investigating the speech act of ostensible invitations...

109

Journal of Language Sciences & Linguistics. Vol., 4 (2), 109-120, 2016

Available online at http://www.jlsljournal.com ISSN 2148-0672 ©2016

Investigating the Speech Act of Ostensible

Invitations: Contrasting Canadian Native English

Speakers with North and Central Native Speakers of

Persian Regional Dialects

Fatemeh Ahmadi Livani1*

, Abbas Eslami Rasekh2

1Department

of Language, Bandargaz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Bandargaz, Iran

2Isfahan University, Iran

*Corresponding Author Email: [email protected]

ABSTRACT: This study is an attempt to investigate the pragmatic role of culture in using ostensible invitations

across the two languages English and Persian. The strategies of Persian speakers are also compared with English

strategies in order to find the differences that may exist between these two languages. Unlike comprehensive

studies on speech acts such as request and apology, the number of cross-cultural studies investigating

expressions of ostensible invitation is fairly limited and there are few studies investigating this speech act in

Persian. The participants of this study were 40 Persian speakers with a low level of proficiency from Gorgan and

Isfahan; the participants were female, aging from 20 to 35 years old. 20 Canadian students in UBC in

Vancouver also participated in this study. A Nelson proficiency test included 50 multiple choice items covering

grammar, vocabulary, and reading comprehension. Two questionnaires (Persian and English) were prepared

both including 10 situations and each situation with three options to consider The English questionnaire was

given English native speakers; the same questionnaire (in Persian) was given to Persian speakers, citizens in

Gorgan and Isfahan. In each situation, participants would choose and evaluate the genuineness of the invitation

i.e. to find out to what degree the invitation (offer) is genuine as opposed to ostensible. The results of the

Scheffe procedure suggested that Persian and English speakers vary in their ostensible speech act strategies,

ostensible invitations used by Canadian participants were different from educated Persian speakers from

Gorgan, the degree of ostensibility in invitations used by educated Persian speakers from Gorgan was greater

than Canadian participants, and these subjects used the least degrees of ostensible invitations. Also, ostensible

speech act used by Canadian participants was different from educated Persian speakers from Isfahan: the degree

of ostensibility in invitations used by educated Persian speakers from Isfahan was higher than Canadian

participants because the values and cultural norms underlying the English language are not necessarily the same

as those of Persian subjects. The effect of cultural differences in using ostensible invitations was revealed to be

significant in both groups. The results revealed that there was a significant difference in the degree of sensibility

of invitations across Persian compared with Canadian, i.e. Canadian participants used more genuine invitations

and patterns of the use were different. The Persian participants used more ostensible invitations; it was done in

order to saving face and showing politeness to the addressees. As a type of politeness strategies, ostensible

invitation plays a very important role in social life (Yan, 2011). Explaining different patterns of invitations (both

ostensible and genuine) in English culture and comparing them with this type of strategy in Persian culture is

considered to be an important part of any EFL teaching program. These difficulties are due to difference

between English and Persian cultural scripts and also speech act strategies among these two languages and can

lead to misunderstanding and cross-cultural clashes.

Keywords: Ostensible Invitation, Politeness Strategy, Culture.

http://www.jlsljournal.com/

J. Lang. Sci. Ling. Vol., 4 (2), 109-120, 2016

110

INTRODUCTION

The culmination of language learning is not just the mastery of forms in order to accomplish the

communicative functions. Mastery of vocabulary and structures results in an insufficient outcome if the learners

cannot use those forms for the purpose of transmitting and receiving thoughts, ideas and feeling. Linguists claim

that communication is capable of being dismantled into a series of speech acts, or communicative acts, which

are used in a systematic way to accomplish certain purposes (Brown, 1987; Faerch, 1989). As such,

investigations have sought to understand the depths of communicative events to arrive at the unspoken purposes

that lie at the heart of each speech event. It is possible to specify general principles for being polite in social

interactions within a particular culture in speech events such as offering and invitations. Invitations are usually

viewed as arrangements for a social commitment. The term invitation has been used in two different senses:

Some invitations have been termed a genuine; yet, some others have been referred to as ostensible. The former

corresponds to the Persian term /davat/ and the latter to the Persian term /ta:rof/. People sometimes extend

invitations they don't intend to be taken seriously, they are called ostensible invitations which are included in

ostensible speech acts. There are a number of cases in which an invitation is extended but is not necessarily

followed by the conclusion of the arrangement under discussion. In other words, one can never be sure whether

such ostensible invitations were ever intended to be completed. The basic idea in designing an ostensible

invitation is to make its pretense at sincerity obvious enough that the addressee will recognize that it was

intended to be seen as obvious. The invitation speech act is conditioned by social norms as well as the

grammatical form of the language (Beebe, 1990; Brown, 1978).

The term invitation is defined by) who reports: "According to popular wisdom, social commitments are

normally arrived at through unambiguous invitations". An operational definition of such a speech act is that it

contains reference to time, place or activity, and most importantly, a request for response. A simple example

would be the following:

Do you wish to have lunch tomorrow?

(Request for response) (Activity) (Time)

In the above invitation, arrangement for event is clear and features of sincere invitation are observed, but

all invitations aren't extended in this way. There are a number of features that make it recognizable to the

interlocutors that the invitation is not a real one. These features include: a) time which is left indefinite; b)

response which is not required; and c) a modal auxiliary such as must or should which is used in expressing the

invitation.

Clark and Isaacs’s view of ostensible invitations differed slightly from Wolfson’s (1989) who had

described what she called ambiguous invitations. She rightly pointed out that the two parties must collaborate to

establish the function of these invitations.

1. A makes B's presence at E implausible.

2. A extends invitation only after it has been solicited.

3. A doesn't motivate invitation beyond social courtesy.

4. A doesn't persist or insist on the invitation.

5. A is vague about arrangements for event E.

6. A hedges the invitation.

7. A delivers the invitation with inappropriate cues (verbal, vocal, and facial).

Seven features of ostensible invitations (An invites B to event E)

Table 1. Seven features of ostensible invitations (An invites B to event E).

The study presented here is an attempt to provide answer to this question, namely:

Are there differences in the Persian speech act behavior of native Persian speakers with Canadian native

speakers concerning the use of ostensible invitations?

1. A makes B's presence at E implausible.

2. A extends invitation only after it has been solicited.

3. A doesn't motivate invitation beyond social courtesy.

4. A doesn't persist or insist on the invitation.

5. A is vague about arrangements for event E.

6. A hedges the invitation.

7. A delivers the invitation with inappropriate cues (verbal, vocal, and facial).


111

METHODOLOGY

A. Participants: The participants of this study were 40 Persian native speakers including

a) 20 university students majoring in a subject other than English chosen from Isfahan;

b) 20 university students majoring in a subject other than English chosen from Gorgan;

And 20 English native speakers of Vancouver University in Canada. Participants’ age range was 20 to 35.

B. Instrument: Nelson English language proficiency test and one questionnaire (in two versions, Persian

and English), both including the same situations and utterances, were used as instrument for data collection. The

English questionnaire was answered by Canadian female native speakers. The Persian data was collected from

Gorgan and Isfahan participants who were not English students.

C. Procedures: The sample group consisted of 100 students. For selecting two groups (two groups with a

low level of proficiency from Gorgan and Isfahan), the researcher needed to use a language proficiency test.

Each group was pre-tested using an established general English language proficiency test (Nelson proficiency

test). Measurement of standard deviation was used as a criterion for subject selection. In each questionnaire, 10

dialogue situations and 30 utterances were prepared based on features which were stated in Clark and Isaacs.

Each situation included three different utterances, participants were asked to select only one utterance which

was favorable for them. In each situation, the selected option showed the difference between patterns of

ostensible invitation which participants used. In addition to the first part, we prepared a seven point scale which

is numbered from 1 to 7 and measured the degree of trueness of the option which they had selected in the

previous part. Minimum trueness received 1 in the scale, and maximum trueness would receive 7. The total

numerical value could be calculated from all responses. When the average score of the learner was higher, the

participants are found to employ more genuine invitation and less an ostensible one. The statistical methods

applied in this study are Nelson proficiency test for determining the proficiency level of Persian students, one-

way ANOVA and a post ad hoc test (Schaffer test). Cronbach’s coefficient alpha formula was used for

estimating internal consistency and reliability of the questionnaires (Alpha was found to be 0.89).

D. Data Analysis: As it was mentioned before, ten discourse situations were chosen for data collection.

Each situation included three different utterances. Participants were asked to select only one utterance which

was favorable for them. In every situation, the selected option showed the difference between patterns of

ostensible invitation which participants used. In the first step of the analysis, questions were analyzed one by

one to see whether there was a difference between patterns of ostensible invitation used by English and Persian

native speakers. In what follows, ten situations are presented in a tabular format, with the response percentages

provided by the situations in each group.

RESULTS

Situation 1: It's your brother's wedding party and you are talking about it with one of your friends;

meanwhile, an acquaintance with whom you don't have a close relationship, overhears your talking .Then she

asks: what's up? Are you talking about a wedding party?

OPTION a) You will mumble and then say: Well. It's my brother's wedding party on Sunday, uh…you can

come if you would like to".

OPTION b) You will tell her: "It's my brother's wedding party, you can come if you would like to". But you

don't specify the time and place of the event.

OPTION c) You will say: "It's my brother's wedding party; I have the honor to be your host". You will insist on

her attendance to this party three times.

Table 2. Degrees of ostensibility displayed in the case of situation 1.

One Persian speaker

(Gorgan)

N=20

Persian speaker

(Isfahan)

N=20

English native

speaker

N=20

A 5 (% 25) 9 (%45) 7 (%35)

B 13 (% 65) 10 (%50) 4 (%20)

C 2 (% 10) 1 (%5) 9 (%45)

65 percent of English native speakers agreed with the second option and half of Gorgani speakers agreed with

this option. On the other hand, nearly 45 percent of Persian native speakers from Isfahan agreed with the third

option which is the genuine invitation. They use the features of ostensible invitation but their invitation is a

genuine one. Regional difference also seems to be the cause of difference between participants from Gorgan and

Isfahan.


112

SITUATION 2. After spending a busy day, you are coming back home by bus. There is a seat and you

occupy it. You see one elderly female relative, standing near you. So you greet her and utter one of the

following options:

OPTION a) You will invite her to take your seat and if she doesn't accept, you will not insist anymore.

OPTION b) You will invite her happily to take your seat.

OPTION c) You will invite her twice to take your seat but if she doesn't accept, you will continue sitting.

Table 3. Degrees of ostensibility displayed by three groups of subjects.

Two Persian speaker

(Gorgan) N=20

Persian speaker

(Isfahan) N=20

English native speaker

N=20

A 4 (% 20) 3 (%15) 0

B 14 (% 70) 12 (%60) 11 (%55)

C 2 (% 10) 5 (%25) 9 (%45)

More than 55 percent of responses in each group agreed with the second option and English native speakers

allocated the highest percentage to themselves (%70).

SITUATION 3. You have bought a beautiful dress for your mother, you show it to your aunt, she says to

you, "it's a very beautiful dress; I wish I had one like this".

OPTION a) You just say:" You can have it"

OPTION b) You will tell her: "If you like it, you can have it. I will buy another one for my mother".

OPTION c) You will tell her:" You can take it as a gift". (You insist to her three times)

Table 4. The comparison of the speech behavior of three groups of subjects.

Three Persian speaker

(Gorgan) N=20

Persian speaker

(Isfahan) N=20


N=20

A 4 (% 20) 3 (%15) 8 (%40)

B 15 (% 75) 9 (%45) 9 (%45)

C 1 (% 5) 8 (%40) 3 (%15)

According to the gained result of the third question, 40 percent of Isfahan subjects selected the first option,

which was ostensible invitation.75 percent of English native speakers and also near half of Persian speakers

from Gorgan and Isfahan selected the second option as an ostensible invitation .So, Persian participants’ choice

were the same, and there was not any significant difference between them, also they were similar with English

native speakers. Despite of being similarity between English native speakers and Persian native speakers from

Gorgan and Isfahan in the chosen patterns, they are absolutely different in degree of ostensibility.

SITUATION 4. You have an appointment. You are planning to pick up your boss at the airport. It's getting

late. You left home to get there by car. At the same time, you see that your brother's wife is coming to your

home. There is nobody at home. Therefore;

OPTION a) You will greet her and while sitting in the car, you invite her inside your house.

OPTION b) You will get out, then you open the door of your house and invite her to enter.

OPTION c) You don’t want to offend her, so you will get out and say: "I have an important appointment, if you

have free time, come with me and after finishing my work, you and I will go back home. Ok?”

Table 5. The degrees of ostensibility of the speech act of invitation use.

Four Persian speaker

(Gorgan) N=20

Persian speaker

(Isfahan) N=20


N=20

A 2 (% 10) 1 (%5) 5 (%25)

B 3(%15) 5 (%25) 1 (%5)

C 15 (% 75) 14 (%70) 14 (%70)

Question 4 shows that close to 70-75 percent of the participants selected the third option, which was an

ostensible invitation. Tendency of the participants to other options was nearly the same. In spite of being the

similarity between the chosen patterns of three groups, English native speakers select this option as a genuine

invitation.

SITUATION 5. You are planning to meet your colleagues at 3:30 p.m. at university now it's 3:20 and it's

getting late .You are driving on a busy street ,at once you see your niece walking in the opposite direction .You

will stop and tell her:

OPTION a)" If you are in a hurry, hop in" but you invite her once.


113

OPTION b)" Let me give you a ride". (You insist three times)

OPTION c) "Hop in" but in fact, you don't have any plan to change your direction

Table 6. The comparison of the speakers' use of ostensible invitation.

Five Persian speaker

(Gorgan) N=20

Persian speaker

(Isfahan) N=20


N=20

A 8(%40) 4(%20) 10(%50)

B 2(%10) 9(%45) 5(%25)

C 10(%50) 7(%35) 5(%25)

There is a discrepancy between three groups in answering this question; 45 percent of Persain native speakers

from Gorgan, chose the second option which was a genuine invitation. Some 50 percent of Persian native

speakers from Isfahan selected the third option as an ostensible invitation; And half of English native speakers

selected the first option as genuine invitation, whereas this option had features of ostensible invitation,.

SITUATION 6. It is your birthday party; you don't want to invite your cousin because you have some

problems with her but your mother compelled you to invite her, therefore;

OPTION a) Just for respecting your mother, you go to her house and after greeting, you tell her: "My

birthday party is on Tuesday night, I'd like you to come”.

OPTION b) You will call and tell her reluctantly: "um..Will you be free on Tuesday? My birthday is on

Tuesday if you are free, come to my party".

OPTION c) You will ask your sister to call and invite her.


Six Persian speaker (Gorgan)

N=20

Persian speaker (Isfahan)

N=20


N=20

A 12 (% 60) 3 (%15) 4 (%20)

B 5 (% 25) 10 (%50) 14 (%70)

C 3 (% 15) 7 (%35) 2(%10)

Therefore, the first option was an instance of ostensible invitation. But after comparing the degree of

ostensibility between different groups of participants, it was revealed that this option received the least degree of

ostensibility among English native speakers. 55 percent of Isfahani students agreed with the third option, it was

a genuine invitation. In contrast, half of Persian speakers from Gorgan agreed with the second option. Inviter

dose not insist on the invitation, this is a feature of ostensible invitation which is seen in this option; so the first

option was ostensible invitations .There was a discrepancy between selected options by Persian speakers from

Gorgan and Isfahan .

SITUATION 7. You have been invited to a friend's house that is very hospitable and entertains you in the

best way, while saying goodbye, you would say,

OPTION a) "Next time, it's your turn to come to our house"

OPTIONb) "If you don't come to our house, I will be upset".

OPTIONc) "I will be waiting for you to come to my house for lunch next week"

Table 8. Degree of ostensibility of the speech act of invitation used.

Seven Persian speaker

(Gorgan) N=20

Persian speaker

(Isfahan) N=20


N=20

A 14 (% 70) 7 (%15) 7 (%35)

B 2 (% 10) 9 (%45) 2 (%10)

C 4 (% 20) 4 (%35) 11(%55)

SITUATION 8. In the university's cafeteria, you are sitting with some of your classmates with whom you don't

have a close relationship. You would like a drink, so;

OPTIONa) You will tell them:" I would like a drink .How about a drink"?

OPTIONb) You will tell them: "I'll treat you to a drink".

OPTIONc)You order a drink for yourself, and offer them before drinking it.


114


Eight Persian speaker

(Gorgan) N=20

Persian speaker

(Isfahan) N=20


N=20

A 6 (%30) 6 (%30) 15 (% 75)

B 4 (%20) 12 (%60) 3 (% 15)

C 10(%50) 2 (%10) 2 (% 10)

75 percent of Canadian participants selected the first option which was an ostensible invitation, but they

allocated the least degree of ostensibility to it. 60 percent of Persian native speakers from Gorgan agreed with

the second option which was an absolutely genuine invitation. And half of Isfahani speakers chose the third

option, which was an ostensible invitation. The results of Isfahan and Gorgan data revealed that there was a

distinction between them with regard to cultural and regional differences.

SITUATION 9. You have come back home from office with one of your colleagues that you have known

for a couple of years, her house is beside yours. When you reach home;

OPTION a) You open the door and invite her to come in, you insist once or twice.

OPTION b) You tell her:" if you like, come in".

OPTION c) You invite her to come in and tell her: "Would you like to have tea with me?" but you don't insist

anymore.


Nine Persian speaker

(Gorgan) N=20

Persian speaker

(Isfahan) N=20

English native

speaker N=20

A 6 (%30) 11 (%55) 4 (% 20)

B 0 7 (%35) 12 (% 60)

C 14(%70) 2 (%10) 4 (% 20)

In situation 9, more than half of Gorgan participants chose the first option as a genuine invitation. Canadian

subjects selected the second option (%60) as a genuine invitation, but it had some features of ostensible

invitation. A desirable choice for Persian native speakers from Isfahan was the third one; this option was an

ostensible invitation. Situation 9 showed the obvious difference between Gorgan and Isfahan participants, the

latter group selected genuine and the next chose ostensible invitation. It can be concluded that regional

difference was the reason of difference in using speech act strategies. One of the consistent findings in Cohen

studies (1996) was that, although the typology of speech acts appears to be universals their conceptualization

and verbalization can vary to a great extent across cultures and languages .In this research Gorgan and Isfahan

participants speak to Persian language, but regional difference cause cultural variation, so it affected the type of

invitation speech act which they used.

SITUATION 10. For a long time, you have decided to talk to Mina privately; one of your friends, about

some important problems but you can't find her. You meet her in the university. While inviting her to lunch for

th next day, Maryam, who is your close friend, arrives and says: where are you going? I mean “are you going

somewhere”?

OPTION a)You will tell her: "I have invited Mina to lunch for tomorrow ,I tend to talk with her privately, you

can come if you would like to" .

OPTION b)You will tell her: "Well ,uh, we are walking If you want to you can come". But you don't insist.

OPTION c)You know Maryam will have to go to class at 1:30 tomorrow, but you ask her:

''Are you free at 1:30 tomorrow? If you are free, come".

The data collected showed that none of three groups agreed with each other and each of them selected

different option. 90 percent of English native speakers selected the first option; 70 percent of Persian native

speakers from Gorgan chose the second option. And Persian native speakers from Isfahan selected the third

option (%65).


Ten Persian speaker

(Gorgan) N=20

Persian speaker

(Isfahan) N=20

English native speaker N=20

A 18 (% 90) 3(%15) 5 (%25)

B 1 (% 5) 14 (%70) 2(%10)

C 1 (% 5) 3 (%15) 13(%65)


115

The data collected showed that 90 percent of English native speakers selected the first option, which was an

ostensible invitation, and the ultimate purpose of the inviter was accomplished off record. But the Canadian

native speakers were different; they selected this option as a genuine invitation. 70 percent of Persian native

speakers from Gorgan chose the second option which was an ostensible invitation. There was a discrepancy

between chosen option of Gorgan and Isfahan participants.

Analysis of the scores gained

The researcher prepared a seven point scale which was numbered from 1 to 7; typically the participants

were instructed to select one of seven degrees. Minimum trueness received 1 in the scale, and maximum

trueness would receive 7. In order to gain the total scores of each participant, responses to the items were

combined. Based on the mean scores, we can conclude ostensible invitations used by Canadian participants were

different from educated Persian speakers resident in Gorgan, the degree of ostensibility in invitations used by

educated Persian speakers from Gorgan was more than Canadian participants. Also, ostensible speech act used

by Canadian participants was different from educated Persian speakers from Isfahan: the degree of ostensibility

in invitations used by educated Persian speakers from Isfahan was higher than Canadian participants. The

descriptive statistics of the subjects’ scores of the three groups is tabulated in table 12.

Table 12. Descriptive tabulation of learners’ scores.

As can be seen in table 12, the means attributed to the three groups are not the same. The most efficient way to

find out whether or not this difference is statistically significant, a One-way ANOVA was run .Before the

ANOVA measurement, we had to examine whether the groups were homogenous. Therefore we run a Levene's

test. Levene's test is designed to test the null hypothesis that the variances of the groups are the same. If

Levene's test shows significance (value of significance is less than 0.05) then we can say that the variances are

significant. This would mean that we violated one of the assumptions of ANOVA and then we would have to

take steps to rectify this matter. However, for these data the variances were found to be similar.

Table 13. Test of homogeneity of variances.

Sig df2 df1 Levene statistic

0.651 95 4 0.617

As can be seen in table 13, the significance of Levence 's test is greater than 0.05 So we could run an ANOVA

test.

Table 14. Analysis of variance of females’ scores on questionnaire.

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F P

Between Groups 9057.290 4 2264.323 87.021 0.000

Within Groups 2827,337 95 29.761 - -

Total 11884.628 99 - - -

As it is shown in table 14, there are significant differences between the three groups of data. (P=0.000, P<0.01).

"F" tends to be 1.00 if the null hypothesis is true. But, to extent null hypothesis is false "F" exceeds 1.00.If it

exceeds 1.00 enough the null hypothesis will be rejected (Hatch & Lazarton, 1991). We know that there is a

significant difference. As it is shown in table 14 "F" is 87.021 so, null hypotheses is rejected .It predicted that

there would be no significant difference among the three groups of participants in the degree of using ostensible

invitations. We can say that the degrees of using ostensible invitations in the three groups are different because

the means are different. In order to apprehend the area of mean differences a post hoc test was done. The

Scheffe's procedure is one of the most flexible, conservative, robust data snooping procedures available. Since

the overall F statistics is significant, Scheffe's procedure can be used to evaluate all a posterior contrasts among

the means, not just the pair wise comparisons. Table 14.summarizes the findings of scheffe's test procedure.

SD Mean N Participants

5,82553 53,60 20 English native speakers

4,97229 44,75 20 Persian educated Gorgan speaker

5,27631 31,45 20 Persian educated speaker Isfahan


116

Table 15. The mean difference is significant at 0.05 levels.

Comparisons of Groups

(I)group (J)group

Mean Difference

Sig.

G1 G2

G3

17.9000

8.8500

0.000

G2 G1

G3

-17.9000

-9.05000

0.000

G3 G1

G2

-8.8500

9.0500

0.000

As shown in table 15, the difference between G1&G2, G1&G3, G2 &G1, G2&G3, G3&G1, G3&G2 is

statistically significant at 0.05 level of probability. As it was mentioned earlier G1 included 20 English native

speakers, G2 included 20 Persian educated learners with a low level of proficiency from Gorgan and G3

included 20 Persian educated learners with a low level of proficiency from Isfahan.

CONCLUSION

The present study explored the ostensible invitations strategies of native Persians from two different regions

in comparison with the data from native speakers of Canadian English. As a type of politeness strategies,

ostensible invitation plays a very important role in social life (Yan, 2011).The findings of the study showed that

there are differences between the strategies that are employed for expressing sincere and ostensible invitations in

Persian and English languages. Contrastive pragmatic studies like the current work determine the patterns and

strategies that native speakers of one language use in different situations. By comparing the patterns of

expressing one speech act in two languages, teachers can equip their students with necessary and appropriate

tools for successful communication. Pragmatics has typically been ignored by textbooks and teacher training

programs, especially in Iran, and despite the wealth of empirical studies conducted on speech acts in general;

few data-based studies have focused on different strategies of ostensible speech act. This study was conducted to

examine the speech act patterns used in invitations within two different regional versions of Persian and across

Canadian English and Persian. The findings of the study showed that there were differences between the

strategies employed for using ostensible invitation in Persian and English languages.

Ostensible invitations used by Canadian participants were different from educated Persian speakers with a

low level knowledge of English from Gorgan. Also, ostensible invitations used by Canadian participants were

different from educated Persian speakers with a low knowledge of English from Isfahan. The Persian

participants used more ostensible invitations, and it was done in order to saving face and showing politeness to

the addressees, but English speakers’ view in facing with this type of invitation was positive and they accepted it

as a genuine invitation. The effect of regional differences in using ostensible invitations was revealed to be

significant. Scheffe test showed there was a meaningful difference between Goragn participants and Isfahan

participants: the mean scores of Gorgan participants were higher than Isfahan participants, Gorgan and Isfahan

subjects were different in chosen options. Distinction between them refers to cultural differences and different

geographical area.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest

REFERENCES

Beebe LM, TakahashiT, 1990. Pragmatic transfer in ESL refusals. In R..C. Scarcella, E. Andersen, & S.D.

Krashen (Eds),Developing communicative competence in a second language. New York: Newbury House.

Brown P, Levinson P, 1987. Politeness: Some universals in language usage Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Brown P, Levinson S, 1978.Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. In E. Goody (ed.), Questions

and politeness: Strategies in social interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 56-311.

Cohen AD, 1996. Developing the ability to perform speech acts. Studies in second language acquisition. 18:

253-267.

Faerch K, Kasper G, 1989. Internal and external modification in interlanguage requests realization. In S.Blum-

Kulka, J. House& G.Kasper (Eds.),Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Norwood,NJ:Ablex.


117

Hatch E, Lazarton A, 1991. The research manual: Design and statistics for applied linguistics. Boston, MA:

Heinle & Heinle.

Wolfson N, 1981. Invitation, compliments and the competence of the native speaker. International Journal of

Psychologist. 24: 7-22.

Yan H, 2011. Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxfords University Press.


118

APPENDIX A

Questionnaire

Name: Age:

There are ten dialogue situations described in the following items numbered from 1 to 10. Every situation

described has got three options for you to a) choose and b) evaluate its untrueness. The purpose of this list is to

identify to what degree your invitation (offer) is formal, untrue, put in other words known as ISFAHANI

TAAROF (minimum untrueness receives 1 in the scale), and to what extent it is serious, i.e. you mean to really

truly invite the addressee (maximum trueness will receive 7).

SITUATION 1: It's your brother's wedding party and you are talking about it with one of your friends;

meanwhile, an acquaintance with whom you don't have a close relationship, overhears your talking .Then she

asks: what's up? Are you talking about a wedding party?

OPTION a)You will mumble and then say : " Well. It's my brother's wedding party on Sunday, uh…you can

come if you would like to".

1-----------2-------------3------------4-----------5-----------6---------7

OPTION b)You will tell her: "It's my brother's wedding party, you can come if you would like to". But you

don't specify the time and place of the event.

1-----------2--------------3------------4------------5-----------6--------7

OPTION c) You will say: "It's my brother's wedding party, I have the honor to be your host". You will insist on

her attendance to this party three times.

1---------- 2---------------3------------4------------5------------6------7

.........................................................................................................

SITUATION 2.After spending a busy day, you are coming back home by bus. There is a seat and you occupy it.

You see one elderly female relative, standing near you. So you greet her and utter one of the following options:

OPTION a) You will invite her to take your seat and if she doesn't accept, you will not insist anymore.

1---------- 2---------------3------------4------------5------------6------7

OPTION) You will invite her happily to take your seat.

1---------- 2---------------3------------4------------5------------6------7

OPTION c) You will invite her twice to take your seat but if she doesn't accept, you will continue sitting.

1---------- 2---------------3------------4------------5-----------6-----7

…………………………………………………………................................

SITUATIONS 3.You have bought a beautiful dress for your mother, you show it to your aunt, she says to you,

"it's a very beautiful dress; I wish I had one like this".

OPTION a)You just say:" You can have it"

1---------- 2---------------3------------4------------5------------6------7

OPTION b) You will tell her: "If you like it, you can have it. I will buy another one for my mother".

1---------- 2---------------3------------4------------5------------6------7

OPTION c) You will tell her:" You can take it as a gift". (You insist to her three times)

1---------- 2---------------3------------4------------5------------6------7

.....................................................................................................................

SITUATION 4. You have an appointment. You are planning to pick up your boss at the airport. It's getting late.

You left home to get there by car. At the same time, you see that your brother's wife is going to your home.

There is nobody at home. Therefore;

OPTION a) You will greet her and while sitting in the car, you invite her to go home with you.

1---------- 2---------------3------------4------------5------------6------7

OPTION b) You will get out, then you open the door of your house and invite her to enter.


119

1---------- 2---------------3------------4------------5------------6------7

OPTION c) You don't want to offend her, so you will get out and say: "I have an important appointment, if you

have free time, come with me and after finishing my work, you and I will go back home. Ok?"

1---------- 2---------------3------------4------------5------------6------7

……………………………………………………………………………

SITUATION 5.You are planning to meet your colleagues at 3:30 p.m in university now it's 3:20 and it's getting

late .You are driving on a busy street ,at once you see your niece walking in the opposite direction .You will

stop and tell her:

OPTION a)" If you are in a hurry, hop in" but you invite her once.

1---------- 2---------------3------------4------------5------------6------7

OPTION b)" Let me give you a ride". (You insist her three times)

1---------- 2---------------3------------4------------5------------6------7

OPTION c) "Hop in" but in fact, you don't have any plan to change your direction.

1---------- 2---------------3------------4------------5------------6------7

...................................................................................................................

SITUATION 6. It is your birthday party; you don't want to invite your cousin because you have some problems

with her but your mother compelled you to invite her, therefore;

OPTION a) Just for respecting your mother, you go to her house and after greeting, you tell her: "My birthday's

party is on Tuesday night, I'd like you to come".

1---------- 2---------------3------------4------------5------------6------7

OPTION b) You will call and tell her reluctantly: "Will you be free on Tuesday? My birthday is on Tuesday if

you are free, please come to my party".

1---------- 2---------------3------------4------------5------------6------7

OPTION c) You will ask your sister to call and invite her.

1---------- 2---------------3------------4------------5------------6------7

.....................................................................................................................

SITUATION7.You have been invited to a friend's house who is very hospitable and entertains you in the best

way, while saying goodbye, you would say,

OPTION a) "Next time, it's your turn to come to our house"

1---------- 2---------------3------------4------------5------------6------7

OPTIONb) "If you don't come to our house, I will be upset".

1---------- 2---------------3------------4------------5------------6------7

OPTIONc)"I will be waiting for you to come to my house for lunch next week".

1---------- 2---------------3------------4------------5------------6------7

.....................................................................................................................

SITUATION8.You have sat with some of your classmates with whom you don't have close relationship, in the

university's cafeteria .You would like a drink, so;

OPTIONa) You will tell them:" I would like a drink .How about a drink"?

1---------- 2---------------3------------4------------5------------6------7

OPTIONb) You will tell them: "I'll treat you to a drink".

1---------- 2---------------3------------4------------5------------6------7

OPTIONc)You will order a drink for yourself, and offer to them before drinking it.

1---------- 2---------------3------------4------------5------------6------7


120

...................................................................................................................

SITUATION9.You have come back home from the office with one of your colleagues that you have known for

a couple of years, her house is beside yours. When you reach home;

OPTIONa)You open the door and invite her to come in, you insist once or twice.

1---------- 2---------------3------------4------------5------------6------7

OPTIONb)You will tell her:" if you like , come in".

1---------- 2---------------3------------4------------5------------6------7

OPTIONc)You invite her to come in and tell her: "Would you like to have tea with me? " but you don't insist

anymore.

1---------- 2---------------3------------4------------5------------6------7

.....................................................................................................................

SITUATION 10. For a long time, you have decided to talk to Mina, one of your friends, about important

problems privately but you can't find her. You are meeting her in the university. While inviting her to lunch for

next day, Maryam, who is your close friend, arrives and says: where are you going? I mean that are you going

somewhere?

OPTIONa) You will try not to offend her so you will tell her: "I have invited Mina to lunch for tomorrow ,I tend

to talk with her privately, you can come if you would like to" .

1---------- 2---------------3------------4------------5------------6------7

OPTIONb) You will tell her: "If you have free time, you can come". But you don`t insist.

1---------- 2---------------3------------4------------5------------6------7

OPTIONc) You know, Maryam should go to class at 1:30 tomorrow, but you ask her:

''Are you busy at 1:30 tomorrow? If you are free, come".

1---------- 2---------------3------------4------------5------------6------7

investigating the speech act of ostensible invitations...

Documents