CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY OF STUDY PROJECT REPORT
I certify my authority of the Study Project Report submitted entitled
A VIETNAMESE - AMERICAN CROSS-CULTURAL STUDY
OF CONVERSATIONAL DISTANCES
In fulfilmentfulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts
Le Thi Huyen
Acknowledgements
I owe my deepest gratitude to my supervisor, M.A Nguyen Thi Thanh Huong,
without whose valuable comments and guidance, my thesis would not have been
accomplished.
My special thanks go to my colleagues from Haiphong Water Supply Company,
those who helped me fill in my survey questionairequestionnaire and give me
constructive suggestions in completing this thesis.
And I am immensely grateful to my former teacher, Ms. Stacy Thompson, who
is living and working in the United States. She has helped me conduct my
survey in the United States.
I owe my family great attitude for theirMy family: my parents, my brother,
my sister-in-law and my boyfriend have been a constant source of love,
support and encouragement.
Finally, I should acknowledge my indebtedness to all my friends for their
assistance during the process of preparing for this research.
Le Thi Huyen
ABSTRACT
Even the best verbal communication skills are not enough to create and sustain successful
relationships. Good relationships, both at home and at work, require the ability to
communicate with emotional intelligence.
Part of our culture involves an unspoken rule that people should ignore nonverbal elements–
as if the injunction were, "hear what I say, and don't notice the way I say it." These elements
are often ignored in school or overridden by parents, so the task of incorporating conscious
sensitivity to nonverbal communications is made more difficult. Thus, this thesis is an
attempt to provide a cross-cultural comparison of common conversational distances, their

(two male friends)
Table 12: Figures on using conversational distances by informants with their same-sex close friend
(two female friends)
Table 13: Figures on using conversational distances by informants with their opposite-sex close
friend
Table 14: Figures on using conversational distances by informants with their same-sex acquaintance
Table 15: Figures on using conversational distances by informants with their opposite-sex
acquaintance
Table 16: Figures on using conversational distances by informants with their same-sex colleague
Table 17: Figures on using conversational distances by informants with their opposite-sex colleague
Table 18: Figures on using conversational distances by informants with their boss
Table 19: Figures on using conversational distances by informants between 20 and 40 years old
Table 20: Figures on using conversational distances by informants above 40 years old
Table 21: Figures on using conversational distances by male informants
Table 22: Figures on using conversational distances by female informants
Table 23: Figures on using conversational distances by informants living in rural areas
Table 24: Figures on using conversational distances by informants living in urban areas
Table 25: Figures on using conversational distances by informants with teamwork occupation
Table 26: Figures on using conversational distances by informants with independent work
occupation
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART A: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................... 1
I. Rationale ....................................................................................................... 1
II. Aims of the study ........................................................................................ 2
III. Scope of the study ...................................................................................... 2
IV. Methodology .............................................................................................. 4
V. Design of the study ..................................................................................... 4
PART B: DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................ 5
ChapterHAPTER 1: Literature reviewBACKGROUND CONCEPTS ............. 5
1. What is communication? ............................................................................. 5

1.3 Procedures of data collection .............................................................. 32
2. Data analysis and findings ......................................................................... 34
23.1 Use of converstionalconversational distance as seen from
communicative partnert’s role relationship .............................................. 34
3.1.1 Data analysis ..................................................................................... 34
23.2 Use of conversational distance as seen from informants’ parameters
.................................................................................................................... 43
PART C: CONCLUSION .................................................................................. 48
I. Summary of main findings: ........................................................................ 48
II. Implications for avoidance of culture shock and cross-cultural
communication breakdown ............................................................................ 48
III. Suggestion for further study .................................................................... 51
Appendices
References???
Appendices???

PART A: INTRODUCTION
I. Rationale
Stated briefly, how something is expressed may carry more significance and weight than
what is said, the words themselves. Accompanied by a smile or a frown, said with a loud,
scolding voice or a gentle, easy one, the contents of our communications are framed by our
holistic perceptions of their context. Those sending the messages may learn to understand
themselves better as well as learning to exert some greater consciousness about their manner
of speech. Those receiving the messages may learn to better understand their own intuitive
responses–sometimes in contrast to what it seems "reasonable" to think.
The use of physical space by individuals in their interactions with others can be considered
as one of the most critical signals of nonverbal communication as this use of physical space
seems to be different from culture to culture; thus, ways of interpretation of the same space
message are also various. In the 1950's, American anthropologist Edward T. Hall pioneered
proxemics to describe set measurable distances between people as they interact. Like gravity,

2. What are the conversational distances of the American informants in given
situations?
3. What are the main similarities and differences in conversational distances between
Vietnamese and American informants?
4. What are the recommendations to the Vietnamese learners of English for avoidance
of culture shock in conversational distances?
III. Scope of the study
2
The study stresses upon the nonverbal communication. Extralinguistically, the study
especially discusses the conversational distances in the two cultures: Vietnamese and
American.
3
IV. Methodology
As the study dwells largely on the practical aspects of cross-cultural communication, the
main method employed in the study is quantitative with due reference to qualitative method.
Besides, contrastive analysis is also used. Therefore, all considerations, comments and
conclusions in this thesis are largely based on:
 Reference to relevant home and foreign publication in both primary and secondary
research;
 Survey questionairesquestionnaires;
 Statistics, descriptions and analysis of the collected and selected data;
 Personal observations and experience;
 Consultations with supervisors;
 Discussions with Vietnamese and foreign teacherscolleagues
V. Design of the study
The study falls into three main parts:
PART A: INTRODUCTION:
 Rationale
 Aims of the study
 Scope of the study

 Emhasis on the meaning of the intended message:
If Zimmerman et al. (1991: 4) mentioned this when illustrating communcation as: T “the
process in which persons assign meanings to events and especially to the behaviour of other
persons”, .
Verderber (1989: 4) had another approach: “Communication may be defined as the
transactional process of creating meaning. A transactional process is one in which those
persons communicating are mutually responsible for what occurs”.
 Emphasis on the message conveyed:
Saville-Troike (1986) identified that: C “communication is [...] considered the process of
sharing and exchanging information between people both verbally and nonverbally”.
 Emphasis on the information, concept, attitude and emotion of the message
conveyed:
It is clarified in the definition of Hybels, S. and Weaver, R. (1992: 5) that: “c
Communication is any process in which people share information, ideas and feelings that
involve not only the spoken and written words but also body language, personal mannerisms
and style, the surrounding and things that add meaning to a message”.
Among the definitions above-mentioned above, the one proposed by Hybels & Weaver
(1992) is the most sufficient and convincing since they have, according to Nguyen Quang (F:
29),
- pointed out the action, interaction and transaction nature of communication;
- specified the characteristics of communication
,- specified the means to carry out communication and
- specified different levels of communication.
6
1.2 Types of communication
Hybels, S. and Weaver, R II (1992: 14) explain that there are different kinds of
communication, among which the most frequently used ones areoften used kinds are:
intrapersonal, interpersonal, interviews, small group and public communication.
 Intrapersonal communication
Intrapersonal communication is communication that occurs within us. It involves thoughts,

Small group communication occurs when a small number of people meet to solve a problem.
The group must be small enough so that each member in the group has a chance to interact
with all other members.
Because small groups are made up of several sender-receivers, the communication process is
more complicated than in interpersonal communication. With so many more people sending
messages, there are more chances for confusion. Messages are also more structured in small
group because the group is meeting together for a specific purpose. Small groups use the
same channels as interpersonal communication, however, and there is also a good deal of
opportunity for feedback, and the settings are also more formal.
 Public communication
In public communication the sender-receiver (speaker) sends a message (the speech) to an
audience. The speaker usually delivers a highly-structured message, using the same channels
as interpersonal communication and small-group communication. In public communication,
however, the channels are more exaggerated than in interpersonal communication. The voice
is louder and the gestures are more expeansive because the audience is bigger. Generally, the
opportunity for verbal feedback in public communication is limited. In most public
communication the setting is formal.
2. What is nonverbal communication?
8
2.1 Definition of nonverbal communication
Even if someone decides to say nothing, they are still communicating. So in fact, how is the
information conveyed?
Today, many researchers are concerned with the information sent by communication that is
independent of and different from verbal information; namely, the nonverbal
communication. Verbal communication is organized by language; nonverbal
communication is not.
Communication is the transfer of information from one person to another. Most of us spend
about 75 percent of our waking huorshours communicating our knowledge, thoughts and
ideas to others. However, most of us fail to realize that a great deal of our communication is
a nonverbal form as opposed to the oral and written forms. Nonverbal communication

10
ChanelChannel
Vocal
Spoken words
(Intralanguage)
Tone of voice, sigh, scream,
vocal quality, pitch, loudness,
and other paralinguistic
factors
Nonvocal
Written words
(Intralanguage)
Gesture, movement,
appearance, facial expression,
touch, and other
extralinguistic factors
Table 1: Further clarification of nonverbal communication
2.2 Significance of nonverbal communication
Is there ever any doubt in your mind as to the mood of a coworker upon their arrival at
work? Nonverbal communication is the single most powerful form of communication. More
than voice or even words, nonverbal communication cues you in to what is on another
person’s mind. The best communicators are sensitive to the power of the emotions and
thoughts communicated nonverbally.
Nonverbal communication is important as "when we speak (or listen), our attention is
focused on words rather than body language. But our judgementjudgment includes both. An
audience is simultaneously processing both verbal and nonverbal cues. Body movements are
not usually positive or negative in and of themselves; rather, the situation and the message
will determine the appraisal." (Givens, 2000: 4).
According to Allan Pease cited in Body Language (1984: 10), “: Tthe fascinating thing is
that the human animal is rarely aware of his postures, movements and gestures that can tell

with whom we come in contact. If the message is unacceptable by the other person,
s/he may not even consider the later messages. Body size, body shape, clothing,
12
facial features and other subjects adorning ourselves can be seen as aspects of
physical appearance that produce potential messages.
 Face and eye behaviour: Face and eye behaviour is known as “oculesics”.
According to many researchers, it is virtually impossible to seperateseparate the
messages sent by the eyes and those sent by the face, thus it is best to consider these
together. This category of nonverbal communication has a major impact in terms of
expressing emotions and regulating interactions between people. For example, when
professor is giving a lecture, you read a magazine instead of looking at him/her and
giving your full attention, this would indicate to the professor that you are
disinterested in his/her lecture.
 Gesture and movement: Gesture and movement is known as “kinesics”. It focuses
on the movements of hands and arms, postures and gross bodily movement such as
standing, walking and sitting. Messages generated by this type of nonverbal
communication have often been referred to as “body language”. Although the body
certainly is sending messages, such messages do not form a linguistic system, with
the exception of the gesturale language of the deaf, and thus “do not represent a
language in any normal sense of that term” (Richmond et al. 1991).
 Vocal behavior: Vocal behavior has been variously known as “vocalics” or
“paralanguage”. Characteristics of the voice anddand its use, including the accent
with which we speackspeak a language, have a major impact on how verbal
messages are received. Some researchers argue that more of the meaning in
interpersonal communication is stimulated by vocalic messages than the verbal
messages themselves.
 Touch: Touch is known as “haptics” and has been called the most potent message in
human communication. Although this may not be universally true, it seems to be
very true in the general U.S. culture where touch is so uncommon. Touch does
indeed send a potent message, one that rarely can be ignored.

Object language/
Artifacts
Environmental
language
- Vocal characteristics
+ Pitch
+ Volume
+ Rate
+ Vocal quality
- Types of vocal flow
- Vocal interference
- Silence...
- Eye contact
- Facial expressions
- Physical characteristics
- Gestures
- Postures
- Body movement
- Touch/Haptics/
Tactile...
- Clothing
- Jewellery
- Accessories
- Make-up
- Artificial scents
- Gift
- Flower...
...
- Setting
- Conversational