A Dissertation by GRACE HUI-CHIN LIN Submitted to the Office of ...
A Dissertation by GRACE HUI-CHIN LIN Submitted to the Office of ...
A Dissertation by GRACE HUI-CHIN LIN Submitted to the Office of ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
(1992) notion <strong>of</strong> politeness. They believed that <strong>the</strong> form <strong>of</strong> politeness might not need<br />
<strong>to</strong> be very formal. Watts, Ide, and Ehlih (1992) asserted <strong>the</strong>re were countless polite<br />
expressions in different cultures around <strong>the</strong> world. They conceived that politeness<br />
could be expressed <strong>by</strong> both verbal and non-verbal communications. Sometimes, a tap<br />
on <strong>the</strong> shoulder would mean more than a thousand words. Likewise, <strong>to</strong> look your<br />
interlocu<strong>to</strong>r in <strong>the</strong> eyes, or <strong>to</strong> smile at him/her could show various types <strong>of</strong> politeness.<br />
Similarly, in Leech’s (1983) pragmatic principle <strong>of</strong> politeness, <strong>the</strong> indirect way <strong>of</strong><br />
requesting was recommended as a better pattern than a direct request.<br />
Intentionality<br />
Students’ perceptions related <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> replacement strategy and <strong>the</strong><br />
interlanguage strategy had responded <strong>to</strong> Faerch and Kasper’s (1983c) <strong>the</strong>ory <strong>of</strong><br />
“intentionality” in using <strong>the</strong> communication strategy. Faerch and Kasper (1983c)<br />
explained that intentionality was, “<strong>the</strong> speaker has control over <strong>the</strong> strategy that is<br />
selected, and <strong>the</strong> choice is responsive <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> perceived problem” (p. 5). Additionally,<br />
in <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>ory <strong>of</strong> “intentionality,” Faerch and Kasper (1983c) emphasized, “The<br />
implication <strong>of</strong> communication strategies being intentional is that <strong>the</strong>re would be<br />
systematic relations between <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> specific communication strategies and<br />
specific conditions <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> communicative situation” (p. 5).<br />
In this study, some students had talked about <strong>the</strong>ir problems <strong>of</strong><br />
“comprehension,” “face-saving,” “struggling process,” and “time-saving,” which<br />
were <strong>the</strong> major fac<strong>to</strong>rs that influenced <strong>the</strong> students, use or non-use <strong>of</strong> a certain<br />
strategy. The students provided reasons <strong>to</strong> explain <strong>the</strong>ir intentionality in choosing<br />
strategies. The students’ reasons associated with <strong>the</strong>ir methods <strong>of</strong> comprehension<br />
check, au<strong>to</strong>matic reaction when talking <strong>to</strong> people from <strong>the</strong> similar language<br />
179