APOLOGY STRATEGIES EMPLOYED BY ENGLISH NATIVE SPEAKERS AND NON-NATIVE SPEAKERS IN ORAL DAILY INTERACTIONS IN BENGKULU

The purpose of this research was to find out the strategies employed by English
native speakers and English non-native speakers and to find out the similarities and
differences of both groups in expressing apology. The participants of this research
were 38 English students at the seventh semester at Universitas Bengkulu and 10
English native speakers who are American. This research used elicitation cards as the
instrument. To collect the data, the researcher recorded the participants’ performance
based on the elicitation cards. The recordings were transcribed and analyzed based on
the guidelines proposed by Salgado (2011). The findings were; first, the most
common strategy employed by native and non-native speakers of English based on
three topics given (losing pen, forgetting someone notebook and damage camera) and
three simulations status (similar status, higher to lower status, and lower to higher
status) was illocutionary force indicating device (IFID). The second strategy was
offer or repair and the third was explanation or account. The least common strategy
employed by both groups was taking responsibility and promise or forbearance. Some
similarities and differences also found in this study. The similarities were found in the
used of IFID as the most common apology strategy and promise or forbearance as the
least common of apology strategy employed. The differences were English native
speakers tended to use combination strategies in a higher frequency than basic
strategies, it contrast with English non native speakers did, the English non-native
speakers sometimes failed to take full responsibility while English native speakers
did not and the English non-native speakers used “really” as the most common
intensifier IFID while English native speakers used “so” more often than the non-
native speakers did. In sum, native speakers of English employed similar apology
strategies in some aspect, but different strategies in some others.