De Gruyter, 2017, 13 (1) - Jeremy and Adrefiza

DE GRUYTER MOUTON Journal of Politeness Research 2017; 13(1): 89119
Jeremy F. Jones* and Adrefiza

Comparing apologies in Australian English
and Bahasa Indonesia: Cultural and gender
perspectives
DOI 10.1515/pr-2016-0033
Abstract: This study examines sociocultural, pragmatic, and gender differences

between native speakers of Australian English (AE) and Bahasa Indonesia (BI)
in expressing the speech act of apology. Based on an oral discourse completion
task (DCT) using data from 24 native speakers of both languages, the study
focuses on the variations in the use of apology strategies in three situations of
moderate severity. The findings show that the two groups use a variety of strate-
gies in expressing apologies. The majority of BI speakers tend to use requests
for forgiveness with relatively strong hearer-oriented strategies. AE apologies,
on the other hand, seem to be dominated by the frequent use of expressions of
regret, with speaker-oriented strategies. Another noticeable speech phenom-
enon lies in the differences in showing directness and politeness: BI speakers
are likely to be more elaborate and less straightforward in their expressions
than AE speakers. It is also evident that Indonesian apologetic acts tend to be
somewhat formulaic and less varied compared with those in Australian expres-
sions. Finally, the findings show quite pronounced gender differences both
within and between the two languages in terms of the strategy use and expres-
sions.
Keywords: apologies, speech acts, cross-cultural pragmatics, culture, socio-
cultural, politeness, Indonesia, Australia
1 Introduction
Studies on cross-cultural speech act performances have increased dramatically
in the last few decades. These include investigations on apologies. The act of
*Corresponding author: Jeremy F. Jones, Program in TESOL and Foreign Language Teaching,
University of Canberra, Australia, E-mail: Jeremy.Jones@canberra.edu.au
Adrefiza, English Education Program, Faculty of Education, Jambi University, Sumatra,
Indonesia, E-mail: adref64@yahoo.co.id
Authenticated | adref64@yahoo.co.id author's copy

Download Date | 1/30/17 10:47 AM
90 Jeremy F. Jones and Adrefiza DE GRUYTER MOUTON
apologizing has been regarded as one of the speech acts that have long attract-
ed pragmatics scholars attention (Grainger and Harris 2007; Shariati and Cha-
mani 2010). Grainger and Harris (2007) claim that studies on apologies have
gained popularity in the last few decades. Their realization is often culturally
specific and difficult for most foreign or second language learners to master
(Kim 2008; Nureddeen 2008). Prior studies on apologies have proliferated
either in a particular language or in cross-cultural perspectives, comparing two
or more different languages at once. Since the comprehensive study by Blum-
Kulka and Olshtain (1984), investigation into apologies has been carried out on
many other languages, mainly to establish the potential universality or varia-
tions in their realizations across languages and cultures.
Although concentrated more on Western languages, there has seemed, in
recent years, to be a growing interest in studying apologies in Eastern lan-
guages (Bataineh and Bataineh 2008). A few scholars, such as Afghari (2007),
Bataineh and Bataineh (2008), Intachakra (2004), Nureddeen (2008), Shariati
and Chamani (2010), and Wouk (2005) are among those who have chosen to
inquire into apologies in Asian and Eastern languages in the last few years.
There has been very little research, however, conducted on Bahasa Indonesia
and Australian English. Studies from Wouk (2005 and 2006) on Lombok Indo-
nesian and Cordella-Masini (1989) on Australian English are the only ones so
far that have investigated apologies in those two countries. However, these
studies were conducted separately (not cross-culturally) with little emphasis on
gender and cultural differences in how the two communities express apologies.
The limited scope of Wouks and Cordella-Masinis studies has provided inspi-
ration for the present authors to investigate Australian and Indonesian intercul-
tural speech act behaviours in apologies, within and between the languages.
This paper is aimed at studying potential differences between Australian
and Indonesian native speakers in expressing apologies. It presents and dis-
cusses the variety of strategies used by speakers of both languages, along with
socio-pragmatic features such as gender and situation, accompanying their at-
tempts to realize the act of apology. The results are expected to throw light on
the way Australians and Indonesians apologize, deepening understanding of
intercultural and gender differences in language use.
In order to gain these results, the study poses the following research ques-
tions:
1. How do young adult Australians and Indonesians, both male and female,
express apology?
2. What are their apology strategies?
3. Are there any gender and cultural differences in apology strategies in both
language communities?

DE GRUYTER MOUTON Comparing apologies in English and Indonesian 91
2 Theoretical framework
The act of apologizing is frequent and has a secure place in our daily interac-
tions. Cordella-Masini (1989) suggests that the act of apologizing is one of the
very common features of ordinary social life in Western societies and indeed in
many others. It is often perceived as a negative politeness strategy that is ex-
pressed to show respect rather than solidarity or friendliness (Holmes 1995).
Apologizing is an integral part of successful relational management, communi-
cating awareness and acceptance of moral responsibility for offensive behav-
ior and initiat[ing] the process of negotiating absolution (Robinson 2004: 292).
It is complex and sometimes difficult to recognize because it involves social,
psychological, linguistic and paralinguistic aspects in its realization (Grainger
and Harris 2007). On most occasions, it also indicates a level of politeness and
involves face management in its realizations (Brown and Levinson 1987;
Holmes 1990), taking place everywhere, in both public and private interactions.
Essentially, the act of apology is most often attributed to social phenomena
such as wrongdoing, conflict, violation or transgression that have happened
and that need to be put right (Holmes 1990, Holmes 1995). Holmes views apolo-
gy as a multifunctional speech act which involves both linguistic and non-
linguistic features. Such complexity is what attracts investigators, and studies
of apologies continue to develop over time, either with an intercultural focus
or specific to a particular language. An ambitious and comprehensive cross-
cultural study of apology was conducted by Blum-Kulka and Olshtain (1984) in
their Cross-Cultural Speech Act Realization Patterns (CCSARP) project. Here,
through the use of DCTs, apologies, along with requests, were analyzed in vari-
ous different languages with respect to variability of social constraints such
as individuality, situation, native and non-native perspectives. Similarities and
differences in their realization patterns were described and discussed. Since
then, studies have explored apologies in many other languages using varying
approaches such as naturally occurring conversation and role play. These stud-
ies include those of Holmes (1990), House (1988), Kasper (1989), and Suszczyn-
ska (1999). However, according to Nureddeen (2008), studies on apologies have
tended to focus on Western languages, with relatively little attention given to
Eastern and Asian languages. That said, Wouk (2005) claims that interest in
exploring apologies in Eastern and Asian languages has begun to develop. A
few examples of the studies are those of Bergman and Kasper (1993), who ex-
plore Thai apologies; Wouk (2005; 2006), who investigates Indonesian Lombok
apologies; Kim (2008), who compares apologies in South Korean and Australian
English; Afghari (2007) on Persian apologies; and Nureddeen (2008), who con-
centrates on Sudanese Arabic apologies.

Grainger and Harris (2007) report that research on apologies has not only
been integrated into pragmatics and politeness theory, but also into other disci-
plines such as sociolinguistics, social psychology, philosophy, and foreign lan-
guage teaching. In pragmatics, for example, the studies frequently attempt to
find out how apologies are realized and performed either in a particular lan-
guage or in two or more different languages. Commonalities and differences as
well as diversity in strategies are further explored and discussed. A number of
social factors such as age, gender, personal relationships, power and status,
discourse contexts, and situations are incorporated into the investigation (see
Blum-Kulka and Olshtain 1984).
Studies on apologies often cover major areas like functions, strategies, lin-
guistic and sociolinguistic structures (Holmes 1990). Other factors are also
drawn in, including nature of the situation, degree of offence, and frequency
of occurrence. In general, these studies suggest that such factors vary signifi-
cantly from culture to culture (Cohen and Olshtain 1981; Olshtain 1989; Vollmer
and Olshtain 1989). In terms of its frequency, Japan is regarded as a country
where the act of apology is believed to occur most often (Spencer-Oatey 2008).
2.1 The functions of apologies

On most occasions in most societies, an apology is primarily aimed at maintain-
ing good relations between participants (Holmes 1990). With the apology, the
speaker admits his or her wrongdoing that may have caused damage to the
victimized person, and initiates an attempt to restore the equilibrium. However,
an expression of apology may also serve a function other than just admitting
an offence or transgression. A study by Robinson (2004), for example, suggests
that the apology term sorry can also be used to accomplish non-apology
actions. He argues that apology can serve the function of personal regret or
showing a condolence, depending upon the context in which it occurs. This
is probably why an apology is often perceived as a bivalent or multivalent
speech act which expresses more than one illocutionary or pragmatic meaning
(Thomas 1983, cited in Holmes 1990: 163). Expressions like I am sorry about
the news of your father or I am sorry to hear about it are evidently showing
sympathy or responding to bad news rather than simply admitting or accepting
an offence, as there is no indication that an offence has taken place. There are
also cases where the casual sorry is expressed, particularly when someone is
accidentally touched or bumped. Here, the apology is expressed spontaneously
as the offence occurs. In this particular context, saying sorry, at least, is
usually deemed essential for social harmony, as its absence is often considered
unacceptable or even rude in English-speaking society.

The majority of apology studies, however, focus on its main function of

maintaining equanimity through admitting an offence which may have taken
place either in the interaction or in other human action (Keenan 1993). Keenan
(1993) proposes that social or personal transgressions often occur during inter-
actions in which the threat of offending others and various sorts of social norm
violations may happen. When such a violation happens, the relationship can
be damaged or even ruined. Here, an apology is essential, since it functions as
an attempt to remedy the damage and restore the balance (Holmes 1990; Borkin
and Reinhart 1978; Brown and Levinson 1978; Blum-Kulka et al 1989). For this
reason the act of apology tends to be regarded as an act of verbal redress which
is used to restore social harmony (Olshtain and Cohen 1983). At the same time,
the act of apology acknowledges the need of the hearer not to be imposed upon
or offended (Holmes 1995). As the apology is only an attempt to improve the
relationship, its occurrence does not guarantee the harmonious relationship
that the apologizer expects. Success can be influenced by many factors such
as the degree of offence committed, the strategy used, the measure of remorse
felt by the apologizer, the seriousness, or the truthfulness of the apology and
the generosity of the respondent in granting forgiveness (Takaku, Weiner, and
Ohbuchi 2001).
2.2 Apology strategies

Studies on apology strategies have been conducted comprehensively. They have
been explored in either specific languages or interculturally comparing several
languages at once. Olshtain and Cohen (1983) proposed a basic set of strategies
(also called semantic formulae) in performing apologies. These include: use of
an apology term; taking on responsibility; giving an explanation or account;
making an offer of repair; promising forbearance; and expressing concern for
the recipient. Fraser (1981) and Blum-Kulka and Olshtain (1984), within the
CCSARP project, have come up with similar apology strategy variations. They
include: an expression of regret; an offer of apology; and a request for forgive-
ness. Suszczynska (1999) suggests that among the three, an expression of regret
is the weakest form of apology.
Other studies have offered yet more variations of strategies. Olshtain and
Cohen (1983) and Olshtain and Weinbach (1987), for example, propose a few
main structural components of an apology. These include: (a) an expression of
apology or regret, saying for example Im sorry; (b) an expression of responsi-
bility/blame; (c) an offer of repair; (e) a token of forbearance, that is, a promise
that it will not happen again. On many occasions, however, these components

may not appear simultaneously. One component, such as an expression of apol-

ogy, can be represented only by Sorry by the speaker, particularly when ad-
dressed to a close friend. This is supported by Mills (2003, cited in Grainger
and Harris 2007), who questioned whether, indeed, any of these components
are universal constituents of an apology.
The difference in discourse between direct and indirect has also allowed for
further discriminations in apology types. In terms of directness, Fraser (1981)
distinguishes two types of apologies: (a) direct (announcing the apology; stat-
ing ones obligation to apologize, offering to apologize, and requesting accep-
tance); (b) indirect (expressing regret, requesting forgiveness, acknowledging
responsibility, promising forbearance, and offering redress).
The literature on requests may also throw some light on the apologizers
choice of strategy. According to Blum-Kulka and Olshtain (1984), a speaker can
adopt a range of perspectives in making a request:
1. Hearer-oriented: Could you tidy up the kitchen soon?
2. Speaker-oriented: Do you think I could borrow your notes from yesterdays
class?
3. Speaker- and hearer-oriented: So, could we please clean up? (Blum-Kulka
and Olshtain 1984: 203)
The first emphasizes the role of the hearer; the second emphasizes the speakers
status as the one who requests; and the third represents a more inclusive ap-
proach. The chief difference between a request and an apology is that between
pre- and post-event acts. However, an apology is still a politeness strategy in
which hearer and speaker perspectives apply; that is, it constitutes a point of
view operation (Blum-Kulka and Olshtain 1984: 204).
Indeed, Cordella-Masini (1990), a researcher in Spanish linguistics, has
used the distinction between speaker-oriented (SO) and hearer-oriented (HO)
to provide illumination on apology expressions. She classifies SO expressions
as those in which the speaker is the agent of the apology, as in the utterances
Im sorry and I apologize; the speaker takes control and does not refer any
action to the hearer. Meanwhile, HO are those in which the speaker explicitly
asks for the hearers participation in the act of apologizing. Some examples in
English are: Can you forgive me? and Please accept my apology, where the
speaker wants the hearer to participate actively in the apology situation. In
terms of politeness theory, HO may be said to be more deferential, attending to
negative face, in the sense that one is self-effacing in making an appeal to
the hearer, reluctant to impose. In Chilean Spanish, SO utterances are indicated
by the use of an expression of regret and those with the verb dar (give), while
HO utterances are indicated by imperatives and requests using disculpar, excu-

sar, and perdonar. In her study, she compares apology terms used by speakers
of Australian English and Chilean Spanish, males and females, in a single situa-
tion, namely apologizing to a boss for being late for a meeting. She found that
Australian males tended to be more direct in expressing apologies compared
to their female counterparts. The majority of the patterns used were a combina-
tion of explicit expressions of apology such as I am terribly sorry, I must apolo-
gize and an explanation of account such as I missed the bus, My car broke
down. She also found that Australians tended to use SO apologies more fre-
quently than the Chileans.
2.3 Gender variations

It is popularly understood that men and women are different from each other.
They not only differ from one to another in biological aspects and physical
appearance, but also in speech styles (Cameron 1990; Coates 1993; Holmes
1995; Lakoff 1975; Romaine 2000; Tannen 1990; Wouk 1999). There has been
much evidence produced on gender differences in human speech, accompanied
by various explanations for speech behaviours and styles. Tannen (1990), for
example, has claimed that women tend to be more supportive and rapport-
building while men are typically more informative and report-giving; Holmes
(1995) concludes that womens speech is generally facilitative, affiliative, and
cooperative, while mens speech behaviour tends to be more competitive and
control-oriented.
Wouk (2006) draws attention to evidence of gender speech variations oc-
curring in apologies. She mentions studies from Cordella-Masini (1990), Meier
(1996), and Holmes (1990; 1995) as showing evidence of men and women exhib-
iting different behaviours in apologizing. Cordella-Masini, who worked on apol-
ogies in Australian English and Chilean Spanish, observed gender differences
in Australian apologies. She reported that an explicit expression of apology
and an explanation of why the apologizer committed the offence were found
most frequently in Australian speech, especially between participants of the
same gender, while the use of a promise not to do it again appeared to be more
frequent between females. Wouk (1998, cited in Wouk 2006: 279), with a focus
on Indonesian apologies, noticed a relatively small gender difference, for exam-
ple in their use of pragmatic particles.
As pointed out above, Holmes (1995) noted gender variation in New Zea-
land apologies, but she also found that most apologies occurred among fe-
males. The fact that women are more likely to apologize than men has been
supported by other studies. These include one by Tannen (1994), who re-

searched gender differences in American apologies. She found that in America,

women were more willing to apologize than men. A similar trend was also
reported by Meyerhoff (1999), who found that in the Vanuatu speech communi-
ty women also tended to apologize more often than men. Marquez Reiters
(2000) analysis of British English and Uruguayan Spanish also reported an
overall higher frequency in womens apologies. Other studies found a similar
pattern. These include studies by Bataineh and Bataineh (2005), who focused
on American English; Bataineh and Bataineh (2006), who investigated Jordani-
an Arabic; Shardakova (2005) looking at Russian; and Suszczynska (2005) on
the use of Hungarian.
Significant at this point is the work by Holmes (1989) pointing to the evi-
dence from previous studies on apologies, indicating that men and women tend
to perceive apologies differently. For men, apologies may be perceived as self-
oriented face-threatening acts (FTAs), as they can damage their face, and they
therefore need to be avoided where possible. But, when they do use them, men
tend to use formal strategies which focus on the speaker (eg Im sorry or I
apologise), thus SO in Cordella-Masinis (1990) terms. For women, in contrast,
apologies are often perceived as other-oriented speech acts, so are often used
as ways of facilitating social harmony (e.g. Please forgive me or Would you
accept my apology?) are often expressed, thus HO. By regarding apologies as
a negative politeness strategy aimed at fulfilling the addressees face needs
(other-oriented), women may be thought to be more likely than men to main-
tain social harmony or equilibrium in society.
2.4 Significance of the theoretical background

This review of research on apologies has certainly revealed an opening for the
present study. Indonesian and Australian apologies have been studied before
but not comparatively, and contributions on either language have been few and
not extensive. Salient points from the literature including the definition of
apology as maintenance of social harmony, the identification of various apolo-
gy types and strategies, and views on gender variation underpin the reporting
and discussion of the studys data.
The relatively simple distinction between SO and HO advanced by Blum-
Kulka and Olshtain (1984) and adopted by Cordella-Masini (1990) and Wouk
(2006), is a useful one for capturing variations in expressions of apology be-
tween different cultures and genders. Working, like Cordella-Masini (1990),
with data from Australian and one other culture, we have adopted this distinc-
tion for this study, especially for the discussion of apology terms and strategies.

3 Methodology
This study involved a total of 24 native speakers of the two languages. They
were mostly university students (aged 19 to 30) studying in various disciplines
at universities in Canberra, Australia, and in Jambi, Indonesia. The authors
used their connections with students to recruit them. The subjects were not the
authors own students. They were required to express their apologies based on
three situations of moderate severity: missing a close friends birthday party,
revealing a close friends secret about a job application, and breaking a promise
to return a close friends book. This moderate severity is one that lies between
too light and too heavy in gravity, a scale defined in studies by Cordella-Masini
(1989), Holmes (1990), and Wouk (2005). These particular situations were se-
lected because, in the researchers estimation, such predicaments are quite
common in both societies and are instantly recognizable to ordinary people as
moderate in degree of severity. Too light and too serious degrees of severity of
offence would be beyond the investigation of present study, for two main rea-
sons. First, a serious offence may have legal consequences, require compensa-
tion, and perhaps be beyond apology. Meanwhile, a light offence would prob-
ably require little apology and might even be dismissed.
The following table provides details on the number of subjects of the study:
Table 1: Subjects of the study.
Australian Indonesian Total
Male: 6 Female: 6 Male: 6 Female: 6 24
Written descriptions of the apology situations (see Appendices 1 and 2) were

given to the participants, who were allowed time to absorb the content and ask
any questions. They then mentally prepared their expression of apology in the
way people normally do. All expressions were audio-recorded using a voice
digital recorder. The responses were then analyzed and categorized according
to gender in both language groups. This procedure had been successfully em-
ployed by Yuan (2001) in investigating compliment exchanges in Kunming
(Southwestern Mandarin) Chinese.
The oral DCT technique has been widely used and proved as an appropriate
data collection technique in pragmatic studies. The reason for choosing it is
twofold. First, despite the artificiality of the prompt, it can capture the oral
naturalness of the language, is easily practicable and only requires an invest-

ment of time in the transcription. Furthermore, through the use of oral DCTs,
variables such as age, gender, situation, role relationships, and power status
of the interactants can still be controlled and managed during data collection
(see Beebe and Cummings 1996; Golato 2003; Kohler 2008; and Tran 2008).
4 Findings and discussion

This discussion cannot hope to deal with all the pragmatic phenomena embod-
ied in the data. Thus we limit our attention to what we assess as salient fea-
tures, in particular those that respond to the research questions. The first point
of interest is the explicit use of the major apology words, for example sorry in
English and maaf in BI. There follows an examination of the overt strategies
used to apologize, entailing phrases and clauses. Then there is an analysis of
the apology construction, the more elaborate moves that the participants make,
not only apologizing but also giving reasons. The use of intensifiers also de-
serves consideration since it is through these that the apologies derive a good
deal of their strength. Finally, we offer a perspective on differences in behav-
iour between the cultures and genders represented in the data.
4.1 The use of apology terms

It would be predictable that speakers of the two languages represent their apol-
ogies through the use of apology terms sorry (AE) and maaf (BI). In general,
the usage is more frequent in BI than in AE with a ratio of 35 : 20. Table 2 below
shows the use of apology terms in the two languages.
Table 2: The use of apology terms in AE and BI.
Australian English Bahasa Indonesia Total
Male: 6 Female: 14 Male: 12 Female: 23 55
The above table represents simply the numerical count but is interesting for
the comparisons of frequency. It is evident here that females use many more
apology terms than males. This occurs in both AE and BI. However, Indonesian
females use them even more frequently than their Australian female counter-
parts. Indonesian males also show more frequent use of these terms compared
to Australian males.

Both maaf and sorry can represent the same literal meaning, asking for
forgiveness, but on many occasions they also function as a supporting move
which indicates the speakers politeness behaviour over a series of social acts.
As suggested by Wouk (2005), the term maaf does not always necessarily func-
tion as apology, particularly when occurring in isolation. Nor does it indicate
that an offence or a transgression has been committed. Rather, it functions as
an impersonal form, especially when it is used without participants mentioned
and verb employed. As regards BI, if it is to function as an apology, it may be
interpreted as a reduced form of saya minta maaf (I request forgiveness). Most
often, maaf is used in various forms such as maafkan or maafin, both represent-
ing the meaning of asking for forgiveness in English. In many contexts, they
are followed by personal pronoun saya or aku. It is clear that none of them
occurs in isolation, thus they do not function as an impersonal form. The fol-
lowing are examples of apology expressions in BI:
(1) Female: Birthday

Hai Irma, ini Eni. Hi Irma, this is Eni.
Aduh maaf ya kemaren nggak bisa (Particle/Exclamation) I ask forgive-
datang. Maaf bangat, lupa lupa ness, I couldnt come yesterday.
lupa, terus ketiduran. Maaf ya, mau Very sorry, I really forgot, then I
kan maafin? Janji ya, nanti kita went to sleep. Forgive me, would
makan siang di KFC atau dimana you forgive me? I promise to take
terserah kamu, OK? Emmm maafin you out at KFC or elsewehere for
dong? a lunch, OK? (Filler) (would you)
forgive me?
(2) Male: Book Return

Halo Yoga, aaa aku mau minta Hello Yoga, (filler) I just want to
maaf nih. Aaa aku kemaren nggak ask for forgiveness. (Filler) I
datang, masalahnya bukunya hi- couldnt come yesterday, the prob-
lang, aa sudah kucari cari nggak lem was I couldnt find the book,
ketemu. Tapi aku janji aa aku akan (filler) I have tried to find it, but I
ganti secepatnya. Aaa kalau juga failed. But I promise to get a new
nggak ketemu terpaksa aku ganti. one for you if I still cannot find it.
Aaa jadi aku minta maaf ya, sori (Filler) I ask for forgiveness, (Im)
banget. very sorry.
In Example (1), the apology term maaf is used several times with a few variants
such as, maaf ya, maaf banget, and maafin, all signifying a reduced form of
the HO form Maafkan saya (forgive me). The use of intensifier banget (very)

is interesting to note. In an HO form, maaf functions as a verb and thus cannot

be used with an intensifier. However, in the above context, banget can be inter-
preted as a representation of the speakers strong sincerity in her apology. Also,
as pointed out by Wouk (2006), the use of repeated apology terms signals an
intensification of the apology.
In Example (2), maaf is used twice in the form of request for forgiveness
(HO), aku minta maaf ya (I ask/request for forgiveness). Here, maaf functions
as a noun, signifying something that the speaker seeks (forgiveness) from the
addressee following an offence committed by the speaker. The particle ya con-
firms the HO strategy as it signals the speakers persuasive attempts to win
forgiveness from the hearer. Interestingly, the term sori (borrowed from English)
with intensifier banget is also used, intended to show depth of apology. The
expression may also reflect that this apology term has become perfectly accept-
able in Indonesian society, without varying its original English usage.
It appears that neither of the terms maaf or sori occur in isolation. Rather,
they are usually combined with other words and phrases to constitute a more
elaborate apology expression. This is probably due the fact that, for an offence
as serious as missing a friends birthday party, a single word such as maaf or
sori would not be the key to forgiveness.
The following example shows an elaborate expression performed by a fe-
male respondent:

Halo Assalamualaikum, Nora ya? Halo (Islamic greeting), Is it Nora?
Nora, maafkan Vivi ya kemaren, Nora, forgive me about yesterday, I
Vivi nggak bisa datang ke acara (Vivi) couldnt come to your birth-
ulang tahunnya, karna kemaren tu day party because I (Vivi) was sick.
Vivi sakit. Jadi aaa Vivi nggak bisa So I couldnt come to your place.
datang ke tempat Nora, disuruh My mother asked me to buy and
sama orang tua mesti berobat ke take some medicine now. Nora,
rumah sakit sekarang. Nora, maafin forgive me please please dont get
aku ya, please please jangan marah angry at me. If you do feel disap-
ya Nora. Kalau Nora merasa kecewa pointed, er guess what, I (Vivi)
gimana aaa Vivi gak bisa bisa mem- couldnt do anything because I
balas karma Vivi nggak bisa hadir couldnt come to your birthday
ke ulang tahun Nora. Terima kasih party. Thank you Nora.
ya Nora.
In the above, two HO indicating devices are used, maafkan Vivi and maaf-
kan aku ya. Both mean forgive me in English. The speakers turn in the

example is relatively lengthy, signaling that she is making a particular effort to

restore the relationship with the hearer through the use of more explanations
of why she could not come to the party. The use of HO types is evident as the
speaker asks for the addressees participation in determining the result of the
exchange. Ultimately, this is an elaborate request for forgiveness.
The following is a further example of hearer orientation from a male in BI:
(4) Male: Birthday

Aduh, mas saya minta maaf ya. (Interjection), (address term),
Saya tu lupaaa kemaren, kelupaan I ask for forgiveness for yesterday.
karna saya sibuk, jadi mohon maaf. I forgot, really forgot because I was
busy, so (I) beg forgiveness.
Here maaf is used together with saya (personal I/subject participant) and the
term minta (request). It thus provides evidence that it is an HO apology again
within the category of request for forgiveness strategy. Interestingly, the expres-
sion ends with another apology jadi mohon maaf (so I beg forgiveness). Al-
though the personal I (saya) does not occur, this closing apology may be
interpreted as a reduced form of so I beg your forgiveness. It is a much shorter
apology than the one in Example (3) but nonetheless, through repetition, em-
phatic in the request for forgiveness.
In AE, the use of the term sorry is most preferred, representing a total
number of 20 occurrences in the data. The term apologize, however, is absent
in the corpus. The absence is likely to be due to the formality of the word,
which would not necessarily be appropriate between close friends with an
equal social status and distance in remedial exchanges in a modern English-
speaking society.
The following are examples from AE respondents:

My God, Im so sorry sorry sorry I didnt come last night. I completely
forgot. Im a horrible horrible friend and make it up to you. Ill take you
up for a big lunch or dinner or a big night out on the town. Im so sorry.
Sorry I missed that appointment this morning. Er you know that book that
I needed a couple of days ago. Er I misplaced it. Um I was hoping er I
could give it give back er to you next week. Sorry again.
In Example (5) sorry is used four times. Here, the speaker is trying to express
her strong and sincere regret by the repetition. To intensify the remorse, the

full clause Im sorry tends to be used. In Example (6), the single term sorry
is used twice. It is conceivable that the victim would regard the use of this
simple term as too casual for the situation.
(7) Male: Job Application

Hey, I er you know that er the job interview that you said that youre going
for, I know you wanted to keep it private but Im really sorry I accidentally
told to one of our friends. Er I hope thats OK.
In the above case, there is a single instance of sorry but intensified with real-
ly, this alone giving the apology a less casual ring than the previous one.
Overall, the data clearly tell us that the apology term sorry is common in
AE and its interpretation is not as complex as the use of its counterpart maaf
in BI. Sorry in AE represents an SO type and is an expression of regret strategy,
while maaf is used to indicate an HO type but never occurs in isolation. It is
used in various forms such as in maafkan, maafin, followed by aku or saya
(first person singular) and particle ya.
4.2 The use of SO and HO apology strategies in AE and BI

The use of explicit (SO-HO) strategies shows up an area where the two language
groups differ from one another in expressing apologies. Such differences in SO
and HO adoption may be illustrated in the table below.
What is plain from the table is that the HO request for forgiveness strategy
never occurs in AE, whose speakers here are placing more emphasis on them-
Table 3: SO-HO strategies used in AE and B1.
No Strategies AE BI
Male Female Male Female
1 SO: Expression of regret (Im sorry; 7 12 6 1

Saya menyesal; Maaf nian;
Maaf bangat)
2 HO: Request for forgiveness (Forgive 0 0 12 24
me; I ask for forgiveness; Maaf[in/kan/
aku] ya; Sori ya; Aku minta maaf)
Total 7 12 18 25

selves, not on their hearers. Expressions like Forgive me or I ask/seek/re-

quest forgiveness are not present in the AE data. Meanwhile, this strategy
plays a very prominent role in BI expressions (12 in males and 24 in females),
all HO and thus generally more inclusive. The politeness in HO comes, for
example, through the use of the particle ya, which has a sense of begging,
adding to attempts to gain forgiveness from the hearer. All AE apologetic ex-
pressions are SO, expressions of regret in nature, and are more frequent in
females than males (12 : 7). In BI it is males who use more of this strategy than
females.
Regarding the AE expression of regret strategy the following utterances
typify the approach:

Hi, Im sorry I didnt meet you this morning with that book. I cant find it
anywhere. Ill try to get it as soon as possible and get it back to you, I just
cant find it.
(9) Male: Birthday

Hi mate yeah Im really sorry that I didnt come to your birthday party last
night. I just I just clean forgot yeah. Do you wanna organize to do some-
thing else perhaps?
Here, the use of SO expressions like Im sorry characterizes the apology expres-
sions. None of this strategy is found in Indonesian apologies, which, as pointed
out above, are mostly expressed through either HO or SO forms or a combina-
tion of these two forms. HO forms, predominant in the BI data, are often per-
formed through expressions such as maaf(kan)(in) aku ya (Please forgive me)
with the majority being request for forgiveness. An expression like Saya minta/
mohon maaf (I ask for forgiveness), is also common in these apologies, both
male and female. Two examples follow:
(10) Male
Darul, aaa aku mau kasih tahu, Darul, I just want to let you know,
aaa aku minta maaf soal kemaren, I ask for forgiveness, I couldnt
saya tidak bisa datang ke acara come to your birthday party. Sorry
ulang tahun kamu karna aku sibuk Rul, so sorry. I was so busy that I
sekali. Sori ya Rul, aaa maaf sekali. couldnt let you know. Once again,
Saking sibuknya aku nggak bisa I ask for forgiveness.
kasih tahu kamu. Sekali lagi saya
minta maaf.

(11) Female
Hei aku kemaren minta maaf ya Hi, I ask for forgiveness for yester-
aku nggak bisa datang. Aku malu day, I couldnt come. Im ashamed.
aku lali aku lupa. Aku minta maaf I really ask for forgiveness.
banget nih.
The HO form with request for forgiveness like saya minta maaf or aku minta
maaf (I ask for forgiveness) is evident in the above examples, indicating that
the speaker is the agent in the exchange. An interesting phenomenon is that,
as claimed by Wouk (2006), Saya minta maaf is not equivalent to the English
SO form I apologize. In her study of Lombok Indonesian apology, Wouk (2006)
claims that Indonesians do not have a form of apology comparable to I apolo-
gize, as most other societies do. This is probably because Indonesian apologies
are somewhat less varied than those elsewhere. Although expressions of regret
are found in Indonesian exchanges, they do not always correspond to apology
as such. Wouk (2006) adds that the term sori or maaf, for example, does not
necessarily represent its English counterpart sorry, which indicates an expres-
sion of regret. On some occasions, maaf is also used to indicate solidarity po-
liteness, mostly when embarking on an exchange with the hearer. In this way,
it does not indicate that a violation, a conflict, or a transgression has taken
place.
In general, however, the term maaf has the lexical meaning of sorry and
stands as the main indicator of apologizing in BI. In many situations, maaf can
be used in isolation without incorporation into a verbal construction. It still
represents an act of apologizing but when it is combined with minta (ask) as
Saya minta maaf (I ask for forgiveness), which is very common in the BI data
here, it represents an Indonesian standard formal apology expression.
Indeed, what characterizes the Indonesian apology is standard formal.
The culture seems to favour this approach to apologizing, one that is deferen-
tially HO. In Australian apologies little surprise in the stereotypically infor-
mal culture the degree of formality is lower, and self-referential sorry is
favoured in practice, while the other-referential and more old-fashioned for-
give me is not used. Ultimately, the comparison in the use of SO and HO apology
strategies, as far as the present data are concerned, reveals a clear contrast
between Australian and Indonesian preferences.
4.3 Apology construction

In terms of the construction of the apology expressions, the two languages
display a similar pattern. Generally, the expressions are constructed in a formu-

laic manner; that is, they are initiated with an opening remark such as greeting
Hi or Halo, and followed by an Illocutionary Force Indicating Device (IFID)
(Blum-Kulka and Olshtain, 1984; Holmes 1989; Nureddeen, 2008), most often
through the use of apology terms sorry or maaf. As suggested by Nureddeen
(2008) and Blum-Kulka and Olshtain (1984), the IFID is regarded as a category
encompassing the explicit use of an apology expression through the utterance
of the terms sorry, forgive me, and so forth. The IFIDs can be represented
through either the expression of regret or request for forgiveness, as discussed
in the previous section. In AE, the IFID is usually indicated through the use of
either Im sorry or simply sorry, while in BI, the term maaf corresponds
to that function. The IFIDs are then followed by any combination of the sub-
types of apology strategy such as explanation of account, statement of lack of
intent, responsibility-taking, or repair. Sometimes, another one or two IFIDs
are used again at the end of the expression so as to confirm the apology or to
indicate the sincerity of the apology. The repetition of IFIDs may also be aimed
at showing a serious attempt to restore harmony among the interlocutors. This
tendency for repetition is spread throughout the examples above.
A common feature of the Indonesian apologies is the frequent use of the
Islamic greeting Assalamualaikum. This is no surprise in a Muslim country
where people are taught from childhood to use the ritual greeting. More often
than not in the data, it is preceded by the secular greeting halo (borrowed from
the English), thus Halo assalamualaikum.
4.4 Intensification
Prior studies such as those of Blum-Kulka and Olshtain (1984), Eslami-Rasekh
(2004), Nureddeen (2008), Suszczynska (1999) and Wouk (2006) view intensifi-
cation as an element within the apology expressions which is indicated through
the use of either intensifiers or the repetition of the apology terms. Wouk (2006)
reports that intensification can occur either within the apology terms used or
within the apology strategies. She adds that studies in the use of intensification
in a number of apologies in different languages have been undertaken. In both
Eslami-Rasekhs (2004) and Suszczynskas (1999) studies, speakers of American
English, for instance, are reported to use expressions of regret with frequent
use of intensification, while Poles, Iranians, and Hungarians tend to use less
intensification in their apologies than Americans do (Wouk 2006).
A study from House (1988, cited in Wouk 2006) claims that the amount of
intensification used depends on some specific factors. These include the situa-
tion, degree of offence, role relationships between the speakers and hearers,

and the social status of the interlocutors. In Wouks (2006) study of Lombok
Indonesian apology, intensification was found to be more favoured between
speakers of equal or lower status and disfavoured between those of higher
status.
Regarding the apologies in the present study moderate in severity and
between interlocutors of equal status what remains is to identify the type and
rate of occurrence of intensification in the data from the two languages. As can
be seen in Tables 4 and 5 below, the two language groups show a noticeably
different proportion of the use of intensifiers in their apologies. AE speakers
opt for many more intensifiers than do BI speakers. There are a total of 14
intensifiers in AE and only 3 in the BI data. This latter count corresponds to
Wouks (2006) findings on Indonesian Lombok apologies, where there was a
relatively low frequency of intensification found. Not only do Indonesians use
a low frequency of intensifiers, but they also employ many fewer types of inten-
sifiers in their apologies. In other words, Indonesian intensifiers are far less
varied than those of the Australians. There are only two main intensifiers in
BI, while AE offers seven in the data. Table 4 demonstrates the frequency of
intensifiers used in BI:
Table 4: Intensifiers used in BI.
No Intensifiers Male Female Total
1 Banget/bangat 1 0 1
2 Nian 2 0 2
Total 3 0 3
The terms bangat or banget and nian signify the meaning of very in English.
Their frequency is low, comprising only a total of three instances in the data.
Although they can be used interchangeably in everyday conversation, bangat
is more informal and commonly used among young people or teenagers. It was
Table 5: Intensifiers used in AE.
No Intensifiers Male Female Total
1 Really 3 8 11
2 So 0 3 3
Total 3 11 14

originally borrowed from the indigenous language of Jakarta but it has become
widespread in Bahasa Indonesia.
As shown in Table 5, there are only two intensifiers (really and so) present
in the AE data. Really occurs 11 times, while so only three times, used only by
females. Overall, the use of intensifiers in AE is much more frequent in females
than in males.
4.5 Cultural and gender perspectives

Assessing the gravity of the situation, each participant offers a realistic apology
following the prompt. They all present a reason, brief or elaborate, for their
transgression. However, as the above findings and discussion have already sug-
gested, certain cultural and gender differences emerge.
Among the AE participants, the dominant apology form is sorry and in
particular Im sorry, identifying them as SO. The BI participants also consistent-
ly use expressions equivalent to sorry but, in all cases except two, request
forgiveness, which is HO. Further, it takes little effort to notice that the BI
apologies tend to be appreciably longer and more elaborate than those in AE.
This too suggests a greater hearer orientation and more attentiveness to the
face of the hearer. On a scale of deference, therefore, the Indonesians show
more than the Australians. Such an outcome is perhaps no surprise in light of
the intercultural generalization that Indonesians, like other Asians, are more
deference-oriented than English speaking people of Western culture (Wouk,
2005).
Gender differences are similarly evident. AE males appear less insistent on
the apology, with fewer instances of the really sorry that recur in the AE
female data; they are altogether quite cool, casual and brief. Two males do
not say sorry at all. The AE females quite heavily emphasize sorry, with repeti-
tions of really sorry and even an example of sorry sorry sorry. More emotion
is invested in these apologies. Evidently, then, the females tend to be more
committed to apology than the males, corresponding to the greater frequency
of female apologies reported in the literature (see section 2.5). The finding also
correlates with Holmes (1995; 2008) generalization about male reticence or
avoidance when it comes to apologizing.
As mentioned above, Indonesian apologies are typically somewhat longer
than the Australian ones. The females are not necessarily any more elaborate
than their male counterparts, though the longest and the most effusive belongs
to a female, with I promise repeated three times and please forgive me
twice. It is noticeable that while the BI females say please forgive me (maaf-

kan aku ya), the males say I ask for your forgiveness (Aku minta maaf), a
degree more formal and perhaps less emotional. It should also be pointed out
that the more numerous instances of HO in the BI data than the AE are due to
the much larger number of BI females who opt for HO forms; that is, they tend
towards negative politeness. As Holmes (1995) reminds us, negative politeness
is characteristic of low power, and it may be that the Indonesian females ex-
hibit such a politeness form because they are aware of their low power in their
society. Ultimately, then, the data do not challenge some of the generalizations
about culture and gender in the recent literature on language behaviour.
5 Conclusion
It must be acknowledged that, since the data of the present study are relatively
limited in terms of volume and authenticity, further research with a larger sam-
ple and scope, along with (if possible) a more authentic data collection proce-
dure is recommended for greater reliability and validity.
That said, the findings of the present study should add to the body of
knowledge on the pragmatics of apology, from an intercultural and gender
point of view. They reveal, in particular, that speakers of Australian English
and Bahasa Indonesia have different tendencies in the realization of apologiz-
ing acts. The Australians in the study are given to expressions of regret, using
predominantly sorry or really sorry; the Indonesians, meanwhile, make requests
for forgiveness and utter more complex and varied apology expressions than
their counterparts. Evidently the Indonesians appear as much more deferential
and formal than the Australians, who are by comparison informal in their lan-
guage of apology. As regards the gender aspect of the study, it seems to confirm
differences of discourse style between male and female, and offers no evidence
of convergence between genders.
Pedagogically, the findings may be used as a resource by teachers of lan-
guage, discourse and intercultural communication. Among other things, the
findings could promote discussion about avoiding communication breakdown
between genders and between people of different cultures. Indeed, since there
has been relatively little research into apology in the two languages, this study
hopes to narrow the gap of sociocultural misunderstanding between the two
neighbouring countries. It may also bring a degree more understanding be-
tween Indonesia and Australia, which seem to have, in this era, regular crises
in their relations; and it may also contribute to understanding between Austra-
lia, Indonesia and the rest of the world

References
Afghari, Akbar. 2007. A Sociopragmatic study of apology speech act realization patterns in
Persian. Speech Communication 49. 177185.
Bataineh, Rula Fahmi & Ruba Fahmi Bataineh. 2006. Apology strategies of Jordanian EFL
students. Journal of Pragmatics 38(11), 19011927.
Bataineh, Rula Fahmi & Ruba Fahmi Bataineh. 2005. Apology strategies of American
university students: An intercultural analysis of the effect of gender. Journal of
Intercultural Communication 9. 119.
Bataineh, Rula Fahmi & Ruba Fahmi Bataineh. 2008. A cross-cultural comparison of
apologies by native speakers of American English and Jordanian Arabic. Journal of
Pragmatics 40. 792821.
Beebe, Leslie M. & Martha C. Cummings. 1996. Natural speech data versus written
questionnaire data: How data collection method affects speech act performance. In
Susan M. Gass & Joyce Neu (eds.), Speech Acts Across Cultures: Challenges to
Communication in a Second Language, 6586. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Bergman, Marc L. & Gabriele Kasper. 1993. Perception and performance in native and
nonnative apology. In Shoshana Blum-Kulka & Gabriele Kasper (eds.), Interlanguage
Pragmatics. 82107. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Blum-Kulka, Shosana. & Elite Olshtain. 1984. Requests and apologies: A cross-cultural study
of speech act realization pattern (CCSARP). Journal of Applied Linguistics 5(3). 196212.
Blum-Kulka, Shosana. 1982. Learning to say what you mean: A study of speech act
performance of Hebrew as a second language. Applied Linguistics 3. 157167.
Blum-Kulka, Shoshana, Juliane House & Gabriele Kasper. 1989. Cross-Cultural Pragmatics:
Requests and Apologies. New York: Ablex, Norwood.
Borkin, Ann. & Susan M. Reinhart. 1978. Excuse me and Im sorry. TESOL Quarterly
12(1). 5770.
Brown, Pamela, & Stephen C. Levinson. 1978. Universals in language usage: Politeness
phenomena. In Ester Goody (ed.). Questions and Politeness: Strategies in Social
Interaction. 56310. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, Penelope & Stephen C. Levinson. 1987. Politeness: Some Universals in Language
Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cameron, Deborah. 1990. Feminism and Linguistic Theory. London: Macmillan.
Coates, Jennifer. 1993. Women, Men, and Language. London: Longman
Cohen, Andrew D. & Elite Olshtain. 1981. Developing a measure of sociocultural competence:
The case of apology. Language Learning 31(1). 113134.
Cordella-Masini, Marisa. 1989. Apologizing: A cross-cultural study in Chilean Spanish and
Australian English. MA Thesis. Canberra: TESOL, Canberra College of Advanced
Education.
Cordella-Masini, Marisa. 1990. Apologizing in Chilean Spanish and Australian English: A
cross-cultural perspective. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 7. 6692.
Eslami-Rasekh, Zohreh. 2004. Face-Keeping Strategies in Reaction to Complaint: English and
Persian. Journal of Asian and Pacific Communication 14(1). 115138.
Fraser, Bruce. 1981. On apologizing. In Florian Coulmas (ed.). Conversational Routine:
Exploration in Standardized Communication Situations and Prepatterned Speech, 259
273. The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter.

Golato, Andrea. 2003. Studying Compliment Responses: A Comparison of DCTs and

Recordings of Naturally Occurring Talk. Applied Linguistics 24(1). 90121
Grainger, Karen & Sandra Harris. 2007. Special Issue: Apologies. Journal of Politeness
Research 3. 19.
Holmes, Janet. 1989. Sex differences and apologies: One aspect of communicative
competence. Applied Linguistics 10(2). 194212.
Holmes, Janet. 1990. Apologies in New Zealand English. Language in Society 19. 155199.
Holmes, Janet. 1995. Women, Men and Politeness. London: Longman.
Holmes, Janet. 2008. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. 3rd edn. Harlow: Pearson
Education.
House, Juliane. 1988. Oh excuse me please: Apologizing in a foreign Language. In
Bernhard Kettemann, Peter Biermauer, Alwin Fill & Annemarie Karpf (eds.), Englisch als
Zweitsprache. 303327. Tubingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.
Intachakra, Songthama. 2004. Contrastive Pragmatics and Language Teaching: Apologies and
Thanks in English and Thai. Regional English Language Centre Journal 35(1). 3762.
Kasper, Gabriele. 1989. Variation in interlanguage speech act realisation. In Susan Gass,
Carolyn Madden, Dennis Preston & Larry Selinker (eds.). Variation in Second Language
Acquisition: Discourse and Pragmatics 2758. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Keenan, Susan. K. 1993. Investigating deaf students apologies: An exploratory study.
Journal of Applied Linguistics 14(4). 374 381.
Kim, Heesoo. 2008. The semantic and pragmatic analysis of South Korean and Australian
English apologetic speech Acts. Journal of Pragmatics 40. 257278.
Kohler, Michael. 2008. Refusals in English and Greek: Theoretical Aspects and Empirical
Study ZfAL 48. 75104.
Lakoff, Robin Tolmach. 1975. Language and Womans Place. New York: Harper & Row.
Marquez Reiter, Rosina. 2000. Linguistic Politeness in Britain and Uruguay: A Contrastive
Study of Requests and Apologies. London: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Meier, Ardith. J. 1996. Two Cultures Mirrored in Repair Work. Multilingua 15(2). 149169.
Meyerhoff, Miriam. 1999. Sorry in the Pacific: Defining Practices. Language in Society 28:
225238.
Mills, Sara. 2003. Gender and Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nureddeen, Fatima Abdurahman. 2008. Cross-cultural pragmatics: Apology strategies in
Sudanese Arabic. Journal of Pragmatics 40. 279306.
Olshtain, Elite & Andrew D. Cohen. 1983. Apology: A speech act set. In Nessa Wolfson &
Elliot Judd (eds.), Sociolinguistics and Language Acquisition. 1835. Rowley, MA:
Newbury House.
Olshtain, Elite. & Liora Weinbach. 1987. Complaints: A study of speech act behavior among
native and non-native speakers of Hebrew. In Jef Verschueren & Marcella Bertuccelli
Papi, (eds.). The Pragmatic Perspective. 195208. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Olshtain, Elite. 1989. Apologies across languages. In Shoshana Blum-Kulka, Juliane
House, & Gabriele Kasper (eds.). Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies.
155173. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Robinson, Jeffrey D. 2004. The Sequential Organization of Explicit Apologies in Naturally
Occurring English. Research on Language and Social Interaction 37(3). 291330.
Romaine, Suzanne. 2000. Language in Society: An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. New
York: Oxford University Press.

Shardakova, Maria. 2005. Intercultural Pragmatics in the Speech of American Learners of

Russian: Apologies Offered by Americans in Russian. Intercultural Pragmatics 2. 423
451.
Shariati, Mohammad & Fariba Chamani. 2010. Apology Strategies in Persian. Journal of
Pragmatics 42. 16891699.
Spencer-Oatey, Helen. 2008. Culturally Speaking: Culture, Communication and Politeness
Theory. 2nd edn. London: Continuum.
Suszczynska, Malgorzata. 1999. Apologizing in English, Polish, and Hungarian: Different
languages, different strategies. Journal of Pragmatics 31. 10531065.
Suszczynska, Malgorzata. 2005. Apology Routine Formula in Hungarian. Acta Linguistica
Hungarica 52, 77116.
Takaku, Seiji, Bernard Weiner & Ken-Ichi Ohbuchi. 2001. A Cross-cultural examination of the
effects of apology and perspective taking on forgiveness. Journal of Language and
Social Psychology 20 (1 & 2). 144166.
Tannen, Deborah. 1990. You Just Dont Understand: Women and Men in Conversation. New
York: William Morrow.
Tannen, Deborah. 1994. Gender and Discourse. New York: Oxford University Press.
Thomas, Jenny. 1983. Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Applied Linguistics 4. 91112.
Tran, Giao Quynh. 2008. The naturalized role-play: An innovative methodology in cross-
cultural and interlanguage pragmatics research. Reflections on English Language
Teaching 5(2). 124.
Vollmer, Helmut & Elite Olshtain. 1989. The language of apologies in German. In Shoshana
Blum-Kulka, Juliane House & Gabriele Kasper (eds.). Cross-Cultural Pragmatics:
Requests and Apologies. 197218. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Wouk, Fay. 1998. Solidarity in Indonesian conversation: The discourse marker kan.
Multilingua 17. 379406.
Wouk, Fay. 1999. Gender and the use of pragmatic particles in Indonesian. Journal of
Sociolinguistics 3(2). 194220.
Wouk, Fay. 2005. The language of apologizing in Lombok, Indonesia. Journal of Pragmatics
38. 14571486.
Wouk, Fay. 2006. Strategies of apologizing in Lombok Indonesia. Journal of Politeness
Research 2. 277311
Yuan, Yi. 2001. An inquiry into empirical pragmatics data-gathering methods: Written DCTs,
field notes, and natural conversations. Journal of Pragmatics 33. 271292.
Appendix 1
Descriptions of apology situations Australian English
Situation 1 (Being absent at a close friend birthday party):
You were invited to come to a birthday party of a close friend. The invitation was delivered
through email/phone last week. You didnt come to the party for a certain reason. Now youre
calling him/her to apologize. Please express your apology naturally as you normally do in
real situation in your own language.

Situation 2 (Revealing a close friends secret):

You were told a secret of a job application by a close friend. You promised not to tell it to
anybody else, but you accidentally revealed it to others in a conversation just in front of him/
her. Now youre calling him/her to apologize. Please express your apology naturally as you
normally do in real situation in your own language.
Situation 3 (Forgetting to return a close friends book):

You promised to return a book you borrowed from a close friend yesterday. She/he was
waiting for you yesterday, but you did not turn up. Now youre calling him/her to apologize.
Please express your apology naturally as you normally do in real situation in your own lan-
guage.
Appendix 2
Descriptions of apology situations Bahasa Indonesia
Situasi 1 (Tidak hadir pada acara ulang tahun teman dekat):
Anda diundang untuk menhadiri acara ulang tahun seorang teman dekat. Undangan disampai-
kan via email/telp semingu sebelumnya. Anda tidak datang karna alasan tertentu. Sekarang
anda menelpon teman anda tersebut untuk minta maaf. Silahkan utarakan permintaan maaf
anda tersebut seperti apa adanya.
Situasi 2 (Menceritakan rahasia teman dekat):

Anda telah menceritakan rahasia seorang teman dekat ke orang lain. Anda sebelumnya ber-
janji tidak akan menceritakannya kepada orang lain, namun tanpa sengaja anda membuka
rahasia tersebut kepada orang lain ketika ngobrol bersama orang lain. Sekarang anda menel-
pon teman dekat anda tersebut untuk minta maaf. Silahkan utarakan permintaan maaf anda
tersebut seperti apa adanya.
Situasi 3 (Lupa mengembalikan buku teman dekat):

Anda berjanji mau mengembalikan buku yang anda pinjam dari seorang teman dekat. Dia
telah menunggu anda sejak lama ditempat yang telah ditentukan, namun anda tidak muncul
saat itu. Sekarang anda menelpon teman dekat anda tersebut untuk minta maaf. Silahkan
utarakan permintaan maaf anda tersebut seperti apa adanya.

Appendix 3
Apology transcription Australian English
Female:
No Situation Apology Expression Recording

Code
1 Birthday My God, Im so sorry sorry sorry I didnt come last A.28

night. I completely forgot. Im a horrible horrible friend
and Ill make it up to you. Ill take you out for a big
lunch or dinner or a big night out on a town. Im so
sorry.
Um about your party last night you probably noticed A.31
that I wasnt there. Im sorry sorry like I forgot er um
like I was just crazy busy and I just completely forgot
about it and I was thinking we could go out to a nice
dinner and you know Ill buy you a dinner um and I
hope you have a fun yeah Im so sorry.
2 Job Application Um Cathlin you know that job that you told me about. I A.29
may or may not have actually told everybody. Im really
sorry and I er they thought that its really good and er
um yeah but Im really sorry and I hope you dont hate
me forever.
Hey, um I am really sorry but I may have um accidental- A.32
ly told a couple of people about that job that youd ap-
plied for and Im really sorry I didnt mean to it but just
slipped out and yeah I hope its all right and I hope you
get it.
3 Book Return Hey Im really sorry I didnt come this morning um I A.30
couldnt I misplaced the book er but Ive found it now
and Im completely finished with it and if you can meet
me um this afternoon or tonight I can come or I can
come and give the book back. Im really sorry. I hope
youre um I didnt make it too inconvenient to you and
you didnt need it too badly.
Um you know er that book that you er um lent me Im A.33
still using it, I just need it to complete my assignment
um I really sorry that I didnt meet you this morning but
I should be able to give it to you tomorrow if thats
alright. Um Im really sorry but I need it to finish my
assignment. Um and youre like the best friend ever so
yeah.

Male:
No Situation Apology Expression Recording

Code
1 Birthday Hi mate yeah Im really sorry that I didnt come to your A.34
birthday party last night. I just I just clean forgot yeah.
Do you wanna organize to do something else perhaps?
Hi mate, sorry I didnt er come to your birthday last A.43
night. Er I had er some other important stuff to do. Um
I wanna make it up to you if you wanna catch up some
other time.
2 Job Application Hey, I er you know that er the job interview that you A.35
said that youre going for I know you wanted to keep it
private but Im really sorry I accidentally told to one of
our friends er I hope thats OK.
Yeah, Im sorry for giving away your secret er I really A. 41
didnt mean to do that.
3 Book Return Sorry I missed that appointment this morning. Er you A.39
know that book that I needed a couple of days ago. Er
I misplaced it. Um I was hoping er I could give it give
back er to you next week. Sorry again.
Hi, Im sorry I didnt meet you this morning with that A.45
book. I cant find it anywhere. Ill try to get it as soon
as possible and get it back to you, I just cant find it.
Appendix 4
Apology transcription Bahasa Indonesia
Female:
No Situation Apology Expressions Code Translation
1 Birthday Hai Irma, ini Eni. Aduh maaf A.1.16 Hi Irma, this is Eni. (Particle/
(Ulang Tahun) ya kemaren nggak bisa dat- Exclamation) I ask forgive-
ang. Maaf bangat, lupa lupa ness, I couldnt come yester-
lupa, terus ketiduran. Maaf day. Very sorry, I really
ya, mau kan maafin? Janji ya, forgot, then I went to sleep.
nanti kita makan siang di Forgive me, would you for-
KFC atau dimana terserah give me? I promise to take
kamu, OK? Emmm maafin you out at KFC or else-
dong? wehere for lunch, OK? (Filler)
forgive me?

Halo Assalamualaikum, Nora A.1.22 Hello (Islamic greeting), is it

ya? Nora, maafkan Vivi ya ke- Nora? Nora, forgive me for
maren Vivi nggak bisa dat- yesterday, I couldnt come to
ang ke acara ulang tahunnya, your birthday, because I was
karna kemaren tu Vivi sakit. sick. So (filler) I couldnt
Jadi aa Vivi nggak bisa dat- come to your house, my par-
ang ke tempat Nora, disuruh ents asked me to go to a
sama orang tua mesti bero- hospital for a medical check.
bat ke rumah sakit sekarang. Nora, forgive me please
Nora, maafin aku ya, please please Dont get upset to
please jangan marah ya me. If youre disappointed I
Nora. Kalau Nora merasa wouldnt be able to do any-
kecewa gimana aa Vivi bisa thing because I couldnt
bisa membalas karma Vivi come to your birthday.
nggak bisa hadir ke ulang ta- Thanks Nora.
hun Nora. Terima kasih ya
Nora.
2 Job Application Halo Waty, aaa maaf ya ke- A.1.17 Hello Waty, (filler) Im sorry
(Lamaran maren udah bongkar rahasia, for telling your secret yester-
Pekerjaan) lupa kalau aku janji, aaaa ya day, I really forgot that I
maaf ya, soalnya keceplosan promised not to tell anyone,
kemaren tu, habisnya cerita (filler) Im sorry, it slipped
kita kan seru, jadi langsung out so I told them that you
aja loncat keluar dari mulut have applied for that job you
aku kalu kamu udah apply wanted. So I request for for-
sama job yang kamu kepen- giveness please please.
gen waktu itu. Jadi saya (Filler)..Would you forgive
minta maaf ya, please me? Its up to you if you
please. Aaaa maukan maaf- want to meet me or not, I
in? Terserah kamu lah gim- wont mind if you get upset
ana aaa mau ketemu aku to me, its really up to you.
atau aku ketemu kamu terser- Please forgive me OK?
ahlah mau marahin aku kay-
ak apa, terserah kamu.
Please maafin aku ya?
Halo assalamualaikum. Put, A.1.25 Hello (Islamic greeting). Put,
ini Vivi Put, maaf ya Put, ke- this is Vivi, Im sorry about
maren aku keceplosan ngo- yesterday, it slipped out, so
mong, keasyikan kemaren I didnt realise that I told
ngomongnya Put. Put, jadi your secret to others. Put, so
aku minta maaf nian ya. Im so sorry. Im very sorry.
Minta maaf nian. Aaaa gima- (Filler) How can I say, I really
na ya Put ya, aku benar ben- really ask for forgiveness,
ar minta maaf, tolong maafin please forgive me, lets still

aku, jadi masih mau kan be friends. I ask for forgive-

sama aku kalau pengen cur- ness OK Put? Thank you.
hat atau cerita lagi sama
aku? Aku minta maaf ya put?
Terima kasih.
3 Book Return Hai Susi. Aaaaa marah ya? A.1.18 Hi Susi. (Filler)...are you an-
(Mengembalik- Aaa soal kemaren nggak bali- gry? (Filler) about yesterday
an Buku) kin buku. Ya gimana ya itu, when I couldnt come to re-
saya udah cari kemana mana turn your book. (Filler), how
tapi, nggak ketemu. Tapi can I explain, its, I have
saya janji bakal balikin buku tried to find it but I failed.
itu secepatnya, saya janji. But I promise I will get it
Saya janji, entah itu saya back to you as soon as
ganti. Tapi maaf ya kemaren possible, I promise.
tu saya nggak tepati janji I promise I will get a new
balikin buku kamu dan saya one. But Im sorry, I couldnt
tahu kok buku itu penting keep my promise yesterday
penting bangat buat kamu. and I know that you really
Ya selain lupa ya pertamanya needed that book. (Filler)
lupa, habis tu yaaa saya kira I really forgot then I thought
mungkin saya pinjamin sama I might have lent it to some-
teman. Tapi maaf maaf ya. one else. But Im sorry.
Please please ya maafin aku, Please please forgive me,
pokonya nanti saya ganti nan- I will get a new one if I still
ti kalau bukunya nggak kete- cant locate it. But most im-
mu ya? Tapi yang terutama portantly, please forgive me.
tu, tolong maafin saya ya...? Thats all, thank you.
Ya itu aja, makasih....
Halo assalamualaikum. Okti A.2.26 Hello (Islamic greeting). Is it
ya? Okti maaf ya kemaren Okti? Okti, Im sorry I
aku nggak bisa datang, kita couldnt come yesterday, I
jajnjian ketemuan untuk ke- promised to meet you to re-
baliin buku, karma aku lupa turn your book, but I really
naroknya Ti, atau mungkin forgot where I put the book
dipinjam sama teman. Kalau so I couldnt get it, or I
misalkan hilang atau dipin- might have lent it to some-
jam ama teman gitu, dia one, and he hasnt returned
nggak balikkin ya Vivi janji it yet to me. (Filler) Can I
bakal balikinnya Ti. Aa digan- just give you some money to
ti uang atau Vi ganti buku get a new one? Once again I
yang aslinya. Sekali lagi Vi ask for forgiveness because
minta maaf ya Ti ya nggak I couldnt give the book back
bisa balikin bukunya itu to you yesterday, Im sorry...
kemaren, maaf ya Ti...

Male:
1 Birthday Darul, aaa aku mau kasih A.1.19 Darul, (filler) I just to want
(Ulang Tahun) tahu, aaa aku minta maaf to let you know, (filler) I ask
soal kemaren, saya tidak for forgiveness about yester-
bisa datang ke acara ulang day, I couldnt come to your
tahun kamu karna aku sibuk birthday party because I was
sekali. Sori ya Rul, aaa maaf extremely busy. Im sorry
sekali, saking sibuknya aku Rul, (filler) so sorry, being so
nggak bisa kasih tahu kamu. busy I couldnt tell you that I
Sekali lagi saya minta maaf couldnt come. Once again, I
ask for forgiveness.
Halo assalamualaikum Fer. A.2.23 Hello (Islamic greeting) Fer.
Ini Doni Fer, maaf kemaren This is Doni Fer, Im sorry I
saya nggak bisa datang ke couldnt come to your birth-
acara ulang tahunnya karma day party yesterday because
kemaren ada salah satu fami- one of my relatives was sick
ly yang sakit dan kami harus and we had to come and see
mengunjunginya kesana kar- him because he was in a se-
ma sakitnya itu parah. Sekali rious condition. Once again,
lagi Doni pengen minta maaf I want to ask your forgive-
sama Fery karma Doni nggak ness because I couldnt
bisa datang aaa di acara come to your birthday, Im
ulang tahun Fery, maaf ya Fer? sorry Fer.
2 Job Application Halo, aaa Lex, aaa aku mau A.2.20 Hello, (filler) Lex, (filler)I
(Lamaran ngomongin masalah kema- just want to tell you some-
Pekerjaan) ren. Aaa aku kemaren kece- thing about yesterday.
plosan, nggak sengaja, masa- (Filler) it slipped out yester-
lah pekerjaan kemaren. Aaa day, I didnt do it deliberate-
aku kan udah janji nggak ly. (Filler) I know that I prom-
akan ngomongin sama orang ised not to tell it to anyone,
lain, tapi kemaren aa sori ya, but yesterday (filler) sorry it
aku keceplosan. Aku janji just slipped out. I promise
aku akan nggak akan ngo- not to tell it again to anyone
mongin ke orang lain lagi. else. Im sorry, forgive me.
Sori ya, maafin aku.
Halo In, sori nian In, aku ke- A.2.24 Hello In, Im very sorry In, it
maren kecoplosan ngomong. really slipped out yesterday.
Kemaren kan Iin bilang I know that you dont want
nggak boleh dibilang bilang me to tell anyone, but yester-
sama siapa siapa, tapi day I didnt realise it so it
kemaren karna keasyikan just slipped out. So Im very
ngomong ya aku keceplosan. sorry because it slipped out
Jadi ya sori lah aa maaf ban- and I have told anyone, Im
gat karna aku keceplosan sorry In.
ngomong, maaf ya In?


3 Book Return Halo Yoga, aaa aku mau A.1.21 Hello Yoga, (filler) I just want
(Mengem- minta maaf nih. Aaa aku to ask for forgiveness.
balikan Buku) kemaren nggak datang, (Filler) I couldnt come yester-
masalahnya bukunya hilang, day, the problem was I
aa sudah kucari cari nggak couldnt find the book,
ketemu. Tapi aku janji aa aku (filler) I have tried to find it,
akan ganti secepatnya. Aaa but I failed. But I promise to
kalau juga nggak ketemu get a new one for you if I
terpaksa aku ganti. Aaa jadi still cannot find it. (Filler)
aku minta maaf ya, sori I ask for forgiveness, Im
banget. really sorry.
Halo assalamualaikum A.2.27 Hello (Islamic greeting) Ang-
Angga. Angga ini Doni Ngga, ga. Angga this is Doni, yes-
kemaren aa maaf nian kema- terday (filler) Im very sorry
ren kan kita sudah punya jan- that I promised to return
ji Doni mau kembaliin buku your book that I borrowed
yang Doni pinjam kemaren from you but I didnt turn
dari Angga, tetapi waktu up, but I have tried to find
Doni cari cari buku itu nggak that book but I couldnt get
ketemu Ngga, entah entah ke- it, I was really not sure
mana buku itu, aaa jadi aaa where I put it, (filler) so
nanti Doni bakalan nyari (filler) I still keep looking for
buku itu lagi. Jadi kalau buku it now. So if I still cant find
itu tidak dapat, Doni janji it Ill get a new one for you.
Doni akan a membelikan Thanks Angga.
yang baru untuk Angga aaa
persis dengan buku yang
Angga miliki kemaren.
Makasih Ngga.
Bionotes
Jeremy F. Jones
Jeremy F. Jones is an Adjunct Associate Professor in the Program of TESOL and Foreign
Language Teaching at the University of Canberra, Australia. His teaching, research and
publications are in the areas of discourse analysis, intercultural communication, testing and
assessment, and language teaching methodology.
Adrefiza
Adrefiza is currently lecturing in the TEFL Education Program, Faculty of Education, Jambi
University, Sumatra, Indonesia, and is also the Head of the Language Centre. His main area

of interest lies in intercultural pragmatics and speech acts, comparing English and Bahasa
Indonesia with regard to various sociocultural parameters, and considering pedagogical
implications for EFL teaching. Other interests include language acquisition, language
teaching methodology, and assessment.


De Gruyter, 2017, 13 (1) - Jeremy and Adrefiza

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

De Gruyter, 2017, 13 (1) - Jeremy and Adrefiza

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

DE GRUYTER MOUTON Journal of Politeness Research 2017; 13(1): 89119

Jeremy F. Jones* and Adrefiza

Abstract: This study examines sociocultural, pragmatic, and gender differences

Authenticated | adref64@yahoo.co.id author's copy

Authenticated | adref64@yahoo.co.id author's copy

Authenticated | adref64@yahoo.co.id author's copy

2.1 The functions of apologies

Authenticated | adref64@yahoo.co.id author's copy

The majority of apology studies, however, focus on its main function of

2.2 Apology strategies

Authenticated | adref64@yahoo.co.id author's copy

may not appear simultaneously. One component, such as an expression of apol-

Authenticated | adref64@yahoo.co.id author's copy

2.3 Gender variations

Authenticated | adref64@yahoo.co.id author's copy

searched gender differences in American apologies. She found that in America,

2.4 Significance of the theoretical background

Authenticated | adref64@yahoo.co.id author's copy

Table 1: Subjects of the study.

Australian Indonesian Total

Male: 6 Female: 6 Male: 6 Female: 6 24

Written descriptions of the apology situations (see Appendices 1 and 2) were

Authenticated | adref64@yahoo.co.id author's copy

4 Findings and discussion

4.1 The use of apology terms

Table 2: The use of apology terms in AE and BI.

Australian English Bahasa Indonesia Total

Male: 6 Female: 14 Male: 12 Female: 23 55

Authenticated | adref64@yahoo.co.id author's copy

(1) Female: Birthday

(2) Male: Book Return

Authenticated | adref64@yahoo.co.id author's copy

is interesting to note. In an HO form, maaf functions as a verb and thus cannot

(3) Female: Birthday

Authenticated | adref64@yahoo.co.id author's copy

example is relatively lengthy, signaling that she is making a particular effort to

(4) Male: Birthday

(5) Female: Birthday

Authenticated | adref64@yahoo.co.id author's copy

(7) Male: Job Application

4.2 The use of SO and HO apology strategies in AE and BI

Table 3: SO-HO strategies used in AE and B1.

Male Female Male Female

1 SO: Expression of regret (Im sorry; 7 12 6 1

Authenticated | adref64@yahoo.co.id author's copy

selves, not on their hearers. Expressions like Forgive me or I ask/seek/re-

(8) Male: Book Return

(9) Male: Birthday

Authenticated | adref64@yahoo.co.id author's copy

4.3 Apology construction

Authenticated | adref64@yahoo.co.id author's copy

Authenticated | adref64@yahoo.co.id author's copy

Table 4: Intensifiers used in BI.

No Intensifiers Male Female Total

Table 5: Intensifiers used in AE.

No Intensifiers Male Female Total

Authenticated | adref64@yahoo.co.id author's copy

4.5 Cultural and gender perspectives

Authenticated | adref64@yahoo.co.id author's copy

Authenticated | adref64@yahoo.co.id author's copy

Authenticated | adref64@yahoo.co.id author's copy

Golato, Andrea. 2003. Studying Compliment Responses: A Comparison of DCTs and

Authenticated | adref64@yahoo.co.id author's copy