c. TI1e hearer was il:\iured. or offended
by the act
Barrett
(ibid)
added
one
more
i.e.
the
act
was
unju_ tified umkr
the
circumstances.
Norriek
(1978:2&0
as quoted
in Trosborg,
1994: 376 and Owen, 1983:
132)
describes the social fhnctions of apologies:
"
admitting responsibility for a str..e which affected someone L'l. an adverse
way
(thereby
implicating contrition)
.,
asking to be forgiven.
"
showing good mmL"lers
"
assuagl11g (soothing) the addressee's w-rath (anger)
"
getting off the hook (
t-'l escape)
are
researchers
had conducted investigation
on this particular
speech act
Fer
tWtt res:so14
writer
could only
mention. some of
therr4 such
as:
Ito
Sacbie who investigated the similarities and.
differences of
apology !'ealization across
cul'tli!\:l an.d
gender especially between American and JayaD.ese. The results showed tlw
four groups
Am.ericar: lVJP.Je
and Female as
well as Japar.ese Male and Female
realized the:r apology strategies
very si..·nilar 1wys, 86% of Amerieanl\t,ale used IFID
(explicit apology) frequently and Japanese Females
w;ed intensifiers
most ol'£!1 (37%),
Sachie also
faurui
tl-tat
both
Japanese Iv!ale and
Female used promise
for
forbearance
more often than A'llerican
diet
111e
overall result indicated that the clloice
of
apology
 |