1. Introduction

This chapter introduces the importance of sociopragmatic knowledge in cross-cultural communication and the lack of attention to constructive feedback (CF) in speech act research. It also discusses the significance of studying high-proficiency Chinese EFL learners’ CF and the goal of the study. The chapter highlights the differences in CF between native American speakers, native Chinese speakers, and high-proficiency Chinese EFL learners, as well as the influence of politeness theory and pragmatic transfer. The chapter also outlines the potential benefits of the study for raising EFL learners’ awareness of cultural differences and providing suggestions for teaching CF. Finally, it emphasizes the contribution of the study to speech act research.

2. Literature Review

This chapter discusses previous studies on speech acts from cross-cultural and interlanguage pragmatics, especially concerning suggestions and advice. It also examines research on CF as a speech act. The studies discussed focused on similarities and differences in speech acts across different languages, social variables that influence speech acts, and differences between native and non-native speakers. Studies on advice and suggestions among EFL or ESL learners were analyzed. Additionally, previous research on CF, especially strategies for providing appropriate feedback, was reviewed. CF was found to share similarities with suggestions but also has its own unique differences. The importance of cultural differences influencing CF was emphasized.

3. Methodology

This chapter introduces the methodological details of the study, including participant selection and data collection. The study used a Directed Questionnaire Task (DCT) to collect data from participants. Three versions of the DCT questionnaires were used, one in Chinese and two in English, each containing 12 situations and background information. Data analysis involved the establishment of a coding scheme based on three frameworks, which was used to analyze the data collected. Inter-rater reliability was ensured by having another coder independently perform the coding. Finally, nonparametric tests using the χ2 statistic in SPSS 20 were conducted to analyze the frequency of the strategies employed in constructive feedback.

4. Results and Discussion

This chapter presents the results and discussion of head acts, hedges, and supportive moves used by American speakers, Chinese speakers, and high-proficiency Chinese EFL learners in providing constructive feedback (CF). American speakers used strategies more frequently than Chinese speakers, with hedge being the most commonly used strategy. Chinese speakers preferred indirect strategies due to their emphasis on face and the concept of collectivism, while American speakers preferred direct strategies. High-proficiency Chinese EFL learners used a variety of strategies, resembling both American and Chinese speakers. In terms of hedges, American speakers used modal verbs, adverbs, and phrases most frequently, while Chinese speakers used conditional hedges more frequently. High-proficiency Chinese EFL learners used a variety of hedges, with a tendency to mix the usage habits of American and Chinese speakers. The usage of supportive moves did not differ significantly among the three groups, and compliments were the most frequently used supportive move. These findings suggest that high-proficiency Chinese EFL learners have a good command of sociopragmatics and tend to mix the usage habits of both American and Chinese speakers when providing constructive feedback.

5. Conclusions and Pedagogical Implications

The study investigated the similarities and differences in constructive feedback (CF) applications among native Chinese speakers, native American speakers, and high-proficiency Chinese EFL learners. The findings showed significant differences in head acts, hedges, and supportive moves among the three groups. Pedagogical implications suggested the incorporation of CF into EFL textbooks, emphasis on modal verbs and modifying words in pragmatic teaching, and the necessity for EFL learners to identify problems and give negative assessments when providing CF.

Limitations of the study included the small number of participants limited to tertiary education students, and the context specificity of the written DCT. Future research should include a larger and more diverse participant pool and incorporate ethnography studies with natural observations for real and first-hand data.