Types of Hedges Used by American and Vietnamese Celebrity

Ngoan Nguyen Quang, Quyen Nguyen Le To

Nội dung chính của bài viết

Tóm tắt

Abstract: The study was to compare and contrast type of hedges used by American and Vietnamese celebrities in responses to questions in interviews. The data were collected from 96 online interviews with American and Vietnamese celebrities. The study was conducted mainly with quantitative methods with the combination of some qualitative methods for explanation and discussion. The findings showed that out of the five categories under investigation, “Quality hedges” were most frequently-used with a rather high rate, while “Relevance hedges” took the lowest position in frequency by both groups of celebrities. Also, hedges used in the American and Vietnamese data were different from each other in the distribution of “Quantity hedges”, “Manner hedges” and “Mixed hedges”.

Keywords: American celebrities (Acels), Vietnamese celebrities (Vcels), hedges on quality maxim (QlHs), hedges on quantity maxim (QnHs), hedges on relevance maxim (ReHs), hedges on manner maxim (MaHs), mixed hedges (MiHs).

Chi tiết bài viết

Tài liệu tham khảo

[1] G. Lakoff, Hs: A study of meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts. In P. Peranteau, J. Levi, and G. Phares (Eds.), Papers from the Eight Regional Meeting of Chicago Linguistic Society (pp. 183 –228), Chicago University Press, Chicago, 1972.
[2] G. Clemen, The concept of hedging: Origins, approaches and definitions. In R. Markkanen and H. Schröder (Eds.), Hedging and discourse: Approaches to the analysis of a pragmatic phenomenon in academic texts (pp. 235–248), Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, 1997.
[3] L. A. Zadeh, A fuzzy-set-theoretic interpretation of linguistic hedges. Journal of Cybernetics 2 (1972) 4.
[4] A. Mauranen, “They're a little but different”...: Observations on hedges in academic talk. In K. Aijmer and A. B. Stenström (Eds.), Discourse patterns in spoken and written corpora (pp. 173-197), John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam, 2004.
[5] K. Hyland, Writing without conviction? Hedging in science research articles, Applied Linguistics 17 (1996) 433
[6] K. Hyland, Hedging in scientific research articles, John Benjamins, Amsterdam, 1998.
[7] K. Hyland, Disciplinary discourses: Social interaction in academic writing, Longman, London, 2000.
[8] G. Yule, Pragmatics, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1997.
[9] G. Brown and S. Levinson, Politeness: Some universals in language usage, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1987.
[10] Nguyễn Quang, Một số vấn đề giao tiếp nội văn hóa và giao văn hóa, Nxb ĐHQG Hà Nội, Hà Nội, 2003.