ABSTRACT

The aim of this thesis is to research how learning and using English affects Japanese

English users’ L1 pragmatic competence in terms of giving compliments. Compliments are a

potentially important factor in interacting with others worldwide. Recently in the TESOL

field, both teaching pragmatics and the study of multi-competence, which is the cognitive

capability of speakers of more than two languages (Cook, 1991), have been the focus of much

attention. Research in these areas supports the claim that NNESTs and multilinguals in

general have unique cognitive abilities.

To see how significantly English language experiences impacted Japanese English

speakers' complimenting behavior in their L1, the findings of this study, drawn from

questionnaires, videotaped simulations, and interviews, were categorized into three

interlinked themes: 1) Linguistic Influences 2) Pragmatic Influences and 3) Identity

Influences. The results indicated that Japanese participants who had experienced living in the

US performed linguistically and pragmatically different complimenting behaviors than

average native speakers, and that these differences could be attributable to the acquisition of

L2 pragmatic competence. That is to say, English language experience influenced

participants' L1 pragmatic competence, greatly affecting how they utilized compliments.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of figures ......................................................................................................................... vi

List of tables ............................................................................................................................vii

List of appendices .............................................................................................................. viii

List of abbreviations ............................................................................................................ ix

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1

Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1

Need and Significance ............................................................................................... 2

Purpose and Description of the Study ........................................................................ 3

Definition of Terms ................................................................................................... 4

Road Map of This Study ............................................................................................ 5

REVIEW OF LITERATURE .......................................................................... 6

Non-native Speakers as English Teachers .................................................................. 6

Native, non-native, and multi-linguals: some definitions .................................... 6 Non-native English speaking teachers ................................................................ 7

Language Transfer ..................................................................................................... 8

Pragmatic transfer .............................................................................................. 9 Multi-competence Theory and Effects of L2 Acquisition on L1 Pragmatic

Competence ..................................................................................................................... 10

Competence ..................................................................................................... 10 2.3.2 Multi-competence theory ................................................................................. 11

Backward pragmatic transfer: effects of L2 acquisition on L1 pragmatic competence ...................................................................................................... 11

Identity and Language Use ...................................................................................... 12

Identity ............................................................................................................. 12 Identity and multiple language users ................................................................. 13

Politeness and Giving Compliments ........................................................................ 14

Politeness and cultures ..................................................................................... 14 Why a focus on complimenting/giving compliments? ....................................... 16 The definition of giving compliments ............................................................... 16

Comparison of Compliment Behaviors in Japanese and English ....................... 17 Summary ................................................................................................................. 19

METHODOLGY ........................................................................................... 20

Introduction ............................................................................................................. 20

Participant Selection ................................................................................................ 20

Participant selection for the videotaped simulations .......................................... 20 Participant selection for the questionnaire......................................................... 21 Participant selection for the interview ............................................................... 21

Procedure ................................................................................................................ 21

Videotaped simulations ........................................................................................... 25

Interview ................................................................................................................. 27

Interview question design ................................................................................. 28 Interview analysis............................................................................................. 29

Ethical Considerations ............................................................................................. 30

RESULTS/FINDINGS .................................................................................. 31

Introduction ............................................................................................................. 31

Linguistic Influences ............................................................................................... 31

The use of adjectives: using more varied adjectives .......................................... 32 Adding subject nouns ....................................................................................... 34 The use of more self-centered compliments ...................................................... 37

Pragmatic Influences ............................................................................................... 38

Influences on frequency: topics and target persons to compliment .................... 39 Influences on topics .............................................................................................. 40

Influences on compliment targets .......................................................................... 42

The use of compliments as a conversation facilitator ........................................ 43 Responding to compliments ............................................................................. 46

Identity Influences ................................................................................................... 47

New perceptions: a widened view of the world ................................................. 47 Summary of this Chapter: Bridging to the Next Chapter .......................................... 49

DISCUSSION ............................................................................................... 50

Introduction ............................................................................................................. 50

Overall Findings and Results ................................................................................... 50

How does learning English as an L2 affect Japanese users’ L1 pragmatic

competence in terms of giving compliments? ................................................... 50 Possible causalities ................................................................................................ 51

Is this effect a change or an expansion of pragmatic range of compliment targets and objects?...................................................................................................... 52

What kind of factors, for example, social distance and topics used to compliment are affected most and least? And why? ............................................................. 53

Perceptions of Non-Native English Users: Especially Native Japanese Speakers ..... 54

Who are the multilinguals? A brief description of NNSs based on the findings and results............................................................................................................... 55

Perceptions of multilinguals and the world for future: the qualifications of NNS teachers and multilinguals in general ................................................................ 55

Implications for Teaching Pragmatics in EFL Situations .......................................... 56

The contents to teach: replicate the real environment as much as possible in teaching materials............................................................................................. 57

Utilize findings as a motivator for building intrinsic motivations ...................... 60 Limitations .............................................................................................................. 61

Participant selection ......................................................................................... 62 Questionnaires.................................................................................................. 62 Videotaped simulations .................................................................................... 63 Interviews ........................................................................................................ 64

Final comments ....................................................................................................... 64

REFERENCES .................................................................................................................... 65

List of figures

Figure 4.1: The relationships between the three influences ................................................... 31

Figure 4.3: The ratio of noun stated compliments: open-ended questions (percentages) ....... 35

Figure 4.4: Frequency of self- and topic-centered compliments in Q8, Ability of a Stranger 37

Figure 4.5: The increased likelihood of giving compliments: JN to JE (by topic) ................. 40

Figure 4.6: The increased likelihood of giving compliments (by social distance) ................. 42

Figure 4.7: The incident ratio of questions attached to compliments: open-ended questions . 45

List of tables

Table 3.1: Transcription Sample ..............................................................................................29

Table 4.2: Adjectives in Japanese and English Translations....................................................33

List of appendices

Appendix 1.

Appendix 2.

List of abbreviations

NNS ..................................................................................... Non-Native Speaker (of English)

NS ............................................................................................... Native Speaker (of English)

NNEST .................................................. Non-Native English-Speaking Teachers (of English)

NEST ............................................................. Native English-Speaking Teachers (of English)

Murahata | 1

INTRODUCTION

Introduction

Learning languages in addition to one's native language is an important part of life

worldwide. In many countries, studying other languages is required as part of getting a better

education, which can lead to better, more cooperative lives for multilingual speakers. It can

also lead to nations having better relationships with other countries, because languages can

function as bridges between different people in different countries. This phenomenon, the

growth of multilingual speakers, will probably continue in coming decades because of the

expanding internationalization and globalization of the world.

The process of becoming a resident of the world through acquiring other languages

influences not only the quality of life on a national scale, but also positively and negatively

affects how we are as individual multiple language users. What prompted me as the principal

investigator to become eager about researching who we truly are as multilinguals occurred

when I discovered changes of my use of my native language, which is Japanese. These

changes include linguistic changes such as the use of pronouns and the way I respond to tag

questions, and pragmatic changes, such as the way I interact others. The use of compliments,

which is the main focus of this study, especially intrigued me because this change was the

biggest among those mentioned above; therefore, with this topic, I began thinking about

native language and its permanence. Many language learners take language proficiency tests

to measure their progress, but we do not usually measure the use of our native languages,

because it is considered to be perfect or fluent enough not to require testing. However, when I

realized that my native language use had been truly changed, possibly affected by learning

Murahata | 2

and using English, I thought researching the effects of an L2 on an L1 would benefit the

fields of SLA and TESL or TESOL. For example, regarding the English language, there

simply are more NNSs than NSs, and we cannot talk about them without finding out who

they might be as speakers in general and as Non-native English Speaking Teachers.

Need and Significance

Nearly three fourths of English speakers are non-native (House, 2003; Jenkins &

Leung, 2013; Seidlhofer, 2005). This number is quite large; therefore, it is dangerous to judge

NNSs based on only their L2 proficiency, particularly when there are many people who label

them as “deficient” because of their imperfect language proficiency in L2, especially when it

comes to English teaching (Cook, 1999; Medgyes, 1992; Rubin, 1992). In addition to this, as

the negative connotation of the term non-native speakers suggests, there might be many

people who view the goal of language learning as acquiring languages as close to their native

form as possible, and, thus, L2 learners and users may possibly be seen as inferior. However,

there have been many studies investigating what NNSs are capable of doing in many areas,

including teaching, and this research supports the idea that NNSs' abilities give them special

advantages that NSs do not have. The aim of this study is to continue fostering the view of

NNSs as a uniquely talented people, and also to uncover previously unknown aspects of

being NNS, specifically how L1 pragmatic competence may be influenced by learning

additional languages. The pragmatic aspect of language use was chosen as the crucial

component of this study because it reflects language behaviors as a whole. All linguistic and

non-linguistic communications, explicit and implicit, have value through the way they affect

speakers; not everyone can respond to or be aware of all of these ways (Watzlawick, Bavelas,

Jackson, & O’Hanlon, 2011). According to this idea, the value of linguistic actions can be

revealed by investigating them through the lens of pragmatic language use. As long as a

study deals with language, attention to pragmatics is necessary as part of drawing a solid

Murahata | 3

picture of language learning and teaching, and their consequences.

Purpose and Description of the Study

The purpose of this study is to discover what the effects of using and learning English

are on the pragmatic competence of Japanese L1 speakers in terms of giving compliments.

Three different sources of data were used to conduct this research—questionnaires,

videotaped simulations and interviews—which were designed using the following three

research questions as guidance:

1) How does learning English as an L2 affect Japanese users’ L1 pragmatic

competence in terms of giving compliments?

2) Is this effect a change or an expansion of pragmatic range of compliment targets

and objects?

3) What kind of factors, for example, social distance and topics used to

compliment are affected most and least? And why?

All participants in this study were Japanese speakers who were categorized into two

groups: 1) the JN group, composed of native Japanese speakers who had never lived in the

US, and 2) the JE group, composed of native Japanese speakers who had lived in the US. All

research was conducted in Japanese because this study focused on participants’ L1 use. In the

questionnaire, participants were asked about the likelihood of giving compliments in

hypothetical situations where both the social distance between the compliment giver and

receiver and the compliment topic varied, with four options in each category. They were also

asked to write a word, phrase or sentence that they would actually say in each situation. In

the videotaped simulations, participants in both JN and JE groups had conversations in pairs

to see whether they would compliment and how in four hypothetical situations. As with the

questionnaire, the social distance between the compliment giver and receiver and compliment

topic varied, with four options in each category. The aim of this method was to elicit non-

Murahata | 4

verbal communications and possibly responses to compliments. In the interviews, questions

were designed to uncover what the effects of English language experience had been on their

L1 complimenting behavior looked like in depth. Five interviewees volunteered as cultural

informants.

The goal of the present study is, first, to help NNS of English in general to understand

themselves. NNESTs in English Language Teaching (ELT) field will also benefit from this

research because they can use it to stimulate intrinsic motivation in their students by giving

them new perceptions about L2 English language users’ capabilities. A third audience for this

thesis is company recruiters, including English teaching institutions, where NNS may be

negatively judged based on only their L2 language proficiency. The last intention of this

paper is to expand previous academic research in terms of language transfer and its users,

especially from the view of multi-competence theory.

Definition of Terms

Compliments

A compliment is a speech act which is used socially to build solidarity or maintain

harmonious relationships between a giver and a receiver through the giver's positive

evaluation of the addressee’s various qualities. Compliments can be explicit or implicit

expressions, depending on cultural background and personal preference.

Native and non-native speaker

A native speaker is “someone who has learned a particular language as his/her first

language, rather than as a foreign language” (Longman Dictionary of American English

4th edition, p. 669).

A non-native speaker is someone who has learned a particular language as a foreign

language.

Murahata | 5

Multilingual / Bilingual

A person who is learning and has learned at least one foreign language.

Road Map of This Study

The next chapter is a literature review which serves as scaffolding this entire study

using information from previous research. Based on the literature review and research

questions, in chapter 3, the methodology how the research was designed and conducted is

presented. Chapter 4 describes the data collected and analyzed through these methods. In

chapter 5, discussions of what these findings and results mean, what implications of this

study are for further research , and its limitations are presented.

Murahata | 6

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Non-native Speakers as English Teachers

Native, non-native, and multi-linguals: some definitions

A lot of people may naturally understand that being either a Native Speaker (NS) or

a Non-Native Speaker (NNS) of a language can have a tremendous impact on a person’s

social position in society, and this is especially true in the field of Teaching English as a

Second Language (TESL). Even though the use of these terms has been expanded and re-

evaluated in recent decades, defining who NS and NNS are has become more important than

ever in this globalized and internationalized world, where people are exposed to and acquire

multiple languages in many different situations. The Longman Dictionary of American

English 4th edition defines a NS as “someone who has learned a particular language as his/her

first language, rather than as a foreign language” (2008, p. 669). It is likely that most people

would agree with this definition; therefore, this is the definition I will use in this paper.

Accordingly, NNS can be defined in opposition to NS, as someone who has learned a

particular language as a foreign language.

The word multilingual, on the other hand, is used to describe “in or using several

languages” (Oxford Dictionary, n.d.). As a noun, it also refers to someone who speaks more

than two languages. The expansion of travel opportunities which have enabled many people

in the world to study languages abroad and also to work in foreign countries have increased

the number of people who are regarded as multilingual. However, it is difficult to clearly

define who multilinguals are, especially in terms of drawing a line between those who

acquired two or more languages in childhood and those who learned foreign languages later

Murahata | 7

in life. Defining the meaning of being able to speak or use a language is also quite difficult

because speakers could be equally fluent or not in their use of languages. Despite the

difficulty of differentiating between these terms, participants in this study are considered to

have learned rather than acquired their additional language, English, because they learned it

in later in their lives. The main focus of this study is to reveal how the pragmatic competence

of those who have learned additional languages are influenced by studying and using these

languages; therefore, the terms multilinguals and bilinguals in this paper primarily refer to a

person who is learning and has learned at least one foreign language.

Non-native English speaking teachers

Whether NNSs of English are sufficiently capable of teaching English compared to

NSs has been discussed enthusiastically within the TESL field. In the past, NNS applicants

seeking employment in this field were often ignored by the administrators of many English

Language Teaching (ELT) institutions in English-speaking countries, such as the US,

Australia and Britain. NNSs were regarded as unqualified to teach English because of their

perceived imperfect language proficiency in the target language. According to Clark and

Paran (2007), 72.3% of 90 responses by recruiters who worked at ELT institutions in the UK

asserted that being an NS of English is a very important qualification in the hiring process (p.

17). In non-English speaking countries, the number of NNS English teachers (NNESTs) has

been increasing in recent years; however, there are still many NNSs who have been

struggling to be hired as English as a Second Language (ESL) instructors. Despite the fact

there still are unpleasant situations for NNSs regarding employment, an increasing amount

research supporting the effectiveness of NNSs as English teachers has been published in the

TESL field over the last twenty years (Anchimbe, 2006; Kato, 2013; Kim, 2009; Merino,

1997; Walkinshaw & Oanh, 2014). These authors state that NS- and NNESTs each have their

own advantages in teaching English. Therefore, both sorts of English teachers should be

Murahata | 8

treated with equal respect in the field. In this study, pragmatic competence is explored as one

of the unique advantages of NNESTs in order to showcase their qualification.

In contrast to ESL situations, in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) situations,

NNESTs dominate English language teaching classrooms in many countries, including Japan.

For instance, in Japan, many middle and high school English courses only employ NSs of

English as Assistant Language Teachers (ALT). According to Japan’s Ministry of Education

(2015), the actual amount of time that ALTs were utilized in high school EFL classes was

only 9.6% during the 2015 academic year. A possible reason for this low number is that

native Japanese-speaking English teachers and ALTs face some difficulties in team-teaching,

including mismatches between students’ and teachers’ perceptions and ALTs' lack of explicit

grammar knowledge, which is a heavy point of focus in Japanese English education

(Johannes, 2012). Therefore, in EFL situations such as Japan, many NNESTs actually

dominate in the English teaching classroom. If NNESTs are shown to be more qualified to

teach certain aspects of English, which this study also aims to reveal, it could dramatically

shift the perception of NNESTs from being imperfect in terms of their language proficiency

to being effective teachers with developed cognitive abilities.

Language Transfer

When it comes to language transfer, many English language teachers might feel that

their students’ unique accents and grammatical errors, which are derived from their L1, are

an inevitable and unfortunate part of learning an L2. Phonological, syntactical and pragmatic

aspects of students’ L1s, are transferred to their L2s to different degrees based on various

factors in L2 language learning and communication (Ellis, 2008). Depending on the

similarities or differences between a student’s L1 and the target language, the transfer from

L1 can occur positively or negatively (Kasper, 1992; Odlin, 1989). Negative transfer is also

called interference (Lightbrown & Spada, 2013). Therefore, it is important for language

Murahata | 9

teachers to understand students’ L1s and how different their L1s are from the target language

so that they can be effective and minimize interference when they teach an L2.

Pragmatic transfer

One aspect of language that is affected by L1 transfer is pragmatic competence in

an L2. Acquiring L2 pragmatic competence is seen as an important component of L2 learning

because speakers of different languages have different communication preferences in specific

situations, such as when using speech act strategies. In the context of these situations, NNSs

may have idiosyncratic communication styles cultivated through L1 use (Kasper, 1992).

Thomas (1983) called this predictable misunderstanding of standard L2 pragmatics

“pragmalinguistic failure” (p. 101) because of the inappropriate pragmatic transfer of speech

act strategies from one language to another. Pragmalinguistic failure can lead to serious

miscommunications; therefore, it is reasonable to say that pragmatic transfer plays an

important role in teaching and learning an L2.

Pragmatic transfer from an L1 to an L2 has been well established, whereas the

phenomenon of “backward transfer,” which refers to the transfer of language competence

from an L2 to an L1 as a result of L2 pragmatic acquisition, has been less explored. This

study aims to investigate backward transfer from English to Japanese as a result of learning

and using English pragmatics. Some research into the area of L2 pragmatic transfer has

already been done. Nakajima (1997) conducted a study that examined whether or not L2

pragmatic acquisition occurred. He concluded that the experience of living in a country

where the learner's target language is spoken gives the learners the chance to develop the type

of pragmatic competence which NSs in the same context acquire as a matter of course.

According to Nakajima, L2 pragmatic acquisition does occur based on language experiences.

Therefore, based on this, it can be hypothesized that evidence of enhanced language

competence in an L2 can be detected in L1 use. The existence of backward transfer also

Murahata | 10

shows that multilinguals have their uniquely developed cognitive abilities which can expand

the advantages of being an NNEST and being multilingual in general.

Multi-competence Theory and Effects of L2 Acquisition on L1 Pragmatic

Competence

Competence

In order to discuss language competence, some definitions are in order. Chomsky

(1965) defined competence as “the speaker-hearer’s knowledge of his language,” separating

it from performance, “the actual use of language in concrete situations” (p. 4). According to

his definitions, the performance of uttering a sentence like “I’m eating an apple” becomes

possible if the speaker and the hearer are linguistically competent, in other words, linguistic

performance directly reflects linguistic competence. Supplementing Chomsky’s definitions,

Hymes (1972) pointed out that as children learn their first language, they acquire not only the

grammatical knowledge construct sentences, but also sociolinguistic knowledge about how to

appropriately use their language in different contexts, coining the term communicative

competence (p. 277). When it comes to investigations of pragmatic language use, including

this thesis, consideration about sociolinguistic aspects of languages cannot be overlooked;

thus, what competence means should be beyond Chomsky’s definition.

As this thesis aims to investigate an aspect of communicative competence, several

questions arose: How is this competence developed in each of the different languages that a

multilingual person speaks? And how L1 and L2 knowledge constructed? For example, if

native speakers of English can intuitively produce grammatically correct sentences with the

appropriate use of the article, “an,” in the sentence above, is this enough to claim L1

knowledge? If non-native English users can correctly produce the sentence and also explain

why it is correct, is their knowledge equal? What does it mean to be knowledgeable as a

language user? This account of linguistic knowledge, which could be constructed based on

Murahata | 11

whether intuitive or descriptive knowledge is considered, is still controversial. Also,

sociolinguistic language use is the main focus of this study. Therefore, the investigator

considers competence as more how multilinguals are competent in terms of sociolinguistic

language used in a specific situation in L1, compliments, rather than what they know about.

2.3.2 Multi-competence theory

One of the biggest differences between being a NS- and a NNEST is often the number

of languages that the teachers are able to speak, and many researchers insist that

multilinguals who are capable of using of more than two languages have unique cognitive

abilities (Ben Zeev, 1977; Choong, 2006; Durgunoglu & Oney, 2000). In addition, there is

considerable research based on multi-competence theory (MCT), which has contributed to

investigating how acquiring and learning an additional language affects the users’ cognitive

abilities. Cook (1991) first defined the word “multi-competence” as knowledge of the

languages that one person speaks in the same mind. This competence means not only

proficiency in these languages, but also in the cognitive abilities that have been developed

through learning more than two languages, which separates multilinguals from monolinguals

(as cited in Cook, 2003, p. 2). Thus, having the cognitive abilities which enable a speaker to

manage the pragmatic, syntactic and phonological systems of an L2 might be seen as a

beneficial characteristic for English teachers because this widened view of language use

would facilitate students’ learning in different ways. The fundamental goal of teaching

English is to be able to communicate with people from all over the world, so being aware of

language learning and its by-products may support language teachers in motivating their

students. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that multi-competent NNEST could be more

effective than NSs in this regard.

Backward pragmatic transfer: effects of L2 acquisition on L1 pragmatic competence

Murahata | 12

To demonstrate that multilinguals have unique cognitive abilities developed through

the use of more than two languages, specifically in regard to pragmatic competence, some

research has already been done on the effects of learning additional languages on learners’

L1s based on MCT. Some studies have investigated whether those who speak more than two

languages are different from NSs regarding pragmatic competence (Cao, 2016; Cenoz, 2003;

Kecskes, 2015; Krause-Ono, 2004; Suzuki, 2013; Tao & Thompson, 1991). This research has

demonstrated there might be a shared space in multilinguals’ brains that allows them to

utilize multiple languages and the cognitive abilities cultivated through the use of those

languages. These scholars have shown that there is a possibility that pragmatic competence

develops through learning additional languages and that L2 pragmatic acquisition affects

pragmatic competence in their L1, suggesting this would be to the benefit of being a NNS in

the classroom and in general.

Identity and Language Use

Along with pragmatic transfer, personal identity is also a considerable factor

determining how people use languages and could possibly be influenced by language

experience. Identity plays a crucial role in shaping who we are as a fundamental framework

of self; therefore, it should not be dismissed in a discussion of language influences.

Identity

In wide range of academic fields, identity has been subdivided into components such as

social, cultural, and ethnic; however, in this paper, I will not focus on a specific subdivision,

but rather on how identity shapes us in general. The following definitions can help us grasp

what identity means in this paper:

1. Who someone is, 2. The qualities someone has that make him/her different from

other people. (Longman Dictionary of American English 4th edition, 2008, p. 508)

Murahata | 13

A self-structure – an internal, self-constructed, dynamic organization of drives,

abilities, beliefs, and individual history. (Marcia, 1980, p. 109)

A person’s self image – as an individual and as part of a group. (Akerlof & Kranton,

2005, p. 1)

The way a person understands and views himself, and is often viewed by others, at

least in certain situations – a perception of self that can be fairly constantly achieved.

(Horn, Nolen, Ward, & Campbell, 2008, p. 62)

Unfortunately, what these definitions of identity overlook is how it is constructed. Hall & Du

Gay (1996) explore a feature of identity construction. They propose that identities emerge

within specific communities, where a specific discursive framework or unified

communicative style is shared, as the product of differentiating and excluding those who do

not belong to the community rather than to signal unity (p. 4). Considering the components

above, I propose the following definition of identity as one’s internal and dynamic

perceptions of various factors which determine who one is as developed through relating to

others in communicatively unified communities, drawing on the differences between the self

and others.

With this definition, a hypothesis arose; if a person experiences living in more than

one single communicatively unified community, in other words, in a different community

where people speak a different language, how does it affect the person’s identity? Pragmatic

transfer, which is the main focus of this thesis, could possibly be seen as a predictable

indication of the influence of languages on the identity. Thus, investigating identity

influences could be another approach in revealing the effects of L2 on L1.

Identity and multiple language users

Investigating the effects and influences of using multiple languages on a multilingual

speaker’s identity is complicated by the fact that identity is defined differently in different

Murahata | 14

languages and cultures. One view claims that speakers have distinct identities in different

languages. In this view, language competence in each of the languages spoken by a person is

isolated, as Heller (2006) stated, “multilingualism [is seen] as a set of parallel

monolingualisms, not a hybrid system” (p. 5). Le Page & Tabouret-Keller (1985) have also

claimed that languages have an identity-developing function, which causes a speaker

differentiate themselves from speakers of other languages by drawing a line between each

community depending on the language spoken. That is to say, in multilinguals, separate

identities are cultivated and developed through the use of separate languages, rather than one

complicated identity resulting from the use of multiple languages that build on one another.

However, in contrast to researchers above, there is an opposing view of identity as

uniquely mixable. According to Cook & Wei (2016), code-switching, which is a very

common social interaction feature, indicates that speakers may have unique identities that are

different from their identities in their L1 or L2 (p. 713). In addition to this, Peirce (1985)

insists that in conversation with NSs of the target language, language learners not only

exchange information, but also organize or reorganize their perceptions of themselves and

how they relate to the social context (p. 18). These researchers support the idea that language

users’ identities are constantly being constructed as they interact with others in different

languages; therefore, identity is not shifted or isolated, but changeable. This is the perspective

adopted in this thesis, which focuses on the change in Japanese English users’ identity as one

of the consequences of the language learning experience.

Politeness and Giving Compliments

Politeness and cultures

Before talking about compliments, what shapes complimenting behavior in both

Japan and the US needs to be understood, along with the factors which shape different

linguistic actions in general. For instance, how people perceive politeness toward others

Murahata | 15

greatly influences their way of complimenting and heavily impacts how people compliment

in the world. Brown & Levinson (1987) originally established the term face which describes

“the public self-image that every member [of society] wants to claim for himself” (p. 61).

The authors divide face into two different types, positive and negative, and depending on

culture and language, people in different social groups have either positive or negative faces,

which can greatly affect how they form utterances. Brown and Levinson define each face as

follows:

(a) negative face: the basic claim to territories, personal preserves, rights to non-distraction

(b) positive face: the positive consistent self-image or ‘personality’ (crucially including the

desire that this self-image be appreciated and approved of) claimed by interactants. (p. 61)

Some linguistic actions, called Face Threatening Acts (FTA), spontaneously offend

others, and to avoid this, people employ positive or negative politeness depending the

situation. According to Kitamura (2000), there are ways in which both negative and positive

politeness can be expressed. Positive politeness can be expressed “by indicating similarities

amongst interactants” or “by expressing an appreciation of the interlocutor’s self-image” (p.

1). Negative politeness can be expressed “by saving the interlocutor’s ‘face’ (either

‘negative’ or ‘positive’) by mitigating face threatening acts (hereafter FTAs), such as advice-

giving and disapproval” or “by satisfying ‘negative face’ by indicating respect for the

addressee’s right not to be imposed on” (p. 1).

Related specifically to compliments, the different faces provoke different linguistic

actions in order to keep and build harmonious relationships with others who have the same

type of face. Thus, the giving of compliments might be shaped by whether a speaker who

initiates a compliment belongs to a positive or negative politeness culture. The main two

cultures addressed in this study are American (or western) and Japanese, and the

communicative styles of these two cultures employ positive and negative politeness,

Murahata | 16

respectively; therefore, the another purpose of this study is to see whether these two different

types of politeness and face-work can be transferred across languages and cultures as a result

of language learning experience.

Why a focus on complimenting/giving compliments?

Pragmatic language use is a crucial component of any successful linguistic

interaction, and giving compliments is one of the most common politeness strategies that we

utilize to build relationships with others in many different situations. Complimenting

behaviors encompass many different factors, including contexts and cultural differences, and

because cultural background heavily shapes these behaviors, the pragmatic competence

related to giving compliments is likely to be affected by learning other languages. This is

especially true of a compliment-giving behaviour, which requires a speaker to produce their

own language, thus potentially reflecting the language users’ pragmatic competence strongly.

Although there are many studies which have investigated different ways of giving

compliments among different cultures, the effect of L2 pragmatic acquisition on L1

pragmatic competence in terms of giving compliments has been relatively unexplored.

Therefore, this study explores this area.

The definition of giving compliments

Definitions of compliments incorporate several different elements. Holmes (1988)

defined a compliment as “a speech act which explicitly or implicitly attributes credit to

someone other than the speaker, usually the person addressed, for some ‘good’ (possession,

characteristic, skill etc.) which is positively valued by the speaker and the hearer” (p. 446).

Herbert (1989) asserted that both the speaker’s act of giving compliments and the receiver’s

response toward compliments can facilitate solidarity between a giver and a receiver. In

addition to this, cultural differences shape complimenting behaviors in different countries.

Murahata | 17

Therefore, taking all of this into account, the following definition was determined for use in

this thesis and to guide research design and data analysis: A compliment is a speech act which

is used socially to build solidarity or maintain harmonious relationships between a giver and

a receiver through the giver's positive evaluation of the addressee’s various qualities.

Compliments can be explicit or implicit expressions, depending on cultural background and

personal preference.

Comparison of Compliment Behaviors in Japanese and English

What separates Japanese compliments from American compliments is, firstly, a usage

limitation caused by the negative politeness commonly employed in Japanese culture. Ono

(2010) explored the framework of Japanese compliments, and according to him, there are

some factors that limit compliment expression or do not allow certain types of compliments

to be uttered at all. These are related to concerns about age difference and social distance

between speakers. He suggests that compliments in Japanese are meant to be a linguistic

action that occurs from older to younger because of the hierarchical relationship based on the

ages of a giver and a receiver. Complimenting a receiver’s property, abilities, or someone

related to the receiver might be a violation of negative face, in other words an FTA, because

it may be perceived as an evaluation of the receiver, which is inappropriate if the compliment

giver is younger. For instance, a 21-year-old person in Japan who compliments someone

older might commit an FTA because they are violating this unspoken rule, whereas in

western culture, this compliment would not be considered an FTA. However, depending on

context, it may be acceptable for a younger person to compliment an older one if they have a

closer relationship. This is one of the differences in complimenting between the two

languages.

In terms of how specifically Japanese native speakers utilize compliments, Barnlund

and Araki (1985) found that Japanese speakers tended to use indirect compliments, which

Murahata | 18

they explicitly or implicitly try to avoid committing FTAs in order to maintain harmonious

relationships with others. According to their study, Japanese native speakers are more likely

to indirectly give compliments, which means they often give compliments to those who are

outside of a conversation using reported speech. This specific utilization of compliments

among Japanese native speakers does not require direct evaluation about a receiver; thus, it is

imaginable that they reduce the risk of threatening others’ face with personal judgments.

The third noticeable difference between complimenting in these two cultures is the

frequency and diversity of compliment targets. Daikuhara (1986) found that Japanese

speakers tended to compliment their acquaintances more frequently (34%) and closer friends

less frequently (16%), while Americans showed the opposite behavior, complimenting closer

friends more (49%) and acquaintances less (15%). In addition, in terms of frequency of

compliment topic selection, Japanese speakers have also been found to compliment clothes

and appearance less frequently than Americans (Tsuda, 1992). Therefore, it can be

hypothesized that Japanese speakers who have lived in the US will compliment differently

and more often than native Japanese speakers.

Despite these usage differences, the grammatical structures of compliments in each

language show similarity. Manes and Wolfson’s (1981) effort demonstrated that 80% of

compliments uttered by Americans could be categorized into three patterns.

a) NP is/looks ADJ (e.g. Your shoes look nice)

b) I like/love NP (e.g. I like your shirt)

c) PRO is ADJ NP (e.g. This is such a nice watch)

Kim (2006) also categorized Japanese compliments into three different types:

a) only evaluation terms (e.g. ii desune! [good!])

b) evaluation terms + other information (e.g. sutekina fukuwo kitemasune. [(You are)

wearing a nice shirt.])

Murahata | 19

c) no evaluation terms (e.g. totemo kanndou shimashita. [(I) was very moved.])

Evaluation terms represent mainly adjectives and na-adjectives in Japanese. Emotions, stating

a fact, thanking, and congratulatory words are used when evaluation terms are absent.

Japanese is a null-subject language, so the parenthesis in the translations of the Japanese

compliments above represent the words absent in the original sentences. This language

feature is one major grammatical difference between the languages; however, this difference

is not limited to compliments and can be seen in other speech acts. Interestingly, the a and c

compliment types in English and the a and b compliment types in Japanese are quite similar,

and the b type in English and c type in Japanese have similar structures, as well. Thus, aside

from the differences resulting from Japanese as a null-subject language, the grammatical

structures of compliments in both languages are almost equivalent. The studies discussed

above serve to reveal possible influences on backward pragmatic transfer through the

investigation of whether or not Japanese speakers’ L1 complimenting behavior remains the

same or changes by becoming more similar to complimenting behavior in English as a result

of English language experience.

Summary

The significance of research on multilinguals and their cognitive abilities is obvious in

regard to NNESTs, and my hope is that the results of this study will positively influence

people’s perceptions about being multilingual. Given the significant differences in

complimenting behaviors between English and Japanese, there are many approaches to

investigating how English language experience might impact Japanese users’ pragmatic

competence in their L1.

Murahata | 20

METHODOLGY

Introduction

In this chapter, the methodology used to collect data and the process of how the

researcher designed the study is described. This study employed three different methods of

data collection to study the effect of English language experience on Japanese English users’

pragmatic competence. In order to validate the findings based on triangulation, defined by

Burns (2010) as “a combination of angles on the data which will help give us more

objectivity” (p. 95-96), this paper employed a questionnaire to elicit quantitative data and

videotaped simulations and interviews to elicit qualitative data.

Participant Selection

In order to answer the principle research questions, research participants were

required to be one of two specific types of speakers. The first group were Japanese native

speakers, and the second group were Japanese English bilinguals. Due to a lack of access to a

random selection of people representing Japanese native speakers, the researcher asked an

instructor teaching English at Miyazaki University to have his students participate in this

study as Japanese Native Speakers (JN). Because the purpose of this study was to see

whether experience with English study and use affects Japanese native speakers’ pragmatic

competence, Japanese students who had lived in the US were also involved as Japanese-

English Bilinguals (JE). They were composed of Japanese students who the researcher had

met in Spokane and were initially approached about participating in this study through email.

Participant selection for the videotaped simulations

Murahata | 21

Even though all JE participants had experienced living in the US, some of them had

been there only a few months or less than a half year, so they could have been unqualified to

represent JE participants in this study. Therefore, the criterion of distinguishing between JN

and JE participants for the videotaped sessions was determined by whether they had spent

more than one year in the US based on their self-reports. JE participants were chosen because

they reported that they had lived in the US more than one year. Accordingly, participants

who had been chosen for the JN group reported that they had never lived in an English-

speaking country.

Participant selection for the questionnaire

Whereas one year of experience living in the US was the criterion for selection for the

videotaped simulations, participants categorized in JE group for this method were those who

had lived in the US for any length of time. In terms of JN participants, they were categorized

based on their self-report mentioning that they had never lived in the US.

Participant selection for the interview

As the interview was intended to provide qualitatively in-depth information about

what participants had experienced regarding compliments and the effect of English on their

complimenting behaviors in Japanese, five JE participants who had experienced living in the

US more than one year were selected for this portion of the study.

Procedure

Because the aim of the videotaped sessions was to investigate naturally occurring

compliments, these sessions were conducted before the questionnaire and the interview,

which asked explicit questions about giving compliments. This order of implementation was

the same for all participants.

Murahata | 22

3.4 Questionnaire

The questionnaire had two sections: 1) questions about demographic information and

2) the likelihood of giving compliments in given situations according to a Likert scale. There

were 65 total questionnaire participants, including 32 from the JN group (mean age 18.69)

and 33 from the JE group (mean age 22.97).

3.4.1 Questionnaire design

The questionnaire (see Appendix 1: Attachment F) was created using SurveyMonkey,

an online questionnaire website. The first section of this questionnaire was composed of

questions asking about the demographic information of participants, including their age,

gender, first language, major and length of experience living in an English-speaking country.

To investigate specifically the third research question (“What factors, for example,

social distance, gender and topics used to compliment are affected most and least, and

why?”), the second section asked respondents about the likelihood that they would give

compliments in hypothetical situations. There were four questions in this part and each

contained specific information about those situations, including the objects participants might

compliment, such as a T-shirt, and who the participants might be complimenting, such as

family members. These types of information might affect a compliment giver’s word choice

or even whether he/she would compliment or not. First, the researcher introduced four

different areas that participants could compliment: Ability, Social Status, Possessions and

Appearance. These areas were introduced as topics of compliments because they represent

what people generally spend a significant amount of time to acquire, achieve or take

possession of. The definitions for each factor are as follows: 1) Ability: personal abilities

which a person is especially capable of doing, for example, presentation skills, the ability to

play musical instruments or accomplish a goal, 2) Social status: positions within the society

Murahata | 23

mainly related to occupation, for example, a promotion, getting a great job and other

achievements, 3) Possessions: something that is classified as a tangible fixed asset, for

example, a car or a house, and 4) Appearance: one’s external side, which others can see, for

example, a new hair style, make up, or clothes. In addition to these factors, the participants

were given various compliment targets. There were four different sets of compliment targets:

a) Family members: father, mother, or siblings, b) Friends: someone with whom the

participants hang out with relatively often, c) Acquaintances: someone the participants barely

know and d) Strangers: someone the participant meets for the first time. Regarding the

situations in which the hypothetical conversations occurred, the researcher created different

settings, including meeting someone on the street or at the concert. All of the components

explained above were mixed and matched to design individual questions.

Additionally, along with asking participants about the likelihood of giving compliments, the

researcher asked participants what they would actually say in their compliments. This was

done to see if there was any difference in the grammatical structures and words that JE and

JN participants used in each different situation. Participants were asked to write those words,

phrases or sentences in given boxes.

3.4.2 Questionnaire analysis

Firstly, after collecting the data, answers for the Likert scale questions were

compiled and displayed graphically to compare results according to different variables. In

terms of the participants’ answers about what they would actually say, the text was initially

sorted by questions. After this sorting process, those phrases or words were categorized using

a grounded approach to see if there were any relationships between the participants’ language

experiences and their use of the Japanese language. To investigate the specific grammatical

forms and vocabulary participants used to compliment, all compliments were categorized into

Murahata | 24

two major types: 1) self-centered compliments, which start with a first person pronoun, and

2) topic-centered compliments, in which the compliment sentence starts with the target of the

compliment. Examples of these two types are given below:

1) Topic-centered compliment

Your shirt is cool.

The shoes you’re wearing look very nice.

2) Self-centered compliment

I like your shirt.

I was very moved listening to your piano playing.

In addition to this, during the coding process, topic-centered compliments were further

divided into three separate structures to investigate the specific parts of speech that

participants used to compliment, adjectives, nouns or adverbs. Accordingly, each compliment

was then sorted into one of structures listed below:

a) Adjectives + Noun + IP: A noun declared compliment a

b) Noun + Adjectives + IP: A noun declared compliment b

c) Adjectives + IP: A core compliment

IP= Interactional particle (e.g. ne, sa, no, yo, na)

The compliments were sorted in Japanese prior to being translated into English in order to

avoid misinterpretations that might have occurred due to translation. This was important

because the main purpose of this study was to see how participants from the JE and the JN

groups spoke Japanese differently.

Murahata | 25

Videotaped simulations

While the questionnaire provided quantitative data about the likelihood of giving

compliments and the phrases or words that participants would use, the videotaped sessions

demonstrated how participants actually performed when giving compliments. The use of

videotaping as opposed to audio recordings enabled the researcher to investigate visible

factors, such as facial expressions and gestures, which might yield significant findings.

Participants were six students from the JE group who had lived in the US more than one year

and six students from the JN group who had never lived in the US. The recording of the JN

participants was conducted in a classroom on the campus of Miyazaki University by the

instructor of the English class mentioned above. The one with the JE group, composed of

students from Gonzaga University and Spokane Falls Community College, was conducted at

a place where all participants agreed to meet and be videotaped, which was one of the

participants’ houses.

3.5.1 Videotaped simulations design

To see how both Japanese participants who had lived in the US and who had not

performed complimenting differently with given characters and situations, these videotaped

sessions involved role playing exercises that utilized pair work. Each participant played a role

in four different situations. This videotaped sessions used the same four categories of

compliment targets that were used in the questionnaire, Family members, Friends,

Acquaintances and Strangers. With these categories, four different scenes were created, 1)

talking with a sibling for the first time in months at home, 2) talking with a friend for the first

time in months on the street, 3) talking with an acquaintance for the first time in months on

the street and 4) talking with a stranger for the first time at the bus station. The reason why

scenes 1, 2 and 3 introduced the situation of meeting with a partner for the first time in

Murahata | 26

months was to elicit catching up conversations which could potentially lead to participants

complimenting each other on the changes that had occurred in their lives since they last met.

Every time a scene changed, participants switched partners in order to avoid a deviation of

the data because role playing with the same partner more than once might have resulted in

similarly patterned utterances in spite of different roles.

Along with the situations described above, participants were given information about

themselves as characters with cards (see Appendix 1: Attachment G). The characters were

created and given using the same four complimenting categories used in the questionnaire,

Ability, Social Status, Possessions and Appearance. For example, the information “wearing a

new cap bought yesterday” corresponded to Appearance because it directly represented the

character's appearance. Similarly, “lost 5 kilograms/ten pounds over the summer”

corresponded to Ability because losing weight represented the character's ability to

successfully manage a dietary habit.

3.5.2 Videotaped simulation analysis

To analyze the data collected through videotaping, the researcher created a chart

containing transcriptions of the role played conversations. The chart sorted the data according

to video number, scene, length, who said what to whom, the context in which a compliment

occurred, including topics, non-verbal communications, and compliments and compliment

responses uttered. Because the videotaping was done in the Japanese language, the section

listing actually uttered compliments was separated into three different lines: 1) the

compliment in Romanized Japanese, 2) a word by word translation from Japanese to English

(see Appendix 2 for the abbreviations) and 3) a rough, idiomatic English translation of the

compliments. In the second line, Hosoda’s (2009) abbreviations were utilized. This is an

example of the analysis:

Murahata | 27

Video 2: JE

Scene 3: Meeting acquaintance for the first time in months

Length: 3:35

Who: M1 to W3

Context: Got a new bag (Appearance)

Non-v: looking at the face, smiling

Comp: iinee niatteru yo. Dokode katano?

Good, looks good on you, IP. Where, bought, IP?

“It looks good! Where did you get it?”

Re: arigatou! Koreha Shinjukude kattano.

Thank you, this, Shinjuku (the name of the place), bought, IP

“Thank you! I bought this in Shinjuku.”

Interview

The last data collection method employed in this study was the interview. Data

collected through interviews tends to be subjective depending on the individuals interviewed;

however, this research method enables us to elicit rich qualitative data. Based on the

interview questions listed below, detailed information about participants’ thoughts and

experiences in terms of the effects of their English language experiences on their spoken

Japanese was collected. Five participants were interviewed, and all were Japanese speakers

who had lived in the US. All interviews were conducted in Japanese because the use of L1

allowed participants to articulate their thoughts more clearly and contributed to a comfortable

interview environment.

Murahata | 28

Interview question design

The questions created for these interviews were primarily intended to guide

conversations between the interviewees and the interviewer, the principal investigator. Some

of the questions addressed this study’s research questions. However, the interviewer also

asked follow-up questions to elicit deep data. All interview questions are listed below as well

as in Appendix 1: Attachment H.

1) Questions asking background information: age, the length of study abroad, first language

etc)

2) Could you define what giving compliments is? Can you give me a couple of examples of

compliments?

3) What motivates you to give compliments?

4) When do you compliment and when not? Who would you give compliments to most and

least in the US and in your home country?

5) Is there any preferred topic that you like to compliment? Why?

6) Could you rank following topics to complimen:, social status, ability, appearances and

possessions and why? 1 means you would give compliment most and 4 means least.

7) You have been living in the US. How do you differentiate the way Americans and

Japanese compliment? Same? Different? If different, why?

8) Has living in the US affected your way of giving compliments? How?

Questions one and two were created as warm-up questions. Question two in particular was

intended to prepare interviewees to answer the rest of questions in the interview more

spontaneously because having interviewees define compliments for themselves would raise

awareness of compliments. Questions three, four, five and six were made to elicit possible

reasons behind why interviewees' choice of compliment topics had changed because of the

effect of English language experiences. Questions seven and eight asked directly about the

Murahata | 29

principal research question (“How does learning English as an L2 affect Japanese users’

pragmatic competence of L1 in terms of giving compliment?”). The questions above were

designed to demonstrate Japanese interviewees’ self-reported perspectives on giving

compliments and changes in their L1 use.

Interview analysis

To analyze the data collected through the interviews, transcriptions were made based

on the recordings. Regarding interview quotations cited in the next chapter, these are

displayed using pseudonyms to avoid any risk of identifying the participants.

Because of the language utilized in interviewing, what each participant actually

said in Japanese was transcribed, and translations were created afterward based on these

Japanese sentences. The following transcription is an example.

Table 3.1 Transcription Sample

Japanese Original English

Line 1 あきら：最近学校どうですか。

勉強大変？

Akira: How’s school? Is studying

hard?

Line 2 あさこ：学校ですか。そうです

ね、宿題多いです。

Asako: School. Well, there is a lot of

homework.

Line 3 あきら：ほんまか。てか明日雨

降るらしいね！

Akira: Really? By the way, I heard

that it would rain tomorrow!

Line 4 あさこ：え、そうなんですか。

やだー。

Asako: What, really? I hate it.

Murahata | 30

Ethical Considerations

In order to reduce any ethical risk to participants caused by volunteering for the

research, the researcher obtained permission to conduct the study from Gonzaga University’s

Institutional Review Board (see Appendix 1). There was no compensation for participating in

this study. All participants agreed to participate in the research on the first page of the

questionnaire. The questionnaire was confidential except for those who offered their contact

information at the end of the questionnaire so that the researcher could inform them about the

research. Participants who volunteered for the interview and the videotaped sessions signed a

consent form indicating that they agreed to participate in these activities. In transcribing the

video files and audio recordings, participants were assigned pseudonyms and their personal

information was kept confidential.

Murahata | 31

RESULTS/FINDINGS

Introduction

Using a grounded approach, the analysis of the three data sources—questionnaires,

videotaped simulations and interviews—revealed seven possible influences on Japanese

English speakers’ language use caused by English language experience. These seven findings

were then categorized into three interlinking themes: 1) linguistic influences, 2) pragmatic

influences and 3) an identity influence. These influences are related to each other, as the

following Figure 4.1 shows; each influence is connected to the others by how they impact

each other in various ways. For example, linguistic influences can affect pragmatic

competence, which in turn can affect pragmatic influences.

Figure 4.1: The relationships between the three influences.

Linguistic Influences

The first theme, linguistic influences, explores how Japanese English users’ first

language use could have been changed by using and experiencing English after having spent

Linguistic Influences Pragmatic Influences Identity Influence

Murahata | 32

time studying in an English-speaking country. Possible changes include style of language

production and form, for example, the speakers’ use of adjectives, nouns and the structure of

the compliments they would hypothetically give in the Japanese language.

The use of adjectives: using more varied adjectives

Analysis found that JE participants used more varied adjectives than JN participants.

The reason why adjectives were chosen as the focus of this section was that when people

compliment, they positively evaluate the objects of their compliment with some sort of

qualifier, typically adjectives. There are some compliments that lack these qualifiers, which

are formed using other compliment expressions that convey congratulatory words and

feelings; however, these are much less common. Therefore, the variety of adjectives used in

participants’ compliments was chosen as a measure of linguistic influence. To investigate the

structure of each compliment uttered in both the JN and JE groups, three formulas were

created to determine adjective use. All adjectives that appeared in the adjective slots of these

formulas were extracted, in the speakers’ native Japanese first and then translated by the

researcher into English. Adjectives include i-adjectives and na-adjectives, which both have

the same attribute describing and modifying nouns (McNally & Kennedy, 2008, p. 68). The

formulas are as follows:

a) Adjectives + Noun + IP: A noun declared compliment

b) Adjectives + IP + nouns: Anastrophe

c) Noun + Adjectives + IP: A noun declared compliment

d) Adjectives + IP: A core compliment

IP= Interactional particle (e.g. ne, sa, no, yo, na)

Participants’ answers to question 8 from the questionnaire, which represented complimenting

one’s Ability (specifically performing on piano at a concert) and the use of adjectives toward

Strangers, were chosen for analysis with the formulas. This question was chosen because, of

Murahata | 33

all those on the questionnaire, it resulted in the greatest likelihood of participants giving a

compliment. The process of detecting adjectives using these formulas do not include self-

centered compliments. Table 4.2 shows which adjectives were supplied by both groups in

response to the open-ended question 8, which asked what word, phrase or sentence they

would use to compliment a Stranger playing the piano at a concert. The circles (“○”) on the

right side of the table indicate that the adjective was found in compliments, while the dashes

(“-”) mean that it was not found.

Table 4.2 Adjectives in Japanese and English Translations

Japanese English Translation JN JE

Adjective 1 すごい(Sugoi) cool, awesome, breathtaking ○ ○

Adjective 2 素晴らしい

(Subarasii)

wonderful, great, marvelous,

splendid, excellent, fine, remarkable,

fantastic, superb, gorgeous

○ ○

Adjective 3 良い(Yoi) good, better, best, nice ○ ○

Adjective 4 素敵な(Sutekina) wonderful, lovely, nice, great, neat,

darling, charming, cool

− ○

Adjective 5 綺麗な(Kireina) beautiful, pretty, lovely, fine − ○

Adjective 6 かっこいい

(Kakkoii)

cool, neat, flash, stunning − ○

Adjective 7 上手な

(Zyouzuna)

good, expert, skillful, handy, skilled ○ −

The number of compliments found in this section was 32 for JN and 31 for JE. Table 4.2 also

illustrates that the JE group used seven original Japanese adjectives, while the JN group used

Murahata | 34

only four. The adjectives were translated using Genius, the English-Japanese Dictionary 3rd

Edition, and any meanings which were not related to compliments, for example, the meaning

“clean” for “kireina,” were excluded.

In addition to the difference in the numbers of adjectives used by each group, one

of the interviewees provided the following statement in the interview, in response to a

question asking how her English language experience had impacted her L1 use, specifically

compliments:

I might have begun complimenting more concretely because of the translation from

English to Japanese. I compliment in English here so the translation of the words that

I use to compliment in English might be transferred to how I compliment in Japanese.

(Hitomi)

Based on this, a hypothesis arose. If Japanese participants who had lived in the US had

become accustomed to complimenting in English, their word choice in English language

compliments might have expanded their use of adjectives in Japanese because of the

translation processes in their brain. For example, the word “cool” can be translated into two

different adjectives in Japanese, “Kakkoii” and “Sugoi,” which are both found in Table 4.2

and have different meanings according to their translations (Eijiro on the WEB, n.d.). In

addition, the English word “beautiful” can be translated into “Subarashii,” “Sugoi” and

“Kireina,” all of which appear in the table separately (Genius, English-Japanese Dictionary

3rd Edition, n.d.). Thus, complimenting in English might have expanded their word choice,

leading to the use of more varied adjectives in Japanese.

Adding subject nouns

The second linguistic influence is that participants labeled as JE tended not to drop

nouns in their answers to the open-ended questions in the questionnaire, while JN participants

Murahata | 35

seemed to more frequently skip stating nouns. The Japanese language has a function where,

depending on the context, the speaker can choose to drop nouns when information is shared

with the listener. For example, a sentence in English, “Look! I bought this book yesterday!”

could be translated into Japanese without the noun as, “Look! Bought yesterday!” because

the existence of the book has been established by the speaker’s showing it to the listener

along with the imperative “Look!” Thus, the book becomes shared information which allows

the speaker to omit the actual word “book.” The questions asked in the questionnaire directly

told the participants what to compliment, so it was possible, and even predictable, that all

participants could have omitted stating nouns. However, as Figure 4.3 indicates, JE

participants mentioned these optional subject nouns frequently compared to JN participants.

The specific compliment structure in which participants used subject nouns even though they

did not need to was the formula “Adjectives + nouns,” where the order of adjectives and

nouns is interchangeable because of the grammatical system of the Japanese language.

Figure 4.3: The ratio of noun stated compliments: open-ended questions (percentages).

The graph above shows the incidence ratio of noun-stated compliments in answers to

all the open-ended questions in the questionnaire. The participant quoted in the previous

Q8: Ability Q10: Social Status Q12: Possession Q14: Appearance

JN 16.8 4.69 37.3 40

JE 19.69 10.32 61.02 58.82

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Per

cen

tage

The Ratio of Noun-Stated Compliments: Open-Ended Questions (Percentage)

Murahata | 36

section explained in the interview that she had begun to compliment more concretely

(Hitomi) a statement that can be applied to both adjectives and nouns. Because stating nouns

is optional dropped in Japanese, the phenomenon of JE participants not omitting these nouns

as frequently as JN participants could have been caused by their English language

experiences. This phenomenon did not appear to be influenced by the compliment topic; the

ratios found in both groups had similar shapes, indicating that JE participants’ use of subject

nouns was greater in with topic.

In addition, as Figure 4.3 shows, there were some topics in which JE participants used

subject nouns more than others, specifically situations with concrete compliment objects,

such as Possessions and Appearance. A possible explanation for this disparity is that

participants in the JE group might have experienced complimenting and/or being

complimented more at the beginning of a conversation while living in the US, which would

have given them more chances to compliment and/or to be complimented about Appearance

and Possessions, which are both relatively more frequent as the topic of compliments objects

than Ability and Social status in this type of conversation. Wolfson (1983) discovered that

one complimenting behavior of Americans is to open a conversation with a compliment, and

those who study abroad have many opportunities to meet strangers in daily life, even

passively, such as when attending events held by the schools they attend or the communities

they live in. This plethora of opportunities to meet others might have caused the JE

participants to become accustomed to experiencing compliment exchanges based on visible

objects. Some of the interviewees mentioned that this increase in compliment opportunities

affected how often they complimented. They stated that they complimented others about very

visible objects, such as Appearance, which has been shown to be likely when meeting

someone for the very first time (Hitomi, Takuya, Yoshie). Also, according to one of the

interviewees, “complimenting at the beginning of a conversation is natural in English”

Murahata | 37

(Hitomi), which implies that compliments might be used to start conversations in English

more so than in Japanese. From this, we may conclude the increased use of noun-stated

compliments, especially in concrete compliments, suggests that JE participants’

complimenting behavior in their L1 was affected by their English language experience in the

US.

The use of more self-centered compliments

The third linguistic influence on JE participants’ language use in their L1 is that they

utilized self-centered compliments, such as “I like your shirt” (self-centered) instead of

“Your shirt looks nice” (topic-centered), more than participants in the JN group. As with

section 4.2.1, the results discussed here emerged from analysis of the open-ended question 8

in the questionnaire, which asked participants to compliment the Ability of a Stranger.

Figure 4.4: Frequency of self- and topic-centered compliments in Q8, Ability of a Stranger.

Figure 4.4 shows that the JE group used self-centered compliments more frequently than the

JN group. The actual examples of self-centered compliments written by the JE group were,

“Sugoku kanndo shimashita. [I was very moved.]” and “Kiitete horebore shimashita. [I was

charmed/fascinated by listening to your piano playing]”. The specific phrase used most

27

19

4

13

JN Group JE Group

Frequency of Self- and Topic-Centered Compliments in Q8, Ability of a Stranger

Topic-centered Self-centered

Murahata | 38

frequently to give a self-centered compliment was the same as the first example, “I was

moved.”

There are two possible explanations for this phenomenon. The first possibility was

suggested by what one of the interviewees stated in his interview. He explained,

For example, only the one who compliments knows if he is happy or not about the

concert, in my opinion. In Japan, we do consider whether or not our opinions are

appropriate for others when we talk, so a compliment in which we thrust our own

opinions on someone else could be hard to use because it is not widely acceptable in

Japan, while people can do it in the US. (Takeshi)

According to the interviewee, compared to the western style of expressing opinion more

freely, Japanese people tend to avoid expressing their opinions because they avoid being

opposed to other people in unfamiliar contexts. However, western-style communication

requires speakers to express their opinions clearly, and JE participants may have gotten used

to expressing themselves in the US through English, which might have caused them to give

more self-centered compliments. This is supported by Kumagai and Kumagai (1986), who

insist that how Japanese speakers deliver the meaning of a sentence is based on the cultural

concept of Amae, which is a passive dependency on others. This contrasts with western style

communication, where personal opinions are given more freely. Within this conception, the

self in Japanese is not usually exposed in conversation (p. 306). Japanese native speakers

often rely on others to infer the meaning a sentence, especially one with the self as a subject;

thus, it could be said that the frequent use of self-centered compliments among JE

participants was caused by their experiences with western style communication.

Pragmatic Influences

The second theme, which is the main focus of this study, is the pragmatic influences

Murahata | 39

of having lived in an English-speaking country on JE participants’ spoken Japanese. Three

findings were combined to form this theme, including frequency of compliments, the use of

compliments as a conversational facilitator, and the response to complimenting in their first

language, Japanese. Findings in this category illustrate how JE participants utilized

compliments rather than examining the actual language produced, as discussed in the

previous theme; therefore, this theme correlates the causality of why Japanese participants

labeled as JE performed differently from JN.

Influences on frequency: topics and target persons to compliment

In response to an interview question asking, “How do you differentiate the way

Americans and Japanese compliment?”, one of the most commonly mentioned differences

was frequency. As this awareness of the significant difference in compliment frequency

suggests, it was found that English language experience in the US impacted how frequently

JE participants complimented in their L1. The interviewees also noted that they now

compliment more frequently in Japanese. After being asked, “Has living in the US affected

your way of giving compliments? How?” interviewees provided the following answers:

“I began complimenting more in L1.” (Yoshie)

“The frequency of compliments in L1 increased a little bit I guess.”(Hitomi)

“I became more open since I came to the US, because everyone talks to each

other in the US, so regarding expansion of chances to compliment, I would compliment more even in L1.” (Takuya)

As these quotations show, interviewees stated that they noticed themselves complimenting

more in their L1 after living in the US. A possible explanation of their changed attitudes

toward compliments, specifically increased frequency, demonstrate that, as stated in the third

quotation, participants who had experienced living in the US had become more tolerant of

exchanges with people outside of their group of acquaintance because they had experienced

western-style friendly interactions with random people. Another explanation for the increased

Murahata | 40

compliment frequency among JE participants was suggested by a comment from one of the

interviewees. He stated, “Not how I compliment, but what I compliment, including people

and topics might have expanded” (Takeshi). Although this statement could be attributable to

how his identity changed while abroad, which is discussed later, the expansion of

compliment objects he describes could possibly mean that he might compliment more

because he now is simply able to identify more compliment objects.

Influences on topics

In this section, the increase in complimenting on the part of JE participants is

examined by compliment topic and target. Figure 4.5 demonstrates the likelihood of giving

compliments according to both compliment topic and target, with topic as the primary focus.

In the figure, JN participants represent the baseline against which JE participants’

complimenting frequency is compared.

Figure 4.5: The increased likelihood of giving compliments: JN to JE (by topic).

According to Figure 4.5, JE participants gave compliments as much as 10% more frequently

Q8: AbilityQ10: Social

StatusQ12: Possession

Q14:Appearance

Family Members 4.48 2.13 7.36 10.85

Friends 7.77 2.75 9.35 8.46

Acquaintances 9.87 -1.3 -0.39 9.47

Strangers 10.07 0.87 -6.04 3.62

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

Per

cen

tage

of

fre

qu

ency

The Increased Likelihood of Giving Compliments: JN to JE group

Murahata | 41

than JN participants in two categories, and there were only three categories out of sixteen

where JN participants complimented more frequently. This means that though the JE group

demonstrated different degrees of compliment frequency with different topic/target

combinations, overall, they complimented more frequently in their L1 than the JN group.

This was especially notable in questions where the participants were asked to create

compliments based on Ability, where JE participants exhibited the most obvious influence,

such that their complimenting frequency increased in inverse proportion to social distance.

Within the topic of Ability, JE participants’ complimenting behavior with those closest to

them (Family Members and Friends) was less impacted, whereas their complimenting

behavior with those most distant from them (Acquaintances and Strangers) was most

impacted. In contrast, interestingly, questions about Appearance demonstrate the opposite

result—the closest relationships were influenced most while the distant relationships were

influenced less. That is to say, the likelihood of complimenting Ability increased

proportionally with the distance of the compliment giver’s relationship to the compliment

receiver, and the likelihood of complimenting Appearance was inversely proportional.

On the other hand, compliments about Social Status illustrated the least increased

ratio compared to the other compliment topics. There was no significant impact of JE

participants’ English language experience on likelihood of them giving compliments in this

area. A possible explanation for why this occurred is related to the open-ended nature of the

question where participants were asked to write what they would actually say in this context.

Participants in both groups might have imagined offering congratulatory words instead of

compliments. The answers from the open-ended question elicited many “congratulations” but

not many compliments. The situation described in this question was getting a much better

job, but it is possible that a different situation would have elicited different results, since both

JE and JN participants preferred giving congratulatory words to complimenting. Thus, this

Murahata | 42

question might have not functioned as planned.

The another noticeable result shown in Figure 4.5 is that JE participants were not very

likely to compliment the Possessions of Strangers. The compliment object used this question

was a car, and there is no evidence that western-style complimenting does not allow people

to compliment each other’s cars. Thus, it might be that JE participants were not originally

familiar with evaluating if a car looked good because of their lack of experience owning cars

or because they were indifferent. Therefore, this result is an outlier in this study.

Overall, despite the different degrees of complimenting likelihood , JE participants

were more likely to give compliments more frequently in nearly all categories, suggesting

that their complimenting behavior was influenced by their English language experiences.

Influences on compliment targets

While Figure 4.5 exhibited how much higher JE participants’ likelihood of giving

compliments was than JN participants’ according to topic, Figure 4.6 presents the same data

grouped by compliment target, in order of social distance.

Figure 4.6: The increased likelihood of giving compliments (by social distance).

FamilyMembers

Friends Acquaintances Strangers

Q8: Ability 4.48 7.77 9.87 10.07

Q10: Social Status 2.13 2.75 -1.3 0.87

Q12: Possession 7.36 9.35 -0.39 -6.04

Q14: Appearance 10.85 8.46 9.47 3.62

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

Co

mp

lime

nt

Fre

qu

en

cy

The Increased Likelihood of Giving Compliments: JN to JE group

Murahata | 43

Unlike the likelihood of complimenting on specific topics, which exhibited almost fixed

patterns, the likelihood of complimenting specific target persons followed no apparent

pattern, being unique according to topic. At the very least, it can be said that there is very

little relationship between the likelihood of giving compliments and the distance of

relationships between compliment givers and receivers. However, to stretch a point, it could

be said that the results for Family Members and Friends appear to be similar, while the

results for Acquaintances and Strangers have similar shapes, as well. What differs between

these two pairings is that if the target person is more distant than Friends, the likelihood of

complimenting on Social Status or Possession tends to decrease, and that the likelihood of

complimenting on Ability or Appearance uniformly manifests as a “U” shape with all

relationships. Although there were no obvious patterns, results on the likelihood of giving

compliments by compliment target still indicates that JE participants may compliment more

frequently than JN participants.

The use of compliments as a conversation facilitator

Aside from higher frequency, the data from JE participants showed that they utilized

compliments in a unique way, as a conversational facilitator. To investigate how JE

participants use of compliments was impacted by their English language experiences, how

often both groups of participants appended questions to their compliments was an additional

focus of analysis. Asking questions in conversations obviously facilitates filling information

gaps and continues the flow of talk; without questioning, there are no natural interactions.

Firstly, based on the videotaped simulations, how often participants in both groups

added a question when they complimented was calculated. Multiple questions accompanying

a single compliment were counted as one questioning action in the analysis. The incident

ratio of questions calculated among all compliments from the JN group was 4.88% (2

compliments out of 41 with questions) whereas the ratio from the JE group was 22.72% (10

Murahata | 44

compliments out of 44 with questions ). This result draws attention to how the JE group

tended to append questions to compliments more frequently in order extend conversations

than the JN group. The instructions for the videotaped simulations included statements asking

participants to have natural conversations, which implied that participants would use some

conversational strategies beyond complimenting including questioning. However, the

dramatic difference between the number of questions asked by each group and the fact that

the JE group’s questions were almost always attached to a compliment strongly suggests that

JE participants’ were affected by their English language experiences.

Supporting the conclusion drawn from the videotaped simulations, the open-ended

questions from the questionnaire asking participants what they would actually say in specific

situation further evidence that JE participants utilized a combination of compliments and

questions to facilitate conversation more often. In each question, each participant was asked,

“What would you say to compliment in this situation? Please write a sentence, phrase or

word that you would actually say to people in each category.” Including questions in their

answers was completely participants’ choice. Figure 4.7 indicates the incident ratio of

questions attached to compliments, sorted by topics.

Murahata | 45

Figure 4.7: The incident ratio of questions attached to compliments: open-ended questions.

The most noticeable aspects of this figure is the obvious differences between the JN and JE

groups. Supporting the results of the videotaped simulations, the JE group showed a much

higher tendency to add questions to their compliments in two topic areas, which could greatly

facilitate conversations with others. The second noticeable factor is that these significantly

higher ratios were found only in compliments on Possession and Appearance. According to

Figure 4.7, when JE participants wrote what they would say in Q12: Possession and Q14:

Appearance, they added questions to compliments approximately 17% of the time, whereas

JN participants added questions less than 3% of the time. In terms of compliments on Ability,

no one asked additional questions, and there were very few questions were added to

compliments on Social Status by both groups. The way the JE participants appended follow-

up questions was mostly asking how the compliment receiver took possession of the object,

for example, “Kakkoi! Dokode kattano? [Cool! Where did you buy it?]” (Q12: Possessions,

Friends), “Sono syatsu kawaiine. Dokode kattano? [The shirt is cute. Where did you buy

it?]” (Q14: Appearance, Friends).

Q8: Ability Q10: Social Status Q12: Possession Q14: Appearance

JN 0 1.56 3.17 2.4

JE 0 0.79 16.95 17.65

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Qu

est

ion

Fre

qu

en

cyIncident Ratio of Questions Attached to

Compliments (Percentage)

Murahata | 46

In terms of the disparity between the number of questions attached to concrete

(Possession and Appearance) and abstract (Ability and Social Status) compliments by both

groups displayed in Figure 4.7, the same reason mentioned in section 4.2.2 could apply to

this result as well. The fact that JE participants had more opportunities to meet with others

for the first time while living in the US might have affected what they typically compliment

because complimenting visible objects such as Appearance and Possessions is more likely in

initial meetings. Thus, living abroad in the US could have enhanced JE participants’ use of

compliments as a conversation facilitator.

Responding to compliments

The principal research questions were designed to discover on how native Japanese

speakers who have experienced living in the US would give compliments; however, there is

another pragmatic influence that emerged in the course of analysis: how they receive

compliments, which can also greatly affect the shape of an interaction. Japanese speakers

normally tend to be humble and not to respond compliments by accepting them, which

affects the grammar of their response (Matuura, 2004; Grossi, 2009; Kim, 2009; Tajeddin &

Ghamary, 2011). Commonly used compliment responses in Japanese are grammatically

constructed to include refusal words or phrases, for instance, “iya (no)” and “sonnna koto

naiidesu (that’s not true).” While Japanese native speakers are generally expected to be

humble, the results of the videotaped simulations indicated that JE participants’ way of

responding to compliments may have been influenced by their time abroad because they

performed virtually no refusing in their responses. According to the transcribed utterances

from the videos, among JN participants, six compliment responses out of 41 denied that the

compliment was true, whereas there was only one such denial out of 44 responses from the

JE group.

In addition to the data from videotaped simulations, a statement uttered by one of the

Murahata | 47

interviewees supports the existence of this pragmatic influence on JE participants. She stated

that she was more shy when she responded to compliments in Japanese before studying

abroad (Hitomi). Because in western-style communication, people usually tend to accept

compliments rather than reject them, it is very possible that JE participants’ complimenting

behavior in terms of responding to compliments changed due to the experience of being and

interacting with others in the US. As mentioned above, investigating how participants

responded to compliments was not the main focus of this study. However, it was revealed as

a worthy topic for further research.

Identity Influences

Aside from linguistic and pragmatic influences, there is an additional possible

influence on JE participants’ perceptions of complimenting: a change in identity. In fact, the

influences discussed above may be attributable to a change in identity because identity is a

factor which may shape language production and use. As mentioned in chapter 2, in this

paper, identity is defined as one’s internal and dynamic perceptions of various factors which

determine who one is as developed through relating to others in communicatively unified

communities, drawing on the differences between the self and others. Based on this

definition, the influence of identity on complimenting caused by participants’ experience

living in the US are discussed in this section.

New perceptions: a widened view of the world

According to the definition of identity given above, if JE participants’ perceptions of

self and various factors have been impacted by living abroad, for example, becoming able to

recognize the world in more detail, it could be said that their identity has been influenced.

Although the research conducted for this study did not elicit enough data to determine

whether the influences are an expansion or change, or if some parts of the JE participants’

Murahata | 48

identities were dominated by the norms of their new communicatively unified community,

one of the interviewees mentioned that this type of cognitive expansion may have occurred.

He stated,

Not how I compliment, but what I compliment, including people and topics might

have expanded… the range of topics and target persons to compliment has been

expanded as much as we experienced things in the new culture. For example, my

attitude toward studying English changed because now I know how truly hard it is to

study in the US. (Takeshi)

Being in a different culture gives us many opportunities that we are often unable to

experience in our own culture. For example, Takeshi gained a new respect for people who

study English abroad after experiencing it for himself. Because international students are

required to communicate with others in English in the US in order to survive, learning how to

use the language in a way people in that context do is mandatory for academic success. In

some countries, including Japan, studying English is only for the purpose of passing entrance

exams to enter universities, and the English that they learn does not usually cover how people

in the US actually use it. Thus, his expanded perception of learning English abroad has been

influenced by living in that specific context, and his likelihood of complimenting people who

take studying English seriously might have increased because of his new awareness.

Acquiring new perceptions also applies to topics researched in this study. For

instance, in terms of Appearance, American and Japanese fashion and a hairstyles are quite

different, as shown by Maynard & Taylor (1999) who explored the different images of young

girls in Japanese and American fashion magazines. As mentioned above, the aspects of

Appearance that we compliment are visually obvious because we can literally see these

objects; therefore, there should be many opportunities for new perceptions to be cultivated.

Then, in terms of the likelihood complimenting of Social Status, JE and JN participants were

Murahata | 49

mostly students or had graduated from university recently, so complimenting Social Status

might have been hard for them to imagine because some of them had never officially worked

before, and they were still socially categorized as students. Additionally, meeting people who

work in different fields would accordingly also be rare because they had spent time mostly on

campus. This explains the diminished likelihood of giving compliments about Social Status—

in other words, their perceptions toward working had less of an impact. Therefore, it suggests

that identity influence greatly correlates with the other types of influence. Still, because the

research conducted for this thesis was mainly designed to investigate pragmatic competence,

researching how participants’ perceptions about the world may change their complimenting

behaviors requires further research.

Summary of this Chapter: Bridging to the Next Chapter

This chapter introduced and explored three different types of influences on

complimenting behavior: linguistic, pragmatic and identity. The theme originally set as the

main focus of this thesis was pragmatic influences; however, it turned out that the pragmatic

influences are deeply connected to the others. The overlapping quality of these three

influences contributed to revealing how English language experience affects Japanese

English users’ language competence. Based on these findings and results, the next chapter

discusses 1) implications for how we as teachers and scholars should perceive English users,

especially those who speak Japanese as a first language, 2) teaching pragmatics and 3)

limitations of data collection and analysis.

Murahata | 50

DISCUSSION

Introduction

The discussion section of this paper will first address how we might perceive English

users based on the findings and results from the previous chapter. Then, implications for

teaching pragmatics, especially for complimenting in different cultures will be discussed.

Limitations found in collecting and analyzing the data and possibilities for further research

will also be addressed before the final comments.

Overall Findings and Results

Before moving on the discussion of implications and limitations, how the overall

findings and the results answer the principal research questions is addressed.

How does learning English as an L2 affect Japanese users’ L1 pragmatic

competence in terms of giving compliments?

This research question is fundamental; thus; all findings and results found in this

study relate to the question of how JE participants’ L1 had been influenced by learning and

experiencing English in the US. All findings were categorized into three types of influences,

as mentioned in chapter 4: linguistic, pragmatic and identity. Linguistic influences include,

firstly, the use of various adjectives, specifically the finding that those who had lived in the

US used more varied adjectives than average native speakers. The second linguistic influence

was that the JE participants produced compliments with clearly stated nouns whereas the JN

participants tended to drop subjects, as commonly done in the Japanese language. The last

linguistic influence was the use of self-centered compliments, which were used more

frequently by JE participants than JN participants. Three pragmatic influences were found in

Murahata | 51

this study. The first pragmatic influence was that the frequency of compliments from JE

participants was higher than that from JN. The second pragmatic influence was that JE

participants used compliments as a conversation facilitator by adding extra questions to

compliments. The last pragmatic influence was that JE participants tended to accept

compliments rather than refuse them, as the JN participants tended to do. One identity

influence was found, which was that JE participants’ unique way of complimenting could be

attributed to their acquisition of new perceptions through English language experience.

Possible causalities

Three possible explanations for the three influences emerged in data analysis: a) the

use of language itself possibly caused the linguistic influences, b) L2 pragmatic acquisition

could have resulted in the pragmatic influences, and c) the fact that JE participants gained a

new worldview affected how they perceived complimenting situations based on their

language experiences in the US, which may have led to the identity influences. What possibly

caused these influences was revealed most through interviews.

Cause a, that the use of the language itself caused the linguistic influences, was most

likely the result of reverse translation. Reverse translation means that a person who learned

an L2 transfers vocabulary from the L2 into his/her L1. This reverse translation might have

possibly expanded the use of adjectives in Japanese for participants in JE group. Also, having

gotten used to producing sentences that required a specified focus noun in English could

arguably be the reason that JE participants utilized more noun-stated compliments than JN

participants.

Cause b, that L2 pragmatic acquisition caused the pragmatic influences, was possibly

caused by JE participants having experienced western-style interactions with others, for

example, using complimenting as a conversation facilitator. As Wolfson (1983) argued, one

Murahata | 52

common purpose of complimenting in US society is to establish solidarity with others at the

beginning of a conversation. Therefore, this is a reasonable explanation for why JE

participants performed differently in this regard and added follow-up questions to each

compliment.

Cause c, that JE participants gained new worldviews based on their language

experiences in the US, which in turn affected how they perceived complimenting situations

have called an identity influence, has the potential to explain not only possible effects on

complimenting behaviors, but all other speech acts, as well. In this study, it was partially

revealed that JE participants’ way of evaluating the world around them had been expanded,

which also expanded what they saw as complimenting possibilities. In the same way that the

interviewee whose perception of studying English was influenced by living abroad as

explained in chapter 4, being in the US brought each interviewee new thoughts and

experiences. Thus, cause c may have influenced topic selection and frequency, as well.

With all causalities above, JE participants’ new language behaviors had been shaped

in unique ways. Still, these three causes should be considered only partial explanations for

language influence. There might be additional, significantly different possibilities for

language influence yet to be found, for example, gender or age differences.

Is this effect a change or an expansion of pragmatic range of compliment targets and objects?

It is clear that, regarding the aspects of complimenting behaviors examined here,

findings and results indicated that JE participants’ L1 pragmatic competence experienced

change in many areas. However, what was not found here was whether L2 pragmatic

acquisition dominated the original pragmatic competence or if JE participants' newly

acquired pragmatic competence is added to that original competence.

For example, given or actual situations where participants have conversations with

Murahata | 53

people whose ages are older would contribute to eliciting further information about if the new

pragmatic competence overrides the original L1 pragmatic competence. These specific

situations would greatly reflect Japanese speakers’ pragmatic language use because

interacting in Japanese with an older person as the receiver of a compliment requires specific

language use based on cultural expectations. For instance, honorific language, which younger

people are expected to use toward older people, utilizes more complex grammatical

structures. Giving compliments in general implies that the speaker is evaluating others, so in

judging other people younger Japanese speakers have to be humble, and cause some FTAs if

they are not. In fact, one of the three main types of FTAs for those who have negative face as

defined by Brown & Levinson (1978) supports the danger of increased frequency of giving

compliments as a possible FTA. The act of the speaker expressing in his or her evaluation of

the listener or something closely related to the listener would be one example of this. Strong

feelings of desires might harm the listener’s face. According to this type of FTA, frequently

uttered compliments to the same individual, which could be interpreted as a strong

evaluation, might cause some problems because of Japanese cultural expectation. Thus,

investigating whether or not Japanese speakers behave in the same way with those who are

younger and older, before and after having language experiences living in the US, would be

beneficial to reveal if multilinguals preserve their originally acquired L1 pragmatic

competence.

What kind of factors, for example, social distance and topics used to compliment are affected most and least? And why?

Data addressing this research question revealed how JE participants’ complimenting

behavior was impacted by English language experience in regard to social distance and

compliment topic. In terms of compliment frequency by topic, JE participants were more

likely to give compliments about Ability and Appearance. In complimenting Ability, the more

Murahata | 54

social distance there was between the compliment giver and receiver, the more likely the JE

group was to give compliments. Conversely, in complimenting Appearance, the JE group

demonstrated the opposite behavior. The likelihood of complimenting Social Status was least

impacted by JE participants’ English language experiences; as a compliment target, Family

Members saw the largest increase in compliment likelihood in this area, but even this was

only 2.75%. The likelihood of complimenting Possessions increased by a markedly higher

ratio with Family Members and Friends, more than 7%, whereas the likelihood of

complimenting Acquaintances on Possessions experienced relatively no change.

Surprisingly, the likelihood of complimenting Strangers on Possessions decreased

dramatically.

The likelihood of giving compliments according to target persons demonstrated more

complicated results, that is to say, there was no obvious pattern as there was with the

likelihood of complimenting according to topic. At the least, it could be said that if the

relationship between the compliment giver and received was more distant than Friends, the

likelihood of giving compliments was decreased. Originally, at the time the study was

designed, the likelihood of compliments toward Strangers was predicted to increase because

it is not uncommon for people to engage in conversation with strangers in the US, and

experiencing random conversations may have led to some different behaviors on the part of

JE participants. However, the results did not show an increase; therefore, no matter how often

international students interact with Strangers in the US, it might not affect their attitude

toward giving compliments to Strangers in their L1.

Perceptions of Non-Native English Users: Especially Native Japanese Speakers

The findings and results yielded by this study undercover the extended cognitive

competences of multilinguals as a result of language influence, which helps to reveal who

they truly are. Although, as discussed in the literature review, NNSs are often only seen as

Murahata | 55

deficient language users, these results point to the significance of rethinking how both NSs

and NNSs perceive multilinguals in all fields, including the NNS as an English teacher.

Who are the multilinguals? A brief description of NNSs based on the findings and results

The results indicate that the L1 cognitive abilities of multilinguals are different from

those of monolingual speakers, which allows multilinguals to think and behave in

linguistically and cognitively unique ways. They are more capable of adjusting to new

environments and developing their own interpretations of the world in order to fit into these

contexts. According to multi-competence theory by Cook (1991), the cognitive abilities they

cultivate will be shared between L1 and L2; thus, they perform differently in their L1 than

monolinguals, as shown by the differences between the JE and JN groups. This means that

not only are multilinguals’ L1s unique, but also that they recognize more of the world with

widened viewpoints.

One unknown factor is whether L2 cognitions and language behaviors dominate a

speaker’s language capacity in both L1 and L2, which may create some problems when they

return to living in their home countries after having adjusted to their new cultures. It is also

possible that excessive exposure to an L2 might cause a decline of L1 proficiency, and in this

case, a multilingual might eventually fail to maintain a well-balanced language proficiency.

Therefore, it is extremely important to investigate to what extent multilinguals’ L1 and L2

language use lacks that balance, and how to prevent declining language capabilities.

Perceptions of multilinguals and the world for future: the qualifications of NNS teachers and multilinguals in general

As discussed in the literature review, NNESTs are still regarded as insufficient in

many countries because there are many people who believe that NSs of English are ideal

English teachers because of their fluency and accuracy of language use. However, a

Murahata | 56

multilingual teacher has the potential to teach the language in their own way with cognitive

abilities that monolingual teachers have not developed. Especially when teaching pragmatics,

knowing and being able to introduce the different ways people interact with each other and

what intercultural communication truly looks like are effective assets in cultivating

intercultural competency in students.

Interculturally competent people are capable of adjusting to new environments and

utilizing all they acquire in communicating with others from all over the world in many

different fields. Though the capacity of their expanded cognition will require more research,

there are many places where they can play key roles in the world. For instance, study abroad

directly contributes to internationalization by giving multilinguals opportunities to strengthen

learning in any classroom by bringing their unique perceptions to teachers and other students

in the countries where they study abroad and to their home countries when they return. In

addition, multilinguals’ capabilities would benefit many different industries in this time of

rapidly spreading international businesses. To conclude, multilinguals can acquire skills from

the new cultures they experience, and they can fit into many places and with many people,

and hopefully, they are able to bring back what they have gained in their home country.

Increasing the number of multi-competent humans will contribute to great

understanding between cultures as we interact more. It is important to recognize value of

multilinguals. Regarding them as a deficient language users is meaningless, when actually

they have the potential to be the leaders of an internationalized future.

Implications for Teaching Pragmatics in EFL Situations

What is revealed in this paper may greatly be beneficial in teaching pragmatics in

EFL situations because not all those studying English in this world have the opportunity to

study abroad and experience using and learning language such as the JE participants did. The

research indicated that language experiences in the US actually contributed to developing

Murahata | 57

their cognitive abilities. Using this information, there should be some ways that students

studying English as a foreign language can expand their worldviews while still within their

home countries.

The contents to teach: replicate the real environment as much as possible in teaching materials

As mentioned above, being in foreign countries to learn and experience a language is

not equally possible for everyone because of many factors, including financial and physical

reasons. Also, student's language learning environments in their home countries, for example,

in public school systems, sometimes do not give them enough opportunities to acquire a

specific language use. This is especially true in Japan, where teaching English language

curriculums heavily focus on passing the entrance exams for universities, and what these

exams are composed of is grammar, vocabulary, translations and reading—not the use of

language in everyday life. Therefore, teaching only part aspects of a language results in a

lack of cultivating communicative competence. However, the results presented in this study

showed that the actual use of the language in context facilitated students' pragmatic

competence, so the idea of using materials which replicate the real situations in teaching the

language should be emphasized.

For instance, based on the result that English language experience in the US

influenced the way JE participants utilized compliments as a conversational facilitator could

be used to develop students’ communicative competence. Teaching material such as a

dialogue introducing complimenting connected with follow-up questions in a conversation

could help students them get used to having smoothly flowing conversations and act as a

model of interacting in English. The following dialogue is from a textbook used in teaching

English at high schools in Japan.

Murahata | 58

Context: Summer vacation. Bob invited his friends, Su and Yuki, Kazuo to have a potluck

party at his host family’s house

B=Bob, K=Kazuo, M=Min-Su, Y=Yuki

1. Y= Bob, where can we put our dishes?

2. B= Here on this table.

3. Y= I brought cheesecake. It has a lot of calories, but it’s very good.

4. K= Mine is tofu salad. Easy to make and tastes good.

5. M= Here’s some chijimi, Korean pancakes with kimchi.

6. K= Yummy! May I taste one?

7. M= Wait until we’re ready, Kazuo.

8. K= OK.

9. B= Look! I’ve made California rolls.

10. K= Oh, they look like makizushi.

11. M= Isn’t this a great international potluck dinner?

12. Y=It sure is. We’re all set. Let’s eat!

Hello, there! English Conversation (2013)

Topics used in complimenting in English are mainly classified into two categories,

Appearance and Ability according to Manes & Wolfson’s (1981) categories. Even though the

topic of this dialogue is food, the only compliment in the whole of this text is the word,

“yummy!” in the sixth line. With more compliments, this dialogue would be more enjoyable

and teachable, and as an example, the following modified dialogue could produce rich

outcomes.

B=Bob, K=Kazuo, M=Min-Su, Y=Yuki

Murahata | 59

1. Y= Bob, where can we put our dishes?

2. B= Here on this table.

3. Y= I brought cheesecake. It has a lot of calories, but it’s very good.

4. B= Wow! It looks nice! How long did it take to make it?

5. Y= Thanks! It took just one hour. What did you bring, Kazuo?

6. K= Mine is tofu salad. Easy to make and tastes good.

7. M= You are good at cooking! I just wanted healthy dishes!

8. M= Here’s some shijimi, Korean pancakes with kimuchi.

9. K= Yummy! May I taste one?

10. M= Wait until we’re ready, Kazuo.

11. K= OK.

12. B= Look! I’ve made California rolls.

13. K= Oh, they look like makizushi. They look delicious! Were they hard to make?

14. B= Oh thank you, Kazuo! These weren’t hard because I have made them many

times!

15. M= Isn’t this a great international potluck diner?

16. Y=It sure is. We’re all set. Let’s eat!

The modified sentences in red include some compliment actions and follow-up

questions. This version has the potential to help leaners learn the pragmatic language use of

compliments about food, which is a major topic of compliments in English, and can also help

them to learn adjectives used in complimenting expressions. Teaching materials such as the

one shown above could be modified and used more effectively with minor changes to

produce significant learning outcomes. Replicating the types of situations students encounter

while studying aboard and interacting with NSs of English would contribute to developing

Murahata | 60

students’ pragmatic and linguistic competence.

Utilize findings as a motivator for building intrinsic motivations

In addition to designing materials aimed at the development of pragmatic

competence, having students become aware of the fact that all multilinguals potentially have

their own unique cognitive and language competences could be used as a motivator for

cultivating their intrinsic motivation toward language learning. The same reason mentioned

above applies to a situation where students are not motivated to learn English for reasons

other than passing the entrance exams for universities, and in this situation, having students

know their potential capabilities could be a great language-learning facilitator. One way

NNESTs could implement the use of this knowledge as an intrinsic motivator would require,

firstly, that NNESTs know about what being an L2 user of English means. To fulfill this

condition, providing a teacher education course would be necessary. In this course, NNESTs

would be taught about how learning and using L2 positively affects learners’ cognitive

abilities, and that being an L2 user should not be regarded as deficiency because of the lack

of mother-tongue language skills. This might also motivate NNESTs themselves because

they should not feel that they are inferior in terms of their language proficiency compared to

NSs. Therefore, as a first step, teacher education should be implemented in order to build a

foundation for having students intrinsically motivated to learn an L2.

The next step is to actually motivate students. It has been found that an intrinsically

motivated student performs better in learning an L2, and based on Self-Determination Theory

(SDT), there are three types of intrinsic motivation. The first type is knowledge, which refers

to motivation to explore new perceptions and develop knowledge. The second type is

accomplishment, which refers to motivation to accomplish learning goals and the desire to

master a task. The last type is stimulation, which refers to motivation brought on by the

excitement and enjoyment stimulated by challenging a task (Noels, Pelletier, Clement, &

Murahata | 61

Vallerand, 2000). Enhancing those three types of intrinsic motivation based on findings of

this study could accelerate L2 learning. This enhancement could be implemented in many

different ways, but two major ways come to mind. First, the easiest method is to talk to

students about being L2 users. Besides teaching content, a teacher could tell his/her students

that learning outcomes manifest not only in their language proficiency but also in their

cognitive ability. Especially for those who study English based on extrinsic factors, such as

getting better grades and passing the exams, being told what they would truly acquire might

motivate them to seek out new ideas about what they could do in the future, or master a task

which shows their development of new cognitions, which could lead students to feel excited

about learning. Second, as part of course objectives, providing students with an explicit

explanation of learning objectives, which would include not only improving accuracy and

fluency, but also acquiring pragmatic competences. With well-determined objectives, true

language learning could have students become conscious about their cognitive development,

motivating them intrinsically.

What the purposes of teaching English are and what English teaching should look like

are still controversial issues, including in Japan where there are still are many places where

English learning takes place with only extrinsic motivations because of an ignorance what

learning and using an L2 can allow us to become capable of. Taking the implementations

suggested above to heart would make it significantly move successful language learning

forward.

Limitations

This section discusses the limitations that arose regarding the data itself and the

methods used for data collection. It also suggests expanded possibilities for further research

and deeper research on the same topic.

Murahata | 62

Participant selection

The first limitation regarding participants who volunteered in this research was their

age. The average age was 18.69 for the JN group and 22.97 for the JE group. These averages

mean that there was no data collected from both younger and older Japanese speakers, who

may have performed much differently. In Japan, the older a person is, the more sophisticated

communications should be because of the society's hierarchical system. Therefore, involving

both younger and older participants might yield results that would enable us to realize a more

authentic picture of language learning effects.

Also, participants in JE group were a mix of students who had already gone back to

Japan and those who had not been to Japan for a long time. Japanese speakers still living in

the US might have not been able to imagine how they would perform in giving compliments

in Japanese if they had not had many opportunities to interact with Japanese people at the

time of the data collection. Thus, involving Japanese participants who have returned to Japan

after living in the US would contribute to more accurate results and further validate the data.

In addition, although the investigator asked for the participants’ gender in the

questionnaire, the gender ratios were not well balanced in either group (JN: 13 men and 20

women, JE: 11 men and 21 women).For this reason, differences in complimenting behavior

according to gender were not analyzed in this study. In future studies, collecting data equally

from each gender will be necessary to investigate complimenting differences by gender.

The failure to track individuals would also be an another limitation of this study.

Because this study compared only two different variables, the JE and JN groups, and it was

difficult to investigate how an individual person’s pragmatic competence might have been

influenced.

Questionnaires

Along with involving both younger and older participants mentioned above, adding

Murahata | 63

questions that would ask participants to investigate how they would react with differently-

aged people as target persons might produce different results. There was no specific

designation in terms of age of the imagined targets to compliment; therefore, introducing

situations with a wide range of ages would be ideal in future studies.

The only criterion for participant selection for the questionnaire was having lived in

the US, so the analysis did not take into account possible differences between data from those

who had lived in the US over a few years and who had lived in the US only a few months.

Investigating how length of study abroad influences complimenting behavior would elicit

more comprehensive results about the effects of English language experience.

The questionnaire conducted in this study mainly focused on eliciting participants’

likelihood of giving compliments in given situations and language production, but not their

perceptions about complimenting. Therefore, questions about how they perceive

compliments, for example, asking participants if complimenting were easy for them, were

missing from the questionnaire. Adding questions about participants perceptions about

compliments would be beneficial to elicit further information.

Videotaped simulations

Even though videotaping is useful to elicit is non-verbal expressions, the videotaped

simulations conducted in the study did not successfully draw out those expressions because

each participant was holding a card with information about their assigned role. While they

were playing the role, they looked down to check what their characteristics were, which

prevent their eyes movements from being tracked, for example. The instructions did not

mention that they were not supposed to hold the card, and if the instructions had included that

statement, participants might have forgotten what to say because of the amount of

information they had been given.

In addition, because the situations in the simulations were all given, the authentic

Murahata | 64

language occurrences were limited. Participants sometimes played the role of someone who

was not even close to their real demographic background, for example, a doctor, which led to

difficulty in producing language that truly reflected their own. Also, the compliment objects

used in this study included ones which were hard to imagine for certain participants. For

instance, owning a motorcycle would have been hard to imagine for those who had not had

their own motorcycle before for financial reasons. Depending on the individual, a person’s

perception toward compliment objects could be completely different. Thus, eliciting

authentic language use could be limited, and using real situations would be a great source

information in further studies.

Interviews

As mentioned in the section on the limitations of participants selection, more

interviews should have been conducted with Japanese participants who had gone back to

Japan and become aware of how differently American and Japanese compliment to elicit the

deeper data. Some of interviewees actually mentioned that imagining how they would

compliment in Japanese was hard because there were not many opportunities for them to

interact with Japanese people in the US, which limited the data collection.

Final comments

The deeper I went into this research, the more fun—and limitations—I found. This

study has potential to expand research in related fields, including teaching English, applied

linguistics and socio-linguistics. The findings and results of this study will surely lead to

something for the future, especially for NNESTs, multilinguals in general, and all those who

have been seeking out information on who the residents of the world are. Therefore, I am

greatly honored to be part of the circulation of this knowledge as a multilingual and also an

English language user, and here is the end of my memorable thesis journey.

Murahata | 65

REFERENCES

Akerlof, G. A., & Kranton, R. E. (2005). Identity and the Economics of Organizations. The

Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(1), 9-32.

Anchimbe, E. A. (2006). The native-speaker fever in English language teaching (ELT):

Pitting pedagogical competence against historical origin. Linguistik Online, 26, 3-14.

Barnlund, D., & Araki, S. (1985). Intercultural encounters: The management of compli-

ments by Japanese and Americans. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1, 9-26.

Ben Zeev, S. (1977). The influence of bilingualism on cognitive strategy and cognitive

development. Child Development, 48, 1009-1018. Bernhardt, E. B. (1991). Reading

development in a second-language. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1978, 1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage.

Cambridge: Cambridge Uni- versity Press.

Burns, A. (2009). Doing action research in English language teaching: A guide for

practitioners. Routledge.

Cao, M. (2016). Backward pragmatic transfer: An empirical study on compliment responses

among Chinese EFL learners. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, Vol. 6, No. 9,

1846-1854. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0609.18

Murahata | 66

Cenoz, J. (2003). The intercultural style hypothesis: L1 and L2 interaction in requesting

behavior. In V. J. Cook (Ed.), Effect of the Second Language on the First (pp. 62-80).

Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. MIT press.

Choong, K. P. (2006). Multicompetence and second language teaching. Working Papers in

TESOL & Applied Linguistics, 16 (1), 1-3

Clark, E., & Paran, A. (2007). The employability of non-native speaker teachers of EFL: A

UK survey. System, 35, 407-430.

Cool. (2016). In Eijiro on the Web. Retrieved from

http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=cool&ref=sa

Cook, V. J. (1991). The poverty-of-the-stimulus argument and multi-competence. Second

Language Research, 7, 2, 103-117.

Cook, V. (1999). Going beyond the native speaker in language teaching. TESOL quarterly,

33(2), 185-209.

Cook, V. (Ed.). (2003). The effect of the second on the first. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Cook, V., & Wei, L. (Eds.). (2016). The Cambridge Handbook of Linguistic Multi-

competence. Cambridge University Press.

Daikuhara, M. (1986). A Study of Compliment from A Cross-cultural Perspective: Japanese

vs. American English, Penn Working Papers in Educational Linguistics, 2, 103-133.

Durgunoglu, A. Y. & Oney, B. (2000) Literacy development in two languages: Cognitive and

sociocultural dimensions of cross-language transfer. A Research Symposium on High

Standards in Reading for Students from Diverse Language Groups: Research, Practice

& Policy. Washington, DC: Office of Bilingual Education and Minority Languages

Affairs, United States Department of Education.

Murahata | 67

Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition: Second Edition. Oxford

University.

Grossi, V. (2009). Teaching pragmatic competence: Compliments and compliment responses

in the ESL classroom. Prospect Journal, 24(2).

Hall, S., & Du Gay, P. (Eds.). (1996). Questions of cultural identity (Vol. 126). London: Sage.

Heller, M. (2006). Linguistic minorities and modernity: A sociolinguistic ethnography. A&C

Black.

Herbert, R. K. (1989). The ethnography of English compliments and compliment responses:

A contrastive sketch. Contrastive pragmatics, 3-35.

Holmes, J. (1988). Paying compliments: A sex-preferential politeness strategy. Journal of

pragmatics, 12(4), 445-465.

Horn, I. S., Nolen, S. B., Ward, C., & Campbell, S. S. (2008). Developing practices in

multiple worlds: The role of identity in learning to teach. Teacher Education Quarterly,

35(3), 61-72.

Hosoda, Y. (2009). Diluting disagreement in Japanese conversation. Kanagawa University

Repository, (169), 87-117.

House, J. (2003). English as a lingua franca: A threat to multilingualism?. Journal of

sociolinguistics, 7(4), 556-578.

Hymes, D. H. (1972). On Communicative Competence. In Pride, J. B., & Holmes, J. (Eds.),

Sociolinguistics, 269-293. Baltimore, USA: Penguin Education, Penguin Books Ltd.

Jenkins, J., & Leung, C. (2013). English as a lingua franca. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Johannes, A. A. (2012). Team teaching in Japan from the perspectives of the ALTs, the JTEs,

and the students. TEFLIN Journal, 23(2), 165.

Kasper, G. (1992). Pragmatic transfer. Second language research, 8(3), 203-231.

Murahata | 68

Kasper, G., & Rose, K. R. (Eds.). (2001). Pragmatics in language teaching. Ernst Klett

Sprachen.

Kato, K (2013). Beyond the native speaker: World Englishes and the NEST/NNEST

dichotomy. Retrieved from TODO: clickthrough

URLhttps://kinjo.repo.nii.ac.jp/?action=repository_uri&item_id=533&file_id=22&file_

no=1

Kecskes, I. (2015). How does pragmatic competence develop in bilinguals?, International

Journal of Multilingualism, DOI: 10.1080/14790718.2015.1071018

Kim, E., Y. (2009). Do non-native speakers make good ESL teachers? The Journal of

Adventist Education, , 40-42.

Kim, H.J. (2009). A study of compliment across cultures: The effect of socio-linguistic

transfer on EFL learners. Retrieved August 15, 2013 from

http://www.paaliJapan.org/resources/proceedings/PAALS/pdf.

Kim, K. (2006). "Home" no danwa ni kansuru nikkann taisyou kenkyu.[Research on

Discourse Comparison in Japanese and Korean] Dissertation Abstracts International

Kitamura, N. (2000). Adapting Brown and Levinson’s ‘Politeness’ Theory to the Analysis of

Casual Conversation. Proceedings of ALS2K, the 2000 Conference of the Australian

Linguistic Society.

Krause-Ono, M. (2004). Change in backchanneling behavior: The influence from L2 to L1 on

the use back channel. Studies of Cognitive Science, Society of Muroran Cognitive

Science, 3, 51-81.

Kumagai, H. A., & Kumagai, A., K. (1986). The hidden "I" in amae; "passive love" and

Japanese social perception. Blackwell Publishing on Behalf of the American

Anthropological Association, 4, 305-320.

Murahata | 69

Le Page, R. B., & Tabouret-Keller, A. (1985). Acts of identity: Creole-based approaches to

language and ethnicity. CUP Archive.

Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. M. (2006). How languages are learned. Oxford University Press,

USA.

Manes, J., & Wolfson, N. (1981). The compliment formula. In F. Coulmas (Ed.),

Conversationalroutine (pp. 115-132). The Hague: Mouton.

Marcia, J. E. (1980). Identity in adolescence. Handbook of adolescent psychology, 9(11),

159-187.

Matsuura, H. (2004). Compliment-giving Behavior in American English and Japanese. JALT

Journal, 26(2), 147-170.

Maynard, M. L., & Taylor, C. R. (1999). Girlish images across cultures: Analyzing Japanese

versus US Seventeen magazine ads. Journal of Advertising, 28(1), 39-48.

McNally, L., & Kennedy, C. (2008). Adjectives and adverbs: Syntax, semantics, and

discourse. Oxford University Press.

Medgyes, P. (1992). Native or non-native: who's worth more?. ELT journal, 46(4), 340-349.

Merino, I. (1997). Native english-speaking teachers versus non native english speaking

teachers. Revista Alicantina De EstudiosIngleses, 10, 69-79.

Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. (2015). The investigation of

the implementation status for English education in high school. Retrieved from

http://www.mext.go.jp/component/a_menu/education/detail/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2016/0

4/05/1369254_3_1.pdf

Nakajima, Y. (1997). Politeness strategies in the workplace: Which experiences help

Japanese businessmen acquire American English native-like strategies? Working

Papers in Educational Linguistics, 13.1, 49-69.

Murahata | 70

Noels, K.A., Pelletier, L.G., Clement, R. and Vallerand, R.J. (2000). Why are you learning a

second language? Motivational orientations and self-determination theory. Language

Learning 50, 57 85.

Odlin, T. (1989). Language transfer: Cross-linguistic influence in language learning.

Cambridge University Press.

Ono, N. (2010). Nihongo dannwa ni okeru hatarakikake to wakimae no kenkyu : Meue ni

taisuru home to kenson no bunseki wo chushin ni [Research on approach and

discernment in Japanese discourse based on analysis of compliments and humility

toward elderly person]. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Waseda University, Tokyo.

Peirce, B. N. (1995). Social identity, investment, and language learning. TESOL quarterly,

29(1), 9-31.

Rubin, D. L. (1992). Nonlanguage factors affecting undergraduates' judgments of nonnative

English-speaking teaching assistants. Research in Higher Education, 33(4), 511-531.

Sakai, S., Ito, Y., Shimazaki, M., Tsui, Y., Duchon, B., & Usukura, M. (2013). Hello, there!

English conversation. Tokyo: Tokyo Shoseki.

Seidlhofer, B. (2005). English as a lingua franca. ELT journal, 59(4), 339.

Suzuki, E. (2013). Chuugokujin nihonngo gakushuushano gyakkou teni [Reverse transfer of

Chinese learners of Japanese]. Journal of International Exchange Center, Akita

University, 2, 3-18.

Tajeddin, Z., & Ghamary, M. R. (2011). The effect of instruction in pragmatics: compliments

& compliment responses. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 1(9). 1078-1090.

Tao, H., & Thompson, S. A. (1991). English backchannels in Mandarin conversations: A

case study of superstratum pragmatic ‘interference.’ Journal of Pragmatics, 16(3), 209-

223.

Thomas, J. (1983). Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Applied Linguistics, 4, 91-112.

Murahata | 71

Tsuda, S. (1992). Contrasting attitudes in compliments: Humility in Japanese and hyperbole

in English. Intercultural Communication Studies. II-1. Retrieved from

http://www.trinity.edu/org/ics/ICS%20Issues/02%20ICS%2

0II%201/Microsoft%20Word%20-%20p137%20Tsuda.pdf

Watzlawick, P., Bavelas, J. B., Jackson, D. D., & O'Hanlon, B. (2011). Pragmatics of human

communication: A study of interactional patterns, pathologies and paradoxes. WW

Norton & Company.

Walkinshaw, I., & Oahn, D., H. (2014). Native and non-native English language teachers:

Student perceptions in vietnam. SAGE Open, , 1-9.

Wolfson, N. (1983). An empirically based analysis of complimenting in American English.

Sociolinguistics and language acquisition, 82-95.

Murahata | 72

Appendix 1

I. Research Protocol See Attachment A

II. Human Subjects

A. Number of subjects, including individuals who serve as "controls: "

Approximate number and ages of participants: Number Age Range

Normal Vulnerable 150 18 and older Control Total

B. Source(s) and type(s) of subjects: Participants are former and current Japanese and English native college students studying at Miyazaki University, Gonzaga and Spokane Falls Community College. They will be e-mailed to participate in the survey and the interview. An instructor teaching English at Miyazaki University will be emailed to have his students participate. The participants’ nationality is

Japanese and American. Only Japanese participate in the videotaping and the interview. To be interviewed the participants will voluntarily provide their e-mail at the end of the videotaping to be interviewed. These students will have voluntarily provided their e-mail addresses to be contacted by the researcher. All participants will then complete the anonymous questionnaire. If the participants provide their e-mail address they will then be contacted by the researcher to arrange an interview.

C. Criteria for selection/exclusion of subjects:

Participants should be native Japanese and English speakers who are current and former students studying at Miyazaki university in Japan, Spokane Falls Community college and Gonzaga University in the US. All participants will be emailed to take the questionnaire. For videotaping research, only Japanese participants will be emailed to participate. For the interview, Japanese participants who have lived in the US will be emailed to participate.

D. How subjects will be approached and by whom:

Murahata | 73

The researcher will be contacting the instructor who works at Miyazaki university to request students’ participation in the survey and videotaping via email. Also, those who are studying at Gonzaga University and Spokane Falls Community College will be emailed to participate in the videotaping. For Native English speakers, the researcher will also be contacting via email to request students’ participation. All participants have the right to stop participating

in this research anytime, and if they request, the principal investigator can answer any questions through email at kmurahata@zagmail.gonzaga.edu or phone at (509)- 263-5183.

E. Location where procedures are to be carried out:

The questionnaire will take place online powered by Survey Monkey. The participants take the questionnaire at home or, especially for students at Miyazaki University, during class time. The videotaping will take place on campus at Miyazaki University by the instructor and on places agreed beforehand in the US. The interview will take place on campus at Gonzaga university or via Skype. The places where all research take place for this study are open during research.

Voluntary Participation

A. Describe the method for ensuring that subjects understand that their

participation is voluntary and that they do not feel coerced. The researcher clearly states in his research proposal that all research is completely anonymous and voluntary.

B. Will subjects receive an inducement, e.g.. payment, services without

charge, extra course credit? Specify details. What is the rationale for offering the inducement?

No participant will receive an inducement.

C. If subjects are children and they are capable of assent, describe provisions for soliciting their assent as well as the provisions of soliciting permission of their parent(s) or authorized representative. If there is an assent form or standard briefing statement for children, provide a copy as an attachment (Attachment C).

No children are being asked to participate.

D. Attach a copy of the consent form to be signed by the subject and/or any

explanations of the research to be given orally to the subject (Attachment D). If no consent form is to be used, explain the procedures to be used to ensure that participation is voluntary. (See instructions for contents of consent forms and safeguards for vulnerable populations.)

Consents will be given at the beginning of the survey, videotaping and interview (See Attachment B, C and D). The survey is voluntary and an anonymous survey online. The researcher clearly states in his proposal, email to participants, and teacher invitation that the research is voluntary and anonymous. If the participant decides to provide their e-mail to

Murahata | 74

be interviewed they will sign the additional consent form (See Attachment D)

E. If any deception (withholding of complete information) is required for the validity of this activity, explain why this is necessary, and describe a debriefing plan and/or attach a debriefing statement (Attachment E). Again, this is self-explanatory.

Concealment is required for the videotaping because the purpose of this research is to investigate participants’ spontaneous conversation provoking compliments. If they are biased

or aware of what to be investigated, the result will lack its validity accordingly. The way the principal investigator will partially use the concealment in the process of the data collection is that they will not be told that the research is to investigate their utterances and facial expressions employed when they compliment. If participants request the purpose of this study after they participate in videotaping with providing their email address, the principal investigator contact them and tell what his actually research is about. Regarding the questionnaire and the interview, no deception or concealment will be used. III. Confidentiality and Anonymity

A. Will participation be anonymous, that is, the investigator will have no

way to identify subjects by appearance, name or data? Participation is confidential. Participants have the opportunity to provide contact information if they wish to receive more information regarding what has been investigated by the researcher.

The research include the following disclaimer: Disclaimer: “Your participation in the research study is voluntary and you should not encounter any cost to complete the survey. There is no direct compensation for completing the survey, or known risk for participating in this study. The potential benefits are an increased awareness in the reading perspectives of Saudi students. All information you provide on the survey is confidential. No personal identifying data will be included in the final reports or presentations of the study results. If you have any questions or concerns about participating in this research, please feel free to contact me at kmurahata@zagmail.gonzaga.edu or by telephone at (509)-263-5183.”

Therefore, the responses will remain anonymous unless a participant voluntarily provides his/her contact information.

B. If data are collected that could be associated with individual subjects,

describe the methods to be used to ensure the confidentiality of data

obtained. (Confidentiality for data is required unless subjects give express

written permission that their data may be identified.). Data collected through survey will be received by the researcher online via Survey Monkey. If participants provide their name and/or other contact information, their information will remain secure on the researcher’s secure online account. Depending on the participants preferred means of communication, the researcher will either use his secure email account or secure Skype phone number to contact willing participants and provide them with

Murahata | 75

information to participate in an information exchange program. The majority of the research consists of analyzing anonymous online responses.

C. Who specifically will have access to some or all of the data? What

provisions are there for control over access to documents and data? Only the researcher will have access to data collected thorough the survey and the interview. In terms of the videotaping, the instructor at Miyazaki University will have access to video files gained at Miyazaki University; however, he will sign a consent form proving he is not going to use the data for his individual purpose.

D. How long will data be held? How will they be ultimately disposed of? Data will be retained after the completion of the study for three years in a secure location. After three years, all paper documents will be shredded and electronic files deleted.

IV. Risks/Benefits

A. Will subjects in the proposed research be placed at more than minimal

risk, as defined by federal policy? No, participants will not be placed at more than minimal risk.

B. Nature and amount of risk (including side effects), substantial stress,

discomfort, or invasion of privacy: The amount of risk should be very minimal, if any. Participants may experience minimal stress when reflecting on past experiences related to compliments. There are no physical risks.

C. What steps are being taken to reduce the level of risk, including any

follow-up planned as part of the risk mitigation procedures? With the survey clearly being provided as voluntary and anonymous, the level of risk is reduced to minimal to none.

For Interview and videotaping, participants will be explained by the researcher or the instructor that all data will not be published with their personal information.

D. Plan for handling adverse effects: Not applicable.

Murahata | 76

E. Arrangement for financial responsibility for adverse effects:

Not applicable.

F. Describe the benefits to the subject and/or society of the proposed

research. Why do the benefits outweigh any risks that may be involved?

Attachment A

It has been popular to study abroad which is to be exposed to target languages to

Checklist to be completed by investigator Yes No A. Will any group, agency, or organization other than G.U. be involved? If yes, please

specify. Japanese students in Miyazaki university will be participating via online survey, but their participation is anonymous.

X

B. Will materials with potential radiation risk be used, e.g., x-rays, radio- -- isotopes? If yes, please indicate:

1. Status of annual review by Radiation Safety Officer (RSO). If approved, attach one copy of approval (Attachment F).

2. Title of application submitted to Radiation Safety Committee (RSC).

X

C. Will any other hazardous materials come in contact with research subjects? -- If yes, indicate nature of hazard and steps taken to mitigate risk to subjects.

X

D. Will an investigational new drug (IND) be used? -- If yes, give name, proposed dosage, how administered, status with FDA, and IND number. Enclose one copy (Attachment G) of: (1) available toxicity data; (2) reports of animal studies; (3) description of human studies done in other countries; (4) a concise review of the literature prepared by the investigator.

X

E. Will other drugs be used (including over the counter drugs)? -- If yes, give names, dosages, how administered, and side effects.

X

F. Will medical, academic or other records be used? X G. Will audio-visual or tape recordings, or photographs be made? X H. Should this activity be covered by adverse effects insurance? -- If yes, explain

why X

Murahata | 77

learn, and it has been widely said that the best way to learn languages require actual communications with native speakers (NS) so that the importance of nonnative speakers as an English teacher are seemingly disregarded. Also, there has been some socio linguistic research about the cultural difference in terms of giving compliments, but the impact of learning additional language on their pragmatic competence in first language has researched less popularly. Thus, research on multi-competence of NNS could possibly show their significant capability in teaching English. Research questions addressed in this study are: 1) How does learning English as an L2 affect Japanese English learners’ pragmatic

competence of L1 in terms of giving compliments? (Backward pragmatic transfer), 2) Is this effect change or expansion of pragmatic range of whom they compliment? and 3) What factors, social distance, gender and age is affected most and least? And why?

An eligibility of NNS in teaching English have been discussed enthusiastically

whether they are sufficiently capable to teach English compared with NS. In the early years, NNS applicants for teaching English were ignored by administrators of many ELT institutions in English spoken countries, such as the US, Australia and Britain, because these NSS were regarded as unqualified to teach English in terms of their language proficiency of the target language. According to Clark and Paran (2007), 72.3% of 90 responses that answered though a questionnaire by recruiters who worked at English teaching institutions in UK composed of being NS of English is very important (p. 17). It may be imaginable that there still are many NNS who struggle to be hired as ESL teachers in those countries while the number of NNS English teacher has been increasing these days. In contrast, along with expanding opportunities for NNS to study abroad, for example getting a certification of TESOL or TESL, there are many well qualified NNS English teachers who are dominant in EFL situations because of the lack of NS residing to teach English. Thus, it is the time to rethink of eligibility of NNS teachers.

The study will involve Japanese and English native college students in Japan and the

US who are 18 years and older. The researcher will be contacting through email to request participating in research (see Attachment E). Japanese college students include the ones whose major is Education or English Teaching, and American students’ major will be

various. Because this study is to see whether English learning experience impacts on learners’ first language use, Japanese students who are or had been studying in the US are

included as Japanese natives. The three different types of research conducted in this study to triangulate the data

introducing qualitative and quantitative data. Using likert-scale questionnaire enables us to reveal what participants self-report about compliments, and videotaping results what participants actually perform giving compliments. The interview will show more in depth about how they perceive giving compliments answering given questions. The all information obtain through these three research will be analyzed by the principal investigator, Keisuke Murahata. First, they will be asked to go online and complete a brief survey via Survey Monkey. The survey is completely voluntary and anonymous. The researcher plans to use the tools provided by Survey Monkey to aid in his organizing all the survey results. The translated questionnaire is attached as a Attachment F. Then, the researcher will read through the participants’ responses and look for any similarities in responses to find a

general idea for the responses. Second, Japanese students who participate the survey will also be asked to participate videotaping. This activity is also voluntary and anonymous (a instruction is attached as an Attachment G). The data will be analyzed based on Conversational Analysis, Schegloff (2007), to investigate how they compliment in actual

Murahata | 78

conversations. In third investigation which is interview, one or two Japanese students who participate in videotaping and currently studying in the US will be asked to be interviewed. The questions that participants answer is below as a Attachment H. The transcriptions will be made to analyze answers. At the begging of each research, the researcher will inform that participants’ personal information will not be mentioned on the thesis.

Attachment B

Consent Form for the Survey

Dear students, (this will be attached on the questionaire)

Thank you for volunteering to participate this survey. I am asking you to participate in this survey because you

are Japanese native speakers.

The purpose of this research is to examine how Japanese native speakers perceive giving compliments. If you

agree to voluntarily participate in this study, I will ask you to complete the survey. There is no direct

compensation for completing the survey, or known risk for participating in this study.

All information you provide on the survey is confidential. No personal identifying data will be included in the

final reports of presentations of the study results.

If you have any questions or concerns about participating in this research please feel free to contact me at

kmurahata@zagmail.gonzaga.edu or by telephone at 1- (509)-263-5183.

If you agree to take the survey please choose option (a) below. If you prefer not to participate choose option (b)

below and you can exit the survey at any time.

Once again, thank you very much for your participation and support of this research.

Keisuke Murahata

Gonzaga University

(a) Yes. I have received this information; understand I can ask questions of the Principal Investigator (Keisuke

Mutahata) via email at kmurahata@zagmail.gonzaga.edu, anytime before, during or after participation in the

Murahata | 79

survey. By making this selection I agree to continue and complete the survey.

(b) No. I have received this information; understand I can ask questions of the Principal Investigator (Keisuke

Mutahata) via email at kmurahata@zagmail.gonzaga.edu, anytime before, during or after participation in the

survey but I prefer not to participate in this study. By making this selection I understand no information will be

collected on any response I have made so far and I will be directed away from the survey site.

Attachment C

Consent Form (Videotaping)

INFORMED CONSENT FORM TO PARTICIPATE IN RESEARCH

Title of Project: Videotaping Research on Spontaneous Conversations in Given Situations by Japanese Native Speakers

Principal Investigator: Keisuke Murahata, graduate student, Master of Arts in Teaching English as a Second Language, kmurahata@zagmail.gonzaga.edu , (509)263-5183, Gonzaga University

Advisor or Sponsor Information: James Hunter, Ph.D., Director, MA/TESL & ESL Program

and Mary Jeannot, Ed.D, Associate Professor, Interim Director,

MA/TESL & ESL Program

PURPOSE OF THE RESEARCH

Murahata | 80

I invite you to take part in a research study about the Spontaneous Conversation in Given

Situations by Japanese Native Speakers. Thank you or volunteering to participate in this

videotaping. I am asking you to participate in this videotaping because you are a Japanese

native speaker. The purpose of this research is to explore how Japanese native speakers have

a conversation in given situations. The investigator analyze the use of the language and facial

expressions.

PROCEDURES

See attached instruction paper. (Attachment G)

TIME TO PARTICIPATE

If you agree to voluntarily participate in this study, I will ask you to have a conversation in a

group. It will take about 20 minutes to complete the videotaping. There will be no following

activity.

DISCOMFORTS AND RISKS

There are no known risks for participating in this study.

POTENTIAL BENEFITS

The potential benefits are an increased awareness in how Japanese native speakers have a

conversation based on given situations.

COST AND COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION

Your participation in my research study is voluntary and you should not encounter any cost

to complete the survey. There is no direct compensation for completing this research.

Murahata | 81

STATEMENT OF CONFIDENTIALITY

My research records that are reviewed, stored, and analyzed at Gonzaga University will be kept

in a secured area in and will be stored for 3 years. In the event of any publication or

presentation resulting from my research, no personally identifiable information will be

shared.

I will keep your participation in my research study confidential to the extent we are able.

However, it is possible that the Gonzaga Institutional Review Board (a committee that reviews

and approves research studies) may inspect and copy research records.

STUDY WITHDRAWAL

If you choose to participate, you are free to withdraw your permission for the use and sharing

of your information at any time. You must do this in writing. Write to me and let me know

that you are withdrawing from the research study. My email address is

kmurahata@zagmail.gonzaga.edu

VOLUNTARY PARTICIPATION

Taking part in this research study is voluntary. If you choose to take part in my research, your

major responsibilities will include following your instructor to participate in the videotaping.

You do not have to participate in this research. If you choose to take part, you have the right to

stop at any time. If you decide not to participate or if you decide to stop taking part in the

research at a later date, there will be no penalty or loss of benefits to which you are otherwise

entitled.

Murahata | 82

CONTACT INFORMATION FOR QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS

You have the right to ask any questions you may have about this research. If you have

questions, complaints or concerns or believe you may have developed an injury related to this

research, contact me at kmurahata@zagmail.gonzaga.edu or by telephone at (509)263-5183.

For more information about participation in a research study and about the Institutional Review

Board (IRB), a group of people who review the research to protect your rights, please contact

the Gonzaga IRB at IRB@gonzaga.edu.

SIGNATURE AND CONSENT/PERMISSION TO BE IN THE RESEARCH

Your signature below means that you have received this information, have asked the questions

you currently have about the research and those questions have been answered. You will receive

a copy of the signed and dated form to keep for future reference.

By signing this consent form, you indicate that you are voluntarily choosing to take part in this

research.

___________________________ __________ ______________________

Signature of Subject Date Printed Name

Murahata | 83

Your signature below means that you have explained the research to the subject and have

answered any questions he/she has about the research.

___________________________ _________ _________________

Signature of Principal Investigator Date Printed Name

Attachment D

Consent Form (Interview)

INFORMED CONSENT FORM TO PARTICIPATE IN RESEARCH

Title of Project: The effect of learning English on Japanese English learners' pragmatic competence in terms of giving compliments.

Principal Investigator: Keisuke Murahata, graduate student, Master of Arts in Teaching English as a Second Language, kmurahata@zagmail.gonzaga.edu , (614)330-5665, Gonzaga University

Advisor or Sponsor Information: James Hunter, Ph.D., Director, MA/TESL & ESL Program

and Mary Jeannot, Ed.D, Associate Professor, Interim Director,

MA/TESL & ESL Program

PURPOSE OF THE RESEARCH

Murahata | 84

We invite you to take part in a research study about the effect of learning and experiencing

English on Japanese English learners’ pragmatic competence in terms of giving compliments.

Thank you or volunteering to take this interview. We are asking you to participate in this

interview at Gonzaga University because you are a Japanese student who have been studying

in the US. The purpose of this research is to explore how learning and experiencing English

affects your pragmatic competence in terms of giving compliments.

PROCEDURES

You will be asked questions based on your life in the US, especially how you perceive giving

compliments and how English influenced it.

TIME TO PARTICIPATE

If you agree to voluntarily participate in this study, we will ask you to answer 7 questions

(see Attachment H). It will take about 20-30 minutes to complete the interview. There will

be one interview.

DISCOMFORTS AND RISKS

There are no known risks for participating in this study.

POTENTIAL BENEFITS

The potential benefits are an increased awareness in the giving compliments perspectives of

Japanese students who have been in the US, and the influence of learning and experiencing

English.

COST AND COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION

Murahata | 85

Your participation in my research study is voluntary and you should not encounter any cost

to complete the interview. There is no direct compensation for completing my survey.

STATEMENT OF CONFIDENTIALITY

My research records that are reviewed, stored, and analyzed at Gonzaga University will be kept

in a secured area in and will be stored for 3 years. In the event of any publication or

presentation resulting from my research, no personally identifiable information will be

shared.

I will keep your participation in my research study confidential to the extent we are able.

However, it is possible that the Gonzaga Institutional Review Board (a committee that reviews

and approves research studies) may inspect and copy research records.

STUDY WITHDRAWAL

If you choose to participate, you are free to withdraw your permission for the use and sharing

of your information at any time. You must do this in writing. Write to me and let me know

that you are withdrawing from the research study. My email address is

kmurahata@zagmail.gonzaga.edu

VOLUNTARY PARTICIPATION

Taking part in this research study is voluntary. If you choose to take part in my research, your

major responsibilities will include answering the questions from the given interview.

You do not have to participate in this research. If you choose to take part, you have the right to

stop at any time. If you decide not to participate or if you decide to stop taking part in the

Murahata | 86

research at a later date, there will be no penalty or loss of benefits to which you are otherwise

entitled.

CONTACT INFORMATION FOR QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS

You have the right to ask any questions you may have about this research. If you have

questions, complaints or concerns or believe you may have developed an injury related to this

research, contact me at kmurahata@zagmail.gonzaga.edu or by telephone at (509)263-5183.

For more information about participation in a research study and about the Institutional Review

Board (IRB), a group of people who review the research to protect your rights, please contact

the Gonzaga IRB at IRB@gonzaga.edu .

SIGNATURE AND CONSENT/PERMISSION TO BE IN THE RESEARCH

Your signature below means that you have received this information, have asked the questions

you currently have about the research and those questions have been answered. You will receive

a copy of the signed and dated form to keep for future reference.

By signing this consent form, you indicate that you are voluntarily choosing to take part in this

research.

___________________________ __________ ______________________

Signature of Subject Date Printed Name

Murahata | 87

Your signature below means that you have explained the research to the subject and have

answered any questions he/she has about the research.

___________________________ _________ _________________

Signature of Principal Investigator Date Printed Name

Attachment E Emails for participants to ask participations

Email to Participants (survey)

Hello (name of participant),

My name is Keisuke Murahata and I am a current graduate student in the MA TESL program

at Gonzaga University. I have made a survey for the research for my thesis: The effect of

learning English on Japanese English users' pragmatic competence in terms of giving

compliments. Would you be willing to take my survey? I would greatly appreciate it. Please

let me know if you have any questions or have any problems opening the link.

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/19klysOp_-

ypgIYFyZ_53OEeQczhsU4AlexcC6qDflcM/viewform

Thank you,

Murahata | 88

Keisuke Murahata

Keisuke Murahata Gonzaga University | Class of 2016 Master of Arts in TESL kmurahata@zagmail.gonzaga.edu | 509-263-5183

Email to Participants (videotaping)

Hello (name of participant),

My name is Keisuke Murahata and I am a current graduate student in the MA TESL program

at Gonzaga University. I am currently writing a thesis and need to collect data. A topic of my

research is: Videotaping Research on Spontaneous Conversations in Given Situations by

Japanese Native Speakers. This time, I want you to participate in videotaping research which

is to investigate how Japanese native speakers have conversations in pair. Would you be

willing to participate in videotaping research? I would greatly appreciate it. Please let me

know if you have any questions or have any problems opening the link.

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/19klysOp_-

ypgIYFyZ_53OEeQczhsU4AlexcC6qDflcM/viewform

Thank you,

Keisuke Murahata

Murahata | 89

Keisuke Murahata Gonzaga University | Class of 2016 Master of Arts in TESL kmurahata@zagmail.gonzaga.edu | 509-263-5183

E-mail to Participant to be interviewed

Dear (name of participant),

My name is Keisuke Murahata and I am a current graduate student in the MA TESL program

at Gonzaga University. Thank you for time to consider to volunteer helping my research on

the effect of learning English on Japanese English users' pragmatic competence in terms of

giving compliments.

Would you be willing to be interviewed? You will be asked some questions about how you

perceive giving compliments in different ways considering, for example, cultural differences.

I appreciate your voluntary participation and I wish to set up an interview time. What day

and time works best for you to meet at the Schoenberg Center or at John H. Hemmingson

Center? If these places do not work please specify a location. If Skype needs to be utilized

that is fine. Please let me know your availability.

Thank you,

Keisuke Murahata

Murahata | 90

Keisuke Murahata Gonzaga University | Class of 2016 Master of Arts in TESL kmurahata@zagmail.gonzaga.edu | 509-263-5183

E-mail to the instructor at Miyazaki University

Dear professor Murahata,

I am Keisuke Murahata, who is currently a student in Teaching English as a Second

Language at Gonzaga University. I understand that you are busy, but I am writing this email

to ask whether you can ask your students to participate in my research for my thesis.

I have been writing a thesis based on “The impact of learning English on Japanese

English learners’ pragmatic competence in terms of giving compliments to consider the

multi-competence of non native speakers”. I would like your students to take a questionnaire

and video taping to examine how Japanese native students perceive the giving compliments. I

have attached the questionnaire and instruction for video taping on this email for you, so

please ask me if you have any questions. Thank you for your time.

Best Regards,

Keisuke

Keisuke Murahata

Murahata | 91

Gonzaga University, MA TESL

Email: knurahata@zagmail.gonzaga.edu

Phone: 1-509-263-5183

Attachment F Survey

Murahata | 92

Murahata | 93

Murahata | 94

Murahata | 95

Attachment G

Videotaping Instruction Instructions:

Murahata | 96

1) Thank you for participating in this research. This is a consent form to fill out in order for

you to agree to participate in this study. (Have participants fill out)

2) This research will involve pair work. I will assign a random number to all of you from 1

to 6. Then I will also assign your partner. For example, “Number 1 will be paired up with

number 2.” You will be assigned four different partners during this research.

3) There are four different scenes, and I want you to play a role in each scene as if you were

the character I will specify once the research begins.

4) Each scene takes three minutes to be completed. You have one minute to prepare before

starting. While you are preparing, please do not talk with your partner.

5) When three minutes pass, I will tell you so that we can move on to the next scene. Then I

will assign the next partner based on the assigned numbers.

6) Do you have any questions so far? If not I will continue explaining.

7) Now I will assign your number. You are number 1, number 2… number 6.

8) Then I will assign your partner. Number 1 will be paired up with number 2. Number 3

will be paired up with number 4. Number 5 will be paired up with number 6. Number 7

will be paired up with number 8. Then please have a seat at each table. (Participants have

a seat face to face at each table)

9) There are two pieces of paper in front of you. Please choose one paper and do not show

your paper to your partner.

10) The first scene is about an interaction between family members. You two are siblings.

This information is on your paper. Also, there is information about you on the paper. For

the next one minute, you can prepare what to say based on the information. Then I want

you to try to have a natural conversation with your partner as if you two were siblings.

You can say anything related to the information provided but please do not forget your

role, siblings in the first scene. Do you have any questions? Now start.

Murahata | 97

11) One minute passed. For the next three minutes, please try to have a conversation

naturally. Now start.

12) (After three minutes pass) Time is up. Put your paper face down on the desk. Now I will

assign your next partner. Number 1 will be paired up with number 8. Number 2 will be

paired up with number 5. Number 3 will be paired up with number 6. Number 4 will be

paired up with number7. Then please have a seat at each table. Then choose a paper in

front of you.

13) The second scene is about an interaction between close friends. Please have a

conversation as if you two were friends. For next one minute, you will prepare for next

conversation. Now preparation starts.

14) One minute passed. For next three minutes, please try to have a natural conversation with

your partner. Now start.

15) (After three minutes pass) Time is up. Put your paper face down on the desk. Now I will

assign your next partner. Number 1 will be paired up with number 7. Number 2 will be

paired up with number 8. Number 3 will be paired up with number 5. Number 4 will be

paired up with number6. Then please have a seat at each table. Then choose a paper in

front of you.

16) The third scene is about an interaction between acquaintances. Please have a conversation

as if you two were acquaintances. In next one minute, you will prepare for next

conversation. Now preparation starts.

17) One minute passed. For next three minutes, please try to have a natural conversation with

your partner. Now start.

18) (After three minutes pass) Time is up. Put your paper face down on the desk. Now I will

assign your last partner. Number 1 will be paired up with number 6. Number 2 will be

paired up with number 7. Number 3 will be paired up with number 8. Number 4 will be

Murahata | 98

paired up with number 5. Then please have a seat at each table. Then choose a paper in

front of you.

19) The last scene is about an interaction between strangers. Please have a conversation as if

you two were strangers. For next one minute, you will prepare for the next conversation.

Now preparation starts.

20) (After three minutes pass) Time is up. Put your paper face down on the desk. This is the

end of this research. If you have any questions about this study, please provide your

contact information to the principal researcher, Keisuke Murahata. Thank you for your

participation.

Handouts

Scene 1 A B

Family

“Siblings, meeting at the

house for the first time in

months”

Wearing a new cap got

yesterday

Played the piano at a

concert last week

Got promoted and

hourly wage raised

(part-time job)

Wearing a new shirt

bought last week

Lost 5 kilograms/ten

pounds for this summer

Got a well-paid part-

time job

Bought a new car

Murahata | 99

Bought a new

motorcycle

Scene 2 A B

Friend

“meeting on the street for

the first time in months”

Dyed hair a different

color

Played the guitar at a

band concert last week

Entered Tokyo/Harvard

University

Bought a new

motorcycle

Wearing a new watch

bought day before

yesterday

Lost 5 kilograms/10

pounds for this summer

Got a well-paid part-

time job

Bought a bicycle

Scene 3 A B

Acquaintance

“meeting on the street for

the first time in months”

Got my hair cut

Got an A on a test

Got a well-paid part-

time job

Bought a new

motorcycle

Wearing a new

backpack got last

month

Saved a lot of money

Got a well-paid part-

time job

Bought a new car

Scene 4 A B

Stranger Wearing sun glasses Wearing new shoes got

Murahata | 100

“meeting in the line at the

bus station for the first time,

only two of them. The next

bus comes in 30 minutes

later.“

bought last week

Got a 900 score on

TOEIC test

Just started working as

a doctor

Bought a motorcycle

yesterday

Played the guitar at a

concert last month

Started working as a

professor

Just bought a new car

Attachment H

(INTERVIEW QUESTIONS)

1) Questions asking background information: age, the length of study abroad, first language

etc) 2) Could you define what giving compliment is? Can you give me a couple of examples of

compliments? 3) What motivates you to give compliments? 4) When do you compliment and when not? Who would you give compliments most and least

in the US and in your home country? 5) Is there any preferred topic that you would like to compliment? Why? 6) Could you rank following topics to compliment, social status, ability, appearances and

possessions and why? 1 means you would give compliment most and 4 means least. 7) You have been living in the US. How do you differentiate the way Americans and

Japanese compliment? Same? Different? If different, why? Has living in the US affected your way of giving compliments? How?

Appendix 2

IP Interactional particle(e.g. ne, sa, no, yo, na) P Other particles SUB Subject marker(ga) GEN Genitive(no) TOP Topic marker(wa) QT Quotation marker(to, tte) Q Question marker(ka and its variants) Copulative verb COP Copulative verb N Nominalizer(e.g. no, n) TAG Tag-like expression ONO Onomatopoeic expressions NEG for marking negation PST past

HON honorific