might use the bald on-record strategy, including: great urgency
or desperation: Watch out! Speaking as if great efficiency is necessary: Hear me out ;
task-oriented: Pass me the hammer; little or no desire to maintain someone's face: Don't
forget to clean the blinds! ; doing the FTA is in the interest of the hearer: Your headlights
are on! ; Offers: Leave it, I'll clean up later. Eat!
I.4.3.2. Positive Politeness
Positive politeness strategies seek to minimize the threat to the hearer’s positive face. They

is often softened, made less direct, and imposing (e.g. past continuous ‘I was
wondering’; informal tag ‘What d’you reckon?).
 The focal stage is subdivided into elements such as asker’s reasons or constraints
(e.g. ‘I’ve tried everywhere but can’t get one’), the other’s face (e.g. ‘you’re the
only person I can turn to’), and more.
 The third stage is the final stage which consists of anticipatory thanks, promises,
and compliments (e.g. ‘I knew you would say yes. You’re an angel.’).
I.4.3.4. Off-record (indirect)
The final politeness strategy is the indirect strategy. This strategy uses indirect language
and removes the speaker from the potential to be imposing. For example, a speaker using
the indirect strategy might merely say “wow, it’s getting cold in here” insinuating that it
would be nice if the listener would get up and turn up the thermostat without directly
asking the listener to do so.
I.5. Offering as a speech act
According to Searle’s speech act classification (in Levinson 1983:245), the position of
offers can be easily recognized in the class of commissives. But Hancher (in Wierzbiska,
1987:192) states that offering has “a double nature”, being “a commissive” like a promise
but also “a directive” like a request. This statement is reasonable as offering something to
somebody is both to try to direct that person’s behavior, and also commit oneself to a
corresponding course of behavior. Anna Wierzbiska (1987:191) states the following
meaning of offers: I think of X as something that could be good for you, I say: I will cause

8
X to happen if you say you would want me to do it, I think that you may want it to happen,
I don’t know if you want it to happen, I say this because I want to cause you to know that I
would cause it to happen if you said that you wanted it to happen, I assume that you will
say if you want it to happen.
Offer falls into two types: offer something and offer to do something. Offering to do
something means to say that one is willing to do it. Offering something to somebody
“shows or expresses willingness or intention to do or to give something, etc.” (Oxford

because they drink that everyday, so it is too ordinary. In Germany, for social invitations,
flowers or chocolates are suitable gifts. And you should give an odd number of flowers,
say, eleven or thirteen, not twelve and the present them without the wrapping paper (Liz
Taylor, 1996:128). The most suitable gift in Vietnam when you come to someone’s home
is fruit put in plastic bags, and other kinds of gifts carefully wrapped in colorful wrapping
paper. Unlike the Westerners, the Vietnamese “will not open your gift in front of you but
will accept it, place it aside and open it later” (Claire Ellis, 1996:157). Claire Ellis
(1996:157) also states that in Vietnam, “presents are given on numerous occasions”. And if
“in the West, a gift is a symbol of thanks from the giver, in Vietnam, where the Buddhism
prevails, giving a gift is one way in which the giver can gain greater merit for the next life.
Hence, the whole action is to the benefit of the giver, not the receiver”. There are
thousands of reasons leading to the behavior of offering gifts, from ordinary occasions
such as coming to visit a friend, returning from a trip, etc to important events like attending
a wedding party, getting a job promotion, etc. Besides, in Vietnam, offering gifts also
comes from the reason of religion. They believe and expect to receive more in their future. 10
Chapter II. Methodology
II.1. Instrument
The theoretical background of the study relies on the research of various home and foreign

politeness theories. The full text of the questionnaires is given in Appendix A. The
informants were required to express verbally when they offer a birthday gift to and respond
to a gift offer from the following people: a new friend/colleague you have just met for a
very short time (far social distance), their close friend (close social distance), their brother
or sister (intimate relationship, same family rank), their employee (lower social status),
their employer (higher social status). The survey was done in some language centers in
Hanoi (Apollo center, Clever Learn Center); in the Embassy of the United States at Lang
Ha Street, Hanoi and at some universities in Hanoi (Foreign Trade University, University
of Industry and Vietnam National University, Hanoi). It took each participant about 10
minutes to complete the DCT. The researcher was sitting there to provide any information
or clarify any point that was unclear to the informant, and to make sure that the informants
did not skip any situation.
However, it should be noted that there are some aspects of communication, which the
questionnaire fails to capture, for example: Paralinguistic factors: pitch, rate, volume, vocal
filers, etc. Non – verbal factors: gestures, body motions, facial expressions, etc. Setting of
communication: place, time, conversational distance, kind of presents, on what occasions,
etc. With respect to these limitations, the study is only regarded as a preliminary study and
any conclusions are tentative and suggestive.
II.3. Informants
American informants: The questionnaire was mostly handed to American people who
work at the Embassy of the United States in Hanoi and teach at some English centers in
Hanoi, Vietnam such as Apollo center, Clever Learn center, etc. The rest was sent by
email. The total number of American informants is 50.
Vietnamese informants: The same number of Vietnamese informants as the American
ones was chosen, with the hope to collect as accurate data as possible for the contrastive
analysis. The Vietnamese informants come from Hanoi and the North of Vietnam as the
language in this area is temporarily taken as standard Vietnamese. These informants all are
lecturers at Hanoi University of Industry, Foreign Trade University and Vietnam National

12

straightforwardness without any hedging or
hesitation.
- Hey! I have got a gift
for you. (Situation 1)
2.Showing
concern
This is the way that the G wants to pay
his/her special attention to the R.
- I thought you would
like this one. (Situation

13
for the
Receiver
1)
3. Giving the
Receiver
a surprise
The G would like to give the R a nice
surprise by having the R guess what the gift
is.
- I have something for
you; can you guess what
it is? (Situation 1)
4. Showing
modesty
about the gift
value
Usually expressed in their choice of
vocabulary such as “small”, “just”, “and

- Sir, may I give you
something?
- Could I make you
happy?
(Situation 1)
Table 1.Offering gift strategies

Strategy
Definition
Example
1. Thanking
An expression of gratitude
- Oh, thank you so
much!
- Wow, thanks a lot!
(Situation 2)
2. Token refusal
The R mildly complains about the gift
- You shouldn’t do like

14
of the G. Often using modal verbs
“should” or “need” in negative form.
this.
- You don’t need to give
me a gift. (Situation 2)
3. Complimenting
the gift
Used only when the gift if unwrapped in
the cases of close distant: close friend or

already possesses the same gift or the
gift is not his/her taste
- Oh, I already have
this.
- It’s not appropriate.
(Situation 2)
8. Flat refusal
This gives the H almost no further
chance to insist.
- No, thank you
anyway! (Situation 2)
9. Delay
Would be direct with an excuse or
reason to save the G’s face.
- Let it next time.
Thanks. (Situation 2)
Table 2.Responding to gift offer strategies
The list of strategies, however, would be modified based on the data of the present study.
Thus, may be some categories were collapsed, and the categories that were not reflected in
the data were dropped from the classification scheme. Apart from the strategies, we found
linguistic modifiers embedded in the offering and responding made by the informants but
due to limitation of this thesis, they were not analyzed and compared including the external
modifiers and internal modifiers. 15
Chapter III. Strategies in gift offering
The focus of this study is on the verbal expression in offering gifts and responding to gift
offers in Vietnamese and American languages and cultures from cross – cultural
perspective. In fact, what to say to give a gift, and how to respond to a gift offer are culture

4
Showing modesty about the gift value
12%
10.4%
5
Stating reason of gift offering
24.8%
16.4%
6
Wishes
1.6%
34%
7
Expressing the Giver’s feeling
5.2%
6.4%
8
Asking for permission to offer a gift
0.4%
0.4%
Table 3.Strategies used to offer a gift
It can be easily seen from the above table that all strategies are employed by both groups of
informants. Both groups use the strategy “asking for permission” at the lowest rate. In our

16
observation, sometimes, in some situations the informants resort to several strategies at the
same time, not only one, to produce more effective offers.
1. Direct offer
According to politeness strategy theory in Brown and Levinson (1987:180), this is bald on
– record strategy. Both American and Vietnamese employ this strategy at a rather high

- I know you will love this.
By the Vietnamese informants:
- Em biết là sếp rất thích cái này nên đã mua tặng sếp ạ. (I know you like this so I
buy it for you)
- Mình nghĩ chắc là bạn sẽ rất vui khi nhận được món quà này. (I am sure that you’ll
be happy getting this gift)
Brown and Levinson (1987:190) state that when giving a gift, the G assumes that the R
will like or likes it. Thus, by employing this strategy, the G makes the positive face want of
the R be satisfied. The G notices and understands the R’s taste, hobby, need, want, etc and
to some extent, the G has or appears to have the same taste as the R. It is positive
politeness strategy.
3. Giving the R a surprise
This strategy is often accompanied by nonverbal behaviors. For example, hiding the gift
behind the back, the G wears a mysterious expression of the face and says:
By the American informants:
- I have something for you. Can you guess what it is?
- Hey, I have a nice surprise for you.
By the Vietnamese informants:
- Này, đố mày biết cái gì đấy! (Hey, guess what it is!)
- Chị thử đoán xem em có cái gì tặng chị đây này. (Please guess what I have for you)
- Mình có cái này rất hay muốn tặng bạn, thử đoán xem! (I’d like to give you
something very nice, please make a guess!)
This strategy is used at a rather low rate by the both of groups. However, the Americans
resort to this strategy more often than the Vietnamese (4.00% vs 2.00%). Usually, when
giving gifts to their close friend, the informants employ this strategy. This is also positive
politeness strategy.
4. Showing modesty about the gift value
The Americans often use the words like “small”, “just”, and “little”. This would mean that
the gift is modest in order that the R can be happier to receive the gift without any wonder.
This is positive politeness, according to politeness strategy theory. The rate of the

your birthday)
- Em xin tặng sếp món quà nhỏ nhân dịp sinh nhật. (I have a small gift for you on
your birthday)

19
It can be easily seen that this is the second most frequently used strategy by the American
informants. And they tend to favor short and simple utterances while the Vietnamese,
similar to strategy “showing concern for the R”, often use longer sentences. We had
interviewed some American informants, they considered roundabout expressions to be
unsure, insincere and lack of involvement. Moreover, they said that such wordy
roundabout expression is not necessary because they already know why to offer a gift, no
need to speak out. Meanwhile, if too short or simple sentences are used in Vietnamese, the
G may be considered to be rude, impolite or informal. Although this strategy is less used
often in Vietnamese than in American (16.4% vs 24.8%), the utterances in Vietnamese are
various. Besides using the same reason as the Americans above, the Vietnamese often
resort to so – called “on – the – occasion” strategy. This way makes the R implicitly
understand that the G does not offer the gift intentionally, but accidentally. Thus, the R will
feel comfortable to receive the gift. Nevertheless, in practice, in some cases the G does not
do this accidentally, but intentionally. It is noticeable that, this strategy is mainly used in
the situation of offering gift to boss or employee.
6. Wishes
This strategy is the most frequently used by the Vietnamese: 34% compared to only 1.6%
by the Americans. The Vietnamese often expect good health, happiness, property, success,
etc and their utterances are conventional and formulaic. Wishes by the Americans are often
short and simple while the Vietnamese tend to make long utterance of wishes. It is believed
that the more wishes they get, the more likely they become true:
By the American informants:
- Best wishes for you!
- Happy birthday to you!
By the Vietnamese informants:

8. Asking for permission to give a gift
Surprisingly, both American and Vietnamese informants employ this strategy at the same
rate (0.4%). And this is the least frequently used strategy by both groups of informants.
They are:
By the American informants:
- Sir, may I give you something?
- Could I make you happy?
By the Vietnamese informants:

21
- Em xin mạn phép gửi đến anh món quà này nhân dịp sinh nhật. (I ask for
permission to give you this present on the occasion of your birthday)
One special thing here is the American express their offer in the form of question with
modal verb “may” or “can” and the Vietnamese one uses a statement. Both two kinds of
requests have the same aim: asking for permission. According to Brown and Levinson
(1987:224), this is one of the negative politeness strategies showing deference. Brown and
Levinson (in Nguyen Quang 2004:125) regard making question as an effective negative
politeness strategy and the question form “May I…? / Can I…?” is more frequently used
by the American informants. In the term of degree of formality, the words “xin mạn phép”
in Vietnamese seems to sound more formal than the modal verb “Can “or “Could” in
American.
III.2. Similarities and differences of gift offering between American and Vietnamese
III.2.1. Data analysis
The data analysis of the employment of gift offering strategies in interaction with different
informants has shown that all the strategies mentioned above are available to both speakers
of American and Vietnamese. However, the use of these strategies differs from partner to
partner. The most preferred strategies by the Vietnamese informants with all partners are
“wishes” and “direct offer”. Dominating the choice of the American informants is “direct
offer” and “stating reason”. The detailed analysis is presented in Appendix B (1)
III.2.2. Major similarities and differences