The analysis of perception of lying by Mandarin Chinese speakers

Authors

  • Ahmad Adha University of Szeged
  • Xiaoyun Li University of Szeged

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1558/eap.20772

Keywords:

Lying, Objective falsity, Mandarin Chinese

Abstract

Subjective falsity, or speaker’s belief that a statement is false, has been argued by philosophers to be the necessary condition for a lie. Results from an empirical study with English (Coleman and Kay, 1981), Arabic (Cole, 1996) and Spanish speakers (Hardin, 2010) support the philosophers’ argument. Indonesians, however, perceive objective falsity as the most important element to define a lie (Adha, 2020). This led us to repeat the investigation with Mandarin Chinese speakers. We wanted to know, first, if the Chinese word huanghuà “lie” covered the three prototypical elements of lie as suggested by Coleman and Kay. And what is the most important element for
Mandarin Chinese speakers in a prototypical lie? Secondly, how do Chinese people demonstrate the categorisation and the evaluation of lying compared to the speakers of other languages. We found that Mandarin Chinese speakers also consider objective falsity as the strongest element. However, Mandarin Chinese speakers perceive intention to be a stronger element to determine whether a story contains a lie or not compared to Indonesians.

Author Biographies

  • Ahmad Adha, University of Szeged

    Ahmad Adha is currently a PhD candidate in the Doctoral School of Linguistics, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary. The author has completed both his bachelor’s and master’s degrees from Hasanuddin University in Makassar, Indonesia. He has published several papers on the topic of perception and production of lying. His other areas of interests include pragmatics and cross-cultural research.

  • Xiaoyun Li, University of Szeged

    Xiaoyun Li was born in Hunan, China, in 1990. He received his master’s degree in Foreign Linguistics and Applied Linguistics from Xi’an Polytechnic University, China, in 2017. Currently, he is a PhD candidate studying at Department of Theoretical Linguistics, Doctoral School of Linguistics, University of Szeged, Hungary. His main research interests include Corpus Linguistics, Learner Language Study, Discourse Analysis, Social Pragmatics, English for Academic Purpose (EAP), and Natural Language Processing (NLP).

References

Adha, A. (2020). Indonesians do not believe in lying: New results of replicating Coleman and Kay’s study. Pro-Fil, 21(1), 11–23. https://doi.org/10.5817/pf20-1-2067

Aune, R. K. & Linda, L. W. (1994). Cultural differences in deception: Motivations to deceive in Samoans and North Americans. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 18(2), 159–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/0147-1767(94)90026-4

Brown, P. (2002). Everyone has to lie in Tzeltal. In S. Blum-Kulka & C. Snow (Eds.), Talking to adults (pp. 241–275). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Cao, J. X. (2009). The analysis of tendency of transition from collectivism to individualism in China. Cross-Cultural Communication, 5(4), 42–50.

Carson, T. L. (2010): Lying and deception: Theory and practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Chan, S. (1999). The Chinese learner – a question of style. Education + Training, 41(6/7), 294–304.

Chen, R., Hu, C., & He L. (2013). Lying between English and Chinese: An intercultural comparative study. Intercultural Pragmatics, 10(3), 375–401. https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2013-0017

Cole, S. A. N. (1996). Semantic prototype and the pragmatics of Lie across cultures. The LACUS Forum, 23, 475–483.

Coleman, L., & Kay, P. (1981). Prototype semantics: The English word lie. Language, 57(1), 26–44. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1981.0002

Danziger, E. (2010). On trying and lying: Cultural configuration of Grice’s maxim of quality. Intercultural Pragmatics, 7(2), 199–219. https://doi.org/10.1515/iprg.2010.010

Fallis, D. (2012). Lying as a violation of Grice’s first maxim of quality. Dialectica, 66(4), 563–581. https://doi.org/10.1111/1746-8361.12007

Fu, G., Xu, F., Cameron, C., Heyman, G., & Lee, K. (2007). Cross-cultural differences in children’s choices, categorizations, and evaluations of truths and lies. Developmental Psychology, 43(2), 278–293. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.43.2.278

Eichelberger, J. (2012). A semantic and pragmatic analysis of the Spanish word lie: Implications and applications for the second language learner. Master’s thesis, Baylor University.

Hardin, K. J. (2010). The Spanish notion of lie: Revisiting Coleman and Kay. Journal of Pragmatics, 42, 3199–3213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.07.006

Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work related values. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede’s model in context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1014

Hruschka, D. (2020). Cultural diversity in the meaning of lies, deceptions, and other misrepresentations. SocArXiv, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/8puwc

Institute of Linguistics of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. (2016). Xiàndài hànyu cídi dian: Dì qi ban (Modern Chinese dictionary: The 7th edition). Beijing: Commercial Press.

Kecskés, I. (2007). Formulaic language in English lingua franca. In I. Kecskés & L. R. Horn (Eds.), Explorations in pragmatics: Linguistic, cognitive and intercultural aspects (pp. 191–219). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Lackey, J. (2013). Lies and deception: An unhappy divorce. Analysis, 73(2), 236–248. https://doi.org/10.1093/analys/ant006

Leal, S., Vrij, A., Vernham, Z., Dalton, G., Jupe, L., Harvey, A., & Nahari, G. (2018). Cross-cultural verbal deception. Legal and Criminal Psychology, 23, 192–213. https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12131

Mahon, J. E. (2008). Two definitions of lying. International Journal of Applied Philosophy, 22(2), 211–230. https://doi.org/10.5840/ijap200822216

Mahon, J. E. (2015). The definition of lying and deception. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https:/plato.stanford.edu/entries/lying-definition/

Mao, W., & Chi, I. (2011). Filial piety of children as perceived by aging parents in China. International Journal of Social Welfare, 20, S99–S108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2397.2011.00826.x

Németh, E. T. & Adha, A. (2021). Valóban könnyebb utolérni a hazug embert, mint a sánta kutatyát? A hazugság fogalmának értelmezése Magyar nyelvhasználók körében: egy kérdoíves vizsgálat eredményei (Is it really easier to catch a liar than a limping dog? The interpretation of the concept of lying among Hungarian speakers: The results of a questionnaire survey). Argumentum, 17, 488–510. https://doi.org/10.34103/ARGUMENTUM/2021/25

Sweetser, E. (1987). The definition of lie: An examination of the folk models underlying a semantic prototype. In D. Holland & N. Quinn (Eds.), Cultural models in language and thought (pp. 44–66). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Turri, A., & Turri, J. (2015). The truth about lying. Cognition, 138, 161–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2015.01.007

Yeung, L., Levine, T., & Nishiyama, K. (1999). Information manipulation theory and perceptions of deception in Hong Kong. Communication Reports, 12(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/08934219909367703

Downloads

Published

2023-01-16

Issue

Vol. 8 No. 1 (2023)

Section

Articles

License

© Equinox Publishing Ltd.

For information regarding our Open Access policy, click here.

How to Cite

Adha, A., & Li, X. (2023). The analysis of perception of lying by Mandarin Chinese speakers. East Asian Pragmatics, 8(1), 109–131. https://doi.org/10.1558/eap.20772