Tea traditions in different countries

 МУНИЦИПАЛЬНОЕ БЮДЖЕТНОЕ ОБЩЕОБРАЗОВАТЕЛЬНОЕ УЧРЕЖДЕНИЕ

        ОДИНЦОВСКАЯ СРЕДНЯЯ ОБЩЕОБРАЗОВАТЕЛЬНАЯ ШКОЛА № 1

        ( 143000,Московская Область, г.Одинцово ,ул. Солнечная, д. 14)

КОНКУРСНАЯ РАБОТА

по Английскому языку

Английский Речевой этикет

                                                                                                                                   Выполнила:

Гладыш Елизавета Васильевна, 7 класс

                                                                                               Руководитель:

                                                                          Худоба Ксения Ивановна,                                                                                                    

Учитель иностранного языка

                     Одинцовской средней общеобразовательной школы №1

Одинцово 2015

Content

Introduction................................................................................................ 3

1 Weather................................................................................................... 4

1.1 The Rules Of English Weather-Speak......................................... 4

1.2 Moderation Rule.......................................................................... 4

2 Grooming Talk........................................................................................ 4

2.1 The Rules Of Introduction........................................................... 4

2.2 The No-name Rule....................................................................... 5

2.3 The `Pleased To Meet You` Problem.......................................... 6

2.4 The Long Goodbye...................................................................... 7

3 Humor Rules........................................................................................... 7

3.1 The Importance Of Not Being Earnet Rule................................. 8

3.2 The `Oh, Come Off It!` Rule....................................................... 8

3.3 Irony Rules................................................................................... 8

3.4 The Understatement Rule............................................................. 9

3.5 The Self-desprecation Rule.......................................................... 9

3.6 Humor And Comedy.................................................................... 9

4 The Seven Deadly Sins........................................................................... 10

5 Talk-Rules: The Mobile Phone............................................................... 11

Conclusion................................................................................................. 13

Bibliography …………………………………………………………..... 14

Appendix ……………………………………………………………….. 15

Introduction

Each nation has its own traditions and customs that make it distinctive from the rest ones. Thus Englishmen are widely known for their social etiquette. We all strongly believe that English people are reserved, well-bred gentlemen that tend to perfect manners. There’s a point that all of them own a strange sense of humour and like talking about weather. But are these facts or stereotypes?

This work intends to consider the most common stereotypes about English talk and find out not so widely known characteristic features of English communication.

This problem has already been widely studied, for example by a famous English writer Kate Fox, and I tried to refer to her books in my research but give my own explanation and add practical use. Scientists like Goreg P., Jacobs E., Paxman J. have made a contribution to learning this problem and I’ve taken into account their knowledge. That is the main timeliness of the work.

The purpose in writing this work was to study English social etiquette to state whether all the stereotypes are true or not. Moreover, this investigation was conducted to find distinctive features of English people.

The object of research is English language in different communicative situations.

The subject of research is vocabulary, grammar and pronunciation.

The tasks of the paper may be formulated as follows:

- Critical study of the material on the theme;

- Giving specter of different social codes and communicative situations;

- Studying the distinctive features of English small talk;

- To define the most common topics and characteristics of English conversation;

- To analyze stereotypes about English talk and state whether they are true of false;

I suppose to find out the answers for the given tasks and put them into action.

The methods of research are comparative, statistical analysis, generalization.

The main factors of scientific novelty of the research are to generalize book knowledge and present practical visual part.

1 WEATHER

Any discussion of English conversation, like any English conversation, must begin with The Weather. As Dr Johnson commented  ‘When two Englishmen meet, their first talk is of the weather’, and this observation is as accurate now as it was over two hundred years ago.

The weather at all: English weather-speak is a form of code, evolved to help us overcome our natural reserve and actually talk to each other. Everyone knows, for example, that ‘Nice day, isn’t it?’, ‘Ooh, isn’t it cold?’, ‘Still raining, eh?’ and other variations on the theme are not requests for meteorological data: they are ritual greetings, conversation-starters or default ‘fillers’. In other words, English weather-speak is a form of ‘grooming talk’ – the human equivalent of what is known as ‘social grooming’ among our primate cousins, where they spend hours grooming each other’s fur, even when they are perfectly clean, as a means of social bonding.

1.1 The rules of English weather-speaking

If it is both wet and cold, or if you are just feeling grumpy, you can indulge what Jeremy Paxman calls our ‘phenomenal capacity for quiet moaning’. This is a nice observation, and I would only add that these English ‘moaning rituals’ about the weather have an important social purpose, in that they provide further opportunitiesfor friendly agreement, in this case with the added advantage of a ‘them and us’ factor – ‘them’ being either the weather itself or the forecasters. Moaning rituals involve displays of shared opinions (as well as wit and humour) and generate a sense of solidarity against a common enemy – both valuable aids to social bonding.

1.2 Moderation Rule

The only conversational rule that can be applied with confidence to snow is a generic, and distinctively English, ‘moderation rule’: too much snow, like too much of anything, is to be deplored. Even warmth and sunshine are only acceptable in moderation: too many consecutive hot, sunny days and it is customary to start fretting about drought, muttering about hose-pipe bans and reminding each other, in doom-laden tones, of the summer of 1976.

2 GROOMING-TALK

2.1The rules of introduction

Grooming-talk starts with greeting-talk. Weather-speak is needed

in this context partly because greetings and introductions are such an awkward business for the English. The problem has become particularly acute since the decline of ‘How do you do?’ as the standard, all-purpose greeting. The ‘How do you do?’ greeting – where the correct response is not to answer the question, but to repeat it back, ‘How do you do?’, like an echo or a well- trained parrot 13 – is still in use in upper-class and upper-middle circles, but the rest are left floundering, never knowing quite what to say. Instead of sneering at the old-fashioned stuffiness of the ‘How do you do?’ ritual, we would do better to mount a campaign for its revival: it would solve so many problems.

Awkwardness Rules

As it is,  introductions and greetings tend to be uncomfortable,

clumsy and inelegant among Englishmen. Among established friends, there is less awkwardness, although they are often still not quite sure what to do with their hands, or whether to hug or kiss. The French custom of a kiss on each cheek has become popular among the chattering classes and some other middle- and upper-middle-class groups, but is regarded as silly and pretentious by many other sections of society, particularly when it takes the form of the ‘air-kiss’. Women who use this variantare disparagingly referred to as ‘Mwah-Mwahs’.

Handshakes are now the norm in business introductions – or rather, they are the norm when people in business are introduced to each other for the first time. (Note, though, that the English handshake is always somewhat awkward, very brief, performed ‘at arm’s length’, and without any of the spare-hand involvement – clasping, forearm patting, etc. – found in less inhibited cultures.)At subsequent meetings, particularly as business contacts get to know each other better, a handshake greeting often starts to seem too formal, but cheek-kisses would be too informal and in any case not allowed between males, so we revert to the usual embarrassed confusion, with no-one being quite sure what to do. Hands are half-extended and then withdrawn or turned into a sort of vague wave; there may be awkward, hesitant moves towards a cheek-kiss or some other form of physical contact such as an armtouch – as no contact at all feels a bit unfriendly – but these are also often aborted half-way. This is excruciatingly English: overformality is embarrassing, but so is an inappropriate degree of informality (that problem with extremes again).

2.2 The No-name Rule

You do not go up to someone at a party (or in any other social setting where conversation with strangers is permitted, such as a pub bar counter) and say ‘Hello, I’m John Smith,’ or even ‘Hello, I’m John.’ In fact, the only correct way to introduce yourself in such settings is not to introduce yourself at all, but to find some other way of initiating a conversation – such as a remark about the weather.

The ‘brash American’ approach: ‘Hi, I’m Bill from Iowa,’ particularly if accompanied by an outstretched hand and beaming smile, makes the English wince and cringe

 ‘I just don’t get it,’ said one woman. ‘You say your name and they sort of wrinkle their noses, like you’ve told them something a bit too personal and embarrassing.’ Rather than giving your name, I suggested, you should strike up a conversation by making a vaguely interrogative comment about the weather (or the party or pub or wherever you happen to be). This must not be done too loudly, and the tone should be light and

informal, not earnest or intense. The object is to ‘drift’ casually

into conversation, as though by accident. Even if the other person

seems happy enough to chat, it is still customary to curb any urges

to introduce yourself.

Eventually, there may be an opportunity to exchange names, providing this can be achieved in a casual, unforced manner, although it is always best to wait for the other person to take the initiative. Should you reach the end of a long, friendly evening without having introduced yourself, you may say, on parting, ‘Goodbye, nice to meet you, er, oh – I didn’t catch your name?’ as though you have only just noticed the omission. Your new acquaintance should then divulge his or her name, and you may now, at last, introduce yourself – but in an offhand way, as though it is not a matter of any importance: ‘I’m Bill, by the way.’

2.3 The ‘Pleased to Meet You’ Problem

In a small social gathering such as a dinner party, the host may solve the name problem by introducing guests to each other by name, but these are still awkward moments, as the decline of ‘How do you do?’ means that no-one is quite sure what to say to each other when introduced in this manner. ‘How are you?’, despite having much the same meaning, and being equally recognised as a non-question (the correct response is ‘Very well, thank you’ or ‘Fine, thanks’ whatever your state of health or mind), will not do in initial introductions, as custom dictates that it may only be used as a greeting between people who already know each other. Even though it does not require an honest answer, ‘How are you?’ is far too personal and intimate a question for first-time introductions.

The most common solution, nowadays, is ‘Pleased to meet you’ (or

‘Nice to meet you’ or something similar). Etiquette books and in some social circles – mainly upper-middle class and above, although some at the higher end of middle-middle are affected says that it's incorrect to ‘Pleased to meet you’ because it is an obvious lie: one cannot possibly be sure at that point whether one is pleased to meet the person or not.

But even among those with no class prejudice about ‘Pleased to meet you’, who believe it is the correct and polite thing to say, this greeting is rarely delivered with ringing confidence: it is usually mumbled rather awkwardly, and as quickly as possible – ‘Plstmtye’. This awkwardness may, perversely, occur precisely because people believe they are saying the ‘correct’ thing.

Formality is embarrassing. But then, informality is embarrassing. Everything is embarrassing.

The Embarrassment Rule

In fact, the only rule one can identify with any certainty in all this

confusion over introductions and greetings is that, to be impeccably English, one must perform these rituals badly. One must appear self-conscious, ill-at-ease, stiff, awkward and, above all, embarrassed. Smoothness, glibness and confidence are inappropriate and un- English. Hesitation, dithering and ineptness are, surprising as it may seem, correct behaviour. Introductions should be performed as hurriedly as possible, but also with maximum inefficiency. If disclosed at all, names must be

mumbled; hands should be tentatively half-proffered and then clumsily withdrawn; the approved greeting is something like ‘Er, how, um, plstm-, er, hello?’

2.3 AND FINALLY . . . THE LONG GOODBYE RULE

The initial stage of the parting process is often, deceptively, an

unseemly rush, as no-one wants to be the last to leave, for fear of‘outstaying their welcome’ (a serious breach of the privacy rules).  Thus, as soon as one person, couple or family stands up and starts making apologetic noises about traffic, baby-sitters, or the lateness of the hour, everyone else immediately looks at their watch, with exclamations of surprise, jumps to their feet and starts hunting for coats and bags and saying preliminary goodbyes. (Although ‘Pleased to meet you’ is problematic as a greeting, it is acceptable to say ‘It was nice to meet you’ at this point, if you are parting from people to whom you have recently been introduced – even if you have exchanged no more than a few mumbled greetings.) If you are visiting an English home, be warned that you should allow a good ten minutes – and it could well be fifteen or even twenty – from these initial goodbyes to your final departure.

Those leaving are desperate to get away, and those hovering in the

doorway are dying to shut the door on them, but it would be impolite to give any hint of such feelings, so everyone must make a great show of being reluctant to part. Even when the final, final, final goodbyes have been said, and everyone is loaded into the car, a window is often wound down to allow a few more parting words.As the leavers drive off, hands may be held to ears with thumbs and little fingers extended in a phone-shape, promising further communication. It is then customary for both parties to wave lingering, non-verbal goodbyes to each other until the car is out of sight. When the long-goodbye ordeal is over, we all heave an

exhausted sigh of relief.

As often as not, we then immediately start grumbling about the

very people from whom, a moment earlier, we could apparently hardly bear to tear ourselves.

The English often refer to this ritual not as ‘saying goodbye’ but as

‘saying our goodbyes’, as in ‘I can’t come to the station, so we’ll say our goodbyes here’. I discussed this with an American visitor, who said, ‘You know, the first time I heard that expression, I didn’t really register the plural – or I guess I thought it meant you said one each or something. Now I know it means a LOT of goodbyes’.

3 HUMOUR RULES

Humour rules. Humour governs. Humour is omnipresent and

omnipotent.

In other cultures, there is ‘a time and a place’ for humour; it is a

special, separate kind of talk. In English conversation, there is always an undercurrent of humour. They can barely manage to say ‘hello’ or comment on the weather without somehow contriving to make a bit of a joke out of it, and most English conversations will involve at least some degree of banter, teasing, irony, understatement, humorous self-deprecation, mockery or just silliness. Humour is their ‘default mode’, if you like: we do not have to switch it on deliberately, and we cannot switch it off. For the English, the rules of humour are the cultural equivalent of natural laws – we obey them automatically, rather in the way that we obey the law of gravity.

3.1 The importance of not being earnest rule

Although we may not have a monopoly on humour, or even on

irony, the English are probably more acutely sensitive than any

other nation to the distinction between ‘serious’ and ‘solemn’,

between ‘sincerity’ and ‘earnestness’.

This distinction is crucial to any kind of understanding of

Englishness. I cannot emphasize this strongly enough: if you are not able to grasp these subtle but vital differences, you will never understand the English – and even if you speak the language fluently, you will never feel or appear entirely at home in conversation with the English. Your English may be impeccable, but your behavioural ‘grammar’ will be full of glaring errors.Once you have become sufficiently sensitized to these distinctions, the Importance of Not Being Earnest rule is really quite simple. Seriousness is acceptable, solemnity is prohibited. Sincerity is

allowed, earnestness is strictly forbidden. Pomposity and selfimportance are outlawed. Serious matters can be spoken of seriously, but one must never take oneself too seriously. The ability to laugh at ourselves, although it may be rooted in a form of arrogance, is one of the more endearing characteristics of the English.

3.2 The ‘Oh, Come Off It!’ Rule

The English ban on earnestness, and specifically on taking oneself too seriously, means that our own politicians and other public

figures have a particularly tough time. The sharp-eyed English public is even less tolerant of any breaches of these rules on home ground, and even the smallest lapse – the tiniest sign that a speaker

may be overdoing the intensity and crossing the fine line from sincerity to earnestness – will be spotted and picked up on

immediately, with scornful cries of ‘Oh, come off it!’ And we are just as hard on each other, in ordinary everyday conversation, as we are on those in the public eye.

Among the young and others susceptible to linguistic fads and fashions, the current response might be the ironic ‘Yeah, right’ rather than ‘Oh, come off it!’ – but the principle is the same. Similarly, those who break the Importance of Not Being Earnest rule are described in the latest slang as being ‘up themselves’, rather than the more traditional ‘full of themselves’

3.3 Irony rules

Almost all of the English people subscribed to this belief, and many foreigners, rather surprisingly, humbly concurred. Humour is universal; irony is a universally important ingredient of humour: no single culture can possibly claim a monopoly on it. Irony is the dominant ingredient in English humour, not just a piquant flavouring. The English, according to an acute observer of the minutiae of Englishness, are ‘conceived in irony.

We float in it from the womb. It’s the amniotic fluid . . . Joking but not joking. Caring but not caring. Serious but not serious.’ For those attempting to acclimatize to this atmosphere, the most important ‘rule’ to remember is that irony is endemic: like humour in general, irony is a constant, a given, a normal element of ordinary, everyday conversation. The English may not always be joking, but they are always in a state of readiness for humour. We do not always say the opposite of what we mean, but we are always alert to the possibility of irony.

3.4 The Understatement Rule

The reasons for our prolific understating are not hard to discover:

our strict prohibitions on earnestness, gushing, emoting and boasting require almost constant use of understatement. Rather than risk exhibiting any hint of forbidden solemnity, unseemly emotion or excessive zeal, we go to the opposite extreme and feign dry, deadpan indifference.

We are exercising restraint, but in such an exaggerated manner that

we are also (quietly) laughing at ourselves for doing so. We are parodying ourselves. Every understatement is a little private joke about Englishness.

3.5 The Self-deprecation Rule

It usually involves not genuine modesty but saying the opposite of what we really mean – or at least the opposite of what we intend people to understand.

The modesty that we actually display is generally false – or, to put it more charitably, ironic.

And therein lies the humour. Again, we are not talking about obvious, thigh-slapping funniness: the humour of English selfdeprecation, like that of the English understatement, is understated, often to the point of being almost imperceptible – and bordering on incomprehensible to those unfamiliar with English modesty rules.

3.6 Humour and comedy

It seems clear to me that English comedy is influenced and informed by the nature of everyday English humour as I have described it here, and by some of the other ‘rules of Englishness’ identified in other chapters, such as the embarrassment rule.English comedy, as one might expect, obeys the rules of English humour, and also plays an important social role in transmitting and reinforcing them. Almost all of the best English comedy seems to involve laughing at ourselves.

The English comedy is superior to that of other nations, the fact that we have no concept of a separate ‘time and place’ for humour, that humour suffuses the English consciousness, does mean that English comic writers, artists and performers have to work quite hard to make us laugh. They have toproduce something above and beyond the humour that permeates every aspect of our ordinary social interactions. Just because the English have ‘a good sense of humour’ does not mean that we are easily amused – quite the opposite: our keen, finely tuned sense of

humour, and our irony-saturated culture probably make us harder to amuse than most other nations. Whether or not this results in better comedy is another matter, but my impression is that it certainly seems to result in an awful lot of comedy – good, bad or indifferent; if the English are not amused, it is clearly not for want of effort on the part of our prolific humorists.

The `guiding principles’ of English humour are classless. The taboo on earnestness, and the rules of irony, understatement and self-deprecation transcend all class barriers. No social rule is ever universally obeyed, but among the English these humour rules are universally (albeit subconsciously) understood and accepted. Whatever the class context, breaches are noticed, frowned upon and ridiculed.

4 The Seven Deadly Sins

There are seven words that the English uppers and upper-middles regard as infallible shibboleths. Utter any one of these ‘seven deadly sins’ in the presence of these higher classes, and their onboard class-radar devices will start bleeping and flashing: you will immediately be demoted to middle-middle class, at best, probably

lower – and in some cases automatically classified as working class.

Pardon

To the uppers and upper-middles, using such an unmistakably lower-class term is worse than swearing.

Toilet

‘Toilet’ is another word that makes the higher classes flinch – or

exchange knowing looks, if it is uttered by a would-be social climber. The correct upper-middle/upper term is ‘loo’ or ‘lavatory’ (pronounced lavuhtry, with the accent on the first syllable). ‘Bog’ is occasionally acceptable, but only if it is said in an obviously ironic-jocular manner, as though in quotes. ‘gents’, ‘ladies’, ‘bathroom’, ‘powder room’, ‘facilities’ and ‘convenience’; or jokey euphemisms such as ‘latrines’, ‘heads’ and ‘privy’ (females tend to use the former, males the latter).

Serviette

A ‘serviette’ is what the inhabitants of Pardonia call a napkin. This

is another example of a ‘genteelism’, in this case a misguided attempt to enhance one’s status by using a fancy French word rather than a plain old English one. It has been suggested that ‘serviette’ was taken up by squeamish lower-middles who found ‘napkin’ a bit too close to ‘nappy’, and wanted something that sounded a bit more refined. Whatever its origins, ‘serviette’ is now regarded as irredeemably lower class. Upper-middle and upperclass mothers get very upset when their children learn to say ‘serviette’ from well-meaning lower-class nannies, and have to be

painstakingly retrained to say ‘napkin’.

Dinner

There is nothing wrong with the word ‘dinner’ in itself: it is only a

working-class hallmark if you use it to refer to the midday meal, which should be called ‘lunch’. Calling your evening meal ‘tea’ is also a working-class indicator: the higher echelons call this meal ‘dinner’ or ‘supper’. (Technically, a dinner is a somewhat grander meal than a supper: if you are invited to ‘supper’, this is likely to be an informal family meal, eaten in the kitchen – sometimes this is made explicit, as in‘family supper’ or ‘kitchen supper’. The uppers and upper-middles use the term ‘supper’ more than the middle- and lower-middles). To be safe, you will have to ask what time you are expected. The answer will help you to place your hosts on the social scale.

Settee

Or you could ask your hosts what they call their furniture. If an

upholstered seat for two or more people is called a settee or a couch, they are no higher than middle-middle. If it is a sofa, they are upper-middle or above. Some younger upper-middles, influenced by American films and television programmes, might say ‘couch’ – although they are unlikely to say ‘settee’, except as a joke or to annoy their class-anxious parents.

Lounge

And what do they call the room in which the settee/sofa is to be found? Settees are found in ‘lounges’ or ‘living rooms’, sofas in ‘sitting rooms’ or ‘drawing rooms’. ‘Drawing room’ (short for‘withdrawing room’) used to be the only ‘correct’ term, but many upper-middles and uppers feel it is bit silly and pretentious to call, say, a small room in an ordinary terraced house the ‘drawing room’, so ‘sitting room’ has become acceptable.

Sweet

Like ‘dinner’, this word is not in itself a class indicator, but it

becomes one when misapplied. The upper-middle and upper classes insist that the sweet course at the end of a meal is called the ‘pudding’ – never the ‘sweet’, or ‘afters’, or ‘dessert’, all of which are dйclassй, unacceptable words. ‘Sweet’ can be used freely as an adjective, but as a noun it is piece of confectionary – what the Americans call ‘candy’ – and nothing else.

‘Smart’ and ‘Common’ Rules

The opposite of ‘smart’ is what everyone from the middle-middles

upwards calls ‘common’ – a snobbish euphemism for ‘working class’. But beware: using this term too often is a sure sign of middle-middle class-anxiety. Calling things and people ‘common’ all the time is protesting too much, trying too hard to distanceyourself from the lower classes. Only the insecure wear their snobbery on their sleeve in this way. ‘Naff’ is a better option, as it is a more ambiguous term, which can mean the same as ‘common’,but can also just mean ‘tacky’ or ‘in bad taste’. It has become a generic, all-purpose expression of disapproval/dislike: teenagers often use ‘naff’ more or less interchangeably with ‘uncool’ and

‘mainstream’, their favourite dire insults.

5 EMERGING TALK-RULES: THE MOBILE PHONE

For example: I have found that most English people, if asked, agree that talking loudly about banal business or domestic matters on one’s mobile while on a train is rude and inconsiderate. Yet a significant minority of people still do this, and while their fellow passengers may sigh and roll their eyes, they very rarely challenge the offenders directly – as this would involve breaking other,wellestablished English rules and inhibitions about talking to strangers, making a scene or drawing attention to oneself. The offenders, despite much public discussion of this problem, seem oblivious to the effects of their behaviour, in the same way that people tend to pick their noses and scratch their armpits in their cars, apparently forgetting that they are not invisible.

There are, for example, as yet no agreed rules of etiquette on the

use of mobile phones during business meetings. Do you switch your phone off, discreetly, before entering the meeting? Or do you take your phone out and make a big ostentatious show of switching it off, as a flattering gesture conveying the message ‘See how important you are: I am switching off my phone for you’? Then do you place your switched-off phone on the table as a reminder of your courtesy and your client’s or colleague’s status? If you keep itswitched on, do you do so overtly or leave it in your briefcase? Do you take calls during the meeting? My preliminary observations indicate that lower-ranking English executives tend to be less courteous, attempting to trumpet their own importance by keeping phones on and taking calls during meetings, while high-ranking

people with nothing to prove tend to be more considerate.

Many women now use their mobiles as ‘barrier signals’ when on their own in coffee bars and other public places, as an alternative to the traditional use of a newspaper or magazine to signal unavailability and mark personal ‘territory’. Even when not in use, the mobile placed on the table acts as an effective symbolic bodyguard, a protector against unwanted social contact: women will touch the phone or pick it up when a potential ‘intruder’ approaches. I mean, there are real people in there you could call or text if you wanted, you know? It’s sort of reassuring.

The idea of one’s social support network of friends and family

being somehow ‘inside’ the mobile phone means that even just touching or holding the phone gives a sense of being protected – and sends a signal to others that one is not alone and vulnerable.The space-age technology of mobile phones has allowed us to return to the more natural and humane communication patterns of preindustrial society. These factors are particularly problematic for the English, as we tend to be more reserved and socially inhibited than other cultures; we do not talk to strangers, or make friends quickly and easily.

Mobile phones – particularly the ability to send short, frequent,

cheap text messages – restore our sense of connection and community, and provide an antidote to the pressures and alienation of modern urban life. They are a kind of ‘social lifeline’ in a fragmented and isolating world.

Conclusion

In the process of investigation English social etiquette and small talk I have made a conclusion that there exist some special features of English communication, including the content and manner of behavior that makes it different from other nations.

There are some true stereotypes about Englishmen that make them different from the rest of the world but we shouldn’t judge only by these peculiar things, because Great Britain is a multi-cultural society nowadays and people of different nations have their own manners and rules of behavior and conversation. Together they make a united nation that we tend to call English.

In this paper the following aspects were presented: English weather speak, introduction rules, humour rules, forbidden topics and vocabulary, mobile phone talk.

I’ve collected information on this problem, analyzed it, and wrote my own dialogues to show the most obvious peculiarities. In each dialogue I’ve tried to emphasize the most widespread rules of behavior.

The following conclusions were drawn:

• There are some true stereotypes about Englishmen ( they are reserved, reluctant to break the ice, but always ready to discuss weather and joke);
• There exist a peculiar vocabulary: widely used and even banned words and topics for an English conversation;
• There exist a special pronunciation and intonation rules according to the situation and social class;
• English humour is a distinctive feature of a nation and they have their own rules of humour;
• The English language of different social layers is also different in terms of vocabulary, grammar and pronunciation;

This work may be useful for all learners of English, both teachers and students.

Bibliography

1. Bennett, Alan: The Old Country, London, Faber & Faber, 1978
2. Bryson, Bill: Notes from a Small Island, London, Doubleday, 1995
3. Collett, P and Furnham, A (eds): Social Psychology at Work, London, Routledge, 1995
4. Collyer, Peter: Rain Later, Good, Bradford on Avon, Thomas Reed, 2002
5. Daudy, Philippe: Les Anglais: Portrait of a People, London, Headline, 1992
6. Dunbar, Robin: Grooming, Gossip and the Evolution of Language, London, Faber & Faber, 1996
7. Fox, Kate: Passport to the Pub: The Tourist’s Guide to Pub Etiquette, London, DoNot Press, 1996
8. Fox, Kate: The Racing Tribe: Watching the Horsewatchers, London, Metro 1999
9. Gorer, Geoffrey: Exploring English Character, London, Cresset Press, 1955
10. Jacobs, Eric and Worcester, Robert: We British, London, Weidenfeld and Nicholson, 1990
11. Mikes, George: How to be a Brit, London, Penguin, 1984
12. Morgan, John: Debrett’s Guide to Etiquette & Modern Manners, London, Headline, 1996
13. Paxman, Jeremy: The English: A Portrait of a People, London, Michael Joseph, 1998
14. Priestley, J. B.: English Humour, London, William Heinemann, 1976
15. Storry, Mike and Childs, Peter (eds): British Cultural Identities, London, Routledge, 1997

Appendix

Dialogue 1

In a queue.

Oxford English speaker (OE): Could you give me a handkerchief, please?

Worker (W): emm…. Can you give me a handkerchief?

Aristokrat: Hndkrchf? Of course!

OE: Thank you, ser!

W: Fank you!

A: You’re welcome.

OE: Excuse me, could you tell me the time, please?

W: emm…What time is it?

A: Hpstn

W: Alf past ten.

OE: Thank you.

In this dialogue I consider pronunciation of different social classes. As an example, a representative of working class doesn’t pronounce consonants, in comparison with an aristocrat who avoids vowels.

Dialogue 2

Somewhere in England. At the bus stop. Two Englishmen are waiting for a bus and talking. American and Russian are joining their conversation.

Englishman 1: It’s cold, isn’t it?

Englishman 2: Mmm, yes. Pretty cold today.

Englishman 1: I’ve heard it eill be snowy in Manchester!

Englishman 2: Goodness, really?

American: Cold?! Do you call it cold? Ha! You should come to Montana if you wanna see cold!

Russian: Pfff You all don’t even know what is cold because you haven’t been to Siberia!

In this dialogue I consider “ the weather speak rule” and “the introduction rule”.