Disagreement Strategies in the Discourse of American Speakers of Arabic

Abstract

This study attempts to investigate the disagreement strategies that are used by American speakers of Arabic with a view to identifying which disagreement strategies they use in equal and non-equal status situations. In addition, it aims to see whether variables like gender and social status affect the linguistic choices and disagreement strategies that they use. The subjects of the study are 28 (14 male and 14 female) American speakers of Arabic who were learning Arabic and were residing in Jordan at the time of data collection. The researchers analyze their interactional recorded responses to a set of stimuli included in an oral (recorded) discourse completion task (ODCT) prepared for this purpose. The ODCT comprises six scenarios in which the respondent is requested to disagree with two peers, two higher-status interlocutors, and two lower-status interlocutors. The findings of the study show that the American speakers of Arabic use two main disagreement strategies, non-confrontational and confrontational disagreements, which are in turn divided into sub-strategies. Further, they employ the non-confrontational strategies slightly more than the confrontational ones, as the percentage for the former is 51% while for the latter is 49%. Interestingly, the study suggests that the topic of discussion significantly influences the choice of strategy, sometimes resulting in women being more confrontational than men, which contrasts with common perceptions reported in the literature about gender-based communication styles.