Cover not available
Article published In:
Australian Review of Applied Linguistics
Vol. 36:1 (2013) ► pp.71–101

Investigating apology response strategies in Australian English and Bahasa Indonesia

Gender and Cultural perspectives

| Faculty of Education, University of Jambi, Sumatra, Indonesia
| University of Canberra

Studies on apologies have proliferated in pragmatics research, but little research has been conducted on apology responses (ARs). The present inquiry contributes to filling the gap in the literature, and it does so by examining such responses in two languages, Australian English (AE) and Bahasa Indonesia (BI). The study ultimately focuses on two variables, gender and culture. It probes behavioural differences in the genders in and between the two societies, and considers cultural differences in the expression of ARs. Using oral discourse completion tasks (DCTs), the researchers recorded and analyzed a total of 360 responses to three apology situations. The findings reveal that ARs in both languages were complex and elaborate, embodying various subsidiary speech acts and expressions. The ARs generally showed indirectness and mitigated face threats towards interlocutors. However, one striking result is that there was no marked gender difference in AR strategy either within or between languages, thus challenging a stereotype that females are more accepting and ‘polite’ than males (Brown, 1980; Holmes, 1995, 2008). Another surprising result was that, in a significant minority of cases, Indonesians were revealed to be more direct and face-threatening than their Australian counterparts, again confronting a stereotype of speech behaviour, in this case that Asians are more indirect and ambiguous than native English-speakers in Western cultures

Keywords: speech acts, Pragmatics, culture, gender, apology responses, Indonesia, Australia
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 1 January 2013
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.36.1.04jon
References
Adrefiza
(1995) Explicit forgiveness and other responses to apology: A cross-cultural study in Australian English and Bahasa Indonesia. MA-TESOL Study Project Reports. University of Canberra. Australia.Google Scholar
Afghari, A.
(2007) A sociopragmatic study of apology speech act realization patterns in Persian. Speech Communication, 491, 177–185. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Agyekum, K.
(2006) Apology: A Repair Mechanism in Akan Social Interaction. South African Journal of African Languages, 26(2), 53–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aziz, E. A.
(2000) Indonesian speech act realization in face threatening situations. Monash University Linguistics Papers, 2(2), 15–41.Google Scholar
Bennett, M. & Earwaker, D.
(2001) Victims’ responses to apologies: The effects of offender responsibility and offense severity. The Journal of Social Psychology, 134(4), 457–464. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bergman, M.
(1989) Apologizing in Thai-English. Interlanguage: A Pragmatic Perspective. Manuscript of the University of Hawaii at Manoa, April, pp. 1–46.Google Scholar
Bing, J. & Bergvall, J.
(1996) The question of questions: Beyond binary thinking. In V. Bergvall, J. Bing & A. Freed, (Eds), Rethinking language and gender research: Theory and practice (pp. 1–30). London: Longman.Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, S. & Olshtain, E.
(1984) Requests and apologies; A cross-cultural study of speech act realization pattern (CCSARP). Journal of Applied Linguistics. 5(3), 196–212. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, P. & Levinson, S.C.
(1978) Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. In Goody, E. (Ed), Questions and politeness (pp. 56–311). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(1987) Politeness: Some universals in the language usage. Cambridge England: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, P.
(1980) How and why are women more polite: Some evidence from a Mayan community. In S. McConnell-Ginet et al., (Eds), Women and language in literature and society (pp. 111–136). New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Chen, R. & Yang, D.
(2010) Responding to compliments in Chinese: Has it changed? Journal of Pragmatics, 421, 1951–1963. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coates, J.
(2004) Women, men, and language. London: Pearson Education Limited.Google Scholar
Cohen, A. D. & Olshtain, E.
(1981) Developing a measure of sociocultural competence: The case of apology. Language Learning 31(1), 113–134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cordella-Masini, M. I.
(1989) Apologizing: A cross-cultural study in Chilean Spanish and Australian English. Unpublished MA Thesis. Canberra: TESOL Canberra College of Advanced Education.Google Scholar
Darine, C. & Hall, B.
(1998) Culture shock! Singapore: Times Books International.Google Scholar
Farghal, M. & Al-Khatib, M. A.
(2001) Jordanian college students’ responses to compliments: A pilot study. Journal of Pragmatics, 331, 1485–1502. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goffman, E.
(1971) Relations in public: Micro studies of the Public Order. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Golato, A.
(2003) Studying compliment responses: A comparison of DCTs and recordings of naturally occurring talk. Applied Linguistics, 24(1), 90–121. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grainger, K. & Harris, S.
(2007) Special issue: Apologies. Journal of Politeness Research, 31, 1–9. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hofstede, G.
(1980) Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
Holmes, J.
(1989) Sex differences and apologies: One aspect of communicative competence. Applied Linguistics, 10(2), 194–213. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1990) Apologies in New Zealand English. Language in Society, 191, 155–199. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1995) Women, men and politeness. London: Longman.Google Scholar
(2008) An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. London: LongmanGoogle Scholar
Johnson, S. & Meinhof, U.
(Eds) (1997) Language and masculinity. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kasper, G. & Rose, K.R.
(1999) Pragmatics and SLA. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 191, 81–104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, H.
(2008) The semantic and pragmatic analysis of South Korean and Australian English apologetic speech acts. Journal of Pragmatics, 401, 257–278. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kohler, M.
(2008) Refusals in English and Greek: Theoretical aspects and empirical study. ZfAL, 481, 75–104.Google Scholar
Lakoff, R.
(1975) Language and Woman’s Place. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Lakoff, R.T.
(2001) Nine Ways of Looking at Apologies: The Necessity for Interdisciplinary Theory and Method in Discourse Analysis, in Schiffin, D., Tannen, D, and Hamilton, H.E. (Eds). The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, (pp. 199–213). London: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lorenzo-Dus, N.
(2001) Compliment Responses among British and Spanish University Students: A Contrastive Study. Journal of Pragmatics, 331, 107–127. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martinez-Flor, A.
(2006) Task effect on EFL learners’ production of suggestions: A focus on elicited phone messages and emails. Miscelanea: A Journal of English and American Studies, 331, 47–64.Google Scholar
McCullough, M. E. et al.
(1998) Interpersonal forgiving in close relationships: II. Theoretical elaboration and measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 751, 1586–1603. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mills, S.
(2003) Gender and politeness. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Norrick, N. R.
(1978) Expressive illocutionary acts. Journal of Pragmatics, 21, 277–291. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nureddeen, F. A.
(2007) Cross-cultural pragmatics: Apology strategies in Sudanese Arabic. Journal of Pragmatics, 401, 279–306. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Olshtain, E.
(1989) Apologies across languages. In S. Blum-Kulka, J. House & G. Kasper, (Eds.), Cross-cultural pragmatics: Request and apologies (pp. 155–173). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Owen, M.
(1983) Apologies & remedial interchanges. Berlin: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paltridge, B.
(2004) Making sense of discourse analysis. Brisbane: Harding Colour.Google Scholar
Robinson, J. D.
(2004) The sequential organization of ‘explicit’ apologies in naturally occurring English. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 37(3), 291–330. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Romaine, S.
(1984) The language of children and adolescents. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Rusdi.
(2000) Information sequence structure in seminar discussions: A comparative study of Indonesian and Australian students in academic settings. Doctoral Thesis. Curtin University of Technology, Australia.Google Scholar
Sawir, E.
(2002) Communicating in English across Cultures: The Strategies, and Belief of Adult EFL Learners. PhD Thesis, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.Google Scholar
Shariati, M. & Chamani, F.
(2010) Apology Strategies in Persian. Journal of Pragmatics, 421, 1689–1699. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spencer-Oatey, H.
(2008) (Ed). Culturally speaking: culture, communication and politeness theory (2nd ed.). London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Tang, C.-H. & Zhang, G.Q.
(2008) A contrastive study of compliment responses among Australian English and Mandarin Chinese speakers. Journal of Pragmatics. Article in Press. A copy from: [URL].
Tannen, D.
(1990) You just don’t understand: Women and men in conversation. New York: Ballantine.Google Scholar
Tran, G. Q.
(2008) The naturalized role-play: An innovative methodology in cross-cultural and interlanguage pragmatics research. Reflection on English Language Teaching, 5(2), 1–24.Google Scholar
Vollmer, H. J. & Olshtain, E.
(1989) The Language of Apologies in German. In S. Blum-Kulka, J. House & G. Kasper, (Eds,), Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies (pp. 197–218). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Wouk, F.
(2005) The language of apologizing in Lombok, Indonesia. Journal of Pragmatics, 381, 1457–1486. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2006) Strategies of apologizing in Lombok Indonesia. Journal of Politeness Research, 21, 277–311. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yuan, Y.
(2001) An inquiry into empirical pragmatics data-gathering methods: Written DCTs, field notes, and natural conversations. Journal of Pragmatics, 331, 271–292. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 11 other publications

Adrefiza, Adrefiza
2024. Comparing the Use of Linguistic Hedging Devices (LHDs) in English and Bahasa Indonesia: Gender and Pedagogical Perspectives. Innovare Journal of Education ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
An, Yi, Hang Su & Mingyou Xiang
2022. Apology responses and gender differences in spoken British English. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) 32:1 ► pp. 28 ff. DOI logo
Bowe, Heather, Kylie Martin & Howard Manns
2014. Communication across Cultures, DOI logo
Chung, Chi-ting Alvan & Chun-yin Doris Chen
2022. Universality? Cross-linguistic influence?. Concentric. Studies in Linguistics 48:2 ► pp. 174 ff. DOI logo
El-Dakhs, Dina Abdel Salam
2018. Investigating the apology strategies of Saudi learners of English. Pragmatics and Society 9:4 ► pp. 598 ff. DOI logo
El-Dakhs, Dina Abdel Salam
2021. Compliments and compliment responses in Egyptian and Saudi Arabic. Pragmatics and Society 12:4 ► pp. 537 ff. DOI logo
Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, Pilar & Maria Sifianou
2017. (Im)politeness and Identity. In The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness, ► pp. 227 ff. DOI logo
Saleem, Tahir, Uzma Anjum & Summiya Tahir
2021. The Sociopragmatic and Pragmalinguistic Strategies in L2 Pragmatic Competence: A Case of Pakistani ESL Learners. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research 50:2 ► pp. 185 ff. DOI logo
Saleem, Tahir, Uzma Unjum, Munawar Iqbal Ahmed, Ayaz Qadeer & Krisda Chaemsaithong
2021. Social distance and speech behavior: A case of Pakistani English speakers’ apology responses. Cogent Arts & Humanities 8:1 DOI logo
Saleem, Tahir, Musarat Yasmin, Aisha Saleem & Krisda Chaemsaithong
2021. Linguistic politeness of Pakistani English and British English speakers: Culture and gender perspectives. Cogent Arts & Humanities 8:1 DOI logo
Waluyo, S & S Sutiyatno
2020. Apology response strategies used by Indonesian EFL fresh graduates: on gender and academic achievement. Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1517:1 ► pp. 012055 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 march 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.