A SOCIOLINGUISTIC INVESTIGATION ON (IM)POLITE EMAIL REQUESTS OF TURKISH EFL STUDENTS

Öz

This paper explores gender-based differences in the requests made by 20 Turkish EFL preparation class students (10 males, 10 females) in a state university in İstanbul, Turkey, to their instructor, based on the politeness theory. The data involved the emails sent by the students making a request on several topics to their instructor and were analysed according to the coding scheme of Holtgraves and Yang (1992) including three factors affecting politeness: formality of address phrase, degree of imposition and directness. The analysis of qualitative and quantitative data showed that there are certain differences among these three factors regarding two genders. The evaluation of the data indicated that the females used more formal address phrases than their male counterparts. Both genders employed indirect requests more than direct ones, but the female participants used slightly more indirect requests. The females were more careful about thanking and closing their emails which increased both the imposition and politeness level of the females’ requests. The results concorded with the results of the previous studies and so it replicated and justified similar research.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• sociolinguistics,requests,English as a foreign language(EFL)

İngilizce'yi yabancı dil olarak öğrenen Türk öğrencilerin kibar/kaba ricalarını içeren e-postalar üzerine toplumdilbilimsel bir araştırma

Öz

Bu araştırma, Türkiye, İstanbul’da bir devlet üniversitesinin hazırlık sınıfına devam eden (10 kız, 10 erkek) 20 adet Türk, İngilizce hazırlık öğrencisinin okutmanlarına gönderdikleri ricaların “kibarlık kuramı” ışığında cinsiyete bağlı farklılıklarını incelemeği hedefler. Araştırmanın verilerini, öğrencilerin çeşitli konularda bir ricada bulunmak üzere ders okutmanlarına gönderdikleri e-postaları içermektedir ve bu veriler, kibarlığı etkileyen üç faktörü: resmi hitap, yükümlülük dereceleri ve açıklık-dürüstlük cümleciklerini kapsayan,  Holtgraves ve  Yang’in  (1992) kodlama planına göre çözümlenmiştir. Nicel ve nitel verilerin çözümlemeleri,  bu üç faktör, iki cinsiyete göre farklılıklar göstermiştir.  Verilerin değerlendirilmesi sonucunda, kızların erkek katılımcılara göre daha resmi hitap biçimlerini kullandıkları görülmüştür. İki cinsin de dolaysız ricalar yerine dolaylı ricalar kullandığı; fakat kızların biraz daha fazla dolaylı ricalar kullandığı görülmüştür. Kızlar, yükümlülük ve kibarlık seviyelerini artıran teşekkür etme konusunda ve epostalarını bitirme konusunda daha dikkatli davranmışlardır. Araştırmanın sonuçlarının, daha önce yapılmış olan benzer araştırmaların sonuçlarıyla uyumlu olduğu, böylece daha önce aynı konuda yapılmış araştırmaların sonuçlarını tekrarladığı ve doğruladığı görülmüştür.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Anahtar sözcükler: Toplumdilbilim,ricalar

Kaynakça

1. REFERENCES Aitchison, J. (1999). Linguistics. London: Book point Ltd.
2. Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G. (1989). Investigating cross-cultural pragmatics: An introductory overview. In S. Blum-Kulka, J. House, & G. Kasper (Eds.), Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies (pp. 1-34). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.
3. Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4. Christie, C. (2006). ) Gender and Politeness. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(4), 638-642.
5. Coates, J. (1993). Women, men, and language: A sociolinguistic account of gender differences in language. Harlow, Essex: Pearson.
6. Elmianvari, A. & Kheirabadi, R. (2013). The Study of EFL Students‟ Requests Based on Politeness Theory. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 4(2), 375-385.
7. Gibson, E. (2009). A study of gender, questions and the fast-food industry. Griffith Working Papers in Pragmatics and Intercultural Communication 2(1), 1-17.
8. Hameed, W. Q. (2010). The Impact of Gender in Determining Politeness Strategy with Reference to Iraqi Students of English. Journal of the College of Arts, 54(2) (A Special Issue on The Second Scientific Conference of The College of Arts /2010 ).

9. Holtgraves, T., & Yang, J. (1992). Interpersonal underpinnings of request strategies: General principles and differences due to culture and gender. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62 (2), 246-256.
10. House, J. & Kasper, G. (1989). Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Norwood, N. J.: Ablex, 123-154.
11. Ishikawa, Y. (2013). Gender Differences in Request - A Statistical Analysis of American English in the NICT JLE Corpus. International Journal of Humanities and Management Sciences (IJHMS), 1(1), 57-62.
12. Khalib, F.M. & Tayeh, A. (2014). Indirectness in English requests among Malay university students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 134, 44 – 52.
13. Lakoff, R. (1975). Language and Woman's Place. New York: Harper & Row. Lee, Y. (2011). Comparison of Politeness and Acceptability Perceptions of Request Strategies between Chinese Learners of English and Native English Speakers. Asian Social Science, 7(8), 21-34.
14. Liama, C. & Stockwell, P. (2002). Sociolinguistics. In Schmitt (Ed.). An Introduction to Applied Linguistics. London: Arnold; 150-169.
15. Macualay, M. (2001). Tough talk: Indirectness and gender in requests for information. Journal of Pragmatics, 33, 293-316.
16. Mckelvie, B. (2000). The effect of hyper femininity on communication patterns in dating couples. Dissertation Abstract International, 60, 63-75.
17. Mohammadi, M. & Tamimi, S. H. (2014). Native speakers' assessment of (im)politeness of non-native speakers' requests. International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, 3(4), 23-40.
18. Mulac, A., Bradac, J., & Gibbons, P. (2001). Empirical support for the gender-as-culture hypothesis. An intercultural analysis of male/female language differences. Human Communication Research, 27(1), 121–152.
19. Norris, J. M. (2001). Use of address terms on the German Speaking Test. In K. R. Rose, & G. Kasper, Pragmatics in Language Teaching (pp. 248-282). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20. Parviz, M. (2012). Politeness Accommodation in E-Mail Requests among Iranian Postgraduate Students of EFL. International Journal of Applied Lingistics & English Literature, 1(7), 127-136.
21. Rahmani, E, Rahmany, R., & Sadeghi, B. (2014). Politeness strategies and politeness markers in email request sent by Iranıan EFL learners to professors. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 5(1), 183-197.
22. Reiter, R. M. (2000). Linguistic politeness in Britain and Uruguay: contrastive study of requests and apologies. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
23. Searle, J. R. (1975). Indirect speech acts. In: Cole, P., Morgan, J. (Eds.), Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts. Academic, New York, 59-82.
24. Searle, J. (1979). Expression and meaning: studies in the theory of speech acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25. Sifianou, M. (1999). Politeness phenomena in England and Greece. A cross-cultural perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
26. Spolsky, B. (1998). Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Trosborg, A. (1995). Interlanguage Pragmatics: Requests, Complaints, and Apologies. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
27. Trudgill, P. (1974). Sociolinguistics: An Introduction. Harmon's Worth: Penguin Books Ltd. Tseng, C. H. (2015). “You Must Let Me Pass, Please!”: An Investigation of Email Request Strategies by Taiwanese EFL Learners. Journal of ELT and Applied Linguistics (JELTAL), 3(1), 11-28.
28. Uso-Juan, E. (2010). Requests: A sociopragmatic approach. In A. Martínez-Flor and E. Usó- Juan (eds.) In Speech Act Performance: Theoretical, Empirical and Methodological Issues. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 237-256.
29. Uzun, L. (2013). Requesting preferences of Turkish EFL learners: Age, gender, and proficiency level. The Journal of Academic Social Science Studies, 6(8), 737-754.
30. Verschueren, J. (2003). Understanding pragmatics. London: Arnold.