Writing 3 Assignment Annotated Bibliography By: Andre Mutia 12010/NK-1 2012 Article 1 Abed, A., Q. (2011). Pragmatic Transfer in Iraqi EFL Learners' Refusals, International Journal of English Linguistics, 1(2), 166-185. doi:10.5539/ijel.v1n2p166 The study deals with pragmatic transfer of Iraqi EFL learners' refusal strategies as reflected by their responses to a modified version of 12- items written discourse completion task; and compare with two groups ,namely Iraqi native speakers of Arabic and American native speakers of English. The data were collected from task consisted of three requests, three offers, three suggestions, and three invitations. Each one of the situations included one refusal to a person of higher status, one to a person of equal status, and one to a person of lower status. Data analyzed according to frequency types of refusal strategies and interlocutor's social status. I prefer this article because it is very useful for my topic. The author found that Iraqi EFL learners are apt to express refusals with care and/or caution represented by using more statements of reason/explanation, statements of regret, wish and refusal adjuncts in their refusals than Americans. Americans are more sensitive to their interlocutor's higher and equal status, whereas Iraqi EFL learners to lower status. The study is suitable for the topic I chose for its valuable information. Article 2 Al-Khatani, S., A., W. (2005). Refusals Realizations in Three Different Cultures: A Speech Act Theoretically-based Cross-cultural Study, Journal King Saud University, 18, 35-57. In this paper, the researcher assumes differences in the ways people from different cultural backgrounds perform refusals even while using the same linguistic code (i.e. English). Three groups of subjects, Americans, Arabs and Japanese are compared in the ways they perform refusals with respect to three dimensions of semantic formulas: order, frequency and content of semantic formulas. In addition, the subjects are given different status in which the refuser is equal, higher, or lower to the refusee. The aim of presenting the three groups of participants is to point out the differences in realizing speech acts of refusals in different cultures and problems posed to L2 learners when producing speech acts in the target language. This paper will be useful for may study to know how refusals are performed in different cultures. The limitation of this reserach is that it study how people perform refusals in different situations, but not all situations. This study recommends second language teachers to help learners enhance their knowledge or competence of appropriate use of speech acts in the target language. This article will be a good reference for my research especially on refusal in cross-cultural scope. Article 3 Al-Shboul, Y., Maros, M., & Yasin M., B., M. (2011). An Intercultural Study of Refusal Strategies in English between Jordanian EFL and Malay ESL Postgraduate Students, The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 18(3), 29 – 39. This study investigates the similarities and differences of the speech act of refusals in English between Jordanian English as a Foreign Language (EFL) and Malay English as a Second Language (ESL) postgraduate students. Data were collected using a modified version of the Discourse Completion Test (DCT) initially developed by Beebe, Takahashi and Uliss-Weltz (1990). This article is valubale source for my topic. Results revealed that both groups used almost similar strategies with similar frequency in performing refusals and they differed in the use and frequency count of indirect strategies with the Malays using less indirect strategies than the Jordanians. The authors suggest that the results of this study are expected to be useful in studies in intercultural comparisons. This article will be a good base for my topic, source got from this article is beneficial. Article 4 Farnia, M. (2012). An Intercultural Communication Study of Chinese and Malaysian University Students’ Refusal to Invitation, International Journal of English Linguistics, 2(1), 162-176. doi:10.5539/ijel.v2n1p162. This study aims to investigate the pragmatic behavior of refusal to invitation by Chinese international university students and Malaysian university students in Malaysia. The second aim is to seek the respondents’ perception in the process of refusing an invitation regarding their cognition, language of thought, and perception of insistence after refusing an invitation. The subjects were selected from forty Chinese international students and forty Malaysian students at University Sains Malaysia, Malaysia. Data were collected through a written discourse completion task and an immediate structured post-interview. The focus are the similarities and the differences of the expressions used both by Chinese and Malaysian students. This article will be very useful for my study. The author suggests that the research will not only make contributions to the studies of refusal behavior in the intercultural communication in general but to the pragmatic behavior of refusal to invitation between Chinese international students and Malaysian students in particular. Article 5 Farrokhi, F. (2012). The Role of Refusal Instruction in Pragmatic Development, World Journal of Education, 2(4). doi:10.5430/wje.v2n4p85. This study investigate whether either of the instruction types, explicit vs. implicit, proves more efficient in ameliorating pragmatic performance of Iranian EFL learners. Data were collected from Sixty Iranian learners of English as a foreign language participated in which they were assigned to three groups of explicit, implicit, and control. This research will be very useful for my topic. All groups were exposed to conversations from ‘Spectrum’ English books where refusals stood out. This study is very useful for the topic I would like to study. The findings appear to prove the efficiency of explicit instruction over implicit one in boosting Iranian EFL learners’ pragmatic performance. This article matches my topic, for it gives me information about refusal. Article 6 Ghazanfari, Alireza, B., & M., Malekzadeh, S. (2013). Investigating cross-linguistic differences in refusal speech act among native Persian and English speakers, International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, 2(4), 49-63. doi: 10.5861/ijrsll.2012.214. The aim of this study was to investigate the speech act of refusal performed by native Persian and English speakers with respect to linguistic devices. The study was conducted in two phases. In the first phase, refusal utterances were analyzed with respect to semantic formulas - that is words, phrases, or sentences meeting a particular semantic criterion to perform an act of eliciting. In the second phase, gender differences were examined, as well. One hundred movies (50 in Persian, 50 in English) were used as instruments for gathering the data. The results showed that there were some differences between the two languages with regard to refusal utterances and gender. Finally, the authors found that pedagogical implications of study for language learning and teaching have been enumerated. Article 7 Honglin, Li. (2007). A Comparative Study of Refusal Speech Acts in Chinese and American English, Canadian Social Science, 3(4), 64-67. This paper presents a comparative study of speech acts of refusal in Chinese and American English (AE). The results show that refusals vary in directness with situations and cultures, just like other speech acts, yet there are some similarities between Chinese and AE. On the one hand, both languages employ the three directness types, namely the direct refusal speech act, ability of negation and indirect refusal speech act, and prefer indirect refusals. The situational variability of directness in both languages follows a similar trend. On the other hand, Americans are more direct than Chinese and Chinese sincere refusals are considered as face-threatening acts, which call for politeness strategies to minimize the negative effects on the addressee(s). Furthermore, Chinese shows the lower degree of situational variation in the use of the three directness types. Article 8 Kwon, J. (2005). Expressing refusals in Korean and in American English, Multilingua - Journal of Cross-Cultural and InterlanguageCommunication, 23(4), 339–364. doi:10.1515/mult.2004.23.4.339. This study investigated refusals of forty Korean speakers in Korea (KSKs) and thirty-seven American English speakers in the USA (AEAs). Subjects' refusals were collected using a Discourse Completion). Data were analyzed in terms of semantic formula sequences and were categorized according to the refusal taxonomy by Beebe et al. (1990). The author focuses his study on the speakers of Korean. This study is very beneficial for my topic. The author found that there differences between Korean and English refusals. These differences may cause pragmatic failure when Korean learners of English rely on their native culture-specific refusal strategies in interacting with native English speakers. This article will be a good base for my topic. Article 9 Morkus, N. (2009). The realization of the speech act of refusal in Egyptian Arabic by American learners of Arabic as a foreign language, International Journal of Linguistics, 3(5), 512-525. This study investigated how the speech act of refusal is realized in Egyptian Arabic by intermediate and advanced American learners of Arabic as a foreign language. It also compared the performance of the learners to that of native speakers of Egyptian Arabic and native speakers of American English. The study aimed to investigate the relationship between the learners’ language proficiency and their pragmatic competence. Four groups participated in the study: 10 native speakers of Egyptian Arabic, 10 native speakers of American English, 10 American learners of Arabic at the intermediate level, and 10 at the advanced level. Data were collected using enhanced open-ended role plays which consisted of 6 scenarios eliciting refusals of offers and requests in equal and unequal status situations. Both quantitative and qualitative data analytic methods were used for analyzing the interactions. Results show that there were important differences between the two learner groups and the native speakers of Egyptian Arabic with regard to the frequency of direct and indirect strategies and individual strategy use. This study will fit my topic as it study the refusal act itself. Article 10 Sattar, A., Q., H., Lah, S., C., & Suleiman, R., R., R.. (2013). A Study on Strategies Used in Iraqi Arabic to Refuse Suggestions, The International Journal of Language Society and Culture, 81-95. This study attempts to outline the preferred semantic formulas used in refusing suggestions in Iraqi Arabic. The corpus consists of responses to a Discourse Completion Test (DCT) that consisted of three different situations. Data were collected from 30 Iraqi Arabic native speakers studying at Universiti Sains Malaysia, Malaysia. The survey was written in Arabic language to elicit responses that approximate verbal refusals to suggestion that might be given in these situations. This study will support for my topic. The corpus was analyzed and categorized according to the refusal taxonomy by Beebe et al (1990) to determine the strategies used and the frequencies of their use. Results showed variation in the frequency and the content of semantic formulas used by the group in relation to the contextual variables, which include the status of interlocutors (higher, equal, or lower status). This article is a good reference for my topc. It gives a lot of information about apeech act of refusal. Article 11 Shishavan, H., B., & Sharifian, F. (2013). Refusal strategies in L1 and L2: A study of Persian-speaking learners of English, Multilingua, 32(6), 801–836. doi 10.1515/multi-2013-0038. The aim of this study was to explore pragmalinguistic strategies employed by a group of Iranian English language learners when making refus- als to invitations, requests, offers and suggestions in their first (Persian) and second (English) languages. Data were collected from 86 participants through a Discourse Completion Test (DCT). The social variables under study were gen- der and social power differentials between the interlocutors. As a novel attempt in studies of interlanguage pragmatics, cultural schemas underlying refusals of Iranian English language learners were also investigated through Focus Group Interviews (FGI). The findings indicated that the participants used refusal head acts, the core components realising refusals, with similar frequency in their L1 (Persian) and L2 (English). The aothor suggest that this study would bring production and interpretation of refusals by the Ira- nian students both in Persian and English to a large extent. Article 12 Tavakoli, M., & Shirinbakhsh, S. (2013). Backward Pragmatic Transfer: The Case of Refusals in Persian, International Journal of Society, Culture, and Language, 1-24 The authors of this article study how refusals happen in Persian. The purpose of this study was to examine Cook‘s (2003) multiple competence‘ by investigating backward pragmatic transfer (from L2 [English] to L1 [Persian]) in refusals to invitations. It explored participants‘ frequency and content of refusal strategies in L1 regarding the status (i.e., power and distance) of interlocutors and the proficiency level of EFL learners. The participants were Persian speakers with no knowledge of English language, and Persian EFL learners at three proficiency levels of elementary, intermediate, and advanced. Data were collected via a three -scenario role play. Results revealed significant differences between Persian native speakers and high-proficient EFL learners in terms of content and frequency of refusal strategies utilized. Overall, this study provided some evidence for backward pragmatic transfer among EFL learners. Article 13 Wannaruk, A. (2008). Pragmatic Transfer in Thai EFL Refusals, InternationalJournal of Linguistics, 39(3), 319-337. This study investigates similarities and differences between refusals in American English and Thai and incidences of pragmatic transfer by Thai EFL learners when making refusals. The participants of the study include Thai and American native speakers and EFL learners. All of them are graduate students. The data were collected by means of a discourse completion test (DCT) which was designed on the basis of interviews carried out with a view to possible situations for refusals. EFL data for refusals were compared with similar data elicited from native speakers of American English and Thai. Results indicate that overall all three groups share most of the refusal strategies and that pragmatic transfer exists in the choice and content of refusal strategies. Awareness of a person of a higher status and the characteristics of being modest in L1 culture motivate pragmatic transfer. Article 14 Yamagashira, H. (2001). Pragmatic Transfer in Japanese Refusal, International Journal of Linguistics, 3, 259-275. In this paper, the researcher used language patterns to compare refusals by Japanese and American. The goal is to find whether pragmatic transfer could be found and whether L2 proficiency affect Japanese speaker. In the study of pragmatic, this is good for my paper. The author limits his study on the research done by Takahashi, Beebe, and Ulizz-Weltz. The conclusion given by Yamagashira here is that the pragmatic transfer does not occur in both Japanese and American. This paper studies whether the pragmatic transfer happens by comparing Japanese and American refusals, and it will support my study. Article 15 Yang, J. (2008). How to Say ‘No’ in Chinese: A Pragmatic Study of Refusal Strategies in Five TV Series, NACCL-20, 2. In this article, the researcher analyzed situations in which refusal will occur and examined the refusal strategies and corresponding linguistic forms that can be employed to react to various refusal situations in Chinese culture.This paper categorizes situations of refusal according to the initiating acts of refusal. Data collected from 160 video clips collected from five television series, this paper found that refusal is initiated by four types of acts: request, offer, invitation, and suggestion. Each type can be subcategorized in terms of their different communicative functions. This article is very useful for my topic. The author suggests that this study can facilitate the instruction of refusal to learners of Chinese from multiple pers- pectives.