Confucian Values as Challenges for Communication in Intercultural Workplace Contexts: Evidence from the Motivational Concerns in Vietnamese Politeness Behaviour

  • Thi Hong Nhung PHAM
Part of the Multilingual Education book series (MULT, volume 24)


The present chapter explores salient issues regarding Confucian values that occupy politeness behaviour of the Vietnamese in Vietnamese – Anglo-cultural interactions in intercultural contexts in Vietnam. We will present an analysis of the literature on the impact of Confucian values on Asian communication and Vietnamese politeness, broadly interpreted, and then describe the empirical data of how Confucian values have an impact on the fundamental motivational concerns underlying politeness behaviours of Vietnamese working in intercultural contexts. From the findings, relevant implications for the teaching of English as a foreign language in various Asian Confucian cultures in general and in Vietnam in particular are suggested in order to prepare English language learners better for intercultural communication contexts.


  1. Atkinson, P., & Coffey, A. (2004). Analysing documentary realities. In D. Silverman (Ed.), Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice (2nd ed., pp. 56–75). London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  2. Bargiela-Chiappini, F. (2003). Face and politeness: New (insights) for old (concepts). Journal of Pragmatics, 35, 1453–1469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Chang, H.-C. (1997). Language and words: Communication in the analects of Confucius. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 16(2), 107–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chang, H.-C., & Holt, G. R. (1994). Debt-repaying mechanism in Chinese relationships: An exploration of the folk concepts of pao and human emotional debt. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 27(4), 187–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cheng, S. (1990). Understanding the culture and behaviour of East Asians – A Confucian perspective. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 24(4), 510–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Clyne, M. (1996). Inter-cultural communication at work: Cultural values in discourse (reprint). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Dam, Q. (1994). Nho giáo xưa và nay (Confucianism: Past and present). Hanoi: Nhà Xuất Bản Văn hóa thông tin (Culture and Information Publishing House).Google Scholar
  9. Gao, G. (1998). Don’t take my words for it-understanding Chinese speaking practices. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 22(2), 163–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics, Speech acts (Vol. Vol. 3, pp. 107–142). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  11. Gu, Y. (1990). Politeness in modern Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics, 14(2), 237–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Haugh, M. (2003). Anticipated versus inferred politeness. Multilingua, 22(4), 397–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Haugh, M., & Hinze, C. G. (2003). A metalinguistic approach to deconstructing the concept of ‘face’ and ‘politeness’ in Chinese, English and Japanese. Journal of Pragmatics, 35, 1581–1611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hinze, C. G. (2012). Chinese politeness is not about ‘face’: Evidence from the business world. Journal of Politeness Research, 8, 11–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Holstein, J. A., & Gubrium, J. F. (2004). The active interview. In D. Silverman (Ed.), Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice (2nd ed., pp. 140–161). London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  16. Hwang, K. K. (1987). Face and favor: The Chinese power game. American Journal of Sociology, 92, 944–974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ide, S. (1989). Formal forms and discernment: Two neglected aspects of universals of linguistic politeness. Multilingua, 8(2–3), 223–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Katalanos, N. K. (1994). When yes means no: Verbal and non-verbal communication of Southeast Asian refugees in the New Mexico health care system. Unpublished MA thesis, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.Google Scholar
  19. Kecskes, I. (2017). Context-dependency and impoliteness in intercultural communication. Journal of Politeness Research, 13(1), 7–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. King, A. Y. (1985). The individual and group in Confucianism: A relational perspective. In D. J. Munro (Ed.), Individualism and holism: Studies in Confucian and Taoist values (pp. 57–84). Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan.Google Scholar
  21. Lakoff, R. (1990). Talking power: The politics of language in our lives. New York: Basic.Google Scholar
  22. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  23. Lebra, T. S. (1976). Japanese patterns of behavior. Honolulu: The University Press of Hawaii.Google Scholar
  24. Lee, C. L. (2012). Self-presentation, face and first-person pronouns in the Analects. Journal of Politeness Research, 8, 75–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lii-Shih, Y. E. (1994). What do “yes” and “no” really mean in Chinese? In B. Kachru (Ed.), Georgetown University round table on languages and linguistics (pp. 128–149). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Lim, T. (2002). Language and verbal communication across cultures. In W. B. Gudykunst & B. Mody (Eds.), Handbook of international and intercultural communication (2nd ed., pp. 69–87). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  27. Locher, M. (2004). Power and politeness in action: Disagreements in oral communication. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mao, L. R. (1994). Beyond politeness theory: ‘Face’ revisited and renewed. Journal of Pragmatics, 21, 451–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Markus, H., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Marr, D. G. (2000). Concepts of “individual” and “self” in twentieth-century Vietnam. Modern Asian Studies, 34(4), 769–796.Google Scholar
  31. Matsumoto, Y. (1989). Politeness and conversational universals – Observations from Japanese. Multilingua, 8(2), 207–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nguyen, P. L. (1990). Why they rarely say “thank you”? Journal of Vietnamese Studies, 1(3), 42–44.Google Scholar
  33. O’Hara-Devereaux, M., & Johansen, R. (1994). Global work: Bridging distance, culture and time. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  34. Park, M., & Kim, M.-s. (1992). Communication practices in Korea. Communication Quarterly, 40(4), 398–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Peltokorpia, V., & Clausen, L. (2010). Linguistic and cultural barriers to intercultural communication in foreign subsidiaries. Asian Business & Management, 10(4), 509–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pham, N. (2007a). Áp đặt trong lời mời của văn hoá Á đông là hành động đe doạ thể diện âm tính hay chiến lược lịch sự dương tính: Tiếp cận từ góc độ Nho giáo (Imposition in Asian-Confucian politeness is a negative face threatening act or positive face enhancing act? A Confucian perspective). Tạp chí Ngôn ngữ (Journal of Linguistics), 3(214), 69–82.Google Scholar
  37. Pham, N. (2007b). Xu hướng giải quyết mâu thuẫn trong môi trường giao tiếp đa văn hoá tại các văn phòng dự án phi chính phủ (Tendency of solving conflicts in NGO intercultural offices). Tạp chí Tâm lý học (Journal of Psychology), 2(95), 56–63.Google Scholar
  38. Pham, N. (2014). Strategies employed by the Vietnamese to respond to compliments and the influence of compliment receivers’ perceptions of the compliment on their responses. International Journal of Linguistics, 6(2), 142–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Robinson, J. H. (2003). Communication in Korea: Playing things by eyes. In L. Samovar & R. Porter (Eds.), Intercultural communication: A reader (10th ed., pp. 57–64). Belmont: Thomson Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  40. Schlund, K. (2014). On form and function of politeness formulae. Journal of Politeness Research, 10, 271–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schnurr, S., & Chan, A. (2009). Politeness and leadership discourse in New Zealand and Hong Kong: A cross-cultural case study of workplace talk. Journal of Politeness Research, 5, 131–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Scollon, R., & Scollon, W. S. (1995). Intercultural communication. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  43. Spencer-Oatey, H. (2002). Managing rapport in talk: Using rapport sensitive incidents to explore the motivational concerns underlying the management of relations. Journal of Pragmatics, 34, 529–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Tsui, A. (1991). The pragmatic functions of I don’t know. Text, 11(4), 607–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Vu, T. T. H. (1997). Politeness in modern Vietnamese: A sociolinguistic study of a Hanoi speech community. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Toronto, Toronto.Google Scholar
  46. Xiaohong, W., & Qingyuan, L. (2013). The Confucian value of harmony and its influence on Chinese social interaction. Cross-Cultural Communication, 9(1), 60–66.Google Scholar
  47. Yu, M. (2003). On the universality of face: Evidence from Chinese compliment behavior. Journal of Pragmatics, 35, 1679–1710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Yum, J. O. (1988). The impact of Confucianism on interpersonal relationships and communication patterns in East Asia. Communication Monographs, 55, 374–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.English DepartmentUniversity of Foreign Languages, Hue UniversityHueVietnam

Personalised recommendations