本研究旨在探討台灣大學生和美國大學生，其抱怨語言行為在抱怨策略(complaint strategies) 和抱怨修飾語上 (complaint modifications) 的使用差別。另外，台灣大學生的英語程度是否影響其中介語抱怨行為也是本研究關心的議題。語料蒐集以言談情境角色扮演(role play)和言談情境填充問卷(DCT)為主，情境變數為四：社會距離遠近(social distance)、社會地位高低(social status)、對話者的性別(interlocutor gender)、社會責任義務(social obligation)。言談情境角色扮演由八十位受試者參與：二十位台灣大學生的中文、二十位美國大學生的英文、二十位台灣英語系大學生的英文及二十位台灣非英語系大學生的英文；言談情境填充問卷由一百八十位受試者參與：六十位台灣大學生、六十位美國大學生、三十位台灣英語系大學生及三十位台灣非英語系大學生。研究結果顯示：不論在言談情境角色扮演或言談情境填充問卷中，受試者皆傾向使用間接的抱怨策略以避免衝突，未達責備程度(Below the level of reproach)是最主要的抱怨策略。另外，在言談情境角色扮演時，四組受試者在抱怨策略的使用上非常相似。然而，就各策略的使用頻率(frequency use)、策略偏好的順序(preference order)及抱怨修飾語(complaint modifications)的使用，這四組的表現有顯著的差異。另一方面，在言談情境填充問卷中，四組受試者在抱怨策略的使用上非常不同。但其在策略的使用頻率、策略偏好的順序及抱怨修飾語的使用上並無顯著的差異。再者，研究顯示：美國大學生(NS-E)比以英語為外語的台灣大學生(EFL)使用較直接的抱怨策略。這結果和Olshtain and Weinbach’s (1993:115)的研究相同，亦即和母語者相比，學習者會使用較不直接的策略(less severe strategies)，因為學習者會試著「不計任何代價避免直接面子威脅的互動」。另外，研究發現受試者的英語程度的確會影響其抱怨中介語的語言表現。結果顯示：台灣非英語系大學生受其有限的英語能力影響，使其在表達抱怨時會有相當程度的困難。最後，值得注意的是：本研究使用的語料為言談情境角色扮演(role play)和言談情境填充問卷(DCT)，建議未來研究應蒐集真實語境語料(natural occurring data) 並分析和言談情境角色扮演(role play)的語言表現之差異性。此外，因為時間的因素，本研究對於對話者的性別差異(gender differences) 並未深入探討，建議將來的研究可進一步分析此議題，以提供更多及更全面的了解。

This study aimed to investigate Chinese EFL interlanguage complaint behaviors in terms of production collected by role play and DCT. Four contextual factors were involved: social distance, social status, gender and obligation. A total of 320 role plays were elicited from 80 college students, including 20 native speakers of English, 20 native speakers of Chinese, 20 EFL-low proficiency learners and 20 EFL-high proficiency learners. Additionally, the DCT data were elicited by 180 participants, including 60 native speakers of Chinese, 60 native speakers of English, 30 EFL-high proficiency learners and 30 EFL-low proficiency learners. Three aspects of complaints were examined: complaint strategies, complaint modifications and the effect of language proficiency. Results showed that no matter in role play or on DCT, participants tended to use more indirect strategies to avoid conflicts with others. Below the level of Reproach was the main complaint strategy they used. Besides, the complaint strategies used by the four groups were quite similar in role play. However, they differed in the frequency of strategy use, the preference orders, and modifications used in making their complaints. On the other hand, participants performed quite differently on DCT. They differed in strategy use, but there were no significant difference in frequency use, preference orders, and the use of modifications. Furthermore, NS-E tended to use more direct strategies than EFL learners. This result echoed Olshtain and Weinbach’s (1993) findings that learners would use less severe strategies than native speakers because learners would try to “…avoid straightforward face-threatening interactions at all costs” (p. 115). Besides, proficiency effect is found in EFL learners’ interlanguage complaints production. It is more difficult for EFL-L learners to make complaints because of their low L2 proficiency. For future studies, gathering natural occurring data to compare the differences between role play is suggested. Besides, due to time limitation, the issue of interlocutor gender differences is not discussed and future work could include this matter to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the speech at of complaints.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………………….iii
ACKNOWLEDEMENTS…………………………………………………………....v
LIST OF TABLES……………………………………………………………………x
LIST OF FIGURES………………………………………………………………..xiii
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION………………………………………………….1
1.1 BACKGROUND AND MOTIVATION………………………………………………….....1
1.2 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY………………………………………………………………..3
1.3 OVERVIEW OF CHAPTERS.…………………………………………………………… ..4
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW………………………………………...5
2.1 POLITENESS THEORY……………………………………………………………………5
2.1.1 Grice’s Cooperative Principle (CP)……………………………………..5
2.1.2 Leech’s Politeness Principle (PP)…………………………………….. ..6
2.1.3 Brown and Levinson’s Face-Saving View……………………………...9
2.1.3.1 The Notion of Face…………………………………………………9
2.1.3.2 Strategies for Doing FTAs………………………………………...10
2.1.3.2.1 Payoff Consideration…………………………………………11
2.1.4 Chinese Politeness…………………………………………………......14
2.2 THE SPEECH ACT OF COMPLAINING………………………………………………16
2.2.1 The Definition of A Complaint…………………………………………17
2.2.2 Complaint Strategies……………………………………………………18
2.2.2.1 Olshtain and Weinbach (1987)……………………………………..18
2.2.2.2 Trosberg (1995)…………………………………………………….19
2.2.2.3 Shea (2003)………………………………………………………...20
2.2.2.4 Lin (2005)………………………………………………………….21
2.2.2.5 Chang (2007)………………………………………………………24
2.2.3 Previous studies on the Speech Act of Complaining…………………...25
2.2.3.1 Interlanguage Complaints………………………………………….26
2.2.3.2 Chinese Complaints………………………………………………..35
CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY………………………………………………..37
3.1 THE IMPORTANCE OF DATA COLLECTION METHOD………………………….. 37
3.1.1 Discourse Completion Task (DCT)……………………………………..39
3.1.2 Role Play………………………………………………………………..40
3.2 PARTICIPANTS……………………………………………………………………………45
3.3 INSTRUMENT……………………………………………………………………………..46
3.4 PROCEDURE…………………………………………………………………50
3.4.1 Confidentiality………………………………………………………..…51
3.4.2 Assumptions of the study……………………………………………….51
3.5 DATA ANALYSIS AND TRASCRIPTION……………………………………………….52
3.6 CODING SYSTEM………………………………………………………………………...52
3.6.1 Complaint Strategies……………………………………………………52
3.6.2 Modifications…………………………………………………………...59
3.6.2.1 Internal Modfications………………………………………………60
3.6.2.2 External Modifications……………………………………………..67
CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…………………………………...73
4.1 DISTRIBUTION OF COMPLAINT STRATEGIES…………………………………….73
4.1.1 Total number of complaint strategies…………………………………….73
4.1.2 Overall patterns of Complaint strategies used in Role play and on DCT..74
4.1.2.1 Examples of complaint strategies in the Role Play and on DCT data..76
4.1.3 Complaint strategy Preference Order in Role Play....……………………81
4.1.4 Complaint strategy Preference Order on DCT…………………………...91
4.1.5 Complaint Strategies Used Among the Four Groups…………………….96
4.1.6 Implicit vs. Explicit influences on Complaint Strategies.........................105
4.2 Effect of L2 Proficiency: Pragmalinguistic Transfer…………………...121
4.3 MODIFICATIONS……………………………………………………………………….133
4.3.1 Overall use of Modifications…………………………………………...133
4.3.2 Internal Modifications………………………………………………….136
4.3.2.1. Downgraders………………………………………………………138
4.3.2.2 Upgraders…………………………………………………………142
4.3.3 External Modifications………………………………………………...146
4.3.3.1 Mitigating Modifications………………………………………….147
4.3.3.2 Aggravating Modifications……………………………………….150
CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION…………………………………………………..153
5.1 SUMMARY.....................................................................................................................153
5.2 LIMITATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTURE STUDY.…………….156
APPENDIX A: Questionnaire: Chinese Version for NS-C……………………..164
APPENDIX B: Questionnaire: English Version for Native English Speaker….173
APPENDIX C: Role Play Situations: Chinese Version for NS-C………………184
APPENDIX D: Role Play Situations: English Version for EFL………………...186
APPENDIX E: Role Play Transcription Conventions…………………………..188

施玉惠Shih, Y. H. (1987). Cross-Cultural Pragmatic Failure for Learners of English in Taiwan. 第四屆中華民國與英語教學研討會論文集。台北：文鶴，233-256。
Austin, J. (1962). How to do things with words. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bardovi-Harlig, K. & Hartford, B. S. (1992). Saying “no” in English: Native and nonnative rejections. In L. F. Bouton (Ed.), Pragmatics and Language Learning. Volume 2 (pp. 41-57). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Barron, A. (2003). Acquisition in Interlanguage Pragmatics: Learning how to do
things with words in a study abroad context. John Benjamins: Amsterdam.
Beebe, L., & Cummings, M. (1996). Natural speech data versus written questionnaire data: How data collection method affects speech behavior. In S. M. Gass & J. Neu (Eds.), Speech acts across cultures: Challenges to communication in a second language(pp. 65-83). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyer.
Blum-Kulka, S. (1982). Learning how to say what you mean in a second language: A study of speech act performance of learners of Hebrew as a second language. Applied Linguistics, 3, 29-59.
Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G. (1989). Cross-cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies. Newwood, NJ: Ablex.
Blum-Kulka, S., & Olshtain, E. (1984). Requests and apologies: A cross-cultural study of speech act performance of learners of Hebrew as a second language. Applied Linguistics, 3, 29-59.
Blum-Kulka, S., & Olshtain, E. (1986). Too many words: Length of utterance and pragmatic failure. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 8, 165-180.
Boxer, D. (1993a). Social distance and speech behavior: The case of indirect
complaints. Journal of Pragmatics, 19, 103-125.
Boxer, D. (1993b). Complaining and commiserating: Exploring gender issues. Text, 13(3), 371-395.
Boxer, D. (1993c). Complaints as positive strategies: What the learner needs to know.
TESOL Quarterly, 27 (2), 277-299.
Boxer, D. & Pickering, L. (1995). Problems in the presentation of speech acts in ELT materials: the case of complaints. ELT Journal, 49 (1), 44-58.
Boxer, D. (1996). Ethnographic interviewing as a research tool in speech act analysis: The case of complaints. In S. M. Gass & J. Neu (Eds.), Speech acts across cultures: Challenges to communication in a second language(pp. 217-239). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyer.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge university press.
Chang, H. M. (2001). Complaints in Chinese: The case of elementary school, junior high school, senior high school, and college students. Unpublished master thesis, National Tsing Hua University Press.
Chang, S. L. (2007). The speech act of complaining in Mandarin Chinese: Perceptions and productions among four age groups. Unpublished master thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University Press.
Chen, R. (1993). Responding to compliments: A contrastive study of politeness strategies between American English and Chinese speakers. Journal of Pragmatics, 20, 49-75.
Cohen, A. (1996). Investigating the production of speech act sets. In S. M. Gass & J. New (Eds.), Speech acts across cultures: Challenges to communication in a second language (pp. 21-43). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Cohen, A. D., & Olshtain, E. (1981). Developing a measure of sociocultural competence: The case of apology. Language Learning, 31(1), 113-134.
Cohen, A. D., Olshtain, E., & Rosenstein, D. S. (1986). Advanced EFL apologies: What remains to be learned? International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 62, 51-74.
Crookall, D. & Saunders, D. (1989). Communication and Simulation. Clevendon: Multilingual Matters.
Du, J. S. (1995). Performance of face-threatening acts in Chinese: Complaining, giving bad news, and disagreeing. In G. Kasper (Ed.), Pragmatics of Chinese as native and target language (pp. 165-206). Honolulu: University of Hawaii, Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center.
Eisentein, M., & Bodman, J. W. (1993). Expressing gratitude in American English. In G. Kasper & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlanguage Pragmatics (pp. 64-81). Oxford: Oxford university Press.
Faerch, C. & Kasper, G. (1989). Internal and external modification in interlanguage request realization. In S. Blum-Kulka, J, House, & G. Kasper (Eds.), Cross-cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies (pp. 221-247). NJ: Ablex.
Fraser, B. (1981). On apologizing. In Florian Coulma (ed.), Conversational Routine, 259-271. The Hague: Mouton.
Fromkin, V., & Rodman, R. (1998). An Introduction to Language. Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace College Publishers.
Goffman, E. (1976). Replies and responses. Language in Society, 5, 257-313.
Golato, A. (2003). Studying compliment responses: A comparison of DCTs and recordings of naturally occurring talk. Applied Linguistics, 24, 90-120.
Grice, H, P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan, (Eds.), Syntax and semantics(v3): Speech acts. (pp. 41-58). New York: Academic Press.
Gu, Y. (1990). Politeness phenomena in modern Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics, 14, 237-257.
Henning, G. (1986). Quantitative methods in language acquisition research. TESOL Quarterly, 20(4), 701-708.
Herbert, R. K. (1990). Sex-based differences in compliment behavior. Language in society, 19, 201-224.
Hinkel, E. (1997). Appropriateness of Advice: DCT and multiple choice data. Applied Linguistics, 18(1), 1-26.
Holmes, J. (1988). Paying compliments: A sex-preferential politeness strategy. Journal of Pragmatics, 12, 445-465.
Holmes, J. (1995). Women, Men and Politeness. London: Longman.
Holmes, J. (1998). Complimenting : A positive Politeness Strategy. In J. Coats (Ed.), Language and Gender: A reader (pp. 100-120). Malden: Blackwell.
Houck, N., & Gass, S. M. (1996). Non-native refusals: A methodological perspective. In S. M. Gass & J. Neu (Eds.), Speech acts across cultures: Challenges to communication in a second language (pp. 45-64). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
House, J. & Kasper, G. (1981). Politeness markers in English and German. In Florian Coulma (ed.), Conversational Routine, 157-185. The Hague: Mouton.
House, J., & Kasper, G. (1987). Interlanguage pragmatics: Requesting in a foreign language. In W. Lorscher & R. Schulze (Eds.), Perspectives on Language in Performance (pp. 1250-1288). Tuebingen: Narr.
Johnston, B., Kasper, G., & Ross, S. (1998). Effect of rejoinders in production questionnaires. Applied Linguistics, 19(2), 157-182.
Kasper, G. & Dahl, M. (1991). Research methods in interlanguage pragmatics. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13(2), 215-248.
Kasper, G., & Grotjahn, R. (1991). Methods is second language research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13, 109-112.
Kasper, G., & Rose. K. R. (2001). Pragmatics in Language Teaching. In Kenneth, R. R. & Kasper, G.,(Eds.), Pragmatics in Language Teaching. (pp.1-9). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kasper, G. (2000). Data collection in pragmatics research in H. Spencery-Oatey (Ed.), Cultually speaking: Managing rapport through talk across cultures. (pp. 316-341). London and New York: Continuum.
Leech, G. N. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. London: Longman.
Lee, J. S. (1999). Analysis of pragmatic speech styles among Korean learners of English: A focus on complaint-apology speech act sequences. (Doctoral dissertation, Standford University, 2000). Dissertation Abstracts International, 61, 535A.
Lakoff, R. (1975). Language and woman’s place. New York: Harper and Row.
Lin, Y. H. (2005). Gender differences in the speech act of complaining in Mandarin Chinese. Paper presented at AILA 2005 (The 14th World Congress of Applied Linguistics), July 24-29, 2005, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Manes, J., & Wolfson, N. (1981). The compliment formula. In Florian Coulma (ed.),
Conversational Routine, 115-132. The Hague: Mouton.
Mao, L. R. (1994). Beyond politeness theory: Face revisited and renewed. Journal of Pragmatics, 21(5), 451-486.
Matsumoto, Y. (1988). Reexamination of the universality of face: Politeness phenomena in Japanese. Journal of Pragmatics, 12, 403-426.
Murphy, B. & Neu, J. (1996). My grade’s too slow: The speech act set of complaining. In S. M. Gass & J. Neu (Eds.), Speech acts across cultures: Challenges to communication in a second language (pp. 191-216). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyer.
Olshtain, E., & Weinbach, L. (1987). Complaints: A study of speech act behavior among native and nonnative speakers of Hebrew. In J. Verschueren & M. Bertucelli-Papi (Eds.), The pragmatic perspective (pp. 195-208). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Olshtain, E., &Weinbach, L. (1993). Interlanguage features of the speech act of complaining. In G. Kasper & S. Blum-Kaulka (Eds.), Interlanguage Peagmatics (pp. 108-122). New York: Oxford University Press.
Rintell, E., & Mitchell, C. (1989). Studying requests and apologies: An inquiry into method in S. Blum-Kulka, J. House, and G. Kasper (Eds.), Cross-Culture pragmatics: requests and apologies (pp. 248-294). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Robinson, M. (1991). Introspective methodology in interlanguage pragmatic research. In G. Kasper (Ed.), Pragmatics of Japanese as native and target language (pp. 29-84). (Technical Report; Vol. 3). Honolulu: Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center, University of Hawaii.
Sasaki, M. (1998). Investigating EFL students’ production of speech acts: A comparison of production questionnaires and role plays. Journal of Pragmatics, 30, 457-484.
Schiffrin, D. (1994). Approaches to Discourse. Blackwell Publishing.
Shea, H. K. (2003). Japanese Complaining in English: A Study of Interlanguage Pragmatics. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Teachers College, University of Columbia.
Takahashi, T., & Beebe, L. M. (1987). The development of pragmatic competence by Japanese learners of English. JALT Journal, 8, 131-155.
Tanck, S. (2002). Speech act sets of refusal and complaint: A comparison of native and non-native English speakers’ production. Retrieved April 10, 2006 from http://www.american.edu/tesolwptanck.pdf#search
Tang, C. H., & Zhang, G. Q. (2008). A contrastive study of compliment responses among Australian English and Mandarin Chinese speakers. Journal of Pragmatics, doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2008.05.019.
Thomas, J. (1983). Cross-Culture Pragmatic Failure. Applied Linguistics, 4, 91-112.
Thomas, J. (1995). Meaning in Interaction: an Introduction to Pragmatics. London: Longman.
Trosberg, A. (1995). Interlanguage pragmatics: Requests, complaints, and apologies. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Tsai, I. T. (2007). Studying apologies: a comparison of DCT and Role Play data. Unpublished master thesis, Sun Yat-sen University Press.
Wolfson, N. (1986). Research methodology and the question of validity. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 689-699.
Wolfson, N. (1989). Perspectives: Sociolinguistics and TESOL. Heinle &Heinle Publishers.
Wolfson, N., Marmor, T. & Jones, S. (1989). Problems in the comparison of speech acts across cultures. In S. Blum-Kulka, J. House, and Kasper (Eds.), Cross-culture pragmatics: requests and apologies (pp. 174-196). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Yuan, Y. (2001). An inquiry into empirical pragmatics data-gathering methods: written DCTs, oral DCTs, field notes, and natural conversations. Journal of Pragmatics, 33, 271-292.