eLibrary
  • Home
  • Sources
  • Search
  • About

Strategic Deception in Interlanguage Pragmatics: A Comparative Study on Chinese EFL Learners and Native Speakers of American English

Xuechun Zhao
Scientific Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, (2024), Vol.6, No.11, pp.139-155
Published: November 12, 2024
DOI: 10.54691/dsftzj84
PDF: Download Full Text PDF
Abstract

The speech act of strategic deception permeates every aspect of life. It not only involves false statements at the verbal level but may also be accompanied by deceptive nonverbal acts, such as facial expressions and body movements. This study employs a questionnaire survey, particularly the Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), to collect and analyze samples from Chinese EFL learners and native speakers of American English in America (NSEs). Among them, the samples from NSEs served as a control group. The aim is to uncover Chinese EFL learners’ pragmatic characteristics and strategies in the speech act of strategic deception. The research questions focus on (1) Compared to NSEs, which strategies of the speech act of strategic deception do Chinese EFL learners tend to use more frequently? (2) Compared to NSEs, what speech act expression characteristics do Chinese EFL learners prefer to use? (3) What are the similarities and differences between Chinese EFL learners and NSEs in terms of pragmatic expressions? The findings indicate that Chinese EFL learners tend to adopt a relatively passive and defensive attitude in the speech act of strategic deception to maintain their face and control the communicative situation. They are also adept at using modals, interrogative sentences, and other expressions to mitigate the directness and offensiveness of speech acts, thereby maintaining the harmony of interpersonal relationships. In addition, compared to NSEs, Chinese EFL learners have some native language expressions that are rarely or never used and need to be further improved. This study provides valuable empirical evidence for the practical performance of Chinese EFL learners, contributing significantly to the in-depth development of cross-cultural communication research.

Keywords: Chinese EFL Learners; Native Speakers of American English in America(NSEs); The Speech Act of Strategic Deception; Interlanguage Pragmatics.
APA Citation: Xuechun Zhao (2024). Strategic Deception in Interlanguage Pragmatics: A Comparative Study on Chinese EFL Learners and Native Speakers of American English. Scientific Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 6(11), 139-155. https://doi.org/10.54691/dsftzj84

References

  1. Lin M F. An interlanguage pragmatic study on Chinese EFL learners' refusal: Perception and performance[J]. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 2014, 5(3): 642.
  2. Xue K. Value Judgments in Chinese Euphemism[J]. Contemporary and Ancient Literary Creation, 2021, (28):109-110.
  3. Xinxin G. A Superficial Analysis of Chinese Euphemism[J]. Sinogram Culture, 2023, (08):11-13.
  4. Yao W. The Expressive Effects of Vague Language in Chinese[J]. Journal of Shanxi Youth Vocational College,2018,31(04):89-92.
  5. Wugu W. A Brief Analysis of the Euphemistic Function of Vague Language[J]. Journal of Hunan Industry Polytechnic, 2012,12(02):85-86.
  6. Yueguo G. Politeness, Pragmatics and Culture[J]. Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 1992, (04):10-17+80.
  7. Lee M Y P. Discourse structure and rhetoric of English narratives: Differences between native English and Chinese non-native English writers[J]. Text & Talk, 2003, 23(3): 347-368.
  8. Geng Y, Wharton S. Evaluative language in discussion sections of doctoral theses: Similarities and differences between L1 Chinese and L1 English writers[J]. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2016, 22: 80-91.
  9. Xu X, Nesi H. Differences in engagement: A comparison of the strategies used by British and Chinese research article writers[J]. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2019, 38: 121-134.
  10. Bataineh R F, Bataineh R F. Apology strategies of Jordanian EFL university students[J]. Journal of pragmatics, 2006, 38(11): 1901-1927.
  11. Al-Zumor A W Q G. Apologies in Arabic and English: An inter-language and cross-cultural study[J]. Journal of King Saud University-Languages and Translation, 2011, 23(1): 19-28.
  12. Chang Y F. Refusing in a foreign language: An investigation of problems encountered by Chinese learners of English[J]. 2011.
  13. Jiang L. An Empirical Study on Pragmatic Transfer in Refusal Speech Act Produced by Chinese High School EFL Learners[J]. English Language Teaching, 2015, 8(7): 95-113.
  14. Su I R. Bi-directional transfer in Chinese EFL learners’ apologizing behavior[J]. Concentric: Studies in Linguistics, 2012, 38(2): 237-266.
  15. Ren J, Gao X. Negative pragmatic transfer in Chinese students' complimentary speech acts[J]. Psychological Reports, 2012, 110(1): 149-165.
  16. Aijuan L. On Pragmatic “Borrowing Transfer”: Evidence from Chinese EFL Learner's Compliment Response Behavior[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics (Foreign Language Teaching & Research Press), 2010, 33(4).
  17. Cao M. Backward Pragmatic Transfer: An Empirical Study on Compliment Responses among Chinese EFL Learners[J]. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2016, 6(9): 1846.
  18. Yuan Z, Zhang R. Investigating longitudinal pragmatic development of complaints made by Chinese EFL learners[J]. Applied Linguistics Review, 2018, 9(1): 63-87.
  19. Bu J. A Study of Pragmatic Transfer in Criticism Strategies by Chinese EFL Learners[J]. Athens Journal of Philology, 2022, 9: 275-294.
  20. Krashen S. Principles and practice in second language acquisition[J]. 1982.
  21. Zhaoxiong H. A New Introduction to Pragmatics[M]. Shanghai Educational Publishing House, 2000.
  22. Searle J R. Speech Acts[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969.
  23. Searle J R. Indirect speech acts[M]. Speech Acts. Brill, 1975: 59-82.
  24. Hussein A A. The sociolinguistic patterns of native Arabic speakers: Implications for teaching Arabic as a foreign language[J]. Applied language learning, 1995, 6(1-2): 65-87.
  25. Goffman E. The presentation of self in everyday life[M]. Social theory re-wired. Routledge, 2023: 450-459.
  26. Wolk R L, Henley A. The Right to Lie[J]. New York: Peter H. Wyden. 1970.
  27. Miller G R. Telling it like it isn’t and not telling it like it is: Some thoughts on deceptive communication[J]. The Jensen lectures: Contemporary communication studies, 1983: 91-116.
  28. Ekman P. Mistakes when deceiving[J]. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1981, 364(1): 269-278.
  29. Burgoon J K, Buller D B. Interpersonal deception: III. Effects of deceit on perceived communication and nonverbal behavior dynamics[J]. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 1994, 18: 155-184.
  30. Galasinski D. The language of deception: A discourse analytical study[M]. Sage Publications, 2000.
  31. Buller D B, Burgoon J K. Deception: Strategic and nonstrategic communication[M]. Strategic interpersonal communication. Routledge, 2013: 191-223.
  32. Oswald S, Saussure L, Maillat D. Deceptive and uncooperative verbal communication[J]. Verbal communication (Handbooks of communicative science 3), 2016: 509-534.
  33. Samoilenko S A. Strategic deception in the age of truthiness[J]. Deception and deceptive communication: Motivations, recognition techniques and behavioral control, 2017: 129-168.
  34. Anolli L, Balconi M, Ciceri R. Deceptive miscommunication theory (DeMiT): A new model for the analysis of deceptive communication[J]. Emerging communication, 2002, 3: 73-100.
  35. Pérez-Rosas V, Mihalcea R. Cross-cultural deception detection[C]. Proceedings of the 52nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 2: Short Papers). 2014: 440-445.
  36. Ekman P, Friesen W V, Scherer K R. Body movement and voice pitch in deceptive interaction[J]. 1976.
  37. Ebesu A S, Miller M D. Verbal and nonverbal behaviors as a function of deception type[J]. Journal of language and social psychology, 1994, 13(4): 418-442.
  38. Zuckerman M, Driver R E. Telling Lies: Verbal and nonverbal correlates of deception[M]. Multichannel integrations of nonverbal behavior. Psychology Press, 2014: 129-147.
  39. Xu Z, Tian X. Detection of Deceptive Speech Acts in Chinese Courtroom Trials[J]. International Journal of English Linguistics, 2018, 8(6): 22-36.
  40. Markowitz D M, Hancock J T. Deception and language: The contextual organization of language and deception (COLD) framework[J]. The Palgrave handbook of deceptive communication, 2019: 193-212.
  41. Al-juboori A, Mustafa S S. Deception Strategies in the Discourse of American Think Tanks: An Argumentative-Pragmatic Analysis[J]. Arab World English Journal, 2022, 13(2): 123-139.
  42. Al-Hindawi F, Al-Aadili N. The pragmatics of deception in American presidential electoral speeches[J]. International Journal of English Linguistics, 2017, 7(5): 207-219.
  43. Krahnke K, Wanasika I. Minimizing strategic deception through individual values[J]. Journal of Academic and Business Ethics, 2011, 4: 1.
  44. Kozmenkova S V, Radbyl T B, Tsyganov V I, et al. Analysis of Deceptive Communication Speech Acts in Linguistic Examination[C]. The Impact of Information on Modern Humans. Springer International Publishing, 2018: 462-468.
  45. BatAnolli L, Ciceri R. The voice of deception: Vocal strategies of naive and able liars[J]. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 1997, 21: 259-284.
  46. Hauch V, Blandón-Gitlin I, Masip J, et al. Are computers effective lie detectors? A meta-analysis of linguistic cues to deception[J]. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2015, 19(4): 307-342.
  47. Ansari S, Gupta S. Customer perception of the deceptiveness of online product reviews: A speech act theory perspective[J]. International Journal of Information Management, 2021, 57: 102286.
  48. Eslami Z.R., & Eslami-Rasekh A. An Empirical Study of NNESTs’Pragmatic Competence Enhancement in an EFL Setting[J]. Investigating Pragmatics in Foreign Language Learning, Teaching and Testing 2008,178-196.
  49. Schauer G.A. Interlanguage Pragmatic Development: The study abroad context[M]. London: Continuum.2009.
  50. Matsuda M. Interlanguage pragmatics: What can it offer to language teachers[J]. The CATESOL Journal, 1999, 11(1): 39-59.
  51. Norouzian R, Eslami Z. Critical perspectives on interlanguage pragmatic development: An agenda for research[J]. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 2016, 20.
  52. Xiaoli L. Research on the Connotation of Pragmatic Competence from the Perspective of Interlanguage Pragmatics[J]. Hundred Schools of Essay Writing, 2021, (12):88-90.
  53. Tanaka K. Developing Pragmatic Competence: A Learners-as-researchers Approach[J]. TESOL Journal, 1997,6(3),14-18.
  54. Thomas J. Cross-cultural pragmatic failure[J]. Applied linguistics, 1983, 4(2): 91-112.
  55. Peter M. Cross-cultural pragmatic failure[J]. Training, Language and Culture, 2019, 3(1): 73-84.
  56. Riley P. Understanding Misunderstandings: cross‐cultural pragmatic failure in the language classroom[J]. European Journal of Teacher Education, 1984, 7(2): 127-144.
  57. Luo X, Gao J. On pragmatic failures in second language learning[J]. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2011, 1(3): 283-286.
  58. Billmyer K, Varghese M. Investigating instrument-based pragmatic variability: Effects of enhancing discourse completion tests[J]. Applied linguistics, 2000, 21(4): 517-552.
  59. Ogiermann E. Discourse completion tasks[J]. Methods in pragmatics, 2018, 10: 229-255.
  60. Triandis H C. New directions in social psychology: Individualism and collectivism[J]. 1995.
  61. Goffman E. Interaction ritual: Essays on face behavior[J]. Pantheon Books, 1967.
  62. Brown P, Levinson S C. Politeness: Some universals in language usage[M]. Cambridge University Press, 1987.
  63. Potter J, Edwards D. Nigel Lawson's tent: Discourse analysis, attribution theory and the social psychology of fact[J]. European journal of social psychology, 1990, 20(5): 405-424.
  64. Metsä-Ketelä M. Pragmatic vagueness: Exploring general extenders in English as a lingua franca[J]. Intercultural Pragmatics, 2016, 13(3): 325-351.
  65. Kupfer J. Pragmatic Contradiction as Irrational Speech[J]. The Monist, 1987, 70(2): 237-248.
  66. Adams G R, Marshall S K. A developmental social psychology of identity: Understanding the person‐in‐context[J]. Journal of Adolescence, 1996, 19(5): 429-442.
  67. Bosma H A, Kunnen E S. Identity-in-context is not yet identity development-in-context[J]. Journal of Adolescence, 2008, 31(2): 281-289.
  68. Blum-Kulka S, House J, Kasper G. Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Norwood[J]. NJ: Ablex, 1989.
  69. Takahashi T. Cross-linguistic influence in the speech act of correction[J]. 1993.
© 2026 eLibrary · Stand on the shoulders of giants