Cover not available
Article published In:
Australian Review of Applied Linguistics
Vol. 42:1 (2019) ► pp.59–83

Direct disagreement in Vietnamese students’ EFL group work discussion

| University of Languages and International Studies, Vietnam National University (ULIS-VNU)
| University of Queensland

Disagreement has been traditionally viewed as a dispreferred response, which speakers tend to avoid or mitigate due to its presumed face threatening effects. However, more recent studies argue that disagreement is not inherently dispreferred or marked, but needs to be contextualized. This article examines the interactions of Vietnamese EFL students in the context of a collaborative task in English. Somewhat surprisingly, given the common portrayal of the Vietnamese as favoring indirect communication, it finds a high incidence of direct disagreement, characterized by the use of ‘no’. The study explores how direct ‘no’ is used in disagreement and the impact it has on the sequence of the interaction as well as the harmony of the group. In the majority of cases, and in contrast with the stated beliefs of the participants regarding disagreement, almost none of the direct uses of ‘no’ have negative consequences on the interaction. The analysis of instances of ‘no’ that impact negatively on the interaction suggests contextually interactional rules underlying its appropriate use. Group work in EFL among Vietnamese students, therefore, is another context in which disagreement is expected and does not necessarily detract from the harmony of the group.

Keywords: disagreement, directness/indirectness, Vietnamese, culture, group communication
Article outline
  • 1.Background: Indirect communication and Vietnamese culture
  • 2.Methodology and data
  • 3.Data analysis
  • 4.‘No’ without observable negative interactional consequences
    • 4.1Constructive disagreement starting with ‘no’
    • 4.2Repeated and hasty ‘no’
    • 4.3‘No’ without follow-up or observable consequences
    • 4.4‘No’ with observable negative interactional consequences
  • 5.Discussion
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
Published online: 4 July 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.17032.hoa
References
Angouri, J.
(2012) Managing disagreement in problem solving meeting talk. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(12), 1565–1579. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ashwill, M., & Thai, N. D.
(2011) Vietnam today: A guide to a nation at a crossroads. Yamouth, ME: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.Google Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Salsbury, T.
(2004) The organization of turns in the disagreements of L2 learners: A longitudinal perspective. In D. Boxer & A. D. Cohen (Eds.), Studying speaking to inform second language learning (pp. 199–227). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Beebe, L. M., & Takahashi, T.
(1989) Sociolinguistic variation in face-threatening speech acts. In M. R. Einsentein (Ed.), The dynamic interlanguage: Empirical studies in second language variation (pp. 199–218). New York: Springer US. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C.
(1987) Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davidson, J.
(1984) Subsequent versions of invitations, offers, requests, and proposals dealing with potential or actual rejection. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 57–101). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Georgakopoulou, A.
(2001) Arguing about the future: On indirect disagreements in conversations. Journal of Pragmatics, 33(12), 1881–1900. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012) ‘A simple disagreement? A row? Or a massive fall out?’: On the challenges of an analytical task. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(12), 1623–1625. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gesteland, R. R.
(2005) Cross-cultural business behavior: Negotiating, selling, sourcing and managing across cultures. Liber: Copenhagen Business School Press.Google Scholar
Gudykunst, W. B., Matsumoto, Y., Ting-Toomey, S., Nishida, T., Kim, K., & Heyman, S. A. M.
(1996) The influence of cultural individualism-collectivism, self construals, and individual values on communication styles across cultures. Human Communication Research, 22(4), 510–543. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gudykunst, W. B., Ting-Toomey, S., & Chua, E.
(1988) Culture and interpersonal communication. Newbury Park, CA.: Sage.Google Scholar
Hall, E. T.
(1977) Beyond culture. New York: Anchor Press.Google Scholar
Hayashi, T.
(1996) Politeness in conflict management: A conversation analysis of dispreferred message from a cognitive perspective. Journal of Pragmatics, 25(2), 227–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M.
(2010) Cultures and organisations: Software of the mind: Intercultural cooperation and its importance for survival (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Holtgraves, T.
(1997) Styles of language use: Individual and cultural variability in conversational indirectness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(3), 624–637. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, G.
(2002) Is “no” an acknowledgment token? Comparing American and British uses of (+)/(−) tokens. Journal of Pragmatics, 34(10–11), 1345–1383. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2004) Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In G. H. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp. 13–31). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kagan, S. L., & Garcia, E. E.
(1991) Educating culturally and linguistically diverse preschoolers: Moving the agenda. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 6(3), 427–443. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kakava, C.
(2002) Opposition in Modern Greek discourse: Cultural and contextual constraints. Journal of Pragmatics, 34(10–11), 1537–1568. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Khan, Y.
(2010) Tips on doing business in Japan. Global Business Languages, 2(1), 185–196.Google Scholar
Kieu, T. T. H.
(2006) Disagreeing in English and Vietnamese: A pragmatics and conversation analysis perspective (Doctoral dissertation). Viet Nam National University, Hanoi.Google Scholar
Kim, D., Pan, Y., & Park, H. S.
(1998) High- versus low-context culture: A comparison of Chinese, Korean, and American cultures. Psychology & Marketing, 15(6), 507–521. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kreutel, K.
(2007) “ I’m not agree with you.” ESL learners’ expressions of disagreement. TESL-EJ, 11(3).Google Scholar
Leech, G. N.
(1983) Principles of pragmatics. London and New York: Longman.Google Scholar
LoCastro, V.
(1986, November). Yes, I agree with you, but…: Agreement and disagreement in Japanese and American English. Paper presented at the Japan Association of Language Teachers’ International Conference on Language Teaching and Learning, Seiri Gakuen, Hamamatsu, Japan.
Locher, M. A.
(2004) Power and politeness in action: Disagreements in oral communication (Vol. 121). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nguyen, P. M.
(2008) Culture and cooperation: Cooperative learning in Asian Confucian heritage cultures – The case of Viet Nam (Doctoral dissertation). Utrecht University, Netherlands.Google Scholar
Nguyen, T. T. M.
(2008) Criticizing in an L2: Pragmatic strategies used by Vietnamese EFL learners. Intercultural Pragmatics, 5(1), 41–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nguyen, T. T. M., & Ho, G. A. L.
(2013) Requests and politeness in Vietnamese as a native language. Pragmatics, 23 (4), 685–714. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Okabe, R.
(1983) Cultural assumptions of East and West: Japan and the United States. In W. B. Gudykunst (Ed.), Intercultural communication theory (pp. 10–33). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Pomerantz, A.
(1984) Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social actions: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 57–101). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A.
(2007) Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis (Vol. 11): Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schiffrin, D.
(1984) Jewish argument as sociability. Language in Society, 13(03), 311–335. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tannen, D., & Kakava, C.
(1992) Power and solidarity in Modern Greek conversation: Disagreeing to agree. Journal of Modern Greek Studies, 10(1), 11–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ting-Toomey, S.
(1999) Communicating across cultures. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Tran, N. T.
(1999) Cơ sở văn hóa Việt Nam. Hô Chí Minh city: Nhà xuât bån Giáo dục.Google Scholar
Truong, A. T., & Storch, N.
(2007) Investigating group planning in preparation for oral presentations in an EFL class in Vietnam. RELC Journal: A Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 38(1), 104–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vu, T. T. H.
(1997) Politeness in modern Vietnamese. A sociolinguistic study of a Hanoi speech community. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from [URL]
Yaeger-Dror, M.
(2002) Editorial introduction to special issue on negation and disagreement. Journal of Pragmatics 341, 1333–1343. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yew, E. H. J., & Schmidt, H. G.
(2007, December). Process study of verbal interactions in problem based learning. Paper presented at the Ascilite Singapore 2007, Singapore.
Yum, J. O.
(1988) The impact of Confucianism on interpersonal relationships and communication patterns in East Asia. Communication Monographs, 55(4), 374–388. DOI logoGoogle Scholar