L2 Apology Strategies Of Intermediate And Advanced Chinese Level Malaysian Students

With the development of the study of Chinese as a foreign language,researches on pragmatic competence have gradually come into researchers' vision.Making apologies is one of the usual speech acts,influenced by many social contexts For Chinese learners,how to apologize properly has become a thorny problem.Based on politeness theory and face theory,this study focuses on the pragmatic competence of L2 apology strategies of intermediate and advanced Chinese level Malaysian students.Differently from the previous studies:first,the native language of the participants in this study is Malaysian,rather than mainstream English;Secondly,this study adopts the oral discourse completion test rather than written discourse completion test,considering the specialty of Chinese written system.In this research,42 Chinese students and 42 Malaysian students with intermediate and advanced Chinese proficiency level are chosen to complete the oral test with 18 situational questions in 10 minutes,and almost 800 minutes of recording and transcription are obtained.In data analysis,the author compares the apology strategies,language forms and social parameters within and between groups,so as to find out the similarities and differences between the two groups.The data analysis presents that:first,as for the overall usage of apology strategy,the frequency of learners' usage of IFID,apology intensification and taking on responsibility is basically the same with that of native speakers,while the learners' frequency of using explanation,offering repair,minimizing strategy and concern for the hearer is significantly lower than native speakers.Secondly,as for the language form,native speakers have a comparatively prominent tendency of using“????”instead of“???”.While for learners,the frequency of using“???”is still higher than“????”.Meanwhile,the category and frequency of using degree adverbs are lower in learners.Thirdly,as for social distance,offence severity and power distance,there are outstanding differences not only within groups but also between groups.(1)As regards social distance,the frequency of the learners' using promising for forbearance,minimizing strategy and concern for the hearer is obviously lower than that of native speakers,while the frequency of learners' using of IFID is significantly higher than that of native speakers in intimate relationships.(2)As regards the degree of offending,the frequency of learners' using explanation and concern for the hearer strategy is lower than that of native speakers under the condition of the severe offence.(3)As regards power distance,when the status of the speaker is higher than that of the hearer.the learners' frequency of using explanation,minimizing and concern for the hearer is obviously lower than that of the native speakers.This research demonstrates that:(1)Malaysian students' using“???”is far more frequent than that of native speakers,proving that the excessive using“???”in TCFL textbooks such as Chinese for Beginners and Spoken Chinese does have a negative impact on learners' output;(2)many studies still define China as collectivism(high-context)However,the choices of apology strategies by native speakers at different social distances in this study confirm that modern Chinese society presents a "dual" feature:"collectivism"in the face of intimate and general relationships and "individualism" in the face of unfamiliar relationships.