-
毕业论文（设计）
Abstract
Business
English
letters
play
an
important
role
in
today
business
world.
It
is
frequently
applied
in
most
aspects
of
business
activities
and
thus
regarded
as
indispensable
transmission
for
business
communication.
However,
when
refusal
information is
needed to be transmitted, it is inevitable that
the addressee
’
s face will
be
threatened.
What
is
worse,
business
will
be
affected
for
improper
expression
of
rejection. Thus, guided
by pragmatic theories, many scholars try to
conclude refusal
strategies which can
be applied in English business letters writing.
Based on Speech Act Theory
and Politeness Principles, the paper studies
refusal
strategies without mixing them
with other kinds of strategies.
Austin
’
s three senses of
speech
act,
Searle
’
s
and
Leech
’
s
classifications
of
speech
act,
Face
Theory
and
Politeness
Principles
constitute
the
framework.
In
the
part
of
case
study,
the
paper
uses antitheses to
analyze
document of sample letters rejecting
customer
s’
requests,
orders, counter offers and claims. The
last part concludes four refusal strategies which
can be applied in refusal business
letter.
Different
scholars
have
different
claims
in
refusal
strategies.
The
refusal
strategies in the
paper is hoped to be of help in business
communication.
Key
Words:
refusal
strategies
speech
act
theory
politeness
principles
English business letters
application
1
毕业论文（设计）
摘
要
商务英
语信函以其真诚友善、清晰自然等特点，在世界商务沟通中起着举足
轻重的作用，
它贯穿商事活动的各个环节，
是商事组织对外传递信息和达成商务
沟通的重要载体。
然而，
当商事组织要表达
拒绝信息时，
对方的面子不可避免地
都会受到一定程度上的威胁
，
表达不当甚至会危及商务沟通的成败。
因此，
众多
研究者从语言学的角度，
结合一定的语用原则，<
/p>
力求总结出既礼貌又实用的拒绝
策略，应用于实际商务信函的写作
中。
在学术上，本文立足于语用学上的言语行为理论和礼貌原
则，把拒绝言语策
略从其它策略中独立出来研究。
Austin
的言语行为三分说、
Searle
对
言语行为
的分类、
Leech
对言语行
为的分类等言语行为理论基本原则、著名的面子理论和
礼貌原则构成了本文主要的理论框
架，
支撑样本信函的分析。
而在对样本信函的
< br>研究中，本文采用对比等方法对拒绝客户要求、拒绝订货、拒绝还盘、拒绝索赔
等
方面的商务英语信函样本进行文本分析，
总结出四条适合商务英语信函应用的
拒绝策略。
不同研究者总结出的应用在商务英语
信函的拒绝言语策略各有不同，
望文中
的几点见解对实际的拒绝
商务信函写作有所帮助。
关键词<
/p>
：
拒绝言语策略
言语行为理论
礼貌原则
商务英语信函
应用
2
毕业论文（设计）
Application of Refusal Strategies under
Speech Act Theory
and Politeness
Principles in English Business Letters
uction
.
.........
..................................................
..................................................
......................
4
1.1 Background ........................
..................................................
...............................................
4
1.2 Purpose of
study
.
.....................
..................................................
..........................................
5
1.3
Organization of the paper
.
.
..................................................
................................................
5
2. Literature
review
................................
..................................................
.........................................
6
2.1 Refusal
strategy
.
..................
..................................................
..............................................
6
2.2 Previous
studies of refusal strategies in English business
letters
...............................
.........
7
3.
Theoretical framework
.................
..................................................
...............................................
8
3.1 Speech act
theory ...........................................
..................................................
...................
9
3.1.1 Important claims of speech act
theory
.
....................
.................................................
9
3.1.2 Speech
act of refusal ...................................
..................................................
.........
11
3.2 Politeness
principles
.
................
..................................................
.......................................
1
2
3.2.1 Face
Theory
.
....................
..................................................
.....................................
1
2
3.2.2 Leech’s
politeness principles
.
............................................ .....................................
1
3
4. Case study
..................................................
..................................................
...............................
1
4
4.1 Types of
business letters
.
..........
..................................................
.......................................
1
4
4.2 Case
analysis
..............................
..................................................
.....................................
1
6
4.2.1 Refusal
reply to customer request ........................
..................................................
1
6
4.2.2 Refusal
reply to order letters ...........................
..................................................
.....
1
7
4.2.3
Refusal reply to counter offers
.......
..................................................
......................
2
0
4.2.4 Refusal reply to a claim
< br>.
...................................
..................................................
....
2
1
5.
Suggestion and conclusion
.
.
..................................................
..................................................
....
2
6
Reference
..................................................
..................................................
....................................
2
8
3
毕业论文（设计）
uction
1.1
Background
For
characteristics
of
formality,
clarity,
consciousness
and
politeness,
English
business letters play an important role
in business communication in today business
world.
Every
aspect
of
business
activities,
like
establishing
business
relationships,
ordering goods, confirming information,
can not go without business letters which are
applied to
as the
significant
tool of communication
between business
organizations.
Composing
a
good
business
letter
contributes
to
a
good
image
of
a
business
body,
while a bad one is possible to destroy
a contract of thousands of dollars, even make a
loss of an important customer.
The reason why losses and
errors were made is that composers of business
letters
attach importance to the
content without noticing politeness strategies and
expressing
formulas.
Therefore,
a
lot
of
linguists
and
businesspersons
pay
more
and
more
attention
on
strategies
of
business
letters
writing.
In
the
sense
of
pragmatics,
some
linguists
have
applied
Politeness
Principles
and
maxims
to
analyze
politeness
strategies
of
business
letters.
Some
have
concluded
writing
skills
of
business
letter
from lexicon, syntax and discourse
aspects. It demonstrates that scholars always
study
politeness strategies which can
be employed to reach different functions, like
refusal
function, request function and
invitation function, but seldom concentrate on a
certain
functional strategy and analyze
business letters of a certain function.
4
毕业论文（设计）
1.2
Purpose of study
This paper has the
following value of three aspects. First, not all
business letters
can
simply
express
its
meaning
perfectly,
especially
when
refusal
information
is
needed to be shown. The
study of the paper aims to list some practical
strategies of
refusal and provide
composers of English business letters a reference
material. Second,
different
nations
have
different
ways
to
refuse.
Thus,
refusal
strategies
are
always
studied
in
terms
of
cross-culture,
while
the
study
of
refusal
strategies
in
English
business
letters
is
not
in
a
large
quantity.
The
paper
helps
to
fill
the
empty.
Third,
guided by the Speech
Act Theory (SAT) and Politeness Principles, the
study analyzes
cases
of
English
business
letters,
from
which
refusal
strategies
are
concluded.
The
function of refusal strategies in
business letters can be more distinct and clearer
in the
paper,
since
it
studies
refusal
strategies
independently
from
strategies
of
other
functions.
1.3 Organization of the paper
The whole paper consists of five parts.
The first part begins with the introduction
of background, purpose of study and the
organization of the paper. Part Two defines
refusal
strategy
and
briefly
reviews
previous
studies
on
it
in
business
letters.
Theoretical
framework
is
discussed
in
Part
Three.
The
author
generally
introduce
Speech Act
Theory (SAT) and
Politeness
Principles which are
important
theoretical
systems
to
application
of
refusal
strategy
in
English
business
letter.
According
to
types
of
business
letters,
the
fourth
part
applies
SAT
and
Politeness
Principles
to
5
毕业论文（设计）
analyze
refusal reply in sample business letters. The last
part makes some suggestions
and
concludes the whole paper.
2. Literature review
2.1
Refusal strategy
A refusal is a
responding act in which the speaker refuses to
engage in an action
proposed by the
interlocutor
(Chen&Zhang
，
1995:
121).
Making
refusals means
to
threaten
the
interlocutor
’
s
face.
When
people
try
to
express
information
of
refusal,
they always use
indirect communicative strategies in order to try
to avoid the task of
offending
their
interlocutors.
In
refusal
situation,
they
might
use
a
variety
of
forms
and contents which scholars have
investigated and concluded to be refusal
strategies.
To
avoid
being
impolite
or
rude
in
making
a
refusal,
speakers
sometimes
turn
to
refusal
strategies. Refusal strategy is always discussed
in the field of pragmatics and
cross-
culture.
Most linguists
focus refusal strategies on the cross-cultural
sense, which is an
important
stage
in
pragmatic
developing
course.
In
the
1960s
to
1970s,
Austin
claimed his Speech
Act Theory (SAT). In 1975 to 1981, Brown &
Levinson declared
their
famous
Face
Theory,
while
Leech
replenished
Face
Theory
with
Politeness
Theory. All of
the theories are under the background of the
similar culture. But how is
the level
of the similarity? Many researchers try to solve
out the question by the study
6
毕业论文（设计）
of act in cross-cultural sense(He
Zhaoxiong
，
2000). Most of the
studies are focusing
on the speech act
of politeness, like refusal, request, apology,
etc. Takahashi & Beebe
(1986)
’
s
investigation
on
refusal
strategies
between
the
US
and
Japan,
and
Liao
&
Bresnahan
(1996)
’
s contrastive study
of refusal strategies between the US and China
Taiwan are two of the most well-known
researches in this field.
The
paper
is
on
the
application
of
refusal
strategies
in
English
business
letters
while the cross-cultural sense is not
emerged. Guided by pragmatic theories, the paper
makes an illustration on how to say
“
NO
”
in a politeness way to an English business
letter addressee. Several previous
studies have been conducted on refusal strategies
in
English business letters.
2.2
Previous
studies
of
refusal
strategies
in
English
business letters
Several
investigators have expressed their opinions on the
subjects by publishing
articles in
journals.
Zheng Ling, has published her
article
Politeness Principle and
Business English
Writing
in
Journal of Shanghai University of
Electric Power
in 2003, where
Leech
’
s
politeness principle
and its
six maxims are introduced. According to
Leech’
s claim,
her article explains that strategies
are defined as methods which speakers try to make
some achievements in verbal
communication. Strategies, in other words, are
both to
minimize cost and maximize
benefit to the interlocutor (Zheng Ling, 2004).
She then
analyzes
documentations
of
business
letters
with
the
six
maxims,
one
of
which
is
7
毕业论文（设计）
Approbation
Maxim.
The
composer
of
the
sample
business
letter
succeeded
in
refusing a
customer’s
demand to cut the
price because he wrote the refusal letter with
an approachable beginning and pointed
out the mistake of the customer indirectly. The
method
and
the
words
composed
in
the
sample
letter
are
in
conformity
with
the
Approbation Maxim.
In
the
article
Writing
Skills
of
Clash
of
Foreign
Trade
Correspondence
,
Lu
Wenmin bases on
Leech
’
s classification of
speech act, puts forward the concept of the
clash of foreign trade correspondence
and expounds the writing skills of it in terms of
vocabulary, sentences and text
structure. The writing skills of it in the three
structures
can
also
be
used
as
a
strategy
to
express
refusal
in
business
letters
writing
(Lu
Wenmin, 2005).
Cai Yucheng
’
s
article
On the Pragmatic Analysis of
Business Refusal Letters with
Theory of
Politeness Principle
published in
Journal of Chang Chun
University
shows
that
the
politeness
principle
is
one
of
the
basic
requirements
in
the
written
form
of
business
letters.
The
article
shows
some
refusal
letters,
which
are
endowed
with
specific
standards
beyond
the
principle
of
politeness.
It
is
determined
by
those
compensational
strategies
that
whether
there
will
be
the
possibility
to
continue
the
cooperation between the company and its
customer (Jiang Yucheng, 2006).
3. Theoretical framework
This paper is about the practical
application of English business letters in a real
8
毕业论文（设计）
business
circumstance.
In
other
words,
the
paper
depends
on
the
theoretical
background of pragmatics, which is a
discipline concentrating on language use.
In terms of pragmatics,
a
refusal
in
English
business
letters is
without doubt
a
negatively affected speech
act
to
business
partner.
It can be
classified into
different
scholars
’
speech
act theories and appear different compensational
strategies. A refusal
is also a face-
threatening action, which is involved with the
Face Theory and can be
perfectly
limited by Politeness Principles.
3.1 Speech act theory
3.1.1
Important claims of speech act theory
If the speaker is doing something by
saying something
（
Austin,
1962
）
, what he
has done can be named as speech act.
The core of speech act is the communicative
aim or purpose which the speaker tries
to transmit by his utterance. No matter what
people
do,
express
apology
or
thanks
to
others,
they
have
performed
speech
acts
if
they
success
to
convey
certain
communicative
purpose
and
complete
certain
communicative function. For example, if
we say
“
NO
”
to others in a certain situation,
we
have
performed
the
speech
act
of
refusal
(He
Ziran
&
Chen
Xinren,
2004:
56).
Therefore, speech act
theory emphasizes the function of verbal
communication by the
speaker who plays
a subjective role in the whole speech act course.
John Langshaw
Austin, Searle, Geoffrey
N. Leech and other linguists have declared their
claims to the
contribution of SAT.
Speech
act
theory
is
the
first
major
theory
in
the
study
of
pragmatics.
It
is
9
毕业论文（设计）
originated
with
the
Oxford
philosopher
J.
L.
Austin,
who
illustrated
his
claims
on
speech
act
theory
in
1962 in
his book
How to
Do Things with
Words
.
In
this
book,
Austin outlined his theory of
speech acts and the concept of performative
language, in
which to say something is
to do something. He divided
people
’
s speech act into
three
senses. The first sense is a
locutionary act. It is an act of saying something
meaningful
and able to be
understoo
d.
The second sense
is illocutionary act which is the one of
using a sentence to perform a function
such as command, request, etc. They also have
certain
forces
which
are
defined
as
illocutionary
force.
The
third
sense,
a
perlocutionary
act,
focuses
on
the
results
or
effects
that
are
produced
by
people
’
s
utterance. It concerns the
consequential effects of a locution upon the
listener. In those
senses, what Austin
really drives at is the illocutionary act. Speech
act theory is in fact
a theory of the
illocutionary act (Hu Zhuanglin, 2001:249-251).
In 1969, the famous linguist J.R.
Searle based on Austin
’
s
theory and raised an
appropriate
definition of indirect speech. In his opinion,
indirect speech is defined as
utterances in which one speech act form
is used to realize another different speech act
(Zhou
Wenfang,
2006).
He
divided
illocutionary
act
into
fives
types
which
are
assertives
(or
representatives),
directives,
commisives,
expressives
and
declarations.
Here,
directives
means
the
working
act
which
the
speaker
says
to
the
listener.
For
example, acts of ordering, telling and
refusing.
British
linguist
G
..N.
Leech
(1983)
said:
“different
circumstances
require
different
politeness”
. Based on speech
function
and the aim to maintain
appropriate
social
relationship,
Leech
claimed
that
illocutionary
functions
should
be
classified
10
毕业论文（设计）
into
four
types.
These
four
types
are
competitive,
convivial,
collaborative
and
conflictive. Refusal belongs to the
conflictive illocutionary act.
3.1.2
Speech act of refusal
The core
component of a refusal is a denial or an
expression of unwillingness to
comply
with a previous request, invitation, suggestion or
offer. It may occur when the
request
itself is not proper or irrational, when the
speaker has no ability of or interest
in doing what requested, or when some
event or state impedes the speaker to comply.
Klim and Floyd (1990: 460) define a
refusal as
“
an attempt to
bring about behavioral
change by
encouraging the other to withdraw his or her
request
”
.
Within
the
framework
of
Searle
’
s
(1975)
speech
act
theory,
refusals
may
be
placed
under the category of directives, which refer to
acts intended to get the listener
to
do
something.
Directives
are
listed
among
those
which
threaten
the
addressee
’
s
positive face-want. The categorization
partially reflects the complexity of the speech
act.
Due
to
its
complexity,
in
natural
conversation,
refusal
often
involves
a
long
negotiating sequence,
and the risk of offending the
interlocutor
’
s face is
so much a
part of the speech
act that some degree of indirectness usually
exists. As Searle (1975:
82) suggests
that the main reason for indirect speech acts is
politeness. Indirect speech
acts
constitute one of many forms of politeness and
indirectness is so much associated
with
politeness
that
directives
are
more
often
expressed
as
interrogatives
than
imperatives. Thus, it requires a high
level of pragmatic competence.
Based
on
Leech
’
s
classification
of
speech
act,
refusal
is
in
the
scope
of
conflictive
speech
act,
whose
linguistic
function
and
social
function
are
conflictive
11
毕业论文（设计）
(Wang
Yi,
2002).
In
nature,
speech
act
of
refusal,
together
with
other
conflictive
speech act, like threatening and blame,
is impolite. In order to decline the conflict and
antagonism between the speaker and
interlocutor, indirect speech act of refusal
should
be performed.
3.2 Politeness principles
Politeness is a communicative strategy
which people use to maintain and develop
relationships. Politeness can be seen
as one of the basic social guidelines for human
interaction. It is
“a
system of interpersonal
relations designed to facilitate interaction
by
minimizing
the
potential
conflict
and
confrontation
inherent
in
all
human
interchange”
(
Lakoff, 1990: 34)
3.2.1
Face Theory
Many
linguists
such
as
Leech,
Brown
&
Levinson
have
proposed
politeness
theories. Among
all the theories, the most popular and influential
one is put forward
by Brown &
Levinson in 1978 and 1987. Central to
Brown & Levinson
’
s theory of
politeness
are
the
notions
of
“
face
”
,
“
face-threatening
acts
(FTA)
”
and
“
politeness
strategies
”
.
According to Brown & Levinson (1978: 62), face has
two related aspects:
positive
face
and
negative
face.
An
individual’s
positive
face
is
the
expression
of
involvement or belonging in a group
which includes the desire
“
to be ratified, under
stood, approved of, liked or
admired.
”
An
individual
’
s negative face
is the expression
of restraint and
independence which includes the desire to be free
from imposition, to
have
his
or
her
territory
respected
and
his
or
her
freedom
of
action
unimpeded
by
12
毕业论文（设计）
others.
“
Face
”
, they claim, is
“
something that is
emotionally invested, and that can be
lost, maintained or enhanced, and must
be constantly attended to interaction
”
(
Brown
& Levinson, 1978: 66)
Besides face, another central notion in
Brown and Levinson
’
s
approach is what
they call face-
threatening act (FTA): act whose propositional
content threatens or runs
contrary to
the face wants of participant in an interaction.
Or simply, any act that puts
face
at
risk
is
a
FTA.
According
to
Brown
&
Levinson
(1987),
request,
criticism,
apology, disagreement, refusal and the
like, are all FTAs since these speech acts by
their, nature, run contrary to the face
wants of the listener or of the speaker. FTAs may
threaten the
speaker
’
s or the
listener’
s positive or
negative face needs. Positive face is
threatened by
acts
like
refusal,
and
negative face is
threatened by
impositions from
other, such as
request, invitation, suggestion, or offer.
3.2.2
Leech
’
s politeness
principles
Based on the speech act
theory of proposed by Austin and Searle and the
theory
of
conversational
implicature
of
Grice,
Leech
(1983)
proposed
a
series
of
maxims
under Politeness Principle, that is,
(1)
Tact Maxim:
Minimize cost to other and maximize benefit to
other
(2)
Generosity Maxim: Minimize benefit to
self
(3)
Modesty
Maxim: Minimize praise of self and maximize
dispraise of self
(4)
Approbation
Maxim:
Minimize
dispraise
of
other
and
maximize
praise
of
other
(5)
Agreement
Maxim:
minimize
disagreement
between
self
and
other
and
13
毕业论文（设计）
maximize
dispraise of self
(6)
Sympathy Maxim: Minimize antipathy
between self and other and maximize
sympathy between self and other.
Among of all these maxims, the Tact
Maxim is the most important one. The Tact
Maxim applies to
Searl
e’
s Directive and
Commissive categories of illocution. There
are
two
sides
of
the
Tact
Maxim,
the
negative
side
is
to
minimize
the
cost
of
the
listeners or addressees, and the
positive side is to maximize benefits to the
listeners or
addressees.
“
The
second
is
less
important,
but
is
a
natural
corollary
of
the
first.
”
(Leech,
1983:
109-110)
In
conflict
situations,
the
function
of
the
Tact
Maxim
is
a
negative
one: it is a means of avoiding conflict. The
action of the maxim is to
“
cause
us
to
suppress,
to
play
down,
to
hedge,
beliefs
which
are
costly
to
the
reader
or
listener.
”
(Leech, 1983: 104)
4. Case
study
4.1 Types of business letters
In
the
business
world,
there
were
various
letters
between
companies
and
companies, companies and
individuals. The purposes are numerous, yet the
following
are the main types:
(1)
Letter for building business
relationship
To
expand
its
business,
a
company
must
develop
new
relationship
with
other
14
毕业论文（设计）
companies.
While
it
can
be
achieved
by
business
advertisement
on
TV
or
in
the
newspapers
and
magazines,
the
best
and
common
way
is
through
business
letters
which
serves
as
a
personal
representative
to
introduce
your
company
and
your
purpose.
(2)
Inquiry letters and Quotation letters
When the buyer and the seller do
business for the first time, they have to know
things such as the
product
’
s
quality, the sales
condition,
the after-sales
services and
the price, with the last
point the most important. Form the view of the
buyer, such a
letter is called Inquiry
letter while from the view of the seller, it is
called Quotation
letter.
(3)
Ordering
letters
Order letters are written for
the formal acceptance of the transaction for the
fear
of
some
unnecessary
trouble
in
the
future.
The
letter
should
be
numbered
and
the
detailed aspects of the
products should be included for reference.
(4)
Complaint
letters
Unlike claim letters,
complaints letters are usually written by an
individual to a
company when he feels
the quality of the goods or service is poor. The
purpose is to
get the
sellers
’
s sympathy and
settle the problem as the complainer expects.
(5)
Claim letters
A claim letter is written when the
buyer is not satisfied on receiving the goods
and asks for claim. Usually the
dissatisfaction is caused by the reasons that the
goods
are not delivered on time, the
quality is not the same as the sample, the
quantity is not
15
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
上一篇：3.高考常考单词后缀——名词变形容词
下一篇：(完整版)英语名词变形