中美商务谈判中拒绝策略对比研究-定稿 .doc

ContentsChinese Abstract2English Abstract31. Introduction41.1 Background and Purpose of the Study41.2 Structure of the Thesis42. Literature Review52.1 Studies Abroad52.2 Studies at Home52.3 Comments on Previous Studies63. Theoretical Framework63.1 Refusal Speech Act63.2 Context of Culture73.3 Brown and Levinsons politeness Theory74. Comparison of Refusal Strategies in Business Negotiation between America and China84.1 Similarities in Refusal Strategies in Business Negotiation between America and China84.2 Differences in Refusal Strategies in Business Negotiation between America and China104.3 The Future Trend of Refusal Strategy in Business Negotiation between China and America135. Conclusion13References150中美商务谈判中拒绝策略差异研究 摘 要在经济全球化的进程中，中美之间的贸易往来日益频繁，国际商务谈判的重要性也更加凸显。但在国际商务谈判中，来自不同文化背景下的谈判者有着不同的价值观念和思维方式，这影响着双方谈判风格中拒绝策略的选择。为了避免沟通上的障碍及误解，“拒绝策略”的成功应用有着重大的意义。本文以拒绝言语行为等理论为基础，以中美企业贸易往来的实例为对象，具体分析文化差异在中美商务谈判中产生的影响。通过研究发现，中美商务谈判因世界观的差异，采用了迥异的拒绝策略。美国人由于崇尚个人主义，所以在商务谈判中更倾向于采取较为简洁的直接拒绝策略。而中国人受儒家文化的影响，更注重保全双方的面子，更多地采用了间接拒绝策略。但受文化全球化的影响，中美之间在商务谈判中采取的拒绝策略融合趋势增强，产生出一定的共性。在一些特定的场合，中美之间的拒绝策略也有相似之处。关键词：中美商务谈判；拒绝策略；文化差异A Comparative Study on Refusal Strategies in Sino-US Business NegotiationAbstractIn the process of economic globalization, the trade between China and America is increasingly growing and the significance of international business negotiation is more salient. However, in international business negotiations, negotiators from different cultural backgrounds have various values and ways of thinking, which influences the option of refusal strategies in the negotiation style of both parties. In order to avoid obstacles and misunderstandings in communication, the successful use of refusal strategy in business negotiation is of great significance for both parties. Based on the theory of refusal speech act, the author analyzes the effect of cultural differences in Sino-US business negotiations with the example of mutual transactions. Through the research, it is found that negotiators from China and the United States have adopted different refusal strategies for different world views. Because Americans advocate individualism, they are prone to adopt a more concise direct refusal strategy in business negotiations. Under the Confucian culture, Chinese people value mutual face, so the more indirect refusal strategy is more prevailing in China. Nevertheless, owing to the influence of cultural globalization, the trend of integration of refusal strategies adopted by Chinese and Americans in business negotiations has increased, resulting in certain commonalities. In some certain occasions, there are some similarities of refusal strategies between China and the United States.Key words: Sion-US business negotiation; refusal strategies; cultural differences1. Introduction 1.1 Background and Purpose of the StudyThe international cooperation and cross-cultural communication of China is growing for the acceleration of globalization process and rapid economic development. Individuals around the world maintain closer contact than several decades, and the business cooperation between China and the United States has also become more and more frequent. There are also friction and cultural shock in this process. If interlocutors in different cultures dont have a clear understanding of mutual social culture, language, religion and so on, misunderstandings even conflicts are difficult to avert. In order to avoid those awkward and embarrassing situations, people should take notice of the cultural differences when they study a foreign language.J.L. Austin (1952) says that words are parts of deeds. Therefore, a successful business negotiation is from the good language communication skills. Since sometimes refusal is unavoidable in international business negotiation, the study on refusal is necessary. In this thesis, the author concentrates on refusal strategies adopted by the Chinese and Americans in the international business negotiations. Analyzing the differences of refusal strategies between China and the United States can promote mutual business negotiation. In negotiation, how to use refusal correctly and avoid misunderstandings caused by different cultures have become the top priority. If refusal strategies are appropriate, it will not only lead to the breakdown of trade but also lead to economic loss. Therefore, it is extremely significant to study in detail the differences in the use of refusal strategies among business negotiations between China and the United States. The study may contribute to a better understand how to refuse appropriately in business negotiations for protecting the face of both parties.1.2 Structure of the ThesisThe author will narrate the thesis from five parts. The introduction is in the first part, which includes the background and purpose of the study. The second part is the literature review. The author introduces the studies home and abroad. The third part is the theoretical framework, which contains refusal speech act, context of culture and Brown and Levinsons politeness theory. The fourth part is the comparison of refusal strategy in business negotiation between America and China. The author presents this part from the similarities and differences of refusal strategies and the future trend of refusal strategies in business negotiations between America and China. The author will analyze similarities from politeness principle and interests principle and differences from direct refusal strategies and indirect refusal strategies. The last part is the conclusion where the author will present major findings about this study.2. Literature ReviewRefusal essentially is a face-threatening act. If the refusal is improper, it will threaten the relationship between the parties. In order to save the faces of listener and speaker, an appropriate refusal strategy is particularly significant. Therefore, the study on refusal has attracted a lot of attention of scholars at home and abroad. 2.1 Studies AbroadBeebe et al. (1990) co-researches the types of refusal speech acts and gives a clear classification of refusal strategies. Liao & Breshnahan (1996) compares refusal strategies between America and China Taiwan. The investigation shows that the choice of refusal strategies is enormously influenced by culture. Kwon (2004) has made a comparative study about South Korean refusal and American refusal and found that indirect refusal strategies are more prevalent in South Korea. The study also presents that culture plays a significant part in the option of refusal strategies.Salacuse, J. W.(1999) studied the competitiveness of foreign trade in the United States. He concludes that the failure of speech act in international business negotiation and the influence of global economy are both the reasons for the decline of the competitiveness of American trade. 2.2 Studies at HomeOver the past two decades, Chinese scholars have attached more and more importance to the study of refusal strategies. Below are some of the representative studies.Ma Yuelan (2000) compares the similarities of refusal strategies between the United States and China, and summarizes eleven refusal strategies. Mas study aims to illustrate the common features of refusal strategies between China and America and to provide feasible refusal strategies for English and Chinese learners to refuse more appropriately. The study shows that in different contexts the choice of refusal strategies is different.Yao Jun (2003) makes a comparative study of refusal strategy between Americans and Chinese people. He finds that the expressions between them are different and Americans tend to adopt more concise expression. The results mirror the nature of politeness and the different social values between Chinese and American culture. China is a collectively-oriented country, while America is an individually-oriented state. Zeng Wenxiong (2002) studies the application of pragmatic strategies in business English negotiation from pragmatic awareness. He points out that strategies such as politeness, praise, euphemism, humor and ambiguity are commonly used in international business negotiation. He also points out that the establishment of pragmatic awareness helps to improve the ability to use pragmatic strategies.2.3 Comments on Previous StudiesMost studies have clearly narrated the differences of refusal strategies between China and America and also classified the kinds of refusal strategies. The scholars still have expressed the reasons for different refusal strategies among countries. Nevertheless, there are not quite a few studies of refusal focusing on a certain field. There are even fewer studies of refusal on international business negotiation. As we all know, the international business negotiation also plays an important part in the globalization process. Since the refusal is significant in the business negotiation, the related studies on refusal strategies in international business negotiation are necessary. In this study, the author centers upon refusal strategies between China and America in international business negotiations. 3. Theoretical Framework3.1 Refusal Speech ActIn our daily life, some speech acts such as complaints, disapproval, requests, disagreement and refusal demand a higher level of pragmatic competence than others because they are easy to risk the interpersonal relationship of speakers. These speech acts are frequently called face-threatening acts. Speech act theory originates from the works of Austin and Searle. When refusal is discussed, it is necessary to refer to these two representative scholars. Therefore, this part includes three minor sections that are Austins speech act theory, Searles speech act theory and refusal speech act.Firstly, speech act theory was first introduced by Austin. In accordance with J. L. Austin, there seems to be no clear-cut boundary between speaking and acting. Rather, saying is sometimes acting. In other words, words are parts of deeds. According to Austin, there are three senses in which saying sometimes may be understood as doing that includes locutionary act, illocutionary act and perlocutionary act. Locutionary act is the actual uttering of a sentence with a particular meaning. Illocutionary act is the action intended to be performed by a speaker. Perlocutionary act is the consequence or effect. These three acts are performed simultaneously. Secondly, in 1975, Searle put forward the concept of indirect speech act. It is believed that in indirect speech act the speaker and the listener can convey more different meanings than the literal meaning relying on the mutually common knowledge, linguistic, non-verbal information, the general analysis and reasoning ability of the hearer. Speech act theory is vital in various revealing investigation of language use. The last section is refusal speech act theory. Lu Liting (2014) says that refusal speech act, as a face-threatening activity to the hearer, mainly occurs when the speaker makes suggestions, invitations, requests, offers and so on, and the hearer directly or indirectly says “no”. However, how to say no is important in the communication between different countries. If the refusal strategy is inappropriate, the relationship between two parties may be hurt. Thus, a high level of pragmatic competence is important when refusal occurs. In order to avoid negative influences caused by refusal speech act and save the face of both sides, people living in different countries or using different languages should adopt suitable refusal realization pattern. Meanwhile, in business negotiation, the two parties should adopt suitable refusal strategies.3.2 Context of CultureContext is the environment where the language is used, including all subjective and objective factors. The anthropologist Edward T. Hall (1976) puts forward that the culture has the context in his book Beyond Culture. According to the reliance of culture on context, culture is divided into high context culture and low context culture in his book. The contexts of culture are different among countries. In Beyond Culture, according to the definition of high and low context culture, Hall divides China, Japan, Korea and some other countries into high context culture countries. While other western countries are low context culture countries, such as America. The reason is that China is influenced by Confucianism, which proposes we should be implicit and euphemistic in communication. While America is influenced by individualism and has more immigrants, they advocate more concise expression.The study also analyzes the differences of American and Chinese refusal strategies from the context of culture. Because America belongs to one of the low context culture countries, the direct refusal strategy is more popular in America. China is typically a representative country of high context culture, so Chinese refusal is more implicit and euphemistic. 3.3 Brown and Levinsons politeness TheoryEnglish scholars Brown and Levinson (1978) published Universals in Language: Politeness Phenomena, which has attracted the great attention in the field of linguistics. Brown and Levinsons politeness theory is usually called face-saving theory. In 1987, Brown and Levinson improved the theory and changed the title to Politeness: Some Universals of Language Usage.There are two types of the face, one is the negative face and the other one is the positive face. Negative face is the claim to territories, freedom of action, freedom from imposition and the want to be left alone. While positive face is the want to be liked, appreciated, well thought-of, respected and to be respected. Brown and Levinson define the action that causes people to lose face as face-threatening acts (FTA), which also includes intrinsically threatening face. Brown and Levinson also put forward the polite strategy to maintain the face of the hearer. They propose FTA-minimizing strategies to mitigate face threat. 4. Comparison of Refusal Strategies in Business Negotiation between America and ChinaBusiness negotiation is the process through which two parties move from two diverse positions to a point of mutual consent by a series of discussion. In the process, bargaining is an indispensable and normal part. Sometimes the requirement of the other part is beyond yours, you need to refuse to protect your benefit. In international business negotiation, owing to the different cultures, refusal strategies are also various. If the refusal strategy is not proper due to cultural misunderstanding, it will not only trigger the breakdown of trade, but also lead to economic loss. Therefore, it is significant to compare refusal strategies in business negotiations betwe