How Do the Vietnamese Lose Face? Understanding the Concept of Face through Self-Reported, Face Loss Incidents

Pham Thi Hong Nhung

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ijll.20140203.21

| Peer-Reviewed

How Do the Vietnamese Lose Face? Understanding the Concept of Face through Self-Reported, Face Loss Incidents

Pham Thi Hong Nhung

Published in International Journal of Language and Linguistics (Volume 2, Issue 3)

Received: 28 April 2014 Accepted: 17 May 2014 Published: 30 May 2014

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

In Western universal theory, face has been considered as an individual possession, a fundamental motivation for politeness and driven by the concern for autonomy as well as the desire to be free from imposition. However, research on face and politeness in a number of East Asian countries has provided evidence that such a way of conceptualizing face may not be valid to these cultures and languages. Given the scarcity of research on the concept of face in Vietnamese, this paper explores face in Vietnamese by means of self-reported incidents where a sense of face loss (mất mặt or mất thể diện) was felt. Scenarios reconstructed from collected authentic incidents were used to examine whether different participants responded in the same way to situations perceived as potentially causing loss of face. The findings have confirmed that face in Vietnamese is both an individual and collective possession and a subjective value, conditionally dependent on social evaluation.

Published in	International Journal of Language and Linguistics (Volume 2, Issue 3)
DOI	10.11648/j.ijll.20140203.21
Page(s)	223-231
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2014. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Face, Vietnamese, Politeness, Face Loss

References

[1]	André, J. St. “How the Chinese lose “face”,” Journal of Pragmatics, 55, pp. 68-85, 2013.
[2]	Bergman, M. L. and Kasper, G. “Perception and performance in native and nonna-tive apology,” in Interlanguage pragmatics, G.Kasper and S. Blum-Kulka, Eds. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993, pp. 82-107.
[3]	Brown, P. and Levinson, S. “Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena” in Questions and Politeness, E. N. Goody, Ed. Cambridge: Cam-bridge University Press, 1978, pp. 57-324.
[4]	Brown, P. and Levinson, S. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987.
[5]	Cheng, C. Y. “The concept of face and its Confucian roots,” Journal of Chinese Philosophy, 13, pp. 329-348, 1986.
[6]	Chen, R. “Responding to compliments. A contrastive study of politeness strategies between American English and Chinese speakers,” Journal of Pragmatics, 20, pp. 49-75, 1993.
[7]	Ervin-Trip, S. Nakamura, K. and Jiansheng, G. “Shifting face from Asian to Europe,” in Essays in semantics and pragmatics, M. Shitabai and S. Thompson, Eds. Amsterdam: John Ben-jamins, 1995, pp. 43-71.
[8]	Fillmore, C. and Atkins, B. “Towards a frame-based organization of the lexicon: The semantics of RISK and its neighbours,” in Frames, fields, and contrasts: New essays in semantics and lexical organization, A. Lehrer and E. Kittay, Eds. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erl-baum, 1992, pp. 75-102.
[9]	Gao, G. “Don’t take my word for it. Understanding Chinese speaking practices,” International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 22, pp. 163-186, 1998a.
[10]	Gao, G. “An initial analysis of the effects of face and concern for “other” in Chi-nese interpersonal communication,” International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 22, pp. 467-482, 1998b.
[11]	Goffman, E. Interaction Ritual: Essays in Face-To-Face Behavior. New York: Pantheon Books, 1967.
[12]	Graham, M. and David, C. “Power and politeness: Adminis-trative writing in an “organized anarchy”,” Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 10, pp. 5-27, 1996.
[13]	Gu, Y. “Politeness and Chinese face,” Lecture given in the Department of Linguistics. University of Luton, summer 1998.
[14]	Hagge, J. and Kostelnick, C. “Linguistic politeness in professional prose: A discourse analysis of auditors’ suggestion letters, with implica-tions for business communication pedagogy,” in Written Communication, 6, pp. 312-339, 1989.
[15]	Harris, S. “Politeness and power: Making and responding to requests in institution-al settings,” in Text, 23, pp.27-52, 2003.
[16]	Haugh, M. and Hinze, C. “A metalinguistic ap-proach to deconstructing the concept of face and politeness in Chinese, English and Japanese,” Journal of Pragmatics, 35, pp 1581-1611, 2003.
[17]	Henderson, A. “Compliments, compli-ment responses, and politeness in African-American community,” in Sociolinguistic variation: Data, theory and analysis. Selected papers from NWAV at Stanford CA, J. Arnold, R. Blake, S. Schwenter and J. Solomon, Eds. California: Center for Language and Information Stanford, 1996, pp. 195-208.
[18]	Herbert, R. K. “The ethnography of English compliments and compliment responses: A contrastive sketch,” in Contrastive pragmatics, W. Oleksy, Ed. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 1989, pp. 3-35.
[19]	Hotgraves, T. “Yes but…Positive politeness in conversation arguments,” Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 16, pp. 222-239, 1997.
[20]	Holtgraves, T. and Yang, J. “Interpersonal underpinnings of request strategies: General principles and differences due to culture and gender,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, pp. 246-256, 1992.
[21]	Hu, H. C. “The Chinese concept of face,” American Anthropologist, 46, pp.45-64, 1944.
[22]	Hummer, M. and Mazloff, D. C. “Older adults’ responses to patronizing advice: Balancing politeness and identity in context,” Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 20, pp. 168-196, 2001.
[23]	Ide, S. “Formal forms and discernment: Two neglected aspects of universals of linguistic politeness,” in Multilingua, 8, pp. 223-257, 1989.
[24]	Kádár, D. Z. and Pan, Y. “Chinese “face” and im/politeness: an introduction,” Journal of Politeness Research, 8, pp. 1-10, 2012.
[25]	Kasper, G. “Linguistic politeness: Current research issues,” Journal of Pragmatics, 14, pp.193-218, 1990.
[26]	Mao, L. R. “Beyond politeness theory: Face revisited and reviewed,” Journal of Pragmatics, 21, pp. 451-486, 1994.
[27]	Matsumoto, Y. “Reexamination of the universality of face: Politeness phenomena in Japanese,” Journal of Pragmatics, 12, pp. 404-426, 1988.
[28]	Matsumoto, Y. “Politeness and conversational universals – Observations from Japanese,” Multilingua, 8, pp. 207-221, 1989.
[29]	Morand, D. A. “Dominance, deference, and egalitarianism in organizational interaction: A sociolinguistic analysis of power and politeness,” Organization Science, 7, pp, 544-556, 1996.
[30]	Nelson, L. G., Al-Batal, M, and Echols, E. “Arabic and English compliments: A cross-cultural study,” Applied Linguistics, 17, pp. 409-432, 1996.
[31]	Nguyen, T. Q. T. “Thể diện: The Vietnamese concept of face – Perceptions of teacher from Nha Trang”. Unpublished PhD thesis. La Trobe University, Victoria, Australia, 2014.
[32]	Nwoye, O. “Linguistic politeness and socio-cultural variations of the notion of face,” Journal of Pragmatics, 18, pp. 309-328, 1992.
[33]	Orechioni, K. C. “A multilevel approach in the study of talk in interaction,” Pragmatics, 7, pp. 1-20, 1997.
[34]	Pham, T. H. N. “Vietnam-ese concept of face: evidence from its collocational abilities,” E-journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 4, pp. 257-266, 2007.
[35]	Pham, T. H. N. Communicating with Vietnamese in Inter-cultural Contexts: Insights into Vietnamese Values. Vietnam: Educational Publishing House, 2011.
[36]	Pham, T. H. N. “Strategies employed by the Vietnamese to respond to compliments and the influences of compliment receivers’ perception of the compliment on their responses,” International Journal of Linguistics, 6, pp. 142-156, 2014.
[37]	Pizziconi, B. “Re-examining po-liteness, face and the Japanese language,” Journal of Pragmatics, 35, pp. 1471-1506, 2003.
[38]	Rees-Miller, J. “Power, severity, and context in disagreement,” Journal of Pragmat-ics, 32, pp. 1087-1111, p. 2000.
[39]	Smith, P. B. and Bond, M. H. Social Psychology across Cultures: Analysis and perspectives. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1994.
[40]	Spence-Oatey, H. Cultural Speaking. Managing Rapport Talk through Talk across Cultures. London: Continuum, 2000.
[41]	Spencer-Oatey, H. “Managing rapport in talk: Using rapport sensitive incidents to explore the motivational concerns underlying the management of relations,” Journal of Pragmatics, 34, pp. 529-545, 2002.
[42]	Spiers, J. A. “The use of face work and politeness theory,” Quality Health Research, 8, pp. 25-47, 1998.
[43]	Suszczynska, M. “Apologizing in English, Polish and Hungarian: Different languages, different strategies,” Journal of Pragmatics, 31, pp. 1053-1065.
[44]	Takaku, S., Weiner, B., and Ohbuchi, K. “A cross-cultural examination of the effects of apology and perspective taking on forgiveness,” Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 20, pp. 144-166, 2001.
[45]	Vu, T. T. H. “The role of the concept of face in linguistic behavior research,” Vietnamese Journal of Linguistics, 1, pp.8-14, 2002.
[46]	Watts, R. J. Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
[47]	Watts, R. J., Ide, S., and Ehlich, K. Politeness in Language: Studies in its History, theory and practice, Eds. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyer.
[48]	Weizman, E. “Request hints” in Cross-cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies, J. House and G. Kasper, Eds. Norwood: Ablex Publishing Corporation, 1989, pp. 71-95.
[49]	Wolfson, N. “Compliment in cross-cultural perspective,” TESOL Quarterly, 15, pp.117-124, 1981.
[50]	Yeung, L. N. T. “Polite requests in English and Chinese business correspondence in Hong Kong,” Journal of Pragmatics, 27, pp. 505-522, 1997.
[51]	Yli-Jokippi, H. Requests in Professional Discourse: A Cross-cultural Study of British, American and Finnish Business Writing. Helsinki: Suomalailen Tiedeaktemia, 1994.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Pham Thi Hong Nhung. (2014). How Do the Vietnamese Lose Face? Understanding the Concept of Face through Self-Reported, Face Loss Incidents. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 2(3), 223-231. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20140203.21

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Pham Thi Hong Nhung. How Do the Vietnamese Lose Face? Understanding the Concept of Face through Self-Reported, Face Loss Incidents. Int. J. Lang. Linguist. 2014, 2(3), 223-231. doi: 10.11648/j.ijll.20140203.21

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Pham Thi Hong Nhung. How Do the Vietnamese Lose Face? Understanding the Concept of Face through Self-Reported, Face Loss Incidents. Int J Lang Linguist. 2014;2(3):223-231. doi: 10.11648/j.ijll.20140203.21

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijll.20140203.21,
  author = {Pham Thi Hong Nhung},
  title = {How Do the Vietnamese Lose Face? Understanding the Concept of Face through Self-Reported, Face Loss Incidents},
  journal = {International Journal of Language and Linguistics},
  volume = {2},
  number = {3},
  pages = {223-231},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijll.20140203.21},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20140203.21},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijll.20140203.21},
  abstract = {In Western universal theory, face has been considered as an individual possession, a fundamental motivation for politeness and driven by the concern for autonomy as well as the desire to be free from imposition. However, research on face and politeness in a number of East Asian countries has provided evidence that such a way of conceptualizing face may not be valid to these cultures and languages. Given the scarcity of research on the concept of face in Vietnamese, this paper explores face in Vietnamese by means of self-reported incidents where a sense of face loss (mất mặt or mất thể diện) was felt. Scenarios reconstructed from collected authentic incidents were used to examine whether different participants responded in the same way to situations perceived as potentially causing loss of face. The findings have confirmed that face in Vietnamese is both an individual and collective possession and a subjective value, conditionally dependent on social evaluation.},
 year = {2014}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - How Do the Vietnamese Lose Face? Understanding the Concept of Face through Self-Reported, Face Loss Incidents
AU  - Pham Thi Hong Nhung
Y1  - 2014/05/30
PY  - 2014
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20140203.21
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijll.20140203.21
T2  - International Journal of Language and Linguistics
JF  - International Journal of Language and Linguistics
JO  - International Journal of Language and Linguistics
SP  - 223
EP  - 231
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2330-0221
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20140203.21
AB  - In Western universal theory, face has been considered as an individual possession, a fundamental motivation for politeness and driven by the concern for autonomy as well as the desire to be free from imposition. However, research on face and politeness in a number of East Asian countries has provided evidence that such a way of conceptualizing face may not be valid to these cultures and languages. Given the scarcity of research on the concept of face in Vietnamese, this paper explores face in Vietnamese by means of self-reported incidents where a sense of face loss (mất mặt or mất thể diện) was felt. Scenarios reconstructed from collected authentic incidents were used to examine whether different participants responded in the same way to situations perceived as potentially causing loss of face. The findings have confirmed that face in Vietnamese is both an individual and collective possession and a subjective value, conditionally dependent on social evaluation.
VL  - 2
IS  - 3
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Pham Thi Hong Nhung

Hue University of Foreign Languages, Hue city, Vietnam

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Pham Thi Hong Nhung. (2014). How Do the Vietnamese Lose Face? Understanding the Concept of Face through Self-Reported, Face Loss Incidents. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 2(3), 223-231. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20140203.21

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Pham Thi Hong Nhung. How Do the Vietnamese Lose Face? Understanding the Concept of Face through Self-Reported, Face Loss Incidents. Int. J. Lang. Linguist. 2014, 2(3), 223-231. doi: 10.11648/j.ijll.20140203.21

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Pham Thi Hong Nhung. How Do the Vietnamese Lose Face? Understanding the Concept of Face through Self-Reported, Face Loss Incidents. Int J Lang Linguist. 2014;2(3):223-231. doi: 10.11648/j.ijll.20140203.21

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijll.20140203.21,
  author = {Pham Thi Hong Nhung},
  title = {How Do the Vietnamese Lose Face? Understanding the Concept of Face through Self-Reported, Face Loss Incidents},
  journal = {International Journal of Language and Linguistics},
  volume = {2},
  number = {3},
  pages = {223-231},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijll.20140203.21},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20140203.21},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijll.20140203.21},
  abstract = {In Western universal theory, face has been considered as an individual possession, a fundamental motivation for politeness and driven by the concern for autonomy as well as the desire to be free from imposition. However, research on face and politeness in a number of East Asian countries has provided evidence that such a way of conceptualizing face may not be valid to these cultures and languages. Given the scarcity of research on the concept of face in Vietnamese, this paper explores face in Vietnamese by means of self-reported incidents where a sense of face loss (mất mặt or mất thể diện) was felt. Scenarios reconstructed from collected authentic incidents were used to examine whether different participants responded in the same way to situations perceived as potentially causing loss of face. The findings have confirmed that face in Vietnamese is both an individual and collective possession and a subjective value, conditionally dependent on social evaluation.},
 year = {2014}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - How Do the Vietnamese Lose Face? Understanding the Concept of Face through Self-Reported, Face Loss Incidents
AU  - Pham Thi Hong Nhung
Y1  - 2014/05/30
PY  - 2014
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20140203.21
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijll.20140203.21
T2  - International Journal of Language and Linguistics
JF  - International Journal of Language and Linguistics
JO  - International Journal of Language and Linguistics
SP  - 223
EP  - 231
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2330-0221
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20140203.21
AB  - In Western universal theory, face has been considered as an individual possession, a fundamental motivation for politeness and driven by the concern for autonomy as well as the desire to be free from imposition. However, research on face and politeness in a number of East Asian countries has provided evidence that such a way of conceptualizing face may not be valid to these cultures and languages. Given the scarcity of research on the concept of face in Vietnamese, this paper explores face in Vietnamese by means of self-reported incidents where a sense of face loss (mất mặt or mất thể diện) was felt. Scenarios reconstructed from collected authentic incidents were used to examine whether different participants responded in the same way to situations perceived as potentially causing loss of face. The findings have confirmed that face in Vietnamese is both an individual and collective possession and a subjective value, conditionally dependent on social evaluation.
VL  - 2
IS  - 3
ER  -

Copy | Download