The Influence of the Evil Eye Belief on Complimenting ...

The Influence of the Evil Eye Belief on Complimenting Behaviour among the

Saudi Hijazi Community

A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

Mansour Alobaisi

Bachelor of Languages and Translation (King Saud University, Riyadh)

Master of Applied Linguistics (La Trobe University, Melbourne)

School of Global, Urban and Social Studies

College of Design and Social Context

RMIT University

November 2021

ii

Declaration

I certify that except where due acknowledgement has been made, this research is that of the

author alone; the content of this research submission is the result of work which has been

carried out since the official commencement date of the approved research program; any

editorial work, paid or unpaid, carried out by a third party is acknowledged; and, ethics

procedures and guidelines have been followed.

In addition, I certify that this submission contains no material previously submitted for award

of any qualification at any other university or institution, unless approved for a joint-award

with another institution, and acknowledge that no part of this work will, in the future, be used

in a submission in my name, for any other qualification in any university or other tertiary

institution without the prior approval of the University, and where applicable, any partner

institution responsible for the joint-award of this degree.

I acknowledge that copyright of any published works contained within this thesis resides with

the copyright holder(s) of those works.

I give permission for the digital version of my research submission to be made available on the

web, via the University’s digital research repository, unless permission has been granted by the

University to restrict access for a period of time.

Mansour Alobaisi

15 November 2021

iii

Dedication

This work is entirely dedicated to my parents who have been very supportive. This dedication

is also extended to my wife, children, siblings, and relatives who stood by me as a foundation

of motivation, support, and help.

iv

Acknowledgements

I praise and thank Allah for his many blessings that have allowed me to undertake and

complete my PhD journey.

I owe a debt of gratitude to my supervisor, Kerry Mullan, for her indispensable advice,

time, effort and patience. I also extend my gratitude to my co-supervisor, Chantal Crozet. Their

guidance, constructive comments and wealth of experience have been invaluable to me.

Throughout my studies, my parents have kept me constantly in their prayers and given

me unconditional love and support. My beloved parents never ceased to pray for me, encourage

and assist me in all my endeavours. They spared nothing to ensure that my needs were met and

that I achieved my goals. No words can express my depth of gratitude to them.

I would like to thank my wife, Turaifa, for her love, patience and encouragement, and

being there for our children when my studies took me away from the family. I would also like

to extend my thanks to my children Yousef, Atheer, Abdulrahman, Abdulbari, Fatima, Jinan

and Abdulmalik who have been endlessly patient and tolerant. I look forward to making up for

lost time with them.

All the staff in the Faculty of School of Global, Urban and Social Studies at RMIT have

always been helpful and understanding and assisted me to overcome the many challenges and

difficulties that I encountered as a foreign student. My sincere thanks go to them and to all my

friends and colleagues at RMIT and in other universities, all of whom have contributed in some

way to the completion of this PhD.

Lastly, but not least importantly, I thank all those who participated in the data collection process

involving a survey and interviews. Evidently, without their generous time and effort, this PhD

journey would never have been accomplished.

v

Table of Contents

Declaration............................................................................................................................... ii

Dedication ............................................................................................................................... iii

Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................. iv

List of Tables ........................................................................................................................... ix

Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... 1

Chapter 1: Introduction .......................................................................................................... 2

1.1. Background .......................................................................................................................................2 1.2. Islamic complimenting behaviour ....................................................................................................4 1.3 The Context of this Research .............................................................................................................5 1.4. Rationale for the study ......................................................................................................................6 1.5. Research Objectives and Research Questions ..................................................................................8 1.6. Significance of this research .............................................................................................................9 1.7. Summary .........................................................................................................................................11

Chapter 2: Literature Review ............................................................................................... 14

2.1. Introduction.....................................................................................................................................14 2.2. Theories and frameworks for complimenting and responding behaviours: ...................................14 speech act theory and politeness theory .................................................................................................14

2.2.1 Speech Act Theory...........................................................................................................14 2.2.2 Politeness theories............................................................................................................15 2.2.3 Politeness and the post-modern view...............................................................................18 2.2.4 Principles of politeness theory and the notion of face .....................................................20

2.3. Complimenting behaviour ..............................................................................................................22 2.3.1. Conflicting concepts of the term ‘compliments’ ............................................................22 2.3.2. Compliments from a western perspective .......................................................................23 2.3.3. Compliments from the Southeast Asian perspective ......................................................25 2.3.4. Compliments from an Arabic perspective ......................................................................26 2.3.5. The definition of a compliment in this study ..................................................................30 2.3.6. The influence of socio-demographic variables on compliment behaviour .....................31 2.3.7. Saudi social and cultural fabric as related to complimenting behaviour ........................32 2.3.8. Gender in compliment behaviour of western/Non-Muslim cultures ..............................33 2.3.9. Complimenting behaviour in Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries .......................35 2.3.10. Age in compliment behaviour.......................................................................................39 2.3.11. Relative power and social position in compliment behaviour ......................................42 2.3.12. Compliment Topics.......................................................................................................44

2.4. Compliment Response Strategies ...................................................................................................53 2.4.1. Thanking responses to compliments ...............................................................................57 2.4.2. Downgrading ..................................................................................................................59 2.4.3. Shifting credit .................................................................................................................60 2.4.4. Praise upgrade .................................................................................................................62 2.4.5. Offering ...........................................................................................................................63

vi

2.4.6. Invocation .......................................................................................................................65 2.4.7. Remaining silent .............................................................................................................68 2.4.8. Other responses ...............................................................................................................69

2.5. Intercultural communication and religion ......................................................................................72 2.6. Saudi Vision 2030 in the context of intercultural communication .................................................74 2.7. Belief in the evil eye and its relationship with complimenting behaviour .....................................75

2.7.1. Sight in interpersonal communication ............................................................................75 2.7.2 Sociocultural insight into the evil eye..............................................................................77 2.7.3. Evil eye in the Arabian Peninsula ...................................................................................82 2.7.4. Religion and compliment behaviour in Arabian Peninsula ............................................83 2.7.5. Saudi Speakers and the Evil Eye Phenomenon ..............................................................90 2.7.6. Evil eye protection ..........................................................................................................91 2.7.7. Warding off the evil eye .................................................................................................92

2.8. Summary .........................................................................................................................................96

Chapter 3: Methodology...................................................................................................... 100

3.1. Research Design ...........................................................................................................................101 3.2. Quantitative Phase ........................................................................................................................103

3.2.1. Research Instruments ....................................................................................................104 3.2.2. Participants....................................................................................................................106 3.2.3. Sample sizes ..................................................................................................................107

3.3. Qualitative phase ..........................................................................................................................109 3.3.1. Research instruments: semi-structured interviews .......................................................109 3.3.2. Participants....................................................................................................................111

3.4. Research process ...........................................................................................................................112 3.5. Data Analysis ................................................................................................................................114

3.5.1. Quantitative data ...........................................................................................................115 3.5.2. Qualitative data .............................................................................................................117

3.6. Measures of Reliability .................................................................................................................122 3.7. Summary .......................................................................................................................................122

Chapter 4: Results for Giving Compliments ..................................................................... 125

4.1. Introduction...................................................................................................................................125 4.2. Close relationship .........................................................................................................................126 4.3. Strangers .......................................................................................................................................130 4.4. Power distance ..............................................................................................................................134 4.5. Summary of survey results ...........................................................................................................138 4.6. DCT analysis results for complimenting behaviour, with age, gender, and social position as the

variables. ..............................................................................................................................................144 4.7. Interactions ...................................................................................................................................154 4.8. DCT Data analysis by ANOVA ...................................................................................................155 4.9. Summary .......................................................................................................................................156

Chapter 5: Results for Compliment Responses................................................................. 158

5.1. Introduction...................................................................................................................................158 5.2. Close relationship .........................................................................................................................158

5.2.1. Appearance ...................................................................................................................160 5.2.2. Possession .....................................................................................................................160 5.2.3. Skill ...............................................................................................................................161

vii

5.2.4. Personal Traits ..............................................................................................................161 5.3. Stranger .........................................................................................................................................161

5.3.1. Appearance ...................................................................................................................164 5.3.2. Possession .....................................................................................................................164 5.3.3. Skill ...............................................................................................................................164 5.3.4. Personal Traits ..............................................................................................................164

5.4. Power distance ..............................................................................................................................165 5.4.1. Appearance ...................................................................................................................167 5.4.2. Possession .....................................................................................................................168 5.4.3. Skill ...............................................................................................................................168 5.4.4. Personal Trait ................................................................................................................168

5.5. Summary .......................................................................................................................................169 5.5.1. Close relationship .........................................................................................................169 5.5.2. Stranger .........................................................................................................................171 5.5.3. Power distance ..............................................................................................................172

5.6. Dominant compliment response strategies ...................................................................................173 5.7. DCT analysis results for compliment response strategies- age, gender, and social position as the

variables. ..............................................................................................................................................175 5.8. Interactions- Statistical significance .............................................................................................187 5.9. DCT Analysis by ANOVA ...........................................................................................................189 5.10. Summary .....................................................................................................................................189

Chapter 6: Results of semi-structured interviews............................................................. 191

6.1. Introduction...................................................................................................................................191 6.2. Results...........................................................................................................................................192

Question 1: How often do you compliment your family members, friends, and colleagues on

their appearance, skills, possessions, or personal traits? Would you consider using a religious

expression when complimenting them? If yes, which religious expression would you use? .192 Question 2: If you decided to use this religious expression, would you say it loudly (out loud)

or you would say it in your heart? Explain why. ....................................................................194 Question 3: Which compliment topic is most important to you when complimenting a family

member, friend, or colleague? ................................................................................................195 Question 4: Which compliment topic is least important to you when complimenting a family

member, friend, or colleague? ................................................................................................196 Question 5: How would you feel if someone admired your appearance, skills, possessions, or

some personal traits, and complimented you without invoking blessings? ............................197 Question 6: Do you think that the evil eye may harm people regardless of the religion or

culture of the giver of the compliment when religious expressions are not invoked? ............199 Question 7: Do you think that neglecting the invocation of religious expressions while

admiring something and complimenting you on it would affect people’s conversational

interaction with you? ..............................................................................................................201 Question 8: Would you avoid talking about your success or the success of a family member

because of the evil eye? ..........................................................................................................203 Question 9: Do you think that the power of the evil eye is different from one person to

another? If yes, would you avoid talking about your success or the success of a family

member with that particular person? ......................................................................................205 Question 10: Some people put something on their neck, wrists, in their pockets, or on their

cars to ward off the evil eye. Would you do the same to ward off this evil? If not, can you

explain why? ...........................................................................................................................206 6.3. Summary .......................................................................................................................................208

Chapter 7: Discussion .......................................................................................................... 212

viii

7.1. Addressing the first research questions ........................................................................................212 7.2. Addressing the second and third research questions ....................................................................215 7.3. Common trends .............................................................................................................................219

7.3.1. Dominant complimenting strategies .............................................................................220 7.3.2. Dominant compliment response strategies ...................................................................220 7.3.3. Social variables and religious expressions....................................................................221 7.3.4. Giving compliments ......................................................................................................222 7.3.5. Compliment responses ..................................................................................................227

7.4. Theoretical support .......................................................................................................................231 7.5. Triangulation .................................................................................................................................233 7.6. Summary .......................................................................................................................................233

Chapter 8: Conclusions ....................................................................................................... 236

Limitations of this study ......................................................................................................................241

Future research .................................................................................................................... 242

Recommendations regarding inter-cultural communications within and outside Saudi

Arabia.................................................................................................................................... 243

References ............................................................................................................................. 246

Appendices ............................................................................................................................ 263

Appendix A-Giving compliments scenarios for DCT- English version ..............................................263 Appendix B- Compliment Scenarios-Arabic version ..........................................................................266 Appendix C- Compliment response scenarios- English version .........................................................269 Appendix D-Compliment responses Scenarios-Arabic version ..........................................................272 Appendix E - Semi-structured interviews: List of topical questions ...................................................275 Appendix F-Semi-structured interviews- all responses .......................................................................276 Appendix H - Information sheet-Arabic version .................................................................................364 Appendix I - Consent form-English version ........................................................................................368 Appendix J - Consent form-Arabic version .........................................................................................370 Appendix K - WhatsApp invitation .....................................................................................................372 Appendix L - Coding table for giving compliments - Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) .............373 Appendix M - Coding tables for Compliment Responses - Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) ....380 Appendix N - DCT frequency data analysis to identify the effect of age, gender, and social position on

dominant complimenting strategies. ....................................................................................................389 Appendix O - DCT frequency data analysis to identify the effect of age, gender, and social position on

dominant compliment responding strategies. ......................................................................................405 Appendix P-ANOVA results of DCT data showing significance assessment of main effects and

interactions in complimenting behaviour. ...........................................................................................423 Appendix Q - ANOVA results of DCT data showing significance assessment of main effects and

interactions in compliment response behaviour. .................................................................................455 Appendix S – Ethics Approval ............................................................................................................484

ix

List of Tables

Table 1. Herbert’s taxonomy of compliment responses detailing different strategies used by

interlocutors………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………....53

Table 2. Compliment response strategies identified by Herbert (1986)..…………………………………54

Table 3. Herbert’s (1986) original taxonomy strategies: Accept, Reject, and Evade……………..116

Table 4.1. Frequencies of survey responses on strategies used by Hijazi participants when

complimenting on appearance, possessions, skills, and personal traits of a close

relationship………………………………………………………………………………….126

Table 4.2. Frequencies of strategies used by Hijazi people when complimenting on the

appearance, possessions, skills or personal traits of a stranger………………………………………………131

Table 4.3. Strategies used by Hijazi people when giving compliments on appearance,

possessions, skills and personal traits according to power distance.………………………………………135

Table 4.4. Two dominant strategies used by Saudi Hijazi community when complimenting

close relationship..………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………138


strangers…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….139


people of power distance……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………141

Table 4.7. Most frequent complimenting strategies for compliment topics and

situations……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..142

Table 4.8. Dominant strategies used by two age groups when complimenting a close

relationship on four compliment topics…………………………………………………………………………………….144

Table 4.9. Dominant strategies used by two age groups when complimenting strangers on four

compliment topics..…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….146

x

Table 4.10. Dominant strategies used by two age groups when complimenting people of power

status for four compliment topics……………………………………………………………………………………………….147

Table 4.11. Gender differences in dominant strategies when complimenting a close person

on four topics………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………148

Table 4.12. Gender differences in frequencies of dominant strategies when complimenting a

stranger on four topics..………………………………………………………………………………………………………………149

Table 4.13. Gender differences in frequencies of dominant strategies when complimenting

people with higher power status on four topics.………………………………………………………………………150

Table 4.14. Dominant strategies used by three groups of social positions when complimenting

a close person on four topics.……………………………………………………………………………………………………..151


a stranger on four topics.…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….152


a person of higher power status..………………………………………………………………………………………………..153

Table 4.17. Chi-square test results of socio-demographic variables x four compliment topics

when complimenting people of different social positions.……………………………………………………….154

Table 5. 1. Strategies used by Hijazi people when responding to compliments offered by close

persons on appearance, possessions, skills and personal traits..……………………………………………….159

Table 5.2. Strategies used by Hijazi people when responding to compliments from strangers on

appearance, possessions, skills and personal traits.…………………………………………………………………..162

Table 5.3. Strategies used by Hijazi people when responding to compliments by a person of

power distance on appearance, possessions, skills and personal traits.……………………………………165

xi

Table 5.4. Compliment responding - close relationship.………………………………………………………………………..169

Table 5.5. Dominant compliment response to strangers…………………………………………………………………………171

Table 5.6. Dominant compliment responses to people of power distance………………………………………172

Table 5.7. Compliment response strategies across situations.……………………………………………………………..173

Table 5.8. Dominant response strategies used by two age groups when receiving compliments

from a close relationship..…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..175


from a stranger..…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..177

Table 5.10. Dominant response strategies used by the age groups when receiving compliments

from a person of higher power status…………………………………………………………………………………………178

Table 5.11. Gender differences in dominant response strategies when receiving compliments

from close relatives..……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………179


from a stranger..…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..181

Table 5.13. Gender differences in response strategies when receiving compliments from a

person of higher power status..…………………………………………………………………………………………………..182

Table 5.14. Dominant response strategies used by three groups of social positions when

receiving compliments from a close relationship.…………………………………………………………………….183


receiving compliments from a stranger..……………………………………………………………………………………185

Table 5.16. Dominant response strategies used by three groups of social position when

complimented by a person of higher power status.……………………………………………………………………186

Table 5.17. Chi-square tests of interactions between three social variables and compliment

topics used when responding to compliments given by different demographic variables…...187

Table 6.1. Interviewees’ linguistic frames of responses to Question 1.……………………………………193

xii

Table 6.2. Interviewees’ linguistic frames of responses to Question 2…………………………………….194


Table 6.4. Interviewees’ linguistic frames of responses to Question 4.……………………………………197




Table 6.8. Linguistic frames of responses from interviewed participants for Question 8..…….204


Table 6.10. Interviewees’ linguistic frames of responses to Question 10………………………………..207

1

Abstract

This study investigated the compliment behaviour demonstrated by Saudi Hijazi Arabic

interlocutors. Various cultural practices and linguistic norms were revealed by documenting

the influence of the evil eye belief on behaviours related to the giving and receiving of

compliments. Also, the variations in complimenting practices in the context of social variables,

namely age, gender, social distance, and relative power, were mapped to provide insight into

the validity of existing literature. The study adopted a mixed-methods approach, with the

quantitative component comprising of a sociodemographic questionnaire and an open-ended

Discourse Completion Task (DCT), while the qualitative component consisted of semi-

structured interviews. Findings revealed significant variations in compliment behaviour across

the continuum of the investigated social variables. Moreover, the study’s findings confirmed

that the belief in the evil eye has a strong influence on the participants’ preference for specific

complimenting strategies.

2

Chapter 1: Introduction

This introductory chapter outlines the background of the evil eye phenomenon that is

the focus of this study, leading to the research questions and objectives. These objectives and

research questions provide the reasons and justifications for the context and purpose of this

research and are relevant to the issues discussed in the later chapters.

1.1. Background

This study attempts to advance the literature about the influence of cultural beliefs and

social variables on the speech acts of compliments and compliment responses given by Saudi

Hijazi Arabic speakers. This study is expected to shed light on the intersection of cultural

practices and linguistic norms by investigating the influence of the evil eye belief on

complimenting behaviour. More precisely, the religious expressions used when compliments

are given for different reasons or responded to by Saudi Hijazi Arabian citizens are examined.

Religious expressions are added to compliments to ward off any harmful ‘evil eye’ effects

intended by the person offering the compliment.

Looking at religious expressions from the lens of Saudi Hijazi speakers, these

expressions play an important role in being positive as they enhance the cohesion of their

community when the belief in the evil eye is involved in compliments and praise can attract

the evil eye.

Why should this be investigated? Complimenting a person on an achievement, for

example, indicates the speaker’s positive attitude towards that person and can help to build and

strengthen a personal relationship for mutual benefit. If belief in the evil eye and its harmful

effect is part of a society’s culture, attaching religious expressions to compliments indicates

the sincerity of the compliment giver and their wish that nothing harmful will befall the person

being complimented. Overall, this is a culture of decent behaviour that requires adherence to

socio-cultural norms.

3

Positive evaluation and complimenting are mutually related. When giving

compliments, the receiver perceives a positive evaluation by the interlocutor (the reason for

complimenting), and the fact that the receiver has positively evaluated, leads the interlocutor

to have a positive evaluation of the receiver. Belief in the evil eye requires attaching a religious

expression to the compliment to avoid any harmful effect on the receiver. So, in Islamic

traditions, only when a religious expression is attached to the compliment, a positive evaluation

occurs.

Culture is a powerful factor in shaping the social norms of a community in terms of

defining the dominant values and views of its constituents and helps people see the world better

when there is interaction with other cultures. Furthermore, social variables, such as age, gender,

relationship, and social status, strongly influence an individual’s interactions with others.

Speech acts reflect these cultural norms and individual behaviours in different social

settings. Therefore, understanding the impact of cultural traditions and social norms on the

usage of speech acts will contribute to the cultivation of positive mutual relationships. In the

conservative Saudi Arabic society,

Islamic customs and practices mediate interlocutors’ preferences for certain linguistic

strategies. The Holy Quran1 and Hadith2 lend authority to the idea of the evil eye and prescribe

specific practices during interactions according to age, gender, and social differences. Apart

from Islamic customs, the principles of politeness also play an essential role in compliment

behaviour.

Belief in the evil eye is a strong factor informing the Islamic rules on complimenting

behaviour, which every Saudi Muslim is expected to obey. The Saudi Hijazi community is a

1 Quran is the Islamic sacred book, believed to be the word of God and revealed to Muhammad, peace be upon

him, by the archangel Gabriel and written down in Arabic for all mankind. The Quran consists of 114 units of

varying lengths, known as suras; the first sura is recited as part of the ritual prayer. These suras touch upon all

aspects of human existence, including matters of doctrine, social organisation, and legislation. 2 Hadith means the narration of all the sayings, doings or approvals (Taqrir) of prophet Muhammad, peace be

upon him.

4

traditional Islamic population in the western region of Saudi Arabia where the major cities of

Mecca, Medina, Jeddah, and Yanbu are located, and is the most densely populated region in

this country. On the other hand, the younger generation is more technologically aware, more

progressive, often western-educated (Alqahtani, 2020), and exposed to cultures worldwide due

to their expanded intercultural communication. This exposure of young people to cultural

diversities is likely to affect their complimenting behaviour and their belief in the evil eye.

However, there have been very few studies on the complimenting behaviour of this

community and the influence of the belief in the evil eye on the complimenting behaviour of

both the traditional older generation and the younger generation. As this research focuses on

Islamic complimenting behaviour, various issues related to this topic are reviewed in the next

section.

1.2. Islamic complimenting behaviour

Complimenting behaviour is one aspect of communication. In Arabic, Saudi Arabia,

and Islamic cultures, the protocols of complimenting behaviour have been prescribed by

Islamic texts like the Quran and Hadith. Islamic religion strongly believes Allah has sole power

over the entire universe, including elements of good and bad. One bad aspect is the evil eye.

The Islamic religious texts want followers to believe in the evil eye and seek Allah’s protection

from its harmful effects. Complimenting a person for some reason can imply jealousy or can

create jealousy in people who hear the compliment.

According to Islamic beliefs, all those who overhear the compliment might not be

people of integrity, as there is a possibility of the evil eye being directed at the receiver of the

compliment, thereby causing some harm. This means that when giving a compliment, the

protection of Allah must be invoked; hence, the Islamic texts prescribe that the giver of the

compliment must attach a blessing or religious expression to the compliment.

5

The role of fatalism and communication in Arab communities, Divine Will and its

Extensions, and why maašaallah is used in Colloquial Jordanian Arabic, have been explained

by (Migdadi, Badarneh, & Momani, 2010). The authors evaluated the Arabic religious formula,

maašaallah, based on the speech act theory, Gricean maxims, and the politeness model of

Brown and Levinson. The same theories have been applied in this research also. The theories

have been described in a later section of this thesis. As has been shown both by these authors

and in this thesis, the expression has semantically extended meanings of divine will consist of

an invocation, a compliment, an expression of gladness, an expression of modesty, a marker of

sarcasm, and as a conversational backchannel. The expression is also used as a mitigating tool

to soften face-threatening acts of refusal, complaint, and criticism when complimenting a

person. It is also used to remind the receiver of the compliment that s/he is fully protected under

the Divine Will (Soorat al-Qalam chapter 68 verse 51).

If this is not done for any reason, the receiver of the compliment can remind the

interlocutor to say the prayers or say it themselves. Every follower of the Islamic religion is

bound to follow this protocol without exception; otherwise, according to Muslim belief, Allah

will punish the defaulter for the great sin they have committed. However, the belief in the evil

eye has its origins earlier to Quran, as will be shown in section 2,7 dealing with the evil eye.

The evil eye seems to be more common among dishonest people.

1.3 The Context of this Research

Among Saudi Hijazi Arabic speakers, speech act interactions involving complimenting

behaviour are particularly pronounced and have certain specific characteristics. Specifically,

the term Hijaz/Hejaz refers to a region in the Western Arabian Peninsula and is derived from

the Arabic root Ḥ-J-Z meaning “to separate”. Indeed, the Hijaz area separates the land of

Tihamah in the west from the Najd region in the east. Originally, individuals from Hijaz

differentiated themselves with the surnames Hijazi, Hijazy, and Hejazi. Hijaz is notable for the

6

locations of the holiest Islamic cities of Mecca and Medina, which provides the region with

much historical and political prestige. In Saudi Arabia, Hijaz is the most populous region,

accounting for about 35% of the nation’s total population. Despite being increasingly

cosmopolitan, the Hijazi people have retained the strongest traditional identity compared to

other regional groupings in Saudi Arabia.

This research was focused explicitly on Saudi Hijazi Arabic speakers for the

aforementioned reasons. Hence, given the unique historical narratives related to this

community’s identity, there is much sense in researching complimenting behaviour and how it

is affected by the belief in the evil eye. Sampling for the study was specific to this community;

hence, it allowed the generalisation of cultural traditions and social norms to this specific Hijazi

Arabic community.

What makes this study significant is that it will investigate the role of the evil eye when

compliments and compliment responses are involved. Although the speech act of compliments

has been examined in some Arab and Western countries (Jamil, 2016; Ebadi & Salman, 2015;

Alobaisi, 2011; Al Ageel, 2010; Ghanem, 2009; Cedar, 2006; Golato, 2002; Golato, 2003;

Holmes, 1986; Wolfson, 1983), none of these previous studies have investigated its relationship

to the evil eye phenomenon among Saudi Hijazi Arabic speakers across the continuum of social

variables. This research gap was identified and addressed in this study. However, as could be

seen later, many researchers recognised the significance of the evil eye in different cultures and

its role in complimenting in the Islamic traditions (Section 2.7)

1.4. Rationale for the study

This study was conducted to investigate the compliments and compliment responses

practised by Saudi Hijazi Arabic interactants. Since the basis of all civilised interactions is

polite and respectful behaviour between people, the speech act of giving compliments is

important. According to Brown and Levinson (2020), politeness is a fundamental aspect of

7

social order and cooperation among people. However, Locher and Watts (2005) suggested that

Brown and Levinson treat politeness mainly as a face-saving tool and, therefore, is not

politeness itself. Thus, according to the theory, any polite or impolite behaviour can be

considered appropriate behaviour.

Politeness helps maintain friendliness and respect among interlocutors and provides

them with a tool enabling them to be positive during the interaction. According to Adachi

(2011), although people perform many speech acts daily, the speech act of giving and

responding to compliments is the principal tool that helps to establish concrete and positive

interpersonal relationships with others. Thus, speech acts of compliments can be regarded as

polite behaviour, which contradicts Locher & Watts’ (2005) opinion of Brown & Levinson’s

politeness theory.

It is anticipated that this study will contribute to the field of politeness research by

examining speech in a Saudi Arabic community and illustrating the benefit of the speech act

of compliments to socio-pragmatics. Examining compliment behaviour as a speech act can

provide insight into specific norms observed within a speech community. According to Manes

(1983), the speech act of compliments is important because it reflects and expresses certain

cultural norms. Although some works have been done on politeness and complimenting in Gulf

Cooperation Council (GCC) countries (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, United Arab Emirates,

and Bahrain), according to Qari (2017), more studies are required. Such studies will be useful

to teach Arabic to non-native speakers who reside in KSA, and Arabic speakers from other

countries who visit the Hijazi region. As the region receives many thousands of pilgrims and

visitors every year (before the pandemic), the number of people affected is significant. As

Saudi Arabia is implementing a rapid transformation to a knowledge-based economy through

its Vision 2030 (SaudiArabia, Vision 2030, 2016), the potential of outside experts and

8

expatriates contributing to this growth is significant and teaching Islamic customs including

complimenting behaviour assumes importance here.

By understanding what is considered polite in a speech community and how members

of that community express their admiration for each other in their social interactions, we can

understand the social values of that culture (Yuan, 1998). There is also a need to understand

how compliments are utilised differently in different cultures to avoid a social faux pas, which

may lead to communication breakdown. This study’s interviewees indicated that

complimenting without religious expressions can bring interactions to an abrupt halt, as it

breaks down the communication between the two parties.

It is important that when people from different cultures interact, they are aware that the

social norms of the other culture may differ from theirs (Jamil, 2016). Misunderstandings may

occur between people from different cultural backgrounds if they are unaware of the

appropriate use of compliments and how people respond to them in certain social settings.

Cultural stereotyping may occur as a result of a lack of knowledge about how compliments are

given and received in the other culture (Qanbar, 2012). Therefore, it is desirable to have an

adequate understanding of what governs compliments and their responses uttered by people

from different cultural backgrounds, in this case, Saudi societies.

1.5. Research Objectives and Research Questions

One of the primary objectives of this study was to determine the role of the evil eye

belief in shaping compliment behaviour. Also, since the compliment event is culture-specific,

in this research, an attempt was made to capture the practices specific to the Hijazi community

when performing this speech act, particularly since some research studies have found that

socioeconomic variables can influence people’s belief in evil eye. In the studies of Al Amro,

(2013) and Alqahtani F, (2016), socio-economic variables like age, gender, and social status

were compared for different aspects of complimenting and responding behaviour.

9

The research applied a mixed-methods approach to address the research questions to

obtain a comprehensive understanding of compliment behaviour practices in the Hijazi Saudi

Arabic community. A discourse completion task (DCT) was formulated to generate a corpus

of compliments related to four main areas: appearance, skills, personal traits, and possessions.

The DCT also incorporated fluctuations in social variables such as age, gender, social distance,

and relative power. The qualitative phase of the research comprised semi-structured interviews

that elicited the participants’ perceptions of the evil eye and its role in complimenting. Data

collected via these instruments were used to answer the two main research questions:

How is the belief in the evil eye associated with the complimenting behaviour of the

Saudi Hijazi Arabic community?

How are sociodemographic variables associated with the complimenting behaviour of

those who believe in the evil eye?

This question informs the following sub-questions:

(i) How does the speech act of compliments vary across the continuum of social

variables in a sample of Saudi Hijazi Arabic speakers?

(ii) What sociodemographic trends are associated with the convergence of the belief in

the evil eye with the complimenting behaviour practised by Saudi Hijazi Arabic

speakers?

(iii) How and why is the belief in the evil eye related to the complimenting behaviour

of Saudi Hijazi Arabic speakers?

1.6. Significance of this research

Although there have been numerous studies on complimenting behaviour in Saudi

Arabia and other Arabic countries, and many studies on the Hijazi community’s politeness

behaviour, this is the first attempt to link the evil eye belief with complimenting behaviour in

10

this community. Once we can theoretically explain the relationship between complimenting

behaviour and the evil eye and the effect of sociodemographic variables concerning the Hijazi

community, the theory can be applied to other cultures. Similarities and differences between

cultures concerning this relationship will help establish a sound theoretical basis for cross-

cultural communications. This is seen as an important facilitator for achieving the economic

goals of Saudi Vision 2030 (see section 2.6. Saudi Vision 2030 in the context of intercultural

communication). Subsequently, similar socio-cultural investigations could be conducted into

other speech acts such as apologies, condolences, invitations, and requests.

It is anticipated that this study will reveal some clear trends in complimenting strategies

and topics as a function of the distance between the interlocutor and the receiver (close

relationship, stranger, power distance) of the compliment. Similarly, the compliment responses

could indicate prevailing trends. The effect(s) of sociodemographic variables such as gender,

age, and social status on the relationship between complimenting behaviour and belief in the

evil eye will be available from the interview responses.

The findings from this research could lead to recommendations that include cross-

cultural differences in complimenting behaviour and responses and their relationship with evil

eye belief in the English language curriculum (EFL) of schools and universities, particularly

for Saudi Arabia. Students could then benefit by having a better knowledge of cultural

differences in this regard. Saudi youth and job seekers with this background may adjust better

in cross-cultural situations when they go abroad for higher studies and when multinational

companies employ them. Again, this will help to achieve the goals of Vision 2030.

11

1.7. Summary

This research aims to provide insights into the influence of the evil eye on compliment

behaviour and how this underscores the importance of religious belief in managing specific

human interactions in Saudi Hijazi Arabic culture. This issue was used for framing four

research questions, which were addressed with data obtained from a mixed-methods approach.

This research seeks to determine the extent to which the cultural beliefs of the Saudi Hijazi

community influence the speech acts of complimenting behaviour and the social variables that

can moderate this influence. The normal practice of this community is to attach religious

expressions to a compliment due to the firm belief and Islamic prescriptions for the evil eye

belief.

In social interactions, complimenting and attaching religious expressions reflect the

good intentions of the interlocutor and the desire to build and enhance positive social

interactions with others. When religious expressions are used to ward off the evil eye, this is

perceived as a sincere effort to ensure that no harm befalls the receiver of the compliment.

Cultural and social variables such as gender, age, and religious beliefs interact to reflect

individual behaviour and mutual relationships in society. The Holy Quran and Hadith of Islam

dictate social norms of behaviour, including complimenting and prescribing the attachment of

religious expressions in social interactions to ward off the evil eye, as has been said with the

reference on p 5. Thus, culture, language, and communication are interrelated. Social

responsibility and fear of God are two elements prescribing ethical behaviour, even in

complimenting. However, modern education and exposure to the outside world through social

media and the Internet have influenced the younger Muslim generations to embrace a global

culture where there is no gender segregation, and individual freedom is respected and valued.

This generation gap has been widening over time and influences complimenting strategies,

belief in the evil eye, and safeguarding measures prescribed by the religion.

12

The traditional nature of the Saudi Hijazi community due to its location around the two

holy sites of Islam makes it an ideal population for this study. It will be possible to accurately

determine the extent of the Islamic cultural influence on complimenting strategies for different

topics and the importance of attaching religious expressions to these compliments. This work

is based on the theories about speech acts and politeness. Politeness in speech acts includes

complimenting. To the best of the researcher’s knowledge, this study is the first attempt to

study the relationship between complimenting behaviour and belief in the evil eye. Thus, the

study significantly contributes additional knowledge about complimenting behaviour. The

findings could inform the strategies used to manage human interactions in a community

strongly rooted in Islamic religion and culture.

This thesis is organised as follows. After this introductory chapter which presents the

background of the project and establishes the aim, research questions, and sub-questions, the

next chapter (chapter 2) presents a review of the relevant literature, as well as the theoretical

framework, complimenting and compliment response behaviours, and the role of the evil eye

belief in complimenting behaviour. Chapter 3 describes the methodology used for the data

collection and analysis applied in this research, emphasising DCT analysis. The results for

complimenting behaviour are given in chapter 4, while the responses to this behaviour are

presented in chapter 5. The results of semi-structured interviews highlighting the effect of

belief in the evil eye on complimenting behaviour are given in chapter 6. All the results and

their relationships are discussed in chapter 7. Chapter 8 concludes the thesis with a discussion

of the limitations of this study and the opportunities for future research and several

recommendations.

The next chapter discusses the relevant literature on the topic and will be reviewed in

three parts: the theoretical frameworks which can be applied to this research, the evil eye and

13

complimenting and compliment responses, and the belief associated with complimenting

behaviour.

14

Chapter 2: Literature Review

2.1. Introduction

In this chapter, literature relevant to this study is critically reviewed. Each of the main

sections has subsections dealing with specific topics, and the main sections are summarised

below. This first section discussed the available literature on theories and frameworks related

to compliments and compliment responses as speech acts. To this end, speech act theory is

examined as the basis of polite behaviour, one of which is complimenting. Then politeness

theory and the prevailing concept of the face along with its critiques are reviewed. Drawing

upon these different forms and strategies of compliment behaviour and responses are evaluated

in the next section. In the third section, the association between belief in the evil eye and

complimenting behaviour is assessed. The implications of complimenting behaviour in

intercultural communications and its relationship with the goals of Saudi Vision 2030 are

appraised in sections 4 and 5. In section 6, belief in the evil eye and its association with

complimenting behaviour are reviewed. Section 7 concludes the chapter.

2.2. Theories and frameworks for complimenting and responding behaviours:

speech act theory and politeness theory

2.2.1 Speech Act Theory

As an area of pragmatics, speech act theory (Austin, 1962) is the study of linguistic

forms and the users of the information (Cooren, 2015). Austin (1962), the

British philosopher of language and leading proponent of ordinary language philosophy, who

is perhaps best known for developing and forming speech act theory, stated that “not all

sentences are statements” (p. 1). Speech act theory is concerned with how words are used not

only to present information but also to carry out actions. It was introduced in Austin’s (1962)

book How to Do Things with Words and asserts that people use language to claim something

15

and to do things. When we speak, the words themselves do not have a concrete meaning but

are significantly affected by the circumstances in which they are spoken by the listener and

heard by the speaker.

Austin described certain utterances as performatives that later become speech acts.

According to this theory, performatives consist of locutionary, illocutionary, and

perlocutionary acts, later described by Searle. According to Searle, all speech must fall under

one or more of the three categories to determine how a speech act is interpreted (Witek, 2015).

The locutionary act refers to the practice of saying something (also known as the locution) to

convey a specific meaning (Kissine, 2012). Austin introduced this concept, defining it as the

act of making an utterance that is meaningful (Witek, 2015). An illocutionary act is one where

speech or a sentence is used to do something by expressing it. The acts carry a directive for the

audience. They may issue an instruction to the audience in the form of an order, an apology, a

promise, compliment, offers, request, complaint, invitation, etc. Lastly, a perlocutionary act

refers to the actual state of mind induced by the consequence of saying something. Such acts

may produce extra effects such as persuading one to accomplish certain tasks. Thus,

compliments can be categorised as illocutionary speech acts.

2.2.2 Politeness theories

In all communities, people use culturally-specific formulae to establish strong, smooth,

and healthy relationships. This can be seen in the case of complimenting a friend about his or

her promotion, congratulating newlyweds, or praising a child’s achievement. For a speaker to

express politeness, they will have to resort to forms that have already been established, known

as ‘fixed polite formulae. These forms are used to acknowledge social distance, maintain social

ties, and ensure that culture-specific politeness is observed in any inter-personal relationship.

Using these formulae, the speaker can politely contradict, blame, or even interrupt any

interlocutor in their setting.

16

It is assumed that an act of politeness lies within the boundaries of a well-defined

context of normative behaviour and can be understood only within a framework of a specific

culture. Notably, culture and social expectations of behaviour are the two elements that govern

the way people perceive politeness (Paltridge, 2012; Tawalbeh & Aloqaily, 2012; Yo 2011).

Althigafi (2017) found that the Saudi speakers of English were unable to produce appropriate

responses in many situations. This could be due to cultural factors. If so, it is possible that

interlocutors’ understanding of what constitutes politeness can vary substantially across

cultures. Nonetheless, compliments are universally regarded as positive politeness strategies

that cultivate goodwill and establish solidarity between interlocutors.

Taking a pragmatic perspective, Thomas (1995) identified a variety of uses of

politeness as a real word goal, as deference, as a register, as a surface-level phenomenon, and

as an illocutionary element (p. 149). Also, three different perspectives of politeness have been

identified:

A. Politeness based on principles and maxims (Leech, 1983).

B. Politeness based on the management of face (Brown & Levinson, 1987).

C. Politeness based on conversational contract (Fraser, 1990).

In recent decades, politeness has been an essential area in the field of pragmatics (Thomas,

1983; Blum-Kulka, 1987 & 1992; Watts, Idl & Ehlich, 1992; Eelen, 2001). However, due to

this paradigm, its definition has not been unequivocally established. Politeness is likely to be

influenced by change over some time and across cultures, resulting in a situation that makes it

slippery and hard to define (Watts et al., 1992). Disagreement still exists among scholars

(Lakoff, 1975; Brown and Levinson, 1978; Leech, 1980; Arndt and Janney, 1985; Hill et al.,

1986; Ide, 1989; Kasper, 1990; Sifianou, 1992) (LPRG, 2021) on how to define politeness.

17

Based on Brown & Levinson’s (1987) theory, politeness is a face-saving strategy where

the individual is rational and taking steps to save face. Rationality indicates that the person is

“endowed with…a precisely defined mode of reasoning from ends to the means that will

achieve those ends” (Brown & Levinson, 1987, p. 68). Goffman defined face as “the positive

social value a person effectively claims for himself by the line others assume he has taken

during a particular contact” (Goffman, 1955, p. 213.). Brown and Levinson defined it as the

“public self-image that every member wants to claim for himself” (Brown & Levinson, 1978,

p. 66). They categorised face as either positive or negative, which is to be understood in terms

of wants that every person knows every other individual has (Brown & Levinson, 1987) (see

section 2.1.5.).

Conversational maxim is based on Grice’s theory (1975) which posits that speakers

mean more than what they say in their conversation. He claimed that speakers are sensible and

equal individuals who are primarily interested in efficiently conveying messages. Then, Grice

proposed the cooperative principle, by which he describes how speakers make their

conversations effective in a social setting. In other words, it describes how speakers and

listeners cooperate and accept each other in a particular way. This principle states that speakers

should determine what they have to say when they have to say it and how they want to say it.

Grice divided this principle into the maxims of quantity, quality, relation, and manner.

Lakoff (1973) extended to pragmatics the notion of grammatical rule and its associated

notion of well-formedness and applied this rule to politeness. Lakoff (1973, p. 64)

conceptualised politeness as “a device used to avoid friction in personal interaction”. Hence,

to be pragmatically competent, two rules apply when conveying messages: be clear and be

polite. This led Lakoff to propose three maxims that are usually followed in interactional

18

settings: do not impose (formal and impersonal politeness), give the receiver options (informal

politeness), and make the receiver feel good (intimate relations).

As positive politeness strategies, compliments must adhere to Lakoff’s maxims. In the

giving and receiving of compliments, some phrases can make the receiver or giver of a

compliment feel good (see later sections). Conversely, the intimate relationship between

interactants may be ruined by not adhering to some of these phrases in a compliment setting.

An example of this in Muslim societies is the inclusion of religious expressions when giving

compliments, as omitting them may result in fear of the evil eye, which will be addressed later.

The politeness and the conversational-contract approach introduced by Frazer (1975)

was influenced by Grice’s cooperative principle and Goffman’s (1967) concept of face. Based

on politeness and the conversational-contract view, Frazer noted that speakers are engaged in

conversations that require a mutual understanding of several initial sets of rights and

obligations, which, early in the exchange, regulate what speakers expect from others. In a

conversation, the participants can negotiate the conversation contract by readjusting the rights

and obligations between them. These elements of rights and obligations vary according to what

the participants choose. However, according to Ansari-Naim (2015), some conversational

norms have already-established conventional and rarely negotiable language. This can be

reflected in giving and receiving compliments where interlocutors have only little room to

manoeuvre.

2.2.3 Politeness and the post-modern view

The recent works on politeness tend to support earlier approaches. These are the

traditional approaches inspired by Grices's cooperative principle, speech act theory, and the

works derived from Lakoff (1973), Brown and Levinson (1987), and Leech (1983). Based on

these approaches, politeness falls into two categories: first-order, and second-order politeness

(Watts et al., 1992) defined first-order politeness (politeness 1) as “the various ways in which

19

polite behaviour is perceived and talked about by members of sociocultural groups” (p. 3,

emphasis added), and second-order politeness (politeness 2) as “a term within a theory of social

behaviour and language usage” (p, 3, emphasis added) (Haugh, 2012, p. 117).

Eelen (2001) provided a useful summary:

Norms are not forward entities, but rather highly versatile argumentative tools, and by

their nature, operational aspects need to be examined more closely before they can be

posited as explanatory concepts and before they can be allocated any scientific role

whatsoever.” (Eelen, 2001, p. 233, cited in Terkourafi, 2005, p. 243).

The post-modern view is not aligned with the traditional theories of politeness which

imported insights from social theory into pragmatics but exported politeness into the realm of

social theory. However, Terkourafi (2005) stated that the post-modern view is an extension of

the traditional view, arguing: two crucial similarities between traditional and post-modern

theories are that both are theory-driven and consist of pragmatic level analysis. They differ

concerning the application of speech act theory in traditional theories and cooperative principle

in post-modern theories. Hence, respective biases may influence the results obtained from the

data. Traditional theories assume the a priori existence of a norm, so quantitative data analyses

are not conducted. Post-modern theories challenge the existence of norms, thus pre-empting

the value and acceptance of quantitative analysis of data (Terkourafi, 2005).

Terkourafi expressed the view on what can be understood as a complement to traditional

and post-modern views. This view was data-driven and involved the analysis of a corpus or

corpora of naturally-occurring social interactions to observe the regularities and consistencies

between linguistic expressions and their co-occurrent extra-linguistic contexts. For Terkourafi

to discover these regularities, it is necessary to categorise real-life contexts. This present

research adopted a similar methodology.

20

2.2.4 Principles of politeness theory and the notion of face

Because of the desire for a positive public self-image, each individual wants to be

viewed accordingly. For example, when we have a conversation with someone, we need to

possess the right tools for navigating the interaction. Brown and Levinson’s politeness theory

was first published in 1978 and continues to be used by researchers in many fields. According

to the authors, in any interaction, the persons involved always have an interest in maintaining

their positive and negative faces, and both faces are to be understood in terms of wants that

every person knows every other individual has.

The notion of the face reflects the public self-image of both the speaker and hearer. A

positive face denotes that a person desires to be respected and accepted by other interactants,

whereas a negative face concerns freedom from imposition. The positive face represents an

individual’s intent that their needs and wants should be recognised and appreciated in any

interaction, such as instances of apologies, humility, and acceptance of compliments. In

contrast, the negative face expresses the desire to be saved from any form of imposition, such

as not agreeing with or doubting the intentions and sincerity of the speaker. One aim of this

study was to show the importance of using religious expressions in Saudi Arabia to protect

both the positive and the negative face when giving and receiving compliments.

Speech acts can directly or indirectly influence the face of individuals through a Face

Threatening Act (FTA). FTAs may occur on two levels: threatening either the positive face or

the negative face (Brown & Levinson, 1978). Brown and Levinson (1978) created a list of

speech acts, classifying them according to positive or negative face. For example, requests are

thought to be FTAs because they run against the addressee’s negative face to the extent that

the speaker delays or prevents the addressee from an undesirable act by constraining the hearer

to do what that speaker wants. On the other hand, expressing disagreements may also lead the

speaker to conclude that the hearer’s opinion is wrong, which may threaten the positive face of

21

that hearer. Some acts threaten both the positive and negative face of the hearer by making the

hearer comply with the speaker's wants but not necessarily the hearer's (Fasold, 1990). Brown

and Levinson found that there are speech acts such as the acceptance of a compliment that can

threaten the positive face of the speaker.

There are several criticisms of the Brown and Levinson (B&L) theory, two of which

were discussed by Longcope (1995). One is the perceived flaws regarding the basis of

individuals' selection of strategies (rights and obligations). The other is the refutation that every

individual has both a positive and a negative face. New definitions for the notions of

discernment and volition and concepts of relative face orientation need to be incorporated into

politeness theory to address these criticisms. According to Gilks (2010), a limitation of the

B&L theory is its failure to establish a connection between the linguistic concept and everyday

usage.

Moreover, this politeness theory cannot be applied to all countries and cultures.

Furthermore, several studies have not found a definite relationship between power and

politeness, as posited by the B&L theory. For this reason, compliments can be perceived as

creating delicate situations, especially those involving gender (particularly in Saudi Arabia),

where speakers need to consider the social when giving and receiving compliments. Certain

predefined culture-specific strategies can help both the speaker and the hearer not lose face and

maintain the desired self-image during interactions. These strategies are meant to reduce

potential damage to the positive and negative faces of interlocutors.

As a distinct compliment behaviour in some Arab countries, people use the strategy of

offering the object as a response to a compliment on belongings (Nelson, El Bakari & Al Batal,

1993). Some people in Arab countries use this strategy to avoid the evil eye. This means that

the person giving the compliment needs to be aware that the receiver of that compliment has

22

started to feel uncomfortable. Therefore, the giver of the compliment is required to use another

strategy to return the communication process to normal. This is discussed in more detail later

in this chapter under the section on the evil eye.

2.3. Complimenting behaviour

In this section, literature on complimenting behaviour is reviewed to identify the

research gap that motivated this study, establish the research objectives, and inform the

research design. The chapter also contains a comprehensive review of various terms, concepts,

and ideas relevant to complimenting behaviour. Additionally, the chapter examines the

conceptualisation of compliments in different cultures. Various compliment issues arising from

fluctuations in social variables will also be reviewed. This approach would be relevant to the

current preferences for specific compliment response strategies among Arabic interlocutors.

Also, the notion of the evil eye is examined more closely, with a focus on Islamic customs and

beliefs.

2.3.1. Conflicting concepts of the term ‘compliments’

Over the past fifty years, there has been substantial research on the way compliments

are utilised and interpreted from different, mostly in other countries and various cultural

contexts. It is not known whether and to what extent the findings in other cultural contexts can

be applied to Saudi Arabia. It was pointed out above and supported Feghali (1997), that there

are significant variations in culture even within GCC countries.

To date, the term ‘compliment’ has been defined in various ways. Dictionaries differ in

their definitions of the term, and this is reflected in scholarly debate. Several scholars drew

attention to the speech act of compliment when investigating what constitutes this speech act.

First, it is appropriate to examine how a ‘compliment’ is defined in a dictionary. For example,

The Oxford Dictionary (2000) defines it as:

23

“A ceremonial act or expression as a tribute of courtesy, ‘usually understood to mean

less than it declares; now, esp. a neatly-turned remark addressed to anyone, implying

or involving praise; but, also applied to a polite expression of praise or commendation

in speaking of a person, or to any act taken as equivalent.”

According to the Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (Cambridge Dictionary,

2021), a compliment is “a remark that expresses approval, admiration or respect". In the

Merriam Webster dictionary (2021), the definition of ‘compliment’ is “an expression of

esteem, respect, affection, or admiration; especially an admiring remark.” These definitions,

according to Jamil (2016), suggest that the act of a compliment is a positive assessment from

the giver towards the addressee based on observations. A more detailed clarification of

‘compliment’ is given in the Collins COBUILD English dictionary for advanced learners

(Collins, 2021),

A compliment is a polite remark that you say to someone to show that you like their

appearance, appreciate their qualities, or approve of what they have done. If you

consider something that a person says or does as a compliment, it convinces you of your

good qualities, or that the person appreciates you. You can refer to your compliments

when you want to express thanks, good wishes, or respect to someone in

a formal way.

The definitions of a compliment in English language dictionaries suggest that a compliment in

Western culture can be expressed formally and informally. In this regard, the givers of a

compliment do so to show their politeness, admiration, appreciation, and approval of the

addressee’s appearance, qualities, and skills.

2.3.2. Compliments from a western perspective

In recent decades, the study of speech acts has increased substantially in applied

linguistics, sociolinguistics, pragmatics, semantics, and philosophy. Studies on compliments

24

from a Western perspective appeared in the early 1980s (see Manes 1983; Manes & Wolfson

1981; Wolfson 1981). Although Manes and Wolfson observed that the speech act of giving a

compliment in English was formulaic, their definition is brief and general, defining

compliments as “expressions of positive evaluation” (Manes & Wolfson, 1981, p 116). This

definition considers only one main feature. Wolfson (1983, p. 89) defined ‘compliments’ as

“social lubricants”, with the major function of complimenting being “to create or to maintain

solidarity between interlocutors”.

Hence, according to Wolfson’s view (1983), compliments can be regarded as positive

affective speech acts communicated to the addressee to increase or intensify solidarity between

the interlocutors. This definition illustrates the main role of a compliment and what it does in

social interaction. However, according to Adachi (2011), it disregards the linguistic and socio-

pragmatic features of compliments. Wierzbicka (1987) noted that a compliment is saying

something positive about the addressee. There are many topics and ways of complimenting.

Saying something like “you have a wonderful car” is most likely to be seen as praise, which is

only one way of complimenting, in which, possession is the topic. ‘You are wearing a nice

dress’ may be another example of possession being complemented. Apart from possession,

there are other categories of compliment topics, as will be discussed in section 2.3.12 below.

Unlike Manes and Wolfson, Holmes (1988, 1995) proposes a more technical and

comprehensive definition of a compliment. Holmes (1995, p. 117) suggested that "when

collecting and analysing examples of a particular speech act, it is important to have a clear

definition to decide what counts and what does not.” Hence, she proposed the following

definition of a ‘compliment’: “a speech act which explicitly or implicitly attributes credit to

someone other than the speaker, usually the person addressed, for some ‘good’ (possession,

characteristic, skill, etc.) which is positively valued by the speaker and the hearer” (Holmes

25

1988, p. 446; Holmes 1995, p. 117). According to Herbert (1986), compliments are indications

of appreciation and good relationships with others.

A substantial number of sociolinguistic scholars have responded to Holmes’ definition

of a compliment. Many sociolinguists favoured and used this definition (e.g., Jucker, 2009).

However, Adachi (2011) maintained that Holmes' definition is unclear regarding whom the

credit is attributed. He argued that it is just stated as “usually the person addressed”, which may

mean it could be someone other than the addressee. Adachi also observed that several scholars

like Herbert (1990), Jaworski (1995), and Knapp et al. (1984) had pursued compliments

without clearly defining the term ‘compliment’.

2.3.3. Compliments from the Southeast Asian perspective

The rapid developments in the field of the speech act of compliments in the West gave

gone hand in hand with growing research in the East. This is relevant to this study because

Asian and Arabic cultures have similarities in terms of power distance and collectivism. Two

representative examples of Korea and Japan are given here. For example, Kodama (1996)

introduced a well-formed definition of ‘compliment’ in which he described some of the specific

features of compliments in Japanese culture. Kodama offered this definition: “complimenting

is a (speech) act of giving positive evaluations explicitly and/or implicitly, based on the premise

that it is to make the addressee feel good, about a variety of things that are related to the A,

their families or similar things that the S acknowledges as ‘good’.” (p. 61).

Although this definition is similar to that of Holmes cited above, for various reasons,

there are distinctive features in Kodama's definition that are lacking in the western definition.

Firstly, Kodama (1996) included a vast array of expressions on how to give compliments in

Japanese culture. In addition to the positive distinction given to the receiver of a compliment,

Kodama (1996) affirmed that a compliment could be directed to the addressee and extended to

26

family members. Yoshida (2005) provided a comprehensive list of the possible expressions

used in Japanese society when giving compliments. While Kim (2006) compared compliments

in Japanese society with those used in Korea and provided this detailed definition of a

compliment based on the speakers’ intention of making addressees feel good, it is a positively

evaluative speech act that the S (speaker) conveys directly and/or indirectly, about A

(Addressee) and/or a variety of things related to the A, that the S acknowledges as ‘good’, their

related people, possessions, activities.

According to Adachi (2011), Kim’s definition included those who are involved in the

compliment context, the pragmatic function, and how the compliment behaviour is conducted.

Based on Kim’s findings, the definition was divided into four segments: the receiver of a

compliment (the direct addressee in interaction); the attribute (topic) to which the compliment

relates (attributes that are considered as good and are related directly/indirectly to the

addressee); the intention of the compliment giver (to please the addressee) and how a

compliment is expressed (related to the way it is perceived directly/indirectly). These four

points are relevant to this research also.

2.3.4. Compliments from an Arabic perspective

In the Arabic language, the term mujamalah is often considered equivalent to the

English term ‘compliment’ (Jamil, 2016), as it can be used to describe complimenting in some

situations. However, according to Almaany (2019), a more suitable Arabic term for

‘compliment’ is itra and illustrates this with many examples. One example is ( تلميذه أثنى على

بخير ووصفه مدحه medeh tilmeetheh” we “wesefeh bikhair” meaning that (he“ ,(أطراه،

complimented his student by being nice; the teacher has praised his student which involves

compliments and good attributes). On the contrary, mujamalah denotes politeness and

insincerity according to Arabic dictionaries, as exemplified by Omar (2008) and Al Azam

27

(2000). For example, سا / تسلي" رهی عامله أو اقتناع أدبا: ال عن كالمه" في بالجميل/ (aamaleh/ sayereh

beautifully/ fee kalamih adab: la un igtina uo tasleem)” means that “he treated him or spoke

with him politely. However, being polite in this situation does not necessarily mean that he

agrees with the addressee”.

Admiration is not always expressed to praise an observed quality; it can be used merely

to maintain a cordial relationship with the receiver of the compliment. Then, it becomes a polite

formality, as was noted by Jamil (2016). When the term mujamalah is used, the receiver of this

term may not regard it as a sincere communicative behaviour but an attempt to enhance the

qualities manifested by the addressee. Thus, the term mujamalah is not the exact equivalent of

‘compliment’ in English. However, based on the earlier definition, it can be used and is also a

common practice in many social settings.

Similar to this study on the Hijazi community, a study of the Najdi community in Saudi

Arabia was conducted by Mohammad (2013). The author found compliments to be more

frequent among those of the same gender, age, and social status. Personality and performance

were preferred topics for men, and appearance was preferred for women. Women used the

complimenting strategies of lengthier compliments with invocations, appreciation tokens,

praise upgrades, and more frequent returns to compliments. Younger and middle-aged groups

preferred appearance, while older groups preferred personality and performance as the

compliment topics. Unfamiliar speakers paid more compliments for performance and

responses, and these compliments generally included an invocation and blessing. This addition

of invocation and blessing could be an indication of belief in the evil eye.

Nelson et al. (1993) examined differences in complimenting behaviours between

Egyptians and Americans using a set of interviews followed by surveys of university students

in both countries. Results revealed that the majority of both Egyptian and American

compliments were adjectival. In both countries, complimenting was direct rather than indirect.

28

Egyptian compliments tended to be longer than American compliments and contained more

comparative adjectives, metaphors, and references to marriage and children. Egyptians tended

to compliment personality traits more frequently than did Americans, who usually gave

compliments on skills and work performance.

A very commonly held view is that in western cultures, compliments are generally paid

and appreciated (Holmes, 1986). On the other hand, in eastern cultures like Malaysia,

compliments are either rejected or denied. In a Malaysian study, Othman (2011) noted that

Malaysia has a multicultural society due to its colonial history. In Malaysia, when compliments

are given, they are more appreciated than denied or rejected by Malay speakers, reflecting a

shift towards western culture due to its British colonisation. Compliment responses differed

according to the subject of the compliment and its relative distance from the compliment

receiver. Compliment rejections were more frequent when the distance was very short (closer),

while longer distances resulted in compliment acceptance.

Similarly, in a UAE study, using DCT and interviews, Al Falasi (2007) observed that,

sometimes, UAE Arabic female learners of English were transferring their compliment

expressions and strategies to English (L1 to L2). This happened even with new pragmatic

norms learned through their English language education. In a comparison of interview data on

Syrian and American compliment behaviour, Nelson et al. (1996) found that both were likely

to either accept or mitigate the force of the compliment than to reject it, employing response

types such as utterances of agreement, compliment returns and deflecting or qualifying the

comments.

On the other hand, US recipients were more likely than Syrians to use appreciation

tokens. The Syrians preferred acceptance + formula in their response, unlike the US recipients.

Using Discourse Completion Task (DCT), interviews, and the content analysis of a textbook,

Al-Hilu (2017) found that although complimenting behaviour is a universal phenomenon in

29

world languages, its realisation and production were culture-specific. Pragmatic transfer, which

accounts for almost half of the compliment responses, reflected the strong effect of the deep-

rooted native speakers’ social norms in applying strategies. Most Iraqi participants revealed

their pre-conceived anxiety about the evil eye, absent in the Irish culture.

A DCT analysis of interview responses by Amel (2019) showed that regardless of

context and social distance, Hungarians’ preferred compliment response (CR) strategies were

mitigation, acceptance and then rejection, no response, and request interpretation in declining

order of importance. Arabs usually preferred acceptance followed by mitigation, request

interpretation, rejection, and no response in decreasing priorities. The CRs of Arabs were

generally longer than those of Hungarians. Context and social distance affected the CR patterns

of Arabs. Responses to a compliment from a family member or friend tended to be lengthier

than those given to a stranger or a person with a higher social status (e.g., a professor). The

same factors also determined their CR strategies. Arabs mainly used the acceptance strategy

with friends and family members and mitigation with strangers and people in higher positions.

Hungarians used mitigation with friends, strangers, and family members and acceptance

with people in higher positions. Shaari and Maros (2017) noted that the globalisation of culture

through the acquisition of practices common to other cultures, through online social networking

experience and popular culture media, has modified people’s communication strategies and

behaviours. This has led to the acceptance of many foreign values, thereby transforming the

new generation of Malays into a modern society characterised by an appreciation of differences

and flexible adaptation to various changes in their cultural environment.

Online video chats on Skype engaged in by Iranian learners of English (EFL learners)

and native English speakers were analysed by Morady Moghaddam (2019). The data showed

the same global behaviour of acceptance by both Iranian and English speakers. However, in

the case of Iranians, Iranian cultural values such as sha’n (dignity), shekasteh-nafsi (modesty),

30

tarof (insincere offer), and adab-va-ehteram (courtesy and respect) were the moderating

variables influencing their Persianised English responses. Communication media did not

change response patterns. For those who spoke English as a foreign language, pragmatic

competence may be strongly regulated by L1 conventions, leading to cross-cultural

miscommunication and pragmatic failure manifested in L2.

The works cited above, comparing western and eastern/Arabic compliment behaviour,

show that some adjustments are made in Arabic complimenting strategies despite differences.

However, they usually occur in the case of young Arabic learners of English. A notable

observation was that there is cultural globalisation with convergence towards some common

culture due to the interaction of younger generations with prevalent cultures in the online social

networking environment. Many foreign values have been accepted and adopted, leading to the

transformation of the new generation to a common global culture. This is affecting compliment

strategies on different topics in different contexts. It seems that communicative behaviours

involving compliments in Arabic cultures are more complex than those seen in English,

especially when offering an object as a compliment response or using metaphors when giving

compliments.

Unlike English dictionaries, Arabic dictionaries underscore the behavioural

characteristic of a compliment (see discussions on formulaic Islamic expressions in the

following sections). Focussing on the good qualities manifested by the addressee might be a

prerequisite to initiating a compliment in English. On the other hand, this is not the case in

Arabic as this might not be seen as an important aspect.

2.3.5. The definition of a compliment in this study

Holmes’ (1986, p 485) definition of a compliment comprises several aspects, which can

help researchers examine the communicative behaviour of the speech act of compliments

across cultures. However, Al-Amro (2013) argued that the definition lacks several important

31

elements of compliments concerning social and cultural norms. Also, it does not extend the

compliments to include family members, specifically children. Mursay and Wilson (2001)

considered these missing features when defining ‘compliment’ as “a speech act which directly

or indirectly attributes credit…compliment behaviour of interactants.” (p. 151). Notably, this

definition illustrates compliments according to socially-acceptable behaviour. It also shows

that a compliment can be directed explicitly/implicitly to a third party who has a close

relationship with the addressee, such as family members or relatives.

Adachi (2011) analysed all the elements of the aforementioned definitions, especially

those of Holmes (1988, 1995), Kodama (1996), Kim (2006), and Wierzbicka (1987). This led

Adachi (2011) to the following definition, which will be adopted for this study:

Complimenting is a speech act in which the speaker explicitly and/or implicitly attempts

to convey positive evaluations/judgments about the addressee’s quality and a variety of

matters closely related to the addressee.

2.3.6. The influence of socio-demographic variables on compliment behaviour

The linguistic phenomenon of complimenting behaviour permeates social interactions.

When performed sensitively, it contributes towards establishing solidarity and harmony among

interlocutors. Yet, when doing so, caution must be exercised to address any existing constraints

on speech acts as different cultures may have significantly different social norms and

behaviours. Failure to observe these can be damaging to the interlocutors’ faces. Moreover,

even within a specific community that shares the same language, interlocutors may frequently

alter their speech based on differences in a social context. Factors such as age, gender, social

distance, and relative power will guide the interactants’ choice of specific linguistic strategies.

Moreover, these linguistic choices can convey additional information about the speaker’s

identity. The conservative, traditional Saudi Arabian society offers a rich context for

investigating these differences. This gives importance to the context of this study, which is the

32

Saudi Hijazi community. This research assumes significance here because it comprehensively

examines the effect of all socio-economic variables to provide a reasonable answer to the

variable differences in gender effect of complimenting behaviour in Saudi Arabia.

2.3.7. Saudi social and cultural fabric as related to complimenting behaviour

The fabric of Saudi culture and society, especially its Islamic religion, drives people’s

communication behaviour. There is a close and inextricable relationship between culture,

language, and communication. According to Okon (2012), a major area of interaction between

religion and communication can occur in interpersonal communication. Religion is both a

cultural phenomenon and a historic platform for cultural expressions. There is a bond between

religion and culture to impact communication. While religion defines social solidarity and

cohesion, communication is the means of achieving them through sharing and fellowship. The

interaction between religion and communication is a significant area of social functions,

especially in spreading a religion. Notably, in academic classification, religion is subsumed

under culture. Croucher et al. (2017) explained the complex connection between religion,

culture, and communication, and observed that religion is an essential element of the human

condition.

The sociological and psychological characteristics of individuals are moulded by

culture. Culture also determines an individual’s religious beliefs, religious denomination, and

strength of religious devotion. Some researchers posit that religion is a part of the culture, while

others see religion as a form of culture in itself (Beyers, 2017), depending on how they

conceptualise and operationalise these two terms. However, according to (Ramadan, 2010)

Islam is a culture. Communication between individuals and communities influences their

understanding and conceptualisation. Cultural beliefs and practices also determine the implied

meanings of the two terms. Understanding the interactions between culture and religion and

33

communications helps one to understand how they shape the world, particularly since today’s

globalised world affects culture and religion in many ways.

The Islamic social system and value system were discussed by Mowlana (2003), who

stated that a social system is the process of interaction within the society and exhibits solidarity.

While a social system is not a value in itself, it comprises a combination of values and actions

of those individuals that make up the society. Ethical thinking and practices in Islamic societies

relate to tabligh. Communications and social interactions are based on the normative religious

ethics prescribed in the Quran and Sunnah, and those coming from Greek and Persian

traditions. These were reinforced by advice given by wazirs and sultans on the politics of

government and further influenced by the western culture of global secularism and modern

views and practices.

Oral communication is of great importance in Islam, originating from the Quran,

Sunnah, and Hadith. Islamic idealism serves a special purpose of social responsibility

embedded in the religious prescriptions of ethics in communications. The Islamic ethical

framework of communication is based on taqwa (piety), consisting of fear of God and

protecting oneself from unethical forces. These two Islamic principles play a significant role

in complimenting behaviour and associated religious expressions during interpersonal

interactions. According to Khalil (2016), polite interactions that include blessings are used in

Arabic culture (Ameli & Molaei, 2012). (Khalil, 2016) further asserted that Islam is a religion

of communication and Allah is a communicative God interested in the welfare of the believers.

Thus, in the religion of communication, naturally, God has a special place and in compliments,

this part is served by adding a religious expression to compliments.

2.3.8. Gender in compliment behaviour of western/Non-Muslim cultures

In general, a great deal of research has investigated the influence of gender on the

practice of giving and responding to compliments. Initial studies conducted to determine the

34

correlation between gender and specific linguistic features regarded the female genderlect as a

deviation from the norm. Hidalgo-Tenorio (2016) argued that this form of discrimination

allowed language to maintain a hierarchical social relationship between the genders. While

western nations do not lend themselves to such overt bias, societies in the Middle East have

embraced it according to Islamic norms.

Interestingly, complimenting behaviour represents a unique avenue wherein the

exchange of verbal codes aligns with women’s inclination to be responsive, rather than

assertive, in speech acts. Holmes (1988) theorised that complimenting a woman is more

acceptable and socially appropriate than complimenting a man. Several other studies have

confirmed this assertion and evidenced that, compared to men, women are more likely to give

and receive compliments. However, results reported in recent works show mixed trends. In the

studies conducted by Rees-Miller (2011), American women complimented other women on

appearance and hairstyles. In the case of men, performance, especially in sports, reinforced the

values of heterosexual masculinity.

The role of gender in complimenting behaviour is controversial as some works provide

evidence for the role, while others do not. It is possible that in cultures where there is the

segregation of genders, as in the case of Arabic culture, gender has a significant effect on

complimenting behaviour. In a systematic review of complimenting behaviour among Persians,

(Derakhshan, Eslami, & Chalak, 2020) cited the work of Ansarin and Morady Moghaddam

(2016), showing that females gave more compliments than males in face-to-face interactions.

Although both male and female speakers used explicit compliments very frequently, males

used explicit compliments more frequently.

Studies by Eslami et al. (2019) also found that females give more compliments on

Facebook than do males during online interactions, thus supporting the findings for face-to-

face interaction. Both male and female Facebook users gave more explicit and formulaic

35

compliments than implicit and non-formulaic ones. A US study noted the effects of gender on

the negative strengthening of positive and negative adjectives (Gotzner & Mazzarella, 2020).

Female participants tended to strengthen the negation of a positive adjective when the speaker

had less power. Female participants interpreted potentially face-threatening statements like

‘Your schedule is not fair’ as a function of the relative power of the hearer over the speaker, as

in the case of an employee and the boss. On the other hand, male participants interpreted the

same statement as a strong interpretation to socially distant speakers rather than close ones.

These findings did not offer a straightforward explanation of the polarity asymmetry of

negative strengthening based on politeness considerations, suggested by Horn (1989) and

Brown & Levinson (1987). In the studies conducted by Nur Indah (2017), Indonesian female

EFL students used more complimenting strategies than did their male counterparts, influenced

by their relationship with the hearers. A detailed explanation of various Saudi complimenting

situations is provided in the following sections.

2.3.9. Complimenting behaviour in Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries

When the genderlect theory (Tannen, 1990) was applied to Saudi Arabia by Hidalgo-

Tenorio, (2016) and Kendall and Tannen (2015) in their review, several differences were

observed. The Arabic situation is examined in detail here. Specifically, men and women differ

markedly in their approach to the interpersonal communication process in Saudi Arabia and

many other countries where strict Islamic norms are enforced. The genderlect theory of

communication views the genders as belonging to different cultural groups. Moreover, it

assigns unique features derived from communicative styles, linguistic codes, and verbal

repertoires to men and women. Although the theory has been criticised recently for

conceptualising female genderlect as a deviation from the male norm, it is highly applicable in

conservative cultures like Saudi Arabia (Hidalgo-Tenorio, 2016). Kendall and Tannen (2015)

argued that Saudi men and women perceive the purpose of communication differently. While

36

men employ the language to exercise dominance and achieve tangible outcomes, women use it

to establish social connections and foster relationships. Men are more likely to be assertive.

Women, on the other hand, seek to be expressive and polite. This divide applies to the

complimenting behaviour of the genders as well.

Gender separation in Saudi Arabia is a seriously debated issue (Meijer, 2010; Al-

Rasheed, 2020; Alasmrai, 2021). In Saudi Arabia, generally, all interactions between men and

women are governed by prevailing social values. These values dictate that each party must

engage in speech acts differently. For example, Saudi females tend to avoid unnecessary verbal

interaction with unfamiliar males. Also, most Saudi women cover themselves entirely and

cannot be seen in public without the hijab. It is considered inappropriate for a man to

compliment the appearance of another man’s wife or daughter, regardless of the circumstances

(Al-Amro, 2013). The act can be interpreted as an indication of the admirer’s coveting the

female. However, men can offer compliments to women on their cooking, for example, as an

expression of gratitude.

Overall, both men and women may freely engage in complimenting behaviour but only

within the confines of their gender (Al-Amro, 2013). Indeed, in contrast to simple compliment

norms for cross-gender exchanges in non-Arab cultures, conservative societies such as Saudi

Arabia practise complex traditions of gender-differentiated compliment norms. However,

greater tolerance of the non-segregation of genders in mixed communities was observed by

Almalki (2020) in the case of Saudi male students who had spent four or more years in the

USA compared to those who had stayed in Saudi Arabia. In this research, the effect of age was

examined using Young, Subordinate, and Superior categories of samples. There was some

trend among the younger males especially towards greater tolerance of non-segregation

between genders of the Saudi Hijazi community.

37

In the Arabian Peninsula, there are more speech situations regarding women-to-women

complimenting than men-to-women, women-to-men, or men-to-men. This can be attributed to

the cultural traditions of some Arab societies, where religious celebrations offer a wide range

of possibilities for women to exchange compliments. Ceremonies like Eid festivals are

occasions when some women may dye their hands and feet with henna and buy new clothes or

pieces of jewellery, which holds for children. These celebrations provide numerous

opportunities to exchange compliments between female acquaintances, female neighbours, and

family members. On the other hand, men are occasionally complimented by women in a small

number of situations, such as the acquisition of a new car, academic achievements, or

workplace promotion. Similar situations also offer an avenue for men to compliment other

men, and on some occasions, even women colleagues as a matter of societal politeness.

In Saudi Arabia, across three age groups, Alqahtani (2016) did not find any gender

differences in the complimenting behaviour of men and women. On the other hand, the

frequencies of Hijazi Arabic compliment response strategies (CRs categories) differed for the

male-to-male and female-to-female participants in the study (Migdadi, 2021). Gender did not

affect the complimenting behaviour of Saudi EFL students in the studies of (Alqarni, 2020),

which was ascribed to the influence of the English language and eastern culture by the authors.

Thus, the Saudi results of studies on the effect of gender on compliment responses are mixed.

It cannot be said that genderlect theory holds in Saudi cases, even if gender segregation is

culturally sanctioned in the country.

In Arabic cultures like Saudi Arabia, inappropriate complimenting may lead to losing

face, possibly resulting in an interactional breakdown. In this country, even in women-to-

women speech situations, females are not expected to give and receive compliments in public

places or social settings in the presence of the opposite gender. The only public place where

38

one might see Saudi females complimenting each other on their appearance is at universities

(Alharbi, 2017). This is because education in Saudi Arabia is single-gendered, and women can

dress freely. The Saudi Arabian society can be generally identified as being highly stratified in

terms of gender.

Gender differences in politeness strategies were studied by Salem (2000) using tape

recordings of the speech of 500 Jordanian university students, who concluded that female

students were more polite than their male counterparts. Findings also showed that males spoke

for longer, asked fewer questions that implied criticism or antagonism, and used disruptive

interruptions to assert their status and power. Conversely, females were more oriented towards

affective speech with a positive function, asked questions to enhance arguments, and

interrupted less frequently, indicating interest and rapport. Moreover, female students were

willing to talk more than their male counterparts in some intimate contexts. Generally, women

displayed solidarity in their interaction, while men’s speech reflected a desire to show power

and status. According to Qanbar’s (2012) findings, in Yemini society, women gave and

received more compliments than men. Furthermore, the incidence of men complimenting

women was found to be twice as much as vice versa. The common topics were personal traits

and abilities for men and appearances for women. Qanbar (2012) explained this difference by

emphasising men’s forthright nature during their interactions with women. This is unlike the

cultural norms of Saudi Arabia, where such interactions are strictly discouraged.

Gender differences in compliment response strategies were investigated by Al-Rousan,

Awal, and Salehuddin (2016) using Jordanian university students. An agreement was the most

commonly used strategy by both men and women. In responding to compliments, females were

inclined to use appreciation tokens, acceptance comments, and reassignment strategies, while

males preferred using a questioning strategy. Here, male students’ indirect concurrence with

39

compliment attrition corroborates the claim that they tend to perceive compliments as face-

threatening acts. Coupled with Qanbar’s (2012) findings, these inferences also substantiate the

observations made by Kendall and Tannen (2015). Women’s general tendency to accept

compliments and respond favourably supports the idea that they consider complimenting

behaviour as an affective speech act and use it to maintain solidarity and reinforce intimacy.

As stated above, the convergence of all cultures towards a global culture has been

indicated in some studies like those of Tomlinson (1996), Shaari and Maros (2017), and

Oyekola (2018). They have suggested three types of global interactions of cultures: cultural

homogenisation, cultural heterogenization, and cultural hybridisation. Any of these can affect

complimenting behaviour.

In Saudi Arabia, the most important cultural changes have taken place in women’s

education. They are being given increasing access to areas that were once considered men-only

domains, such as education (Alsuwaida, 2016). More recently, they were given the right to

drive and the right to education, healthcare, and employment without the need for permission

from a male guardian (Perper, 2018). However, the basic culture of gender segregation still

prevails. Therefore, the globalisation of culture has so far not had a significant effect on

conservative cultures like that of Saudi Arabia.

2.3.10. Age in compliment behaviour

Various experiences of cultural and historical events predict a generation’s perception

of life. Over time, gaps in ideologies and belief systems may accrue and complicate

intergenerational interactions. This phenomenon is especially salient for the rapidly developing

Middle East economies. Tiliouine and Estes (2016) suggested that the transition experiences

of the Arab countries are reflected in the residents’ social lives. However, among the older

populations of highly conservative societies, this change may not be welcome. Elamin and

40

Omair (2010) identified age as the most significant predictor of men’s “traditional” attitude

towards women employees. The authors showed that driven by exposure to liberal western

ideas and beliefs; younger generations were better oriented to depart from traditional norms.

Thus, the Arab World finds itself at a generational crossroads. This ambiguity most clearly

manifests itself in compliment response strategies employed by different age groups, as

indicated by the findings of this study. These generational differences are observed in

complimenting behaviour as well.

It is not possible to measure the effect of age differences on complimenting behaviour

in a majority of studies in the Middle East (Salam El-Dakhs, 2017; Ebadi & Salman, 2015; Al-

Rousan, Awal & Salehuddin. 2016) as they used university students as study samples.

However, younger Algerian speakers were more adept at using other dialects (Ammour, 2012).

In these studies, the younger generations were driven by an imperative to avoid traditional

forms for making their speech distinct and set boundaries when projecting ideological beliefs,

whereas the elders preferred stability in language use and rejected such changes.

On the other hand, more loan words were used in dialect by older urban Makkan Hijazi

than by the younger generations (the site of this research also) in the studies of Alahmadi

(2015). Thus, different generations are likely to possess diverse lexical preferences for

distinguishing themselves from other groups. Al-Ageel (2016) noted that younger speakers

were more likely to reject an invitation than those in their middle or old age, as the latter were

aware of their social role and, therefore, adhered to social values. Previously, Al-Ageel (2010)

noted that compliments from parents and grandparents were generally rewarded with kisses on

hands or heads as a gesture of respect and politeness. In contrast, compliments from same-age

peers inspired jokes and humorous responses.

41

In the Saudi studies of Alqahtani (2016) and Al-Amro (2013), compliment exchanges

among the three age groups of young (18-30), middle (30-50), and old (over 50) were

investigated. Al-Amro (2013) reported less frequent compliments used by the older speakers

compared to their middle and younger counterparts. Alqahtani (2016), on the other hand, did

not find any difference in age groups in the use of normal compliments (explicitly addressing

the appreciated item with clarity and distinction). Only a few of the middle-aged and elderly

respondents shared a preference for popular sayings such as:

“atteeb ma yestghreb min hel atteeb, elly leh-em fi menhej atteeb khebreh” (kindness

isn't strange to kind people, who are experienced in kindness) and “al-hey yeheek wa

al-maiyet yezedek gheben” (activity is contagious, just like laziness.)

The low frequency of compliments in the older age groups could be due to their adherence to

Islamic doctrines which discourage complimenting as it might cultivate arrogance. Thus, both

Alqahtani (2016) and Al-Amro (2013) found that older people gave compliments less

frequently as they adhered to Islamic norms. (Alqahtani F (2016) observed the reduced

frequency of complimenting and responding behaviour among people older than 50 years. The

compliment topic and language were also different in the case of older people. In a similar

study, Al Amro, (2013) also found similar effects. In both these almost identical studies, the

older people being more traditional, stick to only expressing proverbs and other Islamic

comments, rather than complimenting or responding to compliments.

Interestingly, younger respondents were also more likely to both give and receive

compliments among themselves (Al-Amro, 2013; Alqahtani, 2016). Al-Amro (2013) explained

that this age-related complimenting behaviour was due to the speakers feeling more

comfortable with exchanging compliments within their age group. Also, regarding compliment

42

responses, the three test groups demonstrated significant differences. While the agreement was

common for the young and middle-age groups, non-agreement was favoured by the older age

group. Notably, the younger generations were more likely to use praise upgrade and return

strategies, and less likely to employ evil-eye protection. Contrastingly, middle-aged and elderly

participants favoured the use of reassignment, invocation, and evil-eye protection (Al-Amro,

2013). Hence, it can be assumed that the younger generations are less sensitive to the evil-eye

belief, whereas middle-aged and older generations share a common affinity for the same.

To summarise, in the Arab World, the social variable of age has a significant influence

on complimenting behaviour. In line with their own belief and value systems, different age

groups have developed unique strategies for such interactions.

2.3.11. Relative power and social position in compliment behaviour

The measures of social distance and relative power (power distance for short) have been

frequently employed in numerous empirical studies investigating complimenting behaviour.

However, these constructs are not operationalised by adhering to a universal definition. To

illustrate, although there is consensus that multiple factors predict social distance in a

relationship collectively, these factors’ exact nature and/or identity are obscure. In linguistics,

studies have been devoted to discerning these factors by applying several parameters such as

“frequency of contact, length of acquaintance, and positive/negative affect” (Spencer-Oatey,

1996). Again, the measure of relative power has been associated with domination and control,

implying strong negative connotations. Yet, in some Asian cultures such as China and Japan,

incongruency of power is perceived as a tangible way of cultivating mutual responsibilities

(Spencer-Oatey, 1996). Thus, the idea of relative power varies across cultures, and its

interpretations can be contradictory.

Recent social psychology studies have found that power and social distance are, to a

significant extent, intertwined. For instance, Magee and Smith (2013) noted that power nurtures

43

an asymmetrical social distance and that individuals in high-power positions experience greater

social distance from those in low-power positions. The authors further proposed that social

distance both emerges from and operates within power relationships. These proposals

correspond with the findings of Lammers et al. (2011), who empirically validated the influence

of power on increasing social distance. For this research, relative power will be conceptualised

as asymmetric control and influence. At the same time, social distance will be understood as

the level of familiarity between the interlocutors that function as power balance/imbalance.

Despite the significant influence of relative power and social distance on

complimenting behaviour among interlocutors, few studies in the Arab World have attempted

to validate this relationship. This may be because the majority of studies tend to use samples

of university students who possess power congruity and only moderate social distance.

Notably, in Saudi Arabia, Islamic teachings control the social relationships of local

populations. According to the teachings of the Holy Quran and Hadith, Saudi children are

expected to show respect to their parents and elders, which leads to considerable incongruity

of power between them. The studies by Alobaisi (2011), Al-Ageel (2010), and Al-Amro (2013)

shed some light on this issue.

According to Alobaisi (2011), male Saudi Arabic speakers frequently differentiate

between compliments received from higher family members and those of equal status. This

was evident in the use of additional strategies, apart from the routine colloquial expressions,

such as “hatha min fadli Allah” and “kull ma sha’ Allah”, when responding to a compliment

from parents. The frequency of “hatha min fadli Allah” decreased by 25 percent when

responding to a compliment from a sibling. Interestingly, Alobaisi (2011) ascribed the use of

“kull ma sha’ Allah” to the belief in the evil eye common among Saudi males. Additionally, in

the context of intimate relationships such as family, the strategy of offering the complimented

44

object was more frequently employed by male addressees. On the other hand, Al-Ageel (2010)

affirmed that female Saudi Arabic speakers responded with indirect strategies when

complimented by male family members and more direct strategies when responding to female

family members. This suggests that, in addition to the relationship with a family member as a

variable of social distance, gender plays an active role in establishing power congruity.

Regarding social distance, Al-Amro (2013) demonstrated that compliment exchanges

occur primarily in close relationships. The greater the distance, the fewer and shorter are the

compliments. The evidence offered by both Alobaisi (2011) and Al-Ageel (2010) supports this

observation. Al-Ageel (2010) observed that even among family members, compliments from

distant relatives were met with indirect response strategies. Al-Amro (2013) also noted that in

large social distance exchanges, the addressees primarily responded with invocation instead of

returning the favour in close relationship exchanges. Also, the range of topics was noted to be

a function of social distance. In close relationships, compliments regarding personal

appearances predominated (Al-Ageel, 2010; Al-Amro, 2013). Conversely, between distant

interlocutors, compliments about personality and possessions were more common.

2.3.12. Compliment Topics

With advancements in sociolinguistic and pragmatic literature, the utility and

applicability of different compliment topics have become prominent. Primarily, these

dimensions are culture-specific because they are sensitive to the norms and traditions of a

unique linguistic community. To illustrate, in the conservative Saudi culture, men

complimenting women about their appearance is strictly prohibited. On the other hand, it might

not be considered anything out of the ordinary among western speakers in more liberal

societies. According to Singh (2017), compliments can be subdivided into five groups:

45

unspecific compliments, accurate compliments, possession- and appearance-specific

compliments, action-specific compliments, and attribute-specific compliments.

The Middle East is a linguistically diverse region home to multiple dialects of Arabic,

Persian, Hebrew, and Kurdish, among other languages. There is much literature that elaborates

on the paradigms of complimenting behaviour exercised by these various communities. In the

main, the literature focuses on the differences in compliment responses in terms of the

variations of social variables such as age, gender, and power distance (Al-Rousan, Awal &

Salehuddin, 2014; Alotaibi, 2016; Salam El-Dakhs, 2017; Ebadi & Salman, 2015). However,

few studies have been conducted to examine the breadth of compliment topics favoured by

Middle Easterners. Nonetheless, the studies by Mahmood and Ali (2018), Khodabakhshi and

Zolfagharkhani (2015), Danziger (2018), Qanbar (2012), Ghanem (2010), Al-Rousan et al.

(2014), Al-Batayneh (2013), Al-Amro (2013), and Alqahtani (2016) offer some insight into

this realm. Although not all these studies were explicitly focused on investigating preference

for compliment topics, collectively, they provide a comprehensive understanding of relevant

trends about the same.

Mahmood and Ali (2018) attempted to map similarities and differences in the

complimenting behaviour of Iraqi college students during same-gender interactions. The

authors found that male students predominantly complimented their male friends on their

ability and skills, followed by appearance, personality, ethics, and possessions. However, the

female students were more likely to praise their female friends for their appearance. These

findings align with those reported by Monjezi (2014). Mahmood and Ali (2018) offered several

explanations for the gender-based differences regarding preferences for specific compliment

topics. The authors argued that, socially, women tend to place a higher value on appearance,

whereas men prioritise skills based on external influences. Furthermore, the geographical area

46

– rural, urban, or city – where participants were brought up also influences their choice of

compliment topic, as Mahmood and Ali (2018) found. Interestingly, however, in contrast to

Monjezi’s (2014) findings, Mahmood and Ali (2018) noted that both genders complimented

with the same frequency.

In a study of compliments and compliment responses, albeit with less naturalistic data,

Khodabakhshi and Zolfagharkhani (2015) documented the frequency distribution patterns of

compliments given by the cast of male and female characters in Persian movies. Appearance

and ability accounted for about 60% of the topics, making them the most common compliment

topics in this case. Men complimented women on their appearance during cross-gender

interactions, whereas women complimented men on skills and abilities. For example:

Male (Abdolreza): “Chi kar kardi? Che khoshgel shodi!?” (“What did you do? You

have become so beautiful”)

Male (Suitor): “Khanoom, najib, ba shakhsiat” (“Ladylike, noble and personable”)

Female (Sara): “To behtarin pedare donyayi” (“You are the best father in the world”)

On the other hand, in same-gender interactions, men complimented other men on their abilities,

while women routinely praised each other on their appearance. These findings support those

reported by Monjezi (2014) and Mahmood and Ali (2018), discussed above. Khodabakhshi

and Zolfagharkhani (2015) offered cultural, situational, and religious norms as possible

explanations for their observed gender-based differences regarding the preference for

compliment topics.

According to Khodabakhshi and Zolfagharkhani (2015), generally, both genders

believe that women are more concerned about physical appearance and must, therefore, be

praised for the same. Furthermore, Islamic traditions and cultural norms dictate that women

47

should be cautious when complimenting men about their appearance, for it might be interpreted

as being romantically assertive. Lastly, men occupy the dominant role in Iranian families and

are, accordingly, appreciated for their skills. From a pragma-linguistic perspective, the study

of Khodabakhshi and Zolfagharkhani (2015) allowed for the generalisation of the findings from

Monjezi (2014) and Mahmood and Ali (2018). The latter studies employed university graduate

and undergraduate students as their sample, while Khodabakhshi and Zolfagharkhani (2015)

used movie dialogues which, although scripted, offered a broad range of social variables,

thereby yielding rich data.

To date, no study has focused solely on examining compliment topics in terms of

different social variables among Israeli Hebrew speakers. However, the analysis by Danziger

(2018) on complimenting behaviour in Israeli Hebrew culture provided some insight into the

same. The author affirmed that the compliment topic had the greatest impact on interactants’

choice of strategy when responding to praise. Danziger (2018) grouped compliment topics into

two super-categories, namely, “external compliments’’ (appearance, performances, and

possession) and ‘‘internal compliments’’ (physical appearance, talent, and personality). The

difference between appearance and physical appearance is that appearance denotes outward

appearance arising from deliberate thought and effort like a haircut, clothes, and makeup. In

contrast, physical appearance denotes natural appearance such as eye colour or body shape,

which generally cannot be changed (Lorenzo-Dus, 2001).

According to Danziger (2018), while external compliments were mostly welcomed and

conventionalised, internal compliments were met with negative reactions. The author explained

this discrepancy by suggesting that internal compliments are generally perceived as intimate

by the Israeli Hebrew speakers and, therefore, are less welcome. Contrastingly, external

compliments are recognised as being separate from the self, making them more acceptable.

48

This trend of preference for distinct compliment topics indicates a broader shift from asceticism

to hedonism, Danziger (2018) argued.

In her study of complimenting behaviour in the Yemini Arabic speech community,

Qanbar (2012) gathered data using ethnographic fieldwork. The author observed that the

majority of the compliments (32.5 percent) were based on appearance, followed by personal

traits (31.5 percent), ability and skill (20.25 percent), relationships (14.25 percent), and

possessions (1.5 percent). The compliment topic of appearance was preferred by females,

whereas males praised each other on personal traits and ability. On the other hand, in cross-

gender encounters, women complimented men on personal traits while men praised women for

personal traits and appearance. These results (Qanbar, 2012) were generally supported by

Khodabakhshi and Zolfagharkhani (2015), Monjezi (2014), and Mahmood and Ali (2018). The

frequency of compliments during same-gender interactions observed by Qanbar (2012) was

supported by Khodabakhshi and Zolfagharkhani (2015) and Monjezi (2014).

Among different Arabic speech communities, the complimenting behaviour of

Jordanian Arabic speakers has received much attention (Ghanem 2010, Al-Rousan et al. 2014,

and Al-Batayneh 2013). According to both Ghanem (2010) and Al-Rousan et al. (2014),

women preferred complimenting each other on their appearance during same-gender

interactions. However, while Ghanem (2010) noted possession as the compliment topic

favoured by male interlocutors, Al-Rousan et al. (2014) found appearance to be the dominant

theme. These findings of both Ghanem (2010) and Al-Rousan et al. (2014) were contradicted

by Khodabakhshi and Zolfagharkhani (2015), Monjezi (2014), Mahmood and Ali (2018), and

Qanbar (2012). Notably, Ghanem (2010) argued that physical appearance was not an

appropriate topic for compliments among men. However, the findings of Al-Rousan et al.

(2014) did not align with this observation. A possible explanation could be the effect of cultural

49

influences on interlocutors’ preference for compliment topics since Al-Rousan et al.’s (2014)

study was conducted in Malaysia.

According to Ghanem (2010), in cross-gender encounters in Jordan, females

compliment males on ability, followed by possession, personality, and appearance. Conversely,

men praise women on appearance followed by personality, ability, and possession. Ghanem

(2010) maintained that males were more likely to compliment females on appearance than vice

versa since male initiation of a romantic relationship is considered more socially acceptable in

Jordanian society, and therefore not unnatural. Similar findings were reported in a study on

complimenting behaviour in selected Persian movies by Khodabakhshi and Zolfagharkhani

(2015) and on Yemeni students by Qanbar (2012). Contrastingly, the study of Jordanian

students conducted in Malaysia by Al-Rousan et al. (2014) revealed that while men

complimented women for their skill and children, women were more likely to praise men for

their appearance and skills. Notably, as mentioned above, the study of Al-Rousan et al. (2014)

was performed on Jordanian students residing in Malaysia, which may account for the

deviations from the trends observed in the Arabic-speaking communities in the Middle East.

Arabs usually compliment their relatives and friends on their appearance (a new haircut,

clothes, etc.) and skills (cooking, repairing, sewing, or driving, among other activities).

Compliments may also be directed towards possessions, especially valuable belongings.

Regarding cooking, there exist certain common expressions that are predominantly

communicated. To elaborate, instead of saying the dish is succulent, delicious, or well done,

Saudi speakers offer their admiration in peculiar ways, primarily via the semantic formulas like

Lah yaatek s’sah’ha (May God give you health) and Lehla yeqtealek yed’din (May God save

your hands). The following examples provided by Anssari (2011) illustrate this form of social

interaction in the case of Moroccan Arab interlocutors:

50

One neighbour visits another. The host is cooking, and she proposes to the visitor to try

the dish she has just finished cooking.

A: Duqili kif ja had ewgine (Would you try the dish and give me your opinion?)

B: lahla yeqtaalek yed’din (May God not cut your hands/may God save your hands.)

We also find some situations where both formulas can be used together:

A woman visits her tailor to pick up a traditional dress. The tailor seeks the woman’s

opinion about the traditional dress

Tailor: wa kif jatek l’lebsa (How do you find the dress? /What do you think of the

Dress?)

The woman: lah yeatek as’aah, lehla yeqtaalek yed’din (May God give you health,

May God save your hands.)

It is common to hear some interlocutors in the Arab world complimenting each other

by praying for the addressee. Among Saudi women, this form of exchange is expected when

someone has recently had a bath or if they apply henna in their hair or a tattoo on their hands,

as in the following example:

b sah’hah w’r’rah’hah (May this bath or henna bring you good health and well-being)

In certain Arab cultures, a new possession is another speech situation where

complimenting is acceptable. Specifically, compliments are expected when an individual

acquires a new asset and uses it for the first time, be it jewellery, car, clothes, house, or any

other possession of value. The semantic formula employed is Nbous b’yed’dik/byed’dikum (I

kiss with your hand) was one example of this in the case of Moroccan Arabic (Anssari, 2011).

This expression is meant to encourage the addressee to compliment the speaker. The use of the

formula signals the speaker’s intent to share with the addressee the satisfaction of using or

possessing the asset for the first time as a symbol of solidarity and cooperation. Here, the

addressee must provide a suitable response; not doing so would be considered rude. To

51

illustrate, when a Saudi speaker expects a compliment regarding their new clothes, a suitable

response would be, “I wish you would live long to be able to outwear this item and many

more”.

However, the popularity of this form of compliment among Saudi Arabic speakers

might differ from one region to another. Therefore, further research is needed to investigate

different regions in Saudi Arabia.

To adhere to the rules of protocol, Arab speakers omit the quality of an object when

complimenting. This is evident when the attributes (beauty or skills) of an individual are to be

complimented. Hence, compliments can be a standalone dimension and need not explicitly

pertain to a specific quality of the addressee.

A woman talking to another about the daughter of a third person:

cend’ha wah’d I’binita mashaa llah (She has one daughter - what God wants) or Wa

shef’ti tbark llah (You see, God bless her).

It is also worth mentioning that according to Anssari (2011), the omitted compliment is

to be inferred from the conversation, and it could be that the girl mentioned here is beautiful,

skilled at her work or studies, tall, etc. The omission of the qualifier, which here should be an

adjective, is probably one of the most classic examples of the avoidance of evil eye danger.

This strategy also allows the speaker to project their goodwill. Omission, as a complimenting

strategy, was not tested in this research. However, the impact of certain other compliment

response strategies tested in this study, such as remaining silent or laughing, could be attributed

to wanting to give praise but without including an adjective.

Since this research will focus on complimenting behaviour among Saudi Arabic

speakers, it was logical to examine the preferences of the interactants in this linguistic

community regarding compliment topics. Al-Amro’s (2013) and Alqahtani’s (2016) studies

were among the few studies that informed this inquiry. Both studies revealed appearance as the

52

compliment topic most favoured by Saudi Arabic speakers, followed by performance. This

trend corresponds to the general findings substantiated by the literature reviewed in this section.

Concerning gender-based differences, appearance-specific compliments were more common

among women than men (Al-Amro, 2013; Alqahtani, 2016). However, in same-gender

interactions, while Alqahtani (2016) noted appearance to be the dominant compliment topic

(29.26 percent) among male interlocutors, Al-Amro (2013) found personality (32.1 percent) to

be the most common, and appearance to be the preferred topic in cross-gender interactions.

In addition to gender-associated trends relevant to interlocutors’ preference for

compliment topics, Al-Amro (2013) and Alqahtani (2016) also investigated the interactions in

terms of the social variable of age. According to Al-Amro (2013), both young and middle-aged

speakers of Saudi Arabic are predominantly complimented on appearance. On the other hand,

older speakers complimented primarily on personality traits. In contrast, Alqahtani (2016)

noted a preference for complimenting on appearance only in the younger participants. While

middle-aged interlocutors commonly complimented others on performance, older respondents

were more likely to give compliments on personality. Additionally, while Al-Amro (2013)

found the frequency of possession-specific compliments relatively scarce across all groups,

Alqahtani (2016) found it significant among young and middle-aged participants. Alqahtani

(2016) further reported that most of the compliments were paid to interactants in the same age

group.

In summary, for Middle Easterners, the preferred compliment topics are appearance,

skills, and personality. Women tend to both give and receive compliments more frequently than

men. Compliment topic preference in same-gender and cross-gender interactions can vary

significantly depending upon the linguistic community. The influence of age on preference for

53

compliment topics is mostly on relative frequencies of appearance, traits, and skills statistically

significant. These are the topics preferred more by younger persons.

2.4. Compliment Response Strategies

The Arab World is united by a common Islamic heritage that permeates every facet of

life. This distinct characteristic is also reflected in the compliment response strategies used by

Arabic speakers in the Middle East. As indicated earlier, substantiated by Islamic doctrines,

the belief in the evil eye is pervasive in interlocutors’ interactions. To emphasise, among Saudi

Arabic speakers, in the absence of specific religious utterances, compliments can be considered

a potential invocation of the evil eye (Al-Amro, 2013). Accordingly, multiple unique response

strategies have emerged to accommodate this belief via semantic formulas. Collectively, they

construe a linguistic ideology that illuminates the region’s cultural belief system.

Herbert (1986) proposed a taxonomy of compliment responses detailing different

strategies used by interlocutors. These are presented below.

Table 1. Herbert’s taxonomy of compliment responses detailing different strategies used by

interlocutors.

Response Type Example

A. Agreement

I. Acceptance

1. Appreciation Token

2. Comment Acceptance

3. Praise Upgrade

II. Comment History

III. Transfer

1. Reassignment

2. Return

Thanks; thank you; [smile]

Thanks, it's my favourite too.

Really brings out the blue in my eyes, doesn't

it?

I bought it for the trip to Arizona.

My brother gave it to me.

54

So's yours.

B. Nonagreement

I. Scale Down

II. Question

III. Nonacceptance

1. Disagreement

2. Qualification

IV. No Acknowledgement

It's really quite old.

Do you really think so?

I hate it.

It's all right, but Len's is nicer.

[silence]

C. Other Interpretations

I. Request

You wanna borrow this one too?

Brief descriptions of the compliment response strategies identified by Herbert (1986) are as

follows.

Table 2. Compliment response strategies identified by Herbert (1986)

Response Type Description Example

Appreciation Token A verbal acceptance of the compliment

that does not semantically cater to the

specifics of the addresser’s speech act.

Thanks!

Comment Acceptance Acceptance of the compliment is

coupled with a relevant comment about

the appreciated topic.

Yeah, green is my

favourite too!

55

Praise Upgrade Addressee accepts the compliment and

emphasises its insufficiency by

contributing to the compliment force.

I am always alluring.

Comment History Addressee abstains from taking

personal credit by offering an

impersonal detail about the appreciated

topic.

I saw many others like

this in the Riyadh

bazaar.

Reassignment The complimentary force is shifted to

either a third person or the appreciated

object.

My brother gave it to

me as a present.

Return The complimentary force is transferred

to the addresser.

You look good too.

Scale Down Addressee challenges the

complimentary force by pinpointing a

flaw or asserting that the appreciation is

overstated.

The stitching is not

perfect.

Question Addressee might request elaboration or

repetition of the original compliment or

question its sincerity or

appropriateness.

Oh ya?

Disagreement Addressee asserts that the

complimented topic does not merit

praise.

It’s not worth it.

56

Qualification Addressee merely qualifies the praise,

usually with a semantic accompaniment

such as but, though, well, etc.

Well, it’s okay but

Sami has a better one.

No Acknowledgement Addressee offers no sign of having

heard the compliment and may, instead,

respond with an immaterial topic.

[silence]

Request Addressee interprets the utterance as a

form of request and not a simple

compliment

Should I give it to you?

Although comprehensive, Herbert’s taxonomy of compliment responses is not

culturally exhaustive and therefore does not cover the wide breadth of linguistic diversity

observed across cultural boundaries. Consequently, several additional categories of

compliment responses are proposed. Namely, ‘offering’ such as responding to a compliment

on a ring or a watch by saying (please take it) and ‘invocation’ under the “agreement” category,

and ‘evil-eye protection’ under the “nonagreement” category such as responding to the same

compliment by asking the giver of the compliment to use a religious expression such as Masha

Allah. These responses have not been proposed previously as the Saudi context is unique and

distinguished by its cultural and religious norms.

Moreover, for this study, participants’ response strategies are clustered according to

five additional categories (‘thanking = appreciation’, ‘downgrading’= scale down, ‘praise

upgrade’ = praise upgrade, ‘shifting credit’= reassignment, and ‘remaining silent’ = no

acknowledgment), in addition to the ones proposed above. Additionally, response strategies

outside the spectrum of these clusters are grouped under a new category labelled ‘other

response’. Many studies have investigated the use of compliment response strategies among

57

Arabic speakers, as indicated in subsequent sections. From these studies, the pragmatic

applicability of the identified categories in Arab cultural contexts can be substantiated.

2.4.1. Thanking responses to compliments

Several studies have documented the frequency of thanking responses in the

complimenting behaviour of Arabic speakers. While thanking was identified as the most

common response by Al-Rousan et al. (2016), Mostafa (2015), Hussein (2007), and Al-Jammal

(2017), studies by Ebadi and Salman (2015) and Al-Amro (2013) suggested a few others.

Numerous explanations can be proposed for this discrepancy. Firstly, it must be acknowledged

that these studies were performed in different dialects of Arabic, namely, Egyptian, Iraqi,

Jordanian, Saudi, and Yemini. The corresponding regions are distinct in their cultural traditions

and social values that guide complimenting behaviour. To illustrate, Abduljaber and Kalin

(2019) noted that, owing to a plethora of mechanisms such as neoliberal economic

deregulation, both Jordan and Egypt are more receptive to global integration than other

conservative Arab nations. Therefore, the Egyptian and Jordanian Arabic speakers are more

liable to engage in complimenting behaviour as a positive politeness strategy.

In his seminal work The Pragmatics of Politeness, Leech (1983) proposed the

agreement maxim contending that interlocutors seek to maximise agreement and minimise

disagreement between each other. This does not necessarily exclude the possibility of

disagreement but merely implies that individuals are more forthcoming when in agreement.

Unlike the case of Jordan and Egypt, adherence to traditional protocols may still be the norm

in more conservative Arab nations. Furthermore, the inconsistency in thanking as a response

strategy can also be justified by acknowledging the compliment instead of thanking the

addressor. Ebadi and Salman (2015) accounted for the low frequency of compliment responses

by emphasising the intimate relationship between the interlocutors and the informal setting of

58

the complimenting behaviour. Another possible reason could be the requirement that thanking

be followed by another response such as comment history or comment acceptance.

In Arabic, complimenting behaviour, thanking as a standalone response strategy is

insufficient. Its usage can indicate a lack of interest in continuing the conversation on the part

of the addressee and thus becomes a potentially face-threatening act (Al-Amro, 2013).

Interestingly, Ebadi and Salman (2015) noted that the use of thanking utterances (shukren:

thank you; shukren jazillan: thank you very much) were more frequent when interlocutors

received praise from unknown individuals in the formal settings. The authors proposed a desire

on the part of the addressee to satisfy the unknown recipient’s negative face and minimise the

likelihood of imposing a face-threatening act as a possible explanation. On the other hand, in

their study conducted on a sample of Egyptian undergraduate students, Mostafa (2015) found

that thanking utterances were considered the easiest way to respond to a compliment. The

author further determined that males were more likely to use a simple “thank you”, whereas

females often accompanied the compliment with terms such as “sweetie” and “dear”.

The use of thanking responses by Arabic interlocutors is significantly different

according to gender. Mostafa (2015) affirmed that females were more likely than males to use

thanking as a compliment response strategy. This is in line with findings reported by Ebadi and

Salman (2015), Al-Rousan et al. (2016), Al-Amro (2013), and Al-Jammal (2017). The only

study that reported a greater frequency of thanking responses in male interlocutors was Hussein

(2007). Not all these studies provided detailed data on the frequency of same-gender and cross-

gender exchanges. Consequently, hypothesising about the potential rationale for the divergence

in the frequency of thanking response is somewhat complex.

Earlier, in their study on Jordanian college students, Farghal and Al-Khatib (2001)

found that males were more likely to respond with a ‘thank you’ upon being complimented by

females rather than their male peers. However, in general, Islamic societies discourage females

59

from offering compliments to their male counterparts. Therefore, the possibility of such

exchanges is somewhat limited in these countries. Al-Amro (2013) corroborated this

assumption by revealing those instances of same-gender exchanges were twice as many as

cross-gender exchanges.

Overall, the frequency of the thanking response strategy varies among Arabic speakers.

Generally, thanking is employed in combination with other responses. Global integrations and

compliance with the politeness maxim may explain the greater prevalence of thanking found

in some studies. On the other hand, the requirement to acknowledge the compliment, the

inclusion of an additional response to thanking, intimacy between the interlocutors, and

informal settings may account for the low prevalence of thanking in response to compliments

found in other Arabic studies. Some of the more common response strategies used by

compliment receivers are reviewed below, focusing on the strategies investigated in this

research.

2.4.2. Downgrading

Although the frequency of downgrading was demonstrated to be significant by Mostafa,

(2015), the majority of other studies investigating complimenting response behaviour in Arab

cultures did not find it to be a very popular strategy with Arabic speakers (e.g., Ebadi & Salman,

2015; Al-Rousan et al., 2016; Hussein, 2007; Al-Amro, 2013; Al-Jammal, 2017). Mostafa

(2015) validated the frequent utterances of downgrading, derived from her findings, by

explaining the sociocultural beliefs of Egyptian Arabic speakers. Downgrading as a strategy

for compliment responses was most common when interlocutors were praised for their ability

or character, the author confirmed. In the Egyptian belief system, character and abilities are

celebrated as gifts from Allah. Accordingly, Egyptian Arabic speakers do not consider them

topics worthy of praise since bragging about the same might hurt other individuals who are not

60

blessed similarly, as was noted by Mostafa (2015). Additionally, Mostafa (2015) proposed that

Egyptians tend to be humbled by being praised for their abilities or character.

Downgrading as a compliment response strategy can be explained by the agreement

and modesty maxims proposed by Leech (1983). According to these maxims, the addressee

must agree with the addressor but seek to minimise self-praise. The author confirmed that

downgrading as a strategy for compliment responses was most common when interlocutors

were praised for their ability or character. However, in highly-stratified Arabic societies, the

use of downgrading may not be deemed as a natural response to a compliment, for it can

potentially damage the interlocutors’ positive face. When responding to a compliment about

an object, downgrading would imply that it is of inferior quality. If a compliment is attributed

to a behaviour, downgrading would suggest it is nothing out of the ordinary. Nonetheless, in

other societies, this strategy can be used to enhance oneself in the eyes of the compliment

addressor (Gou et al., 2012). The findings reported by Mostafa (2015) support this.

To summarise, the use of downgrading as a compliment response strategy does not

usually occur among Arabic speakers. Therefore, it may potentially hurt the interlocutors’

positive face and is not acceptable in stratified Arabic societies. The agreement and modesty

maxims may help explain any deviation from this trend.

2.4.3. Shifting credit

As a compliment response strategy, the shifting of credit was found to be infrequent in

most of the studies (Mostafa, 2015; Ebadi & Salman, 2015; Al-Rousan et al., 2016; Hussein,

2007; Al-Amro, 2013; Al-Jammal, 2017). Except for one study (Al-Amro, 2013), the use of

such utterances was found to be more prevalent, although not statistically significant, among

females than males. On the other hand, Ebadi and Salman (2015) reported no significant gender

differences in this regard. Mostafa (2015) argued that interlocutors may shift credit if they

perceive the attribution of the compliment to be unmerited and that the credit would better

61

serve the individual who deserves it. Moreover, Egyptian Arabic speakers sought to reassign

credit to Allah’s will when things take a surprising turn. Yet, Mostafa (2015) observed that as

an extension of their Islamic faith, religious utterances in interlocutors’ routines were

prominent and complicated deductions. Other studies (Ebadi & Salman, 2015; Al-Amro, 2013)

also confirmed that the reassigning of credit to Allah is a customary form of shifting credit

among Arabic speakers.

Jordanian Arabic speakers concur with their Egyptian counterparts’ belief that “most of

what they possess came from God”. Notably, during cross-gender compliment exchanges, male

students were more likely to ascribe credit to Allah than did the females (Al-Rousan et al.,

2016). Al-Amro (2013) also highlighted the strong ties of religion with compliment responses

among Arabic speakers. Yet, in contrast to other studies, the author discerned that the use of

shifting credit by Saudi Arabic speakers was restricted to male interlocutors, with only one

female participant having used this response strategy. In line with the modesty maxim proposed

by Leech (1983), Al-Amro assessed reassigning credit to Allah as a manoeuvre to avoid self-

praise. The same can also be conceptualised as an evasion tool. Moreover, shifting credit serves

to reassure the compliment-giver that their praise is accepted and appreciated. Additionally, it

can act as a protective measure against any unwanted and possibly unpleasant effects of the

compliment.

It must also be recognised that shifting credit to Allah can help cultivate solidarity

among Arabic interlocutors, for Islam is the glue that binds the Arab culture. However, this

response strategy is rarely practised by Arabic interlocutors. Saudi Arabic speakers may be an

exception to this norm owing to a belief in the notion of the evil eye that will be discussed in

greater detail in Section 6.

62

2.4.4. Praise upgrade

The use of praise upgrade as a compliment response strategy in an Arabic interlocutor’s

interaction offers a unique insight into broader cultural shifts taking place within Arab

societies. Mostafa (2015) and Hussein (2007) found limited evidence to support the use of this

strategy. On the other hand, Ebadi and Salman (2015), Al-Rousan et al. (2016), and Al-Jammal

(2017) demonstrated a dominant preference for praise upgrade among Arabic speakers. Al-

Amro (2013), on the other hand, revealed limited but significant use of this response strategy.

Mostafa (2015) explained that Egyptians, irrespective of gender differences, do not engage in

the act of self-praise, for doing so is considered arrogant. Similarly, Al-Amro (2013)

characterised praise upgrade as a violation of both the modesty maxim and the Islamic and

social values framework that requires interlocutors to eschew conceit. Al-Amro (2013) offered

this example:

Compliment: sabgat alshaar ma hleet-ek (The colour of your hair makes you pretty)

Compliment response: aslaan ana daymaan helwa (Actually, I’m always pretty)

Here, the addressee accepts the compliment and, subsequently, proceeds to brag about

himself/herself with supplementary information. Thereby, the addressor’s positive face is

violated by the idea that the compliment was expected.

The use of praise upgrade as a compliment response strategy varies according to gender.

Ebadi and Salman (2015), Al-Rousan et al. (2016), and Al-Jammal (2017) affirmed that male

Arabic speakers favour such utterances more so than their female peers. However, Al-Amro

(2013) found the opposite to be true. According to Ebadi and Salman (2015), male participants

typically used praise upgrades when complimented for their possessions. These findings

support the inferences made by Mostafa (2015), who confirmed that, although rarely used,

praise upgrades tended to be limited to compliments concerning possessions. However, none

of the other reviewed studies shed light on this. Al-Amro (2013) argued that the use of praise

63

upgrade as a response strategy is common among the younger generations and not the elderly.

Interestingly, apart from Al-Amro (2013), all other reviewed studies used undergraduate and

graduate students as their samples.

Praise upgrade has emerged as a popular compliment response strategy among the

younger generation of male Arabic speakers. However, it violates Islamic traditions by

circumventing the value of modesty.

2.4.5. Offering

Multiple studies investigating compliment responses in the Arabic language have

confirmed some use of offering the complimented object to interlocutors. This type of

compliment response was noted by Al-Amro (2013) on the Najdi Saudi Arabic community, by

Mostafa (2015), on female Egyptian undergraduate students, and by Zantout (2011) on

Lebanese university students.

Other studies on the Mousli Arabic community by Hussein (2007), on Jordanian college

students by Farghal and Al-Khatib (2001), and Kuwaiti college students by Farghal and

Haggan (2006) noted its application to be more prominent. Yet, Ebadi and Salman (2015) on

Iraqi EFL learners and Al-Rousan et al. (2016) on Jordanian university students reported that

no one in their samples used the offering response strategy. According to Mostafa (2015),

among the Egyptian undergraduate students, male respondents were more likely to offer the

object of a compliment than female participants. Al-Amro (2013) and Zantout (2011)

concurred. Al-Amro (2013) conceptualised the strategy of offering as an extension of Leech’s

(1983) politeness maxims by arguing that offering allowed the addressee to repay the debt of

being complimented by the addressor. Furthermore, the act was considered as suggesting the

addressee’s manliness and generosity, the author observed.

64

Compliment response behaviour among Saudi speakers is complicated. In Saudi

Arabia, not acknowledging a compliment is regarded as disgraceful and might be inferred as a

lack of tact on the addressee’s part. Pre-established semantic formulas exist that may help guide

the response to some specific compliments. Primarily, compliment response involves offering

the complimented object to the individual giving the compliment or including religious

formulas for avoiding the evil eye. Across the Middle East, individuals offer the complimented

object as a courtesy, and the complimenting individual may accept the offer unless the object

is a high-value asset. For example, if Ahmed compliments Sami on his new dress, the expected

response from Sami is basiita; itfaddal (please take it). However, this might be problematic for

at least some non-native speakers of Arabic. From an Arabic perspective, most Arabs

understand the norms and do not take the object being offered, whereas English speakers may

feel an obligation to accept the offer.

According to Farghal and Al-Khatib (2001), the act of offering the complimented object

is primarily lip service intended to demonstrate the addressee’s generosity. Both Mostafa

(2015), studying Egyptian undergraduate students, and Al-Amro (2013), studying Najdi Saudi

Arabian community, agreed with this assumption by emphasising that, in the Arabic culture,

the addressors do accept something of value, and this is more usual when the addressee is

known to the addressor. Conversely, based on the study of the Mousli Arabic community,

Hussein (2007) observed that a nice compliment may sincerely inspire the addressee to offer

the object of a compliment as a gift:

Compliment: موبایلك حلو (You have got a nice mobile)

Compliment response: اقبلوا (It is presented to you)

Farghal and Al-Khatib (2001) affirmed that male students were more likely to offer the

object of a compliment when they were complimented by another male. Similarly, female

students were more likely to respond by offering if the compliment came from other females.

65

Along the same lines, Al-Amro (2013) documented that male speakers use an offering response

more frequently upon being complimented by other male speakers rather than female speakers.

In contrast to the findings of Farghal and Al-Khatib (2001), Hussein (2007) revealed that

women speakers use the offering response more actively than male speakers. On the other hand,

Mostafa’s (2015) study reported no difference between genders in terms of the frequency of

the offering response strategy.

In addition to gender, the frequency of the offering response strategy varies as a function

of the interlocutors’ age. The findings of Ebadi and Salman (2015) and Al-Rousan et al. (2016)

indicated no application of the offering strategy, possibly because their samples were

comprised of university students. On the other hand, Al-Amro (2013) and Hussein (2007)

performed their studies on a more comprehensive sample and established a dominant use of

the offering strategy. Moreover, while the studies by Farghal and Al-Khatib (2001) and Farghal

and Haggan (2006) confirmed frequent use of offering response despite using a sample of

college and university students, the studies were conducted much earlier than the research

undertaken by Ebadi and Salman (2015) and Al-Rousan et al. (2016). Al-Amro (2013)

explained this discrepancy by pointing to a behavioural or attitudinal shift in the younger

generations that encourages them to respond more practically.

Studies have found that the frequency of offering responses varies among Arabic

speakers. Both gender and age exert significant, although inconsistent, influence on the use of

this strategy. Some findings suggest that Arabic speakers consider offering to be a gesture of

manliness and generosity.

2.4.6. Invocation

The use of invocation responses (formulaic Islamic expressions for blessing the

addressor) by Arabic speakers is somewhat irregular. To illustrate, while Mostafa (2015), Al-

Amro (2013), Ebadi and Salman (2015), and Hussein (2007) affirmed its use to be significant,

66

other studies by Farghal and Al-Khatib (2001) and Farghal and Haggan (2006) demonstrated

it to be a low-frequency response. Interestingly, the study by Al-Rousan et al. (2016) did not

define a specific criterion that could accommodate the use of invocation responses by Arabic

speakers. Al-Amro (2013) and Mostafa (2015) argued that invocation responses were symbolic

of the strong association of religion with the compliment responses given by Arabic speakers.

Ebadi and Salman (2015) attributed this to the addressees’ desire to appear polite. Nevertheless,

the influence of Islamic rituals on complimenting behaviour of Arabic speakers is indeed

dominant (Mostafa, 2015), as exemplified below:

Compliment: Helw awi el t-shirt da (That’s a very nice T-shirt.)

Compliment response: Shukran, Rabena yekhalik (Thank you, God bless you.)

Compliment: Wow, that was brilliant, it was very good and you were confident and

convincing!

Compliment Response: El hamd lellah, ya Rab enti kaman taamely helw (Thank God,

I hope you too do well.)

The gender of the addressee also plays a significant role in predicting the frequency of

the use of the invocation response. Al-Amro (2013) and Farghal and Al-Khatib (2001) found

that men responded with invocations more frequently than female counterparts. These

revelations run contrary to the commonly-held belief that female Arabic speakers are more

religious than males. Yet, the findings of Ebadi and Salman (2015) and Hussein’s (2007)

findings noted no such difference and indicated that women used invocation responses slightly

more often than men. Additionally, Al-Amro (2013) posited that interlocutors tend to avoid

such responses when communicating with new acquaintances since the addressor might be

more attentive to the addressee’s remarks. Mostafa (2015), on the other hand, found invocation

responses to be routine.

67

The age of the interlocutors may also determine the prevalence of different compliment

response strategies, including invocation. While the majority of the reviewed studies employed

university graduate or undergraduate students as their sample and, therefore, could not establish

any variance across age, the study by Al-Amro (2013) shed some light in this context. The

author found that young-and middle-aged participants produced more invocation responses

than the older aged participants. These findings contradicted those reported earlier by Migdadi

(2003). According to Migdadi (2003), senior respondents employed invocation responses more

often than the young-and middle-aged respondents. The author also proposed the functionality

of the invocation responses extends beyond the spectrum of bestowing divine bounties upon

the addressor. Rather, it served as an indication of thanks and appreciation.

In addition to the functionalities noted above, protection against potential harm from

the evil eye was substantiated by Al-Amro (2013) and Mostafa (2015) as another reason for

using invocation responses. The authors revealed that if a compliment was interpreted as a

threat to the addressee’s negative face, the respondents took to citing Qur’anic verses or

religious formulas to protect themselves from the evil eye, as shown below in an extract taken

from (2015):

Compliment: What’s with all the technology, you became very advanced and you have

a smartphone now, it’s really nice!

Compliment response: Besm allah ma shaa Allah (In the name of God and God's will)

Farghal and Haggan (2006) and Hussein (2007) made similar assumptions. The use of

invocation responses as a form of protection against the evil eye will be analysed in detail in

section 6.4.

The reviewed studies demonstrated significant divergence in their findings related to

the use of invocation response. Nonetheless, the contribution of Islamic doctrines to the

68

eliciting of such responses remained consistent throughout. Overall, male interlocutors in close

social distance relationships were more likely to prefer this form of compliment response.

2.4.7. Remaining silent

Almost all studies investigating compliment response strategies of Arabic speakers

reported the strategy of remaining silent or giving no acknowledgment to be low in frequency

(Mostafa, 2015; Ebadi & Salman, 2015; Al-Rousan et al., 2016; Al-Amro, 2013; Farghal &

Haggan, 2006). Mostafa (2015) observed that, in some cases, the addressee can respond by

changing the subject to evade directly responding to the compliment:

Compliment (female): You are a gentleman.

Compliment response (male): hmm…wenty akhbarek eah fel mozakra (Hmm… and

how’s studying going with you?)

Several factors can prompt the addressee to use silence or non-acknowledgment as a response

strategy. Al-Amro (2013) demonstrated that men were more likely than women to not respond,

and Ebadi and Salman (2012) and Al-Rousan et al. (2016) confirmed this assertion. One

possible explanation for this disparity could be that the women are more attentive to the

addressor’s face than are the men. Furthermore, women might not avoid responding to

compliments, for they are more likely than men to focus on others’ feelings.

The social distance between the interlocutors and the compliment topic can also predict

the choice of remaining silent. For example, Ebadi and Salman (2015) found that Iraqi students

tend to offer no response to appearance-related compliments given by unknown addressors.

The authors explained that in some Arab cultures, compliments offered by strangers are

perceived as an offence, and in reaction, the addressee considers himself/herself justified in

offering no response. Indeed, Al-Hilu (2017) validated this with similar findings in his study

on Irish Arabic speakers. Al-Amro (2013) and Farghal and Haggan (2006) proposed that not

responding to a compliment could lead to various interpretations of the receiver’s behaviour.

69

The giver of the compliment could consider the absence of verbal response to be a sign of

ingratitude or indifference. On the other hand, Al Falasi (2007) suggested that silence could be

a suitable response depending on the addressor’s gender. Among Emirati Arabic speakers,

being silent is considered an appropriate response for female addressees complimented by male

addressors.

Arabic speakers make infrequent use of remaining silent as a compliment response

strategy. Interlocutors’ gender, social distance, and the topic of the compliment can influence

the addressee’s choice of remaining silent. Moreover, silence can lead to numerous

interpretations regarding the addressees’ perception of the compliment.

2.4.8. Other responses

Apart from the study conducted by Mostafa (2015), almost no study reviewed here

informs the continuum of compliments that fall beyond the spectrum of Herbert’s (1986)

taxonomy of compliment responses and the strategies already explored. According to Mostafa

(2015), the addressee may respond using many other strategies, including, but not limited to,

sarcasm, jokes, laughter, flirtatious comments, and fishing for more compliments.

Additionally, addressees may also respond with nonverbal gestures such as hugs, kisses, high

fives, and pats on the shoulder, all of which are significant. Examples are:

Compliment (male): ea da you look so pretty (What’s that! You look so pretty.)

Compliment response (female): (She hugs him.)

Compliment (male): Oh, what’s that? You lost weight and you look perfectly fit now!

Compliment response (male): High-five me.

The use of sarcasm as a compliment response strategy was more prevalent among male students

than their female counterparts. It was primarily produced when the addressee did not like the

compliment or interpreted it in a way different from its intended meaning:

70

Compliment (male): I love the colour of this room, an excellent choice; it’s pleasing to

the eye!

Compliment response 1 (male): omy we okhty byetfarago aal mosalsal el turky rooh

etfarag maahom (My mom and sister are watching the Turkish series, go sit with them.)

Compliment response 2 (male): ya beh el betoolo da aeb we haram (Mr. what you’re

saying is wrong and unethical – inspired by the first movie in the Egyptian cinema

depicting homosexuals.)

Sarcastic responses were primarily disturbing and reflected the deep-seated homophobia of the

participants (Mostafa, 2015).

Jokes as a compliment response strategy were more frequent than sarcasm and, in this regard,

the genders did not differ. Mostafa (2015) categorised this response strategy as an indirect way

of accepting compliments:

Compliment: Wow, that was brilliant, it was very good and you were confident and

convincing!

Compliment response 1: el abd lellah mesek el hadeed tanah (Literal meaning: God's

worshipper (I) held an iron rod and bent it.) (Intended meaning: I can do anything.)

Compliment response 2: kolo beldahlaka (Literal meaning: This word is

meaninglessly inspired by an Arabic movie called “EL Kaif” which contained

numerous

meaningless words.) (Intended meaning: I tried to play it smart.)

Laughter as a compliment response strategy was rarely used, limited to female respondents,

and considered as an indication of compliment acceptance. On the other hand, flirtatious

comments were exclusively used by male participants when responding to female addressors:

Compliment response: shukran, enty el helwa, we amar w maadeya, aaool eah tani

bas? (Thanks, you're the one who's beautiful and outstanding, what else should I say?)

71

Lastly, fishing for more compliments as a response strategy was primarily limited to female

participants, and only four instances of its use were observed in a corpus of 1042 responses.

In a politeness study on requests and apologies, Qari (2017) noted that male and female

Saudi native speakers used direct strategies for requests. Saudi EFL and British speakers were

more indirect. The greatest number of modifiers in the form of religious prayers were used by

Saudi natives as well as EFL speakers. However, the directness of Saudis was not a mark of

impoliteness but only a linguistic form as they used religious modifiers also. Saudi EFL

learners tended to be closer to the British speakers, especially regarding queries on preparatory

forms, reflecting their exposure to the outside world.

Saudi EFL speakers who translated directly from native Arabic to English tended to

make grammatical errors. Also noted were the negative pragmatic transfers by Saudis from the

hearer’s perspective in contrast with the speaker’s perspective used by English speakers.

Gender differences were noted in the case of Saudis but not British speakers. In another study

conducted by Almadani (2021) on the speech act of refusal of requests and invitations, Arab

and African Saudi Hijazi men and women used the same pragmatic markers in their refusals.

However, women and Arab Saudi people used more refusals and pragmatic markers than men.

Women were more confident in refusal speech acts than men. The level of difficulty of refusing

was similar for both groups, indicating the influence of their cultural integration.

In refusals to relatives and friends, more variations of indirect refusal strategies were

used. There was greater hesitation in refusing relatives compared to strangers. Gender had some

effect only on pragmatic markers. Greater hesitation to refuse invitations or requests from the

opposite gender than from the same gender was also noted. Social, pragmatic, and religious

reasons accounted for these behaviours. Saudi and British university students showed

differences in their attitudes to apologising to their parents, as observed by Qari I. (2019). This

72

was attributed to the collectivist/ individualistic cultural dimensions of the two groups. Saudi

males preferred negative politeness strategies to express their apologies, while Saudi females

preferred positive politeness strategies. Saudi males seemed to give respect to their parents

more than females. Moreover, the gender effect on apologising strategies depended on the

situation.

2.5. Intercultural communication and religion

Complimenting behaviour in intercultural contexts assumes great importance in the

modern globalised world. Hence, a review of literature is conducted here on intercultural

communication and how religion plays a significant role in prescribing the codes for such

interactions.

For individuals practising the same religion, it is a vital force behind every interaction.

In western countries, intercultural communication might not be affected by the religion of a

foreigner. However, in Middle Eastern countries and others such as Malaysia, religion does

affect intercultural communication. These countries, where religion is a significant factor in

interpersonal communications, will hold less attraction for students who seek higher education

there (Nadeem et al., 2017). In their work on intercultural sensitivity between the Shia and

Sunni communities of Iran, Ameli and Molei (2012) used Bennett’s intercultural theory.

According to this theory, the development of communication among people decreases their

intercultural sensitivity levels. Ameli and Molei assumed religious affiliation as an index of

development of communication among the people in three cities of Iran. The separate

measurement of intercultural sensitivity in Shia and Sunni communities showed decreased

intercultural sensitivity due to increased communication between them. This finding was

attributed to the effect of minimisation (as per Bennett’s theory) of differences and

maximisation of similarities between them during communications.

73

According to Rüpke (2015), human interactions are determined by acting religiously

irrespective of time, finding a collective religious identity, and religious influence on

communication. In Indonesia, Hadi Kusuma and Susilo (2020) found that the strong foundation

laid by the inherent multiculturalism in the Indonesian culture promoted tolerance towards

cultural and religious differences in communities. For Saudi students in the USA, cultural

differences between home and their host country have created difficulties in verbal and non-

verbal communications with non-Saudi communities regarding non-discrimination of gender,

especially due to negative perceptions against Muslims in the USA after 9/11 incident (Sharma

& Shearman, 2021). A similar problem was encountered by Saudi female international

students, with added problems related to acting without male permission, interacting with

males, and using a free and open internet due to a digital cultural shift towards western systems

(Binsahl et al., 2020). In both cases, poor language proficiency added to their communication

problems.

Even large corporations make the mistake of not understanding and adapting to the

socio-cultural fabric of Saudi Arabia. For example, IKEA, a leading Swedish furniture

distributor, failed to adjust its global values and brand philosophy to the strict cultural

requirements of Saudi Arabia. IKEA, Starbucks, H&M, and many other western companies

had changed their media promotional images to Saudi cultural requirements, especially gender.

However, IKEA drew critical media attention due to its strong values regarding diversity,

gender equality, and inclusion, unlike the other aforementioned companies. Over-interpretation

of modesty and decency in the case of women led to the adaption of its promotional picture.

IKEA’s attempts to stretch cultural restrictions in Saudi Arabia increased over time. To prevent

criticisms, IKEA could have adapted to Saudi culture more acceptably (Morgan, 2021).

74

Altwaian (2017), in his Ph.D. thesis, pointed out that lack of trust can impede

intercultural communications in multinational companies which have employees belonging to

different cultures. Apart from the trust characteristics of ability, honesty, and reciprocity, social

and cultural variables (education, religion, organisational environment, culture) were found to

be important in building trust among members of multicultural teams in Saudi public

companies. Members of the same culture tended to develop trust more easily than those with

different cultures (Altwaian, 2017).

2.6. Saudi Vision 2030 in the context of intercultural communication

Saudi Vision 2030 (Saudi Arabia, 2016), launched in 2016, has three themes: a vibrant

society, a thriving economy, and an ambitious nation. The vision was conceived and initiated

by the progressive Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, who announced the programme on

25 April 2016. Definite plans have been made for the implementation and budget required for

the country’s accelerated economic development programme. A clear path has been defined to

achieve the three main goals and other associated goals. One of the goals related to the theme

of a thriving economy is raising skill levels to global standards, for which the main tool is

education. The English language can contribute to the success of Vision 2030 by helping to

transform the country into a knowledge-based economy aligned with 21st-century

competencies (Alzahrani, 2017).

English being the global language, communicative competency in English facilitates

the development of international awareness and interculturally competent leadership

(Alhuthaif, 2019). However, the conservative attitudes of Islamic culture could impede the

achievement of this indirect aim of Vision 2030. As shown later, traditional belief in the evil

eye is relatively strong in Islamic culture and weak in western cultures. This difference can

influence business and cross-cultural social interactions.

75

The main objective of Saudi Vision 2030 is to improve the nation’s capabilities to the

international level as a catalyst for rapid economic growth. This will necessitate Saudi citizens

interacting with people from other cultures. The Islamic norms of complimenting and attaching

religious expressions to them may not be enforceable in such intercultural communications.

Vision 2030 needs to prepare people for this paradigm shift.

2.7. Belief in the evil eye and its relationship with complimenting behaviour

This section reviews the literature on the belief in the evil eye phenomenon in different

cultures, particularly Islamic culture, by considering its relationship with complimenting

behaviour and methods prescribed and used to ward off the evil eye.

2.7.1. Sight in interpersonal communication

The eye is the main organ that connects individuals with their external environment and

plays several roles in the communication processes. In addition to the designated primary

function of seeing, the eye is assigned different socio-cultural purposes and interpreted

accordingly. The way individuals look is interpretable, for it can indicate the psychological and

the emotional state of a person per se on the one hand, and it may convey information about a

person’s attitude vis-à-vis others, on the other (Anssari, 2011). Hence, a look can be unhappy,

cheerful, rude, pompous, contemptuous, supportive, bold, attractive, perceptive, dismissive,

etc. Additionally, depending upon the intensity and duration of a look, societies may

contextualise it as glancing, staring, peeking, ogling, observing, scanning, surveying,

monitoring, or appraising, to name a few. Moreover, the use of eye contact can serve several

communicative tasks as a polite/impolite strategy, an indicator of high/low socioeconomic

status, or a sign of respect or humiliation.

76

In western cultures, maintaining eye contact with the interlocutor is appreciated as a

marker of good manners and considered a positive quality in face-to-face communication. The

person who looks into the eyes of their interlocutor is perceived as being true and trustworthy.

It may be a marker of superiority and high social status in other settings, such as in the

employer/employee relationship or the student/teacher scenario. However, in some societies,

looking fixedly into the eyes of the interlocutor may not be welcome and is regarded as a

gesture of rude behaviour, bad manners, insubordination, defiance, and disrespect, as is the

case with high/low social classes (castes) in India. Also, in certain Arab nations, avoiding eye

contact, especially by women in their interaction with men, is considered a sign of being very

polite and is highly esteemed. Eyes also play other significant roles in the communication

process, including signalling an intent to communicate or avoid communication.

Beebe et al. (2016) document multiple functions performed by eye contact in

interpersonal relationships. Monitoring occurs when a speaker, via the use of eyes, attempts to

gather information from the listeners to verify if they are being understood or whether the other

interlocutors want to be given a turn to speak. The speaker can also regulate the conversation

with his eyes by looking away as a strategy to maintain the floor or by giving the listener a

prolonged look at the end of his utterance to signal that a response is desired (Beebe et al.,

2016). Gaze avoidance or omission is also a communicative device, whereby interlocutors may

indicate a loss of interest or lack of readiness to communicate with the speaker.

Eye-contact avoidance or even the proscription of the use of sight as a communication

device is found in many religious rites and contexts. For example, during the Catholic rite of

confession, there is no visual contact between the confessor and the priest hearing the

confession. This arrangement might be intended to create an atmosphere of psychological ease

and trust for the confessor, to avoid distractions for either party, and to reinforce the notion of

confidentiality. Another instance of eye-contact avoidance as a religious practice can be found

77

in India, where individuals from lower castes are prohibited from idol viewing or gazing upon

the upper caste members. The proscription of eye contact is also evident in the notion of the

evil eye. Across many cultures/religions, as the subsequent section explains, individuals are

expected to protect themselves from the evil eye being cast upon them by giving no opportunity

for others to see what they do or have. According to (DeVito, 2002), eye avoidance can serve

several different functions. Non-intrusion in the privacy of others is one function of avoiding

eye contact. When you avoid eye contact or avert your glance, you may help others maintain

their privacy. Hiding or closing the eyes to block out unpleasant visual stimuli is another

example. Concerning complimenting behaviour, if an evil eye is suspected, eye contact with

the suspected source is avoided. As it is not always possible to identify such sources, a safer

means to prevent the harmful effects of the evil eye is to pray to God, as will be explained in

section 2.7.6 below.

2.7.2 Sociocultural insight into the evil eye

Those who believe in the evil eye fear that harm will befall both individuals and animals

who become the victims of the gaze or praise of an admirer, which is usually unintentional. It

is also known as the invidious eye. Since the Sumerian period, the belief in the evil eye has

been maintained in nearly all cultures, and the term has many different linguistic expressions.

In Arabic, "evil eye" is known as ʿayn al-ḥasūd (عين الحسود eye of the envious), in Hebrew

as ʿáyin hā-ráʿ ( עין הרע), in Aramaic as "ayna bisha" (ܐܝܢ ܫܐ ܥ in Kurdish çaw e zar (eye of ,(ܒܝ

evil/sickness), in Persian as chashm zakhm ( چشم زخم eye-caused injury) or chashm e bad (bad

eye), in Turkish as kem göz (evil eye, usually used in plural form as kem gözler, evil eyes)

or Nazar (nazar is from Arabic نظر Nadhar, which means eye vision or eyesight), similarly,

in Urdu, the word Nazar ( نظر) or Boori Nazar (bad look) is used. In Punjabi, the words pehri

nazar are used. In Hindi, the evil eye is referred to as Drishti. In Amharic buda, in Pashto Bado

Stergo, and also Nazar, in Greek as το μάτι (to máti), in Albanian as syni keq (or "syri i keq"),

78

in Romanian as deochi, in Spanish as mal de ojo, in Italian as il malocchio, in Neapolitan

dialect as 'o mma'uocchje, in Portuguese mau-olhado ("act of giving an evil/sick look"), in

Swedish as ge onda ögat (to give an evil look), and in Hawaiian it is known as "stink

eye" or maka pilau meaning "rotten eyes" (World Heritage, 2018).

Belief in the evil eye has been in existence for thousands of years across the world, and

its presence is also prevalent in the folk cultures of Scotland and North America (Berger, 2012).

The fear of the evil glance, which is sometimes referred to as overlooking, fascination, or

admiration, can be traced back to the seventh century B.C. in the literature on Acadian and

Assyrian civilisations. In the third century B.C., evidence of its presence can be found in the

Sumerian myths of Mesopotamia that confirm the belief in the eye and the attributing of death

to the evil eye. They include the narrative of Inanna’s journey into the netherworld, where she

is initially the victim of an evil glance but later becomes its visual perpetrator (Kotzé, 2017).

Also, in the story of Gilgamesh and Huwawa, the evil eye does not induce death, but fear in

Gilgamesh when the Huwawa monster gives him the evil glance (Kotzé, 2017). Numerous

stories and myths illustrate how the evil eye can cause death or significant destruction.

The evil eye is also referenced in numerous verses of the Bible. According to Proverb

23:6, one should not consummate the bread of those who carry the Evil Eye. Similarly, in

Samuel 18:9, Saul is believed to have had an evil glance because of the way he looked at David

with jealousy. Additionally, in ancient Greece, there was a belief that envious or angry

individuals had some malicious influence coming from their eyes, which infected the air and

caused corruption of both living creatures and inanimate things. It was believed that a person

with this power could look at anything excellent, and it would lead to the surrounding area

being filled with a malicious presence, in addition to the transmission of envenomed

exhalations to any beings in the vicinity (Berger, 2012). The ancient Romans extended the

79

belief in the evil eye to encompass even the gods. They believed that the gods could look

enviously at a man’s fortunes, resulting in the latter’s destruction.

The evil eye is perceived as a carrier of great misfortune, and millions worldwide

continue to be influenced by this belief. This ancient notion is derived from the assumption that

specific beings such as witches and sorcerers can, through their gaze, bring about illness, death,

or significant harm to a person, plant, or property (Berger, 2012; Gershman, 2015). On most

occasions, those found to possess this threatening glance are women who are older and

unmarried. These women might not even be aware that they possess such power since it could

have been simply passed down to them, much like any other genetic trait such as hair colour

(Berger, 2012). The one upon whom the evil eye has been cast is usually considered to be

affected by it. Young, beautiful children are regarded as being especially susceptible to its

influence. This effect may also fall on pregnant women and brides. In certain cultures, no one

is excluded from the adverse effects of this malicious behaviour. Hence, individuals seek the

intervention of a superpower (for Muslim believers: Allah Almighty) to save themselves from

the adverse effects.

The victim of the evil eye is expected to manifest specific signs of this misfortune.

These may include but are not limited to headaches, fever, gastrointestinal issues, lassitude,

chills, nocturnal emissions, impotence, seizures, and death (Berger, 2012). A new mother may

be unable to feed her baby because her breast milk dries up, and similarly, a cow’s milk

production may stop. Similarly, fruit trees that are recipients of the evil eye tend to weaken. In

short, the envious eye dries up liquids. The harm that befalls a victim is construed to be

significantly magnified if the carrier of this evil glance lavishes compliments on him or her

(Berger, 2012). It is believed that the evil eye may befall beloved ones and may also destroy

valuable belongings. However, it is different from witchcraft, which is deemed intentional,

whereas the evil eye is generally perceived as an unwilled act.

80

The evil eye concept is so deeply rooted in some cultures that it has been held

responsible for deteriorating economic situations. This belief is prevalent in the Arab world,

although individuals react differently based on their socioeconomic background and level of

education (Gershman, 2015). The superstition is centred on the eye because, for human beings,

vision is their most dominant sense, as aforementioned. Even in ancient civilisations, good

vision facilitated human survival and reproduction by enabling successful hunting, protection

against attacks, and search for edible items (Berger, 2012). In anatomy, the eye is seen as the

window of the brain, while in poetry, it is perceived to be the window to the soul. In Persian

culture, it is linked to emotions such as love and envy (Cuesta & Yousefian, 2015). An intense

gaze is viewed as a signal of dominance, aggression, and power in people and animals. When

the powerful one stares, the other party is forced to avoid this gaze by looking aside or down.

In contrast to other cultures, among Islamic societies, the belief in the evil eye originates

from the religion itself, and individuals act and react according to the dictates of religion. As

mentioned in section 1.2 above, the evil eye is mentioned in Soorat al-Qalam chapter 68

verse 51. “Those who disbelieve almost strike you down with their malicious stares when

they hear the reminder [the Qur’an], and they say: He is surely insane!” Also, the sura talks

about the evil eye and its translation (see below)

ٱلفلق ت في ٱلعقد (3) ومن شر غاسق إذا وقب (2) من شر ما خلق (1) قل أعوذ برب ثومن شر حاسد إذا (4) ومن شر ٱلنف

5((حسد

Say: I seek refuge that is, 1 turn to and seek protection with the Lord of the rising dawn that is,

the One Who causes the dawn to break from the harm and mischief of what He has created.

This includes all those whom Allah has created humans, jinn, and animals; one must seek

refuge with their Creator from any harm or mischief that there may be in them. Then He

describes in specific terms what He has mentioned in general terms, as He says: from harm and

81

mischief in the night when the darkness grows intense that is from the harm and evil of what

may happen in the night when the darkness of night covers the earth, and many evil spirits and

harmful animals move about and from the harm and mischief of those who blow upon knots

that is from the harm and mischief of witches who perform their witchcraft by blowing on knots

that they tie to cast spells and from the harm and mischief of the envier when he envies. The

envier is the one who would like the blessing to be taken away from the one whom he envies,

so he strives to cause it to be taken away by whatever means he can. Therefore, there is a need

to seek refuge with Allah from his harm and mischief, and to foil his plan. The word translated

here as (envier) also includes the one who puts the evil eye on others because the evil eye only

emanates from an envier who is evil. This surah refers to seeking refuge with Allah from all

kinds of evil and harm in both general and specific terms. It indicates that magic or witchcraft

is something real, the harm of which is to be feared, so one should seek refuge with Allah from

it and from those who practise it (As-adi 2018). The evil eye is mentioned in Sunnah, as given

below-

The Prophet, peace, and blessings be upon him, said, “The evil eye is real. If anything could

precede the divine decree, it would be preceded by the evil eye. When you are asked to

perform a ritual bath, then do so” Abu (Amina Elias, 2022).

For these reasons, among others, people have become fascinated with the eye as a

means of bringing harm to other beings. The lavish praise is dangerous because it can induce

envy, which is linked to the evil eye (Berger, 2012). Notably, an admired individual is

susceptible to provoking jealousy in others. Hence, protection against the evil eye is seen as

crucial, especially for those considered vulnerable. Some of the approaches include the use of

incantations and special prayers; apotropaic amulets; engaging in rituals that entail utilising

fluids such as saliva, water, and milk; having items floating on water such as oil, hot coals, and

82

bread, and tying coloured ribbons around the vulnerable beings (Berger, 2012). Societies use

different rituals to protect themselves, beloved ones, and their belongings from the evil eye.

Various rituals can be performed specifically to obtain an accurate diagnosis of the evil

eye, as per some rituals described by (Pieroni & Giusti, 2002), (Abu-Rabia, 2005), and

(Wellman & Kavadias, 2021). These rituals tend to vary across cultures and may require the

use of unique ingredients. To illustrate, eastern European’s practise dropping burnt match

heads or charcoal into water. If the solute floats over the surface, the one under treatment is

assumed to have contacted the evil eye. In Greece, wax is dropped into holy water, and if it

dissolves or goes to the sides of the bowl, the patient is believed to have been struck by the evil

eye. Across cultures, numerous symptoms are regarded as being circumstantial, whereas others

must be detected by other established means, as exemplified by (Al-Habeeb, 2003), (Devi,

2003) and by (Reminick, 1974). The circumstantial symptoms are those observed when a

healthy individual suddenly becomes ill following contact with someone. For those who

believe in the phenomenon, the inexplicable deterioration in health is attributed to the influence

of the evil eye.

2.7.3. Evil eye in the Arabian Peninsula

Compliment response behaviour among people in Islamic states is profoundly mediated

by their religious beliefs, the Holy Qur’an, and Hadith. Moreover, different cultural protocols

must constantly be adhered to during social interactions. Accordingly, interlocutors have

developed numerous linguistic formats and semantic formulas that guide the production of both

compliments and their responses. Among the natives of the Arabian Peninsula, these strategies

are intended to ward off the evil eye. Indeed, the belief in the evil eye within the Arabic culture

and among Saudi Arabic speakers influences their responses to compliments.

83

2.7.4. Religion and compliment behaviour in Arabian Peninsula

Religion is a cultural element that permeates social interactions in Arabic-speaking

cultures, especially within the Arabian Peninsula. As a symbol of appropriateness and good

manners, religious invocations or allusions are common in interlocutors’ speech, be it for

greeting: assalamu alaikum (peace upon you); departing: ma’a assalama (with peace);

congratulating: taabaraka Allah (God bless), maa shaa Allah (what God wants); inviting:

billahi alik + invitation (God sake); accepting an invitation: in shaa Allah (if God wants);

agreeing/disagreeing: wallahi + opinion (in the name of God, I think that); blaming: Allah

yesamhak (may God forgive); or promising: in shaa Allah (God willing). Interlocutors are

generally expected to use appropriate religious expressions as markers of politeness and

concern for the addressee (Qanbar, 2012). Nevertheless, the pragmatic interpretation of these

religious routines correlates with the content of the compliments as speech acts. Generally,

compliments in the Arabian Peninsula are characterised by certain cultural constraints

associated with specific connotations and a fear of the evil eye.

The Arabic language derives its vigour from religion. Muslims believe that the Holy

Quran is a miracle from God – as evidenced by the illiteracy of His prophet Mohammad, SAW,

who was unable to read or write – and claim that it was revealed to challenge the highest

linguistic ability of Arabs and non-Arabs. However, the influence of religion on compliments

is not evident in English-speaking populations. According to Almansoob et al. (2019), none of

the American participants in their study used religious expressions, whereas it was very

common (in fact highly recommended) in Arab communities. In Muslim nations, including

Arab countries, individuals respond to compliments with references to the Holy Quran and

Hadith, such as “God bless you,” “praise be to God,” or “if God wills”. Thus, understanding

the relationship between the Arabic language and Islam can offer insight into the prevalent

sociolinguistic trends within the Arabian Peninsula.

84

What confuses westerners is not the content of Islam but its impact on its followers.

According to Iseman (1978), “there is simply no comparable experience in the West . . . it

remains beyond our grasp.” “Religiocentrism” is one of the pathways through which Islam

influences Arabic communication patterns, as discerned from the routine usage of phrases such

as la illuh il-alluh (there is no God but God) and Muktoob (it is written). Doing so ensures that

the profound belief in the will of God is reflected in Islamic Arabic conversations. Moreover,

the utterance of religious formulas such as maa shaa Allah, allahuma salli ala alnnabi (may

God bless the Prophet), and Allahu akbar (God is the greatest) is one of the ways by which the

addressee can be assured that no envy was involved. Otherwise, compliments and favourable

comments might be perceived as an invocation of the evil eye.

Belief in Allah, acknowledging His supremacy, and affiliation with Islam are the

pivotal tenets of Muslim life. Furthermore, from an Islamic perspective, no mortal possesses

the power to influence events, for all depends on the will of God. The fatalist belief in Islamic

Arab countries maintains that human beings are incapable of controlling events. Allah

commands all, which is reflected in various speech acts. The situation is different in the western

world, where the prevailing belief is that the individual has a certain control over their

environment and destiny. In the Arab world, when offering compliments, the speaker is

expected to include some form of religious expressions containing “blessings” or

“benedictions”, including maa shaa Allah and Allah yeiteek alafya (may God give you more

health) (Cuesta & Yousefian, 2015). Failure to do so is seen as a warning signal that misfortune

could follow (Mostafa, 2015). This formality serves many roles as a form of praise, prayer,

expression of happiness, a revelation of decorum, a compliment intensifier, and a mitigating

strategy.

85

The formula for integrating compliments with religious expressions is usually

employed as a protective invocation when complimenting personally or socially valuable

things, including wealth, offspring, beauty, skills, and social accomplishments. It

offers them protection against the evil eye. Usually, individuals practise saying them out aloud.

Additionally, these religious expressions can also be written and worn by those who think they

could become victims of the evil eye. However, such amulets are not popular in Saudi Arabia,

where trinkets are regarded as signs of disrespect to God. When complimenting, established

formulas allow Saudi admirers to be polite and save face by presenting no apparent threat to

the addressee. This can be seen in the practice of speech acts, especially when giving and

receiving compliments.

Numerous Islamic sources document the phenomenon of the evil eye. The Holy Quran

characterises jealousy and envy as satanic tactics that breed dissension. Jealously was the first

sin to be committed both in Heaven and on Earth. The surahs of al-Falaq (113) and Al-Naas

(114) contain prayers that offer believers some protection against the evil suggestions of Satan.

Say: “I seek refuge with (Allah) the Lord of the daybreak, from the evil of what He has

created, and from the evil of the darkening (night) as it comes with its darkness, and

from the evil of those who practice witchcraft when they blow in the knots, and from

the evil of the envier when he envies” (Surah 113:1-5).

Say: “I seek refuge with (Allah) the Lord of mankind, the King of mankind, the God of

mankind, from the evil of the whisperer who withdraws, who whispers in the

breasts of mankind, of jinns and men” (Surah 114:1-6).

On several occasions, the Holy Quran emphasises the dangers of jealousy and envy. The stories

of Habil and Qabil and Yousaf and Yaqoob suggest that even family members are susceptible

to Satan’s lure. Moreover, the Prophet, SAW (peace be upon him), was also made aware that

the evil eye might be cast upon him by non-believers afflicted with hatred and jealously.

86

And indeed, those who disbelieve would almost make you slip with their eyes when

they hear the message, and they say, "indeed, he is mad" (Surah 68:51).

Both the Holy Quran and Hadith acknowledge envy and jealousy as evils that can

overcome men and lead them to harm others. The sacred texts urge believers to seek refuge

with Allah Almighty:

And if there comes to you from Satan an evil suggestion, then seek refuge in Allah.

Indeed, He is the Hearing, the Knowing (Surah 41:36).

And say, "My Lord, I seek refuge in You from the incitements of the devils

(Surah23:97).

Envy is an evil power emerging from the soul of the envier through the eye towards the

envied. Thus, integrating compliments with religious expressions is usually employed as a

protective invocation when complimenting personally or socially valuable things, including

wealth, offspring, beauty, skills, and social accomplishments.

Perhaps, the most popular Islamic phrase used to ward off evil is maa shaa Allah. The

literal meaning of maashallah and its use as a protective invocation is that nothing can happen

against the will of Allah (God). The communicative functions of maašaallah are that they are

used as a mitigating device, whereby it is used to soften face-threatening acts when

complimenting a person and also to remind the receiver of the compliment that s/he is fully

protected by the Diving Will from envious look. Reporting on the authority of Abu Hurayrah,

Imam Al-Bukhari agreed that the Prophet said Alain Haq (the evil eye is a fact) but that it

should not be taken for granted, for it might not affect the targeted individual unless Allah

Almighty so desires. The Holy Quran (Surah 64:11) stipulates that “no disaster strikes except

by permission of Allah. And whoever believes in Allah - He will guide his heart. And Allah

is Knowing of all things.” Abiding by this instruction, Muslims use the expression maa shaa

Allah before giving compliments or praise.

87

Multiple authentic books of the Hadith lend credibility to the evil eye phenomenon.

Umm Salama detailed that the Prophet Muhammad, SAWS, glimpsed a girl with black spots

on her face. The prophet, SAWS, then observed, “she is under the effect of an evil eye; so,

treated her with a ruqya”. Moreover, Ibn ‘Abbas reported the Prophet, SAW, as saying, “the

influence of an evil eye is a fact; if anything would precede the destiny it would be the influence

of an evil eye, and when you are asked to take bath (as a cure) from the influence of an evil

eye, you should take bath.” Other Hadith verses from various books substantiate the evil eye

phenomenon and integrate it into Islam.

In The Book of Seeking Refuge with Allah, Abu Sa'eed said: “The Messenger of Allah

(Peace be upon him) used to seek refuge from the evil eye of the Jinn and the evil eye

of humans.

When Al-Mu'awwadhatan were revealed, he started to recite them and stopped reciting

anything else.”

In Kitab Al-Tibb, Ruqyah reported the Prophet (peace be upon him) as saying: “No

spell is to be used except for the evil eye, or the sting of poisonous insects, or bleeding.”

In The Book on Purification, Abu Hurairah reported Allah’s messenger, SAW, saying:

“When a Muslim, or believer, performs Wudu', washing his face, every evil that he

looked at with his eyes, leaves with the water - or with the last drop of water, or an

expression similar to that - and when he washes his hands, every evil he did with his

hands leaves with the water - or with the last drop of water - until he becomes free of

sin.”

The Muwatta Malik records: “Yahya related to me from Malik that Muhammad ibn Abi

Umama ibn Sahl ibn Hunayf heard his father say, "My father, Sahl ibn Hunayf did a

ghusl at al-Kharrar. He removed the jubbah he had on while Amir ibn Rabia was

watching, and Sahl was a man with beautiful white skin. Amir said to him, 'I have never

88

seen anything like what I have seen today, not even the skin of a virgin.' Sahl fell ill on

the spot, and his condition grew worse. Somebody went to the Messenger of Allah, may

Allah bless him and grant him peace, and told him that Sahl was ill, and could not go

with him. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, came to

him, and Sahl told him what had happened with Amir. The Messenger of Allah, may

Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, 'Why does one of you kill his brother? Why

did you not say, "May Allah bless you?" (ta baraka-llah) The evil eye is true. Do wudu

from it.' Amir did wudu from it and Sahl went with the Messenger of Allah, may Allah

bless him and grant him peace, and there was nothing wrong with him.”

In The Book of Virtues, Abu Sa'id Al-Khudri affirmed: “The Messenger of Allah (ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص)

used to seek protection against the evil of jinn and the evil eyes till Surat Al-Falaq and

Surat An-Nas were revealed. After they were revealed, he took to them for seeking

Allah's protection and left everything besides them.”

Before the advent of Islam, the Arabs extensively utilised amulets and trinkets to ward

off evil. Yet, following their conversion to the monotheistic religion, the practice was

abandoned. Islam offered protection against the harmful effects of the evil eye by drawing upon

the seminal concepts of Tauheed (the unity of God) and Tawakkul (trusting in God’s plan).

And will provide for him from where he does not expect. And whoever relies upon

Allah - then He is sufficient for him. Indeed, Allah will accomplish His purpose. Allah

has already set for everything a [decreed] extent (Surah 65:3).

Certainly, will the believers have succeeded (Surah 23:1).

Those to whom hypocrites said, "Indeed, the people have gathered against you, so fear

them." But it [merely] increased them in faith, and they said, "Sufficient for us is Allah,

and [He is] the best Disposer of affairs." (Surah 3:173).

89

And to Allah belong the best names, so invoke Him by them. And leave [the company

of] those who practice deviation concerning His names. They will be recompensed for

what they have been doing (Surah 7:180).

Thus, in conformity to Tauheed and Tawakkul, Muslims have come to identify the book of

God as being imbued with ultimate healing and protective powers. The Holy Quran prescribes:

And when I am ill, it is He who cures me (Surah 26:80)

And We send down of the Quran that which is healing and mercy for the believers,

but it does not increase the wrongdoers except in loss (Surah 17:82).

According to the Holy Quran, believers can protect themselves from the evil eye by

placing their trust in one God and seeking refuge with Him against all evils. They may practise

Sadaqah (charity in the name of Allah Almighty) or perform incantations of the prayers

stipulated in the Quran and Hadith (Ruqyah), or wear amulets (Ta'wiz). Seeking refuge with

Allah Almighty is the dominant paradigm in Islamic traditions that detail the fight against all

evils. To emphasise, Ibn ‘Abbas affirms that the Prophet, SAW, used to seek refuge with Allah

for Al-Hasan and Al-Husain and say: "Your forefather (i.e., Abraham) used to seek refuge with

Allah for Ishmael and Isaac by reciting the following: 'O Allah! I seek refuge with Your Perfect

Words from every devil and poisonous pests and every evil, harmful, envious eye.’” Moreover,

the Prophet’s, SAW, Hadith elucidates the significance of reciting the Surah Al-Falaq and

Surah A-Naas as protection against all forms of evil. In Al-Fawwaid, Ibn Al-Qayyim states:

The effectiveness of these surahs is great to repel magic, evil eye, and the rest of the

evils and the need for a slave to seek Allah’s protection from these two surahs is

greater than his need for self, eating, drinking, and wearing the dress.

Additionally, Muslims may perform sadaqah in the name of Allah Almighty, although it is

desirable rather than obligatory to do so. Islam recognises sadaqah as a virtue and both the

90

Holy Quran and Sunnah recommend it as a form of protection against all evils. Lastly, Ta'wiz

containing verses from the Holy Quran or prayers prescribed in the Hadith can also be

employed for spiritually healing the body, although this practice is discouraged among Saudi

populations.

The Saudi Arabian society is a tribal one where family members derive status from their

role and influence. All Saudis are required to sustain healthy relationships with their parents,

siblings, and extended relatives and uphold the values of love, respect, and care (Al-Dawood

et al., 2017). It must also be recognised that belief in envy is pervasive across the Middle East

(Hoffman, 2017). Moreover, as emphasised earlier, Islam cautions against the ramifications of

envy and outlines its potential to evoke the evil eye. Thus, compliments are generally not

welcome, and prudence must be exercised when complimenting others on their possessions,

performance, or appearance. Conversely, the younger Saudi generations appear less concerned

about observing the norms relevant to compliment behaviour. Commins and Ruthven (2015)

proposed that exposure to foreign cultural trends explains this shift in attitude. However, all

individuals are expected to adhere to established social protocols to avoid shaming their

families during social gatherings.

2.7.5. Saudi Speakers and the Evil Eye Phenomenon

In the Arab world, compliment behaviour is not necessarily a sincere act, meaning that

it does not always express the speaker’s actual feeling towards the addressee. Rather, the

custom of paying compliments can be conceptualised as a form of social lubrication practised

by the speaker to please the recipient. The integrity of the compliment is often of little relevance

to either of the actors involved. To elaborate, compliments given during certain communal

occasions have a purely social function rather than an information-bearing purpose (Ansari,

2011). Explicitly, whether or not they convey information can be considered optional and might

not influence subsequent actions. On the other hand, compliment responses are predominantly

91

characterised by two prominent features: offering up the complimented object and issues

associated with the evil eye.

The next section deals with the Islamic methods of ensuring protection from the evil

eye demonstrated by Saudi Arabic speakers when complimenting or responding to

compliments.

2.7.6. Evil eye protection

The findings reported by Alobaisi (2011), Mostafa (2015), and Al-Amro (2013) offer

some insight into the pathways through which the belief in the evil eye can prompt interlocutors

to use specific formulaic expressions and linguistic strategies to prevent the evil eye effect.

Mostafa (2015) affirmed that social influences, such as a strong belief in the power of the evil

eye, can cause interlocutors to make superstitious comments to deflect any harm that might

befall the addressee:

Compliment Response: ein el hasood feeha ood (the eye of the person who jinxes

contains a stick; this is said in an attempt to distract the eye from observing one way or

another, by poking it)

Compliment Response: matboseleesh be ain radia ana talaan ain aboya fel Saudia (do

not give me the evil eye, my dad is working hard in Saudi Arabia; this saying is

inspired by bumper stickers found on taxis, microbuses, and trucks)

In addition, Alobaisi (2011) and Al-Amro (2013) found the use of short religious expressions

and Qur’anic verses to be more common amongst Saudi Arabic speakers.

Alobaisi (2011) noted the fear of the evil eye could be manifested irrespective of the

addressor’s social status and level of education. The addressors are expected to use some form

of a religious expression containing blessings or benedictions for reassuring the addressee that

no harm is intended to cast the evil eye. Interestingly, in his study of Omani Arabic speakers,

92

Jamil (2016) concluded that addressees may use a proactive approach and respond by an

invocation request, especially if the addressor is of the same gender:

Compliment: adasatish hilawh (your contact lenses are beautiful)

Compliment response: quli mashallah! ishtritahin min mahal alsalam (say mashallah!

I bought them from Al Salam Store)

In their work, Farghal and Haggan (2006) and Migdadi (2003) also confirmed that the strategy

of requesting an invocation suggests the belief in the evil eye. However, Al-Amro (2013)

argued that invocation requests could threaten the addressor’s face and put them in an

embarrassing position.

Saudi Arabic speakers’ attitudes towards complimenting behaviour underpin the

negotiation of the effects of the evil eye belief. Alobaisi (2011) observed that compliments

offered by family members were met with a customary hatha min fadli Allah (this is from

God’s grace) or jazak Allah khairan (may God reward you). On the other hand, when a non-

family member gave compliments, the addressees favoured the use of kull ma sha’ Allah (say,

this is what God has willed). Previous studies have suggested that the belief in the evil eye can

be understood as being inconsistent among Arabic speakers. Nonetheless, when such beliefs

manifest themselves, Islamic teachings tend to play a dominant role in situating and validating

them.

2.7.7. Warding off the evil eye

Belief in the evil eye is pervasive. Accordingly, numerous remedies exist to help ward

off its effects. The prescribed rituals and rites performed to avoid or cure the effects of the evil

eye vary across religions. Religion plays a central role in the evil eye phenomenon. Among

Jews, for example, the evil eye is avoided by adhering to numerous customs for preventing

admiration or jealousy. When shielding their families from admiration or jealousy, Jewish

93

believers practise the custom of simply paying a shekel to the census taker and allowing coins

to be counted rather than the benefactor’s identity being revealed, thereby averting the

possibility of damage from ayin ha’ra (evil eye). Similarly, a father and a son are never called

successively to read the Torah in synagogues, for there might be an orphan in the congregation

or a father who has lost his child. These individuals might be reminded of their loss and feel

jealous and give ayin ha’ra.

In addition to genuinely religious responses, other popular practices are used to

counteract the effect of the evil eye when compliments are given. For example, the Jews throw

salt or say kein ayin ha’ra (no evil eye). Throwing salt has also been observed as a strategy to

ward off the evil eye among some people of Kakkah, where Anssari (2011) conducted his

research. It is also practised in Makkah where this study was conducted. In some cultures, the

traditions or protocols dictate how babies should be admired, such as blowing on the child just

after praise as a gesture of goodwill and cooperation. This is regarded as a form of protection

against the evil eye. The same protocol may also be used when praising dairy animals and fruit

trees. However, suppose the admirer forgets the protocol. In that case, the mother of the baby

or the owner of the dairy animal or the fruit trees will recite a prayer, or they might speak

poorly of the praised individual, animal, or tree. This may explain why some Arabs reject

compliments.

In some cases, mothers rub dirt onto their baby’s face before taking the child out in

public. This is done because children are frequently exposed to the admiration of passers-by.

Traditions dictate that if someone happens to praise the child, they should immediately say,

“too bad she/he has dirt on him.” However, if the admirer forgets to do so after the praise, the

mother must respond, “He is so dirty right now.”

94

Knowledge of plant-based remedies and rituals intended to ward off the evil eye was

higher with age in the Witches Village (Villarino de los Aires, Salamanca) of Spain (González

et al., 2012). It seems that the older generation in this village has a good knowledge of using

plant-based remedies to ward off the evil eye. On the other hand, Souvlakis (2020) claimed

that the different experiences of the evil eye by laypeople, mental health professionals,

clergymen, and folk healers are not due to any socioeconomic differences but to the trans-

generational and trans-historical heritage. Also, rather than envy, admiration, or jealousy, the

evil eye is related to the “individual’s shame and existential anxiety of ‘being’ seen by the

others’ ‘I’”. Thus, the evil eye is the reflected self.

In several Mediterranean countries, the evil eye is believed to affect men and cause

impotence. In Italy, especially in the southern regions, including Sicily, there is a tradition of

counteracting the evil eye by doing mano figo (fig hand). The practice involves placing the

thumb in between the middle and the ring fingers. Additionally, mano cornuto may also be

enacted by curling the middle and ring fingers into the palm and stretching the index and the

little finger. Both gestures project the imagery of a sexual act as a remedy against the impotence

that the evil eye might produce.

In Turkey, Greece, and the Middle East, the use of a blue eye-in-hand charm, an amulet,

is very common. Mostafa (2015) states that the fear of the evil eye is visible in some Egyptian

communities during compliment exchanges. The semantic protocols followed suggest a strong

belief in the power of the evil eye and vulnerability to being jinxed. However, in the Egyptian

strategy, the interlocutors do not use religious expressions such as maa shaa Allah or similar

phrases. Instead, they utter superstitious sayings that are grounded in social customs. To

illustrate, the compliment addressee might respond by complaining, ridiculing, or evading the

focus of the compliment. For instance, when one is complimented on the purchase of a brand-

new car, the appropriate response would be, “it looks nice, but the engine is rather faulty, and

95

it consumes a lot of gas.” This strategy allows the addressee to evade the influence of the evil

eye and simultaneously maintain social harmony and status equality by denying any

implication of higher status derived from association with the complimented object.

Belief in the evil eye influences socio-cultural customs and practices across the globe.

Drawing upon the same, Saudi Arabic speakers’ precautionary behaviour when exchanging

compliments can be understood. Below is a more detailed explanation of Arabic speakers’

limited use of compliments and the linguistic tools used to resolve the pragmatic constraints

derived from a belief in the evil eye. Generally, admirers are aware of these restrictions

regarding the act of complimenting and therefore use religious linguistic formulas to repair the

situation. These formulas include but are not limited to, maa shaa Allah, barek Allah (May

God bless), Assalah ala alnnebi (peace be upon the Prophet), and khamsa ala ainik (five on

your eyes) about the five fingers of the sacred hand of Fatima that she was a daughter of Prophet

Muhammad. Earlier, this discussion established that, among Saudi Arabic speakers, the use of

compliments must abide by the rules of religious protocol. To offer a compliment without

religious utterances, in some Arab societies like the Moroccan Arabic, there can be

controversial situations, in which, the admirer is exposed as could be observed from the three

situations below cited by Anssari (2011):

1. The addressee might demand the admirer to abide by the religious protocol, as observed

in the following scenario.

[Two girls who know each other meet in the street, one is wearing a dress that the

speaker considers worth a compliment, says:]

A: ghzala kswtek (your dress is beautiful).

B: guli tbarek Allah (say may God bless me. It may be also understood as say may God

save my dress from the evil eye).

96

2. The addressee might secretly incant the religious benediction onto himself/herself

without bringing it to the admirer’s notice.

3. In the most compromising scenario for the admirer, the addressee might reject the

compliment and become upset about the admirer’s lack of concern and good feelings.

[Two girls/friends. One is sitting in her new car and the other is passing by and she

stops to greet her:]

A: wa guelsa darbalek f’tomovil (I see you are well seated in the car!).

B: lleama wash ma yegles hed f’tomovil dialu (May God drive you blind! one cannot

sit in one’s car).

In compliment response behaviour, strategies employed for avoiding the evil eye can

differ significantly from one situation to another. Specifically, they depend on the addressee’s

interpretation, the value of the complimented object, and the social scenario. Expressions

indicating gratitude, acceptance, mitigation, and rejection are frequently used. However, these

strategies are not the only ones that Saudi Arabic speakers might apply. Rather, the Arabic

language contains a broad spectrum of courteous expressions and semantic formulas that

underpin its profoundness. Moreover, the semantic formulas themselves can be utilised to

achieve multiple ends. For instance, Cuesta and Yusefian (2015) noted that the religious

formula Maa Saa Allah can be “used as an invocation, a compliment, an expression of gladness,

an expression of modesty, a marker of sarcasm, a mitigating device and a conversational

backchannel”. Notably, it is the utility of the myriad similar expressions that lend beauty to the

Arabic language.

2.8. Summary

Following the introductory section outlining the chapter contents, section 2 explained

several seminal theoretical concepts of the politeness theory and speech act theory that can help

to interpret compliment behaviour strategies employed by Saudi Hijazi Arabic speakers. These

97

theories are particularly useful when examining compliments and their responses as positive

politeness strategies and potential FTAs. Moreover, these concepts can help contextualise the

variations in complimenting strategies across the continuum of social variables. When

complimenting is considered as a speech act of politeness, both speech act theory and politeness

theory become relevant when examining the complimenting behaviour of anyone. These two

theories constitute the framework of this research and are used to explain or interpret the results.

Various concepts of complimenting and several definitions were discussed in section 3.

Based on the analysis of these concepts about complimenting behaviour and attachment of

religious expressions in various parts of the world, the definition offered by Adachi (2011) was

adopted for this research. There are conflicting reports regarding the influence of gender, age,

and social position on complimenting behaviour. Some studies found that these variables had

a significant effect, while others did not. In this research, these variables are assumed to affect

complimenting behaviour. Similar differences exist concerning preferred compliment topics.

This research assumes no specific preference for all topics as a null hypothesis and tests the

validity of this hypothesis using quantitative and qualitative approaches.

There are variations in terms of the most popular complimenting and response strategies

reported by different researchers. These are examined in detail in this research to determine the

strategies most used by the Saudi Hijazi community. To study the response strategies, a

modified version of the response categories identified by Herbert (1986) is used in this

research. The effects of gender, age, and social position on different types of responses to

compliments according to the adapted categories are examined and found to vary between

different reports. This research looks into this aspect in detail.

In particular, the applicability of research findings on complimenting behaviour in the

western cultural context to the Saudi cultural context was examined in detail. There are

differences in the very definition of compliment. Contrary to the narrow meaning of praise or

98

a polite remark or giving credit to someone else in western culture, in eastern cultures, the

effect of the compliment on the addressee is also considered. However, the cultural variations

even among the eastern countries account for differences in compliment behaviour. In both

cases, although a compliment indicates politeness, it does not always mean that the speaker

agrees with the addressee.

It appears that among the Arabic and Saudi cultures, research works on the differences

in complimenting behaviour between western and eastern countries reveal both similarities and

differences. In western culture, people prefer to give compliments on skills and work

performance, whereas, in eastern cultures, compliments tend to be on appearance and

possessions. Cross-cultural interactions facilitated by social media networks have shown a

converging trend of cultures, which should be reflected in complimenting behaviour.

A more western style of complimenting is being observed, especially among the

younger generation due to their global exposure. Saudi Hijazi communities have their

complimenting behaviour. It is often characterised by limiting the use of adjectives in syntactic

patterns for formulaic compliment strategies. A compliment can be given only to persons of

the same gender, as there are certain situations where Islamic culture prohibits cross-gender

interactions. This trend has not been well researched in respect to the Hijazi community and is

therefore addressed in this study. Sections 5 and 6 dealt with the association between

intercultural communication and religion and the Saudi Vision 2030 objective to facilitate

intercultural communication. As the belief in the evil eye and its relationship with

complimenting behaviour is central to this research, a detailed discussion of the evil eye was

presented in section 7.

In a speech community, the approach to language use establishes pragmatic norms

abiding by which social interactions are performed. To understand Saudi norms regarding

compliments and compliment responses, the research undertaken and reported here

99

investigated the dominant religious expressions used by a Saudi sample of the Hijazi

community during compliment exchanges to ward off the effects of the evil eye. Moreover,

variations in terms of gender and age were mapped to show the separate findings for predefined

clusters.

The literature suggests that the evil eye phenomenon plays a vital role in the compliment

behaviour of Arabic speakers in general and Saudi Arabic speakers in particular. Belief in the

evil eye and its mitigation are grounded in Islamic customs and norms and influence the

complimenting behaviour in strong Islamic communities such as the Hijazi. Hence, they attach

religious expressions when complimenting and resent the omission of these by anyone giving

the compliment. The religious expression is used as a tool to ward off the evil eye; the wearing

of amulets is unnecessary and may even be frowned upon and regarded as superstition. This

research examines these aspects in detail using a suitable research design, which is discussed

in the next chapter.

100

Chapter 3: Methodology

This research examined the influence of the belief in the evil eye on compliment

behaviour demonstrated by Saudi Arabic interlocutors. As indicated in the preceding chapters,

cultural values, social norms, and specific contexts significantly influence the formulation of

compliments and their responses. The notion of the evil eye, grounded in Islamic traditions

strongly impacts complimenting behaviour among the Saudi Arabian communities. Also, the

contemporary body of literature indicates that there are differences in the compliment

behaviour preferred during interactions, and these differences are determined by social

variables such as gender, age, social distance, and relative power. This chapter explains the

methodology adopted to address the research gaps identified in the literature reviewed in the

previous chapter. The two major research gaps are the absence of research on the association

between complimenting behaviour and belief in the evil eye and the paucity of research on this

issue in the Saudi context.

Hence, the research questions that were addressed in this research are:

(i) How does the speech act of compliments vary across the continuum of social variables

in a sample of Saudi Hijazi Arabic speakers?

(ii) What sociodemographic trends are associated with the convergence of the belief in the

evil eye with the complimenting behaviour practised by Saudi Hijazi Arabic speakers?

(iii) How and why is belief in the evil eye related to the complimenting behaviour of

Saudi Hijazi Arabic speakers?

To address the scope of the research questions, this study adopted the mixed-methods

design. Heyvaert et al., (2011) affirmed that the mixed-methods paradigm addresses complex

questions by integrating qualitative and quantitative research elements. Furthermore, it has

been found that a mixed-methods approach can reinforce the interpretation of both datasets by

101

substantiating meaningful associations and triangulating data from multiple sources (Heyvaert

et al., 2011). This chapter describes various research methods with a special emphasis on the

concept of combining methods. It introduces the research instruments, explains the study’s

sample recruitment approach and sample composition. Moreover, specific strategies

undertaken for data collection and analysis procedures are documented along with the tools

used to ensure data reliability and validity.

3.1. Research Design

Research design, also called a research strategy, is a plan devised to answer a set of

questions. It is a framework that includes the methods and procedures used to collect, analyse,

and interpret data. In other words, the research design describes how the researcher will

investigate the central problem of the research and constitutes part of the research proposal

(Bouchrika, 2020). This chapter gives the details of the research design and research processes

adopted for this research.

The research methodology chosen for data collection and analysis must be appropriate

for and aligned with the research questions. A significant majority of studies investigating

compliment behaviour employed either a questionnaire (Allami & Montazeri, 2012; Lin,

Woodfield & Ren, 2012; Razi, 2013) or ethnography (Guo et al., 2012; Jenks, 2013; Rees-

Miller, 2011), while other studies used a combination of methods (Shahsavari et al., 2014;

Cheng, 2011; Sucuoğlu & Bahçelerli, 2015). In general, they paired quantitative methods for

collecting a corpus of speech acts, such as DCT and role play, with a retrospective interview.

It has been found that this combination gives a more comprehensive insight into the trends of

pragmatics production, including compliment behaviour (Jucker, 2009). Further elaborating on

the utility of the mixed-methods research design, Lopez-Fernandez and Molina-Azorin (2011)

observed:

102

This methodological approach starts from the premise that it is often not necessary to choose

between the two traditional strategies (quantitative versus qualitative), the idea being that it can

be more fruitful to consider how the strengths of each can be combined within a mixed

approach. As such, the use of mixed methods may play an important role in research, since the

results obtained via the different methods can enrich and improve our understanding of the

matters under study and foster fresh ideas about them, to answer questions that are difficult to

answer by a single method, quantitative or qualitative.

The rationale for adopting the mixed-methods paradigm for this research is essentially

two-fold: the breadth of the research questions and the multiple advantages offered by a mixed-

methods design (Lopez-Fernandez & Molina-Azorin, 2011). It must be acknowledged that

examining the variations in sociodemographic trends relevant to compliment behaviour

warrants a corpus of authentic speech acts. However, considering the conservatism of the Saudi

Arabic culture, it can be difficult to obtain this data. Hence, the quantitative method of DCT

was employed to address this issue. On the other hand, since there has been little research on

the influence of the evil eye phenomenon on the complimenting behaviour of Saudi Arabic

speakers, the qualitative approach of semi-structured interviews was chosen. This allowed the

researcher to guide participants’ responses and pose counter-questions to discover the

respondents’ underlying assumptions and beliefs.

According to Lopez-Fernandez and Molina-Azorin (2011), triangulation and

complementarity are two of the advantages offered by the mixed-methods approach.

Triangulation seeks to establish similarity in results obtained from quantitative and qualitative

explorations, and the corroboration or correspondence of the data strengthens the reliability of

the findings. On the other hand, complementarity is more concerned with clarifying the results

obtained with one method using a second method as an additional strategy. To illustrate, the

influence of social distance and relative power on participants’ compliment responses, as

103

derived from DCTs, can be understood by interviewing them. Lopez-Fernandez and Molina-

Azorin (2011) also highlighted the value of expansion from employing the mixed-methods

paradigm. Expansion is the analysis and exploration of multiple facets of a phenomenon to

better understand its behaviour.

The temporal orientation of the quantitative and qualitative components must also be

considered when combining methods. In mixed-methods research, data can be collected

sequentially or concurrently. Since the respondents’ experiences would inform the semi-

structured interviews in this research of the DCTs, it was only natural to arrange sequential

data collection. However, such rationale does not necessarily exhaust the potential of

operationalising concurrently. This is because interview themes did not explicitly cite the DCT

scenarios but were instead intended to substantiate the participants’ self-understanding of their

interrelated linguistic choices and beliefs.

Nonetheless, through the sequential operationalisation (QUAN → QUAL), the

participants obtained a greater awareness of complimenting behaviour, making them better able

to engage in introspection during interviews. Moreover, this strategy offered the advantage of

expansion and triangulation, as explained later. The sequence of collecting data in this research

was first the data for the DCTs was collected and after a week, the interviews of the participants

were done.

Based on the above temporal sequencing, the methodology of the quantitative phase of

this research is described, followed by a description of the qualitative phase.

3.2. Quantitative Phase

The quantitative data was collected via a sociodemographic questionnaire survey of a

sample drawn from the Saudi Hijazi community. This was followed by a discourse completion

task undertaken by those who participated in the survey. The details of these two components

are described in the same sequence in the subsections of 3.2.1 below.

104

3.2.1. Research Instruments

3.2.1.1. Sociodemographic questionnaire

This instrument gathered data about the respondents’ social and demographic

characteristics. Notably, mapping the interactions of complimenting behaviour strategies with

various social variables, specifically gender, age, social distance, and relative power, was

relevant to the current inquiry. Hence, the respondents’ sociodemographic data facilitated a

better understanding of the factors that impacted the results. The first part of the questionnaire

was designed to obtain data on the participant’s gender, age, educational level, and position at

work. Although not all of these variables served an explicit role in the compilation of the

datasets, an awareness of them enabled the researcher to detect instances of participant bias.

Thereby, the study’s internal validity was reinforced. Additionally, knowledge of the

respondents’ background supplemented the phenomenological analysis of the qualitative

dataset. This dataset informed the selection of participants for the DCT, explained in the next

section.

3.2.1.2. Discourse Completion Task (DCT)

Several studies investigating complimenting behaviour have confirmed the usefulness

of DCTs for gathering quantitative data (Allami & Montazeri, 2012; Lin et al., 2012; Razi,

2013). However, other researchers have questioned the adequacy of DCTs, claiming that they

do not accurately reflect real and natural conversational scenarios (Flöck & Geluykens, 2015).

Some disadvantages of DCT discussed by (Ivanovska, Kusevska, Daskalovska, & Ulanska,

2016) are lower reliability due to the data being related to hypothetical situations and limited

in authenticity. They are not representative of what the respondents may say in the real-life

situations. The range of situations is of semantic formulas is narrow and hence, only fewer

strategies than the natural situations, are measured. Also, DCT does not present the extended

negotiations as could happen in authentic discourses authentic situations, due to lack of

105

interaction between interlocutors. DCT cannot present comprehensive situations in some

speech act scenarios. Redesigning DCT has been offered as a partial solution to these problems.

In this research, DCT was redesigned to reflect the speech act situations of the Saudi Hijazi

community to the closest approximation of real-life situations, as explained below.

However, despite this, the DTC is still considered to be an acceptable data-collection

tool owing to the several advantages it offers (Agnieszka, 2013). DCTs allow researchers to

gather a large corpus of data on distinct speech acts within a limited timeframe. Moreover, they

provide demographic information since contextual consistency enables comparisons of

responses in the presence of several variables, including gender and age (Agnieszka, 2013). In

this research, the use of DCTs was warranted as Saudi Arabic interlocutors are members of a

conservative society. Hence, using other means to gather data from their authentic speech,

especially that of female participants, would have been a challenging task.

The DCT design was based on natural interaction scenarios characteristic of the Saudi

Arabic culture. It comprised two parts. Part 1 presented 24 potential compliment situations,

and part 2 consisted of 24 contexts requiring compliment responses. These specific settings

were restricted to four compliment topics: appearance, skill, personality trait, and possession.

Numerous studies examining compliments as speech acts divided the data from the corpus

according to these topics, with little or no variation (Al-Amro, 2013; Al-Rousan et al., 2014;

Alqahtani, 2016; Zhang, 2013). Additionally, this study also grouped several unspecific and

accurate complimenting and responding strategies under the ‘Other’ category. ‘Fishing for

more compliments’ is one example.

Since the questionnaire was meant to preserve the authenticity of Saudi Arabic cultural

values and social norms, the scenarios were designed in conformity with naturally-occurring

speech situations between two age groups: those aged between 18 and 25 years and those aged

40 and above. Several researchers have argued against using a DCT, claiming that the corpus

106

corresponds to interlocutors’ written language production and not responses in spoken form

(Floeck & Pfingsthorn, 2016; Wen, Heng & Rafik-Galea, 2014). To address this concern, the

DCT was designed to ensure that respondents are highly familiar with the contexts and roles

of the represented scenarios.

When conducting research within the restrictions of a specific culture, certain linguistic

and social constraints can manifest. Usunier (2011) suggested that focus must be placed on the

emic meaning rather than etic considerations. Accordingly, the DCT scenarios were designed

to accommodate gender-specific linguistic formulas favoured by Saudi Arabic speakers. Two

realistic scenarios were designed - one for each gender. Both the compliment and compliment

response situations were created to represent a continuum of the independent variables (age,

gender, relationships, and power distance). The relationship variable is related to family

members, friends, and strangers as representatives of the various social distances between

interlocutors. The role of relative power and age- and gender-based preferences were also

considered when creating real situations for avoiding inappropriate cultural circumstances (see

Appendices A and B).

3.2.2. Participants

The population of interest for this research comprised Saudi Hijazi Arabic speakers.

Considering the study’s explicit focus on compliment behaviour and the evil eye belief among

Saudi Arab communities, the sample was selected from citizens born in the holy city of Makkah

who were fluent in the Saudi dialect of Hijazi Arabic. This community was considered for this

research because of their traditional behaviour due to being located in and around the holy city

of Makkah. The community tends to follow Islamic traditions strictly. The Arabic language

used by them is typically pure dialect. On the whole, the Hijazi community represents one of

the most traditional Arabic communities. Therefore, the complimenting behaviour of this

community can be expected to be nearest to the Islamic ideals. As of 2020, the Hijazi

107

population numbered about 12.5 million (about 35% of the total population of 34.82 million in

Saudi Arabia in 2020).

Non-probability convenience sampling was used to obtain a pool of respondents.

Invitations were emailed to Saudi Arabian institutions (specifically, the Ministry of Education

head office in Makkah, Umm Al-Qura University, and the training centre at King Abdullah

Medical City) asking for relevant details of interested candidates. Subsequently, keeping in

mind the independent social variables under investigation (gender, age, social position, and

relative power collected through the initial survey described in section 3.2.1.1 above), a final

group of participants was obtained from the initial pool using a table of random numbers. All

respondents confirmed their willingness to participate voluntarily in response to a WhatsApp

invitation (see Appendix K). The WhatsApp invitation also made participants aware of their

right to withdraw at any time.

Firstly, the respondents were informed of the potential risks, benefits, and

confidentiality issues associated with the inquiry. Later, they were required to sign a consent

form documenting their interest in participating. Upon receiving the signed forms, the

researcher briefly explained the task again. In the recruitment processes, as stated above, only

Hijazi citizens born within the Makkah area were considered. For ethical reasons, only adult

participants were selected.

3.2.3. Sample sizes

One hundred and twenty participants undertook the DCT to generate data on

complimenting behaviour. More than the required number of participants were selected first.

From this larger sample size, the required numbers of samples were selected using purposive

sampling. The purposive sampling method was applied to accommodate all variables.

In the first stage, data on frequencies of complimenting strategies used by the

participants in the three complimenting situations of close relationship, stranger and power

108

status on four compliment topics of appearance, possession, skill, and trait were collected,

using 12 complimenting scenarios listed in Appendix A (English) and B (Arabic). In the second

stage, the same data were categorised according to the sociodemographic characteristics of the

participants, which comprised:

a) Age: 40 young (18-25 years) and 80 old (40 plus)= 40+80 =120 and the same

distributed over the two genders as follows-

b) Gender: 60 each of male and female= 60+60=120 and these participants occupy three

types of social positions as below-

c) Social position: 40 each of young, subordinate and superior= 40 x 3 = 120

The frequencies of complimenting strategies were again categorised according to these

variables of age, gender, and social position. The effects of age, gender, and social position on

complimenting strategies used for the same four compliment topics for the same three

complimenting situations were examined, and the dominant strategies were identified based on

the maximum frequencies. It should be noted that in the first stage, only the range of

compliment strategies used in the three situations and for four topics were examined. In the

second stage, the effects of sociodemographic variables were assessed. Thus, the same DCT

data were analysed in two ways.

Compliment responses:

The same 120 survey participants were used for collecting data on frequencies of

compliment response strategies for 12 response scenarios (Appendix C in English and D in

Arabic) also.

An analysis of the frequencies was conducted to determine the dominant response

strategies influenced by the following sociodemographic variables in the same three situations

109

and for four topics. There were 120 participants, who could be categorized in three different

ways as below-

a) Age: 40 young (18-25 years) and 80 old (40 plus) = 120.

b) Gender: 60 each of male + 60 female= 120

c) Social position: 40 each of young, subordinate, and superior (inferred from responses

of participants to the given scenarios), 40+40+40=120.

Twelve scenarios related to the giving of compliments were presented in the Discourse

Completion Task (DCT). Each participant was asked to give compliments based on these 12

scenarios. Since 120 participants were involved in giving compliments and responding to

compliments, the number of responses for each totalled 1,440. Thus, the total number of

responses of both DCTs i.e., giving compliments scenarios and compliment responses

scenarios were 1,440 + 1,440 = 2,880 responses.

Current Saudi Arabian cultural traditions make it difficult for male researchers to gather

data from female respondents. Therefore, the researcher requested the assistance of a qualified

female academic peer experienced in performing studies with a similar focus. This female

assistant was briefed about the project and details of sampling and data collection methods

were described. She was trained in gathering the required data through examples. This peer

collected all data to be obtained from the female participants. On the other hand, data from

Saudi male interlocutors was gathered by the researcher.

3.3. Qualitative phase

3.3.1. Research instruments: semi-structured interviews

In social science research, interviews are a popular method of generating qualitative

data. They offer a broad range of benefits, especially when conducted in combination with a

source of quantitative data (Schatz, 2012). In particular, semi-structured interviews offer many

advantages. The response rate is high, the approach is flexible and inexpensive, and there is

110

less likelihood of misinterpretation on the part of interviewees. Semi-structured interviewees

can elicit rich data and allow the interviewer to investigate further by asking more questions

and requesting more details. The interviewees can also give reasons for their responses, which

allows the researcher to establish meaningful connections (Irvine et al., 2012).

Moreover, the generated data authentically replicates the responses produced in routine

interactional contexts (Madill, 2011). Thus, the use of semi-structured interviews eliminates

any offset in data generalisability acquired from DCT usage. Indeed, several studies

investigating compliment behaviour have employed a combination of these two research

methodologies. DCT with retrospective interviews were used by Chunsheng (2020) to study

compliment responses among Chinese. To study complimenting and complimenting responses

among Australian English, Vietnamese and Vietnamese learners of English, Nguyen (2005)

used DCT and semi-structured interviews. Almadani (2021) used a DCT and semi-structured

interviews to investigate compliment response behaviour among the Hijazi community.

In this research, semi-structured interviews were administered as a follow-up

instrument two days after completing the DCT. While the DCT collected data to analyse

language forms, the semi-structured interviews focused on examining the functional aspects of

language. Thus, the latter is a more suitable fit for demonstrating the influence of the evil eye

belief on Saudi speakers’ compliment behaviour concerning social variables. The participants

were instructed to imagine themselves in real-life situations that required them to engage in

potential compliment and compliment response scenarios. A predefined list of questions,

employed to guide participant responses, helped generate relevant lexis for later qualitative

analysis (see Appendix E). During the interviews, the researcher refrained from interrupting

the respondents unless it was imperative to do so.

111

The list of questions guides the interviews and helps the researcher to ensure that the

interview remains on track and relevant to the topic. Moreover, questions were sequentially

arranged to maintain a conversational flow. The respondents had ample time to respond and

explore their ideas as they related to the themes. In line with the recommendations from earlier

studies (Kallio et al., 2016; McGrath et al., 2018; Adhabi & Anozie, 2017), the interviews took

the form of interaction between researcher and respondents. Hence, the semi-structured

interviews were unlike DCT in the sense that they established rapport between the interviewer

and respondents. The researcher could ascertain the interviewees’ comprehension of the

questions and offer clarifications in instances of misunderstanding. Thus, together with the

sociodemographic information obtained from the quantitative phase, the researcher could

better address the qualitative research questions.

3.3.2. Participants

Several selection criteria were applied to determine respondents’ eligibility to

participate in semi-structured interviews. Adhering to the two-phased mixed-methods research

design explained earlier, respondents were selected from those who voluntarily completed the

sociodemographic questionnaire and the DCT. Subsequently, this strategy allowed the

researcher to perform data triangulation and expansion by establishing compatibility and

consistency in the datasets obtained from the quantitative and qualitative phases.

For the semi-structured interviews, from the original 240 participants, a subset of 60,

representing 25 percent of the sample, was chosen via a combination of convenience sampling

and purposive random sampling (see 3.4 below) to represent the age-gender composition of the

sample used for the DCT. The number of participants was as follows:

1) 10 Young males e.g., a student, diploma …etc. age 18 – 25.

2) 10 Subordinate males e.g., a secretary, security …etc not in high position, age above

40

112

3) 10 Superior males e.g., a manager, head of a department, chairman or director, age

above 40.

4) 10 Young females e.g., a student, diploma …etc. age 18 – 25.

5) 10 Subordinate females e.g., a secretary, office assistant …etc not in high position, age

above 40.

6) 10 Superior females e.g., a manager, head of a department, chairman or director, age

above 40.

Thus, a total of 60 people were selected for the semi-structured interviews, representing

both males and females.

The researcher interviewed the male respondents in face-to-face interactions. Female

participants, on the other hand, were interviewed by telephone. This dual method of

interviewing complied with the social norms of the conservative Saudi Arabian culture.

3.4. Research process

Quantitative data were gathered via the DCT instrument, whereas qualitative data were

generated from the transcripts of semi-structured interviews. The data collection was

operationalised in chronological order.

Firstly, approval was sought from the ethics committee at RMIT University. After

receiving informed (Appendix G and H) participant consent via the prescribed form (Appendix

I and J), the DCT was administered to a sample pool of 240 respondents to generate a corpus

of compliments and compliment responses. Lastly, to gather rich qualitative data, semi-

structured interviews were conducted with a subset of 60 participants. As the participants and

the researcher were natives of Saudi Arabia, the language used in all interactions was Arabic,

although the transcribed interview data was translated into English (Appendix E). The

quantitative and qualitative components of the data collection procedure are detailed below.

113

The scenarios presented in the DCT for data collection differed regarding social

distance and relative power. Notably, the situations that pertained to social distance (both high

and low) gave the respondents an additional choice regarding whom they wished to compliment

(see Appendix A). This allowed the researcher to further discern the age-based compliment

behaviour preferences of Saudi-Arabic speakers. Also, inferences regarding the influence of

low relative power on Saudi Arabic interlocutors’ complimenting behaviour were derived from

the DCT scenarios that pertained to social distance (high). In these scenarios, the interactants

were strangers who exercised little to no influence on each other’s interests. Therefore, a power

congruency was established and could only be influenced by the social variables of age and

gender. Hence, this consideration also offered insight into how age and gender can moderate

power congruency between interlocutors.

Following a perusal of the DCT responses, a total of ninety participants were invited to

participate in interviews. All but three accepted. E-mail invitations were sent to the interested

candidates to determine their availability. A subset of 60 participants (30 males and 30 females)

was selected based on suitable responses, with a proportionate representation of the two age-

based subgroups specified earlier. The semi-structured interviews used ten predefined

questions (see Appendix E and F) as themes to guide the interview process. The belief in the

evil eye was stressed as it influenced the participants’ use of complimenting strategies. Before

each interview, the researcher introduced himself and explained the motivation that prompted

the research. Both verbal and written consents were obtained, and the respondents were assured

of confidentiality regarding their personal information.

Several studies have stressed the importance of establishing and maintaining rapport

when conducting semi-structured interviews (Kallio et al., 2016; McGrath et al., 2018). This

allows the interviewer to become acquainted with the respondents’ personalities and attitudes,

which facilitates data extraction during the interview. Moreover, it enables the interviewee to

114

feel more relaxed and confident (Kallio et al., 2016; McGrath et al., 2018). Hence, in meetings

preceding the interviews, the researcher deliberately engaged the participants in conversations

on informal topics. It helped to ensure that the interviewer and interviewee were comfortable

with each other. The same procedure was also followed in the telephonic interviews. For face-

to-face interviews with the male participants, the interview location was determined based on

the convenience of both parties. Younger respondents (male students) were generally

interviewed where they were familiar, while female students were interviewed via telephone.

On the other hand, interviews with company employees (subordinate and superior) occurred in

their respective offices.

The timing and the anticipated duration of the interviews were communicated to the

respondents in advance. During the interview, the interviewer never sought to influence the

respondent’s opinions and thoughts. Nonetheless, when potential confusion or contradiction

arose, clarification was requested. All the interviews were recorded using two digital devices

(an iPhone X and a digital audio recorder). The researcher took no notes during the interviews;

instead, he focused on the interviewees’ non-verbal cues and asked follow-up questions when

required. However, some observations were recorded privately by the researcher once the

interviews were over.

3.5. Data Analysis

In mixed-methods research, the combination paradigm is adopted for the data analysis

as well. Therefore, the DCT was analysed quantitatively, while the semi-structured interview

data were analysed qualitatively. The quantitative analysis primarily entails preparing the data,

selecting suitable formats for data presentation, choosing appropriate techniques for describing

data, and using relevant statistical tools to analyse relationships and trends. On the other hand,

qualitative analysis requires coding as an essential first step, the application of methods that

115

will yield reliable data and results, and the use of the researcher’s voice. The application of

these strategies to the data obtained in this research is explained below.

3.5.1. Quantitative data

The purpose of gathering data by utilising the DCT was essentially two-fold. Firstly,

the potential compliment situations helped map the topics favoured by Hijazi Saudi Arabic

speakers across the independent social variables of age, gender, social position, and relative

power. And, secondly, the compliment response scenarios revealed the compliment response

strategies favoured by Saudi Arabic interlocutors along the continuum of the independent

variables under investigation. Both analyses were conducted on DCT data, leading to

identifying dominant strategies for the variables examined in each analysis.

The inferences drawn from the data analyses answered the first research question: How

does the speech act of compliments vary across the continuum of social variables in a sample

of Saudi Hijazi Arabic speakers?

Frequencies in the number and percentage of participant responses indicated the

participants’ complimenting and response topic preferences (appearance, possession,

skill/ability, personal trait) according to each social variable. The DCT coding results for

complimenting strategies are given in Appendix L. Owing to the higher number of discourse

items, both same-gender and cross-gender compliment behaviour could also be analysed. The

statistical significance of the main effects was evaluated using ANOVA, and interactions were

determined using both ANOVA and Chi-square. It is noted that Chi-square tests are not

prescribed for the comparison of multiple variables. However, in this case, Chi-square tests are

used to compare only the values within one variable, complimenting strategies. The test was

not done to compare the strategies across strategies, as it may necessitate Bonferroni correction.

To clear this issue, a statistician was consulted and ensured that the Chi-square tests done here

are valid.

116

ANOVA is a more precise instrument for low-frequency data (Appendix P).

Concerning the data from compliment response situations, Herbert’s (1986) taxonomy of

compliment responses was adopted with major changes (see section 2.16 Compliment

Response Strategies). Herbert’s (1986) original taxonomy consisted of three macro strategies:

Accept, Reject, and Evade.

Table 3. Herbert’s (1986) original taxonomy strategies: Accept, Reject, and Evade.

Response Type Example

(iv) Agreement

IV. Acceptance

4. Appreciation Token

5. Comment Acceptance

6. Praise Upgrade

V. Comment History

VI. Transfer

3. Reassignment

4. Return

Thanks; thank you; [smile]

Thanks, it's my favourite too.

Really brings out the blue in my eyes,

doesn't it?

I bought it for the trip to Arizona.

My brother gave it to me.

So's yours.

(v) Nonagreement

V. Scale Down

VI. Question

VII. Nonacceptance

3 Disagreement

4 Qualification

VIII. No Acknowledgement

It's really quite old.


I hate it.

It's all right, but Len's is nicer.

[silence]

(vi) Other Interpretations

117

II. Request You wanna borrow this one too?

However, the micro-categories for each response type are not culturally exhaustive.

Hence, drawing on studies that have investigated similar phenomena with a sample of Saudi

Arabic interactants (Alqahtani, 2016; Al-Amro, 2013; Alobaisi, 2011; Al-Ageel, 2010), this

research proposed several additional categories for quantifying the compliment responses of

Saudi Hijazi Arabic speakers. Overall, mutually exhaustive response strategies were employed

in the analysis process, namely, “thanking,” “downgrading,” “shifting credit,” “praise

upgrade,” “offering,” “invocation,” “evil eye protection,” “remaining silent,” and “other

response”. The participants’ compliment responses were coded according to these strategies

(see Appendix M).

The response strategies of “offering,” “invocation,” and “evil eye protection” were

based on the researcher’s emic perspective of Saudi Arabian cultural traditions. The frequency

of each compliment response type was added according to the independent social variables

being investigated, which helped reveal gender- and age-based preferences for compliment

response strategies. Also, the influence of relative power and social distance on the

participants’ compliment responses was noted.

3.5.2. Qualitative data

The semi-structured interviews focused on determining how the belief in the evil eye

influences the compliment behaviour of Saudi Hijazi Arabic speakers. Data derived from the

interviews illuminated the ten qualitative questions on complimenting and compliment

response scenarios (see Appendix E for English version). These collectively answered the

second research question: What sociodemographic trends are associated with the convergence

of the belief in the evil eye with the complimenting behaviour practised by Saudi Hijazi Arabic

speakers?

118

The quantitative data related to the “evil eye protection” strategy was also considered

for analysis. The semi-structured interview data (Appendix F) were analysed using

interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) converted to linguistic frames. Elaborating

upon IPA, Alase (2017) stated that:

The importance and essence of a phenomenological research approach (IPA) is its

ability to explore, investigate, and interpret the ‘lived experiences of the research

participants. Creswell (2013) asserted that qualitative research has the exploratory

capacity to investigate, interpret, and understand the problematic issues in any

qualitative research study. He stated that “We conduct qualitative research because a

problem or issue needs to be explored” and the phenomenological approach is the most

appropriate tradition to use in getting to the root cause of the phenomenon (Creswell,

2013, p. 47). Therefore, in a phenomenological (IPA) research study, the essence of a

purpose statement is that the research project has a phenomenon that it wants to

explore (or investigate).

Other studies by Pringle et al., (2011) and Pietkiewicz and Smith (2014) confirmed the merit

of IPA. However, Pietkiewicz and Smith (2014) cautioned that:

Doing an IPA study is a demanding enterprise, despite the possible illusion that using

a small sample makes it easy. The researcher needs to combine a wide repertoire of

skills. To gather valuable data, some degree of interviewing experience is

indispensable. Careful, systematic, and rigorous analysis, on the other hand, requires

patience and openness to see the world through someone else’s eyes and the ability to

control a temptation to a priori impose conceptual categories. The inductive character

of most qualitative methodologies requires that theories are derived from data, and not

the other way round.

119

Nonetheless, the researcher opted for this analysis procedure after considering its

potential to shed light on the evil eye phenomenon as manifested in the compliment behaviour

of Saudi Hijazi Arabic interactants. Moreover, the researcher’s knowledge and experience of

Saudi Arabian cultural values, social norms, and specific speech contexts confirmed the

appropriateness of this choice.

IPA concerns itself with subjective experiences to elucidate how individuals accord

meaning to different events for making sense of their reality. Emphasis is placed upon how

people use language as a tool to rationalise their lived experiences, which is particularly

relevant to the evil eye phenomenon. The evil eye belief can be conceptualised to explain

incomprehensible occurrences, drawing upon individuals’ insecurities and socioeconomic

vulnerabilities. Hence, this study adopted the IPA approach to analyse the data obtained from

interviewees’ responses. The social variables of gender, social distance, and relative power

were especially significant as they were more likely to induce insecurity and foster psycho-

emotional vulnerabilities among the participants, particularly the females.

The guidelines proposed by Pietkiewicz and Smith (2014) and Pringle et al. (2011) were

followed for data analysis. The first step involved transcribing the data. The researcher

undertook this task himself since listening and re-listening to the recorded interviews enabled

him to notice and document the slightest variations in expression and afforded him insight into

the interactions of significant themes and categories. When transcribing, the researcher

allocated a unique code to each respondent and followed it with the interview date and time

(e.g., interview with RF1 4 November 2019 02:45 p.m.). Upon completing the transcription

process, the researcher read and re-read the transcripts multiple times to identify any themes

emerging from interviews specific to each respondent. These themes were then grouped into

data clusters based on the social variables under investigation. Moreover, relevant themes were

identified for subsequent analysis, drawing upon commonalities within the cluster-specific

120

themes, as they pertained to the evil eye belief. The use of IPA as a data analysis tool allowed

the researcher to make sense of the participants’ experiences and effectively examine their

subjective opinions.

Using IPA as a data analysis tool requires the researcher to have a considerable degree

of familiarity with the phenomenon under investigation. The researcher’s emic perspective met

this requirement. Familiarity with Saudi religious, behavioural, social, tribal, and

environmental factors facilitated the formulation of reasoned deductions. Nonetheless, the

researcher exercised considerable effort to remain as objective as feasible and not convey his

views to the interviewees. Instead, the respondents were regarded as co-constructors of

knowledge. The additional steps are undertaken to ensure data reliability and validity are

discussed next.

The results obtained from IPA were converted to frequencies of linguistic frames of

responses using the frame analysis method (Goffman, 1974). Frame analysis examines how

people understand and respond to situations and factors associated with them. It helps to

convert qualitative data obtained from interviews into quantitative data, as the small sample

size will not permit valid statistical analysis. In the deductive frame analysis, frames are defined

first, and then matching components are sought in the data. In the inductive frame analysis, the

data is analysed first (using IPA in this study), and then the best describing frames are chosen.

The frames and indicative responses can be tabulated as in the case of thematic analysis. The

inductive procedure was adopted in this study. The linguistic frame analysis conducted in this

study is described below in more detail.

In the first stage, an analysis was conducted of the data obtained from the ten

participants in each social category. In the second stage, the results of the analyses were

integrated to reveal common trends across all social categories. The results obtained by this

procedure are given below, based on the format used by Crowe et al. (2011).

121

Context: Saudi Hijazi Arabic interactants use different types of expressions to

compliment and respond to compliments reflecting the Islamic culture. There are also strong

views about the belief in the evil eye, and these responses can be analysed using linguistic,

cultural, and demographic frames. This is attempted here.

The following research questions have been formulated to guide the research and

achieve its objectives:

(i) How does the production of compliment events vary across the continuum of

social variables in a sample of Saudi Hijazi Arabic speakers?

(ii) What sociodemographic trends are associated with the convergence of the belief

in the evil eye with the complimenting behaviour practised by Saudi Hijazi

Arabic speakers?

Study design: Qualitative analysis using multiple social categories of the Saudi Hijazi

Arabic population.

The issue: The issue of focus is compliments and compliment responses and evil eye

beliefs among the Saudi Hijazi Arabic community.

Data collection: Semi-structured interviews with 10 participants each in three categories

each of male and female population of the community.

Analysis: Framework approach using demographic, cultural, and linguistic frames. This

step is given in detail now.

The demographic frame is the male/female and young/subordinate/superior categories.

The cultural frame is the religious expressions: Masha Allah, Tabaraka Allah, and other

similar expressions.

The linguistic frame is the frequency indicated in the responses like always, very

frequently, occasionally, or never. In this study, as explained above, the demographic and

cultural frames are constant over all the participants. These results are presented in Chapter 8.

122

3.6. Measures of Reliability

Both quantitative and qualitative data have their distinct criteria applied to ensure

credibility. For quantitative datasets, the criteria usually involve reliability and validity

measures (Creswell, 2013). Regarding qualitative datasets, measures of dependability,

transferability, and conformability are given greater precedence (Bowen, 2009). Data validity

was derived from triangulation using multiple sources (namely DCT scenarios and semi-

structured interviews) that confirmed the alignment of the findings with the published

literature. Moreover, the body of evidence was logically organised to build up to the research

questions and propose credible answers.

Additionally, the reliability of this study was ensured by clarifying the different

methods and procedures of the data collection and analysis processes and by having well-

established research methods and triangulation, as suggested by Shenton (2004). The paradigm

of data triangulation also strengthened the credibility of the qualitative findings. Additionally,

member checking was performed by sharing the interview transcripts with the participants to

confirm the accuracy. Lastly, to ensure data transferability, the participant perspectives were

appropriately considered during the research process.

3.7. Summary

This research aimed to investigate and document the influence of social variables (age, gender,

social distance, and relative power) on Saudi Hijazi Arabic interlocutors’ compliment

behaviour strategies and the extent to which belief in the evil eye influences the choice of

strategy. Essentially, this research tried to discover how the production of compliment events

varies across the continuum of social variables in a sample of Saudi Hijazi Arabic speakers. A

related aim was to examine how sociodemographic trends reflect the relationship between the

complimenting behaviour of Saudi Hijazi Arabic speakers and the belief in the evil eye.

123

To address these objectives (formulated as research questions), a quantitative survey

with discourse content analysis and qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted on

a sample of Hijazi Saudi participants. The sample size of the survey and DCT consisted of 240

participants comprising an equal number of male and female participants. For semi-structured

interviews, a total of 60 participants were used, divided into groups of ten to represent young,

subordinate, and superior males and females (total 60). Female participants were interviewed

through phone calls as gender segregation in Saudi Arabia does not allow male researchers to

interact face-to-face with females. A non-probability sampling obtained an initial pool of adult

samples which was narrowed down to the required final numbers using random numbers based

on respondents’ agreement to participate in WhatsApp requests. Only adult Hijazi citizens were

chosen. All ethical requirements were met throughout every phase of the research. The DCT

was given for ten of each of the selected compliment giving and compliment responding

scenarios. Participants were asked to state how they complimented or responded in these

scenarios.

Semi-structured interviews were conducted to explore the relationship between

complimenting behaviours and evil eye beliefs, shed light on the methods used to ward off the

effect of the evil eye. A list of nine pre-prepared questions was used as a guide to help the

researcher maintain the focus of the interviews while having the flexibility to ask for any

clarifications or more information (End & Gass, 2015). This helped the interviewees to give

examples and explain their ideas which assisted the researcher in gathering comprehensive and

clear information. Timing, venues, and duration of the interviews were fixed in advance with

the participants’ agreement. The interview proceedings were audio-recorded using an iPhone

X and a digital recorder to ensure that the interviews were saved for transcription, making them

suitable for the thematic analysis.

124

Survey data were analysed for frequency percentages, and significance was determined

using Chi-square tests. DCT data were also analysed statistically to determine whether and how

gender, age, and social positions affected the giving of compliments and the responses to

compliments. Interview data were analysed using a specially adapted linguistic frame analysis

method (Goffman, 1974). The findings from the quantitative and qualitative datasets were

compared with those in the published literature to confirm the validity and reliability of the

findings.

125

Chapter 4: Results for Giving Compliments

4.1. Introduction

This chapter presents the quantitative results obtained in this study which examines the

cultural characteristics that distinguish Hijazi people when giving compliments to their

interlocutors. The results are first described in line with the three research questions, and then

the general trends will be discussed.

RQ 1. How does the production of compliment events vary across the continuum of

social variables in a sample of Saudi Hijazi Arabic speakers?

As a first step, the collected DCT data was processed to provide background

information on how the complimenting strategies are used by the Saudi Hijazi community for

the four compliment topics vary according to whether the interlocutors are in a close

relationship, are strangers, or one person has greater power/status.

In the tables and texts, power distance has been considered synonymous with a person

of greater power or status. Accordingly, the descriptions used everywhere are about

complimenting behaviour and compliment responses of participants in interactions with people

of high power. Normally, these types of compliments and responses found in this study occur

when a person interacts with a person in power. Hence, the distinctive use of the term is applied.

The Chi-square (2) test results are also given to indicate the statistical significance of

differences in strategies for the four compliment topics. The presentation of the results in the

three tables is explained here.

In Table 1, the questionnaire responses are given in the first two columns for the

compliment topic of appearance. For the first item of religious expression only, 13 participants

responded, which is 10.8% of the total 120. Similar explanations apply to the remaining

columns. The chi-square values were calculated according to the standard formula function of

the SPSS software used for the analysis. These values are given for each compliment topic at

126

the end of the tables. Pie diagrams showing the percentages of responses related to each

compliment topic have been included for the convenience of understanding what is described

in the text. Only the strategies for the responses that were obtained for each compliment topic

have been included in the pie diagrams.

From the trend of frequency percentages, the dominant strategies used by participants

in the three complimenting situations and the four compliment topics were extracted and

summarised in Table 4.7. The effects of age, gender, and social position of the participants in

the same complimenting situations and topics on the dominant strategies were also extracted

from frequencies (not percentages) in the same DCT data. These are presented in Tables 4.8 to

4.16 (for full data, see Appendix N). These results are given below.

4.2. Close relationship

In Table 4.1, the strategies used by the participants when complimenting close relatives

on their appearance, possessions, skills, and personal traits are presented together with the chi-

square analysis results. In Table 4.1, yellow highlights notable low values, and grey highlights

the notable high values.

Table 4.1. Frequencies of survey responses on strategies used by Hijazi participants when

complimenting on appearance, possessions, skills, and personal traits of a close relationship.

Compliment strategies

Close relationship

Appearance Possession Skill Trait

F % f % f % f %

Religious expression 13 10.8 6 5 4 3.3 1 0.8

Religious expression + metaphor 17 14.2

127

Religious expression + repetition 1 0.8

Religious expression + praying 4 3.3 35 29.2 4 3.3 13 10.9

Religious expression + a question 5 4.2 12 10 2 1.7

Religious expression + a comment 28 23.3 36 30 11 9.2 5 4.2

Religious expression + praising 37 30.9 10 8.3 44 36.7 25 20.8

Religious expression + giving advice 23 19.2 19 15.8

Religious expression + encouraging 1 0.8 2 1.7 7 5.8 15 12.6

Religious expression + seeking advice 3 2.5

Religious expression + appreciation token 4 3.3

Appreciation token 1 0.8

Praying 10 8.4 7 5.8 15 12.5 32 26.6

Praising 2 1.7

Inappropriate for giving a compliment 1 0.8 2 1.7

Others 4 3.3 9 7.5 7 5.8 3 2.5

Total 120 100 120 100 120 100 120 100

Chi-square value 110.8 125 126.2 102.6

Df 9 9 9 10

Sig. 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01

The data shown in Table 4.1 indicates that 10 strategies were used by survey

participants, each for appearance, for possession and skills as the compliment topic, and 11

128

strategies for traits, out of 16 types of complimenting strategies. Religious expressions with

repetition, with giving advice, with seeking advice and with appreciation token, appreciation

token without religious expression and praising, were not used as strategies by the

participants when complimenting on appearance.

Chi-square tests of independence were performed to examine the significance of

differences in strategies when complimenting a stranger on different topics. All the Chi-

square values were statistically significant with the values of χ2 (9, N = 120) = 110.8, p =

0.01 for appearance, χ2 (9, N = 120) = 125.0, p = 0.01 for possession, χ2 (9, N = 120) =

126.2, p = 0.01 for skill and χ2 (10, N = 120) = 102.6, p = 0.01. Thus, strategies had more

significant differences when skill was the complimenting topic, closely followed by

possession.

The results given in Table 4.1 suggest that the sample group used 10 different

complimenting strategies when complimenting the appearance of a close relative. The most

common expression used by the participants (30.9%) was a religious expression + praise

(30.9%), followed by the religious expression + a comment (23.3%). The least common

expression used when complimenting a close relative on appearance was inappropriate for

giving a compliment and religious expression + encouraging, both 0.08%.

The strategies most commonly used by the participants when complimenting a close

person on possessions were religious expression + comment and religious expression + praying

at 30% and 29.2%, respectively. The least common strategies were inappropriate for giving a

compliment, religious expression + encouraging and religious expression + repetition at 1.7%,

1.7%, and 0.08%, respectively. In the case of possession, the strategies of combining a religious

expression with metaphor, with giving advice, with seeking advice, and with appreciation

token, appreciation token without religious expressions and praising were not used by the

participants.

129

Religious expression + praising was the most preferred complimenting strategy of the

sample group when complimenting the skills of a close person (36.7%). The second commonly

used strategy to appreciate the skill of a close relationship was religious expression + advising

19.2%. The frequencies of religious expression + seeking advice and religious expression + a

question were 2.5% and 1.7%, respectively, indicating that they were rarely-used strategies. In

the case of skills, the complimenting strategies of combining religious expression with

metaphor, with repetition, with appreciation token, appreciation token without religious

expressions, inappropriate for giving a compliment, and praising were not used.

To compliment the personal traits of a close person, most of the participants preferred

to use religious expression + praying (26.6%) followed by religious expression + praising

(20.8%). The religious expression only (0.08%) and an appreciation token (0.08%) were rarely

used. Religious expressions combined with a metaphor, with repetition, with a question, with

seeking advice, inappropriate for giving a compliment were not used.

Overall, the complimenting strategy of combining a religious expression with a

metaphor was used only when complimenting on appearance. The religious expression,

together with repetition, was used only in the case of possession. The strategy of religious

expression seeking advice was used only in the case of skills. Religious expression with an

appreciation token was used as complimenting strategies only in the case of traits.

The values shown in Table 1 indicate that the strategy of using a religious expression

was more commonly used when appearance was the topic, with a value of 10.8%. The

frequencies of using this strategy for other topics were less than half of this value. Religious

expression with praying was the dominant strategy for possessions with 29.2%, and frequencies

for other topics were much lower. Religious expression with a question was used in about 10%

of the responses in the case of a skills-related compliment, more than double the number used

for other compliment topics. In the case of a religious expression together with a comment,

130

30% of participants used this strategy when complimenting on possessions, and 23.2% of

participants used the strategy when complimenting on appearance.

When complimenting on skills, a religious expression together with praise was used as

the strategy by 36.7% of the participants, while 30.9% used this strategy when complimenting

on appearance and 20.8% when complimenting on a trait. A religious expression together with

encouragement was used by 12.6% of the participants when complimenting on a trait.

Generally, the frequencies using this strategy for other topics were lower. Praying was used by

26.6% of the participants as the main strategy when complimenting on traits. About 12.5% of

the participants used this strategy for complimenting skills. Frequencies of other types of

strategies were quite low for all topics as it includes only certain minor strategies that could

not be categorised in any of the major ones. The maximum frequency was 7.5% when the

compliment was related to a possession.

4.3. Strangers

The statistics for the survey responses regarding the strategies used by Hijazi

participants when complimenting strangers on their appearance, possessions, skill, and

personal traits are given in Table 4.2. Green highlights notable high values, and brown indicates

the notable low values. The percentage frequencies for each topic of compliment are given in

Table 4.2.

131

Table 4.2. Frequencies of strategies used by Hijazi people when complimenting on the

appearance, possessions, skills, or personal traits of a stranger.


Stranger


f % f % f % F %

Religious expression 11 9.2 20 16.7 15 12.5 5 4.2

Religious expression + metaphor 2 1.7

Religious expression + repetition

Religious expression + praying 3 2.5 6 5 12 10 17 14.2

Inappropriate for giving a compliment 64 53.3 63 52.5 14 11.7 7 5.8

Religious expression + a question 1 0.8 9 7.5 8 6.7 1 0.8

Religious expression + a comment 15 12.5 12 10 7 5.8 6 5


Religious expression + giving advice 1 0.8 2 1.7 8 6.7

Religious expression + encouraging 7 5.8 6 5

Religious expression + seeking advice 20 16.7

Others 1 0.8 2 1.7

Religious expression + appreciation token


132


Stranger


f % f % f % F %

Praying 3 2.5 7 5.8 41 34.2

Praising

Total 120 100 120 100 120 100 120 100

Chi-Square value 244.9 154.1 48.2 142.4

Df 8 6 9 10

Sig. 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01

Chi-square tests of independence were performed to examine the significance of

differences in strategies when complimenting a stranger on different topics. All the Chi-square

tests were significant at 0.01 level with values of χ2 (8, N = 120) = 244.9, p = 0.01 for

appearance, χ2 (6, N = 120) = 154.1, p = 0.01 for possession, χ2 (9, N = 120) = 48.2, p = 0.01

and χ2 (10, N = 120) = 142.4, p = 0.01. Numerically, strategies used for appearance were more

significantly different compared to the other compliment topics.

The sample group used nine different strategies when complimenting strangers on their

appearance. The most frequent strategy was inappropriate for giving a compliment (53.3%)

followed by religious expression + praising (16.7%). On the other hand, religious expression

+ metaphor (1.07%) and religious expression + giving advice (0.8%) were the least preferred

strategies. Responses were obtained only for the strategies of using a religious expression, a

133

religious expression together with a metaphor, a prayer, a question, a comment, praise or

advice, inappropriate for giving a compliment, and praying.

Seven strategies were used by the participants when complimenting strangers on their

possessions. Most of them (52.5%) preferred not to compliment at all, indicating their belief

that it is inappropriate, while only 16.7% advocated using only a religious expression. On the

other hand, the least preferred strategies were a religious expression + prayer and a religious

expression + advice with frequencies of 5% and 1.7%, respectively. There were responses only

for the strategies of using a religious expression together with a prayer, a question, a comment,

praise, and giving advice and inappropriate for giving a compliment. Other strategies were not

used.

As is clear from Table 4.2, ten strategies were used by Hijazi participants for

complimenting strangers on their skills. The highest frequency was religious expression +

praise (24.2%), followed by religious expression + seeking advice (16.7%). On the other hand,

religious expression + a comment (5.8%), prayer (5.8%), and others (0.8%) were the least

preferred strategies. There were responses only for the strategies of using a religious expression

together with a prayer, a question, a comment, praise, encouragement, or seeking advice,

among others. Some participants believed that a compliment in this scenario is inappropriate.

Prayer was the most frequently used strategy when complimenting strangers on their

traits (34.2%), followed by religious expression + praise (21.7%). On the other hand, religious

expression + a question and appreciation tokens were the least frequent strategies, both having

a frequency of only 0.8%. There were responses only for strategies of accompanying a religious

expression with a prayer, a question, a comment, praise, giving advice, encouragement, or an

appreciation token, among others. Some considered that a compliment was inappropriate.

134

Overall, it may be noted that a religious expression together with prayer, a compliment,

a question, a comment, and praise were the strategies used for all contexts. However, a religious

expression together with a metaphor was used as a strategy only in the case of appearance.

Religious expression with seeking advice was only used in the case of skills, and an

appreciation token was only used as a strategy in the case of traits.

The statistics presented in Table 4.2 reveal several interesting trends regarding the

dominant strategies used for various compliment topics. Religious expression, with 16.7%

frequency, was used as the dominant strategy when complimenting strangers on their

possessions. When complimenting the skills of strangers, 12.5% of participants used this

strategy. Generally, the frequencies were lower for this strategy and religious expressions with

prayer. Prayer, together with a religious expression, was used mainly to compliment strangers

on a trait and then skill, accounting for 14.2% and 10%, respectively. A majority of participants

complimented strangers on appearance and possession as frequencies of both were over 50%.

Very low frequencies were found in the case of religious expressions together with a question,

the maximum being 7.5% for possession. Religious expressions with a comment were used by

only 12.5% of participants for appearance and 10% for possession. The strategy of religious

expression with praise was used by 24.2% to compliment skills and by 21.7% to compliment

a trait. Religious expression with advice was used by very few participants across all

compliment topics.

4.4. Power distance

The frequency data for the strategies used by Hijazi people when complimenting

persons of power distance on appearance, possessions, skills, and personal traits are presented

in Table 4.3. In Table 4.3, the green highlight is used for notable high values and brown for

notable low values.

135

Table 4.3. Strategies used by Hijazi people when giving compliments on appearance,

possessions, skills, and personal traits according to power distance.


Power Distance


f % F % f % f %

Religious expression 16 13.3 12 10 8 6.7 2 1.7

Religious expression + metaphor 10 8.3 2 1.7

Religious expression + repetition 1 0.8

Religious expression + praying 6 5 5 4.2 35 29.2

Inappropriate for giving a compliment 42 35 47 39.2 13 10.9 10 8.3

Religious expression + a question 5 4.2 3 2.5 6 5

Religious expression + a comment 16 13.3 11 9.2 6 5 3 2.5


Religious expression + giving advice 1 0.8

Religious expression + encouraging 7 5.8

Religious expression + seeking advice 34 28.3 3 2.5

Others 2 1.7 2 1.7 1 0.8 4 3.3

Religious expression + appreciation token


136

Praying 6 5 4 3.3 4 3.3 20 16.7

Praising

Total 120 99.9 120 100 120 100 120 100

Chi-Square value 99.5 152.4 131.4 140.9

Df 8 8 9 10

Sig. 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01

A chi-square test of independence was performed to examine the significance of differences

in complimenting strategies for the four complimenting topics when complimenting a person

of power distance. All the Chi-square tests were significant at 0.01 level with values of χ2 (8,

N = 120) = 99.5, p = 0.01 for appearance, χ2 (8, N = 120) = 152.4, p = 0.01 for possession, χ2

(9, N = 120) = 131.4, p = 0.01 for skill and χ2 (10, N = 120) = 140.9, p = 0.01. Differences in

strategies were most significant in the case possession and least significant in the case of

appearance.

From Table 4.3, the frequencies of strategies used by participants on different topics when

complimenting a person of power distance can be noted. For appearance, inappropriate for a

compliment (35.0%) and religious expression with praise (18.3%) were the two dominant

strategies, with only religious expression and religious expression with comment scored above

10% in this case. Inappropriate for giving a compliment (39.2%), followed by religious

expression + praising (27.5%), were the two most frequent strategies for possession. Values

for others were less than 10%, and for skill, religious expression + praising (35.8%) and

religious expression + seeking advice (28.3%) dominated. There was only one value above 10

in this case. Religious expression with praying was used by 29.2% of participants for a trait,

137

followed by religious expression + praising (26.7%). Except for praying (16.7%), all other

frequencies were less than 10%. A majority of participants did not prefer religious expression

with a question as the frequencies are very low across all topics.

Inappropriate for complimenting (35%) was the major strategy of survey participants

when complimenting a person of power distance on appearance. This indicated the participants’

reluctance to compliment people on appearance if there was a discernible power distance. This

was followed by religious expression + praising with a frequency of 18.3%. The least frequent

strategies used for this topic were others (1.7%) and religious expression + giving advice

(0.8%). In the case of appearance, the response was obtained only on the complimenting

strategies of religious expression combined with metaphor, repetition, question, comment,

praise, giving advice, and praying, among others, inappropriate for giving a compliment, and

others.

In the case of complimenting a person of power distance on possessions, the most

preferred strategy was not to compliment at all, as the frequency of the strategy inappropriate

for giving a compliment was the highest at 39.2%. This was followed by religious expression

+ praising with a frequency of 27.5%. The least frequent strategies used for complimenting

possessions to a person with higher power status were religious expression + metaphor and

others, both with a frequency of 1.7%. The responses were obtained only for the complimenting

strategies of religious expression combined with a metaphor, prayer, question, comment,

praise, inappropriate for giving a compliment, and others.

In the case of complimenting on the skills of individuals with higher authority, 35.8%

of participants preferred to use the strategy of religious expression + praise. About 28.3% of

the participants favoured the strategy of religious expression + seeking advice. On the other

hand, the strategy of praying was used only by 3.3% of the participants, and for the strategy of

138

others, the frequency was only 0.8%. Responses were obtained for the complimenting

strategies of religious expression combined with prayer, a question, a comment, praise, seeking

advice, inappropriate for giving a compliment, and others.

In the case of personal traits, 29.2% of the participants favoured using the strategy of

religious expression + praying, followed by 26.7% of the participants preferring religious

expression + praising. The least-preferred strategies were religious expressions (1.7%

responses) and religious expression + repetition (0.8%). Responses were obtained for the

complimenting strategies of religious expression combined with repetition, prayer, a comment,

praise, encouragement, seeking advice, appreciation token, and inappropriate for giving a

compliment and others.

4.5. Summary of survey results

The statistics for two dominant strategies, each for complimenting someone close,

strangers, or people of power distance, are presented in Tables 4.4 to 4.6, with descriptions

under each. In constructing these tables, the strategy with maximum frequency percentage for

each compliment topic was identified and the value entered in the last column of the tables.

Table 4.4. Two dominant strategies used by the Saudi Hijazi community when

complimenting close relationships.

Compliment topic Dominant strategy Response frequency %

Appearance Religious expression+ praising 30.9

Religious expression + a

comment

23.3

Possession Religious expression+ comment 30.0

Religious expression + prayer 29.2

Skill Religious expression+ praise 36.7

139

Religious expression + giving

advice

19.2

Trait Prayer 26.6

Religious expression + praise 20.8

For appearance, religious expression with praising/a comment were the two dominant

strategies, with widely different response frequencies of 30.9% and 23.3%, respectively. In the

case of possession, religious expressions with comment/praying were very close to each other

(around 30% for both) concerning the frequencies. Skill had a very wide difference in the

frequencies of religious expression with praise/advice, with 36.7% and 19.2% responses,

respectively. For trait, the frequency for prayer was 26.6%, and that of religious expression

with praising had 20.8% responses.

Religious expression combined with praise appears as a dominant strategy for three

compliment topics. The frequency for skill was 36.7%, for appearance 30.9%, and trait 20.8%.

The relative dominance of this strategy across the compliment topics may indicate the relative

importance given to this strategy when the interlocutor is confronted with any of the three topic

contexts. Religious expression appeared as a dominant strategy only for possession and

appearance, with the possible respective relative importance. This means that the participants

are highly aware that possessions and appearance are sensitive topics when giving

compliments.


complimenting strangers.

Compliment topic Dominant strategy Response frequency

Appearance

Inappropriate for giving a

compliment

53.3

140

Religious expression + praise

16.7

Possession Inappropriate for giving a

compliment

52.5

Religious expression

16.7

Skill Religious expression + praising

24.2

Religious expression + seeking for

advice

16.7

Trait Prayer

34.2

Religious expression + praising 21.7

In the case of complimenting strangers on appearance, after a 53.3% response frequency

for inappropriate for giving a compliment, the next dominant strategy was a religious

expression with praise with only 16.7% response (much less than one-third) frequency. This is

a definite indication of the strategy preference of the Hijazi community when complimenting

strangers for appearance. A similar difference in response strategies of inappropriate for giving

a compliment (52.5%) and religious expression (16.7%) when complimenting on possession

could be explained in the same manner. Regarding skill, the dominant strategies of religious

expression + praise (24.2%) and religious expression + seeking advice (16.7%) did not vary

much. When the skill is the topic, it is better to praise strangers than to seek advice. When

141

complimenting strangers on a trait, just a prayer (34.2%) was preferred to religious expression

+ praise (21.7%). Here also, religious expression with praise is a preferred strategy for all

complimenting strategies used for strangers.


complimenting people of power distance.

Compliment topic Dominant strategy Response frequency

Appearance Inappropriate for giving a

compliment

35.0



compliment

39.2


Skill Religious expression + praise 35.8

Religious expression + seeking

advice

28.3

Trait Religious expression + prayer 29.2

Religious expression + prayer 26.7

When appearance is the compliment topic, religious expression with praising (18.3%)

scored only about half of the response for the strategy of inappropriate for giving a compliment

(35.0%). When possession is the topic, 39.2% believed that it was inappropriate to give a

compliment. Religious expression with praising was the next preference, with a frequency of

27.5%. In the case of skill as the topic, religious expression with praising (35.8%) was followed

by religious expression + seeking advice (28.3%). Trait had a close range of frequencies (29.2%

142

and 26.7%) between religious expression + prayer or with praise. So, there is no great

difference in the preferred choice of strategy in this case.

Religious expression with praise was one of the dominant strategies for all compliment

topics. We assume the relative importance of this strategy across the topic is reflected by

whether it is first or second preference and the relative frequencies. In that case, religious

expression with praise was the first dominant strategy in the case of skill and the second in the

case of the other three topics. It had maximum frequency for skill (35.8%), followed by 27.5%

for possession, 26.7% for trait, and 18.3% for appearance. Thus, while religious expression

with praising was a dominant strategy for all topics, it was more frequently used when

complimenting people of power distance for skills as the most preferred strategy.

A summary of results indicating the most frequent complimenting strategy for different

compliment topics and situations is given in Table 4.7. This is an overall summary of the three

previous tables to provide a bird’ eye view of the results of this survey.

Table 4. 7. Most frequent complimenting strategies for compliment topics and situations

Complimenting

situation

Compliment topic Dominant strategy by the

maximum frequency

Response

frequency %

Close relationship Appearance Religious expression+ praise 30.9

Possession Religious expression+

comment/praying

30.0

Skill Religious expression+ praise 36.7

Trait Praying 26.6

Stranger Appearance Inappropriate for giving a

compliment

53.3


compliment

52.5

143


Trait Praying 34.2

Power distance Appearance Inappropriate for giving a

compliment

35.0


compliment

39.2


Trait Religious expression+ prayer 29.2

Religious expression + praise was the dominant strategy in the case of complimenting

a close relationship on appearance and skill. Religious expression + comment/prayer was the

dominant strategy when complimenting a close person on possession and a person of power

distance on a trait. Praying was the dominant strategy when complimenting a close person or a

stranger on a trait. Most participants refrained from commenting on the appearance or

possession of a stranger or a person of power distance.

In this quantitative enquiry, the social variables considered were close relatives,

strangers, and people of power distance. The data revealed that a range of complimenting

strategies was used, and those chosen depended on the compliment topic and the relationship

between the interlocutors. Hence, in answer to the first research question: Speech acts of

complimenting vary depending on the social variables of the Saudi Hijazi community and the

strategies people use to compliment on the topics of appearance, possession, skill, and trait.

However, the separate effects of gender, age, and social position on dominant compliment

strategies can be identified only from the DCT analysis given below.

144

4.6. DCT analysis results for complimenting behaviour, with age, gender, and

social position as the variables.

DCT data on complimenting behaviour was analysed for the frequency by numbers by

age, gender, and social position to determine the effects of these sociodemographic variables

on complimenting strategies for the four topics of appearance, possession, skill, and trait. Since

percentages based on small sizes may be disproportionate, the frequencies in numbers are

presented in the tables below. Only the dominant compliment strategies (with frequencies of

10 or above) preferred by the participants when presented with the options are given here. The

complete data is given in Appendix N. The complimenting scenarios and their use for DCT

data collection were described in the Methodology chapter.

In the case of age, the young group was 18-25 years of age and consisted of 40

participants. In the case of the old, both subordinate and superior categories of participants

were in the 40 plus age group. This gave a combined sample of 80. For gender, the sample

sizes are 60 each for males and females. For the three social positions of young, subordinate,

and superior, the samples sizes are 40 each. These results are described under separate sections

about age, gender, and social position.

Effect of age

The dominant strategies used by the two age groups when complimenting a close person on

four compliment topics are presented in Table 4.8.

Table 4.8. Dominant strategies used by two age groups when complimenting a close

relationship on four compliment topics.

Compliment

Topic

Age 18-25 years (out of 40 participants) Age 40 and above (out of 80 participants

combining subordinate and superior positional

categories)

145

Appearance Religious expression + a comment-13

Religious expression + praise- 12

Religious expression + a comment-15

Religious expression + praise-25

Religious expression + metaphor-12

Possession Religious expression + prayer- 13


Religious expression + prayer- 22

Religious expression + a comment- 26

Skill Religious expression + praise- 29 Religious expression + praise- 15

Prayer – 15

Religious expression + giving advice- 23

Trait Religious expression + praising- 15 Religious expression + praise-10

Religious expression + encouraging-12

Praying- 31

Religious expression + giving advice-10

In the case of appearance, religious expression with a comment and religious expression

with praise were dominant strategies for both younger and older groups. However, religious

expression with praise was more dominant in the case of the older group. These two were the

only dominant strategies in the case of the younger group. The third strategy of religious

expression with metaphor was identified in the older group. Possession had only two dominant

strategies for both groups. Religious expression with a comment was the preferred strategy of

the older group. Religious expression with prayer was the top strategy for the younger group.

For both skill and trait, religious expression with praise was the only dominant strategy

for the younger group. It was one of the top three strategies for skill in the case of the older

group, religious expression + giving advice being predominant. These three strategies, along

with encouragement, were four dominant strategies for a trait in the case of the older group.

146

Here, of the four strategies, prayer was predominant. The dominant strategies used by two age

groups when complimenting strangers on four topics are given in Table 4.9.

Table 4.9. Dominant strategies used by two age groups when complimenting strangers on four

compliment topics.

Compliment

Topic

Age 18-25 years (out of 40

participants)

Age 40 and above (Out of 80 participants

combining subordinate and superior positional

categories)


compliment- 24


Inappropriate for giving a compliment- 40




compliment-20

Inappropriate for giving a compliment-43


Skill Religious expression + praise-18 Religious expression-15

Religious expression + prayer-11


Religious expression + seeking advice-16

Trait Religious expression + praising-17 Praying-41

A significant number of participants in both age groups believed that it was

inappropriate to comment on appearance and possessions. A religious expression combined

with a comment or with praise was also adopted to a lesser extent. In the case of skill and trait,

religious expression with praise was a common strategy, although religious expression alone

or with prayer and seeking advice were also used when the skill was the topic. In the case of

trait, a religious expression together with praise was preferred by the younger group and prayer

by the older group.

147

The dominant strategies used by two age groups when complimenting a person of

higher power status on four compliment topics is presented in Table 4.10.

Table 4.10. Dominant strategies used by two age groups when complimenting people of power

status for four compliment topics.

Compliment

Topic

Age 18-25 years (out of 40 participants) Age 40 and above (out of 80 participants combining

subordinate and superior positional categories)

Appearance Inappropriate for giving a compliment-27


Religious expression-16




Possession Inappropriate for giving a compliment-25 Inappropriate for giving a compliment- 22



Skill Religious expression + praise- 14 Religious expression + praise-29


Trait Religious expression + prayer-11




Praying-20

A majority of participants in both age groups thought it inappropriate to give

compliments on appearance and possessions. Areligious expression combined with praise was

also a popular strategy used by both age groups for compliments on appearance, skills and

traits. The religious expression alone (older group), or combined with a comment, seeking

advice, or with prayer were also common strategies across the topics. The older group preferred

prayer when complimenting on a trait.

148

Effect of gender

Gender differences in dominant strategies when complimenting a close person on four topics

are shown in Table 4.11.

4.11. Gender differences in dominant strategies when complimenting a close person on four

topics.

Compliment

topic

Male Female

Appearance Religious expression-12


Religious expression + metaphor-17



Praying-10

Possession Religious expression + prayer-33 Religious expression + a question-11


Skill Religious expression + praise-32 Religious expression + praise-12

Praying-15




Prayer-11

Prayer-21


A religious expression coupled with praise was the dominant strategy used for

complimenting appearance and skill (both males and females) and for a trait (only males).

Only males used a religious expression alone when complimenting on appearance. Religious

expressions combined with other words and phrases were dominant strategies used for all the

149

topics. Prayer was a dominant strategy used by females for appearance and skill and by both

genders for a trait.

In Table 4.12 below, gender differences in the use of dominant strategies when

complimenting a stranger on four different topics are shown. Notably, regardless of gender,

most participants believed it inappropriate to compliment a stranger on appearance and

possessions; females eschewed commenting on skills. It was the sole dominant strategy used

by males. The religious expression alone or combined with various other words or phrases

were used in other instances, with praise being used more frequently by both genders.

Gender differences in dominant strategies when complimenting a stranger on four

topics are presented in Table 4.12.

Table 4.12. Gender differences in frequencies of dominant strategies when complimenting a

stranger on four topics.

Compliment

topic

Male Female


compliment-43





compliment-36



Skill Religious expression-13








Praying-10


Praying-31

150

Gender differences in dominant strategies when complimenting a person with greater power

are presented in Table 4.13.

Table 4.13. Gender differences in frequencies of dominant strategies when complimenting

people with higher power status on four topics.

Compliment

topic

Male Female


compliment-32






compliment-33



Skill Religious expression + praising-

24


Religious expression + seeking for advice-

26



Praying-10



Praying-10

Refraining from giving a compliment was a dominant strategy used by males

regarding appearance and skill. Religious expression with praise was a popular strategy for

both genders in the case of skill and trait, and females alone in the case of appearance and

possessions.

151

Effect of social position

Dominant strategies used by three groups of social positions when complimenting a close

relationship on four topics are given in Table 4.14.


a close person on four topics

Compliment

topic

Young Subordinate Superior

Appearance Religious expression +

a comment-13

Religious expression +

praise-12


praise-12


praise-13

Possession Religious expression +

prayer-13


a comment-10


prayer-14


a comment-10

Religious expression + a

comment-16

Skill Religious expression +

praising-29


giving advice-10


giving advice-13

Trait Inappropriate for

giving a compliment-

15

Prayer-16 Prayer-15

Some definite trends are evident here. A religious expression combined with praise

tended to be favoured by all groups (sole dominant strategy for subordinate and superior

groups) when complimenting a close person on appearance. A religious expression coupled

with a comment was the main strategy used by all groups when complimenting on a

152

possession. Religious expression with praying was also used for possession by young and

subordinate groups. Although the young group used praise together with religious expression,

the other two groups preferred combining it with advice. The young group felt that it was

inappropriate to compliment someone on a trait. On the other hand, prayer was the single

dominant strategy used by subordinate and superior groups.

Dominant strategies used by three groups of social positions when complimenting a

stranger on four topics are given in Table 4.15.


a stranger on four topics.

Compliment

topic


Appearance Inappropriate for giving

a compliment-24


praise-10

Inappropriate for


17


compliment-23

Possession Inappropriate for giving

a compliment-20

Inappropriate for


18


compliment-25


praise-18

Religious expression-

10


seeking advice-12

Trait Religious expression +

praise-17

Prayer-16 Praying-25

Some clear trends were evident in this case also. Most individuals in both groups

considered it inappropriate to compliment someone on a possession, subordinate and superior

153

groups in the case of appearance and one of the two for the young group. For skill, the

subordinate group used a religious expression, and the other two groups used combinations of

praise (young) and seeking advice (superior) as single strategies. In the case of

complimenting someone on a trait, prayer was preferred by the two senior groups, while the

young group used a religious expression coupled with praise.

Dominant strategies used by three groups of social positions when complimenting a

person of higher power status are given in Table 4.16.


a person of higher power status.

Compliment

topic



compliment-27


praise-11

Religious expression-10 Religious expression + a

comment-12


compliment-25

Inappropriate for giving

a compliment-11


praise-11


compliment-11



praise-14


seeking advice-13


praise-14


seeking advice-12


Trait Religious expression +

prayer-11


prayer-16

Prayer-15

154


praise-16

Several trends are evident in Table 4.16 also. The young group considered it

inappropriate to compliment on appearance, and all groups eschewed complimenting on

possessions. The three groups used three different combinations of religious expression to

compliment appearance. In the case of possessions, apart from many in the young group

considering a compliment to be inappropriate, religious expression + praise was preferred by

both of the other groups. In the case of skill, religious expression combined with praise was a

dominant strategy for all groups. In addition, religious expression with seeking advice was also

preferred by young and subordinate groups. While a religious expression together with prayer

was dominant for young and subordinate groups, prayer was the single dominant strategy for

the superior group. In addition, a religious expression coupled with praise was also used by the

young group.

4.7. Interactions

The Chi-square test values for gender, age, and social positions as independent variables

and the four compliment topics as dependent variables are given in Table 4.17.

Table 4.17. Chi-square test results of socio-demographic variables x four compliment topics

when complimenting people of different social positions.

Close relationship

Trait Skill possession Appearance Dependent

Sig. d.f 2 Sig. d.f 2 Sig. d.f 2 Sig. d.f 2 Independent

0.01 10 33.96 0.01 9 64.64 0.01 9 53.70 0.01 9 52.7 Gender

0.01 20 62.14 0.01 18 73.54 0.09 18 26.45 0.08 18 26.94 Position

155

0.01 10 41.99 0.01 9 55.52 0.16 9 13.05 0.05 9 16.86 Age

Stranger



0.01 10 45.23 0.01 9 43.52 0.12 6 10.10 0.01 8 32.85 Gender

0.01 20 71.90 0.01 18 57.01 0.30 12 14.06 0.24 16 19.62 Position

0.01 10 48.71 0.01 9 43.11 0.19 6 8..66 0.06 8 14.84 Age

Power status



0.20 10 13.37 0.02 8 18.07 0.01 8 28.59 0.01 8 48.08 Gender

0.01 20 52.05 0.11 16 23.00 0.01 16 33.30 0.01 16 66.42 Position

0.01 10 32.36 0.04 8 15.83 0.01 8 22.03 0.01 8 47.81 Age

The results show the significance for all relationships except position x appearance,

position x possession, and age x possession when complimenting close people and strangers.

In the case of power status, gender x trait and position x skill were non-significant, and others

were significant. Thus, there were no significant differences among strategies for these non-

significant interactions. See Tables 4.8, 4.12, 4.13, and 4.14 for the range of strategies and their

frequencies as, together, they determine statistical significance.

4.8. DCT Data analysis by ANOVA

All the results of this analysis are given in Appendix P. Here, only the significant results are

presented.

Position x Gender interaction was significant for a trait in the case of a close

relationship, p=0.045, and a stranger (p=0.000) and power status (p=0.000). This means that

156

the complimenting strategies used for social positions were significantly different for

complimenting someone close, a stranger, and persons with higher power status. The exact

complimenting strategies differentiating for these have already been described along with the

tabulated results above (Tables 4.14, 4.15, and 4.16).

4.9. Summary

This chapter began with presenting the results obtained from the analysis of survey data

about the strategies used by the study participants when complimenting a close relative, a

stranger, or a person of power distance. Combinations of religious expressions with various

methods of complimenting were predominant in most of the topic-related scenarios. Other main

strategies were prayer alone used for a trait (close relationship, stranger) or refraining from

complimenting the appearance or possessions of strangers or people perceived as having high

power or status.

DCT analysis was conducted to determine the influence that age, gender, and social

positions of the participants had on the choice of complimenting strategy when complimenting

someone close, a stranger, or a person perceived to have power. Irrespective of age, most

participants included a religious expression when complimenting someone close. A majority

of participants considered it inappropriate to compliment strangers and people of high power.

When they did compliment, a religious expression was added to different complimenting

methods such as praise, commenting, praying, or seeking advice. In the case of gender, the

addition of a religious expression or a simple prayer was a must when complimenting someone

close. Male participants used only religious expressions together with prayer when

complimenting on possession and with praise when complimenting on a skill. In the case of

complimenting persons of strangers and persons of high power, complimenting was considered

inappropriate by both genders for appearance and possession (the only strategy for men), by

women for skill. Males used religious expressions with praising when complimenting on skill.

157

In the case of social positions, the addition of religious expression to complimenting close

relatives was noted across all social positions for all topics (sole strategy for skill) except trait.

In the case of trait, while the young group considered complimenting close relatives as

inappropriate, praying was used as the sole strategy by subordinate and superior groups.

Religious expressions with different complimenting strategies for skill were used across all

social positions and by the young group for a trait. Praying was opted by the other two social

positions. Other strategies of adding religious expressions with various methods were adopted

across all social positions for skill for all other situations, except the superior group preferring

praying when trait was the topic.

Chi-square and ANOVA tests showed some significant effects and interactions

indicating that the complimenting strategies used for social positions were significantly

different from those applied when complimenting someone close, a stranger, and persons of

higher power status.

158

Chapter 5: Results for Compliment Responses

5.1. Introduction

In continuation of the above chapter on the results of the survey of the Hijazi community

on complimenting behaviour, this chapter presents the results of compliment responses. Both

these were intended to answer the research question:



The quantitative data analysis results obtained from the survey responses are presented in the

following sections. The details of participants groups are given in the Methodology section.

Note that the responses were categorised into responses to compliments given by close

relationships, by strangers, and by people of high power. Tables 5.1 to 5.3 show strategies with

the highest frequency percentages indicating they were preferred; the dominant strategies

identified for each situation are shown in Tables 5.4 to 5.6, and a summary of these is given in

Table 5.7. An examination of the DCT data follows this to determine the influence that

participants’ age, gender, and social position have on the choice of strategy for responding to

compliments. Three compliment scenarios were given comprising the four topics. These results

are presented in Tables 5.8 to 5.16. All data are given in Appendix O.

5.2. Close relationship

The frequencies of strategies used for participant responses to compliments given by

close relatives are presented in Table 5.1. Light green indicates notable high values, and yellow

highlights notable low values.

159

Table 5. 1. Strategies used by Hijazi people when responding to compliments offered by close

persons on appearance, possessions, skills, and personal traits.


Close relationship

Appearance possession Skill Trait

f % f % f % f %

Accepting Compliments/Appreciation

tokens

20 16.7 9 7.5 13 10.9 7 5.8

Accepting Compliments/Agreeing

utterances

20 16.7 13 10.8 3 2.5 3 2.5

Accepting Compliments/Downgrading

utterances

1 0.8 20 16.7

Accepting Compliments/Returning

Compliments

44 36.7 30 25 40 33.3 33 27.5

Accepting Compliments/Praise upgrades 1 0.8 2 1.7 1 0.8 1 0.8

Accepting Compliments/Expressing

pleasure

2 1.7

Accepting Compliments/ praying for the

giver of

18 15 38 31.7 25 20.9 21 17.5

Evading Compliments/Shifting credit 10 8.3 3 2.5 18 15 23 19.2

Evading Compliments/Informative

comment

1 0.8 11 9.2 5 4.2

Evading Compliments/Request reassurance 1 0.8 2 1.7

Evading Compliments/Fault finding

Rejecting Compliments / Disagreeing

utterances

1 0.8

Rejecting and reassuring comments

Invocation request 2 1.7 5 4.2 2 1.7 1 0.8

Offering 1 0.8 14 11.7

Superstitious comments

Remaining silent + smile 2 1.7 2 1.7 2 1.7 2 1.7

Remaining silent

Fishing for more compliments 1 0.8

Motivation 1 0.8

Jokes 1 0.8 2 1.7 1 0.8

Sarcasm

Laughter

Accepting Compliments/ offering help 1 0.8

Total 120 100 120 100 120 100 120 100

Chi-square value 170.7 163.8 213.9 135.6

Df 10 11 13 11

Sig. 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01

A chi-square test of independence was performed to examine the significance of

differences in compliment responding strategies for the four complimenting topics when

receiving compliments from a person of close relative. All the Chi-square tests were significant

at 0.01 level with values of χ2 (10, N = 120) = 170.7, p = 0.01 for appearance, χ2 (11, N = 120)

160

= 163.8, p = 0.01 for possession, χ2 (13, N = 120) = 213.9, p = 0.01 for skill and χ2 (11, N =

120) = 135.6, p = 0.01. The highest significance was observed in the case of responding

compliments on skills, followed by appearance.

Accepting and returning compliments was the preferred strategy used to respond to

compliments on appearance, skill, and trait, at 36.7% for appearance, 33.3% for skill, and

27.5% for a trait. The most-used strategy was the acceptance of compliments/ praying for the

giver of the compliment at 31.7%. The least response of 0.8% was obtained for several

strategies about all the four compliment topics, without any discernible pattern. Chi-square

values indicate that all differences in frequencies are highly significant.

5.2.1. Appearance

The compliment response strategy of accepting compliments from close relatives or

returning compliments to them was preferred by 36.7% of participants, making it the most

popular. This was followed by accepting compliments/appreciation tokens and accepting

compliments/agreement utterances (16.7%), and accepting compliments/ praying for the giver

(15%). The frequencies of all other strategies were less than 10%. In particular, in the case of

strategies accepting compliments/praise upgrades, offering, and jokes, the frequency was the

lowest of all at 0.8%.

5.2.2. Possession

In this case, the maximum response of 31.7% was noted for accepting compliments/

praying for the giver of the compliment. This was followed by a 25% response for the accepting

compliments/returning compliments strategy. Other significant frequencies were those of

offering (11.7%), accepting compliments/agreeing utterances (10.8%), and accepting

161

compliments/appreciation tokens (7.5%). Only 0.8% of the participants used the strategy of

evading compliments/informative comments and fishing for more compliments.

5.2.3. Skill

In this case, 33.3% of participants used accepting compliments/returning compliments

as the preferred strategy. Another 20.9% used the strategy of accepting the compliment/praying

for the giver of the compliment; 15% used the evading compliments/shifting credit strategy,

10.9% used the accepting compliments/appreciation tokens strategy, and 9.2% used the

strategy of evading compliments/informative comment. Only 0.8% of participants used the

strategies of accepting compliments/praise upgrades, evading compliments/request

reassurance, rejecting compliments/disagreeing utterances, motivation, jokes, and for

accepting compliments/ offering help. Thus, it is evident that participants have a low preference

for complimenting others on their skills.

5.2.4. Personal Traits

The maximum frequency of 27.5% was obtained for the strategy of accepting

compliments/returning compliments. This was followed by 19.2% for evading

compliments/shifting credit, 17.5% for accepting compliments/ praying for the giver of and

16.7% for accepting compliments/downgrading utterances. Only 0.8% of participants used the

strategies of accepting compliments/praise upgrades and invocation requests.

5.3. Stranger

The strategies used by participants for various topics when responding to compliments

from strangers are presented in Table 5.2. Light green is for notable high values, and yellow is

for notable low values.

162

Table 5.2. Strategies used by Hijazi people when responding to compliments from strangers on appearance,

possessions, skills, and personal traits


Stranger relationship

Appearance possession Skill Trait

F % f % f % f %

Accepting Compliments/Appreciation tokens 6 5 9 7.5 11 9.2 7 5.8

Accepting Compliments/Agreeing utterances 3 2.5 3 2.5 6 5 5 4.2


utterances

3 2.5 5 4.2 16 13.3


Compliments

76 63.4 41 34.2 8 6.7 30 25

Accepting Compliments/Praise upgrades 1 0.8 2 1.7

Accepting Compliments/Expressing pleasure 1 0.8 14 11.7 3 2.5


giver of

20 16.7 15 12.5 6 5 38 31.7

Evading Compliments/Shifting credit 1 0.8 43 35.8 13 10.8

Evading Compliments/Informative comment 6 5 4 3.3

Evading Compliments/Request reassurance

Evading Compliments/Fault Finding

Rejecting Compliments / Disagreeing

utterances

1 0.8 2 1.7


Invocation request 6 5 6 5 8 6.7

Offering 28 23.3


Remaining silent + smile 6 5 7 5.9 2 1.7

163

Remaining silent

Fishing for more compliments

Motivation

Jokes 1 0.8

Sarcasm

Laughter


Total 120 100 120 100 120 100 120 100

Chi-square value 352.2 146.9 103.7 119.7

Df 8 10 10 9

Sig. 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01



receiving compliments from a stranger. All the Chi-square tests were significant at 0.01 level

with values of χ2 (8, N = 120) = 352.2, p = 0.01 for appearance, χ2 (10, N = 120) = 146.9, p

= 0.01 for possession, χ2 (10, N = 120) = 103.7, p = 0.01 for skill and χ2 (9, N = 120) =

119.7, p = 0.01. Highest significance was obtained in the case of appearance.

In the case of strangers, high frequencies can be observed for certain strategies when

complimenting on the four topics. Notably, a frequency of 63.4% and 34.2% were obtained

when the strategy of accepting compliments/returning compliments was used in the case of

complimenting on appearance and possession, respectively. The results for each

complimenting topic are given below.

164

5.3.1. Appearance

Apart from the maximum frequency of 63.4% for the strategy of accepting

compliments/returning compliments, 16.7% of participants used the strategy of accepting

compliments/praying for the giver of the compliment when receiving compliments on their

appearance from strangers. These two strategies were used by 80% of participants; hence, other

strategies were used by 5% or less.

5.3.2. Possession

The two highest frequencies, in this case, were 34.2% for accepting

compliments/returning compliments, 23.3% for offering, and 12.5% for accepting

compliments/ praying for the giver of, as the strategies. Thus, 70% of responses comprised

these three strategies, and the frequencies of others were less than 10%.

5.3.3. Skill

When a skill is the compliment topic, 35.8% of participants used the strategy of evading

compliments/shifting credit. Other notable frequencies were 14.2% for accepting compliments/

offering help, 11.7% for accepting compliments/expressing pleasure, and 9,2% for accepting

compliments/appreciation tokens. The lowest frequency of 1.7% was obtained for accepting

compliments/praise upgrades.

5.3.4. Personal Traits

The highest frequency of 31.7% was obtained for accepting compliments/ praying for

the giver of strategy. This was followed by 25% for accepting compliments/returning

compliments, 13.3% for accepting compliments/downgrading utterances, and 10.8% for

evading compliments/shifting credit strategies. Others ranged between this value and 6.7%.

165

Other frequencies were less than 10%, and it was 1.7% for two of them, namely, rejecting

compliments / disagreeing utterances and remaining silent + smile.

5.4. Power distance

The frequencies of different response strategies used by participants when responding

to compliments received from persons in a position of power are presented in Table 5.3. The

table also shows the compliment topics and yellow highlights the notable low values and green

for notable high values.

Table 5.3. Strategies used by Hijazi people when responding to compliments by a person of

power distance on appearance, possessions, skills, and personal traits.


Power Distance relationship


f % f % f % f %

Accepting Compliments + Appreciation

tokens

7 5.8 25 20.8 19 15.8 23 19.2

Accepting Compliments + Agreeing

utterances

1 0.8 5 4.2 2 1.7 4 3.3

Accepting Compliments + Downgrading

utterances

9 7.5 6 5 9 7.5 22 18.3

Accepting Compliments + Returning

Compliments

88 73.3 41 34.2 12 10 31 25.8

Accepting Compliments + Praise

upgrades

2 1.7 1 0.8

Accepting Compliments + Expressing

pleasure

21 17.5 9 7.5

166

Accepting Compliments + Praying for

the giver

5 4.2 9 7.5 5 4.2 16 13.4

Evading Compliments + Shifting credit 2 1.7 2 1.7 12 10 11 9.2

Evading Compliments + Informative

comment

2 1.7 25 20.8

Evading Compliments + Request

reassurance

1 0.8

Evading Compliments + Fault Finding

Rejecting Compliments + Disagreeing

utterances


Invocation request 1 0.8 1 0.8 1 0.8 1 0.8

Offering 25 20.8 1 0.8


Remaining silent + smile 5 4.2 3 2.5 2 1.7 2 1.7

Remaining silent

Fishing for more compliments

Motivation

Jokes

Sarcasm

Laughter


Total 120 100 120 100 120 100 120 100

Chi-square value 475 163.4 75 84.5

167

Df 8 10 11 9

Sig. 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01



receiving compliments from a person of power distance. All the Chi-square tests were

significant at 0.01 level with values of χ2 (8, N = 120) = 475, p = 0.01 for appearance, χ2 (10,

N = 120) = 163.4, p = 0.01 for possession, χ2 (11, N = 120) = 75, p = 0.01 for skill and χ2 (9,

N = 120) = 84.5, p = 0.01. The strength of significance was the highest in the case of

appearance.

The popularity of various strategies can be gauged from the percentages given in Table

5.3. Especially, 73.3% favouring accepting compliments + returning compliments and a range

of responses in the frequencies of 20-35% are particularly noteworthy. The strategy of

accepting compliments + returning compliments recorded the highest frequency for

appearance, possession, and trait, but not skill. On the other hand, the lowest frequency of 0.8%

is also notable in the case of many strategies. In particular, the strategy of invocation request

recorded 0.8% for all compliment topics. Chi-square values indicate that the differences

between frequencies are highly significant. The response patterns for individual topics are

described below.

5.4.1. Appearance

Next to the highest frequency of 73.3% in the case of accepting compliments + returning

compliments strategy, all other frequencies were lower than 10. Among them, the highest

frequency of 7.5% was obtained for accepting compliments + downgrading utterances. This

was followed by 5.8% for accepting compliments + appreciation tokens and 4.2% for both

168

accepting compliments + praying for the giver of and remaining silent + smile. All these

strategies together accounted for about 95% of the responses. The lowest frequency of 0.8%

was recorded for accepting compliments + agreeing with utterances and for invocation request

strategies.

5.4.2. Possession

In the case of possession as the topic, the response strategy of accepting compliments +

returning compliments recorded the maximum frequency of 34.2%. A frequency of 0.8% was

obtained for accepting compliments + appreciation tokens as well as for offering. Accepting

compliments + praying for the giver recorded a frequency of 7.5%. For the remaining

strategies, the frequencies were less than 5%. The lowest frequency of 0.8% was obtained for

evading compliments + request reassurance and invocation request.

5.4.3. Skill

The highest frequency of 20.8% for skill as the topic was obtained for evading

compliments + informative comment. The frequency for accepting compliments + expressing

pleasure was 17.5%. A frequency of 15.8% was obtained for accepting compliments +

appreciation tokens. The frequencies for both accepting compliments + returning compliments

and for evading compliments + shifting credit were 10%. Frequencies for other strategies were

less than 5%. In particular, a frequency of 0.8% was obtained for accepting compliments +

praise upgrades and for invocations.

5.4.4. Personal Trait

The maximum frequency of 25.5% was obtained for accepting compliments + returning

compliments as the strategy. Frequencies of 19.2%, 18.3%, and 13.4% were obtained for

accepting compliments + appreciation tokens, accepting compliments + downgrading

169

utterances, and for accepting compliments + praying for the giver, strategies. The frequency

for evading compliments + shifting credit was 9.2%, and the frequency for accepting

compliments + expressing pleasure was 7.5%. The remaining strategies had very low

frequencies. The frequencies for both invocation requests and offerings were 0.8%.

5.5. Summary

Summarised statements of dominant compliment responding strategies for the four

compliment topics and the three situations have been provided in Tables 5.4 to 5.6 and

described below. These tables were constructed by identifying the strategies for which

maximum percentage frequencies were recorded. A summary of the dominant strategies

across all situations and topics has been provided in Table 5.7.

5.5.1. Close relationship

The strategies relevant to each topic and used when responding to a compliment from a close

person are being presented in Table 5.4.

Table 5.4. Compliment responding - a close relationship

Compliment strategy Dominant

topic

Response

frequency

%

Accepting Compliments/Appreciation tokens Appearance 16.7

Accepting Compliments/Agreeing utterances Appearance 16.7

Accepting Compliments/Downgrading utterances Trait 16.7

Accepting Compliments/Returning Compliments Appearance 36.7

170

Possession

Skill

Trait

25.0

33.3

27.5

Accepting Compliments/ praying for the giver of Possession 31.7

Evading Compliments/Shifting credit

Trait 19.2

Offering Possession 11.7%

The frequencies show that three strategies were dominant for appearance. They were

accepting compliments/appreciation tokens and accepting compliments/agreeing utterances

with 16.7% each and accepting compliments/returning compliments with 36.7%. As a

frequency of 16.7% cannot be considered as dominant in the real sense, it can be concluded

that accepting compliments/returning compliments was the dominant complimenting strategy

used by participants in the case of close relationships.

Apart from the frequency of 11.7% for offering, the frequencies for the dominant

strategies used in the case of possession as the topic were a notable 31.7% for accepting

compliments/ praying for the giver and 25% for accepting compliments/returning

compliments. Hence, these two complimenting strategies could be considered alternate

strategies used by the participants depending on the situational context. The frequency data

suggest that the superior strategy of attaching a prayer for the giver of the compliment may be

used in the case of much closer relationships, and the other strategy of accepting and returning

compliments may be used for more formal contexts with less close relationships. The only

dominant strategy for skill as the topic was accepting compliments/returning compliments with

a frequency of 33.3%, which is adequate as it accounts for one-third of the participants.

171

Three dominant strategies could be identified for a trait. These were: accepting

compliments/returning compliments (27.5%), evading compliments/shifting credit (19.2%)

and accepting compliments/downgrading utterances (16.7%). Applying the same argument to

possession-related compliments, accepting compliments/returning compliments can be

considered the dominant strategy as indicated by the frequency percentage.

5.5.2. Stranger

Table 5.5 shows the dominant strategies used when responding to compliments by a stranger.

Table 5.5. Dominant compliment response to strangers

Compliment strategy Dominant

topic

Response

frequency

%

Accepting Compliments/Returning Compliments Appearance

Possession

Trait

63.4

34.2

25.0

Accepting Compliments/ praying for the giver

Trait 31.7

Evading Compliments/Shifting credit Skill 35.8

There were only three dominant strategies here. Accepting compliments/returning

compliments appear here, although the strategy is not dominant in the case of skill. Out of the

two strategies for a trait, accepting compliments/praying for the giver is more dominant, as its

frequency of 31.7% is higher than that for accepting compliments/returning compliments. Skill

is the only topic for which evading compliments/shifting credit occurs with a 35.8% frequency.

172

5.5.3. Power distance

The dominant topics on which response strategies were used by participants when

complimenting persons when there is power distance are given in Table 7.6.

Table 5.6. Dominant compliment responses to people of power distance

Complimenting strategy Dominant

topic

Response Frequency %

Accepting Compliments +

Appreciation tokens

Possession 20.8

Accepting Compliments +

Returning Compliments

Appearance

Possession

Trait

73.3

34.2

25.8

Evading Compliments +

Informative comment

Skill 20.8

Offering Possession 20.8

Considering that there will be no dominant strategy for some topics if the minimum

limit is set at 25% as a decent and acceptable frequency. Here 20.8% was accepted as a

dominant strategy when no higher value was obtained for any other topic. Still, only three

strategies had dominant topics. Thus, in the case of accepting compliments + appreciation

tokens, possession (20.8%) was the only dominant topic. In the case of accepting compliments

+ returning compliments, excepting skill, all the topics were dominant with frequencies as high

as 73.3% for appearance, 34.2% for possession, and a decent 25.8% for the trait. Only skill

173

with 20.8% frequency was the dominant topic for evading compliments and informative

comments. In the case of offering, this was a dominant strategy (20.8%) but used only regarding

possessions.

5.6. Dominant compliment response strategies

We can derive the dominant compliment response strategy adopted by participants on each

topic. Results are presented in Table 5.7.

Table 5.7. Compliment response strategies across situations

Complimenting

situation

Compliment

topic

Dominant strategy by the maximum frequency Response

Frequency

%

Close

relationship

Appearance Accepting Compliments/Returning Compliments 36.7

Possession Accepting Compliments/ Praying for the giver 31.7

Skill Accepting Compliments/Returning Compliments 33.3

Trait Accepting Compliments/Returning Compliments 27.5

Strangers Appearance Accepting Compliments/Returning Compliments 63.4

Possession Accepting Compliments/Returning Compliments 34.2

Skill Evading Compliments/Shifting credit 35.8

Trait Accepting Compliments/ Praying for the giver of/ 31.7

Power

distance

Appearance Accepting Compliments + Returning Compliments 73.3

Possession Accepting Compliments + Returning Compliments 34.2

Skill Evading Compliments + Informative comment 20.8

Trait Accepting Compliments + Returning Compliments 25.8

174

Of the 12 topic-strategy choices, eight were accepting compliments + returning

compliments. This strategy was the dominant complimenting strategy for appearance in all

three complimenting situations. In the case of possession, accepting compliments + returning

compliments was the dominant strategy used for strangers and people in a power distance

situation. In the case of a close relationship, accepting compliments/praying for the giver was

the dominant strategy. In the case of skill, the strategy of accepting compliments + returning

compliments was dominant for close a relationship. Evading compliments with credits

dominated as the strategy when complimenting strangers and with informative comments when

complimenting people of power distance. Accepting compliments/ praying for the giver was

used as the dominant strategy for compliments received from strangers regarding a trait.

Accepting compliments/returning compliments was the dominant strategy in the case of the

close relationship and people of power distance.

These results show that the participants used the complimenting strategy appropriate

for the type of relationship with the person being complimented and the topic on which the

compliment is given. There is some hesitation when complimenting strangers, and caution is

exercised when complimenting people in a power distance relationship, as reflected by the

dominant strategies. However, accepting and returning compliments is usually a common and

appropriate behaviour in any society in any situation. This may be why it is dominant in eight

out of 12 possible topic-strategy choices for different relationships. More on this will be

discussed with the help of the research findings in the Discussion chapter. Hence, the partial

answer to the first research question from the survey is: Speech acts of compliment responses

also vary across the social variables of the Saudi Hijazi community by the strategies they use

to compliment on the topics of appearance, possession, skill, and trait. However, the separate

effects of gender, age, and social position on dominant compliment strategies can be identified

only from DCT analysis, the results of which are given below.

175

5.7. DCT analysis results for compliment response strategies- age, gender, and

social position as the variables.

The procedure for DCT data analysis described in section 4.6 (Chapter 4) above was

adopted for analysis and identification of dominant compliment response strategies. DCT data

on compliment responses were analysed for the frequency (10 or higher) by age, gender, and

social position to inform the effects of these sociodemographic variables on complimenting

strategies for the four topics of appearance, possession, skill, and trait. Since percentages based

on small sizes may be exaggerated, only number frequencies were used. The results are

presented in Tables 5.8 to 5.16 below. The full data are given in Appendix O. The Methodology

chapter provides the details of the collection of this data and analysis.

In the case of age, the younger were 18-25 years of age and consisted of 40 participants.

In the case of the older, both subordinate and superior categories of participants were 40 plus

age group. Hence, these two groups of 40 each are combined to make a sample size of 80. For

gender, the sample sizes are 60 for each gender, and for three social positions, the samples sizes

are 40 each.

Effect of age

Dominant strategies used by two age groups when responding to compliments from a close

relationship on four topics are presented in Table 5.8.


from a close relationship

Compliment topic Young 18-25 Old 40 plus

Appearance Accepting Compliments/Appreciation

tokens-16


Compliments-44

176

Accepting Compliments/Agreeing

utterances-12

Accepting Compliments/ praying for

the giver of-18

Possession Accepting Compliments/ Praying for the

giver of-12


Compliments-25


the giver of-26

Skill Evading Compliments/Shifting credit-13 Accepting Compliments/Returning

Compliments-31


the giver of-22

Trait Accepting Compliments/Returning

Compliments-11


Compliments-22


the giver of-18

Accepting/returning compliments was a dominant strategy for, in the case of all topics

for the older group. Accepting compliments/praying for the giver was also a single dominant

strategy for possession. The younger group also preferred accepting compliments with

appreciation tokens and agreement utterances for appearance and evading

compliments/shifting credit for skill.

The dominant strategies of two age groups when responding to compliments from a

stranger on four topics are given in Table 5.9.

177


from a stranger.

Compliment

topic

Young 18-25 Old 40 plus

Appearance Accepting

Compliments/Returning

Compliments-27

Accepting


Compliments-49

Accepting Compliments/

praying for the giver of-16

Possession Offering-11

Accepting


Compliments=10

Offering-17

Accepting


Compliments-31



Skill Evading

Compliments/Informative

comment-12



Evading


comment-31

Trait Accepting


Compliments-14


Praying for the giver of-

10

Evading

Compliments/Shifting

credit-11

Accepting

Compliments/Downgrading

utterances-15

178

Accepting


Compliments-16



Except for skill, accepting/returning compliments was a dominant strategy for all the

other topics. It was the single strategy used by the younger group. Accepting compliments

and praying for the giver was another dominant strategy used by the older group for all

topics, including skill. Offering was another strategy preferred by both groups for possession-

related compliments. The evading compliment with the informative comment was a preferred

strategy of both groups for compliments on skill.

The dominant strategies used by two age groups when responding to compliments

received from a person of higher power status are presented in Table 5.10.

Table 5.10. Dominant response strategies used by the age groups when receiving

compliments from a person of higher power status

Compliment

topic

Young 18-25 Old 40 plus

Appearance Accepting Compliments/Returning

Compliments-28

Accepting Compliments/Returning Compliments-60

Possession Accepting Compliments/Appreciation tokens-17


Compliments-10

Offering-20


Skill Accepting Compliments/ offering help-10 Accepting Compliments/Appreciation tokens-10

Evading Compliments/Shifting credit-10

Evading Compliments/Informative comment-22

179

Accepting Compliments/Expressing pleasure-18

Trait Accepting Compliments/Appreciation tokens-14 Accepting Compliments/Downgrading utterances-20


Accepting Compliments/ praying for the giver of-12

Accepting/returning a compliment was preferred by both groups in the case of

appearance (single dominant strategy), possession, and by the older group for the trait. Older

groups preferred evading compliments with shifting credit or informative comments also for

skill. Accepting compliments with appreciation tokens was preferred by the younger group

for possession and trait and by the older group for skill.

Effect of Gender

Table 5.11 presents the gender effects of response strategies when complimented by close

relatives.


from close relatives.

Compliment

topic

Male Female

Appearance Accepting Compliments/Agreeing

utterances-14


Compliments-21

Accepting

Compliments/Appreciation

tokens-13

Accepting


Compliments-23

180



Possession Accepting Compliments/ Praying for the

giver of-28

Accepting


Compliments-28



Skill Evading Compliments/Shifting credit-15


Compliments-18

Accepting


Compliments-22



Trait Evading Compliments/Shifting credit-14


utterances-20


Compliments-11

Accepting


Compliments-22



Accepting/returning compliments was a popular strategy for both genders and all

topics except in the case of males for possession. Accepting compliments and praying for the

giver of was the sole dominant strategy in the case of males for possession. Females also

preferred the same strategy for all topics. Various combinations of strategies were applied by

both genders when accepting compliments on appearance and by males alone for

compliments on skills and traits. In particular, evading compliments/shifting credit was used

by males for skills and traits.

181

Gender differences in responding to compliments received from a stranger on four topics are

presented in Table 5.12.


from a stranger.

Compliment

topic

Male Female


Compliments-29

Accepting Compliments/ Praying for the

giver of-12

Accepting Compliments/Returning Compliments-

47

Possession Offering-25 Accepting Compliments/Returning Compliments-

39

Skill Evading Compliments/Informative

comment-12


Accepting Compliments/ offering help-10



utterances-16


Compliments-10


giver of-15

Accepting Compliments/Returning Compliments-

20

Accepting Compliments/ praying for the giver of-

23

In the case of receiving compliments from strangers, apart from skills and possession

compliments by males, accepting/returning compliments was the sole dominant strategy for

appearance and possession in the case of females and one of the dominant strategies for both

182

genders in other cases. Offering was the sole dominant strategy used by males for possession.

For skill, evading compliments with the informative comment was used as the dominant

strategy by both genders. Males used many diverse and quite dominant strategies for the trait.

Accepting compliments and praying for the giver was used by males for appearance and by

both genders for the trait.

Gender differences in responding to compliments from a person of a higher power status on

four topics are given in Table 5.13.

Table 5.13. Gender differences in response strategies when receiving compliments from a

person of higher power status

Compliment

topic

Male Female


Compliments-34


Compliments-54



Compliments-14

Accepting Compliments/Appreciation tokens-18


Compliments-27

Skill Accepting Compliments/Appreciation

tokens-16

Evading Compliments/Shifting credit-11


Accepting Compliments/ offering help-10

Accepting Compliments/Expressing pleasure-19



utterances-19


Compliments-10

Accepting Compliments/Appreciation tokens-15


Compliments-21

183

Accepting/returning compliments was the sole dominant strategy used by both genders for

appearance and one of the dominant strategies used by both genders for possession and trait.

Offering was a dominant strategy of males for possession. Both genders used various

combinations of accepting compliments and two variations of evading compliments for all

topics except appearance.

Effect of Social Position

Dominant strategies used by three groups of social positions when responding to

compliments in a close relationship on four topics are presented in Table 5.14.


receiving compliments from a close relationship.

Compliment

topic




tokens-16

Accepting

Compliments/Agreeing

utterances-12

Accepting


Compliments-24

Accepting


Compliments-20

Accepting

Compliments/ praying

for the giver of-10

Possession Accepting Compliments/

Praying for the giver of-12

Accepting


Compliments-11

Accepting


for the giver of-15

Accepting


Compliments-14

Accepting


for the giver of-11

184

Skill Evading


credit-13

Accepting


Compliments-13

Accepting


for the giver of-11

Accepting


Compliments-18

Accepting


for the giver of-11

Trait Accepting


Compliments-11

Accepting


for the giver of-12

Evading


credit-10

Accepting


Compliments-13

As shown in Table 5.14, accepting/returning compliments was a dominant strategy for

subordinate and superior groups in the case of appearance (sole dominant strategy for

subordinates), possession, and skill, and young and superior groups for the trait. Accepting

compliments and praying for the giver was used as the sole dominant strategy for possession

by young and by a subordinate for the trait. It was one of the dominant strategies used by

subordinate and superior for possession and skill and by superior for appearance, possession,

and skill. Other combinations of accepting compliments were used variously by the three

groups across topics. Evading compliments/shifting credit was used by young for skill and by

superior for the trait.

Dominant strategies used by three groups of social positions when responding to compliments

from a stranger on four topics are presented in Table 5.15.

185


receiving compliments from a stranger.

Compliment topic Young Subordinate Superior



Compliments-27

Accepting


Compliments-27

Accepting


Compliments-22


Accepting


Compliments-10

Offering-10

Accepting


Compliments-16

Accepting


Compliments-15

Skill Evading

Compliments/Informati

ve comment-12

Accepting

Compliments/ offering

help-10

Evading


ve comment-11

Evading


ve comment-20

Trait Accepting


Compliments-14

Accepting


for the giver of-10

Accepting


Compliments-10

Accepting


for the giver of-13

Accepting


for the giver of-15

Accepting

Compliments/Downgra

ding utterances-12

Accepting/returning compliments was the sole dominant strategy used by all groups for

appearance and by the superior group for possession. It was one of the dominant strategies used

by young and subordinate for possession and by subordinate and superior for the trait.

Accepting compliments and praying for the givers was used by all groups for the trait. All three

186

groups used evading compliments and informative comments for skill. Offering was a

dominant strategy used by the young and subordinates for possession.

Dominant strategies used by three groups of social positions when responding to

compliments by a person of higher power status on four topics are given in Table 5.16.

Table 5.16. Dominant response strategies used by three groups of social position when

complimented by a person of higher power status.

Compliment

topic




Compliments-28

Accepting


Compliments-36


Compliments-24

Possession Accepting


tokens-17

Accepting


Compliments-10

Offering-12

Accepting


Compliments-12


Compliments-19

Skill Accepting Compliments/

Offering help-10

Accepting

Compliments/Expressing

pleasure-11

Evading Compliments/Informative

comment-14

Trait Accepting


tokens-14

Accepting


Compliments-12

Accepting


utterances-12

187


Compliments-12

Accepting/returning compliments was the sole dominant strategy used by all three

groups for appearance and were one of the dominant strategies used by young for possession

and subordinate for possession and trait. This strategy was used by the superior for possession

as the sole dominant strategy and one of the dominant strategies for the trait. Three different

main strategies were used by the three groups for skill, and offering was used by the subordinate

as the main strategy for the possession-related compliment.

5.8. Interactions- Statistical significance

In addition to determining the effects of variables on complimenting behaviour, the

interactions of sociodemographic and social variables with compliment topics were examined.

The significance of the interactions of sociodemographic variables as independent variables

and the four compliment topics as dependent variables for the three social variables was

estimated using Chi-square tests. The results are given in Table 5.17.

Table 5.17. Chi-square tests of interactions between three social variables and compliment

topics used when responding to compliments given by different demographic variables.

Close relationship

Trait Skill Possession Appearance Dependent


0.01 11 33.76 0.01 13 26.54 0.01 11 46.24 0.01 10 18.15 Gender

0.01 22 48.76 0.01 26 44.24 0.15 22 28.79 0.01 20 82.78 Position

0.01 11 39.12 0.01 13 31.42 0.03 11 21.63 0.01 10 77.70 Age

Stranger

188



0.01 9 37.73 0.01 9 38.82 0.01 10 69.85 0.03 8 17.06 Gender

0.01 18 36.92 0.03 18 30.32 0.22 20 24.59 0.37 16 17.26 Position

0.01 9 23.72 0.01 9 23.08 0.14 10 14.69 0.39 8 8.51 Age

Power status



0.01 9 38.28 0.01 11 59.23 0.01 10 34.72 0.01 8 22.83 Gender

0.01 18 34.43 0.01 22 49.70 0.01 20 41.15 0.01 16 40.92 Position

0.01 9 21.38 0.01 11 33.24 0.01 10 25.10 0.01 8 20.46 Age

Table 5.17 shows all interactions to be significant except for social position x

possession in the case of a close relationship, social position x appearance and social position

x possession in the case of a stranger, and age x appearance and age x possession in the case

of power status. Thus, there is no difference in response strategies when receiving compliments

in these interactive relationships. Tables 5.10, 5.14, and 5.15 provide the exact range of

strategies and their frequencies as, together, they seem to determine statistical significance.

It can be observed that only two strategies of accepting compliments/returning

compliments and accepting compliments/ praying for the giver of, were dominant in the case

of the non-significant interaction: social position x possession when responding to

compliments given by close relationship (Table 5.14). In the case of the non-significant

interaction, social position x appearance, and social position x possession, only accepting

compliments/returning compliments was used as the dominant response strategy when

responding to compliments by a stranger (Table 5.15).

189

For the non-significant age x appearance and age x possession interactions, when

responding to compliments from a person of higher power status, only accepting

compliments/returning compliments and accepting compliments/appreciation tokens and

offering were used as the major strategies (Table 5.10). Thus, there is no difference in response

strategies when receiving compliments during these interactive relationships, as only a narrow

range of response strategies were used in these situations. When more than three strategies

were dominant for at least one variable, those interactions were significantly different.

5.9. DCT Analysis by ANOVA

No interaction was significant. But main effects of position over trait-power status

(p=0.049), gender over possession-stranger (p=0.000), skill-stranger (p=0.021), possession-

power status (p=-.000), skill-power status (p=0.000) and trait-power status (p=0.025) were

significant. The detailed ANOVA results are given in Appendix Q. The ANOVA is more valid

for low-frequency counts, as has been observed in the DTS data.

5.10. Summary

Compliment response strategies were analysed, and results are presented for

complimenting situations for various topics when responding to close relatives, strangers, or

persons in a strong position of power. Overall, accepting and returning compliments was the

dominant responding strategy for appearance, skill, and trait in the case of close relatives and

persons of high power, and appearance and possession in the case of strangers. Accepting

compliments and praying for the giver is a response strategy when a close person is being

complimented on possession and trait in the case of strangers. Evading compliments and

shifting credit for skill are the predominant strategies used with strangers and people of high

power. Thus, out of the 12 topic-response strategies, eight involved accepting and returning

compliments.

190

DCT analysis also showed accepting and returning compliments to be the major

responding strategy for most combinations of topic-social variables (age, gender, social

position). However, other strategies were also used very frequently in these cases. Chi-square

and ANOVA tests showed significance for some effects and interactions.

191

Chapter 6: Results of semi-structured interviews

6.1. Introduction

As stated in the introduction chapter and the Methodology chapter, the research

questions answered with the data from semi-structured interviews were:

- What sociodemographic trends are reflected in the convergence of the belief in the

evil eye with the complimenting behaviour practised by Saudi Hijazi Arabic

speakers?

- Why and how do evil eye beliefs affect the complimenting behaviour of Saudi

Hijazi Arabic speakers?

Sixty Saudi Hijazi Arabic participants were recruited for the semi-structured interviews,

following the procedure described in the Methodology chapter. The interviewees were

categorised under the following social strata, and the responses were grouped accordingly for

easier analysis.

a) Male- young (18-25)

b) Male- subordinate (40 plus)

c) Male- superior (40 plus)

d) Female- young (18-25)

e) Female- subordinate (40 plus)

f) Female- superior (40 plus)

The results of semi-structured interviews were analysed using an approach similar to the one

employed by Pringle et al. (2011) and Pietkiewicz and Smith (2014) for interpretive

phenomenological analysis (IPA). The themes identified from IPA were used for the analysis

format of Crowe et al. (2011) and the frame analysis procedure of Goffman (1974). Linguistic

192

frames of interviews are based on the number of similar responses across all participants. In

surveys, larger sample sizes are used and statistical analysis is possible. In the case of

interviews, the small sample sizes do not allow statistical analysis. Yet, quantification like

those used in inductive linguistic frames used in this research can offer more specific answers

to the research questions compared to thematic analysis or IPA. This is why linguistic frames

have been used in presenting interview results.

The general format for analysis given by these authors is context, objective, study

design, the case, data collection, analysis, and key findings. The first paragraph under each

interview question is meant to provide the context for linguistic frame analysis as specified by

Goffman (1974) and others. This format was appropriate for this study. The results of this

analysis are presented below for each interview question and summarised at the end.

6.2. Results

Question 1: How often do you compliment your family members, friends, and colleagues

on their appearance, skills, possessions, or personal traits? Would you consider using a

religious expression when complimenting them? If yes, which religious expression would

you use?

In the Arab world, complimenting behaviour is not necessarily a sincere act in that it

might not express the actual feeling towards the addressee. Often, it is only a ritualistic

behaviour or a mere formality when someone talks about their achievements. Compliment

responses are predominantly characterised by two features: offering the complimented object

and issues associated with the evil eye. In this question, the evil eye issue is not covered.

However, one respondent mentioned it, indicating that a compliment and the evil eye are

inseparable. However, as compliments are often considered to be a vehicle for the evil eye,

religious expressions are used to separate it from the compliment and neutralise its harmful

effect. This question addresses the practice of including a religious expression when giving a

193

compliment. Hence, participants are asked only whether they compliment people on their

achievements and use religious expressions when doing so. This question can be considered as

the introductory step for a more detailed probe in the subsequent questions.

The results of linguistic frames for the interviewee’s responses to Question 1 are

presented in Table 6.1.

Table 6.1. Interviewees’ linguistic frames of responses to Question 1

Linguistic frame Young

male

Subordinate

male

Superior

male

Young

female

Subordinate

female

Superior

female

Daily/always 2 0 2 6 0 1

A lot 3 4 3 1 2 1

Middle/average 3 5 5 1 7 5

Occasionally 1 0 0 1 0 2

Not always 1 1 0 1 1 1

Note that the cultural frame was the same for all participants. All of them, across the

social categories, considered adding religious expressions like Masha Allah when

complimenting.

Table 6.1 indicates several interesting trends. In the case of males, as their social strata

rise, there is a tendency for responses to become a daily practice. In the case of females,

complimenting decreases as a daily practice towards middle or average status. In all cases,

except for superior females, only two used compliments only occasionally or rarely. This shows

a preference for giving compliments as many times as one feels is necessary, albeit with the

religious expression always as the cultural stamp. Only one participant mentioned the evil eye.

194

Question 2: If you decided to use this religious expression, would you say it loudly (out

loud) or you would say it in your heart? Explain why.

The popular view is not voicing the religious expression when giving a compliment is

as good as not saying it at all. There could be variations. One could say it loudly to ensure that

the other person has heard it. Some people may say it just loudly enough to be heard by the

other party, but not by others in the vicinity. In rare cases, the religious expression might not

be uttered at all. The complimenting person can claim that the religious expression was said

mentally. Some people may believe that only when the religious expression is spoken loudly

will the evil eye and its effect be neutralised. Hence, it should always be at least loud enough

for the other party to hear. However, this question was not intended to probe the relationship

between a religious expression and the evil eye, although some participants mentioned this in

their responses. How the interview participants differed in these respects was probed using this

second question. The linguistic frames of responses by interview participants for Question 2

are given in Table 6.2.



male

Subordinate

male

Superior

male

Young

female

Subordinate

female

Superior

female

Loud 9 7 10 9 10 10

Not too

loud/low

1 0 0 0 0 0

Not always 0 3 0 1 0 0

As evident, all respondents wanted the other party to hear the religious expressions.

Four of them said it loudly, depending on the situation. The loud expression of religious phrases

195

was meant to prevent harm from the evil eye. Some respondents wanted to ensure that the other

party did not feel that the participant could cast the evil eye and cause harm. Loud religious

expressions make conversational interactions harmonious and peaceful.

Question 3: Which compliment topic is most important to you when complimenting a

family member, friend, or colleague?

Complimenting a person on something achieved or done by them is a matter of

politeness and remains a free choice of the individual. When one person says that he has

achieved something, it is only fair to offer a compliment using expressions like ‘nice’, ‘good’

or ‘very happy to hear that’ etc. Are there some specific topics on which to be complimented

to the exclusion of others? This question arises in some situations. When a person claims an

achievement, which sounds like a boast, it might not deserve a compliment. An example may

be: ‘See how well I did this. No one else can do it as well as I could’.

Compliment topics can be culture-dependent. In Saudi Arabia, women cannot be

complimented on their appearance. On the other hand, possession, skills, attributes, and

personal traits are acceptable topics. In this third question, appearance was suggested as a topic

of admiration to test how well the participants complied with its associated cultural sanctions.

There was zero to one response on appearance as a complimenting topic, showing its relative

rare acceptance. However, the least frequency of only one overall response was for possessions.

Possessions can be considered as boasting.

The linguistic frames of responses of interview participants for Question 3 are presented in

Table 6.3.

196



male

Subordinate

male

Superior

male

Young

female

Subordinate

female

Superior

female

Personal traits 7 6 4 1 6 9

Skills 2 3 5 9 2 1

Appearance 1 1 1 0 1 0

Possessions 1

In all social categories, the majority preferred personal traits as the compliment topic.

In the case of males, there was a tendency to shift from personal traits to skills from young

males to superior males. More mature males opted for what matters in life needs. This was the

reverse for females. For young females, skills were more important, and their importance

decreased and shifted to personal traits. One participant preferred the term ‘possessions’. What

one possesses may have appealed to this participant more than other compliment topics. Only

one male participant complimented on appearance and none in the case of young females and

superior females.

Question 4: Which compliment topic is least important to you when complimenting a

family member, friend, or colleague?

This fourth question can be considered as a mirror image of the previous question. By

inference, the least complimented topic will be the same as the one that had the lowest

frequency response for the most preferred topic. So, the minimum frequency topics for

Question 3 will be the maximum frequency topic for this question. The frequency data shown

197

below confirms this. Table 6.4 provides the linguistic frames of the 4th question responses given

by the participants.

Table 6.4. Interviewees’ linguistic frames of responses to Question 4.

Linguistic

frame

Young male Subordinate

male

Superior

male

Young

female

Subordinate

female

Superior

female

Personal traits 0 0 0 1 1 0

Skills 0 0 0 1 0 0

Appearance 6 0 3 1 2 2

Possessions 4 10 7 7 7 8

While young males least preferred appearance as the compliment topic, all other social

categories had the least preference for possessions. The personal trait was least preferred by

only one young female and one subordinate female. Only one young female did not want skills

as the compliment topic.

Question 5: How would you feel if someone admired your appearance, skills, possessions,

or some personal traits, and complimented you without invoking blessings?

As previously discussed, as per Islamic protocols, compliments must be accompanied

by religious expressions as a safeguard against the evil eye, particularly if the giver of the

compliment is jealous of the other party’s achievement or possession, etc. In the Christian

Bible, Cain killed his brother Abel because of jealousy. If a religious expression does not

accompany the compliment, the receiver may ignore it or may take it seriously. A strong

believer in the evil eye may fear or become anxious that some harm will befall him since he

has not heard the religious expression. As a result, the receiver may insist, request or remind

198

the compliment-giver to say it immediately. If the giver says that he has mentally said it, this

might or might not possessions satisfy the receiver, and the fear might or might not disappear.

The subsequent feelings and actions arising from such interactions are examined in Question

5.

In Table 6.5, the responses of participants to Question 5 in terms of linguistic frames are given.


Linguistic

frame

Young

male

Subordinate

male

Superior

male

Young

female

Subordinate

female

Superior

female

Ask to say 3 6 4 2 2 3

Remind to say 4 2 3 1 2 3

Ask to say if

needed

1 0 0

Feel fear and

anxiety due to

the evil eye

effect

1 1 0 3 4 2

Expect to say 1 1 2 2 2 2

Not particular 1 2 0 0

Many respondents pointed out that the utterance of religious expressions when

complimenting is an essential part of Muslim culture. They are taught this at a very early age.

Non-Muslims not saying it is unacceptable, and these people are regarded as non-believers.

Generally, people become anxious or afraid when religious expressions do not accompany a

compliment. The interview data indicate that most participants believe that some harm will

199

happen to them due to the evil eye. One remedy they have when they cannot force the other

person to say it is to say it themselves. This is especially true in the case of non-Muslims

complimenting. Sometimes, the person directly asks the non-Muslim to say the expression, and

sometimes they try self-protection by saying it themselves. However, when faced with the other

person not saying the expression, they ask them or remind them.

Question 6: Do you think that the evil eye may harm people regardless of the religion or

culture of the giver of the compliment when religious expressions are not invoked?

The other aspect of compliment-giving is addressed with this sixth question.

Compliments need to be accompanied by religious expressions to ward off any evil effects of

jealousy etc., from people to whom the achiever shares his glory. This is the basic tenet. It

depends upon how rational people are. Some people may not believe in the existence of the

evil eye or any other similar phenomenon. Some may strongly believe in the evil eye and other

evil forces. Most people fall between the two extremes. Therefore, this question is likely to

prompt a range of opinions and beliefs, even when a non-Muslim is complimenting a Muslim.

Some respondents insisted that non-Muslims also need to comply with Islamic tenets when

they interact with Muslims. Hence, they wanted to explain the evil eye to non-Muslims and

stress the need to include religious expressions when complimenting and asking them to say

the expression or say it themselves. This question addressed these possibilities.

The belief is that the evil eye cast by someone on another person or thing will cause

harm to the receiver of the compliment. This belief is widespread across all many regions and

faiths in the world in one form or another. In the case of Arab countries, including Saudi Arabia,

the concept of the evil eye has its root in the early Islamic religious concepts. The evil eye may

not be intentional, and the person who is said to possess this may not be aware of it. There may

also be the intentional use of the evil eye due to enmity in a person.

200

This was a specific question on the perceived harmful effect of the evil eye and its repair

using religious expressions when complimenting. The linguistic frames of responses of

interview participants are presented in Table 6.6.


Linguistic

frame

Young

male

Subordinate

male

Superior

male

Young

female

Subordinate

female

Superior

female

Evil eye

exists

6 8 8 10 10 10

Allah

protects

1 1 1 0 0

Explain to or

ask non-

Muslims

2 2 1 1 1 0

Say to

themselves if

non-Muslim

4 2 1 0 0 0

Non-

Muslims

might not be

concerned

0 0 0 1 1 0

More fearful,

person of

same culture

0 0 0 1 0 0

201

Numbers total more than 10 because more than one frame is applicable for some responses.

Most participants were unanimous in asserting the existence of the evil eye; this was

especially evident in the case of all 30 females who said the same thing. In other cases, while

asserting the existence of the evil eye, various strategies were used by non-Muslims, who might

not include religious expressions when complimenting. One young and one subordinate female

mentioned that non-Muslims might not be concerned, especially if they do not believe in the

evil eye or there are no similar beliefs in their culture. Most of the young males said they would

either ask them or explain why they should say it. One respondent from each of the male groups

pointed out that Masha Allah was said to invoke Allah’s protection. One participant even

narrated an event, which she associated with the evil eye, as proof of its existence.

Question 7: Do you think that neglecting the invocation of religious expressions while

admiring something and complimenting you on it would affect people’s conversational

interaction with you?

Very sensitive people may be irritated by small social gaffes committed by other people

and will stop talking to them. Many quarrels between couples lead to the two not being on

talking terms for days. Often the starting point may be the partner not admiring the other for

something done with special care. Similar situations can arise in other relationships as well.

Not using religious expressions could be an unintended omission by the speaker. However,

some receivers insist that it is an integral part of the Muslim culture, and therefore, the

unintentional omission is not an acceptable excuse. Some people, despite the hurt, ignore it or

suffer silently and maintain a very reserved relationship with the speaker from then on. Thus,

a variety of possible responses exist when considering the question of post-compliment

behaviour sans religious expressions arises as a potential factor determining the continuation

of the relationship. These possibilities are examined through the seventh question. Table 6.7

202

shows the linguistic frames of responses given by the interviewed participants for Question

6.7.



male

Subordinate

male

Superior

male

Young

female

Subordinate

female

Superior

female

Yes, it does 4 9 9 3 9 9

Not always 1

Uncomfortable

or fear if not

told,

intentionally

also,

psychological

effect

4 4 4 8 1 1

Hesitate to

interact with the

person

4 1 5 8

Remind to use 1


In these responses, belief in the evil eye is strongly associated with religious expressions

used to prevent its harmful effects, which can be many types. Failure to include religious

expressions when offering a compliment can trigger in the receiver feelings of discomfort, fear,

203

psychological problems, and reluctance to interact in the future with the giver of the

compliment as it triggers the evil eye. Most answers implicitly confirmed the harmful effects

of the evil eye when religious expressions are omitted. In the table above, the specific phrases

used in the responses are categorised into different linguistic frames. Many responses were

related to cognitive experiences as examples of the existence and harmful consequences of not

uttering the religious expressions. The young people had a wider range of responses across the

linguistic frames. On the other hand, responses of seniors indicated an acknowledgment of the

evil eye and its harmful effects if religious expressions are not used. However, if very close

relatives such as a mother do not use religious expressions, it is not considered to produce the

evil eye effect as mothers do not wish harm on their children.

Question 8: Would you avoid talking about your success or the success of a family

member because of the evil eye?

The chance occurrence of adverse events after someone has complimented a person on

achievement could be considered as proof of the existence of the evil eye. An example could

be a person who became a multimillionaire after a lottery win being admired by a certain person

in a certain way, then within a few days, he became bankrupt, leaving him worse off than before

he won the lottery. In this case, there is a tendency to blame the evil eye, whereas the true may

circumstances may be his lavish spending of money and giving huge amounts to so-called

friends who flocked to exploit him.

The first response to such events is to avoid the suspected person completely, even if

confronted. On the other end, the receiver may talk to the other person on all matters except

for any achievements. If the person is a stranger, it is quite easy to avoid or limit

communications. Most responses will fall between these two extremes. The eighth question

204

addressed this issue. In Table 6.8, the linguistic frames of responses from interviewed

participants for Question 8 are presented.

Table 6.8. Linguistic frames of responses from interviewed participants for Question 8.

Linguistic

frame

Young

male

Subordinate

male

Superior

male

Young

female

Subordinate

female

Superior

female

Yes 7 6 5 4 3 6

Situation 4 4 6 3 4 3

Unfamiliar

people

2 1 2 1

Exceptions

of trusted

people/ like

to talk

3 3 2 2

Numbers total more than 10 because more than one frame applies to some responses.

In general, everyone agrees that fear of the potential harm from the evil eye prevents

them from talking to such people. However, it is the nature of human beings to talk to others

about their achievements, and this tendency leads to some exceptions in applying the rule. So,

many people will assess the situation and decide. Some participants avoid talking about

achievements when unfamiliar people are present. Evil eye or not, it is difficult to avoid talking

to people such as close relatives or friends who are trusted. Categorical statements of avoiding

and situational decisions together dominated responses across all social categories.

205

Question 9: Do you think that the power of the evil eye is different from one person to

another? If yes, would you avoid talking about your success or the success of a family

member with that particular person?

People who believe in the evil eye also believe that not all who possess the evil eye

have the same amount of power. The person’s perception of the extent of the power of the evil

eye may be a factor determining whether or not he will talk about success. The all-important

point is how to identify an evil eye before the event occurs so that it can be prevented. The

difficulty of identifying beforehand means that it is not possible to avoid persons with evil eyes

entirely. For example, in a social gathering, there may be people with evil eyes, and they may

have different levels of power, as some believers assert. Some social gatherings cannot be

avoided, so one way to ward off potential harm is to insist that the person suspected of evil eye

attach the religious expression to the compliment even if it is unlikely that the person will

concede and comply. These possibilities are examined in the ninth question. The linguistic

frames of this possibility are examined in Table 6.9, presenting the responses of interviewed

participants for this question.


Linguistic

frame

Young

male

Subordinate

male

Superior

male

Young

female

Subordinate

female

Superior

female

Yes 9 9 9 10 9 6

Difficult to

identify

2 0 2 2 0 0

Remind to

utter

1 2 1 2 2 4

206

religious

phrase

Cannot avoid

them

1 0 1 1 2


It is natural that if a person is suspected or well-known to be evil-eyed, people try to

avoid that person. However, it is difficult to identify a person who possesses an evil eye.

Participants across all social categories said that when unsure, they exercise caution (included

in the Yes category in the table). Asking the person to utter the religious phrase, failing which,

uttering it oneself, were the next two available options. In social circles, it is not possible to

avoid people suspected of having an evil eye. Three ways to deal with this situation are: being

cautious, not talking about one’s achievements, or ensuring that the interaction is brief. Only

six of the 60 interviewees across all social categories mentioned the difficulty of identifying a

person possessing the evil eye, although it is an important point.

Question 10: Some people put something on their neck, wrists, in their pockets, or on

their cars to ward off the evil eye. Would you do the same to ward off this evil? If not, can

you explain why?

Different cultures worldwide have different practices prescribed to prevent or reduce

the harmful effects of various types of evil eye that have been cast. Some precautionary steps

are also prescribed to prevent it altogether. The hanging of strange-looking objects on new

vehicles, new houses or fields of bumper crops, etc., is practised worldwide. Wearing divinised

charms or adorning personal possessions with such charms are also common in some cultures.

The extent to which these measures are aligned with Islamic culture is the issue being explored

207

here. As expected, Islamic religion holds that only Allah can provide protection against evil,

not charms, etc.

This last question is related to the countermeasures practised by some people to ward

off the evil eye by wearing charms on themselves or adorning onto their devices. In Table 6.10,

the linguistic frames of the extent to which the interview participants agreed with this practice

were measured.


Linguistic

frame

Young

male

Subordinate

male

Superior

male

Young

female

Subordinate

female

Superior

Female

Do not

believe

5 8 6 9 9 8

Not in

Islamic

religion

5 2 4 4 2 4

Enough to

say prayers

8 2 2 8 7 5

Black seeds 1


The interviewees’ responses indicated that they did not believe in using

countermeasures such as charms to ward off evil. Only one subordinate female mentioned

using salt and black seeds in a certain situation, although she did not believe in it. Many

participants across social categories stressed the fact that such countermeasures are against

Islam. It was unclear whether they did not wear charms because the religion forbids them, or

208

they reasoned that these are not required. If they were rationally convinced, their acceptance of

the existence of the evil eye is questionable. Young males and females believed that it was

enough to say prayers rather than wear charms. Whether they will use them, if charms are

divinised by prayers was not asked in the interviews. Young males emphasised that the saying

of prayers was important rather than using charms. Also, their female counterparts were sure

about believing and also saying prayers. Other social categories stressed more the non-belief

aspect.

6.3. Summary

This chapter aimed to answer the following research questions: What sociodemographic

trends are reflected in the convergence of the belief in the evil eye with the complimenting

behaviour practised by Saudi Hijazi Arabic speakers? Why and how do evil eye beliefs affect

the complimenting behaviour of Saudi Hijazi Arabic speakers?

Using the format of (Crowe et al., 2011), the context was the Hijaz Saudi Hijazi

community’s beliefs in using religious expressions when giving compliments and the harmful

effects of the evil eye. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to gather data relevant to the

research questions. Ten questions were asked to each of the male and female participants

belonging to young, subordinate, and superior demographic categories of the Saudi Hijaz

community. Frame analysis (Goffman, 1974) was used for analysing this qualitative data.

Demographic and cultural frames are constant here since the questions are targeted to specific

segments of a community, and the religious expressions are being studied. The linguistic frame

was the only varying aspect, and this frame was analysed for each question across the

demographic categories. The interview data provided answers to the two research questions, as

explained below.

From an early age, Muslims are taught to include religious expressions when

complimenting. Non-Muslims or Muslims who do not utter a religious phrase are considered

209

non-believers. Hence, adding a religious expression such as Mashah Allah to compliments was

important to all interviewees. As the social strata of males rose, responses tended to be a daily

practice. In the case of females, the convergence was from daily practice to middle/average.

The trends showed the tendency to use religious expressions with compliments as many times

as possible. All participants wanted to hear religious expressions uttered with compliments. So,

it must be said loudly for the receiver to hear it and make conversational interactions

harmonious and peaceful. This is meant to prevent the evil eye. Also, the other party should

doubt that the evil eye can be cast when complimenting.

Personal traits were the most important compliment topic for all. In the case of males,

there was a tendency to shift from personal traits to skills from young males to superior males.

The reverse was the case with females. The appearance was the least important compliment

topic for young males, and possession was the least favoured topic for all others. There is near

unanimity on the belief in the evil eye among all participants. Even an unintentional omission

of religious expressions is viewed with suspicion, and the interlocutor is asked to say it, and if

the person does not say it, the receiver of the compliment says it. Non-Muslims are either told

about the Islamic beliefs and asked to follow the system, or the religious expression is said by

themselves.

Belief in the evil eye has been closely connected with religious expressions and used to

ward off the harmful effects, which can be many types. Fear, feeling of being uncomfortable,

hesitation and psychological problems can arise when someone does not include religious

expressions when complimenting. Cognitive experiences are given as examples of the

existence of the evil eye and the harmful consequences of not accompanying compliments with

religious expressions. Youngsters had a great range of responses to the evil eye, while the older

people believed that the evil eye produces harm when religious expressions are not used.

However, the non-use of religious expressions by close relatives like parents is tolerated. These

210

people cannot mean any harm to the receiver - belief in the evil eye forces caution in publicising

one’s achievements. One way is to assess the situation and decide on this. If strangers are

present, as, in social gatherings, it is best to avoid talking about one’s achievements. However,

close relatives or friends are trusted to share achievements.

It is difficult to identify an evil-eyed person and the only way is to avoid the risk when

in doubt about anyone by avoiding the person. When it cannot be avoided, as, in social circles,

the suspected person or the receiver of the compliment utters religious expressions when

complimenting or responding to a compliment. Interviewees indicated that they did not believe

in using counter-measures such as charms to ward off the evil eye. Belief in the evil eye was

rooted in Islamic religious scriptures stating that prayers to Allah are the sole protection against

the evil eye.

Participants expressed their strong belief in the need to include religious expressions

when complimenting personal traits, skills, achievements, or possessions, as a means of

preventing harm from the evil eye.

Thus, the following statement, based on the findings of this research, answers the research

question-What sociodemographic trends are reflected in the convergence of the belief in the


Belief in the evil eye is common among all participants irrespective of gender, age, or social

position. Only the degree of belief varies, with young males, in particular, showing a weaker

belief. As the social position is elevated with age, the belief becomes stronger and more

traditional.

The following statement, based on the findings of this research, answers the research question:

Why and how do evil eye beliefs affect complimenting behaviour of Hijazi Saudi Arabic

speakers?

211

The Hijazi community insists on attaching religious expressions to compliments to avoid the

evil eye. If the other party does not do so, the receiver himself/herself says it. In the case of

non-Muslim interlocutors, it is recognised that they can only be requested to attach religious

expressions. If they refuse to do so, the religious expression is uttered by oneself.

212

Chapter 7: Discussion

This study focused on the influence of evil eye belief and religious expressions on

complimenting behaviour according to a range of socio-demographic variables. This study was

done in two interconnected streams. A detailed attempt was made to study complimenting

strategies about complimenting topics through quantitative data collection. Also, the impact of

evil eye belief on complimenting behaviour as affected by socio-demographic variables was

investigated using qualitative approaches. The focus topic was studied using three sub-

questions-



(ii) What sociodemographic trends are associated with the convergence of the belief

in the evil eye with the complimenting behaviour practised by Saudi Hijazi Arabic speakers?



The phenomenon of complimenting behaviour was researched using a survey with

varying social variables of gender, age, and power distance using Discourse Completion Tasks

(DCT) with varying social variables of gender, age, and social position. Evil eye-related aspects

were studied using semi-structured interviews on a sample of participants from the Saudi Hijazi

community.

Firstly, a discussion on how the three research questions were answered by the findings.

Then, some general trends obtained from answering the research questions will be discussed.

7.1. Addressing the first research questions

The first sub-question of this research was-

213



Quantitative results revealed the dominant strategies used for complimenting or receiving

compliments from close relatives, strangers, and people of power distance on four topics. Also,

the responses to the first five questions in interviews identified gender and age effects of

complimenting and responding to compliments.

The quantitative findings showed the dominance of several complimenting strategies

for the four topics of appearance, possession, skill, and trait when complimenting a close

relationship, a stranger, or a person of power distance. Interview data yielded by the first five

questions showed that complimenting behaviour depends on gender and social position.

Effects of age, gender, and social position were noted when complimenting close

relatives, strangers, or a person of higher power status in the dominant strategies used. This

trend was indicated by the analysis from the DCT data. DCT analysis for dominant strategies

based on the predominant frequencies resulted in identifying common patterns of

complimenting and compliment response strategies. Mainly, the strategy of refraining from

giving a compliment was predominant when interacting with strangers and people of higher

power status. When responding to compliments from these interlocutors, the safe course of

accepting and returning compliments was more frequently used. The dominant strategies of the

Saudi Hijazi community, identified from the frequency percentages in the first stage of

analysis, were more or less similar to those of DCT analysis for the various scenarios and

topics. This is because a sub-sample of survey participants was used for DCT data collection

by deliberate sampling to ensure equal representation of gender, age, and social position. As

the participants in both were the same, the frequencies of their responses were also the same.

Although Chi-square tests identified a few interactive effects for gender, age, and social

position, the more precise ANOVA showed only very few interactive effects for these

214

variables. Since these tests were conducted only to assess the statistical significance, they do

not essentially affect the conclusions drawn from the survey or DCT data. As in the case of the

findings of Qanbar (2012), Khodabakhshi and Zolfagharkhani (2015), Ghanem (2010), Al-

Rousan et al. (2014), and Monjezi (2014), there were some definite patterns in gender-age

effects in terms of the most preferred topic. Since appearance was not the most preferred topic,

the findings of this study do not support the results obtained by Al-Amro (2013), including his

observation that older persons preferred complimenting on traits. On the other hand, personal

traits, as the most common topic observed by Alqahtani (2016), is supported by this study.

Although cultural differences seemed to account for some differences among the research

findings in different countries, this argument does not apply to the context of this research.

Some indications of different response strategies for internal and external compliments were

observed here, but insufficient to support Danzig’s (2018) contentions. According to the

interview data, the most preferred compliment topics were personal traits and skills, and the

least preferred was appearance and possessions across all social variables. These results did

not support Qanbar’s (2012) findings. Possession, as the least preferred topic, endorses the

findings of Al-Amro (2013) to some extent, but not that of Alqahtani (2016). The interview

data obtained by this study showed that in interactions involving strangers and power distance,

women were cautious in their complimenting behaviour and adapted to the situation. Men

frequently praised personal traits and abilities, whereas women preferred complimenting on

appearance, thus supporting Qanbar (2012). In his study of Yemini society, Qanbar (2012) had

found that women gave and received more compliments than men. Traits and skills were

preferred by men, and women preferred appearances.

Therefore, the first question can be answered thus:

215

Speech acts (strategies) of complimenting and responding to compliments vary

depending on whether the interaction is with a close relative, a stranger, or as a person of power

distance, and on the sociodemographic variables of age, gender, and social position.

7.2. Addressing the second and third research questions

The second and third research questions were:

(ii) What sociodemographic trends are associated with the convergence of the

belief in the evil eye with the complimenting behaviour practised by Saudi Hijazi Arabic

speakers?

(iii) How and why is belief in the evil eye related to the complimenting behaviour of Saudi

Hijazi Arabic speakers?

Since the two questions are interrelated, they are answered together below.

The evil eye was the major theme of the interviews. Compliments are often considered

as an instrument for casting the evil eye. Hence, religious expressions are used to separate it

from the compliment and neutralise its harmful effect. The interview data revealed several

interesting trends. Most interview respondents were insistent that religious expressions should

accompany the giving of and responding to compliments. Although the opening question did

not explicitly refer to the evil eye, one respondent mentioned it, showing the embedded nature

of the belief in the evil eye whenever an Islamic believer is faced with a complimenting

behaviour (Table 6.1). Most respondents wanted to utter the religious expression aloud for the

receiver to hear it. This will assure the receiver that nothing harmful will befall them. Some

respondents wanted to ensure that the interlocutor should not feel that they can cast an evil eye

and cause harm (Table 6.2). Therefore, if compliments are given without invoking blessings, a

fear of the evil eye may ensue unless a person does not believe in it. Then the respondent asks

216

that it be said aloud, even if the interlocutor is a non-Muslim or says it himself for self-

protection.

The Islamic scriptures endorse the practice of including religious expressions in

complimenting behaviour to prevent the effect of the evil eye on the receiver. Hence, Muslims

in Arab countries follow this practice to ward off evil eye effects. However, no systematic

examination of the association between complimenting behaviour and the evil eye belief has

been conducted to date. In this research, this relationship was measured comprehensively using

interviews to collect qualitative data, as detailed in the Methodology chapter.

Questions 6 to 10 of the interview questions were directly related to the evil eye. The

existence of the evil eye was a strong belief among the participants. Comments related to the

evil eye by interlocutors could be due to social and religious influences highlighting its harmful

effects (Mostafa, 2015). Therefore, methods to prevent harm due to the evil eye become

important. All the participants accepted Allah as the only protector against the evil eye. Hence,

short religious expressions like Masha Allah may be used by interlocutors (Alobaisi, 2011; Al-

Amro, 2013). In Arabic cultures, the interlocutors are expected to say some form of religious

expression to assure the receiver that no evil eye is meant in the compliment. We have already

seen that when the interlocutor does not say this, the receiver asks to say it. This observation

agrees with that of Jamil (2016). Asking to say the religious expression is due to the belief in

the evil eye and not any other cause, as per Al-Amro (2013). However, contrary to his claim,

there were broad trends of gender (and age difference) concerning belief in the evil eye itself

in this study. This seems to be the first report in which the existence of Islamic non-believers

was indicated. Answers like Not particular to hear religious expression for Q5 and 10 young

(6), subordinate (8), or superior (8) males not agreeing that the evil eye existed when all females

agreed for Q6 may be indicative of this trend.

217

As Islam religion insists that only Allah can protect, there is no need or effect of wearing

charms, etc. to ward off the harmful effects of the evil eye. This belief is quite strong among

Islamic people, as was reflected in the responses to Q10. The negation of such practices was

reflected in the variety of responses obtained. Strong belief in Allah as the protector from the

evil eye was expressed in responses expressing no belief in wearing charms and praying to

Allah is enough per Islamic beliefs.

It is unclear whether all Islamic people believe in the evil eye and Allah as the sole

protector because the religion said so or because they were rationally convinced about it. One

may argue that belief in the evil eye is superstition, and hence there is no rationality. People

who believe in the evil eye may be able to narrate their own or others’ bad experiences due to

encountering the evil eye or similar beliefs. In the interviews, two responses used bad

experiences of self and others to justify belief in the evil eye. Perhaps, rationality may deny

such association by giving alternate explanations. However, there are a large number of people

across many cultures who hold such beliefs due to the influences of many factors. To justify

belief in the evil eye, Islamic religion itself can be considered as rational thought. The results

of this study on the evil eye are indicative of such a justification, as the evil eye and its remedy

are backed by Islamic scriptures.

Only 6 out of all the 30 interview participants recognised the difficulty of identifying a

person as evil-eyed. It may be because other respondents had not encountered such problems.

The difficulty identifying the person possessed with an evil eye makes it difficult to avoid them.

At least five out of the total 30 participants acknowledged this problem (Table 6.9). The only

possible strategy here is to avoid interacting with strangers (6 responses out of 30). On the other

hand, close relatives or friends may be safe (10 out of 30 responses – see Table 6.8). The

outcome of religious expressions not accompanying complimenting behaviour is that the

receiver of the message may stop interacting with the giver. It may be tackled in many ways,

218

like asking the interlocutor to say a prayer (20 out of 30 responses) and remind to say, assuming

that the interlocutor forgot to say (15 out of 30 responses). Out of the total of 30 participants,

10 people expected the interlocutor to say but did not know what to do if the interlocutors did

not say it. There were 3 out of 30 participants who were not particular about it (Table 6.5). This

trend may indicate these three were not concerned about the evil eye or did not believe in it.

Participation in large gatherings seems a necessary evil, but it is not certain whether and

how many of those in the gathering are evil-eyed or not. The risk of someone or more than one

among those gathered being evil-eyed is high. The remedy is to avoid social gatherings. But it

is impossible to avoid certain gatherings like those occurring during Ramzan, the annual

religious festival of fasting, prayer, reflection, and community. Variations in the power of the

evil eye among those gathered during the community activities related to Ramzan are said to

have different degrees of seriousness of harm to different people in the gathering (Abu-Rabia,

2005).

The participants interviewed expressed both a strong belief in the evil eye, as well as

variations in the power of the evil eye among those who possessed it. This is a significant

contribution of this research. Participants accept that some persons may possess a more

powerful evil eye and that the harm from them will be more severe. In the same way, the harm

due to people with a less powerful evil eye may also be less. There may not be any critical

point for the power or its effect to transform from not serious to very serious effects. Out of the

total of 30 participants, 22 agreed that there are variations in the power of the evil eye among

persons who possess it (Table 6.9).

An implicit idea in the requirement of religious expressions in complimenting

behaviour is that the person by himself/herself is powerless to defend against the evil eye. Just

as the belief in people differing evil eye power, there is no counter-belief that people have

differing power of self-defence against the evil eye. The absence of counter-belief may be due

219

to the strong faith in Allah as the sole protector, which implies an assumption that people, on

their own, are helpless to defend against the evil eye. So, it becomes compulsory to utter a

religious expression whether the evil eye is present in the complimenting behaviour or not.

Such narratives and counter-narratives about various aspects of Islamic beliefs were revealed

by Pakistani Muslims in the studies of Tarar and Hasan (2019), in which the authors noted a

strong perception at an intuitive-projective faith level, that they could control the external

events and dismantle evil powers by their thoughts.

Thus, the answers to the two research questions are as follows-

i) This study indicates that gender, age, social position, and power distance are

reflected in the association of complimenting behaviour with the evil eye belief

among the Saudi Hijazi community. The interview results also showed that the

participants believed strongly in the evil eye, as it has been part of Islamic

scriptures.

ii) All the interview participants agreed that religious expressions need to be attached

to complimenting and compliment response behaviour to ward off the possibility of

any evil eye effect. This is also because the Islamic religion permits only seeking

the blessings of Allah to ward-off evil eye effect and not use of any charms etc. This

is the way the belief in the evil eye affects complimenting behaviour among the

Saudi Hijazi community.

7.3. Common trends

There was a common pattern in complimenting behaviour between persons of the same

gender, who are closely related, strangers, or who differ in power status on topics of

appearance, possession, skills, and personal traits. Also, a few strategies were dominant in both

compliments giving and responding to compliments across contexts and social and

220

sociodemographic variables. Some variables showed broad trends in these respects. Some

differences across variables were also indicated.

According to DCT analysis, for some social variables and topics, some strategies were

used as the sole dominant strategy, and for some other social variables and topics, the same

strategy was one of the dominant strategies. Other various strategies were used for other

instances of social variables and topics. Thus, the specific strategy varied with both social

variables and topics for each complimenting situation. This conclusion applies to both

complimenting and compliment response results. The participants believed in the evil eye and

used religious expressions as the only way to protect them from its harmful effects.

7.3.1. Dominant complimenting strategies

Many strategies are used for complimenting different types of people on different topics

with varying frequencies of preferences. However, in this study, it was noted that certain

specific strategies were dominant. As was shown in Table 4.7, for each topic, one

complimenting strategy can be regarded as the most important, based on its use by the majority

of respondents. A further examination of the effects of age, gender, and social positions of

participants on complimenting behaviour was revealed by DCT data analysis while confirming

the survey results. Both of these analyses concluded that religious expression needs to

accompany any compliment strategy on any topic. Further, when dealing with strangers and

people of power distance, complimenting on appearance or possession was found to be

inappropriate. Thus, both quantitative and qualitative data showed similar results concerning

complimenting behaviour.

7.3.2. Dominant compliment response strategies

In the same manner, dominant strategies could also be identified when responding to

compliments from different types of people on different topics (Table 5.7). Here also, DCT

221

data analysis revealed similar trends. Unlike in the case of complimenting, accepting and

returning compliments was the most frequent compliment response strategy in 8 out of 12

instances. Thus, the dominant compliment response strategy did not differ from complimenting

situation.

7.3.3. Social variables and religious expressions

In the interviews, irrespective of gender, age, or power distance, the participants wanted to

add religious expressions to their complimenting behaviour. The interview results showed

broad differences across social variables. However, there were some broad trends of

differences in responses specific to gender, age, or social status. The main trends were-

a) More females compulsorily added religious expressions to their compliment giving

than males.

b) A tendency for the use of religious expressions by seniors compared to young

generations of both genders.

c) Mostly personal traits, like character traits that show a person's underlying values or

beliefs, such as ambition, creativity, conscientiousness, persistence, and kindness, were

preferred over other topics for complimenting behaviour. However, there was a shift

from personal traits to skills from young males to superior males. The reverse was the

case with females. There was a shift from skills for young females to personal traits for

superior females. Possession and appearance were the least popular compliment topic,

especially by males.

The results of DCT data analysis more or less confirmed these results.

d) Only the interviews dealt with the effect of belief in the evil eye on complimenting and

responding behaviour. Reminding or asking to say the religious expressions (more

222

among males), fear or anxiety of the evil eye (more among females), age effect in the

belief of evil eye (younger males were fewer believers).

e) For both genders and across all age groups, there was strong agreement that the power

of the evil eye differs from person to person. There is an implicit acceptance of the evil

eye. Generally, wearing charms was not accepted as an approved Islamic practice

against the evil eye. However, some differences in the way that youngsters deal with

the evil eye belief could be due to their changed attitudes towards giving and receiving

compliments. There was some indication that youngsters, especially males, were not

strong believers in the evil eye.

7.3.4. Giving compliments

Complimenting behaviour of the Saudi Hijazi community is related to Islamic culture.

So, this point is discussed to provide the basis for findings discussed further.

Islamic culture and complimenting behaviour

A strong influence of Islamic culture and its inseparable link with certain religious

beliefs and values were visible in social interactions like complimenting behaviour. This may

be because Islamic teachings control social relationships so that people are polite and respectful

to each other, reflecting the culture-specific politeness in their inter-personal relationship

(Saida, 2020; Sharifian, 2008; Alamri, 2021). According to Iseman (1978), religiocentrism is

very high in Islamic cultures and strongly impacts its followers. This applies to complimenting

behaviour, belief in the evil eye, and prevention methods. This was very evident both in giving

and receiving compliments in certain social settings. Notably, culture and social expectation

protocols of complimenting behaviour (Tang & Zhang, 2009) are the two elements that govern

the way people perceive politeness during social interactions. It also shows the significance of

the influence of cultural traditions and social values in guiding complimenting behaviour to

223

express honour or esteem among interlocutors. Now the socio-demographic variables become

important in complimenting behaviour, as the following discussion shows.

Effects of gender, age, and power distance on complimenting behaviour

Some effects of gender, age, and social position can be seen in the interview responses,

summarised in section 6.3.3 above. According to DCT analysis, for some social variables and

topics, some strategies were used as the sole dominant strategy, and for some other social

variables and topics, the same strategy was one of the dominant strategies. Other various

strategies were used for other instances of social variables and topics. Thus, the specific

strategy varied with both social variables and topics for each complimenting situation.

Gender

According to the genderlect theory of communication (Tannen, 1990), the two genders

have different communication styles, linguistic codes, and verbal repertoires. This theory may

be applicable in the case of a conservative society like that of Saudi Arabia (Hidalgo-Tenorio,

2016). But even in Saudi Arabia, modernity is developing fast, and some traditions have

already changed. On the other hand, some others hold that there is no difference separately

attributable to gender alone (Burleson, 2003). Bell and Blaeuer (2006) observed that there were

no causal links between gender and any specific communication interactions attributable to

gender alone. However, these findings are not in line with this study’s findings, which showed

some trends attributable to gender as summarised in section 6.3.3. Torppa (2010) attributed the

differences in perceptions of meanings of messages between males and females as tangible

evidence of gender differences. However, his explanations for this difference may not be

sufficient, as age also often interacts with gender to show different patterns. It may be more

precise to say that younger males and females behaved similarly, while there was more

divergence in older speakers across the genders, as some of the trends in this research showed.

Differences between men and women in the purpose of communication may be reflected in

224

complimenting behaviour, as Kendall and Tannen (2015) noted. In this research, although

younger males and females converged on some complimenting behavioural variables, there

were a few others in which they differed. In the Middle East, the hierarchical social relationship

between genders dictates their differences in complimenting behaviour also. Females tend to

be more responsive and polite rather than more assertive (Salem, 2000). As Holmes (1988)

suggested, women are more likely to give and receive compliments compared to men. Even if

a stranger or another woman of power is involved, women try to give and receive compliments

best suited to the conditions while being cautious. This was observable in the interview

statements given by females in this research. In Saudi Arabia, complimenting behaviour

follows the Islamic restrictions on cross-gender interactions and compliments. Therefore,

pronounced gender differences should have been obtained in this research; but only trends were

visible from interview data. Men frequently praised personal traits and abilities, whereas

women preferred to compliment appearances (Qanbar, 2012). Similar findings were obtained

in the interview responses of this study also. Another evaluation of gender effect was possible

from DCT data, which almost confirmed the interview results.

Age

Although survey questions did not allow to evaluate age effect directly, the DCT data

facilitated distinct evaluation of age. The tendency of younger generations to react differently

was evident in some of the interview responses. In some evil eye situations, the younger males

did not attach as much importance to the evil eye as the older generations. The influence of

western ideas and beliefs (Elamin & Omair, 2010), originating from studying abroad, could be

a reason for this.

225

Power distance

Power distance was found to be an important factor for complimenting strategy. Saudi

male speakers differentiate between people of higher and equal status among their family

members (Alobaisi, 2011). The greater the power distance, the fewer and shorter are the

compliments (Al-Amro, 2013). There were four situations and topics of inappropriate

compliments in this study. Two were on power distance and two on strangers. Social distance

is maximum when interacting with strangers. One observation on just praying instead of

complimenting strangers on traits confirmed the observations of Al-Amro (2013). However, in

this study, social distance led to an attitude that complimenting itself as inappropriate for

appearance (personality) and possession as the topic. These observations are contrary to the

findings of Al-Ageel (2010) and Al-Amro (2013). Their studies used only close and distant

relatives and not true strangers. The results obtained from interview data were more or less

confirmed by those of the DCT results.

Social position

This factor was evaluated in both interviews and DCT using young, subordinate, and

superior categorisation in both cases. Again, there was a broad trend of agreement between the

two sources of quantitative data.

Preferred/dominant compliment strategies for different topics

According to Danziger (2018), compliment topics greatly impacted interactants’

strategy choice for praise response. Complimenting strategies can differ with external

(appearance and possession) and internal compliments (skill and trait). This is very clear from

the dominant strategies for the three complimenting situations and the four topics in this study

(Table 4.7) and from DCT data on dominant strategies (Table 4.8 to 4.16) discussed above.

Thus evidently, different strategies were used in different complimenting situations by the

226

Hijazi Saudi community when complimenting. DCT analysis also converged on to these trends

of results.

The most preferred compliment topics expressed in interviews were the internal

compliments of personal traits and skills. The least preferred was the external compliments of

appearance and possessions across all social variables. From the frequencies of compliment

topics given by Qanbar (2012) to the Yemeni speech community, the order of preference was

appearance, traits, skills, and possessions. In this study, it was personal traits, skills,

appearance, and possessions. Excepting possessions, the order of the other three preferences

was different. Thus, the findings of Qanbar (2012) were not supported by the results.

Possession, as the least preferred topic, endorses the findings of Al-Amro (2013) on the Najdi

Saudi community to some extent, but not that of Alqahtani (2016) in the Middle Saudi

province. These variations in results do not show any Saudi-Non-Saudi difference in the order

of importance of complimenting topics to support or reject our findings or of others.

As has been discussed, the general trend showed external compliments to be preferred

to a greater extent. Therefore, personal traits and skills should be the most frequently

complimented topics. The less preferred internal compliments on appearance and possessions

will have lower frequencies of complimenting. This may be the reason for the observation of

the order: personal traits, skills, appearance, and possessions in this study. It is difficult to

explain why personal traits are more frequent than skills or appearance is more frequent than

possessions. The relative numbers may reflect the general trend in society.

Gender, age, and social variables interactions on preferred/dominant compliment

topics-

Both DCT and interview data measured these trends. As in the case of the findings of

Qanbar (2012), Khodabakhshi and Zolfagharkhani (2015), Ghanem (2010), Al-Rousan et al.

227

(2014), and Monjezi (2014), there was some definite trend towards gender-age effects as the

most preferred topic in this study. In the case of males, personal traits, as the most preferred

topic, decreased from young to superior respondents. Conversely, it increased in young to

superior females. (Table 6.3 of interview results). In the case of the next preferred topic of

skills, the male preference progressively increased from young to superior. On the other hand,

it progressively decreased from young to superior females. Since appearance was not the most

preferred topic, the findings of this study do not support the results obtained by Al-Amro (2013)

that females only preferred appearance. On the other hand, traits as the most common topic

observed by Alqahtani (2016) is supported by this study. Although cultural differences seemed

to account for some differences among the findings of these researchers done in different

countries, this argument does not apply to the context of this research.

7.3.5. Compliment responses

In this study, the main strategies for compliment responses (Table 5.7) were as follows:

accepting compliments/returning compliments dominated in the case of appearance, skill and

a trait for a close relationship, appearance, and possession for strangers and power distance.

For a close relationship, accepting compliments/praying for the giver dominated in the case of

possession. For strangers, evading compliments/shifting credit dominated in the case of skill

and accepting compliments/praying for the giver in the case of a trait. For power distance,

evading compliments/informative comments dominated in the case of skill. Thus, some

indications of different response strategies for internal and external compliments were observed

here but insufficient to support the contentions of Danzig (2018).

In responding to compliments, according to Danziger (2018), while external

compliments were mostly welcomed and conventionalised, internal compliments were met

with negative reactions. The author justified this discrepancy by suggesting that internal

228

compliments are generally perceived as being intimate by the Israeli Hebrew speakers and are

thus less welcomed. On the other hand, external compliments are recognised as being separate

from the self, making them more acceptable. This trend of preference for distinct compliment

topics underscores a broader shift from asceticism to hedonism, Danziger (2018) argued. The

DCT tables on dominant strategies (Table 5.8 to 5.16) also confirmed these trends.

In the Arab world, compliment responses are determined by whether religious

utterances accompany the compliments given by any person. This is due to the belief in the

evil eye. In a broad sense, this study’s categorisation of compliment responses was based on

Herbert (1986). If accepting/returning compliments can be considered as thanking responses,

this strategy dominated in compliment responses of participants in this study and thus supports

the findings of Al-Rousan et al. (2016), Mostafa (2015), Hussein (2007), and Al-Jammal

(2017). However, thanking per se was not a strategy.

In that case, accepting/returning compliments could be regarded as an indirect way of

thanking for the compliment. If this contention is accepted, this strategy adopted by a majority

of the respondents in this study could be explained by the agreement maxim proposed by Leech

(1983). It also becomes a politeness strategy, thus becoming the modern way of complimenting

responses. However, acceptance responses with thanks are rare in Arab countries, as traditional

norms do not permit it. These ideas were suggested by Ebadi and Salman (2015). Another,

better reason seems to be that thanking ends the conversation and thus a face-threatening act,

as was suggested by Al-Amro (2013). Praise from strangers may be responded with thanking

to reduce the negative face of the interlocutor or face-threatening act for the receiver of the

compliment.

In this study, only accepting compliments/praying dominated for a trait as the topic,

when strangers were involved. Thus, accepting the compliment becomes an indirect way of

thanking. Ebadi and Salman (2015) may be correct to that extent. As could be noted, acceptance

229

of compliment is accompanied by an additional response of praying as a natural way of

responding and for a possible effect of warding off evil eye effect, if it is suspected. This is the

common characteristic of Arabic culture, as Ebadi and Salman (2015) had contended.

However, accepting with a downgrading strategy was not a major one for any of the

compliment response situations in this study. This observation agrees with the findings of

Ebadi & Salman (2015), Al-Rousan et al. (2016), Hussein (2007), Al-Amro (2013), Al-Jammal

(2017), and contradicts that of Mostafa (2015). Downgrading can hurt the positive face of the

interlocutor and hence not desirable, and hence, it is not accepted as a standard strategy.

In this study, shifting credit was a major strategy only in the case of strangers with skill

as the topic (Table 4.2). Its low occurrence in this study supports the findings of Mostafa

(2015), Ebadi & Salman (2015), Al-Rousan et al. (2016), Hussein (2007) Al-Jammal (2017).

If shifting credit is to Allah, it is an Islamic practice and builds or strengthens the relationship

between the two people involved. Since religious expression has been seen as a mandatory

requirement of complimenting in the interview responses, the quantitative results of this study

on shifting credit appear to be giving credit to Allah.

Praise upgrade was not found to be a significant strategy of compliment responses in

this study, supporting the observations of Mostafa (2015), Al-Amro (2013) and Hussein (2007)

and rejecting those of Ebadi and Salman (2015), Al-Rousan et al. (2016), and Al-Jammal

(2017). The politeness maxim of Leech (1983) has been extended to this response strategy also.

When praise upgrade is used as a dominant strategy, it violates the Islamic code of modesty,

and hence, such code violation has not been observed in this study.

In this research, the offering was a significant response strategy in the case of strangers

and power distance with possession as the topic. Here, someone possesses something, that is

complimented, leading to the same being offered as a gift to the respondent. An offering may

be indicative of generosity. This finding is supported by Ebadi and Salman (2015) and Al-

230

Rousan et al. (2016) and is contradicted by Hussein (2007), Farghal and Al-Khatib (2001), and

Farghal and Haggan (2006). The politeness maxim of Leech (1983), as an expression of

repaying debt and expression of generosity by the receiver, has been offered as the explanations

for its occurrence.

Remaining silent and remaining silent with a smile was evaluated in the case of

compliment responses during the survey. There were very few responses of these types,

agreeing with the observations of Mostafa (2015), Ebadi & Salman (2015), Al-Rousan et al.

(2016), Al-Amro (2013), and Farghal & Haggan (2006). Due to very low responses, specific

effects of social variables could not be seen in this study, although such effects were claimed

by Al-Amro (2013), Ebadi and Salman (2012), and Al-Rousan et al. (2016), who found that

men were more likely to respond with no response than women.

One would expect that invocation responses in Islamic societies would be very high.

Invocation requests had not been a major strategy of compliment response in the quantitative

results of this research. However, in the interviews, participants had said that invocation

(adding religious expressions) is a must, and if someone fails to abide, they will force it on the

person, sometimes even on non-Muslims. Alternatively, accepting compliments/praying for

the giver is also a type of invocation. This was a significant strategy for possession and skill in

the case of close relationships and appearance and a trait in the case of strangers. These findings

endorse those of Mostafa (2015), Al-Amro (2013), Ebadi and Salman (2015), and Hussein

(2007) and do not support Farghal and Al-Khatib (2001) and Farghal and Haggan (2006).

Invocation indicates deep religious ties between the two persons Al-Amro (2013) and Mostafa

(2015) and politeness of the giver Al-Amro (2013) and Mostafa (2015).

Other responses included in this study were sarcasm, jokes, laughter, motivation, and

fishing for more compliments. None of these were used in the compliment responses in the

situation of power distance, only one participant used jokes in strangers as the situation in the

231

case of appearance, and except sarcasm and laughter, others were used by very few participants

in the situation of a close relationship. So, these response strategies had not been very important

in this study. Thus, the effects reported by Mostafa (2015) on the significant number of

sarcasm, jokes, laughter, motivation, and fishing as response types are not supported by the

findings.

7.4. Theoretical support

Overall, in this study, the politeness theory and speech acts theory as a support for

politeness theory explained complimenting behaviour as a method of being polite to preserve

and enhance relationships with people. In this study, it was shown that complimenting and

responding to complimenting in different situations (close relationship, stranger or persons of

high power) on different topics could either be polite (adding religious expressions, praying,

etc. or accepting and returning compliments) or rude (not complimenting or responding

compliments from a stranger or person of high power). Thus, the degree of politeness varies

with the strategy used. If a high level of politeness is expressed, it will foster good relationships

between the two parties; otherwise, the relationship may be strained, for example, when the

other party is asked to utter religious expressions loudly indicating suspicion of the evil eye.

Thus, the politeness theory, as an extension of speech act theory, applies to the findings of this

study.

The four maxims of Grice (1975) (quantity, quality, relations, and manner) are relevant

here. Unless the quantity, quality, relation, and manner are right, speech acts and compliments

may not achieve the desired results. These were reflected in the careful choice of strategies for

complimenting and responding to compliments by the participants across the three situations

and four topics. Additional support is available from interview responses on religious

expressions by self and others, especially when confronted with the belief in the evil eye. The

existence of variations in complimenting behaviour across social variables was also observed,

232

which may explain the differences in politeness when two persons of different social variables

interact.

On the whole, from the answers to the research questions, the following generalised

trends can be noted about the effect of belief in the evil eye on complimenting behaviour of the

Saudi Hijazi community. Attaching religious expressions to complimenting behaviour is

natural for the orthodox Hijazi community. People outside this community may not follow this

norm strictly when interacting with the Hijazi people, as the responses in interviews indicate.

In such cases, further interactions with such people may be restricted or absent. This may mean,

that Hijazi people mostly confine interactions to themselves, which may not be

realistic/possible. If the outsiders do not use religious expressions in such interactions, there is

a fear of the evil eye, and the remedy is to pray to Allah.

The scope for extending the practice of religious expressions beyond complimenting

can be examined. There may be other daily life interactions among people. Courtesy greetings

like good morning etc. can be replaced by religious expressions. In social interactions like

parties, people can greet each other with religious expressions. Thus, there are many

opportunities for religious expressions in interactions among the Hijazi community and their

interactions with outsiders. The Hijazi community may be practising some of these already.

Scope for including more situations for religious expressions to manage interactions need to be

researched further.

Prescriptions of a set of religious codes for complimenting practices have advantages

beyond one’s own culture. Such codes do exist in the case of other cultures also. Having no

code is also a code for free speech. Thus, globally, intercultural communications transcend

from no code at all to a very specific code, as seen in this study. As was discussed in the

literature review (Chapter 2, section 2.18), intercultural competence is a critical factor when

dealing with locals of a different culture. One has to be very careful when interacting with

233

people of other cultures, especially in complimenting and compliment responding behaviours.

This applies equally well to Saudis going to other countries and people from other countries

coming to Saudi Arabia for various purposes.

7.5. Triangulation

Triangulation of results was achieved to a considerable extent among the three types of

data collections namely surveys, DCT studies, and interviews. However, not all findings were

supported by literature due to differences in context, methods of data collection, variables

tested, and methods of data analysis.

7.6. Summary

The discussions of findings above can be summarised as follows. The quantitative

method of DCT analysis and qualitative method of interviews were used in this study to derive

findings on dominant and associated complimenting and compliment responding strategies

across complimenting situations and topics as affected by gender, age, and social position. This

research showed that out of the four complimenting topics offered, the most common topics in

complimenting behaviour between persons of the same gender were appearance, possession,

skill, and trait.

In the case of close relationships, strategies of attaching religious expressions with

different complimenting methods dominated for both external and internal compliments.

Complimenting was considered by most survey participants to be inappropriate for external

compliments was inappropriate in the case of strangers. The dominant strategies for a trait as

the (internal) topic were religious expressions with praising for skill and just praying when

complimenting strangers. When complimenting people of power distance, the same strategies

as for strangers were dominant when appearance, possession, and skill were the topics. But for

a trait, religious expression with praying was the dominant strategy. Different strategies were

234

used in varied complimenting situations by the Hijazi Saudi community in their complimenting

behaviour.

In the case of responding to compliments, accepting compliments and returning was the

most dominant strategy irrespective of whether complimenting a close relationship, a stranger,

or a person of power distance. For compliment giving and responding to compliments across

situations and social variables, some social variables showed broad trends in these respects.

Generally, the participants believed in the evil eye and used religious expressions as the only

way to protect them from its harmful effects. Some trends of differences across social variables

could be observed here also.

In explaining the findings of this research, partial applications of the Genderlect theory

of Deborah Tannen (1990) to explain gender differences, Herbert (1986) to categorise

compliment responses, the agreement maxim of Leech (1983), and politeness and speech act

theories were useful. It seemed, younger males and females behaved similarly on some

complimenting behaviours in this study. This was also attributable to hierarchical social

relationships existing in the Middle East, which outweighs gender differences.

Indirect ways of thanking, by way of accepting/returning compliments, exists in Saudi

Arabia, as thanking for a compliment is not permitted by the culture. This was a strategy

adopted by a majority of the respondents in this study. Another more probable reason seems to

be that thanking ends the conversation and thus a face-threatening act. Praise from strangers

may be responded with thanking to reduce the negative face of the interlocutor or face-

threatening act for the receiver of the compliment. In this study, only accepting

compliments/praying for a trait as the topic dominated when strangers were involved. Thus, an

indirect way of thanking occurs when the compliment is accepted. Other types of

complimenting and responses were not significant in this study.

235

The evil eye was the major theme of interviews. Compliments are often considered as

a vehicle of the evil eye. So, religious expressions are used to separate it from the compliment

and nullify its harmful effect. Respondents were insistent on religious expressions in giving

and responding to compliments. So, naturally, if compliments are given without invoking

blessings, the receivers of these compliments are unable to avoid or prevent the fear of the evil

eye. Then the respondent asks to say it even if the interlocutor is a non-Muslim or say it oneself.

The existence of the evil eye was a strong belief among the participants. Superstitious

comments like those related to the evil eye by interlocutors could be due to social and religious

influences. Thus, methods to prevent harm due to the evil eye become important. In Islamic

culture, Allah is considered to be the only protector from the evil eye. So, seeking His

protection is the only remedy. There is neither a need, nor it is useful to wear charms etc. These

beliefs and practices have been drawn from the Islamic scriptures. So, short religious

expressions like Masha Allah may be used by interlocutors. Broad trends of some effects of

social variables were noted in this study. The high level of religiocentrism with a strong impact

on its followers is reflected in their complimenting behaviour.

Complimenting is only one of the human interactions, and there are many other types

of interactions among the highly conservative Hijazi community. Scope for management of

other interactions by extension of the findings of this study on the link they have with the belief

in the evil eye can be researched and identified. The requirement for intercultural competencies

for intercultural communications and the achievement of global level competitiveness for Saudi

Arabia through its Vision 2030 has also been highlighted.

236

Chapter 8: Conclusions

This thesis examined complimenting behaviour in the Saudi Hijazi community and the

impact of the belief in the evil eye on this behaviour. Research questions were formulated, and

a mixed-methods approach was adopted for the data collection and analysis crucial to

answering these research questions. Hence, the research questions that were addressed in this

research were:

(i) How does the speech act of compliments vary across the continuum of social variables

in a sample of Saudi Hijazi Arabic speakers?

(ii) What sociodemographic trends are associated with the convergence of the belief in the




As the results in the chapters above have shown, complimenting strategies varied

according to topics and social and socio-demographic variables. The attachment of religious

expressions was a crucial element of the acceptance of and the appropriate and adequate

response to compliments, except when a is the topic. However, even in the case of a trait,

religious expressions combined with praying were the second-preferred choice.

The complimenting of close relatives involves less formal behaviour. However, the

Saudi Islamic culture requires that a religious expression accompany a compliment. On the

other hand, there was a reluctance to compliment strangers due to uncertainty regarding the

acceptance and appropriate response. Hence, generally, strangers are not complimented. Only

when skill and personal traits were the topics was the complimenting strategy similar to those

used for close relatives; that is, the compliment is accompanied by a religious expression or

prayer. The reluctance to compliment people of a higher power on their possession or

appearance is mainly due to the high score for power distance in the case of Saudi Arabia,

237

according to Hofstede’s classification of cultural dimensions. One way to compliment people

perceived as having higher power is to seek their advice when complimenting them on their

superior skills. In these instances, also, a religious expression and prayer accompany the

complimenting of a personal trait. Thus, although there was a reluctance to compliment

strangers and people of a higher power, the reasons for this are different.

There was a great degree of uniformity among the strategies used when responding to

compliments from close relatives, strangers, and people of a higher power. Simply accepting

and returning the compliment was quite a safe strategy in most situations. It is not certain

whether it implied religious expressions also both ways. Attaching religious expressions and

praying may be integral to the acceptance and returning of compliments, as the Islamic culture

demands it. The strategies used when interacting with a stranger or a person of higher power

were similar in most situations for both complimenting and responding to compliments as, in

effect, both are virtually the same. Shifting credit (stranger) or adding an informative comment

(power distance) when complimenting on skills is a clever strategy used to reverse any negative

effect of omitting a religious expression.

The effects of gender, age, and social position were found via the analysis of DCT and

interview data. Age differences were observed concerning accepting compliments and

appreciation tokens. Young participants preferred this strategy when complimenting on

possessions and traits and by older participants for skills. In the case of gender and social

position, several other strategies were used, especially when complimenting people of a higher

power. However, only a few main effects of gender and trait were statistically significant.

Chi-square results showed non-significant interactions of social position with possession in the

case of a close relationship, appearance and possession in the case of a stranger, and age x

appearance and age x possession in the case of power status. This means that the strategies

238

used in these interactions also do not differ significantly. These strategies are presented in

Tables 5.10, 5.14, and 5.15 above.

As accepting and returning compliments were the major response strategies in most

situations, the range of strategies was narrow, and this could be the reason for some non-

significant interactions. In ANOVA, the main effects of position over trait-power status

(p=0.049), gender over possession-stranger (p=0.000), skill-stranger (p=0.021), possession-

power status (p=-.000), skill-power status (p=0.000) and trait-power status (p=0.025) were

significant. Overall, it can be concluded that speech acts of complimenting and responding vary

across close relatives, strangers, and persons of power distance according to sociodemographic

variables such as age, gender, and social position.

The importance attached to uttering religious expressions loudly when complimenting

or responding to compliments is due to the fear that the receiver may possess an evil eye, which

is harmful to the interlocutor. Uttering religious expressions needs to be loud and heard by

everyone. This could be attributed to the belief that religious expressions can ward off evil

spirits or the evil eye that can harm interlocutors. Moreover, by hearing the name of ‘Allah’,

they should feel calm and peaceful. Therefore, religious expressions and praying to Allah are

the only means of prevention prescribed by Islamic scriptures to ward off any evil eye effect.

Implicit in this behaviour is the firm belief that only Allah can save a person from the harmful

effects of the evil eye.

In the interviews, participants generally mentioned the characteristics of the evil eye.

The evil eye may not be visible, and it is only realised when harm occurs to the person or their

belongings. Thus, just by looking at a person, it cannot be said that they possess an evil eye.

Therefore, exercising caution when mingling with strangers is necessary, which is usually

inevitable during religious and social gatherings. Usually, the evil eye cast by a person is

perceived when, immediately after his complimenting, some harm befalls the receiver. Being

239

largely associative, such beliefs in the existence and harmful effects of the evil eye might not

be rational. Traditional people strongly cling to these beliefs as their experiences have taught

them to do so.

On the other hand, the younger Saudi generation is exposed to modern education,

technology, and the outside world, facilitated by advanced communication technologies

(Bradley, 2015). They do not adhere strictly to the traditional protocols associated with

complimenting behaviour and are shaped by a belief in the evil eye or the need to seek Allah’s

protection from its harmful effects, labelling these practices as extreme. Already, big cities like

Riyadh are similar to any modern city found anywhere in the most advanced western countries.

With time, the generation gap between the older, more traditional generations and the young

modern generations will widen, as happens in many other countries. The increasing generation

gaps will lead to significant differences between generations (age difference?) in terms of

complimenting behaviour and belief in the evil eye. The interview responses only broadly

indicated these generation gaps since well-delineated comparisons were not within the scope

of this research.

Younger Muslims and people of other religions and cultures might not believe in the

evil eye or that Allah is their only protection. Forcing young Muslims to utter religious

expressions when giving or receiving compliments might no longer be possible. In the case of

non-Muslims, telling them about the importance of uttering a religious expression and then

asking them to say it loudly when complimenting is one method that can be used. However,

many non-Muslims prefer to pray to their own God, not to Allah, just as for Muslims, Allah is

the one and only true God. In these instances, the only thing the Saudi speaker can do is to say

it himself loudly. These strategies were mentioned by the interview participants.

Religiocentrism is applicable in these cases.

240

Concerning the influence of gender, females were stronger believers in the evil eye than

males, perhaps because of the various traditional religious and social values placed on the

people of Hijaz. Most Muslim women are confined indoors or restricted to mingle only with

their gender as there is gender segregation in public places in Saudi Arabia (although this is

changing with higher education). Therefore, it is possible that with a more modern approach

and recent reforms aimed at creating gender equity, women’s complimenting behaviour, belief

in the evil eye, and responses to it may change. As males progress towards higher social

positions from young to superior, their belief in the evil eye also becomes stronger. This may

be due to their fear of downfall from the current status at any time.

Politeness theory and speech act theory posits that complimenting behaviour

strengthens relationships between people. Hence, if the Saudi interlocutor does not add a

religious expression to a compliment, this omission can offend the receiver and disrupt the

conversational interactions with those interlocutors. Most of the interviewees confirmed that

this does affect interpersonal relationships. The psychological effect and an uncomfortable fear

of possible harm from the evil eye were also expressed by the majority of participants. Hence,

it is natural that there will be hesitation about interacting with people, at least for a few receivers

of compliments that are given without religious expressions. Both males and female

participants said that this tended to affect their interactions with such persons. Uncomfortable

fear and psychological effects showed a decreasing trend by ascending order of social status of

females. Significantly, all the interviewees connected complimenting behaviour with religion.

This is typical of Islamic culture, in which Islamic religious scriptures direct all activities. Saudi

Arabia follows these scriptures in all respects, although some modernisation has been made

regarding certain matters to match global practices to achieve its Vision 2030 goals. Thus,

complimenting behaviour, belief in the evil eye, and methods of preventing harm are based on

241

the Saudi belief in Allah as the only protector, and these beliefs are derived from Islamic

teachings.

Overall, this study contributed to the current literature by determining the relationship

between belief in the evil eye and the different strategies used to give or respond to

compliments, which in turn are influenced by gender, age, and position of the receiver in

various complimenting scenarios and with different topics. In particular, Saudi Arabia and the

Hijazi community are studied in this research since they follow traditional Islamic practices

and therefore obey the dictates of the Islamic religious texts to prevent harm that the evil eye

can cause. In the Islamic tradition, complimenting is generally limited to commenting on

achievements only; compliments on other things would lead to jealousy, which creates the evil

eye. The globalisation of culture resulting from the younger generation’s increasing exposure

to the outside world through technology, travel, and education can facilitate Saudi people’s

interactions with people and organisations in other countries. This is an important means of

attracting more foreign investments, diversifying industries, creating more jobs, boosting the

economy, and, in general, bringing Saudi Arabia into the 21st century, thereby achieving the

goals of Vision 2030.

Limitations of this study

The survey sample size was only 240. Considering that the minimum sample size

required is 385 for 95% confidence and 5% margin of error for an estimated 12500000

population of Hijazi community in Saudi Arabia for 2020 (based on 35% of the total Saudi

population in 2020 as 34.82 million), the sample size used less than ideal. A larger sample

would have led to stronger validity. Data was collected for gender and age only. No data was

collected for the variables of the level of education (especially western), employment (in global

firms), and level of income. Hence, the possible influence of these variables on complimenting

behaviour or belief in the evil eye was not investigated. More specific questions on evil eye

242

belief and generational gaps could have been included in the interviews to obtain a more

comprehensive picture. Instead of just using two age groups comprising people aged 18-25

years and 40 plus, at least one more group between the two ranges could have been used to

reveal a more consistent trend.

Future research

This work presents opportunities for further research in certain areas. A study on the

belief in the evil eye and its impact on complimenting behaviour could be undertaken using

quantitative surveys with clearly defined age groups (e.g., 15-34, 35-49, 50-64, and 64 and

above) for both genders and other variables such as education, employment, and income

levels. This research was limited to one regional Saudi community. There are other regional

communities like Asir and Najd, which may have their complimenting behaviour and

approach to the evil eye. To date, no search has been conducted to investigate complimenting

behaviour and the impact of evil eye belief on complimenting behaviour in these

communities.

In 2017-2018, of a population of about 33.5 million in Saudi Arabia, about 10.74

million were expatriates from Syria, India, Pakistan, Egypt, and many other countries,

including western nations. The cultures of both Muslims and non-Muslims from these countries

will be different, and these differences may be evident in their complimenting behaviour and

belief in the evil eye. Hence, a comprehensive study comparing the complimenting behaviour

and its link with the belief in the evil eye and how this is dealt with by the expatriates from

these countries could be compared with the practices of Saudi native communities and could

yield valuable insights. The findings of this research indicated that if non-Muslims do not utter

religious expressions, the receiver may remind them to do so or utter themselves. There is no

further information about this aspect. Expatriates, even from Islamic countries may have

243

different standards of complimenting and responding behaviours. There may also be clear

differences between the Muslim and non-Muslim expatriates. These differences need to be

studied for a clear idea about how the complimenting and responding behaviours including the

belief in the evil eye, are impacted when Saudi and non-Saudi people interact in Saudi Arabia.

Thus, research on this aspect can make an important contribution to a hitherto unknown aspect.

Islamic societies have a fundamental belief in the evil eye, only its relationship with

complimenting behaviour has been investigated in this study. Whether and the extent to which

it affects other aspects of the lives of Saudi citizens have not been examined and remains a rich

topic for future research. Various cultures in other countries believe in the evil eye or something

similar. A comparison of the impact of these beliefs on complimenting behaviour and the daily

activities of Islamic and non-Islamic cultures from these countries, when Saudis go outside for

various purposes, would be very useful and would present research opportunities.

Recommendations regarding inter-cultural communications within and

outside Saudi Arabia

Although Saudi citizens comply with cultural norms for social interactions with fellow

citizens within their own country, the inherent differences of other cultures (including even

some oriental Muslim cultures) need to be respected. Any interactions need to be tailored to

mutually-acceptable standards, rather than insisting that everyone follow the practices of the

Saudi culture. Complimenting behaviour is social interaction. Intercultural interactions with

Muslims from other countries occur during pilgrimage seasons, as the Hijazi community lives

in and around Mecca. Since the pilgrims may have different types of social behaviours

regarding compliment-giving and beliefs related to the evil eye, mutually-acceptable

international standards of behaviour, following the Islamic scriptures, should be devised.

244

Outside their own country, Saudi citizens should understand that they need to adjust to

local culture and interact freely with the local people, rather than keeping to themselves and

insisting on adhering to the Saudi culture alone. Thus, some give and take needs to occur when

Saudi citizens interact with others, with the long-term objective of developing good

relationships with all. This is particularly important as many Saudi students go abroad for

higher studies in reputed universities, generally accompanied by their families.

In countries like Australia, there is a strong respect for other cultures. Australians expect

a more modern approach when receiving compliments from others, that is, culture-neutral

behaviours. Hence, it would be beneficial for the Saudi students and families who stay in

Australia for educational or other reasons to recognise these differences in their interactions

with local communities. Even if no drastic adjustments in their cultural behaviour can be made

(five daily prayers, dress codes, halal food, etc.), they can integrate other elements of local

culture. Saudi people can mingle with different communities in their neighborhoods and

educational institutions. This is also necessary if they require help when some difficulty arises

due to not understanding the local laws, language, or customs. Saudi people in foreign countries

cannot assume that others believe in the evil eye and therefore add religious expressions to

compliments. Thus, the need to adjust complimenting behaviour is also important here.

The feasibility of taking the first steps is supported by this study’s quantitative findings

(survey and DCT). The variations in complimenting and compliment response strategies for

the four topics offered show a high degree of adaptability to the context of the Hijazi

community. In particular, the findings on the complimenting behaviour engaged with strangers

and people of higher power provide useful ways of interacting with expatriates and other non-

Saudi people who visit the country for various purposes. Thus, it is possible to have a Saudi

population firmly rooted in Islamic principles and at the same time tolerant of other cultures of

expatriates working in Saudi Arabia and contributing to its economic growth in many ways.

245

Here, it is evident that intercultural communication is strongly aligned with the goals of Saudi

Vision 2030.

When Saudi nationals are in a foreign country, they need to adjust to that culture’s way

of expressing compliments, just as outsiders are asked to follow the cultural norms in Saudi

Arabia. The findings from the interviews show how this adaptability occurs. Although a non-

Muslim is expected to add a religious expression when complimenting, it is not always insisted

upon. Similarly, Saudis themselves do not believe in wearing charms and the like to ward off

the evil eye. So, non-Muslims also need not wear charms, etc., but if their culture permits or

advises this, they are free to do it.

When young students return home from their studies abroad, they need to be prepared

for the dual role of a Saudi citizen who adheres firmly to the Islamic culture while at the same

time being more tolerant of those from other cultures who come to work in the country. This

will help to facilitate the achievement of the Saudi Vision 2030 goals.

246

References

Abduljaber, M., & Kalin, I. (2019). Globalization and the transformation of political attitude

structures at the party level in the Arab World: Insights from the cases of Egypt and Jordan.

Societies, 9(1), 24. doi: 10.3390/soc9010024.

Abu-Rabia, A. (2005). The evil eye and cultural beliefs among the Bedouin tribes of the Negev,

middle east. Folklore, 116(3), 241-254. doi:10.1080/00155870500282677.

Abu Amina Elias (2022). Daily Hadith Online THE TEACHINGS OF PROPHET MUHAMMAD ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص IN

ARABIC AND English. Hadith on ‘Ayn: Beware evil eye of envy, perform ghusl. Faith in Allah

Yaqeen Articles. https://www.abuaminaelias.com/dailyhadithonline/2014/05/03/al-ayn-haqq-

ghusl/

Adachi, C. (2011). Sociolinguistic Investigation of Compliments and Compliment Responses

among YoungJapanese. Ph.D. Thesis. The University of Edinburgh.

Al-Ageel, H. (2010). The Practices of Compliments and Compliment Responses among Saudi

Females. Master Thesis, La Trobe University.

Al-Ageel, H. (2016). Requesting Behaviour of Saudi Arabian Women in Contemporary Arabic-

speaking Situations. Ph.D. Thesis, RMIT University.

Alahmadi, S. (2015). Loanwords in the Urban Meccan Hijazi Dialect: An analysis of lexical

variation according to speakers’ sex, age and education. International Journal of English

Linguistics, 5(6), 34-58.

Al Amro, M. (2013). The sociolinguistics of compliment behavior in Najdi Saudi Arabic.Ph.D.

Thesis, Ball State University.

Alamri, S. (2021). Compliment production and compliment responses in immersion and non-

immersion environments Saudi English learners. Department of Media, Culture, and

Language. Ph.D. Thesis University of Roehampton.

Alase, A. (2017). The interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA): A guide to a good

qualitative research approach. International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies,

5(2), 9. doi: 10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.5n.2p.9s.

Alasmrai, M. A. (2021). Addressing Gender Equity Constraints in Saudi Arabia Through the

Power of Adult & Continuing Education's Cognitive Production Based on Socio-

https://www.abuaminaelias.com/dailyhadithonline/2014/05/03/al-ayn-haqq-ghusl/

https://www.abuaminaelias.com/dailyhadithonline/2014/05/03/al-ayn-haqq-ghusl/

247

Political View. Journal of Management system, 36(110), 313-340.

doi:10.21608/sec.2021.163722.

Adhabi, E., & Anozie, C. (2017). Literature review for the type of interview in qualitative

research. International Journal of Education, 9(3), 86. doi: 10.5296/ije.v9i3.11483.

Agnieszka, C. (2013). Discourse completion task: Its validity and reliability in research projects

on speech acts. Anglica. An International Journal of English Studies, 22(2), 100-111.

Al-Batayneh, H. (2013). Implicit Compliments in Jordanian Arabic. Master thesis, Yarmouk

University.

Al Falasi, H. (2007). Just say thank you: A study of compliment responses. The Linguistics

Journal, 2(1), 28-42.

Al-Dawood, A., Abokhodair, N., El mimouni, H., & Yarosh, S. (2017). Against marrying a

stranger. Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Designing Interactive Systems - DIS

'17. doi: 10.1145/3064663.3064683.

Al-Habeeb, T. A. (2003). A pilot study of faith healers' views on evil eye, jinn possession, and

magic in the kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Journal of Family & Community Medicine,

10(3), 31-38.

Alharbi, R. (2017). Responses of Female Non-Native Speakers to English Compliments: A

Cross-generational Study of Saudi Arabia University Students and Lecturers, Master

thesis, Auckland University of Technology.

Alhazmi, A., & Nyland, B. (2010). Saudi international students in Australia and intercultural

engagement: A study of transitioning from a gender-segregated culture to a mixed-

gender environment. The 21st ISANA international education conference (pp. 1-11).

ISANA.

Al-Hilu, M. J. (2017). Complimenting behaviour in the performance of native speakers of Irish

English and Iraqi Arabic: a cross-cultural pragmatics study. Ph.D. Thesis, School of

Modern Languages and Applied Linguistics. The University of Limerick.

Alhuthaif, A. (2019). International Mindedness Within Intercultural Competence: A Collective

Case Study of Faculty’s Conceptualizations and Practices of International Mindedness

in One Saudi EFL Higher Education Institution in an effort to achieve Saudi Arabia's

Vision 2030. Ph.D. Thesis, The Graduate School of Education and Human

Development. The George Washington University.

248

Al-Jammal, A. (2017). The speech act of compliment response as realized by Yemini Arabic

Speakers: A sociolinguistic analysis. International Journal of English Studies, 3(3), 18.

Allami, H., & Montazeri, M. (2012). Iranian EFL learners' compliment responses. System,

40(4), 466-482. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2012.10.010.

Almadani, W. (2021). How Hijazi Men and Women Say “NO”: A Pragmatic and Discourse

Analysis Study of the Speech Act of Refusal, Gender and Culture in Saudi Arabia. Ph.D.

Thesis, University of Sunderland.

Almalki, Y. S. (2020). Can studying abroad change the attitude of Saudi males on sex

segregation? Master Thesis, Graduate School, Department of Communication at

Purdue Fort Wayne. Purdue University.

Almansoob, N., Alrefaee, Y., & Patil, K. (2019). A cross-cultural study of the speech act of

compliment in American English and Yemeni Arabic. Langkawi: Journal of the

Association for Arabic And English, 5(1), 1. doi: 10.31332/lkw.v5i1.1271.

Alobaisi, M. (2011). Compliments and Compliment Responses: A Saudi Male Perspective.

Master Thesis, La Trobe University.

Alotaibi, A. (2016). An analysis of compliment responses by Kuwaiti EFL learners: A

pragmatic approach. European Scientific Journal, ESJ, 12(10), 74. doi:

10.19044/esj.2016.v12n10p74.

Alqahtani, E. M. (2020). Vision 2030 and family: Saudi Arabian males' perception after

studying in the United States. Ph.D. Thesis, Graduate Faculty. The University of Akron.

Alqahtani, F. (2016). Novel Features of Compliment Events in the Middle Province of Saudi

Arabia: An Intra-lingual Study of a Saudi Colloquial Dialect Based on Naturally

Occurring Data. Master Thesis, English School, Department of Linguistics. The

University of Sussex.

Alqarni, S. (2020). A Sociolinguistic Investigation of Compliments and Compliment

Responses among Young Saudis. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ) Volume, 11(1),

231-252. doi:10.24093/awej/vol11no1.18.

249

Ammour, N. (2012). A sociolinguistic investigation of language variation in the speech

community of Nedroma. Magister thesis, University of Tlemcen.

Anssari, S. (2011). The Speech Acts in Moroccan Arabic: An Intercultural Approach. Ph.D.

Thesis, Universitat de València.

Al-Rasheed, M. (2020). Gender Segregation. In V. Anishchenkova (ed). Modern Saudi

ArabiaVol. 62 (4), p 171 172. ABC-CLIO.

Al-Rousan, M., Awal, N., & Salehuddin, K. (2014). Gender differences in using topics and

forms of compliment among Jordanian Students in Malaysia. Journal of Language and

Communication, 1(2), 123-134.

Al-Rousan, M., Awal, N., & Salehuddin, K. (2016). Compliment responses among male and

female Jordanian university students. GEMA Online® Journal of Language Studies,

16(1), 19-34.

Alsahafi, N., & Shin, S.-C. (2017). Factors Affecting the Academic and Cultural Adjustment

of Saudi International Students in Australian Universities. Journal of International

Students, 7(1), 53-72.

Alsharif, A. A., & Alyousef, H. S. (2017). Negotiation and impoliteness strategies in Saudi and

Australian postgraduate students’ emails. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ), 8(4),

333-351. doi:10.24093/awej/vol8no4.23.

Al-Shehri, S. (2020). Transforming English Language Education in Saudi Arabia: Why Does

Technology Matter? International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning

(iJET), 15(6), 108-123. doi:10.3991/ijet.v15i06.12655.

Alsuwaida, N. (2016). Women's Education in Saudi Arabia. Journal of International Education

Research, 12(4), 111-118.

Altwaian, H. (2017). Intercultural Communication Challenges and Impact on Multicultural

Teams in Saudi Arabian Companies–Perceptions and Roles on Beliefs of Trust. Ph.D.

Thesis, The Faculty of Business and Law, Department of Politics and Public Policy. De

Montfort University UK.

250

Alzahrani, A. K. (2017). Markets and language policy in Saudi Arabia: how the English

language can contribute to the success of the Saudi vision 2030. International Journal

of English Language and Linguistics Research,5(6), 1-12.

Amel, G. (2019). A comparative study on compliment responses in Arabic and Hungarian.

Master Thesis, The University of Pécs.

Ameli, S. R., & Molaei, H. (2012). Religious affiliation and intercultural sensitivity:

Interculturality between Shia & Sunni Muslims in Iran. International Journal of

Intercultural Relations, 36(1), 31-40. doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2010.11.007.

As-adi, A. N. (2018). Tafseer as-Sa'di. Tafseer as-Sa'di. Sunniconnect.

https://www.emaanlibrary.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Tafseer-As-Sadi-Volume-10 Juz-

28-30.pdf?x77952

Austin, J. (1962). How to Do Things with Words. Harvard University Press.

Beebe, S., Beebe, S., & Redmond, M. (2016). Interpersonal Communication: Relating to

Others (8th ed.). Pearson.

Beeching, K., & Woodfield, H. (2015). Researching Socio-pragmatic Variability. Springer,

doi: 10.1057/9781137373953.

Bell, E., & Blaeuer, D. (2006). Performing gender and interpersonal communication research.

In The Sagehandbook of gender and communication (pp. 9-23). Sage.

Berger, A. S. (2012). The evil eye—An ancient superstition. Journal of Religion and Health,

51(4), 1098-1103.

Binsahl, H., Chang, S., & Bosua, R. (2020). Cross-cultural digital information-seeking

experiences: The case of Saudi Arabian female international students. Journal of

International Students, 10(4), 872-891. doi:10.32674/jis.v10i4.1573.

Beyers, J. (2017). Religion and culture: Revisiting a close relative. HTS: Theological Studies,

73(1), 1-9. doi:10.4102/hts.v73i1.3864.

Binsahl, H., Chang, S., & Bosua, R. (2020). Cross-cultural digital information-seeking

experiences: The case of Saudi Arabian female international students. Journal of

International Students, 10(4), 872-891. doi:10.32674/jis.v10i4.1573.

https://www.emaanlibrary.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Tafseer-As-Sadi-Volume-10%20Juz-28-30.pdf?x77952

https://www.emaanlibrary.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Tafseer-As-Sadi-Volume-10%20Juz-28-30.pdf?x77952

251

Bouchrika, I. (2020). Types of Research Design: Perspective and Methodological Approaches.

Retrieved May 14, 2021, from Guide2Research:

https://www.guide2research.com/research/types-of-research-design.

Bowen, G. (2009). Supporting a grounded theory with an audit trail: an illustration.

International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 12(4), 305-316. doi:

10.1080/13645570802156196.

Bradley, J. R. (2015). Saudi Arabia exposed: Inside a kingdom in crisis. St. Martin's Press.

Brown, P., & Levnison, S. C. (2020). Politeness: Some universals in language use (Vol. The

International Encyclopedia of Linguistic Anthropology: Studies in Interactional

Sociolinguistics 4). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Burleson, B. R. (2003). The experience and effects of emotional support: What the study of

cultural and gender differences can tell us about close relationships, emotion, and

interpersonal communication. Personal Relationships, 10(1), 1-23. doi:10.1111/1475-

6811.00033.

CambridgeDictionary. (2021). compliment. Retrieved February 2, 2021, from Cambridge

Dictionary: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/compliment.

Chen, X., Yang, L., & Qian, C. (2015). Pragmatic usage in academic email requests:

Comparing written DCT and email data. Lingue E Linguaggi,13(75-85). doi:

10.1285/i22390359v13p75.

Cheng, D. (2011). New insights on compliment responses: A comparison between native

English speakers and Chinese L2 speakers. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(8), 2204-2214.

doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2011.02.003.

Chunsheng, Y. (2020). An Expanded Study of Compliment Responses in Chinese.

Intercultural Communication Studies, 29(1), 1-14.

Collins. (2021). Compliment. Retrieved February 2, 2021, from Collins

COBUILD:https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/compliment.

Creswell, J. (2013). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.

Croucher, S. M., Zeng, C., Rahmani, D., & Sommier, M. (2017). Religion, culture, and

communication. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication.

doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.013.166.

252

Crowe, S., Cresswell, K., Robertson, A., Huby, G., Avery, A., & Sheikh, A. (2011). The case

study approach. BMC medical research methodology, 11(1), 100. doi:10.1186/1471-

2288-11-100.

Cuesta, A. R., & Yousefian, S. (2015). A contrastive study of Arabic and Persian formulas

against the evil eye used by women. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 212,

131–139. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.310.

Danziger, R. (2018). Compliments and compliment responses in Israeli Hebrew: Hebrew

University in Jerusalem students in interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 124, 73-87. doi:

10.1016/j.pragma.2017.12.004.

Derakhshan, A., Eslami, Z. R., & Chalak, A. (2020). A systematic review of compliments

among Iranian Persian speakers: Past, present, and future directions. Journal of English

Language Teaching and Learning, 12(26), 85-123. doi:10.22034/ELT.2020.11468.

Devi, L. S. (2003). Ethnomedical practice in Manipur: A case of evil eye. The Anthropologist,

5(1), 25-40. doi:10.1080/09720073.2003.11890774.

DeVito, J. A. (2002). Human communication: The basic course (Vols. Part 1: Foundations of

Human Communications, Unit No 8: Non-verbal messages). New York: Longman.

Ebadi, S., & Salman, A. (2015). Using compliment responses in Arabic and English: Focusing

on male and female EFL learners in Iraq. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language

Research, 2(7), 157-178.

Elamin, A., & Omair, K. (2010). Males' attitudes towards working females in Saudi Arabia.

Personnel Review, 39(6), 746-766. doi: 10.1108/00483481011075594.

El-Fatah, A., & Hussain, N. (2017). Brown and Levinson's Theory of Politeness. Ekb Journal,

98(2), 63-76. doi:10.21608/maed.2017.172203.

Falaky, M. (2016). Yes, we are: A sociolinguistic study of Egyptian slang. International

Journal of Language and Literature, 4(2). doi: 10.15640/ijll.v4n2a10.

Farghal, M., & Al-Khatib, M. (2001). Jordanian college students' responses to compliments:

A pilot study. Journal of Pragmatics, 33(9), 1485-1502. doi: 10.1016/s0378-2166(01)000066.

253

Farghal, M., & Haggan, M. (2006). Compliment behaviour in bilingual Kuwaiti college

students. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 9(1), 94-118.

doi: 10.1080/13670050608668632.

Floeck, I., & Pfingsthorn, J. (2016). Comparing instrument-induced effects in EFL requests:

Task-based approach vs discourse completion task. Anglica Wratislaviensia, 54, 51-63.

Flöck, I., & Geluykens, R. (2015). Speech acts in corpus pragmatics: A quantitative contrastive

study of directives in spontaneous and elicited discourse. Yearbook of Corpus

Linguistics and Pragmatics, 7-37. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-17948-3_2.

Félix-Brasdefer, J., & Hasler-Barker, M. (2015). Complimenting in Spanish in a short-term

study abroad context. System, 48, 75-85. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2014.09.006.

Gershman, B. (2015). The economic origins of the evil eye belief. Journal of Economic

Behavior & Organization, 110, 119-144.

Ghanem, S. (2010). Jordanian Males and Females' Compliments in Different Social Contexts:

Strategies and Functions. Master thesis, Middle East University for Graduate Studies.

Gilks, K. (2010). Is the Brown and Levinson (1987) model of politeness as useful and

influential as originallyclaimed? An assessment of the revised Brown and Levinson

(1987) model. INNERVATE Leading UndergraduateWork in English Studies, 2, 94-

102.

Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Harvard

University Press.

González, J. A., García-Barriuso, M., Pardo-de-Santayana, M., & Amich, F. (2012). Plant

remedies against witches and the evil eye in a Spanish “witches’ village”. Economic

botany, 66(1), 35-45. doi:10.1007/s12231 011-9183-y.

Gotzner, N., & Mazzarella, D. (2020). Face management and negative strengthening: The role

of power relations, social distance and gender. PsyArXiv, 36 pp.

doi:10.31234/osf.io/w5fyb.

Guo, H., Zhou, Q. and Chow, D. (2012). A variationist study of compliment responses in

Chinese. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 22(3), 347-373.

Hadi Kusuma, J., & Susilo, S. (2020). Intercultural and Religious Sensitivity among Young

Indonesian Interfaith Groups. Religions, 11(1), 26. doi:10.3390/rel11010026.

254

Haugh, M. (2012). Epilogue: The first-second order distinction in face and politeness research.

Journal of Politeness Research, 8(1), 111-134.

Herbert, R. (1986). Say "thank you" - or something. American Speech, 61(1), 76-88.

Herbert, R. (1990). Sex-based differences in compliment behavior 1. Language in Society,

19(2), 201-224.

Heyvaert, M., Maes, B., & Onghena, P. (2011). Mixed methods research synthesis: Definition,

framework, and potential. Quality & Quantity, 47(2), 659-676. doi: 10.1007/s11135-

011-9538-6.

Hidalgo-Tenorio, E. (2016). Genderlect. The Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Gender and

Sexuality Studies, 1-4. doi: 10.1002/9781118663219.wbegss389.

Hoffman, S. G. (2017). International Perspectives on Psychotherapy. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-

56194-3.

Holmes, J. (1995). Women, Men, and Politeness (1st ed.). Longman. Holmes, J. (1986).

Compliments and compliment responses in New Zealand English. Anthropological

Linguistics, 28(4), 485-508.

Holmes, J. (1988). Paying compliments: A sex-preferential politeness strategy. Journal of

Pragmatics, 12(4), 445-465.

Hussein, K. (2007). Strategies of compliment responses in Mosuli Arabic. Journal of

Education and Science, 14(1), 12-24.

Irvine, A., Drew, P., & Sainsbury, R. (2012). ‘Am I not answering your questions properly?’

Clarification, adequacy and responsiveness in semi-structured telephone and face-to-

face interviews. Qualitative Research, 13(1), 87-106. doi:

10.1177/1468794112439086.

Iseman, P. (1978). The Arabian Ethos. Harper’s Magazine.

Islam, M. S., & Kirillova, K. (2020). Non-verbal communication in hospitality: At the

intersection of religion and gender. International Journal of Hospitality Management,

84(January), 10232. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.102326.

Ivanovska, B., Kusevska, M., Daskalovska, N., & Ulanska, T. (2016). On the reliability of

discourse completion tests in measuring pragmatic competence in foreign language

255

learners. International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research, 25(1), 437-

443.

Jamil, A. (2016). Compliment Responses at Higher Education Institutions: A Comparative

Study of Omani and Australian Speakers. Ph.D. Thesis. The University of Queensland.

Jaworski, A., 1995. “This is not an empty compliment!” Polish compliments and the expression

of solidarity 1. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 5(1), pp.63-94.

Jenks, C. (2013). ‘Your pronunciation and your accent is very excellent’: Orientations of

identity during compliment sequences in English as a lingua franca encounters.

Language and Intercultural Communication, 13(2), 165-181. doi:

10.1080/14708477.2013.770865.

Jucker, A. (2009). Speech act research between armchair, field and laboratory. Journal of

Pragmatics, 41(8), 1611-1635. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.02.004.

Kallio, H., Pietilä, A., Johnson, M., & Kangasniemi, M. (2016). Systematic methodological

review: Developing a framework for a qualitative semi-structured interview guide.

Journal of Advanced Nursing, 72(12), 2954-2965. doi: 10.1111/jan.13031.

Kendall, S., & Tannen, D. (2015). Discourse and gender. The Handbook of Discourse Analysis,

639-660. doi: 10.1002/9781118584194.ch30.

Khalil, A. I.-F. (2016). The Islamic perspective of interpersonal communication. Journal of

Islamic Studies and Culture, 4(2), 22-37. doi:10.15640/jisc.v4n2a3.

Khodabakhshi, M., & Zolfagharkhani, M. (2015). A gender-based study of compliments and

compliment responses in Persian movies. The Iranian EFL Journal, 11(3), 61-79.

Knapp, M. L., Hopper, R., & Bell, R. A. (1984). Compliments: A descriptive taxonomy.

Journal of Communication, 34(4), 12-31.

Kotzé, Z. (2017). The evil eye of Sumerian deities. Asian & African Studies, 26(1), 102-115.

Lammers, J., Galinsky, A., Gordijn, E., & Otten, S. (2011). Power increases social distance.

Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3(3), 282-290.

doi:10.1177/1948550611418679.

Leech, G. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics (1st ed.).

256

Longman. Lin, C., Woodfield, H., & Ren, W. (2012). Compliments in Taiwan and Mainland

Chinese: The influence of region and compliment topic. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(11),

1486-1502. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2012.06.012.

Locher, M. A., & Watts, R. J. (2005). Politeness theory and relational work. Journal of

politeness research, 1(1), 9-33. doi:10.1515/jplr.2005.1.1.9.

Longcope, P. (1995). The Universality of Face in Brown and Levinson's Politeness Theory: A

Japanese Perspective. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Educational

Linguistics, 11(1), 69-79.

Lopez-Fernandez, O., & Molina-Azorin, J. (2011). The use of mixed methods research in the

field of behavioural sciences. Quality & Quantity, 45(6), 1459-1472. doi:

10.1007/s11135-011-9543-9.

Lorenzo-Dus, N. (2001). Compliment responses among British and Spanish university

students: A contrastive study. Journal of pragmatics, 33(1), 107-127.

doi:10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00127-7.

LPRG. (2021). Definitions of Politeness. Retrieved February 1, 2021, from Lingustic

Politeness Research Group: https://linguisticpoliteness.wordpress.com/about-

2/definitions/

Madill, A. (2011). Interaction in the semi-structured interview: A comparative analysis of the

use of and response to indirect complaints. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 8(4),

333-353. doi: 10.1080/14780880903521633.

Manes, J. (1983). Compliments: A mirror of cultural values. In N. Wolfson & E. Judd (eds),

Sociolinguistics and Language Acquisition (pp. 82-95). Rowley, Massachusetts:

Newbury House. doi:10.1177/007542428702000112.

Manes, J., & Wolfson, N. (1981). The compliment formula. In F. Coulmas (Ed),

Conversational Routine: Explorations in Standardized Communication Situations and

Prepatterned Speech (pp. 116-132). Mouton Publishers.

Magee, J., & Smith, P. (2013). The social distance theory of power. Personality and Social

Psychology Review, 17(2), 158-186. doi: 10.1177/1088868312472732.

http://doi.org/10.1177/007542428702000112

257

Mahmood, J., & Ali, O. (2018). The complimenting behavior of Iraqi College students: Same-

gender Study. International Journal of English Linguistics, 8(5), 238. doi:

10.5539/ijel.v8n5p238.

Mackey, A., & Gass, S. M. (2015). Second Language Research: Methodology and Design.

Routledge.

Meijer, R. (2010). Reform in Saudi Arabia: The gender‐segregation debate. Middle East Policy,

17(4), 80-100.

Merriam-Webster. (2021). Definition of compliment (Entry 1 of 2). Retrieved February 2,

2021, from Merriam Webster: https://www.merriam-

webster.com/dictionary/compliment.

McGrath, C., Palmgren, P., & Liljedahl, M. (2018). Twelve tips for conducting qualitative

research interviews. Medical Teacher, 41(9), 1002-1006. doi:

10.1080/0142159x.2018.1497149.

Migdadi, F. (2003). Complimenting in Jordanian Arabic: A Socio-Pragmatic Analysis. Ph.D.

Thesis. Ball State University.

Migdadi, F. (2021). A Sociopragmatic Study of Intra-Gender Compliment Responses by Saudi

College Students. Jordan Journal of Modern Languages and Literatures, 13(1), 143-

166. doi:10.47012/jjmll.13.1.9.

Migdadi, F., Badarneh, M. A., & Momani, K. (2010). Divine will and its extensions:

Communicative functions of maašaallah in colloquial Jordanian Arabic.

Communication Monographs, 77(4), 480-499.doi:10.1080/03637751.2010.502539.

Mohammad A, A. (2013). The sociolinguistics of compliment behavior in Najdi Saudi Arabic.

Ph.D. Thesis. Department of English. Ball State University.

Mojezi, M. (2014). The effects of proficiency and gender on the compliments and compliment

responses made by Iranian EFL learners. International Journal of Language Learning

and Applied Linguistics World, 5(1), 625-636.

Morady Moghaddam, M. (2019). Responses to compliments in online English chat: a

comparison between Iranian EFL learners and native English speakers. Journal of

Multicultural Discourses, 14(2), 167-187. doi:10.1080/17447143.2019.1611836.

258

Morgan, C. (2021). Too Much Culturally Aware? When Intercultural Reconciliation Fails in

Business: The Case of IKEA in Saudi Arabia. In E. Akçaoğlu, & R. Wehner (Ed.),

Würzburg International Business Forum International Business Conference 2020

Proceedings, Istanbul, 24 - 25 September 2020 (pp. 63-68). WIBF.

Mostafa, M. (2015). A Study of Compliment Responses among Male and Female Egyptian

Undergraduate Students. Master Thesis. The American University in Cairo.

Mowlana, H. (2003). Foundation of communication in Islamic societies. In J. P. Mitchell, &

S. Marriage (Eds.), Mediating religion: Conversations in media, religion and culture

(pp. 305-316). Bloomsbury Academic.

Nadeem, M. U., Mohammed, R., & Dalib, S. (2017). Religion and intercultural communication

competence. Journal of Philosophy, Culture and Religion, 28, 25-29.

Nelson, G. L., El Bakary, W., & Al Batal, M. (1993). Egyptian and American compliments: A

cross-cultural study. International Journal of intercultural relations, 17(3), 293-313.

doi:10.1016/0147-1767(93)90036-8.

Nelson, G., Al-Batal, M., & Echols, E. (1996). Arabic and English compliment responses:

Potential for pragmatic failure. Applied linguistics, 17(4), 411-432.

doi:10.1093/applin/17.4.411.

Nguyen, T. D. (2005). Giving and Receiving Compliments: Viewed from Textbooks and

Respondents®. In T. Lê, & M. Short (Ed.), Proceedings of the International Conference

on Critical Discourse Analysis: Theory into

Research, 15-18 November 2005, University of Tasmania (pp. 561-573). The University of

Tasmania.

Nur Indah, R. (2017). Compliments across Gender and Power Relation among Indonesian EFL

Learners. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ), 8(2), 132- 144.

doi:10.24093/awej/vol8no2.9.

Okon, E. E. (2012). Religion, culture and communication. American Journal of Social Issues

& Humanities, 2(6), 433-440.

Othman, N. (2011). Pragmatic and cultural considerations of compliment responses among

Malaysian-Malay speakers. Asiatic: IIUM Journal of English Language and Literature,

5(1), 86-103.

259

Oyekola, I. A. (2018). Culture and Globalisation. In O. Ogunbameru, A. Adissa, & D. Adekeye

(Eds.), Cross-cultural Management: A multi-disciplinary approach (pp. 81-102).

Obafemi Awolowo University Press.

Perper, R. (2018, June 27). Saudi Arabian women can now drive - here are the biggest changes

they've seen in just over a year. Retrieved February 1, 2021, from Business Insider:

https://www.businessinsider.in/home/saudi-arabian-women-can-now-drive-here-are-the-

biggest-changes-they've-seen-in-just-over-a-year/articleshow/64762054.cms.

Pieroni, A., & Giusti, M. E. (2002). Ritual botanicals against the evil eye in Tuscany, Italy.

Economic Botany, 56(2), 201-203. Retrieved February 8, 2022, from

https://www.jstor.org/stable/4256554.

Pietkiewicz, I., & Smith, J. (2014). A practical guide to using Interpretative Phenomenological

Analysis in qualitative research psychology. Czasopismo Psychologiczne

Psychological Journal, 20(1). doi: 10.14691/cppj.20.1.7.

Pringle, J., Drummond, J., McLafferty, E., & Hendry, C. (2011). Interpretative

phenomenological analysis: A discussion and critique. Nurse Researcher, 18(3), 20-24.

doi: 10.7748/nr2011.04.18.3.20.c8459.

Qanbar, N. (2012). Compliments in the Yemeni society: A sociolinguistic perspective. GEMA

Online™ Journal of Language Studies, 12(3), 999-1017.

Qari, I. A (2019). The gender of the addressee as a factor in the selection of apology strategies:

The case of Saudi and British. International Journal of Society, Culture & Language,

7(1), 83-95.

Qari, I. A. (2017). Politeness study of requests and apologies as produced by Saudi Hijazi,

EFL learners, and British English university students. Ph.D. Thesis. Department of

Media, Culture, and Language. University of Roehampton.

Ramadan, T. (2010). What I believe. Oxford University Press.

Razi, N. (2013). A contrastive study of compliment responses among Australian English and

Iranian Persian speakers. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 70, 61-66. doi:

10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.01.038.

Rees-Miller, J. (2011). Compliments revisited: Contemporary compliments and gender.

Journal of Pragmatics,43(11), 2673-2688. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2011.04.014.

260

Reminick, R. A. (1974). The evil eye belief among the Amhara of Ethiopia. Ethnology, 13(3),

279-291.

Rüpke, J. (2015). Religious agency, identity, and communication: reflections on history and

theory of religion. Religion, 45(3), 344-366. doi:10.1080/0048721X.2015.1024040.

Saida, T. (2020). Religion and Language: A Sociopragmatic Study of Religious Expressions in

Algerian Speakers’ Compliments and Compliment Responses. Dialogue

Méditerranéen, 10(3), 498-511.

Salam El-Dakhs, D. (2017). The compliment response strategies of Egyptian Arabic-English

bilinguals. Language and Dialogue, 7(3), 387-412. doi: 10.1075/ld.7.3.03sal.

Salem, E. (2000). Politeness Strategies in the Speech of Male and Female Students at

Jordanian Universities. Master Thesis. Yarmouk University.

Saudi Arabia. (2016). Vision 2030. Saudi Arabia. Retrieved December 17, 2018,

fromhttps://vision2030.gov.sa/en.

Saudi Arabia. (2021). Vision 2030 Laying the foundation of our future. Retrieved September

15, 2021, from Saudi Arabia: https://www.vision2030.gov.sa/.

Shaari, A. H., & Maros, M. (2017). Compliments and Compliment Responses Across Borders:

Language and Cultural Change Among The New Generation of Malays. e-Bangi, 14(1),

29-42.

Sharifian, F. (2008). Cultural schemas in L1 and L2 compliment responses: A study of Persian-

speaking learners of English. Journal of Politeness Research, 4, 55-80.

doi:10.1515/PR.2008.003.

Sharma, N., & Shearman, S. M. (2021). Culture Shock and Adaptation: A Narrative Analysis

of Saudi Arabian Students’ Experiences at Tertiary Education Institutions. Global

Partners in Education Journal, 9(1), 48-60.

Souvlakis, N. (2020). A Psychological Ethnographic Study of the Christian Orthodox

Understanding of Evil Eye and Its Effects on Individuals’ Mental Health and

Development of Personhood in the Contemporary Greek Region of Corfu Island. Ph.D.

Thesis. Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Theology and Religion, Durham

University.

261

Schatz, E. (2012). Rationale and procedures for nesting semi-structured interviews in surveys

or censuses. Population Studies, 66(2), 183-195. doi: 10.1080/00324728.2012.658851.

Shahsavari, S., Alimohammadi, B., & Rasekh, A. (2014). Compliment Responses: A

comparative study of native English Speakers and Iranian L2 speakers. Procedia-

Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 1744-1753. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.602.

Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects.

Education for Information, 22(2), 63-75. doi:10.3233/EFI-2004-22201.

Singh, G. (2017). Appreciation and well-being: Proposing Active Constructive Complimenting

(ACC) and Active Constructive Accepting (ACA) to Improve Appreciation. Master

Thesis. The University of Pennsylvania.

Spencer-Oatey, H. (1996). Reconsidering power and distance. Journal of Pragmatics, 26(1),

1-24. doi: 10.1016/0378-2166(95)00047-x.

Sucuoglu, E., & Bahçelerli, N. (2015). A study of compliment responses in English: A case of

North Cyprus. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 3285-3291. doi:

10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.995.

Sweeney, E., & Hua, Z. (2015). Discourse completion tasks. Research Methods in Intercultural

Communication, (pp 212-222). doi: 10.1002/9781119166283.ch14.

Tang, C.-H., & Zhang, G. Q. (2009). A contrastive study of compliment responses among

Australian English and Mandarin Chinese speakers. Journal of pragmatics, 41(2), 325-

345. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2008.05.019.

Tiliouine, H., & Estes, R. (2016). The State of Social Progress of Islamic Societies. doi:

10.1007/978-3-319-24774-8.

Tannen, D. (1990). You Just Don't Understand. Harper Collins New York.

Tarar, A. H., & Hasan, S. S. (2019). Muslim Fundamentalism: Psychological Orientations and

Counter Narratives. Psychology, 9(12), 465-496. doi:10.17265/2159-

5542/2019.12.001.

Tomlinson, J. (1996). Cultural globalisation: Placing and displacing the West. The European

Journal of Development Research, 8(2), 22-35. doi:10.1080/09578819608426663.

262

Trade, A. (2021, January). Saudi Arabia country brief. Retrieved July 19, 2021, from

Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Australian Government:

https://www.dfat.gov.au/geo/saudi-arabia/saudi-arabia-country-brief.

Usunier, J. (2011). Language as a resource to assess cross-cultural equivalence in quantitative

management research. Journal of World Business, 46(3), 314-319.

doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2010.07.002.

Wellman, R., & Kavadias, D. (2021). A Theory of Relational Affliction and Healing: Evil Eye

in Iran and Greece.The Jugaad Project 28.

Wen, T., Heng, C., & Rafik-Galea, S. (2014). Evaluating methods of eliciting language

production data in interlanguage pragmatic research. Journal of Language and

Communication, 1(2), 165-175.

Wolfson, N. (1981). Compliments in cross‐cultural perspective. TESOL Quarterly, 15(2), 117-

124.

Wolfson, N. (1983). An empirically-based analysis of complimenting in American English.

Sociolinguistics and Language Acquisition, 443, 82-95.

Wolfson, N. (1988). The bulge: A theory of speech behavior and social distance. In J. Fine

(Ed), Second Language Discourse: A Textbook of Current Research (Advances In

Discourse Processes) (1st ed.), (pp. 21-38). Abex.

WorldHeritage. (2018). Evil eye. Retrieved May 24, 2021, from World Heritage Encyclopedia:

http://community.worldheritage.org/articles/eng/Evil_eye.

Yoshida, A. (2005). Compliments and Compliment Responses in Japanese Conversation. Ph.D.

Thesis. The Australian National University.

Zantout, Z. (2011). The Compliment Response Behaviour of a Selected Group of Lebanese

University Students: An Exploratory Study. Master Thesis. The American University of

Beirut.

Zhang, J. (2013). Compliments and compliment responses in Philippine English. GEMA

Online™ Journal of Language Studies, 13(1), 25-41.

Zevallos, Z. (2012). Context and outcomes of intercultural education amongst international

students in Australia. Intercultural Education, 23(1), 41-49.

263

Appendices

Appendix A-Giving compliments scenarios for DCT- English version

Giving Compliments Scenarios

Please read the following scenarios and briefly say how you would pay compliments in the

following situations.

If you would not pay a compliment at all in any of the following situations, please indicate N/A

and give a brief explanation of why you would not pay a compliment.

Appearance (close relationship)

1. While having dinner with some family members, you wish to compliment your sister

on her dress. You say:

Possession (close relationship)

2. Your brother has bought an expensive ornament, and you like it very much. You wish

to compliment him. You say:

Skills/ability (close relationship)

3. While your brother is driving a four-wheel-drive car, his driving skill is excellent. You

wish to compliment him. You say:

Personal trait (close relationship)

4. Your friend is always very helpful to you as well as others. You wish to compliment

her. You say:

264

Personal trait (stranger)

1. You go to a gathering and find that the person sitting next to you whom you do not

know is very helpful to other people. You wish to compliment her. You say:

Possession (stranger)

2. You go to a gathering and you see that the person sitting next to you whom you do not

know is wearing an expensive watch and looks very nice to you. You wish to

compliment her. You say:

Skills/ability (stranger)

3. Someone whom you see for the first time is working on the computer. His computer

skills are excellent. You wish to compliment her. You say:

Appearance (stranger)

4. You go to a gathering and the person sitting next to you whom you do not know looks

smart. You wish to compliment her. You say:

Possession (power distance)

1. Your manager goes to work with a nice and expensive watch. You wish to compliment

her. You say:

265

Skill/ability (power distance)

2. Your manager’s computer skills are excellent. You wish to compliment her. You say:

Appearance (power distance)

3. You go to a gathering, and you see your manager looks smart. You wish to compliment

her. You say:

Personal trait (power distance)

4. You always see your manager at work is very helpful to you and your colleagues. You

wish to compliment her. You say:

266

Appendix B- Compliment Scenarios-Arabic version

مواقف الثناء

إداري( )طالب()مدیر إدارة( )مساعد مدیر إدارة( )رئيس قسم( )

الجنس: )رجل( )امرأة(

فأكثر ( ٤٠( )٢٨الى ١٨العمر: )

بالثناء في المواقف التالية. تقومأدناه والقول باختصار كيف المواقفیرجى قراءة

موجز لماذا الثناء غير مناسب إذا كنت ال تقوم بالثناء إطالقا في أي من هذه الموقف، یرجى كتابة غير مناسب مع تقدیم شرح

في هذا الموقف بالنسبة لك.

appearance & close relationship

دخل أخوك وهو یرتدي البشت )المشلح( )العباءة الرجالية(، وبدى عليه انيقا وشكله جميل جدا مما أبهرك منظره عليه ١

أردت أن تثني على مظهره هذا. فكان قولك:كثيرا، ف

possession & close relationship

شترى أخوك سيارة فارهة وأعجبك كثيرا شكلها الخارجي كما جذبتك التقنية العالية التي فيها. فأردت أن تثنى عليها. فكان ا ٢

قولك:

skills & close relationship

ك جمال خطه وروعة في الخط العربي، وعندما رأیت اللوحة األخيرة التي كتبها وصممها، ابهر لدى أخوك مهارة عالية ٣

تصميمه، فمدحته قائال:

personal trait & close relationship

أحد اصدقاؤك دائما في مساعدتك ومساعدة االخرین، وأردت أن تثني على هذه الخصلة الحميدة فكان قولك: ٤

personal trait & stranger

267

خالل حدیثك معه اكتشفت انه یحب مساعدة االخرین كنت في مناسبة مدعو اليها، وجلس بجوارك شخص ال تعرفه، ومن ١

بشكل كبير وملفت للنظر، فأردت أن تثني عليه. فكان قولك:

possession & stranger

كنت في مناسبة مدعو اليها، والحظت أن الشخص الذي یجلس بجوارك والذي ال تعرفه یرتدي ساعة باهظة الثمن وتبدو ٢

على یده فأردت أن تثني عليها. فكان قولك:لك جميلة جدا وأبهرك منظرها

skills & stranger

شخص رأیته ألول مرة وكان یعمل على الكمبيوتر وكانت مهارته علية جدا وتمنيت أن تكون لدیك مهارته في اتقان تعامله ٣

مع البرامج فأردت أن تثني على مهارته التي أبهرتك. فكان قولك:

appearance & stranger

في مناسبة مدعو اليها، والشخص الذي كان یجلس بجانبك ال تعرفه، ویبدو مظهره أنيقا جدا، فأردت أن تثني على كنت ٤

مظهره وأناقته. فكان قولك:

possession & power status

وتبدو لك جميلة جدا وأبهرك منظرها على كان رئيسك في العمل أو استاذك في الجامعة یرتدي ساعة انيقة وغالية الثمن ١

وأردت أن تثني على هذه الساعة. فكان قولك: یده،

skill & power status

وتمنيت ان تكون لدیك مهارته، فأردت أن تثني رئيسك في العمل او استاذك في الجامعة لدیه مهارة عالية في الكمبيوتر، ٢

: قولكعلى هذه المهارة. فكان

appearance & power status

كنت في مناسبة مدعو اليها، ورأیت رئيسك في العمل او استاذك في الجامعة، ویبدو مظهره أنيقا جدا، فأردت أن تثني ٣

على مظهره وأناقته. فكان قولك:

268

personal trait & power status

تالحظ دائما أن رئيسك في العمل او استاذك في الجامعة یساعد زمالءك في العمل أو الجامعة، فأردت أن تثني على هذه ٤

الخصلة الحميدة. فكان قولك:

269

Appendix C- Compliment response scenarios- English version

Compliment responses Scenarios

Please read the following scenarios and briefly say how you would respond to compliments in

the following situations.

If you would not respond to a compliment at all in any of the following situations, please

indicate N/A and give a brief explanation of why you would not respond to a compliment.

Appearance (close relationship)

1. You are having dinner with some family members. Your sister says, “you look smart,

and tonight your clothes suit you.”

Your response would be:

Possession (close relationship)

2. You have bought an expensive ornament. When your brother sees it, he says “It is

beautiful, and the colours are wonderful.”


Skills/ability (close relationship)

3. While you are driving your car, your brother says, “you are a very good driver.”


Personal trait (close relationship)

4. You are always helpful to your family as well as others. A friend of yours complimented

you by saying: “You are so kind. I wish I could help people like you.”


270

Stranger (appearance)

1. You go to a gathering, and there are people whom you do not know, and a lady says to

you “You look smart.”


Stranger (possession)

2. You are sitting in a waiting room and a woman next to you whom you do not know

says, “Your watch must be expensive. I love it.”


Stranger (skills/ability)

3. Someone who is as old as you, and whom you see for the first time sees you working

on the computer. Then he says, “Your computer skills are excellent”.


Stranger (personal trait)

4. Someone whom you see for the first time hears your friends talking to you about how

helpful you are to people. When your friend went, he complimented you by saying:

“You are so kind. I wish I could help people like you.”


Power status (appearance)

1. You go to your work in very nice clothes. When your manager sees you, she says “your

clothes are very nice. You look smart”.


271

Power status (possession)

2. You go to your work in a nice and expensive watch. When your manager sees it, she

says “Your watch is beautiful.”


Power status (skill/ability)

3. Your manager sees you in the library looking for a book on the computer. Then she

says, “Your computer ability is excellent.”


Personal trait (Power status)

4. You are always helpful to your colleagues as well as others. Your manager

complimented you by saying: “You are so kind. I wish I can help people like you.”


272

Appendix D-Compliment responses Scenarios-Arabic version

الثناء مواقف الرد على

)مدیر إدارة( )مساعد مدیر إدارة( )رئيس قسم( )إداري( )طالب(

الجنس: )رجل( )امرأة(

فأكثر ( ٤٠( )٢٨الى ١٨العمر: )

بالرد على الثناء في المواقف التالية. تقومأدناه والقول باختصار كيف المواقفیرجى قراءة

إذا كنت ال تقوم بالثناء إطالقا في أي من هذه الموقف، یرجى كتابة غير مناسب مع تقدیم شرح موجز لماذا الثناء غير مناسب

في هذا الموقف بالنسبة لك.

appearance & close relationship

باءة الرجالية( الذي اشتریته حدیثا، وبدى عليك انيق وشكله جميل جدا دخلت على أخيك وأنت ترتدي البشت )المشلح( )الع ١

فأثني على مظهرك هذا. فكان ردك: مما أبهره منظره عليك كثيرا،

possession & close relationship

فيها. فأثنى عليها شتریت سيارة فارهة وأعجبت أخوك كثيرا حيث شكلها الخارجي جميل جدا كما جذبه التقنية العالية التي ا ٢

ومدحها لك كثيرا. فكان ردك على مدحه هذا:

skills & close relationship

انبهر من جمال خطك لدیك مهارة عالية ٣ التي كتبتها وصممتها، اللوحة األخيرة العربي، وعندما رأى أخوك الخط في

فكان ردك:وروعة تصميمك، فمدحك قائال: "خطك جميل جدا".

273

personal trait & close relationship

أنت دائما في خدمة اسرتك باإلضافة الى الناس االخرین. وأحد اصدقاؤك معجب بهذه الخصلة التي فيك فأثنى عليك قائال: ٤

أنت انسان طيب جدا وأخالقك عالية، فكان ردك:

appearance & stranger

م. فقال لك أحد هؤالء الحضور ال تعرفه مثنيا على مظهرك: أنت في مناسبة مدعو اليها، وبين الحضور اناس ال تعرفه ١

تبدو انيقا بهذا البشت )العباءة الرجالية(، فكان ردك:

possession & stranger

كنت جالس في غرفة االنتظار. وعندما رأى الشخص الذي یجلس بجانبك ساعتك، أعجب بها وأثنى عليها قائال: البد انها ٢

ب هذا النوع من الساعات، فكان ردك: غالية الثمن. أنا أح

skills & stranger

راك شخص ال تعرفه وأنت تعمل على الكمبيوتر بمهارة عالية، فأعجب بهذه المهارة مثنيا عليها قائال: مهارتك في الكمبيوتر ٣

عالية جدا، وأتمنى أن یكون لدى هذه المهارة. فكان ردك:

personal trait & stranger

ال تعرفه كان یجلس بجانبك سمع زمالءك یثنون على مساعدتك للناس وحب الخير لهم. وعندما غادروا، أثنى شخص ما ٤

عليك قائال: انت انسان طيب وأخالقك عالية. فكان ردك:

appearance & power status

أعجب بمظهرك فقال مثنيا ذهبت الى عملك مرتدیا مالبس انيقة، وعندما راك رئيسك في العمل أو استاذك في الجامعة، ١

عليك: تبدو انيقا في مظهرك اليوم، فكان ردك:

274

possession & power status

أعجب بها فقال مثنيا أو استاذك في الجامعة، ذهبت الى عملك مرتدیا ساعة جميلة وأنيقة، وعندما رآها رئيسك في العمل

عليها: ساعتك جميلة جدا، فكان ردك:

skill & power status

وأنت تعمل على الكمبيوتر بمهارة عالية جدا، فأعجب بهذه المهارة وأثنى أو استاذك في الجامعة، راك رئيسك في العمل ٣

عليها قائال: مهارتك في الكمبيوتر عالية. فكان ردك:

personal trait & power status

تقوم بخدمة زمالئك في القسم، فأثنى على هذه الخصلة الحميدة أو استاذك في الجامعة، دائما ما یراك رئيسك في العمل ٤

قائال: انت انسان طيب وأخالقك عالية. فكان ردك:

275

Appendix E - Semi-structured interviews: List of topical questions

Semi-structured interviews: List of topical questions

1) How often do you compliment your family members, friends, and colleagues on their appearance,

skills, possessions, or personal traits? Would you consider using religious expressions when

complimenting them? If yes, which religious expression would you use?

2) If you decided to use this religious expression, would you say it loudly (out loud) or you would say

it in your heart? Explain why?

3) Which compliment topic is most important to you when complimenting a family member, friend, or

colleague?

4) Which compliment topic is least important to you when complimenting a family member, friend, or

colleague?

5) How would you feel if someone admired your appearance, skills, possessions, or some personal

traits, and complimented you without invoking blessings?

6) Do you think that the evil eye may harm people regardless of the religion or culture of the giver of

the compliment when religious expressions are not invoked?

7) Do you think that neglecting the invocation of religious expressions while admiring something and

complimenting you on would affect people’s conversational interaction with you?

8) Would you avoid talking about your success or the success of a family member because of the evil

eye?

9) Do you think that the power of the evil eye is different from one person to another? If yes, would

you avoid talking about your success or the success of a family member with that particular person?

10) Some people put some things on their neck, wrists, in their pockets, or on their cars to ward off the

evil eye. Would you do the same to ward off this evil? If not, can you explain why?

276

Appendix F-Semi-structured interviews- all responses

Sem-Question 1

How often do you compliment your family members, friends, and colleagues on their

appearance, skills, possessions, or personal traits? Would you consider using religious

expressions when complimenting them? If yes, which religious expression would you use?

Young Male

Participant

No.

Response

1 I compliment a lot using Masha Allah, Tabaraka Allah.

2

I compliment a lot, and blessings such as Masha Allah, Tabaraka Allah must not

be excluded from our compliments.

3

I do not use compliments a lot, but I include the name of Allah in my compliments

for a blessing.

4

I would say I am in the middle, and I cannot stress using Masha Allah enough

when any person admires people or things.

5

It is my habit that I do not exaggerate when complimenting, so I can describe

myself in the middle. To give an example of the way I compliment people, I

remember at the wedding of my cousin when I saw him, I complimented him by

saying Masha Allah, Tabaraka Allah, talaqt al uzubia (Masha Allah tabaraka

Allah, you divorced singlehood).

6 I would say in between, and the name of Allah is very important.

277

7

I like complimenting and casting blessings upon people when admiring is deeply

rooted in Islam.

8

I give and receive compliments daily, and of course, Masha Allah would be part

of any compliment.

9

We hear compliments a lot. If I like something and it triggers my attention, I will

begin with Masha Allah, Tabaraka Allah before I compliment.

10

I usually compliment my friends and classmates on their academic achievements.

For example, Masha Allah, derejetuk fi ariadhiat Alyaah, Mabrouk, Allah yibarik

lik (Masha Allah, your score in maths is high, congratulations, may Allah bless

you).

Semi-Question 2

If you decided to use this religious expression, would you say it loudly (out loud) or you would

say it in your heart? Explain why?

Young Male

Participant

No.

Response

1 I say it out loud because I do not want to envy him.

2 I say it out loud because I do not want him to think that I want to envy him.

278

3

Of course, he should hear the name of Allah, otherwise, he would wonder why I

excluded the name of Allah when complimenting him.

4

I intend to say it loud enough so that he is not distracted when he hears the

compliment.

5

The name of Allah and blessings should be said loud enough when complimenting

a person as I do not want to envy him.

6 The evil eye is a fact, and I say Masha Allah out loud so as not to harm anyone.

7

Situations are different but I usually say the name of Allah and His blessings loud

enough, not too loud, not too low.

8

I feel very comfortable when I hear the name of Allah when I am complimented

on something I have, and I do the same when I want to compliment someone.

9

We all want to hear the name of Allah and supplications to ward off the evil eye

that may accompany the compliment given by a person.

10

A good example I can give you to explain this is when I see my friends in a

gathering and they are eating food that I love, the first thing I do is to say Masha

Allah in a voice that everyone can hear. Then I can give compliments, jokes or

talk.

Sem-Question 3

279

Which compliment topic is most important to you when complimenting a family member, friend,

or colleague?

Young Male

Participant

No.

Response

1 Personal traits

2 Personal traits

3 Personal traits

4 Skills

5 Personal traits

6 Skills

7 Personal traits

8 Personal traits

9 Appearance

10 Personal traits

280

Sem-Question 4

Which compliment topic is least important to you when complimenting a family member, friend,

or colleague?

Young Male

Participant

No.

Response

1 Possessions

2 Appearance

3 Appearance

4 Appearance

5 Appearance

6 Possessions

7 Possessions

8 Appearance

9 Possessions

281

10 Appearance

282

Sem-Question 5

How would you feel if someone admired your appearance, skills, possessions, or some personal


Young Male

Participant

No.

Response

1 I will ask him to say Masha Allah because the effect of the evil eye is a fact.

2 I will ask him to mention the name of Allah.

3

I will remind him of Masha Allah, and at the same time, I would utter the religious

expressions in my heart.

4

It depends on the person, but if I could ask him to utter the name of Allah like

Masha Allah, I would do so.

5

Sure, I will have a feeling of fear and anxiety because he did not mention the name

of Allah. The effect of the evil eye is a fact.

6 I will remind him to cast blessings and prayers.

7

I would expect him to include the name of the evil eye; the effect of the evil eye

is a fact.

8

I will not feel reassured and comfortable, so I will remind him of uttering the name

of Allah.

283

9

Our prophet advised us to remember Allah if we admire people and their

belongings by saying Masha Allah tabaraka Allah. Sometimes we forget so we

remind each other of the name of Allah.

10

It depends on the person giving the compliment. If I could ask him to say, Masha

Allah, I would do so. Otherwise, I would end the conversation and nicely leave

this person, without making him think I do not want to speak to him.

Sem-Question 6

Do you think that the evil eye may harm people regardless of the religion or culture of the giver

of the compliment when religious expressions are not invoked?

Young Male

Participant

No.

Response

1

I believe that the effect of the evil eye is a fact in Islam, but I do not know about

other religions. I will utter the blessing myself to deal with compliments given by

non-Muslims.

2

Concerning a compliment given by a non-Muslim, I would say the name of Allah

myself because he does not know what to say in such a situation. If he understands

the culture, I will ask him to say, Masha Allah.

284

3

If the person is not a Muslim, I will explain the situation to him. I will also explain

what he should and should not do when complimenting people.

4

In this case, I will not force a non-Muslim to say Masha Allah because he does

not understand our religion. I will only remind myself of the name of Allah.

5 Religion and culture do not matter in terms of the effect of the evil eye.

6

The evil eye may come out of any person and can harm any person too. Only those

who remember Allah can be protected against its evil.

7

I do not know what to say about the evil eye when a non-Muslim is involved. I

have not come across this situation before, but I will keep saying the name of

Allah in my heart.

8 Yes, there is no doubt about that, we are all human beings.

9

I have no background in other religions, but I believe that the evil eye can cause

harm and damage.

10 The effect of the evil eye is a fact.

Semi-Question 7

Do you think that neglecting the invocation of religious expressions while admiring something

and complimenting you on would affect people’s conversational interaction with you?

Young Male

285

Participant

No.

Response

1

Yes, it does. I fear a person who does not utter the name of Allah when he

compliments me.

2

If I were in a situation like this, I would be hesitant of the person who does not

mention the name of Allah when complimenting.

3 Of course, it does. The effect of the evil eye is a fact.

4

Neglecting religious expressions should not be ignored when we admire a person

or thing. No one would like to be in a situation where they are neglected as the

recipient will not be comfortable.

5

Yes, if I made sure that he intentionally does not mention the name of Allah and

His blessings when complimenting.

6

Intending to neglect religious expressions when complimenting can damage our

relationship.

7

We are obligated not to neglect the name of Allah when complimenting so as not

to envy people.

8

The relationship will not be good if there are no blessings upon what Allah has

given people.

9 I do not think that the conversation would be smooth and comfortable.

286

10

I do not think that the conversation would be normal. It could be a sign that the

giver of the compliment wants to envy the other party.

Semi-Question 8

Would you avoid talking about your success or the success of a family member because of the

evil eye?

Young Male

Participant

No.

Response

1

Yes, I would. The reason is that this is a situation where the effect of the evil eye

is likely to happen.

2 Generally speaking, I would avoid talking about them, situations are different.

3

Usually, in such a situation, I do not talk about them until I am familiar with the

person I am having a conversation with. I would say it depends on the situation.

4 Yes, I would because the effect of the evil eye is a fact.

5

For me, I would not talk about them at all except with those I trust, such as my

family and close friends.

6 I would only talk about them with people whom I trust.

287

7

Although we like sharing our success with others, the effect of the evil eye is a

fact. So, I would be careful when to talk and who will be involved in the

conversation, you know, people like my family and friends.

8 Yes, I would but not with everybody.

9

If I talk about my success in a social gathering and there is a person, I am not

familiar with, I will be nervous because of the evil eye. I would say it depends on

the situation.

10

If the situation allows me to talk, I will talk about them, otherwise, there is no

need to talk.

Semi-Question 9

Do you think that the power of the evil eye is different from one person to another? If yes, would

you avoid talking about your success or the success of a family member with that particular

person?

Young Male

Participant

No.

Response

1 I heard that there are people like that, and I think that is true. If I knew that there

is a person like this, I will not go there. In case I encountered him, I would not

288

talk about something that may trigger his attention. I will keep my conversation

as short as possible.

2 If I knew that this person is present, I would try not to be close to him.

3 Yes, of course, and I will make my conversation very short with him.

4

I only use religious expressions and supplications and I will keep myself distant

from him.

5

Yes, there are people like that. If I had a chance to have a conversation with him,

I would be very cautious, and I will always remind him of the name of Allah and

His blessings.

6

No one can marginalise the role of the evil eye when complimenting. This is

mostly emphasised when the compliment is given by a person who is known for

his evil eye.

7

Sure, some people are famous for their evil eyes and how they harmed others, and

yes, I would avoid such people.

8

Although there are people whose evil eyes can cause harm to others, we cannot

exclude them from a social gathering, for example. However, I would mind my

speech; I will not talk about something special about me or my family, but rather

talk about everyday life in general.

9

I wish not to get involved in a conversation with these people. The effect of the

evil eye is a fact.

289

10

It is difficult to tell whether a person has a powerful evil eye or not, but, of course,

if I know that there is a person like this, I will avoid talking to him.

Semi-Question 10

Some people put some things on their neck, wrists, in their pockets, or on their cars to ward off

the evil eye. Would you do the same to ward off this evil? If not, can you explain why?

Young Male

Participant

No.

Response

1

I do not believe in such things to ward off the evil eye because they are simply

myths, and do not exist in our religion. I only believe that the only way is to

include blessings like Masha Allah.

2

These should not be used to ward off the evil eye; they are only myths. The name

of Allah is the only way to protect us from its evil.

3

What we should do is immunise ourselves against the evil eye with only the name

of Allah and His blessings and nothing else.

4

No, because, as a Muslim, I believe that these activities have nothing to do with

Islam. We are supposed to always remind ourselves of the name of Allah instead

of doing wrong things.

290

5

I have never done any of these actions before, simply because they are against our

religion. We only surround ourselves with the name of Allah and His blessings.

6 I do not do any of them, I think these things are not welcome in Islam.

7

Although the effect of the evil eye is a fact, we should not do such actions, the

name of Allah is enough to ward off its evil.

8

I heard that some people use them in the belief that it neutralises the effect of the

evil eye. However, I only believe that the name of Allah, supplications, and

prayers are enough.

9 I do not believe in using them to ward off the evil eye.

10 I do not think these are permissible in Islam.

Semi-Question 1




Young Female

Participant

No.

Response

1

I always compliment my family members, friends, and colleagues.

Of course, I have to say Masha Allah when giving compliments.

291

2

Not much, I only compliment what I believe deserves complimenting.

Sure, I must use Masha Allah before I compliment someone.

3

I use compliments every day. Not only that, I give compliments over the phone.

It is necessary to use religious expressions, like Masha Allah.

4

I am a person who does not use compliments a lot, even if I see something

attractive or which I admire. However, when I give a compliment, I usually use

religious expressions. I say something like Masha Allah fustanic yehebil (your

dress is crazy, meaning so beautiful).

5

Yes, I compliment a lot, but I must include Masha Allah before saying any

compliment.

6

I use compliments every day. Whenever I see something I like, I say Masha Allah.

For example, If I admire something she has, I say, Masha Allah, hatha hilu alaiki.

Allah yerzugni hatha ashey (Masha Allah, this looks nice on you. May Allah give

me [something] like this.)

7

I always use compliments when talking to people because they make people

happy. Because of the evil eye, it is common sense to use Masha Allah.

8

I use compliments continuously. I like to pray for the receivers of my compliments

to be blessed and ask Allah to give them more.

9

I do compliment but I consider myself in the middle, depending on how close the

person is to me or a stranger. Masha Allah is necessary. For example, wa Allah

hatha ashay hulu (I swear by God, Masha Allah, this thing is nice).

292

10

Compliments are part of our lives and I would feel uncomfortable if Masha Allah

was not used in our communication.

Semi-Question 2



Young Female

Participant

No.

Response

1

I would say it loudly. Masha Allah protects them from anything that may harm

them. It also makes them happy and more confident.

2

I have to say Masha Allah, and I would say it loudly. Some people are sensitive

when complimented because of the evil eye. I say something like Masha Allah

hatha ashay hulu (Masha Allah, this thing is beautiful). When they hear me say

Masha Allah before a compliment, they feel safe from the evil eye. Then they feel

comfortable when having a conversation with you.

3

I say it out loud for two reasons. Firstly, because this comes out involuntarily,

and, secondly, it makes her happy.

4 I prefer to say Masha Allah in my heart but with some people, I have to say it

loudly because I do not want to harm her with the evil eye. I do not want her to

293

think that my compliment has harmed her. If she did not hear something like

Masha Allah, she would not feel relaxed. It may affect our relationship.

5

I would say Masha Allah loudly because if she did not hear it, she would wonder

why I did not say, Masha Allah. Then our conversation cannot be friendly.

6

It depends on the person I am complimenting as some people are very sensitive

towards compliments, so I say it loudly so that they feel pleased when we are

having a conversation. I remember a situation where the conversation soured

because of neglecting to say Masha Allah when giving a compliment.

7

When I want to compliment someone on something, I will let her hear Masha

Allah as this religious expression makes her more cheerful.

8

It depends on the person I'm complimenting. For example, if my relationship with

her is weak, then I will say it loudly. However, if this person is a close friend, I

will say it in my heart. What is important is to say it when giving compliments.

9

I like to hear Masha Allah from other people, and I believe they would like to hear

it from me.

10

I'd rather say it out loud. For example, when I am given a compliment, I feel a

sense of comfort when I hear Masha Allah Tabaraka Allah or Allah yibarik lik

feeha. It also gives me a good impression of that person.

294

Semi-Question 3

Which compliment topic is most important to you when complimenting your family members,

friends, and colleagues?

Young Female

Participant

No.

Response

1 Skills

2 Skills

3 Skills

4 Personal traits

5 Skills

6 Skills

7 Skills

8 Skills

9 Skills

10 Skills

295

Semi-Question 4

Which compliment topic would you avoid when complimenting your family members, friends,

and colleagues?

Young Female

Participant

No.

Response

1 Possessions

2 Possessions

3 Personal traits

4 Skills

5 Possessions

6 Possessions

7 Possessions

8 Appearance

9 Possessions

10 Possession

296

Semi-Question 5



Young Female

Participant

No.

Response

1

If she didn’t say, Masha Allah, I would be tense, [there would be] something

wrong. I would wish she said Masha Allah because I would feel very happy. If

she is not a Muslim, I would ask her to say Masha Allah because she may not

know the culture.

2

If she does not say, Masha Allah, I feel something is missing. I may feel afraid of

her compliment. For example, if she compliments me loudly without invocating

Masha Allah in her compliment by saying: anti tetehadtheen bitalaqa (you speak

fluently), I may be a little afraid, but I would be at ease if she invocates Masha

Allah. Also, my fear of the evil eye will not go away if a compliment is given by

someone who is not from my culture or religion.

3

Fear is still there, but it is not as strong as if the compliment is given by a person

who comes from the same culture.

4

She may have forgotten to say it so I will remind her to say, Masha Allah. If the

giver is not a Muslim, I would wish to hear it from her.

297

5

She is supposed to say, Masha Allah. She knows that she would be in an awkward

situation if she did not say it. If I did not know that person well, not close to me,

I would be concerned. The evil eye may occur from anyone.

6

I will not be worried because I know she would say it in her heart. Our religion

requires us to invoke a religious expression when we exchange compliments. As

for a non-Muslim, I do not know what to say. However, if I did not hear a religious

expression, I would not be in a good mood in that conversation.

7

That is normal because I am sure she would say, Masha Allah. For a non-Muslim

person, I do not know.

8

I would politely ask her to say Masha Allah. from a non-Muslim perspective, I do

not know what to say.

9

I would be surprised if she did not say it. If she is a good person, she would know

that our religion taught us not to harm others. I do not know what to say about

non-Muslims, I have not been in this situation before.

10

It depends on the giver of the compliment. If this person is a family member, a

close person to me, or a person who is well known as an honest person, I would

be ok. If this was not the case, I would begin wondering.

298

Semi-Question 6



Young Female

Participant

No.

Response

1

The evil eye may occur regardless of the religion of the giver of the

compliment.

2 Yes.

3

Sure, but I would be more fearful if the compliment was given by a person who

comes from the same culture.

4 Yes.

5

I live in a society where you expect to hear Masha Allah when a person gives a

compliment. However, if I am in a situation where Masha Allah is not included

when someone compliments me, I will be worried. The evil eye of the giver of a

compliment can affect the receiver of that compliment be it a Muslim or non-

Muslim.

6 I think so.

7

Yes, but I find it difficult to explain the harm of the evil eye resulting from

compliments given by non-Muslim people.

299

8

The evil eye is true, and it can harm people who do not ward off the evil eye by

invoking blessing when they exchange their compliments. It may be difficult for

me if the compliment is given by a non-Muslim who does not believe in what I

believe. It is possible for a non-Muslim to not care about compliments as we do.

It may depend on the person. For example, if the non-Muslim is interested in the

evil eye, it may strike the receiver of that compliment.

9 Of course.

10 The evil eye comes out from bad people whether he is a Muslim or not.

Semi-Question 7


and complimenting you on it would affect people’s conversational interaction with you?

Young Female

Participant

No.

Response

1

I would feel that something is missing in our conversation. I would feel that our

conversation is not smooth.

2

I would feel uncomfortable when the invocation of religious expressions is

neglected when giving a compliment.

300

3 Sure, I would be afraid of envy.

4

It may affect their conversational interaction, mainly people you are not too close

to. It depends on the people you are speaking with. For example, if my mother

complimented me, I would not fear the evil eye regardless of not invocating the

evil eye.

5

Yes, of course, because the person did not say any religious expressions like

Masha Allah. Also, in the future, I would be afraid when speaking with her. I will

be very cautious to not say something that may attract her attention.

6 Our relationship will continue, but there will be some fear of her.

7

It will not seriously damage their relationships with me but neglecting religious

expressions may leave some question marks on my conversational interaction

with those who ignore them.

8

People are different. Some people get affected and some do not. I believe it is rare

that neglecting the invocation of religious expressions will affect people’s

conversation because it is expected that the giver of a compliment will include it

in one way or another.

9

I think it is necessary not to ignore them as the other person may lose her

confidence in that person.

10

At least she should say something that gives a positive signal as a message of

reassurance to the other party. Otherwise, their conversation would not be normal.

This is strange to me.

301

Semi-Question 8


evil eye?

Young Female

Participant

No.

Response

1

I like to share my achievements. I would like people to know about my success.

However, the evil eye is still present when talking about them with people.

2

Yes, I would avoid talking about my success or achievements with people who

are not close enough to me.

3 Yes.

4 In this situation, I would not fear the evil eye.

5

Sure, I will not be talking about myself or my success with people who intend to

harm us.

6 I usually try to avoid being in this kind of situation. Honestly, I fear the evil eye.

7

There are instances where I can talk about my success, however, there are

situations where I try to avoid presenting them. For example, I would avoid

talking about my success if the person did not have what I had. Also, it depends

on how close or unfamiliar that person is to me.

302

8

I like talking about my success or the success of a family member, depending on

the person I am speaking to, but only people I feel comfortable with, such as a

close friend.

9 Sometimes, yes.

10

If there is someone whom I do not know sitting with us, I would not talk about

any achievement until I know her character. Not only because of the evil eye but

also, she might think that I am boasting.

Semi-Question 9



person?

Young Female

Participant

No.

Response

1

Yes. Although I have not met such a person, in case such a thing happened, I

would avoid talking to her. If I were in a situation like this, I would avoid the

details with her. Also, I would remind her to say, Masha Allah.

2

I don't know if there are any studies or not, but I've heard from people that the

power of the evil eye is different from one person to another. Yes, I would avoid

talking with her.

303

3 Yes, the power of the evil eye is different from one person to another.

4

Of course, if I knew any person has a powerful evil eye, I would avoid talking

about any success.

5 Honestly, I would feel afraid of this person. I would not talk with her in detail.

6

Frankly speaking, yes, some people are famous for their evil eyes. Yes, I will

avoid speaking to that person.

7 Yes, and I would avoid involving myself in a conversation with him.

8

Yes, I would not talk about anything that may trigger her attention. In case I talked

about it, I would remind that person to invoke a blessing by asking her to say,

Masha Allah.

9

I heard that there are some people whose evil eye is powerful, but I have not seen

these people yet. Of course, I would try not to have a conversation with them. If I

am involved in this situation, I would be very careful.

10 Yes, I wish not to be involved in this kind of conversation.

Semi-Question 10



304

Young Female

Participant

No.

Response

1

I would not do it because it is forbidden. Religious expressions are enough to

ward off the evil eye.

2

I never do such things to ward off the evil eye. In our religion, these are myths,

and I never believe in them.

3

No, I would not do it. This is not part of our religion. Religious expressions are

enough.

4

No, I prefer to say it rather than do like these people. I would say the religious

expression when speaking with people.

5

No, because I believe these activities are trivial things. I believe in the invocation

of religious expressions as the only way to ward off the evil eye, nothing else.

6

I feel that religious expressions are enough to ward off the evil eye. No need to

use other things like these.

7

These have nothing to do with warding off the evil eye, only religious expressions

do.

8

There is no need for these. A person who maintains the supplications does not

need to use these things.

9 A Muslim is not supposed to use these actions.

305

10

What for! I believe that considering religious expressions such as Masha Allah

when communicating is sufficient.

Semi-Question 1




Male Subordinate

Participant

No.

Response

1

I compliment when it is proper to compliment. Let's say I am a moderate person.

Of course, Masha Allah, Tabaraka Allah. They must be the first thing to think

about when you want to compliment someone or something.

2 I am moderate in my compliments, and I say, Masha Allah.

3 I use compliments a lot. I always include Masha Allah in my compliments.

4 I would say moderate.

5

I use compliments a lot, and I am sincere when I compliment someone. I always

begin my compliments by saying, Masha Allah, la quata illa billah, assalah ala

annabi.

306

6 I am in the middle. I always use Masha Allah at the beginning.

7

Frankly speaking, I compliment you a lot. Masha Allah is necessary when

complimenting a person.

8

I would say I am moderate. The person should not forget religious expressions

like Masha Allah and blessings as they are very important when admiring what

we see.

9 I would put myself in the middle. Masha Allah must come first.

10 I am a person who compliments a lot. I always say, Masha Allah.

Semi-Question 2



Male Subordinate

Participant

No.

Response

1

I say them out loud, otherwise, there is no point in saying it inaudibly. Also, the

receiver may wonder why I did not say them when I complimented him on his

watch, phone or car. He may not show me anything in the future because of the

evil eye. We like using the name of Allah in everything. So, I say, for example,

307

Masha Allah, Tabaraka Allah, jawalik hu lu, Masha Allah (Masha Allah,

Tabaraka Allah, your cell phone is good and sweet, Masha Allah).

2

Sometimes, I say it out loud to avoid any doubts that may arise. The evil eye is

true. There are also situations where I mutter to myself when complimenting,

depending on the conversational interaction.

3

I do not say it out loud, depending on the situation. For example, when I admire

my four-year son, I say Masha Allah, but my son will not hear it. However, if I

admire my colleague, I will say Masha Allah loudly to make him reassured.

4

The first thing I do when I see something I like, I say, Masha Allah, Tabaraka

Allah to stop the effect of the evil eye. My friend must hear them. If he does not

hear me saying Masha Allah, Tabaraka Allah, or the name of Allah, he may think

that I want to cast the evil eye.

5

When I enter a place, I must say, in a loud voice Masha Allah, la quata illa billah,

assalah ala annabi. If I did not say it out loud, the person might be stuck because

of the evil eye.

6

I say it out loud, but sometimes I say it in a very low voice, depending on the

situation. If you do not say it, the evil eye may affect the person.

7

The receiver of a compliment must hear the name of Allah like Masha Allah so

that no harm befalls him. The effect of the evil eye is a fact.

8

It would be better for the person you are complimenting to hear you saying

religious expressions because a phrase like Masha Allah would make his heart full

of peace and comfort, and any doubts relating to the evil eye will fade away. For

308

example, when someone visits your home and enters the house, he starts his

conversation by saying Masha Allah, you feel positive towards him. However,

when he enters and just looks around the house without saying Masha Allah, you

will feel alienated from him.

9

I say religious expressions loud enough because people fear the evil eye. So, when

they hear them out loud, they feel reassured.

10

Certainly, I raise my voice when complimenting because when people hear Masha

Allah, it will have a positive effect on them.

Semi-Question 3


or colleague?

Male Subordinate

Participant

No.

Response

1 Personal traits

2 Personal traits

3 Skills

4 Personal traits

309

5 Personal traits

6 Personal traits

7 Appearance

8 Skills

9 Personal traits

10 Skills

Semi-Question 4


or colleague?

Male Subordinate

Participant

No.

Response

1 Possessions

2 Possessions

3 Possessions

4 Possessions

310

5 Possessions

6 Possessions

7 Possessions

8 Possessions

9 Possessions

10 Possessions

Semi-Question 5



Male Subordinate

Participant

No.

Response

1

I will ask him by saying: please remember Allah, and I will not hesitate to ask him

that. If he is a non-Muslim, it would be a disaster for me, but I will say them

myself. I would rather not tell or show him anything that may trigger his

admiration towards me. Since he is a non-Muslim, He will not be able to say

religious expressions.

2 I will ask him to say, Masha Allah.

311

3 The effect of an evil eye is a fact.

4

I will respond by asking him, please say Masha Allah. If the situation does not

allow me to ask him, I will say them myself.

5 I will ask him to say, salli ala annabi, Masha Allah.

6 I will remind him of saying, Masha Allah. I will also keep saying it.

7

He must use religious expressions. If I did not hear them, I would ask him to say

them.

8 I will remind him of saying the name of Allah. I will ask him to say, Masha Allah.

9

There is no doubt that the name of Allah opens our hearts. If a person does not

mention Allah when he admires something, there will be no harmony.

10 I will ask him to say, Masha Allah. The evil eye is very common in tribal areas.

Semi-Question 6



Male Subordinate

Participant

No.

Response

312

1 Yes, of course. Any human being has an evil eye.

2

Yes, of course, the evil eye is always present, and Allah must be present to

protect us.

3

As I said, the effect of an evil eye is a fact, but the problem is how I would explain

the evil eye to a non-Muslim. I may explain the concept to him. I will try to tell

him that if a person notices something admirable and triggers his attention, he

should use religious expressions.

4

For a non-Muslim, I would try to explain the concept to him or ask him to say

them differently.

5

There is no difference between Muslims and non-Muslims in terms of the evil

eye.

6 Yes, the evil eye is destructive.

7

If he is not a Muslim, he will not be able to say a religious expression. It is difficult

to imagine. I will say them instead.

8

There is no doubt about that, but the situation might be different when a non-

Muslim is involved. I would say the religious expressions myself when a non-

Muslim compliments me.

9

My feeling would remain the same towards compliments, be it from a Muslim or

non-Muslim.

10 The evil eye may come out from any person.

313

Semi-Question 7



Male Subordinate

Participant

No.

Response

1

Of course, the evil eye is true. If I did not feel comfortable with the person with

whom I am having a conversation, it would be impossible for me to talk about

anything admirable.

2

Yes, of course. Some people may pray for you when they hear a religious

expression while complimenting because they feel reassured.

3 Allah is essential in all aspects of our lives.

4

When you use religious expressions such as Masha Allah, you break the fear

barrier that he has, and in the future, he will not be afraid of me. But in case I do

not use them, he feels anxious, and he may have a negative attitude towards me.

He may even tell people that I do not use them in my compliments.

5

Using religious expressions in our compliments gives the impression that you are

a comfortable person, and you wish people well. Consequently, you will make

them talk to you comfortably.

6

Religious expressions including supplications are crucial factors to ward off the

evil eye.

314

7

Religious expressions give us peace of mind. A compliment without the name of

Allah will not make people feel comfortable.

8 I cannot imagine compliments without the name of Allah accompanying them.

9 The name of Allah should not be neglected when exchanging compliments.

10

The effect of the evil eye is a fact. I was affected by the evil eye. So, if the receiver

of your compliment did not hear the name of Allah or blessing from you when

complimenting him, it will negatively affect his psyche and he will lose

psychological stability.

Semi-Question 8


evil eye?

Male Subordinate

Participant

No.

Response

1 Yes, I would, especially those who do not pray.

2 It depends on the social context, situations are different.

3 It is better not to talk about them.

4 Yes, I would. The effect of the evil eye is a fact.

315

5

Not really because I always use the supplications our religion has taught us to say

when we are in such situations.

6 Maybe, depending on the current situation.

7 I never speak of it, especially nowadays.

8

Every human being has a degree of admiration, so if he does not include the name

of Allah in his compliments, the evil eye may occur.

9 Not really, but it depends on the situation.

10

I used to talk about them, but after I was harmed by the evil eye, I began to avoid

talking about something that may attract people to me, depending on the situation.

Semi-Question 9



person?

Male Subordinate

Participant

No.

Response

1

I worked with a person like this, and I used to avoid him by being intelligent when

having a conversation.

316

2 Yes, and I may avoid him. However, I have not been in a such situation.

3 Yes, they live among us, and of course, I would avoid him whenever possible.

4

Sure, there are people like that, and I will be diplomatic with them. If I had a

chance, I would give him advice, in a nice way, that whenever he admires

something, he should use religious expressions.

5 I will stay away from him or try to avoid him.

6

I heard that there are societies in which there are such people, but I have not

spoken to them. In case I had a chance to talk to this person, I would be very brief.

7

Sure, some people are famous for their powerful evil eyes. I would avoid him as

much as possible. I know a village where some of them can cast birds down

because of their powerful evil eye.

8 Mostly, I would avoid him.

9

It is well known that there are some people who have malicious souls. That is why

their evil eye is powerful and I would try to avoid them.

10

The first thing a person should always do is to immunise himself in the name of

Allah. After that, we should evaluate the situation to take proper action when

dealing with such people. I think it is better to make talking with him as short as

possible.

317

Semi-Question 10



Male Subordinate

Participant

No.

Response

1 I do not believe in them, but I heard that some people do.

2 I only believe in what Allah wants us to do, not these actions of course.

3 All these are hocus-pocus. They are false beliefs.

4 I do not believe in them.

5 I never use them.

6 No, I do not, but it may exist in some societies.

7 I do not use them.

8 There is no evidence for such behaviour in our religion.

9

I do not believe in them. It indicates that those who practise them do not possess

strong faith in their Lord.

10 These are forbidden in Islam; we are not supposed to use them.

318

Semi-Question 1




Subordinate Female

Participant

No.

Response

1

I would consider myself in the middle, and also it depends on what I see. It must

be something that deserves complimenting.

Of course, I always consider religious expressions before complimenting them. I

believe that they are necessary. The first thing I do when I admire something, I

always say religious expressions. I always say these three religious expressions:

La kuwata illa billah, Allahuma salli ala annabi, and Masha Allah before I

compliment someone.

2

I would say I am in the middle.

Religious expressions come first when complimenting.

Masha Allah

3

I am an average person, in between.

Yes, yes, yes, I have to think about religious expressions such as Masha Allah.

4 I am a middle person.

319

I thank Allah that I always use religious expressions when complimenting a

person.

5

I am not a much giver of compliments.

The religious expression Masha Allah is always on the tip of my tongue. I am

always known for using Masha Allah.

6

I would say in the middle.

Masha Allah la quata illa billah is a must when we admire anyone or thing.

7

I compliment you a lot.

Sure, I would use religious expressions. I say something like Masha Allah, hatha

hulu. (Masha Allah, this is nice).

8

I compliment you a lot.

Religious expressions are necessary for our compliments.

9

I would classify myself as a moderate compliment giver.

I always remember Masha Allah, Tabaraka Allah

10

I consider myself an average person when complimenting.

The religious expression that always comes to my lips when I compliment

someone is Masha Allah.

320

Semi-Question 2



Subordinate Female

Participant

No.

Response

1

Of course, I say them loudly because some people become fearful of the evil eye

and they may think that I may envy them if they do not hear religious expressions.

2 I say it out loud because it makes a person feel comfortable.

3

I say it out loud to ward off the evil eye. It makes our relationship with others

good. At the same time, neglecting religious expressions sends a negative message

to the receiver.

4

I like to raise my voice when I say Masha Allah or Masha Allah tabaraka Allah

when complimenting. Not only that, I always say Masha Allah whenever I go into

a place because this will make the receiver of my compliment comfortable and

protected from my evil eye.

5

Usually, I say it aloud. For example, If I see someone wearing a beautiful dress, I

say Masha Allah straight away. Sure, this would make her feel reassured.

6

I like to say it out loud so that the receiver can hear Masha Allah because our

religion commands us to utter these supplications before undertaking any action.

We learned this from our religion.

321

7

I have to make the receiver of my compliment hear the religious expression

because the evil eye is true.

8 I say it out loud so that she is relaxed and not afraid of the evil eye.

9

I say it out loud because it protects us and makes us more friendly and creates a

strong affection between us.

10

I always say it out loud so that the person can hear it because this makes the person

feel at ease.

Semi-Question 3


or colleague?

Subordinate Female

Participant

No.

Response

1 Personal traits

2 Personal traits

3 Skills

4 Personal traits

322

5 Personal traits

6 Skills

7 Appearance

8 Personal traits

9 Possessions

10 Personal traits

Semi-Question 4


or colleague?

Subordinate Female

Participant

No.

Response

1

Possessions

I would not compliment a person on what material things she possesses but would

compliment her on the good personal character she has.

2 Possessions

3 Appearance

323

4 Possessions

5 Possessions

6 Possessions

7 Possessions

8 Possessions

9 Personal traits

10 Appearance

Semi-Question 5



Subordinate Female

Participant

No.

Response

1

If I did not hear her saying a religious expression when she complimented me on

something, I would tell her to say, simply, Masha Allah. That does not mean that

I doubt that she intends to envy me, but it is a must and she would not be surprised

if I told her to do so. She knows this already.

324

2

If two women complimented me on something, one used a religious expression in

her compliment while the other did not, I would feel more comfortable with the

one who used the religious expression. Furthermore, would be a little bit fearful

with the one who did not mention any religious expression.

3 I would feel goose bumps.

4

If I were in a situation like this, I would remind her to say a religious expression.

If I were complimented by a non-Muslim, I would not tell her to say, Masha Allah.

Instead, I would keep saying it to myself during the compliment.

5

If I heard her compliment but did not say, Masha Allah, I would remind her to say

it.

6

These situations occur a lot. We were raised to say Masha Allah, but people may

forget to say it when they admire a person or thing.

7 I would feel somehow sceptical. Then I would say it in my heart.

8

If I did not hear her saying a religious expression while complimenting, I would

ask her to say it straight away.

9

I would not accuse someone of harming people, but I feel that I am more

comfortable with those who remember Masha Allah, Tabaraka Allah. I feel more

comfortable with them.

10

Complimenting increases my enthusiasm and makes me stick to the work that I

do. However, ignoring religious expressions makes me feel uncomfortable with

this person.

325

Semi-Question 6



Subordinate Female

Participant

No.

Response

1

Of course, I am 100% sure the evil eye can harm people. For example, I was hurt

by a friend of mine when I was at a wedding. I went faint that night. I was sick for

about a month. When she knew that I was sick, she came to me and told me that

she admired me that night and said, “I may have harmed you”. That is why

religious expressions are important.

2 Yes, of course, the evil eye always exists.

3 Of course, the evil eye is true.

4 Yes, of course.

5 Yes, the evil eye is true.

6 Yes.

7 The evil eye can harm people regardless of the giver of the compliment.

8

Yes, that is true. The evil eye can harm regardless of the source, Muslim or non-

Muslim.

326

9

Yes, of course. For example, I have a non-Muslim maid. If she admires my

cooking, I ask her to say, Masha Allah, Tabaraka Allah.

10

Yes, it is very common, but my attitude may change if the compliment is given

by a non-Muslim. They may be different, I am not sure, I do not know. However,

the evil eye is true.

Semi-Question 7



Subordinate Female

Participant

No.

Response

1 Of course, the evil eye is true.

2 Yes, of course.

3 Religious expressions and Allah make us always calm and peaceful.

4 Yes.

5

I would feel reassured when hearing Masha Allah. If I did not hear her saying

Masha Allah, I would ask her to say it.

327

6

Religious expressions find their way into people’s hearts and have a positive

impact on us.

7

Religious expressions should not be neglected. They make us peaceful and

comfortable.

8 Yes, of course. Religious expressions must be present.

9

I always remember Allah when I am complimenting someone. I feel it

automatically comes with our conversation. We should include them when

exchanging compliments. It would be very nice if a person remembers Masha

Allah. I personally like the person who says it before complimenting me.

10

It makes me tense, and it negatively affects me because we always hear that

someone was harmed by the evil eye.

Semi-Question 8


evil eye?

Subordinate Female

Participant

No.

Response

1 I would be careful.

328

2

If I trust her, I will talk but if she is not close to me, I will avoid talking to her

about something admirable.

3 I do sometimes, but it depends on the situation.

4 Situations are sometimes different.

5 It depends on the situation.

6 Yes, but I have to evaluate the situation first then I will decide.

7 Yes.

8

Normally, I talk about my accomplishments or the achievements of a member of

my family as long as I protect myself with the remembrance of Allah. However,

anxiety about the evil eye remains, so a person must always immunise herself with

religious expressions.

9

For me, it is normal to talk about my achievements or the achievements of

someone in my family.

10 Honestly, yes. The evil eye is true.

329

Semi-Question 9



person?

Subordinate Female

Participant

No.

Response

1

Yes, I swear this is true. I even see that within my family. For example, my

brother’s wife, although she is a very kind-hearted person and I love her so much,

her eye is so powerful. Whenever she admires something, it gets harmed.

2

Sure, of course, the evil eye is different from person to person.

If I knew that she had a powerful evil eye, I would not talk to her in detail, usually

common things.

3

Yes, there are people like that.

The best way is to keep the conversation short with them.

4

Yes of course. It happened to me and to the people who were next to me more

than once from the same person. Although this is true, a person can ward off its

harm by using religious expressions. For this particular person, I would say billahi

alaiki use religious expression (Please say, Masha Allah).

5 Yes. I would treat her differently.

330

6

Yes, I heard that there are people who are famous for harming people with their

eyes, but I have not seen them.

Yes, I would avoid talking to that person if I made sure that she can harm people

when she admires something.

7

Yes.

If I knew that this person could harm people by the evil eye, I would be very

cautious. Also, I would try to ward off this evil by saying more religious

expressions and supplications.

8

Yes, there may be people whose evil eyes are very powerful. I would avoid talking

to these people whenever possible.

9

Yes, but I would not avoid talking to her. I would try not to talk too much with

her. Also, I would not go into detail with her because there is a possibility that she

may harm me, especially if she is known for her evil eye.

10

Yes, if I made sure that this person is known for her evil eye, I would not be keen

on being in a gathering in which she is at.

Semi-Question 10



331

Subordinate Female

Participant

No.

Response

1 Although see some people do, I do not believe in these myths.

2 No, I do not believe in using them. Religious expressions are enough protection.

3 I never use these myths. I only use religious expressions to ward off the evil eye.

4 I strongly believe in Allah to ward off the evil eye, but I also use black seeds.

5

Allah is the only one and has the power to protect us. Thus, there is no need to use

such things.

6

I never do any of these actions. Religious expressions are enough for me to be

protected.

7 I do not believe in them as such actions are not recommended in our religion.

8

I do not use any of these things because if your immune yourself to religious

expressions and supplications, you will be protected. Other than that, remains

myths and non-religious.

9 This is against our religion. I never use them.

10

I do not use any of these myths. I do not believe in them. Only Allah has the power

to protect us.

332

Semi-Question 1




Male Superior

Participant

No.

Response

1

I am moderate in my compliments. Of course, I would always consider the name

of Allah in my compliments.

2

I like complimenting people. I compliment a lot, and I mostly begin with Masha

Allah.

3

I would classify myself in the middle, and undoubtedly begin my compliments

with Masha Allah Tabaraka Allah.

4

I always use compliments. People need compliments in the house, work …etc. I

usually mention the religious expression before I give a compliment. for example,

Masha Allah, ent ya flan Mumtaz fi hatha alamel (Masha Allah, you are excellent

in this job).

5

I always say the religious expression la quata illa billah first when I admire

something.

6

I love complimenting and I use it a lot daily. I say, Masha Allah, Tabaraka Allah

first, followed by my compliment.

333

7

I am moderate in my compliments, and the religious expression baraka Allah feek

must come first.

8 My friends say that I give compliments a lot with the name of Allah included.

9

I would say I am in the middle, and of course, any person would consider the

name of Allah when complimenting.

10 I compliment a lot, and I always use Masha Allah, Tabaraka Allah.

Semi-Question 2



Male Superior

Participant

No.

Response

1

In my compliments, I always make sure that a person hears the name of Allah

because we have learnt from our social experiences that if this person did not hear

it, he may think of something negative. The name of Allah in our compliments

solidifies our communication processes.

2

The person must hear it to be reassured because if something bad happens, he may

relate it to the evil eye.

334

3

If the person is in front of me, I will say it out loud, of course. This is because we

are, as Muslims, supposed to do so to ward off the evil eye.

4

I make sure the person hears the religious expression because I don't want him to

be harmed.

5

When I say la quata illa billah, I make sure that the receiver of a compliment

hears it. We were raised with this habit because our religion requires us to bless

each other when complimenting.

6

I say the religious expression loud enough so that the receiver can hear it,

otherwise, he may think of the issue of the evil eye.

7

My voice should be heard when I utter both the religious expression and the

compliment as doing so makes the conversation very harmonious.

8

Some people may get upset if they don't hear you say the name of Allah or may

enter into a spiral of obsessions, depending on the person.

9

It is important to say it out loud as there are people who may have concerns

resulting from fear of the evil eye. Also, Islam taught us to bless what we love or

admire.

10

I make sure that Masha Allah, Tabaraka Allah is heard by the receiver of my

compliment and those who are present.

335

Semi-Question 3


or colleague?

Male Superior

Participant

No.

Response

1 Skills

2 Skills

3 Personal traits

4

Personal traits

5 Appearance

6 Personal traits

7 Personal traits

8 Skills

9 Skills

10 Skills

336

Semi-Question 4


or colleague?

Male Superior

Participant

No.

Response

1 Appearance

2 Possessions

3 Possessions

4 Possessions

5 Possessions

6 Possessions

7 Appearance

8 Appearance

9 Possessions

10 Possessions

337

Semi-Question 5



Male Superior

Participant

No.

Response

1 I will ask him straight away to include the name of Allah.

2

I would first remember the name of Allah and supplications. I would also be tense

inside.

3

I will ask him, nicely, to say it. I will be very comfortable if he includes the name

of Allah.

4

Some people forget the religious expression when complimenting, and this is

normal. In this case, I would remind him of the name of Allah. For example, I

would say, brother, may Allah reward you, you complimented me on such and

such, but you forgot the name of Allah.

5

Any person would love to hear the name of Allah when complimented on

something because he feels psychological comfort.

6 I will notify him to say the name of Allah.

7

When I am in such a situation, I wish that the giver of a compliment would include

the name of Allah when complimenting me. The effect of the evil eye is a fact.

338

8

For me, I understand such a situation, so I keep remembering Allah. I also don't

pay too much attention to these things, but some people may ask the giver of the

compliment to utter the name of Allah because of the evil eye.

9 Such a situation may happen, and I will remind that person of the name of Allah.

10

On a personal level, although the effect of the evil eye is a fact, I do not pay

attention to it, but if the compliment is on my son, for example, I have to make

sure that the giver of a compliment says, Masha Allah. If I did not hear it when

the compliment was given, I would politely ask him to say it. The name of Allah

must be present when complimenting.

Semi-Question 6



Male Superior

Participant

No.

Response

1

The effect of the evil eye is a fact, but I do not how to react if a compliment is

given by a non-Muslim.

2

I have not studied other cultures and religions, but the effect of the evil eye is a

fact, and anyone can cast its evil and harm others.

339

3 Yes, evil is within every human being.

4

The evil eye can harm regardless of race or religion. This is what we miss here, in

Makkah, no non-Muslim. However, we, as Muslims, should protect ourselves

with religious expressions and supplications, in the morning and at night.

5 The harm of the evil eye has nothing to do with a person's religion or culture.

6 Religion does not matter, and the effect of the evil eye is a fact.

7 Yes, of course.

8

The effect of the evil eye is a fact whether the giver of a compliment is a Muslim

or non-Muslim, no doubt about that.

9

The effect of the evil eye is a fact, and if the giver of a compliment is non-Muslim,

I would say the name of Allah myself to be protected from the evil eye that may

result from his admiration.

10

Usually, if I saw a person admiring something, I would ask him to utter Masha

Allah regardless of the person’s religion or culture.

Semi-Question 7



Male Superior

340

Participant

No.

Response

1

In my opinion, neglecting religious expressions can have a great negative impact

on our communications with others.

2

Religious expressions must be used to expel bad obsessions from a person. For

example, if a person is not accepted for a job, he may attribute this failure to the

evil eye. Therefore, neglecting it may negatively affect the human psyche. Some

people may avoid talking to you in the future, just because you neglected the name

of Allah.

3

Some people are sensitive to issues related to the evil eye, so the name of Allah

is very important in calming those people. Some people may stop talking to you

and leave if they notice you neglect the name of Allah.

4

Hearing a religious expression is a reassuring factor. So, neglecting it may affect

the harmony of the two parties.

5

Sometimes, neglecting religious expressions puts something uncomfortable in the

heart, especially when the compliment is on something valuable to the person. For

example, you may have noticed that some people ask you to say Masha Allah if

you forgot to include it in your compliment.

6 Neglecting the name of Allah when complimenting can be destructive.

7

The evil eye may be present in the mind of the receiver of my compliment. So,

when he hears the name of Allah when complimenting him, he is psychologically

pleased. The name of Allah should not be neglected.

341

8

I am 100% sure that religious expressions are a very crucial factor in people’s

conversation. Thus, neglecting them when complimenting people may have

negative impacts on, not only people's communication but also their relationships.

9

The fear of the evil eye can leave negative effects on a person. Thus, neglecting

the invocation of the name of Allah when admiring someone or something can

make this person alienate you. On the other hand, hearing the name of Allah when

complimenting creates confidence and stability in a person. For example, If the

person neglects the name of Allah when complimenting me, I begin feeling

nervous.

10

Of course, some people may wonder if they do not hear the name of Allah as they

expect to hear it when being admired.

342

Semi-Question 8


evil eye?

Male Superior

Participant

No.

Response

1 As long as the name of Allah is included, I have no issue talking about them.

2

Sometimes, the evil eye may be a reason not to talk about my achievements, but

there are also other factors may that stop me from talking about them. In the last

two years, I preferred not to talk.

3

Situations are different. If I am within my family, yes, I would. However, if the

people around are not close enough to me, I would not, depending on the situation.

4

It is better not to share such information with others as the effect of the evil eye is

a fact.

5 I may avoid talking about them in certain situations, but not all the time.

6 It depends on the situation; I rarely talk about them.

7 Yes, I would.

343

8

Not at all, for example, when my daughter was accepted into medical school, I

talked about her success to my colleagues. Some of my colleagues blame me when

I speak this way because they think that the evil eye may harm my daughter.

9 Yes, I would.

10

I rarely avoid talking about them, depending on the topic of the compliment. If

the compliment is on things that are considered normal among people, I would

talk about them, whereas if the compliment is on something that triggers people’s

attention, I would rather not talk; the effect of the evil eye is a fact.

Semi-Question 9



person?

Male Superior

Participant

No.

Response

1

I heard about these people, but I have not been involved with them. If I happened

to meet someone like this, I would be cautious.

2

I witnessed some of them. I used to be a leader of a club in my neighborhood. One

day while were working, a man came in, when the people in my group saw him,

they all ran away. Later, I have been told that this person has a powerful evil eye.

344

3 Yes, there are people like that, and yes, I would avoid him.

4

This is very common, and I would be normal with those people, but I will protect

myself with the name of Allah and supplications.

5

According to my experience, yes, there are people like that, and I would avoid

them. I had a bad experience with one of them. After I was harmed by him, I went

to him and told him please move away from me, leave me alone.

6

Yes, there are people like that in our societies, and I always try to avoid them as

much as I can.

7

It is hard for me to classify people like that because I have not seen them, but the

evil eye exists. If I had a chance to meet that person, I would avoid him, of course.

8

Yes, there are people whose evil eye is more powerful than others. I have not

experienced having a conversation with them, but I would treat them the same

way I treat others. It is important to say that the effect of the evil eye is a fact, but

we should be wise when giving our judgements or classifying people based on

their evil eye. There are situations where the evil eye can be very sensitive.

9 That is true, and I would avoid him.

10

Yes, there are people known for their powerful evil eyes. I would not only avoid

talking to him, but I would also avoid making a friendly relationship.

345

Semi-Question 10



Male Superior

Participant

No.

Response

1 Simply, I do not believe in them.

2 These actions are not known in my community.

3 These are not Islamic rituals.

4 No, no, this is too much.

5

These myths may be still used in some societies, but we are not supposed to use

them.

6 I never use such myths.

7 Frankly, this is the first time I hear it.

8

There is no doubt that Islam has shaped our culture, but my studies in psychology

also made me resist such myths.

9

In such situations, our actions should be according to Islam, and I do not think

that they exist in our religion. Religious expressions and supplications are the only

way to ward off the evil eye.

346

10

Even though I believe that the effect of the evil eye is a fact, I do not believe that

using them would ward off its evil. I believe that the only way to protect us is in

the name of Allah.

Semi-Question 1




Superior Female

Participant

No.

Response

1

I am middle person.

I always begin my compliment by saying Masha Allah, la quwata illa billah.

2

I am moderate in my compliments.

As you know, we have the fear of the evil eye, so we always say, Masha Allah, la

quwata illa billah.

3

I consider myself among those people who compliment me a lot.

Religious expressions are one of the most important things to consider and think

carefully about when complimenting people. I say Masha Allah before I

compliment someone.

347

4 I am an average person. I always say Masha Allah, tabaraka Allah.

5

I am a moderate person in my daily life, including compliments. Before I

compliment anyone, I say, Masha Allah, tabaraka Allah.

6 If I admire something, I always compliment. I use Masha Allah and supplications.

7

I only compliment what deserves complimenting, and I do not exaggerate in my

compliments, so I would describe myself as moderate. Masha Allah, tabaraka

Allah must be present when admiring a person or thing.

8

I love complimenting people. We were raised to use religious expressions and

supplications in our daily activities.

9

I do not compliment a lot, and I only compliment what I like very much. Masha

Allah and supplications must come first, before giving a compliment.

10 I am a moderate person, in the middle.

Semi-Question 2



Superior Female

Participant

No.

Response

348

1

I like her to hear the religious expression because this reassures her. Many people

fear the evil eye. I sometimes repeat the religious expression several times if I

notice the receiver is still concerned.

2

I like to treat people the way I like to be treated. I feel that when people hear

religious expressions when complimenting, they become happier. I feel that

myself. For example, if she complimented saying Masha Allah, tabaraka Allah,

sheklik gamer (you look beautiful), I feel pleased. This is our religion.

3

No, no, I say it out loud. I repeat it several times so that the person does not be

harmed by the evil eye.

4

Of course, I must make the receiver hear me saying Masha Allah, tabaraka Allah,

may Allah bless you. People fear the evil eye.

5

We all know the damage that the evil eye can cause. Therefore, we all immune

ourselves to the remembrance of Allah. Consequently, religious expressions and

supplications make you and the person you are speaking to in complete comfort.

I say Masha Allah at the beginning of my compliment and la quwata illa billah at

the end, in the middle is what I admire. For example, Masha Allah, sheklik hulu,

la quwata illa billah (Masha Allah, you look sweet, la quwata illa billah).

6

I have to say it out loud because she would feel safe and happy. It makes our

conversation more friendly.

7

I say it out loud because the person I am speaking to will show great pleasure, and

it also makes our conversation more harmonious.

8 Sure, I would say it out loud.

349

9

If I hear, for example, a friend or colleague say Masha Allah at the beginning of

her compliment, I will be comfortable and reassured.

10 I should make my voice loud enough so she can hear Masha Allah.

Semi-Question 3

Which compliment topic is most important to you when complimenting your family members,

friends, and colleagues?

Superior Female

Participant

No.

Response

1 Personal traits

2 Personal traits

3 Skills

4 Personal traits

5 Personal traits

6 Personal traits

7 Personal traits

8 Personal traits

350

9 Personal traits

10 Personal traits

Semi-Question 4

Which compliment topic would you avoid when complimenting your family members, friends,

and colleagues?

Superior Female

Participant

No.

Response

1 Appearance

2 Appearance

3 Possessions

4 Possessions

5 Possessions

6 Possessions

7 Possessions

8 Possessions

351

9 Possessions

10 Possessions

Semi-Question 5



Superior Female

Participant

No.

Response

1

I would feel embarrassed when I ask her to say, Masha Allah. I would also begin

to be cautious and alert to her compliment, but my caution in this situation is

reasonable.

2

It depends on the situation. Usually, I would remind her to say it. If I am given a

compliment by a non-Muslim, evil eye is still in my mind.21

3

Usually, if someone compliments me, the compliment is accompanied by Masha

Allah. However, for example, if someone complimented me without saying a

religious expression, I would frankly fear that situation. I would ask her to say,

Masha Allah.

If a compliment was given by a non-Muslim, I would keep saying the religious

expression myself while complimenting.

352

4

I would be worried. Therefore, I always immune myself to the remembrance of

Allah. With regards to non-Muslims, I would ask her to repeat after me saying

Masha Allah after her compliment.

5

I will stop here, and I will remind her to remember Allah. I will also ask her to

say, Masha Allah. If she is not a Muslim, I will explain the situation to her.

6

Religious expressions are necessary. The evil eye can be cast by a Muslim or non-

Muslim.

7

I wish she says something like Masha Allah. A religious expression is obligatory

in such situations, but sometimes it may be difficult to ask her to say it, depending

on the nature of the person in front of me. I can also alert her to some things, such

as saying thank Allah, this is a grace from Allah …etc. It does not matter whether

the compliment is given by a Muslim or non-Muslim, evil eye is true. If I admired

a non-Muslim or something she has, I would say the religious expression, exactly

like a Muslim.

8

I do not like to embarrass people, but I wish to hear it. I will also keep saying

religious expressions and supplications. For a non-Muslim, I would teach her.

9

I would internally feel tense. This does not create comfort between us. The same

can be applied to a non-Muslim.

10 Simply, I would ask her to say, Masha Allah, in a nice way of course.

353

Semi-Question 6



Superior Female

Participant

No.

Response

1 Evil eye can occur from anyone.

2 The evil eye is true.

3 Yes of course.

4 Frankly, yes.

5 Yes, the evil eye is part of our religion.

6 The evil eye is true.

7 We believe that the evil eye is true.

8 Evil is true, be it a Muslim or non-Muslim.

9 Yes, this is part of our religion.

10 We all believe that evil is true.

354

Semi-Question 7


and complimenting you on it would affect people’s conversational interaction with you?

Superior Female

Participant

No.

Response

1 I will be very comfortable when I hear Masha Allah or some kind of supplications.

2

For example, if a colleague admired my appearance, I would love to hear religious

expressions when complimenting me.

3

We should remind her otherwise people would criticise her by saying that she

ignores using religious expressions in her compliments. The evil eye is true. For

example, I remember a lady who complimented me on my watch without using

religious expressions, and it was cut off.

4

I think yes. I am personally very sensitive about being complimented because of

the evil eye.

5

Yes, of course. I do not think that there will not be reassurance without religious

expressions.

6 We should not neglect them as they are necessary.

7 Sure, of course, it does.

355

8

I think neglecting religious expressions in our compliments may harm peace and

harmony between us.

9

If a religious expression or supplication is not included in the compliment, I will

fear that person, but it depends on the situation, words, and the way she

compliments.

10

For a Muslim, religious expressions are necessary; they must be used. I cannot

imagine a conversation without mentioning the name of Allah.

Semi-Question 8


evil eye?

Superior Female

Participant

No.

Response

1

I would not talk about it. For example, waladi jab 99% fi athanawiah al amah wa

lum ukhbir ahad (my older son got 99% in his high school, but I did not talk about

it).

2

If something was of high value, I would avoid talking about it, as you know, the

evil eye is true.

3 In this situation, I only talk about them with very close ones.

356

4 For me, I try not to talk about them as much as I can, the evil eye is true.

5

Yes. It is impossible to talk about my success or the success of my family because

of the evil eye.

6 I think it is not necessary to talk about them, depending on the situation.

7

I will not talk in detail. Rather, I will be moderate in any situation like this in order

not to trigger their attention.

8

I do not like to talk about them. Although I believe in the evil eye, it is not the

only thing that makes me not talk.

9 Only with those who are close to me such as my and my husband’s families.

10 I usually evaluate the situation first. Then I will decide whether to talk or not.

Semi-Question 9

Do you think that the power of the evil eye differs from one person to another? If yes, would you

avoid talking about your success or the success of a family member with that particular person?

Superior Female

Participant

No.

Response

1

I have not seen this person, but I heard that there are people who are famous for

their evil eyes.

357

Yes, of course. I would avoid her as much as I can.

2

If being told that this person has a powerful evil eye, I would be naturally very

cautious with her, simply evil eye is true.

3

I feel intense in my heart. I have to deal with such a situation, but, frankly, I would

keep reciting some verses from the Holly Qur’an until I feel reassured.

4

If I knew that x person can harm people, I would avoid that person, for sure. I had

been in such a situation before.

5

Maybe yes, for me it depends on the intention of this person, might be good or

bad, but if I knew that she may have an evil eye, I would be very careful in any

conversation with her.

6

Yes, that is true. When having a conversation with her, I will keep saying religious

expressions.

7

I heard that there are people like this, but I have not seen them. I would not avoid

them. Instead, I would keep remembering Allah.

8

I will talk with her, but I will keep saying religious expressions. I will be also

cautious with her.

9

I may avoid talking to her as I would not be comfortable with such people. The

evil eye remains present.

10

Many people say that there are people who can harm people severely. Of course,

I would try to talk about general things.

358

Semi-Question 10

Some people put something on their neck, wrists, in their pockets, or on their cars to ward off


Superior Female

Participant

No.

Response

1 I do not believe in these myths, but I heard some people do.

2

I only believe in religious expressions to be protected from the evil eye, nothing

else.

3

I do not believe in this thing, but I remember that when I bought a car for my

brother, some of my friends told me to put salt and black seed in the car so that

the evil eye cannot harm him.

4

I do not believe in such things. I only protect myself and my family by the

supplications our Prophet told us.

5

I only believe in one thing. I believe that the only thing we should use to protect

ourselves from the evil eye is religious expressions, none of these will help.

6 I never use them.

7 These things are against our religion.

8 No, no, we are Muslims, and we do not believe in these myths.

359

9

Of course not, Islam taught us not to believe in these myths. Allah is the only

power to ward off the evil eye.

10

These actions are considered sins in our religion. We should not think about them.

We are recommended to immune ourselves with the supplications our religion

taught us to ward off the evil eye.

360

Appendix G - Information Sheet-Information sheet

CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE IN RESEARCH

ETHICS APPROVAL NO: _______________

Research title: The role of evil eye in shaping politeness/impoliteness in Saudi Arabia: The

case of compliments and compliment responses in interrelationships

Dear Participant,

I am Mansour Alobaisi, a Ph.D. candidate at RMIT University in Australia. I would like to

invite you to take part in this research to demonstrate how Saudi people interact when they give

or respond to compliments and how this speech act is influenced by the phenomenon of the

evil eye. Before agreeing to participate in this study, you must understand how you will be

involved.

What is the study about?

The literature shows that giving and receiving compliments is cross-culturally different. It has

been asserted that communication may break down when two different cultures interact, and

that has been attributed to the lack of knowledge of others' social norms of communication.

Although many studies have been conducted on western and Asian countries, only a few studies

have been conducted in the Arab world, let alone in Saudi Arabia.

361

Giving and receiving compliments is the focus of this study because they commonly appear

beside other types of speech acts in people’s daily life. This research is intended to shed light

on compliments and compliment responses and their relationship to the evil eye in Saudi

society.

How will you be involved in this study?

I want to invite you to take part in this study. You are kindly asked to complete two tasks. A

questionnaire will be used to investigate how people pay compliments. The other questionnaire

will be employed to investigate compliment responses. It will ask you to respond to different

authentic scenarios in which compliments and compliment responses have been used. Also,

you will be interviewed about giving and receiving compliments, and this interview will be

recorded.

Will anyone know me?

None of the participants will be identified in any reports and publications arising from this

research. Anonymity will be guaranteed since you will not be asked to write your name or any

other identifying elements on the questionnaires. Also, the signed consent forms and the

questionnaires will be collected in two separate envelopes. Project documentation will be

stored in secure, lockable locations at RMIT University. Computer files will be password

protected. After the study, all questionnaires and consent forms will be kept for 5 years in a

secure environment. After that, all data on the study will be destroyed.

Do I have to do this?

If you decide not to take part in this study, that is okay. This will not affect my research.

Will the results of the study appear in publications, thesis, reports or at conferences?

362

The statistical data emanating from the responses to both questionnaires will be included in

this thesis. I may also use the data for conference presentations and publications.

How can I get a copy of the findings?

If you like to have a copy of the study or any part of it, I am pleased to give it to you. However,

you need to put your address in the consent form so that we can send it to you.

What if I have difficulty or questions?

If you have any difficulty or questions regarding this study, you may contact Mr. Mansour

Alobaisi, School of Global, Urban and Social Studies | RMIT University | GPO Box 2476,

Melbourne VIC 3001, Australia

More details for Mansour:

E: [email protected]

You can also contact my supervisor: Dr. Kerry Mullan | Convenor of Languages | Global and

Language Studies

E: [email protected] | T: + 61 3 9925 2264

If you have any complaints or queries that the researcher has not been able to answer to your

satisfaction, you may contact RMIT University Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC).

Please advised that:

• All research in Australia involving humans is reviewed by an independent group of

people called the Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC). This research project

has been approved by the RMIT University HREC. This project will be carried out

according to the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research (2007).

mailto:[email protected]


363

This statement has been developed to protect the interests of people who agree to

participate in human research studies.

• Should you have any concerns or questions about this research project, which you do

not wish to discuss with the researchers listed in this document, then you may contact:

RMIT University

HREC Secretary Dr. Peter Burke

Telephone +613 9925 2251

Email [email protected]

Please, ask me to explain anything you don’t understand before signing the consent form.

You can take the consent form with you and submit it after I answer your question/s. If you

leave a message, I will reply to your email within 24 hours.


364

Appendix H - Information sheet-Arabic version

عنوان البحث: األدب والثناء والرد عليه مقارنة بين المجتمع السعودي

الباحث:

منصور العبيسي، المرشح لنيل شهادة الدكتوراه

والعلوم االجتماعية والتخطيط كلية الدراسات العالمية

[email protected]البرید اإللكتروني:

966557844868+ هاتف:

المشرفان على الدراسة:

د. كيري مولن

كلية الدراسات العالمية والعلوم االجتماعية والتخطيط

[email protected] :البرید اإللكتروني

99252264 هاتف:

د. شانتال كروزت


[email protected] :البرید اإللكتروني

99255211 هاتف:

اخي/ اختي المشارك،




365

أود ان اعرفك بنفسي. أنا (RMIT University)أنت مدعو للمشاركة في مشروع بحثي تحت إشراف جامعة ار ام اي تي

اه في جامعة ار ام أي تي وأقوم بهذا البحث كمتطلب لنيل درجة الدكتوراه من جامعة ار ام منصور العبيسي، طالب دكتور

أستراليا. بدولة اي تي

الرجاء قراءة هذا البيان بعنایة وتأكد على أنك فهمت محتویاته قبل ان تقرر ما إذا كنت تود المشاركة ام ال. إذا كانت لدیك

الرجاء سؤال الباحث قبل الموافقة على المشاركة في هذه الدراسة، من المهم أن تفهم استفسار حول مشاركتك في هذا البحث،

كيف سوف تكون مشاركتك.

لماذا وكيف سوف تكون مشاركتك في هذه الدراسة؟

أود أن أدعوك للمشاركة في هذا الدراسة حيث إن البحث یركز على االسلوب الالئق والمهذب عند القيام بالثناء على أحد او

یطلب منك تنفيذ عدد سوف الرد عليه. في حال إذا قررت المشاركة، سوف یطلب منك أن تقوم بإنجاز عدد من المهام. أوال،

باحث حيث تقوم بالرد على هذه السيناریوهات. فيما یلي أحد السيناریوهات المقترحة:من السيناریوهات المقترحة من قبل ال

حول ماذا تقوم الدراسة؟

استراتيجيات األدب بما في ذلك الثناء والرد عليه وغيرها من أشكال أفعال الكالم مثل المجامالت واالعتذار وكيفية ممارستها

أهم مقومات السلوك البشري اليومي. ویشمل مفهوم األدب، على حد سواء، في الحياة اليومية في مجتمع ما هي من بين

جوانب عامة وجوانب خاصة بالثقافات. وهذا یعني أنه على الرغم من اشتمال كافة الثقافات على استراتيجيات خاصة باألدب

ا وخصائصها اللغویة واالجتماعية الخاصة والسلوكيات المتعلقة بأساليب التخاطب الالئقة في المجتمع، إال أن لكل ثقافة وسائله

التي تتعلق بأسلوب وسلوك التخاطب الذي یدل على االحترام. على سبيل المثال، كما هو الحال في العدید من اللغات األخرى،

قة باللغة الثناء على شخص ما باستخدام اللغة العربية دون درایة بالعلم االجتماعي اللغوي والعملي الخاص بالمجتمعات الناط

العربية قد یؤدي إلى إشكاليات مثل سوء الفهم أو انقطاع التواصل. لذا فان الثناء والرد عليه هو محور هذه الدراسة حيث

یسلط هذا البحث الضوء على األسلوب الالئق والمهذب الذي یمارسه اهل مكة في حياتهم اليومية عند قيامهم بالثناء والرد

ابة على السؤال التالي: عليه. كما یسعى إلى اإلج

بناء على العناصر األربعة المتعلقة بالثناء والرد عليه )المظهر والمهارة والسمات الشخصية والممتلكات(، ما هي درجة

التشابه واالختالف المتعلقة بالثناء والرد عليه في المجتمع المكي وفقا للمتغيرات االجتماعية.

366

ة العربية السعودیة، وتحدیدا مدینة مكة المكرمة. كافة المشاركين والمشاركات هم من سيتم تطبيق هذه الدراسة في المملك

أبناء وسيدات مكة. ستبحث الدراسة وتناقش السلوك المهذب والالئق من خالل تحليل اإلستراتيجيات المتبعة عند تبادل الثناء

٦٠من االناث بالنسبة لالستبانات المفتوحة و ١٢٠من الذكور و١٢٠مشاركا، ٢٤٠بين أهل مكة بحيث تشمل هذه الدراسة

مشاركا ومشاركة للمقابالت.

ما هي الفوائد المرتبطة بالمشاركة؟

سوف یساعد هذا البحث في إثراء المعرفة حول معرفة كيفية تبادل الثناء وبعض الظواهر ذات العالقة في المجتمع المكي،

المؤدب السائد في المجتمع. إذا قررت المشاركة، سوف تساهم في نشر باإلضافة إلى توفير مصدر لالطالع على السلوك

الوعي حول الظواهر االجتماعية، وسوف تساعد على إثراء األدبيات المتعلقة بثقافات الجزیرة العربية.

هل ستحد د هویتي؟

لن تحد د هویة أی ة مشاركة في أي تقاریر ومنشورات ناتجة عن هذا البحث. نضمن لك عدم الكشف عن هویتك ألنه لن یطلب

منك في المقام األول أن تكتب اسمك أو تقدیم أیة عناصر أخرى من شأنها الكشف عن هویتك. كما سيتم، كذلك، جمع نماذج

ه الصنادیق عن البيانات المسجلة. الموافقة الموقعة في صنادیق وسيتم فصل هذ

في جامعة ار ام أي تي. أما وثائق المشروع فسوف یتم تخزینها في مواقع آمنة ومقفلة في وسوف تكون ملفات الكمبيوتر

الجامعة محمية بكلمة مرور.

ط آمن. بعد ذلك، یتم إتالف عند انتهاء الدراسة، سيتم االحتفاظ بنماذج الموافقة والبيانات المسجلة لمدة خمس سنوات في محي

كافة البيانات المتعلقة بالدراسة.

هل ال بد لي من المشاركة؟

إذا قررت عدم المشاركة في هذه الدراسة، فال بأس بذلك. هذا لن یؤثر على بحثنا. كما أنه لدیك الحق:

في االنسحاب من المشاركة في أي وقت •

الحق في أن تطلب التوقف والمغادرة •

وإتالف أیة بيانات غير معالجة، بشرط أن نتمكن من تحدیدها على نحو موثوق، وبشرط أال الحق في سحب •

یزید ذلك من نسبة المخاطرة للمشاركة.

الحق في الحصول على إجابات عن أیة أسئلة یطرحها المشارك في أي وقت. •

367

لك لحمایتك أو حمایة غيرك من األذى، ( كان ذ1باإلضافة إلى ذلك، یمكن الكشف عن أیة معلومات تقدمينها فقط في حال )

( قمت بتزوید الباحثين بإذن خطي.3( صدر أمر من المحكمة أو )2)

هل ستظهر نتائج هذه الدراسة في منشورات أو في أطروحة أو في تقرير أو في مؤتمرات؟

لبيانات لغرض تقدیم العروض سوف تدرج البيانات اإلحصائية في أطروحة الدكتوراه. من الممكن أیضا أن تستخدم الباحث ا

في المؤتمرات والمحافل العلمية.

كيف يمكنني الحصول على نسخة من النتائج؟

إذا كنت ترغب في الحصول على نسخة من الدراسة أو أي جزء منها فيسر الباحث أن یزودك بها ولكن عليك أن تضع عنوان

من إرسالها إليك. بریدك اإللكتروني في استمارة الموافقة حتى یتمكن الباحث

ماذا لو واجهت أية صعوبة أو كانت لدي أية أسئلة؟

إذا واجهتك أیة صعوبة أو كانت لدیك أیة أسئلة بخصوص هذه الدراسة، یمكنك االتصال بمنصور العبيسي. الرجاء أن تطلب

من الباحث أن یشرح لك النقاط التي تشكل عليك قبل التوقيع على استمارة الموافقة.

التيإذا كان الشكاوى إلى إجراءات الرجوع الرجاء البحث، المشاركة في هذا أیة شكوى حول لدیك موقع تجدینها في ت

RMITالشكاوى التي تتعلق بالمشاركة في جامعة الجامعة اإللكتروني تحت صفحة

)Complaints with respect to participation in research at RMIT )

المؤهالت التي حصلت عليها الباحث:

بكالوریوس في الترجمة، جامعة الملك سعود، الریاض، المملكة العربية السعودیة •

التطبيقية، جامعة ال تروب، ملبورن، أسترالياماجستير في اللغویات •

من كلية الدراسات العالمية والعلوم االجتماعية والتخطيط في جامعة درجة الدكتوراهالباحث طالب مرشح لنيل •

RMIT ملبورن، أستراليا ،

ستير تحت یعمل الباحث مدرسة للغة اإلنجليزیة في الكلية الجامعية بالجموم، وقد أجرى الباحث أطروحة الماج •

عنوان، الثناء والرد عليه بين الذكور في المجتمع السعودي.

هذا وتقبل مني خالص التحية واالحترام

http://www.rmit.edu.au/browse;ID=2jqrnb7hnpyo

368

منصور العبيسي


[email protected]البرید اإللكتروني:

966557844868+ هاتف:

Appendix I - Consent form-English version

CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE IN RESEARCH

ETHICS APPROVAL NO: _______________

Research title: The role of evil eye in shaping politeness/impoliteness in Saudi Arabia:

The case of compliments and compliment responses in interrelationships

I acknowledge that:

1. I have had the project explained to me, and I have read the information sheet.

2. I agree to participate in the research project as described.

3. I agree to be interviewed; I may be asked questions by the researcher; my voice will be audio

recorded.


369

4. I understand that my participation is voluntary and that I am free to withdraw from the project

at any time and to withdraw any unprocessed data previously supplied (unless follow-up is

needed for safety).

5. The project is for research. It may not be of direct benefit to me.

6. The privacy of the personal information I provide will be safeguarded and only disclosed

where I have consented to the disclosure or as required by law.

7. The security of the research data will be protected during and after the completion of the

study. The data collected during the study may be published, and a report of the project

outcomes will be provided to Mansour Alobaisi. Any information which will identify me will

not be used.

Participant’s Consent

Participant:

Date:

(Signature)

370

Appendix J - Consent form-Arabic version

نموذج الموافقة على المشاركة في بحث

______________ موافقة لجنة األخالقيات تحت الرقم:

عنوان البحث:

األدب في الثناء وكيفية الرد عليه وعالقة العين به في المجتمع الحجازي

أنا أقر:

بأن ه قد تم توضيح البحث لي وأنني قد قرأت بيان المعلومات. .1

أنا أوافق على المشاركة في هذا البحث كما هو موضح. .2

371

وبأن ه سيتم تسجيل صوتي، كما أوافق على تزوید الباحثة ببعض الرسائل اإللكترونية أنا أوافق على إجراء مقابلة .3

والنصوص باللغة العربية.

أنا أدرك أن مشاركتي في هذا البحث تطوعية وأن لي الحق في االنسحاب من هذه الدراسة في أي وقت. كما أستطيع .4

تمت معالجتها بعد )ما لم یكن هناك حاجة للمتابعة من أجل أن أسحب أیة بيانات كنت قد قدمتها من قبل ولم تكن قد

السالمة(.

أنا أدرك بأن هذا المشروع هو لغرض البحث العلمي وأنني قد ال أستفيد منه بشكل مباشر. .5

أنا أدرك بأن ه سوف یتم احترام خصوصية كافة معلوماتي الشخصية المقدمة وأن ه سيتم الكشف عنها فقط إذا .6

وافقت على ذلك أو حسبما یقتضي القانون.

الدراسة سيتم حمایة البيانات البحثية أثناء الدراسة وبعد االنتهاء منها. وقد یتم نشر البيانات التي تم جمعها خالل .7

وسيتم تقدیم تقریر عن نتائج المشروع إلى منصور العبيسي. ولن یتم استخدام أی ة معلومات تقود إلى هویتي.

موافقة المشاركات

التاریخ: المشاركة:

( )توقيع

یجب أن یتم تزوید المشاركات بنسخة من نموذج الموافقة هذا الخاص بالمشاركة في البحث بعد أن یتم التوقيع عليه.

372

Appendix K - WhatsApp invitation

WhatsApp invitation

Dear Participant,

I am inviting you to the present study for elaborating on your views relevant to one of

the social norms in Saudi Arabia. In course of the inquiry, you will reveal your values, beliefs,

opinions, and attitudes by demonstrating how Saudi people interact while giving or receiving

compliments based on specific situations and questions. These compliment and compliment

response scenarios would be emailed to you when you accept the invitation. The information

you divulge during the study will be used to fully explain the results of the study. There are no

right or wrong answers to this. However, I am interested in gaining a wide variety of opinions.

Before you decide as to whether you would like to participate, you need to be aware of

the purpose of this research and what it would involve. I have attached the relevant information

sheets. I would also take this time to inform you that all your responses shall remain

anonymous, and your identity would not be disclosed to any third party. Please take the time

to peruse the attachments and contemplate your participation. The information sheet covers the

numerous queries you might possess regarding the present study. To clarify the extent of your

participation, the following inquiries have been answered.

What is the study about? How will I be involved?

Will anyone know me?

Do I need to do this?

Will the results of the study appear in publications, thesis, reports or at conferences? How can

I get a copy of the findings? What if I have difficulty or questions?

373

Appendix L - Coding table for giving compliments - Discourse Completion Tasks

(DCTs)

Coding table for giving compliments - Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs)

Seq Position Gender Age Close relationship Stranger

Appearance possession Skill Trait Appearance possession Skill Trait

1 1 1 1 4 4 8 10 5 5 6 4

2 1 1 1 1 4 8 8 5 5 11 8

3 1 1 1 8 4 8 10 5 5 8 4

4 1 1 1 8 4 10 9 5 5 7 4

5 1 1 1 8 8 8 8 5 5 11 8

6 1 1 1 2 4 7 10 7 6 11 8

7 1 1 1 1 7 8 8 5 5 8 8

8 1 1 1 8 4 8 4 5 7 12 4

9 1 1 1 8 4 8 8 5 5 8 8

10 1 1 1 5 12 8 4 5 5 8 4

11 1 1 1 1 4 8 8 5 5 4 4

12 1 1 1 8 7 8 4 5 5 7 5

13 1 1 1 2 4 8 8 5 5 8 7

14 1 1 1 2 12 8 8 5 5 7 5

15 1 1 1 1 4 8 4 5 5 7 4

16 1 1 1 2 8 8 8 5 5 5 5

17 1 1 1 8 4 8 9 5 5 8 8

18 1 1 1 8 7 8 1 5 5 8 8

19 1 1 1 2 8 12 4 5 5 8 8

374

20 1 1 1 7 1 8 9 5 5 6 7

21 1 2 1 6 10 8 13 8 8 11 8

22 1 2 1 10 7 7 9 5 5 5 7

23 1 2 1 7 7 8 9 5 1 6 9

24 1 2 1 7 6 7 8 1 1 8 1

25 1 2 1 7 6 7 13 8 1 6 8

26 1 2 1 7 6 11 9 8 1 6 14

27 1 2 1 7 3 8 9 5 8 8 7

28 1 2 1 7 4 8 4 8 1 5 8

29 1 2 1 7 7 8 8 7 1 8 9

30 1 2 1 7 8 8 4 8 1 5 4

31 1 2 1 7 6 8 9 8 6 5 8

32 1 2 1 7 7 8 13 1 8 8 1

33 1 2 1 4 10 11 9 9 4 8 9

34 1 2 1 7 1 7 8 8 1 6 1

35 1 2 1 4 7 11 8 8 1 8 8

36 1 2 1 8 6 7 8 6 6 7 8

37 1 2 1 7 7 8 13 5 5 8 8

38 1 2 1 8 4 8 8 8 4 5 8

39 1 2 1 8 7 8 8 8 8 8 4

40 1 2 1 8 1 8 4 8 8 8 8

41 2 1 2 2 4 8 15 2 8 1 8

42 2 1 2 1 4 4 8 8 7 4 7

43 2 1 2 2 4 4 15 5 7 1 7

375

44 2 1 2 8 4 8 8 5 6 1 6

45 2 1 2 2 12 12 12 8 5 1 5

46 2 1 2 2 4 8 15 5 8 8 8

47 2 1 2 8 5 12 15 5 5 5 5

48 2 1 2 8 12 4 4 8 6 8 12

49 2 1 2 12 12 12 12 1 7 11 4

50 2 1 2 2 8 8 16 5 6 6 8

51 2 1 2 6 6 6 16 5 5 4 8

52 2 1 2 8 4 8 8 5 5 1 4

53 2 1 2 6 4 10 8 5 5 4 4

54 2 1 2 8 4 8 8 5 5 1 4

55 2 1 2 6 4 9 4 5 1 1 9

56 2 1 2 8 4 1 4 5 5 1 4

57 2 1 2 1 4 12 12 1 1 1 12

58 2 1 2 4 4 4 4 1 1 4 4

59 2 1 2 8 4 8 4 4 4 4 4

60 2 1 2 8 4 10 4 4 6 4 4

61 2 2 2 12 12 12 14 5 5 5 5

62 2 2 2 8 7 15 15 8 7 8 8

63 2 2 2 8 7 12 10 1 1 1 1

64 2 2 2 7 7 7 7 8 7 8 15

65 2 2 2 15 15 9 10 5 5 5 9

66 2 2 2 15 7 15 15 7 5 10 15

67 2 2 2 15 8 15 15 7 5 11 15

376

68 2 2 2 12 15 15 15 15 7 15 15

69 2 2 2 8 1 9 15 8 5 10 15

70 2 2 2 7 7 9 15 7 9 15 15

71 2 2 2 1 6 15 9 5 5 5 15

72 2 2 2 12 12 9 10 5 5 15 15

73 2 2 2 7 12 9 7 5 5 5 15

74 2 2 2 15 15 15 15 7 5 15 15

75 2 2 2 7 7 15 10 7 5 11 15

76 2 2 2 7 12 9 15 7 1 11 15

77 2 2 2 7 7 9 15 8 5 8 15

78 2 2 2 15 7 15 15 5 7 6 15

79 2 2 2 15 7 9 15 7 1 15 15

80 2 2 2 8 7 9 15 8 7 5 15

81 3 1 2 2 4 1 10 4 5 1 15

82 3 1 2 7 8 10 10 5 5 4 10

83 3 1 2 7 8 1 15 5 5 4 15

84 3 1 2 2 7 8 10 5 5 1 15

85 3 1 2 1 1 1 10 1 6 11 9

86 3 1 2 2 15 8 8 5 5 4 15

87 3 1 2 8 4 8 10 5 5 7 15

88 3 1 2 7 15 7 7 5 8 1 4

89 3 1 2 2 7 8 8 5 5 8 15

90 3 1 2 7 1 10 10 5 5 7 5

91 3 1 2 2 5 8 8 5 5 1 10

377

92 3 1 2 8 7 10 8 5 7 15 15

93 3 1 2 1 4 7 15 5 1 11 10

94 3 1 2 1 7 8 15 5 5 5 10

95 3 1 2 1 4 7 15 7 4 8 15

96 3 1 2 1 4 8 8 5 5 4 8

97 3 1 2 2 7 7 15 2 1 8 10

98 3 1 2 1 4 6 15 1 6 4 15

99 3 1 2 2 4 10 9 1 4 8 10

100 3 1 2 6 4 8 15 15 1 8 15

101 3 2 2 7 6 9 9 5 5 11 15

102 3 2 2 8 7 9 15 5 5 5 15

103 3 2 2 8 7 9 10 7 5 11 15

104 3 2 2 8 6 9 15 1 5 10 15

105 3 2 2 15 7 15 9 5 7 11 15

106 3 2 2 15 15 15 15 15 5 11 8

107 3 2 2 8 7 9 9 7 5 15 15

108 3 2 2 8 6 15 15 5 1 11 15

109 3 2 2 7 7 9 7 5 5 10 15

110 3 2 2 7 7 9 10 5 5 10 8

111 3 2 2 15 8 9 15 8 9 10 8

112 3 2 2 8 7 15 15 5 5 11 15

113 3 2 2 8 15 15 7 7 1 5 15

114 3 2 2 8 7 9 9 7 7 11 15

115 3 2 2 7 7 15 15 5 5 11 9

378

116 3 2 2 15 8 9 9 8 5 1 15

117 3 2 2 8 6 9 9 7 5 11 15

118 3 2 2 7 6 9 9 5 5 8 9

119 3 2 2 8 7 15 15 1 5 11 15

120 3 2 2 8 7 9 9 5 1 10 15

Strategies of giving compliments

Value Codes of compliments strategies

1 Religious expression

2 Religious expression + metaphor

3 Religious expression + repetition

4 Religious expression + prayer

5 Inappropriate for giving a compliment

6 Religious expression + a question

7 Religious expression + a comment

8 Religious expression + praise

9 Religious expression + giving advice

10 Religious expression + encouraging

11 Religious expression + seeking advice

12 Others

13 Religious expression + appreciation token

14 Appreciation token

15 Prayer

16 Praise

379

Coding table for variables

Independent variables Dependent variables

Position Close relationship

Gender Stranger

Age Power distance

Coding table for positions Value

Young (student) 1

Subordinate (secretary) 2

Superior (Manager), (Head of the Department) (Chairman) or (Director) 3

Coding table for gender Value

Male 1

Female 2

Coding table for age Value

18 – 22 1

40 and above 2

380

Appendix M - Coding tables for Compliment Responses - Discourse Completion

Tasks (DCTs)

Coding tables for Compliment Responses - Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs)

Seq Position Gender Age Close relationship Stranger

Appearance Possession Skill Trait Appearance Possession Skill Trait

1 1 1 1 1 7 1 4 17 15 9 3

2 1 1 1 8 15 17 3 17 1 9 4

3 1 1 1 1 7 8 3 4 1 8 7

4 1 1 1 8 7 8 8 8 1 1 4

5 1 1 1 8 7 9 8 4 7 9 8

6 1 1 1 8 7 7 7 4 7 1 4

7 1 1 1 8 2 8 3 4 14 1 4

8 1 1 1 8 7 1 1 4 15 1 7

9 1 1 1 8 2 8 8 4 4 2 7

10 1 1 1 2 5 8 9 4 15 4 7

11 1 1 1 2 7 8 4 7 15 7 7

12 1 1 1 2 7 7 1 7 7 1 7

13 1 1 1 2 2 8 7 4 15 9 7

14 1 1 1 2 7 8 7 7 17 9 17

15 1 1 1 2 7 8 8 4 15 7 8

16 1 1 1 2 7 8 9 4 15 9 17

17 1 1 1 2 7 8 3 4 15 2 4

18 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 1 14 8 1

381

19 1 1 1 2 8 8 4 4 1 1 4

20 1 1 1 2 8 8 4 7 2 2 4

21 1 2 1 1 15 9 4 4 2 24 2

22 1 2 1 8 1 9 1 4 4 24 4

23 1 2 1 1 1 9 8 14 4 9 2

24 1 2 1 1 17 1 4 4 4 9 4

25 1 2 1 1 15 1 9 4 4 9 9

26 1 2 1 1 15 9 1 12 9 24 9

27 1 2 1 1 15 4 4 4 4 24 2

28 1 2 1 1 4 7 4 4 6 9 7

29 1 2 1 1 19 1 9 4 1 9 4

30 1 2 1 1 4 4 4 17 1 9 1

31 1 2 1 5 9 4 9 4 5 3 4

32 1 2 1 2 1 4 1 14 4 24 1

33 1 2 1 1 4 4 1 4 4 1 7

34 1 2 1 17 5 21 1 1 9 6 2

35 1 2 1 8 2 4 5 4 15 24 4

36 1 2 1 1 4 20 6 4 4 24 7

37 1 2 1 15 15 1 8 4 17 24 9

38 1 2 1 1 4 4 6 4 15 6 6

39 1 2 1 1 15 4 4 4 15 24 4

40 1 2 1 2 15 4 4 4 4 24 4

41 2 1 2 14 14 14 8 14 15 14 8

42 2 1 2 4 7 8 3 7 15 8 3

382

43 2 1 2 7 7 1 14 14 15 3 3

44 2 1 2 4 7 4 4 7 15 3 3

45 2 1 2 2 7 1 7 4 15 2 7

46 2 1 2 1 1 4 4 7 15 25 1

47 2 1 2 4 17 7 7 1 3 2 2

48 2 1 2 1 7 17 7 4 17 25 7

49 2 1 2 21 21 5 8 21 17 25 7

50 2 1 2 4 14 4 3 4 15 7 7

51 2 1 2 4 8 10 10 4 4 8 7

52 2 1 2 8 7 4 3 4 15 8 8

53 2 1 2 4 21 12 3 4 15 3 12

54 2 1 2 4 7 4 4 4 9 4 1

55 2 1 2 7 2 7 7 7 7 25 12

56 2 1 2 4 2 25 3 4 15 14 8

57 2 1 2 4 1 2 3 4 3 14 8

58 2 1 2 4 2 7 4 4 3 25 4

59 2 1 2 4 7 4 8 1 7 14 8

60 2 1 2 4 7 4 3 4 7 7 4

61 2 2 2 2 4 1 2 4 4 9 1

62 2 2 2 4 4 4 7 4 4 9 7

63 2 2 2 4 4 2 4 4 4 4 4

64 2 2 2 7 7 7 4 7 4 7 4

65 2 2 2 4 4 4 17 4 9 9 9

66 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 7 4

383

67 2 2 2 7 2 9 2 4 1 4 4

68 2 2 2 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7

69 2 2 2 4 4 9 10 4 4 9 7

70 2 2 2 2 4 2 8 4 4 9 4

71 2 2 2 7 1 7 7 4 7 7 7

72 2 2 2 4 7 7 4 4 4 1 4

73 2 2 2 4 7 8 4 7 4 4 7

74 2 2 2 4 7 7 8 4 4 9 4

75 2 2 2 7 4 7 7 4 4 9 6

76 2 2 2 4 15 4 8 4 4 9 8

77 2 2 2 4 4 7 7 4 4 9 4

78 2 2 2 4 4 4 7 4 4 9 7

79 2 2 2 7 4 7 7 7 4 9 7

80 2 2 2 4 7 4 7 4 7 7 7

81 3 1 2 7 7 4 2 4 15 14 3

82 3 1 2 4 7 7 3 7 7 9 7

83 3 1 2 4 15 4 4 17 15 25 3

84 3 1 2 2 15 4 4 17 17 9 8

85 3 1 2 4 7 4 3 2 15 2 3

86 3 1 2 7 14 9 7 14 14 3 3

87 3 1 2 2 15 4 4 4 15 9 3

88 3 1 2 4 4 4 3 4 14 1 3

89 3 1 2 2 15 4 8 2 15 14 4

90 3 1 2 1 4 4 3 1 15 4 7

384

91 3 1 2 4 1 1 8 14 15 25 3

92 3 1 2 17 14 14 8 4 14 14 8

93 3 1 2 4 14 8 8 17 17 14 3

94 3 1 2 1 2 1 3 1 14 1 1

95 3 1 2 4 2 4 3 4 1 8 3

96 3 1 2 3 7 4 3 7 7 7 3

97 3 1 2 4 7 1 8 2 1 9 3

98 3 1 2 7 7 7 3 7 7 9 7

99 3 1 2 4 7 4 3 4 17 1 3

100 3 1 2 14 2 9 8 7 2 9 8

101 3 2 2 4 4 7 8 7 9 7 7

102 3 2 2 7 4 9 7 4 4 9 7

103 3 2 2 7 7 7 7 4 4 9 7

104 3 2 2 4 4 7 7 4 4 9 7

105 3 2 2 2 4 8 4 4 4 4 4

106 3 2 2 4 2 4 8 7 4 9 4

107 3 2 2 7 4 7 4 4 4 9 4

108 3 2 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 7 8

109 3 2 2 4 7 4 17 7 4 9 7

110 3 2 2 7 7 9 4 4 4 9 4

111 3 2 2 7 4 8 4 4 7 4 7

112 3 2 2 4 2 7 4 4 7 9 7

113 3 2 2 4 4 7 4 4 4 7 8

114 3 2 2 4 15 4 7 4 4 9 7

385

115 3 2 2 7 4 4 4 4 4 9 7

116 3 2 2 4 1 4 8 4 9 9 6

117 3 2 2 4 4 7 8 7 7 7 4

118 3 2 2 2 7 7 4 4 4 9 7

119 3 2 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 9 7

120 3 2 2 7 4 7 7 4 4 9 7

Coding table for compliment response strategies

Value Strategies of compliment

responses

Examples

1 Accepting


tokens

thanks, thank you, thank you so much

2 Accepting


utterances

I think it's lovely too.

3 Accepting


utterances

It’s not too bad, is it? / it is a cheap item. / it´s not all

that expensive. / not really of good quality

4 Accepting


Compliments

You’re looking good too. /You too did a good job,

sweety. / your bike looks great, too)

386

5 Accepting

Compliments/Praise

upgrades

Wait, you’ve seen nothing yet. / Really brings out the

blue in my eyes, does it?

6 Accepting


pleasure

I'm glad I could help. / I’m glad you liked it.

7 Accepting Compliments/

praying for the giver of

May Allah bless/protect you. / May Allah جزاك هللا خير

save you. /May Allah sweeten your days.

8 Evading


credit

It's my mom's artistic touch and effort. / shifting the

credit to Allah.

9 Evading


comment

I bought it for the trip to X. /I got it at Macy´s. /I got it

from the internet. /I've had this shirt since I was in high

school.

10 Evading

Compliments/Request

reassurance


11 Evading

Compliments/Fault Finding

I felt that I am messing up everything and that the

introduction was unclear.

12 Rejecting Compliments /

Disagreeing utterances

It is not a beautiful hat. / You are joking. / I don’t think

so. /It is ugly. /I don’t think the colour (black) ruined its

beauty.

13 Rejecting and reassuring

comments

No, my English is not good at all, I just focus on certain

things, you need to focus more too and ask the TAs if

you need anything

387

14 Invocation request Say, Masha Allah. / Say Allahu akbar

15 Offering

16 Superstitious comments What do you think of the formal attire?

17 Remaining silent + smile

18 Remaining silent

19 Fishing for more

compliments

I’ve been excellent for years! /This is better than yours!

/I’ve been known for playing well for years!

20 Motivation I’m pretty much the best in the whole world!

21 Jokes

22 Sarcasm

23 Laughter


offering help

Coding table for positions

Positions Value

Coding table for variables

Independent variables Dependent variables

Position Close relationship

Gender Stranger

Age Power distance

388

Young (student) 1

Subordinate (secretary) 2

Superior (Manager), (Head of the Department) (Chairman) or (Director) 3

Coding table for gender

Gender Value

Male 1

Female 2

Coding table for age

Age Value

18 – 22 1

40 and above 2

389

Appendix N - DCT frequency data analysis to identify the effect of age, gender,

and social position on dominant complimenting strategies.

COMPLIMENTING DCT

ANALYSIS

DCT analysis by age

Close relationship

Appearance

Age

(ye

ars)

Age

(ye

ars)

Po

sses

sio

n

Skill

Trai

t


18-

25

40

PLU

S

18-

25

40

PLU

S

18-

25

40

PLU

S

18-

25

40

PLU

S

1 Religious expression 4 9 3 3 4 1

4 Religious expression +

praying 3 1 13 22 4 7 6

5 Inappropriate for giving

a compliment 1 2

6 Religious expression + a

question 1 4 5 7 2


comment 13 15 10 26 6 5 5


praising 12 25 4 6 29 15 15 10


encouraging 1 2 1 6 3 12

390


metaphor 5 12

12 Others 4 2 7 1 6 3

15 Praying 10 7 15 1 31


repetition 1


seeking advice 3


giving advice 23 9 10


appreciation token 4

14 Appreciation token 1

16 Praising 2

391

Stranger

Appearance Age

(ye

ars)

Age

(ye

ars)

Po

sses

sio

n

Skill

Trai

t


18-

25

40

PLU

S

18-

25

40

PLU

S

18-

25

40

PLU

S

18-

25

40

PLU

S

1 Religious expression 2 9 8 12 1 15 4 1


praying 3 3 3 11 8 9

5 Inappropriate for giving a

compliment 24 40 20 43 5 9 3 4


question 1 3 6 6 2 1


comment 2 13 1 11 5 2 4 2


praising 10 10 5 3 18 11 17 9


encouraging 7 6


metaphor 2

12 Others 1 2

15 Praying 3 7 41

392

Possession-Close

relationship


repetition


seeking advice 4 16


giving advice 1 2 3 5


appreciation token


16 Praising

393

Power status

Appearance

Age

(ye

ars)

Age

(ye

ars)

Po

sses

sio

n

Skill

Trai

t

Compliment strategies 18-2

5

40 P

LUS

18-2

5

40 P

LUS

18-2

5

40 P

LUS

18-2

5

40 P

LUS

1 Religious expression 1 16 5 7 1 7 1 1


praying 3 3 2 3 11 24


compliment 27 15 25 22 9 4 7 3


question 5 3 1 5


comment 16 1 10 6 1 2


praising 11 11 5 28 14 29 16 16


encouraging 7


metaphor 9 1 1

12 Others 2 2 1 4

15 Praying 6 4 4 20

394

Possession-Close

relationship


repetition 1


seeking advice 13 21 3


giving advice 1


appreciation token

14 Appreciation token 1 2

16 Praising

DCT analysis by gender

Close relationship

Appearance

Po

sses

sio

n

Skill

Compliment strategies M

ale

Fem

ale

Mal

e

Fem

ale

Mal

e

Fem

ale

1 Religious expression 12 1 3 3 4

4 Religious expression + praying 2 2 33 2 4

5 Inappropriate for giving a compliment 1 2

6 Religious expression + a question 4 1 1 11 2

7 Religious expression + a comment 5 23 8 28 5 6

395

8 Religious expression + praising 18 19 6 4 32 12

10 Religious expression + encouraging 1 2 7

2 Religious expression + metaphor 17

12 Others 1 3 5 4 5 2

15 Praying 10 2 5 15

3 Religious expression + repetition 1

11 Religious expression + seeking advice 3

9 Religious expression + giving advice 1 22

13 Religious expression + appreciation token

14 Appreciation token

16 Praising

Stranger

Appearance

Po

sses

sio

n

Skill

Trai

t

Compliment strategies Mal

e

Fem

ale

Mal

e

Fem

ale

Mal

e

Fem

ale

Mal

e

Fem

ale

1 Religious expression 6 5 6 14 13 2 5


praying 3 3 3 12 16 1


compliment 43 21 36 27 3 11 6 1



396


comment 2 13 5 7 6 1 4 2


praising 3 17 3 5 15 14 13 13


encouraging 7 6


metaphor 2

12 Others 1 2

15 Praying 1 2 1 6 10 31

Possession-Close

relationship


repetition


seeking advice 6 14


giving advice 1 2 2 6


appreciation token


16 Praising

397

Power status

Appearance

Po

sses

sio

n

Skill

Trai

t


e

Fem

ale

Mal

e

Fem

ale

Mal

e

Fem

ale

Mal

e

Fem

ale

1 Religious expression 6 10 3 9 5 3 2


praying 3 3 3 2 17 18


compliment 32 10 33 14 9 4 3 7


question 5 3 5 1


comment 1 15 5 6 4 2 3


praising 7 15 9 24 24 19 19 13


encouraging 2 5


metaphor 9 1 2

12 Others 2 2 1 2 2

15 Praying 6 4 1 3 10 10

398

Possession-Close

relationship


repetition 1


seeking advice 8 26 1 2


giving advice 1


appreciation token


16 Praising

Position

Appearance- Close

relationship

Po

sses

sio

n

Skill

Trai

t

Compliment

strategies

Yo

un

g

Sub

ord

inat

e

Sup

erio

r

Yo

un

g

Sub

ord

inat

e

Sup

erio

r

Yo

un

g

Sub

ord

inat

e

Sup

erio

r

Yo

un

g

Sub

ord

inat

e

Sup

erio

r

1 Religious

expression 4 3 6 3 1 2 6 1 3 1 6 3

4 Religious

expression +

praying 3 1 13 14 8 4 7

399

5 Inappropriate for

giving a

compliment 1 1 1 15

6 Religious

expression + a

question 1 3 1 5 2 5 1 1

7 Religious

expression + a

comment 13 6 9 10 10 16 1 4 2

8 Religious

expression +

praising 12 12 13 4 2 4 29 7 8 5 5

10 Religious

expression +

encouraging 1 2 1 2 4 3 4 8

2 Religious

expression +

metaphor 5 5 7

12 Others 4 2 7 1 6 3

15 Praying 6 4 3 4 8 7 1 16 15

Possession-Close

relationship

3 Religious

expression +

repetition 1

400

11 Religious

expression +

seeking advice 3

9 Religious

expression + giving

advice 10 13 9 1 9

13 Religious

expression +

appreciation token 4

14 Appreciation

token 1

16 Praising 2

Appearance-

Stranger

Po

sses

sio

n

Skill

Trai

t

Compliment

strategies Yo

un

g

Sub

ord

ina

te

Sup

erio

r

Yo

un

g

Sub

ord

inat

e

Sup

erio

r

Yo

un

g

Sub

ord

inat

e

Sup

erio

r

Yo

un

g

Sub

ord

inat

e

Sup

erio

r

1 Religious

expression 2 4 5 8 6 6 10 5 4 1

401

4 Religious

expression +

praying 2 1 3 1 2 1 6 5 8 8 1

5 Inappropriate for

giving a

compliment 24 17 23 20 18 25 5 6 3 3 3 1

6 Religious

expression + a

question 1 3 4 2 6 2 1

7 Religious

expression + a

comment 2 7 6 1 8 3 5 2 4 2

8 Religious

expression +

praising 10 8 2 5 2 1 18 5 6 17 5 4

10 Religious

expression +

encouraging 2 5 6

2 Religious

expression +

metaphor 1 1

12 Others 1 2

15 Praying 1 2 5 2 16 25

Possession-Close

relationship

402

3 Religious

expression +

repetition

11 Religious

expression +

seeking advice 4 4 12

9 Religious

expression + giving

advice 1 1 1 3 2 3

13 Religious

expression +

appreciation token

14 Appreciation

token 1

16 Praising

Appearance-Power

status

Po

sses

sio

n

Skill

Trai

t

Compliment

strategies Yo

un

g

Sub

ord

ina

te

Sup

erio

r

Yo

un

g

Sub

ord

inat

e

Sup

erio

r

Yo

un

g

Sub

ord

inat

e

Sup

erio

r

Yo

un

g

Sub

ord

inat

e

Sup

erio

r

403

1 Religious

expression 10 6 5 5 2 1 5 2 1 1

4 Religious

expression +

praying 3 1 2 2 2 1 11 16 8

5 Inappropriate for

giving a

compliment 27 6 9 25 11 11 9 2 2 7 2 1

6 Religious

expression + a


7 Religious

expression + a

comment 4 12 1 5 5 2 4 1 1 1

8 Religious

expression +

praising 11 9 2 5 11 17 14 14 15 16 9 7

10 Religious

expression +

encouraging 1 6

2 Religious

expression +

metaphor 1 2 7 1 1

12 Others 1 1 2 1 3 1

15 Praying 4 2 2 2 2 2 5 15

404

Possession-Close

relationship

3 Religious

expression +

repetition 1

11 Religious

expression +

seeking advice 13 12 9 3

9 Religious

expression + giving

advice 1

13 Religious

expression +

appreciation token

14 Appreciation

token 1 1 1

16 Praising

405

Appendix O - DCT frequency data analysis to identify the effect of age, gender,

and social position on dominant compliment responding strategies.

RESPONSE DCT ANALYSIS

Age of participants

Appearance- Close

relationship

Po

sses

sio

n

Skill

Trai

t


5

40 P

LUS

18-2

5

40 P

LUS

18-2

5

40 P

LUS

18-2

5

40 P

LUS

1 Accepting


tokens 16 4 4 5 7 6 7

2 Accepting


utterances 12 8 4 9 3 3

5 Accepting

Compliments/Praise upgrades 1 2 1 1

8 Evading

Compliments/Shifting credit 9 1 2 1 13 5 7 16

15 Offering 1 8 6

17 Remaining silent + smile 1 1 1 1 1 1 2

3 Accepting


utterances 1 4 16

406

4 Accepting


Compliments 44 5 25 9 31 11 22


praying for the giver of 18 12 26 3 22 3 18

14 Invocation request 2 5 2 1

21 Jokes 1 2 1

9 Evading


comment 1 5 6 5

19 Fishing for more

compliments 1

20 Motivation 1

10 Evading

Compliments/Request

reassurance 1 2


Disagreeing utterances 1


offering help 1

6 Accepting


pleasure 2

407

Appearance-Stranger

Po

sses

sio

n

Skill

Trai

t


5

40 P

LUS

18-2

5

40 P

LUS

18-2

5

40 P

LUS

18-2

5

40 P

LUS

1 Accepting


tokens 2 4 6 3 7 4 3 4

2 Accepting


utterances 3 2 1 3 3 4 1

5 Accepting

Compliments/Praise upgrades 1

8 Evading

Compliments/Shifting credit 1 2 4 2 11

15 Offering 11 17

17 Remaining silent + smile 3 3 2 5 2

3 Accepting


utterances 3 1 4 1 15

4 Accepting


Compliments 27 49 10 31 1 7 14 16


praying for the giver of 4 16 3 12 2 12 10 28

14 Invocation request 2 4 2 4 8

408

21 Jokes 1

9 Evading


comment 2 4 12 31 3 1

19 Fishing for more

compliments

20 Motivation

10 Evading

Compliments/Request

reassurance


Disagreeing utterances 1 2


offering help 10 7

6 Accepting


pleasure 1 2 1 2

409

Appearance-Power status

Po

sses

sio

n

Skill

Trai

t


5

40 P

LUS

18-2

5

40 P

LUS

18-2

5

40 P

LUS

18-2

5

40 P

LUS

1 Accepting


tokens 5 2 17 8 9 10 14 9

2 Accepting


utterances 1 2 3 1 1 1 3

5 Accepting

Compliments/Praise upgrades 2 1

8 Evading

Compliments/Shifting credit 2 2 2 10 6 5

15 Offering 5 20 1

17 Remaining silent + smile 4 1 1 2 1 1 1 1

3 Accepting



4 Accepting


Compliments 28 60 10 31 6 6 7 24




410

21 Jokes

9 Evading


comment 2 3 22

19 Fishing for more

compliments

20 Motivation

10 Evading

Compliments/Request

reassurance 1




offering help 10 1

6 Accepting


pleasure 3 18 5 4

411

Gender of participants

Appearance-Close

relationship

Po

sses

sio

n

Skill

Trai

t


e

Fem

ale

Mal

e

Fem

ale

Mal

e

Fem

ale

Mal

e

Fem

ale

1 Accepting


tokens 7 13 4 5 8 5 2 5

2 Accepting


utterances 14 6 9 4 1 2 1 2

5 Accepting

Compliments/Praise upgrades 1 1 1 1 1

8 Evading

Compliments/Shifting credit 8 2 3 15 3 14 9

15 Offering 1 5 9

17 Remaining silent + smile 1 1 1 1 2 2

3 Accepting


utterances 1 20

4 Accepting


Compliments 21 23 2 28 18 22 11 22

412




21 Jokes 1 2 1

9 Evading


comment 1 3 8 2 3

19 Fishing for more

compliments 1

20 Motivation 1

10 Evading

Compliments/Request

reassurance 1 1 1


Disagreeing utterances 1


offering help 1

6 Accepting


pleasure 2

413

Appearance-Stranger

Po

sses

sio

n

Skill

Trai

t


e

Fem

ale

Mal

e

Fem

ale

Mal

e

Fem

ale

Mal

e

Fem

ale

1 Accepting


tokens 5 1 6 3 9 2 4 3

2 Accepting



5 Accepting

Compliments/Praise upgrades 1

8 Evading

Compliments/Shifting credit 1 6 10 3

15 Offering 25 3


3 Accepting


utterances 3 4 1 16

4 Accepting


Compliments 29 47 2 39 3 5 10 20




414

21 Jokes 1

9 Evading


comment 1 5 12 31 4

19 Fishing for more

compliments

20 Motivation

10 Evading

Compliments/Request

reassurance


Disagreeing utterances 1 2


offering help 7 10

6 Accepting


pleasure 1 2 3

415

Appearance-Power status

Po

sses

sio

n

Skill

Trai

t


e

Fem

ale

Mal

e

Fem

ale

Mal

e

Fem

ale

Mal

e

Fem

ale

1 Accepting


tokens 5 2 7 18 16 3 8 15

2 Accepting


utterances 1 5 2 2 2

5 Accepting

Compliments/Praise upgrades 2 1

8 Evading

Compliments/Shifting credit 2 1 1 11 1 10 1

15 Offering 19 6 1


3 Accepting



4 Accepting


Compliments 34 54 14 27 7 5 10 21


praying for the giver of 2 3 6 3 5 7 9


416

21 Jokes

9 Evading


comment 2 6 19

19 Fishing for more

compliments

20 Motivation

10 Evading

Compliments/Request

reassurance 1




offering help 1 10

6 Accepting


pleasure 2 19 9

417

DCT analysis-Position

Appearance- Close

relationship

Po

sses

sio

n

Skill

Trai

t

Compliment

strategies

Yo

un

g

Sub

ord

ina

te

Sup

erio

r

Yo

un

g

Sub

ord

inat

e

Sup

erio

r

Yo

un

g

Sub

ord

inat

e

Sup

erio

r

Yo

un

g

Sub

ord

inat

e

Sup

erio

r

1 Accepting

Compliments/Appreci

ation tokens 16 2 2 4 3 2 7 3 3 7

2 Accepting

Compliments/Agreein

g utterances 12 3 5 4 4 5 3 2 1

5 Accepting

Compliments/Praise

upgrades 1 2 1 1

8 Evading


credit 9 1 2 1 13 2 3 7 6 10

15 Offering 1 8 1 5 4

17 Remaining silent +

smile 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

3 Accepting

Compliments/Downg

rading utterances 1 4 7 9

418

4 Accepting

Compliments/Returni

ng Compliments 24 20 5 11 14 9 13 18 11 9 13

7 Accepting

Compliments/

praying for the giver

of 8 10 12 15 11 3 11 11 3 12 6

14 Invocation request 1 1 2 3 1 1 1

21 Jokes 1 2 1

9 Evading

Compliments/Inform

ative comment 1 5 2 5

19 Fishing for more

compliments 1

20 Motivation 1

10 Evading

Compliments/Reques

t reassurance 1 2

12 Rejecting

Compliments /

Disagreeing

utterances 1

24 Accepting

Compliments/

offering help 1

419

6 Accepting

Compliments/Express

ing pleasure 2

Appearance-

Stranger

Po

sses

sio

n

Skill

Trai

t

Compliment

strategies

Yo

un

g

Sub

ord

inae

Sup

erio

r

Yo

un

g

Sub

ord

inat

e

Sup

erio

r

Yo

un

g

Sub

ord

inat

e

Sup

erio

r

Yo

un

g

Sub

ord

inat

e

Sup

erio

r

1 Accepting

Compliments/Appreci

ation tokens 2 2 2 6 1 2 7 1 3 3 3 1

2 Accepting

Compliments/Agreein

g utterances 3 2 1 3 2 1 4 1

5 Accepting

Compliments/Praise

upgrades 1

8 Evading


credit 1 2 3 1 2 6 5

15 Offering 11 10 7


smile 3 3 2 2 3 2

420

3 Accepting

Compliments/Downg

rading utterances 3 1 3 1 1 3 12

4 Accepting

Compliments/Returni

ng Compliments 27 27 22 10 16 15 1 4 3 14 10 6

7 Accepting

Compliments/


of 4 8 8 3 6 6 2 7 5 10 13 15

14 Invocation request 2 2 2 2 4 4 4

21 Jokes 1

9 Evading

Compliments/Inform

ative comment 2 2 2 12 11 20 3 1

19 Fishing for more

compliments

20 Motivation

10 Evading

Compliments/Reques

t reassurance

12 Rejecting

Compliments /

Disagreeing

utterances 1 2

421

24 Accepting

Compliments/

offering help 10 5 2

6 Accepting

Compliments/Express

ing pleasure 1 2 1 1 1

Appearance- Power

Status

Po

sses

sio

n

Skill

Trai

t

Compliment

strategies Yo

un

g

Sub

ord

ina

te

Sup

erio

r

Yo

un

g

Sub

ord

inat

e

Sup

erio

r

Yo

un

g

Sub

ord

inat

e

Sup

erio

r

Yo

un

g

Sub

ord

inat

e

Sup

erio

r

1 Accepting

Compliments/Appreci

ation tokens 5 1 1 17 4 4 9 9 1 14 8 1

2 Accepting

Compliments/Agreein

g utterances 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 3

5 Accepting

Compliments/Praise

upgrades 1 1 1

8 Evading


credit 2 2 2 4 6 6 2 3

15 Offering 5 12 8 1

422


smile 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

3 Accepting

Compliments/Downg

rading utterances 9 1 5 2 1 6 2 8 12

4 Accepting

Compliments/Returni

ng Compliments 28 36 24 10 12 19 6 3 3 7 12 12

7 Accepting

Compliments/


of 1 1 3 5 2 2 2 1 2 4 4 8


21 Jokes

9 Evading

Compliments/Inform

ative comment 2 3 8 14

19 Fishing for more

compliments

20 Motivation

10 Evading

Compliments/Reques

t reassurance 1

12 Rejecting

Compliments /

423

Disagreeing

utterances

24 Accepting

Compliments/

offering help 10 1

6 Accepting

Compliments/Express

ing pleasure 3 11 7 5 2 2

Appendix P-ANOVA results of DCT data showing significance assessment of

main effects and interactions in complimenting behaviour.

5. Position * Gender

Dependent

Variable Position Gender Mean Std. Error

95% Confidence Interval

Lower Bound Upper Bound

Appearance

Close

Relationship

Young (Student) Male 4.700a .679 3.356 6.044

Female 7.000a .679 5.656 8.344

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 5.500a .679 4.156 6.844

Female 10.050a .679 8.706 11.394

Superior Male 3.500a .679 2.156 4.844

Female 9.150a .679 7.806 10.494

Possession

Close

Relationship


Female 6.000a .686 4.642 7.358

Male 5.550a .686 4.192 6.908

424

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Female 8.900a .686 7.542 10.258

Superior Male 6.000a .686 4.642 7.358

Female 7.650a .686 6.292 9.008

Skill Close

Relationship


Female 8.200a .566 7.078 9.322

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 7.800a .566 6.678 8.922

Female 11.600a .566 10.478 12.722

Superior Male 7.050a .566 5.928 8.172

Female 11.100a .566 9.978 12.222

Trait Close

Relationship


Female 9.250a .740 7.784 10.716

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 9.600a .740 8.134 11.066

Female 12.850a .740 11.384 14.316

Superior Male 11.050a .740 9.584 12.516

Female 11.300a .740 9.834 12.766

Appearance

Stranger


Female 6.450a .526 5.408 7.492

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 4.600a .526 3.558 5.642

Female 6.750a .526 5.708 7.792

Superior Male 4.800a .526 3.758 5.842

Female 5.900a .526 4.858 6.942

Possession

Stranger


Female 4.100a .452 3.204 4.996

425

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 5.150a .452 4.254 6.046

Female 5.100a .452 4.204 5.996

Superior Male 4.650a .452 3.754 5.546

Female 4.800a .452 3.904 5.696

Skill Stranger Young (Student) Male 7.900a .688 6.537 9.263

Female 7.100a .688 5.737 8.463

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 3.550a .688 2.187 4.913

Female 9.200a .688 7.837 10.563

Superior Male 6.000a .688 4.637 7.363

Female 9.700a .688 8.337 11.063

Trait Stranger Young (Student) Male 6.050a .709 4.646 7.454

Female 6.750a .709 5.346 8.154

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 6.350a .709 4.946 7.754

Female 13.150a .709 11.746 14.554

Superior Male 11.800a .709 10.396 13.204

Female 13.350a .709 11.946 14.754

Appearance

Power Status


Female 6.700a .694 5.325 8.075

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 5.000a .694 3.625 6.375

Female 7.000a .694 5.625 8.375

Superior Male 3.850a .694 2.475 5.225

Female 6.800a .694 5.425 8.175

Possession

Power Status


Female 4.450a .585 3.291 5.609

426

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 6.100a .585 4.941 7.259

Female 6.850a .585 5.691 8.009

Superior Male 5.450a .585 4.291 6.609

Female 7.950a .585 6.791 9.109

Skill Power

Status


Female 8.050a .664 6.734 9.366

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 6.500a .664 5.184 7.816

Female 9.350a .664 8.034 10.666

Superior Male 7.150a .664 5.834 8.466

Female 9.300a .664 7.984 10.616

Trait Power

Status


Female 7.200a .807 5.602 8.798

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 5.750a .807 4.152 7.348

Female 8.850a .807 7.252 10.448

Superior Male 11.650a .807 10.052 13.248

Female 8.900a .807 7.302 10.498

a. Based on modified population marginal mean

6. Position * Age

Dependent

Variable Position Age (years) Mean Std. Error



Appearance

Close

Relationship

Young (Student) 18 - 25 5.850 .480 4.900 6.800

40 and above . a . . .

18 - 25 . a . . .

427

Subordinate

(Secretary)

40 and above 7.775 .480 6.825 8.725

Superior 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 6.325 .480 5.375 7.275

Possession

Close

Relationship

Young (Student) 18 - 25 5.850 .485 4.890 6.810


Subordinate

(Secretary)

From (18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 7.225 .485 6.265 8.185

Superior 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 6.825 .485 5.865 7.785

Skill Close

Relationship

Young (Student) 18 - 25 8.225 .401 7.431 9.019


Subordinate

(Secretary)

18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 9.700 .401 8.906 10.494

Superior 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 9.075 .401 8.281 9.869

Trait Close

Relationship

Young (Student) 18 - 25 8.175 .523 7.139 9.211


Subordinate

(Secretary)

18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 11.225 .523 10.189 12.261

Superior 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 11.175 .523 10.139 12.211

Appearance

Stranger

Young (Student) 18 - 25 5.775 .372 5.038 6.512


428

Subordinate

(Secretary)

18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 5.675 .372 4.938 6.412

Superior 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 5.350 .372 4.613 6.087

Possession

Stranger

Young (Student) 18 - 25 4.625 .320 3.991 5.259


Subordinate

(Secretary)

18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 5.125 .320 4.491 5.759

Superior 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 4.725 .320 4.091 5.359

Skill Stranger Young (Student) 18 - 25 7.500 .487 6.536 8.464


Subordinate

(Secretary)

18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 6.375 .487 5.411 7.339

Superior 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 7.850 .487 6.886 8.814

Trait Stranger Young (Student) 18 - 25 6.400 .501 5.407 7.393


Subordinate

(Secretary)

18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 9.750 .501 8.757 10.743

Superior 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 12.575 .501 11.582 13.568

Appearance

Power Status

Young (Student) 18 - 25 5.850 .491 4.878 6.822


429

Subordinate

(Secretary)

18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 6.000 .491 5.028 6.972

Superior 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 5.325 .491 4.353 6.297

Possession

Power Status

Young (Student) 18 - 25 4.775 .414 3.955 5.595


Subordinate

(Secretary)

18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 6.475 .414 5.655 7.295

Superior From (18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 6.700 .414 5.880 7.520

Skill Power

Status

Young (Student) 18 - 25 7.875 .470 6.945 8.805


Subordinate

(Secretary)

18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 7.925 .470 6.995 8.855

Superior 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 8.225 .470 7.295 9.155

Trait Power

Status

Young (Student) 18 - 25 6.550 .570 5.420 7.680


Subordinate

(Secretary)

18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 7.300 .570 6.170 8.430

Superior 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 10.275 .570 9.145 11.405

a. This level combination of factors is not observed, thus the corresponding population marginal

mean is not estimable.

430

7. Gender * Age

Dependent

Variable Gender Age Mean Std. Error



Appearance

Close

Relationship

Male 18 - 25 4.700a .679 3.356 6.044

40 and above 4.500a .480 3.550 5.450

Female 18 - 25 7.000a .679 5.656 8.344

40 and above 9.600a .480 8.650 10.550

Possession

Close

Relationship

Male 18 - 25 5.700a .686 4.342 7.058

40 and above 5.775a .485 4.815 6.735

Female 18 - 25 6.000a .686 4.642 7.358

40 and above 8.275a .485 7.315 9.235

Skill Close

Relationship

Male 18 - 25 8.250a .566 7.128 9.372

40 and above 7.425a .401 6.631 8.219

Female 18 - 25 8.200a .566 7.078 9.322

40 and above 11.350a .401 10.556 12.144

Trait Close

Relationship

Male 18 - 25 7.100a .740 5.634 8.566

40 and above 10.325a .523 9.289 11.361

Female 18 - 25 9.250a .740 7.784 10.716

40 and above 12.075a .523 11.039 13.111

Appearance

Stranger

Male 18 - 25 5.100a .526 4.058 6.142

40 and above 4.700a .372 3.963 5.437

Female 18 - 25 6.450a .526 5.408 7.492

40 and above 6.325a .372 5.588 7.062

Male 18 - 25 5.150a .452 4.254 6.046

431

Possession

Stranger

40 and above 4.900a .320 4.266 5.534

Female 18 - 25 4.100a .452 3.204 4.996

40 and above 4.950a .320 4.316 5.584

Skill Stranger Male 18 - 25 7.900a .688 6.537 9.263

40 and above 4.775a .487 3.811 5.739

Female 18 - 25 7.100a .688 5.737 8.463

40 and above 9.450a .487 8.486 10.414

Trait Stranger Male 18 - 25 6.050a .709 4.646 7.454

40 and above 9.075a .501 8.082 10.068

Female 18 - 25 6.750a .709 5.346 8.154

40 and above 13.250a .501 12.257 14.243

Appearance

Power Status

Male 18 - 25 5.000a .694 3.625 6.375

40 and above 4.425a .491 3.453 5.397

Female 18 - 25 6.700a .694 5.325 8.075

40 and above 6.900a .491 5.928 7.872

Possession

Power Status

Male 18 - 25 5.100a .585 3.941 6.259

40 and above 5.775a .414 4.955 6.595

Female 18 - 25 4.450a .585 3.291 5.609

40 and above 7.400a .414 6.580 8.220

Skill Power

Status

Male 18 - 25 7.700a .664 6.384 9.016

40 and above 6.825a .470 5.895 7.755

Female 18 - 25 8.050a .664 6.734 9.366

40 and above 9.325a .470 8.395 10.255

Male 18 - 25 5.900a .807 4.302 7.498

432

Trait Power

Status

40 and above 8.700a .570 7.570 9.830

Female 18 - 25 7.200a .807 5.602 8.798

40 and above 8.875a .570 7.745 10.005

a. Based on modified population marginal mean

8. Position * Gender * Age

Dependent

Variable Position Gender Age Mean

Std.

Error

95% Confidence

Interval

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

Appearance

Close

Relationship

Young

(Student)

Male 18 - 25 4.700 .679 3.356 6.044

40 and

above

. a . . .

Female 18 - 25 7.000 .679 5.656 8.344

40 and

above

. a . . .

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

5.500 .679 4.156 6.844

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

10.050 .679 8.706 11.394

Superior Male 18 - 25 . a . . .

433

40 and

above

3.500 .679 2.156 4.844

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

9.150 .679 7.806 10.494

Possession

Close

Relationship

Young

(Student)

Male 18 - 25 5.700 .686 4.342 7.058

40 and

above

. a . . .

Female 18 - 25 6.000 .686 4.642 7.358

40 and

above

. a . . .

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

5.550 .686 4.192 6.908

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

8.900 .686 7.542 10.258


40 and

above

6.000 .686 4.642 7.358

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

7.650 .686 6.292 9.008

Male 18 - 25 8.250 .566 7.128 9.372

434

Skill Close

Relationship

Young

(Student)

40 and

above

. a . . .

Female 18 - 25 8.200 .566 7.078 9.322

40 and

above

. a . . .

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

7.800 .566 6.678 8.922

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

11.600 .566 10.478 12.722


40 and

above

7.050 .566 5.928 8.172

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

11.100 .566 9.978 12.222

Trait Close

Relationship

Young

(Student)

Male 18 - 25 7.100 .740 5.634 8.566

40 and

above

. a . . .

Female 18 - 25 9.250 .740 7.784 10.716

40 and

above

. a . . .

Male 18 - 25 . a . . .

435

Subordinate

(Secretary)

40 and

above

9.600 .740 8.134 11.066

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

12.850 .740 11.384 14.316


40 and

above

11.050 .740 9.584 12.516

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

11.300 .740 9.834 12.766

Appearance

Stranger

Young

(Student)

Male 18 - 25 5.100 .526 4.058 6.142

40 and

above

. a . . .

Female 18 - 25 6.450 .526 5.408 7.492

40 and

above

. a . . .

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

4.600 .526 3.558 5.642

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

6.750 .526 5.708 7.792


436

40 and

above

4.800 .526 3.758 5.842

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

5.900 .526 4.858 6.942

Possession

Stranger

Young

(Student)

Male 18 - 25 5.150 .452 4.254 6.046

40 and

above

. a . . .

Female 18 - 25 4.100 .452 3.204 4.996

40 and

above

. a . . .

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

5.150 .452 4.254 6.046

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

5.100 .452 4.204 5.996


40 and

above

4.650 .452 3.754 5.546

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

4.800 .452 3.904 5.696

Skill Stranger Male 18 - 25 7.900 .688 6.537 9.263

437

Young

(Student)

40 and

above

. a . . .

Female 18 - 25 7.100 .688 5.737 8.463

40 and

above

. a . . .

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

3.550 .688 2.187 4.913

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

9.200 .688 7.837 10.563


40 and

above

6.000 .688 4.637 7.363

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

9.700 .688 8.337 11.063

Trait Stranger Young

(Student)

Male 18 - 25 6.050 .709 4.646 7.454

40 and

above

. a . . .

Female 18 - 25 6.750 .709 5.346 8.154

40 and

above

. a . . .

Male 18 - 25 . a . . .

438

Subordinate

(Secretary)

40 and

above

6.350 .709 4.946 7.754

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

13.150 .709 11.746 14.554


40 and

above

11.800 .709 10.396 13.204

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

13.350 .709 11.946 14.754

Appearance

Power Status

Young

(Student)

Male 18 - 25 5.000 .694 3.625 6.375

40 and

above

. a . . .

Female 18 - 25 6.700 .694 5.325 8.075

40 and

above

. a . . .

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

5.000 .694 3.625 6.375

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

7.000 .694 5.625 8.375


439

40 and

above

3.850 .694 2.475 5.225

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

6.800 .694 5.425 8.175

Possession

Power Status

Young

(Student)

Male 18 - 25 5.100 .585 3.941 6.259

40 and

above

. a . . .

Female 18 - 25 4.450 .585 3.291 5.609

40 and

above

. a . . .

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

6.100 .585 4.941 7.259

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

6.850 .585 5.691 8.009


40 and

above

5.450 .585 4.291 6.609

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

7.950 .585 6.791 9.109

Male 18 - 25 7.700 .664 6.384 9.016

440

Skill Power

Status

Young

(Student)

40 and

above

. a . . .

Female 18 - 25 8.050 .664 6.734 9.366

40 and

above

. a . . .

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

6.500 .664 5.184 7.816

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

9.350 .664 8.034 10.666


40 and

above

7.150 .664 5.834 8.466

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

9.300 .664 7.984 10.616

Trait Power

Status

Young

(Student)

Male 18 - 25 5.900 .807 4.302 7.498

40 and

above

. a . . .

Female 18 - 25 7.200 .807 5.602 8.798

40 and

above

. a . . .

Male 18 - 25 . a . . .

441

Subordinate

(Secretary)

40 and

above

5.750 .807 4.152 7.348

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

8.850 .807 7.252 10.448


40 and

above

11.650 .807 10.052 13.248

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and

above

8.900 .807 7.302 10.498

a. This level combination of factors is not observed, thus the corresponding population

marginal mean is not estimable.

442

Tests of Between-Subjects Effects

Source

Dependent

Variable

Type III Sum

of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Corrected

Model

Appearance

Close

Relationship

659.600a 5 131.920 14.327 .000

Possession

Close

Relationship

180.367b 5 36.073 3.838 .003

Skill Close

Relationship

352.300c 5 70.460 10.978 .000

Trait Close

Relationship

396.542d 5 79.308 7.244 .000

Appearance

Stranger

80.500e 5 16.100 2.912 .016

Possession

Stranger

16.875f 5 3.375 .825 .535

Skill Stranger 510.042g 5 102.008 10.768 .000

Trait Stranger 1255.775h 5 251.155 24.994 .000

Appearance

Power Status

165.975i 5 33.195 3.447 .006

Possession

Power Status

160.967j 5 32.193 4.699 .001

443

Skill Power

Status

131.542k 5 26.308 2.983 .014

Trait Power

Status

499.142l 5 99.828 7.671 .000

Intercept Appearance

Close

Relationship

5078.224 1 5078.224 551.508 .000

Possession

Close

Relationship

5055.062 1 5055.062 537.823 .000

Skill Close

Relationship

9366.001 1 9366.001 1459.238 .000

Trait Close

Relationship

11741.188 1 11741.188 1072.469 .000

Appearance

Stranger

3712.507 1 3712.507 671.467 .000

Possession

Stranger

2716.238 1 2716.238 663.846 .000

Skill Stranger 6213.712 1 6213.712 655.922 .000

Trait Stranger 10082.507 1 10082.507 1003.366 .000

Appearance

Power Status

3872.812 1 3872.812 402.114 .000

Possession

Power Status

4043.401 1 4043.401 590.202 .000

444

Skill Power

Status

7520.003 1 7520.003 852.633 .000

Trait Power

Status

7328.418 1 7328.418 563.098 .000

Position Appearance

Close

Relationship

42.050 1 42.050 4.567 .035

Possession

Close

Relationship

3.200 1 3.200 .340 .561

Skill Close

Relationship

7.813 1 7.813 1.217 .272

Trait Close

Relationship

.050 1 .050 .005 .946

Appearance

Stranger

2.113 1 2.113 .382 .538

Possession

Stranger

3.200 1 3.200 .782 .378

Skill Stranger 43.512 1 43.512 4.593 .034

Trait Stranger 159.612 1 159.612 15.884 .000

Appearance

Power Status

9.112 1 9.112 .946 .333

Possession

Power Status

1.012 1 1.012 .148 .701

445

Skill Power

Status

1.800 1 1.800 .204 .652

Trait Power

Status

177.012 1 177.012 13.601 .000

Gender Appearance

Close

Relationship

465.894 1 465.894 50.597 .000

Possession

Close

Relationship

77.188 1 77.188 8.212 .005

Skill Close

Relationship

160.360 1 160.360 24.984 .000

Trait Close

Relationship

107.297 1 107.297 9.801 .002

Appearance

Stranger

67.507 1 67.507 12.210 .001

Possession

Stranger

4.474 1 4.474 1.093 .298

Skill Stranger 181.624 1 181.624 19.172 .000

Trait Stranger 228.124 1 228.124 22.702 .000

Appearance

Power Status

137.860 1 137.860 14.314 .000

Possession

Power Status

15.036 1 15.036 2.195 .141

446

Skill Power

Status

79.106 1 79.106 8.969 .003

Trait Power

Status

11.489 1 11.489 .883 .349

Age Appearance

Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Possession

Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Skill Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Trait Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Appearance

Stranger

.000 0 . . .

Possession

Stranger

.000 0 . . .

Skill Stranger .000 0 . . .

Trait Stranger .000 0 . . .

Appearance

Power Status

.000 0 . . .

Possession

Power Status

.000 0 . . .

447

Skill Power

Status

.000 0 . . .

Trait Power

Status

.000 0 . . .

Position *

Gender

Appearance

Close

Relationship

6.050 1 6.050 .657 .419

Possession

Close

Relationship

14.450 1 14.450 1.537 .218

Skill Close

Relationship

.312 1 .312 .049 .826

Trait Close

Relationship

45.000 1 45.000 4.110 .045

Appearance

Stranger

5.513 1 5.513 .997 .320

Possession

Stranger

.200 1 .200 .049 .825

Skill Stranger 19.013 1 19.013 2.007 .159

Trait Stranger 137.813 1 137.813 13.714 .000

Appearance

Power Status

4.512 1 4.512 .469 .495

Possession

Power Status

15.312 1 15.312 2.235 .138

448

Skill Power

Status

2.450 1 2.450 .278 .599

Trait Power

Status

171.113 1 171.113 13.148 .000

Position * Age Appearance

Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Possession

Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Skill Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Trait Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Appearance

Stranger

.000 0 . . .

Possession

Stranger

.000 0 . . .



Appearance

Power Status

.000 0 . . .

Possession

Power Status

.000 0 . . .

449

Skill Power

Status

.000 0 . . .

Trait Power

Status

.000 0 . . .

Gender * Age Appearance

Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Possession

Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Skill Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Trait Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Appearance

Stranger

.000 0 . . .

Possession

Stranger

.000 0 . . .



Appearance

Power Status

.000 0 . . .

Possession

Power Status

.000 0 . . .

450

Skill Power

Status

.000 0 . . .

Trait Power

Status

.000 0 . . .

Position *

Gender * Age

Appearance

Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Possession

Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Skill Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Trait Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Appearance

Stranger

.000 0 . . .

Possession

Stranger

.000 0 . . .



Appearance

Power Status

.000 0 . . .

Possession

Power Status

.000 0 . . .

451

Skill Power

Status

.000 0 . . .

Trait Power

Status

.000 0 . . .

Error Appearance

Close

Relationship

1049.700 114 9.208

Possession

Close

Relationship

1071.500 114 9.399

Skill Close

Relationship

731.700 114 6.418

Trait Close

Relationship

1248.050 114 10.948

Appearance

Stranger

630.300 114 5.529

Possession

Stranger

466.450 114 4.092

Skill Stranger 1079.950 114 9.473

Trait Stranger 1145.550 114 10.049

Appearance

Power Status

1097.950 114 9.631

Possession

Power Status

781.000 114 6.851

452

Skill Power

Status

1005.450 114 8.820

Trait Power

Status

1483.650 114 13.014

Total Appearance

Close

Relationship

7016.000 120

Possession

Close

Relationship

6532.000 120

Skill Close

Relationship

10804.000 120

Trait Close

Relationship

14109.000 120

Appearance

Stranger

4474.000 120

Possession

Stranger

3277.000 120

Skill Stranger 7883.000 120

Trait Stranger 13403.000 120

Appearance

Power Status

5197.000 120

Possession

Power Status

5238.000 120

453

Skill Power

Status

8833.000 120

Trait Power

Status

9743.000 120

Corrected Total Appearance

Close

Relationship

1709.300 119

Possession

Close

Relationship

1251.867 119

Skill Close

Relationship

1084.000 119

Trait Close

Relationship

1644.592 119

Appearance

Stranger

710.800 119

Possession

Stranger

483.325 119



Appearance

Power Status

1263.925 119

Possession

Power Status

941.967 119

454

Skill Power

Status

1136.992 119

Trait Power

Status

1982.792 119

a. R Squared = .386 (Adjusted R Squared = .359)

b. R Squared = .144 (Adjusted R Squared = .107)

c. R Squared = .325 (Adjusted R Squared = .295)

d. R Squared = .241 (Adjusted R Squared = .208)

e. R Squared = .113 (Adjusted R Squared = .074)

f. R Squared = .035 (Adjusted R Squared = -.007)

g. R Squared = .321 (Adjusted R Squared = .291)

h. R Squared = .523 (Adjusted R Squared = .502)

i. R Squared = .131 (Adjusted R Squared = .093)

j. R Squared = .171 (Adjusted R Squared = .135)

k. R Squared = .116 (Adjusted R Squared = .077)

l. R Squared = .252 (Adjusted R Squared = .219)

455

Appendix Q - ANOVA results of DCT data showing significance assessment of

main effects and interactions in compliment response behaviour.

5. Position * Gender

Dependent

Variable Position Gender Mean Std. Error



Appearance

Close

Relationship


Female 3.500a .795 1.924 5.076

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 5.450a .795 3.874 7.026

Female 4.700a .795 3.124 6.276

Superior Male 4.950a .795 3.374 6.526

Female 4.850a .795 3.274 6.426

Possession

Close

Relationship

Young (Student) Male 6.350a 1.046 4.278 8.422

Female 9.000a 1.046 6.928 11.072

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 8.300a 1.046 6.228 10.372

Female 5.200a 1.046 3.128 7.272

Superior Male 8.300a 1.046 6.228 10.372

Female 4.800a 1.046 2.728 6.872

Skill Close

Relationship


Female 6.200a .891 4.435 7.965

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 7.150a .891 5.385 8.915

Female 5.550a .891 3.785 7.315

Superior Male 5.050a .891 3.285 6.815

Female 6.250a .891 4.485 8.015

456

Trait Close

Relationship


Female 4.650a .646 3.370 5.930

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 5.650a .646 4.370 6.930

Female 6.550a .646 5.270 7.830

Superior Male 4.800a .646 3.520 6.080

Female 6.200a .646 4.920 7.480

Appearance

Stranger


Female 5.900a .888 4.140 7.660

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 6.150a .888 4.390 7.910

Female 4.600a .888 2.840 6.360

Superior Male 6.950a .888 5.190 8.710

Female 4.600a .888 2.840 6.360

Possession

Stranger


Female 6.550a 1.030 4.510 8.590

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 11.350a 1.030 9.310 13.390

Female 4.550a 1.030 2.510 6.590

Superior Male 11.850a 1.030 9.810 13.890

Female 4.950a 1.030 2.910 6.990

Skill Stranger Young (Student) Male 5.000a 1.344 2.338 7.662

Female 15.500a 1.344 12.838 18.162

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 11.550a 1.344 8.888 14.212

Female 7.350a 1.344 4.688 10.012

Superior Male 9.250a 1.344 6.588 11.912

Female 8.100a 1.344 5.438 10.762

457

Trait Stranger Young (Student) Male 6.550a .611 5.340 7.760

Female 4.600a .611 3.390 5.810

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 6.000a .611 4.790 7.210

Female 5.600a .611 4.390 6.810

Superior Male 4.300a .611 3.090 5.510

Female 6.300a .611 5.090 7.510

Appearance

Power Status


Female 4.350a .665 3.033 5.667

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 4.400a .665 3.083 5.717

Female 4.150a .665 2.833 5.467

Superior Male 4.150a .665 2.833 5.467

Female 4.300a .665 2.983 5.617

Possession

Power Status


Female 1.550a 1.057 -.544 3.644

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 10.200a 1.057 8.106 12.294

Female 6.200a 1.057 4.106 8.294

Superior Male 7.400a 1.057 5.306 9.494

Female 5.000a 1.057 2.906 7.094

Skill Power

Status


Female 14.350a 1.200 11.973 16.727

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 5.200a 1.200 2.823 7.577

Female 6.850a 1.200 4.473 9.227

Superior Male 6.750a 1.200 4.373 9.127

Female 7.150a 1.200 4.773 9.527

458

Trait Power

Status


Female 2.900a .665 1.584 4.216

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 3.700a .665 2.384 5.016

Female 4.100a .665 2.784 5.416

Superior Male 5.600a .665 4.284 6.916

Female 4.850a .665 3.534 6.166

a. Based on modified population marginal mean.

6. Position * Age

Dependent

Variable Position Age (Years) Mean Std. Error



Appearance

Close

Relationship

Young (Student) 18 - 25 3.725 .562 2.611 4.839


Subordinate

(Secretary)

18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 5.075 .562 3.961 6.189

Superior 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 4.900 .562 3.786 6.014

Possession

Close

Relationship

Young (Student) 18 - 25 7.675 .739 6.210 9.140


Subordinate

(Secretary)

18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 6.750 .739 5.285 8.215

Superior 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 6.550 .739 5.085 8.015

Young (Student) 18 - 25 6.775 .630 5.527 8.023

459

Skill Close

Relationship


Subordinate

(Secretary)

18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 6.350 .630 5.102 7.598

Superior 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 5.650 .630 4.402 6.898

Trait Close

Relationship

Young (Student) 18 - 25 5.050 .457 4.145 5.955


Subordinate

(Secretary)

18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 6.100 .457 5.195 7.005

Superior 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 5.500 .457 4.595 6.405

Appearance

Stranger

Young (Student) 18 - 25 5.925 .628 4.680 7.170


Subordinate

(Secretary)

18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 5.375 .628 4.130 6.620

Superior 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 5.775 .628 4.530 7.020

Possession

Stranger

Young (Student) 18 - 25 8.175 .728 6.733 9.617


Subordinate

(Secretary)

18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 7.950 .728 6.508 9.392

Superior 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 8.400 .728 6.958 9.842

Skill Stranger Young (Student) 18 - 25 10.250 .950 8.368 12.132

460


Subordinate

(Secretary)

18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 9.450 .950 7.568 11.332

Superior 18 - 225 . a . . .

40 and above 8.675 .950 6.793 10.557

Trait Stranger Young (Student) 18 - 25 5.575 .432 4.719 6.431


Subordinate

(Secretary)

18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 5.800 .432 4.944 6.656

Superior 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 5.300 .432 4.444 6.156

Appearance

Power Status

Young (Student) 18 - 25 5.200 .470 4.269 6.131


Subordinate

(Secretary)

18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 4.275 .470 3.344 5.206

Superior 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 4.225 .470 3.294 5.156

Possession

Power Status

Young (Student) 18 - 25 4.700 .748 3.219 6.181


Subordinate

(Secretary)

18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 8.200 .748 6.719 9.681

Superior 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 6.200 .748 4.719 7.681

Young (Student) 18 - 25 9.450 .849 7.769 11.131

461

Skill Power

Status


Subordinate

(Secretary)

18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 6.025 .849 4.344 7.706

Superior 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 6.950 .849 5.269 8.631

Trait Power

Status

Young (Student) 18 - 25 4.325 .470 3.394 5.256


Subordinate

(Secretary)

18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 3.900 .470 2.969 4.831

Superior 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 5.225 .470 4.294 6.156

a. This level combination of factors is not observed, thus the corresponding population marginal

mean is not estimable.

462

7. Gender * Age

Dependent

Variable Gender Age (Years) Mean Std. Error



Appearance

Close

Relationship

Male 18 - 25 3.950a .795 2.374 5.526

40 and above 5.200a .562 4.086 6.314

Female 18 - 225 3.500a .795 1.924 5.076

40 and above 4.775a .562 3.661 5.889

Possession

Close

Relationship

Male 18 - 25 6.350a 1.046 4.278 8.422

40 and above 8.300a .739 6.835 9.765

Female 18 - 25 9.000a 1.046 6.928 11.072

40 and above 5.000a .739 3.535 6.465

Skill Close

Relationship

Male 18 - 25 7.350a .891 5.585 9.115

40 and above 6.100a .630 4.852 7.348

Female 18 - 25 6.200a .891 4.435 7.965

40 and above 5.900a .630 4.652 7.148

Trait Close

Relationship

Male 18 - 25 5.450a .646 4.170 6.730

40 and above 5.225a .457 4.320 6.130

Female 18 - 25 4.650a .646 3.370 5.930

40 and above 6.375a .457 5.470 7.280

Appearance

Stranger

Male 18 - 25 5.950a .888 4.190 7.710

40 and above 6.550a .628 5.305 7.795

Female 18 - 25 5.900a .888 4.140 7.660

40 and above 4.600a .628 3.355 5.845

Male 18 - 25 9.800a 1.030 7.760 11.840

463

Possession

Stranger

40 and above 11.600a .728 10.158 13.042

Female 18 - 25 6.550a 1.030 4.510 8.590

40 and above 4.750a .728 3.308 6.192

Skill Stranger Male 18 - 25 5.000a 1.344 2.338 7.662

40 and above 10.400a .950 8.518 12.282

Female 18 - 25 15.500a 1.344 12.838 18.162

40 and above 7.725a .950 5.843 9.607

Trait Stranger Male 18 - 25 6.550a .611 5.340 7.760

40 and above 5.150a .432 4.294 6.006

Female 18 - 25 4.600a .611 3.390 5.810

40 and above 5.950a .432 5.094 6.806

Appearance

Power Status

Male 18 - 25 6.050a .665 4.733 7.367

40 and above 4.275a .470 3.344 5.206

Female 18 - 225 4.350a .665 3.033 5.667

40 and above 4.225a .470 3.294 5.156

Possession

Power Status

Male 18 - 25 7.850a 1.057 5.756 9.944

40 and above 8.800a .748 7.319 10.281

Female 18 - 25 1.550a 1.057 -.544 3.644

40 and above 5.600a .748 4.119 7.081

Skill Power

Status

Male 18 - 25 4.550a 1.200 2.173 6.927

40 and above 5.975a .849 4.294 7.656

Female 18 - 25 14.350a 1.200 11.973 16.727

40 and above 7.000a .849 5.319 8.681

Male 18 - 25 5.750a .665 4.434 7.066

464

Trait Power

Status

40 and above 4.650a .470 3.719 5.581

Female 18 - 25 2.900a .665 1.584 4.216

40 and above 4.475a .470 3.544 5.406

a. Based on modified population marginal mean.

8. Position * Gender * Ages

Dependent

Variable Position Gender Age (Years) Mean

Std.

Error

95% Confidence

Interval

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

Appearance

Close

Relationship

Young

(Student)

Male 18 - 25 3.950 .795 2.374 5.526


Female 18 - 25 3.500 .795 1.924 5.076


Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 18 - 25 . a . . .

Above 5.450 .795 3.874 7.026

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 4.700 .795 3.124 6.276


40 and above 4.950 .795 3.374 6.526

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 4.850 .795 3.274 6.426

Male 18 - 25 6.350 1.046 4.278 8.422

465

Possession

Close

Relationship

Young

(Student)

Above . a . . .

Female 18 - 25 9.000 1.046 6.928 11.072


Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 18 - 22 . a . . .

40 and above 8.300 1.046 6.228 10.372

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 5.200 1.046 3.128 7.272


40 and above 8.300 1.046 6.228 10.372

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 4.800 1.046 2.728 6.872

Skill Close

Relationship

Young

(Student)

Male 18 - 25 7.350 .891 5.585 9.115


Female 18 - 25 6.200 .891 4.435 7.965


Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 7.150 .891 5.385 8.915

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 5.550 .891 3.785 7.315


40 and above 5.050 .891 3.285 6.815

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 6.250 .891 4.485 8.015

Male 18 - 25 5.450 .646 4.170 6.730

466

Trait Close

Relationship

Young

(Student)


Female 18 - 25 4.650 .646 3.370 5.930


Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 5.650 .646 4.370 6.930

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 6.550 .646 5.270 7.830


40 and above 4.800 .646 3.520 6.080

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 6.200 .646 4.920 7.480

Appearance

Stranger

Young

(Student)

Male 18 - 25 5.950 .888 4.190 7.710


Female 18 - 25 5.900 .888 4.140 7.660


Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 6.150 .888 4.390 7.910

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 4.600 .888 2.840 6.360


40 and above 6.950 .888 5.190 8.710

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 4.600 .888 2.840 6.360

Male 18 - 25 9.800 1.030 7.760 11.840

467

Possession

Stranger

Young

(Student)


Female 18 - 25 6.550 1.030 4.510 8.590


Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 11.350 1.030 9.310 13.390

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 4.550 1.030 2.510 6.590


40 and above 11.850 1.030 9.810 13.890

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 4.950 1.030 2.910 6.990

Skill Stranger Young

(Student)

Male 18 - 25 5.000 1.344 2.338 7.662


Female 18 - 25 15.500 1.344 12.838 18.162


Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 11.550 1.344 8.888 14.212

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 7.350 1.344 4.688 10.012


40 and above 9.250 1.344 6.588 11.912

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 8.100 1.344 5.438 10.762

Trait Stranger Male 18 - 25 6.550 .611 5.340 7.760

468

Young

(Student)


Female 18 - 25 4.600 .611 3.390 5.810


Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 6.000 .611 4.790 7.210

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 5.600 .611 4.390 6.810


40 and above 4.300 .611 3.090 5.510

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 6.300 .611 5.090 7.510

Appearance

Power Status

Young

(Student)

Male 18 - 25 6.050 .665 4.733 7.367


Female 18 - 2 4.350 .665 3.033 5.667


Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 4.400 .665 3.083 5.717

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 4.150 .665 2.833 5.467


40 and above 4.150 .665 2.833 5.467

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 4.300 .665 2.983 5.617

Male 18 - 25 7.850 1.057 5.756 9.944

469

Possession

Power Status

Young

(Student)


Female 18 - 25 1.550 1.057 -.544 3.644


Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 10.200 1.057 8.106 12.294

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 6.200 1.057 4.106 8.294


40 and above 7.400 1.057 5.306 9.494

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 5.000 1.057 2.906 7.094

Skill Power

Status

Young

(Student)

Male 18 - 25 4.550 1.200 2.173 6.927


Female 18 - 25 14.350 1.200 11.973 16.727

Above . a . . .

Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 18 - 25 . a . . .

Above 5.200 1.200 2.823 7.577

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 6.850 1.200 4.473 9.227


Above 6.750 1.200 4.373 9.127

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

Above 7.150 1.200 4.773 9.527

Male 18 - 25 5.750 .665 4.434 7.066

470

Trait Power

Status

Young

(Student)


Female 18 - 25 2.900 .665 1.584 4.216


Subordinate

(Secretary)

Male 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 3.700 .665 2.384 5.016

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 4.100 .665 2.784 5.416


40 and above 5.600 .665 4.284 6.916

Female 18 - 25 . a . . .

40 and above 4.850 .665 3.534 6.166

a. This level combination of factors is not observed, thus the corresponding population

marginal mean is not estimable.

471

Tests of Between-Subjects Effects

Source

Dependent

Variable

Type III Sum

of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Corrected

Model

Appearance

Close

Relationship

50.867a 5 10.173 .804 .549

Possession

Close

Relationship

317.642b 5 63.528 2.905 .017

Skill Close

Relationship

79.042c 5 15.808 .996 .424

Trait Close

Relationship

56.300d 5 11.260 1.349 .249

Appearance

Stranger

85.742e 5 17.148 1.086 .372

Possession

Stranger

1048.175f 5 209.635 9.887 .000

Skill Stranger 1341.742g 5 268.348 7.432 .000

Trait Stranger 84.642h 5 16.928 2.268 .052

Appearance

Power Status

53.867i 5 10.773 1.219 .305

Possession

Power Status

861.167j 5 172.233 7.704 .000

472

Skill Power

Status

1240.375k 5 248.075 8.613 .000

Trait Power

Status

125.067l 5 25.013 2.832 .019

Intercept Appearance

Close

Relationship

2363.860 1 2363.860 186.802 .000

Possession

Close

Relationship

5863.953 1 5863.953 268.109 .000

Skill Close

Relationship

4684.247 1 4684.247 295.038 .000

Trait Close

Relationship

3558.824 1 3558.824 426.430 .000

Appearance

Stranger

3842.497 1 3842.497 243.378 .000

Possession

Stranger

7862.426 1 7862.426 370.815 .000

Skill Stranger 10701.636 1 10701.636 296.397 .000

Trait Stranger 3636.894 1 3636.894 487.227 .000

Appearance

Power Status

2521.988 1 2521.988 285.338 .000

Possession

Power Status

4522.353 1 4522.353 202.279 .000

473

Skill Power

Status

6925.560 1 6925.560 240.445 .000

Trait Power

Status

2348.065 1 2348.065 265.845 .000

Position Appearance

Close

Relationship

.613 1 .613 .048 .826

Possession

Close

Relationship

.800 1 .800 .037 .849

Skill Close

Relationship

9.800 1 9.800 .617 .434

Trait Close

Relationship

7.200 1 7.200 .863 .355

Appearance

Stranger

3.200 1 3.200 .203 .653

Possession

Stranger

4.050 1 4.050 .191 .663

Skill Stranger 12.013 1 12.013 .333 .565

Trait Stranger 5.000 1 5.000 .670 .415

Appearance

Power Status

.050 1 .050 .006 .940

Possession

Power Status

80.000 1 80.000 3.578 .061

474

Skill Power

Status

17.113 1 17.113 .594 .442

Trait Power

Status

35.112 1 35.112 3.975 .049

Gender Appearance

Close

Relationship

5.565 1 5.565 .440 .509

Possession

Close

Relationship

24.894 1 24.894 1.138 .288

Skill Close

Relationship

9.894 1 9.894 .623 .432

Trait Close

Relationship

4.026 1 4.026 .482 .489

Appearance

Stranger

41.650 1 41.650 2.638 .107

Possession

Stranger

860.826 1 860.826 40.599 .000

Skill Stranger 198.060 1 198.060 5.486 .021

Trait Stranger 2.647 1 2.647 .355 .553

Appearance

Power Status

14.826 1 14.826 1.677 .198

Possession

Power Status

579.812 1 579.812 25.934 .000

475

Skill Power

Status

604.889 1 604.889 21.001 .000

Trait Power

Status

45.589 1 45.589 5.162 .025

Age Appearance

Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Possession

Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Skill Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Trait Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Appearance

Stranger

.000 0 . . .

Possession

Stranger

.000 0 . . .



Appearance

Power Status

.000 0 . . .

Possession

Power Status

.000 0 . . .

476

Skill Power

Status

.000 0 . . .

Trait Power

Status

.000 0 . . .

Position *

Gender

Appearance

Close

Relationship

2.113 1 2.113 .167 .684

Possession

Close

Relationship

.800 1 .800 .037 .849

Skill Close

Relationship

39.200 1 39.200 2.469 .119

Trait Close

Relationship

1.250 1 1.250 .150 .699

Appearance

Stranger

3.200 1 3.200 .203 .653

Possession

Stranger

.050 1 .050 .002 .961

Skill Stranger 46.513 1 46.513 1.288 .259

Trait Stranger 28.800 1 28.800 3.858 .052

Appearance

Power Status

.800 1 .800 .091 .764

Possession

Power Status

12.800 1 12.800 .573 .451

477

Skill Power

Status

7.812 1 7.812 .271 .604

Trait Power

Status

6.613 1 6.613 .749 .389

Position * Age Appearance

Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Possession

Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Skill Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Trait Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Appearance

Stranger

.000 0 . . .

Possession

Stranger

.000 0 . . .



Appearance

Power Status

.000 0 . . .

Possession

Power Status

.000 0 . . .

478

Skill Power

Status

.000 0 . . .

Trait Power

Status

.000 0 . . .

Gender * Age Appearance

Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Possession

Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Skill Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Trait Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Appearance

Stranger

.000 0 . . .

Possession

Stranger

.000 0 . . .



Appearance

Power Status

.000 0 . . .

Possession

Power Status

.000 0 . . .

479

Skill Power

Status

.000 0 . . .

Trait Power

Status

.000 0 . . .

Position *

Gender * Age

Appearance

Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Possession

Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Skill Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Trait Close

Relationship

.000 0 . . .

Appearance

Stranger

.000 0 . . .

Possession

Stranger

.000 0 . . .



Appearance

Power Status

.000 0 . . .

Possession

Power Status

.000 0 . . .

480

Skill Power

Status

.000 0 . . .

Trait Power

Status

.000 0 . . .

Error Appearance

Close

Relationship

1442.600 114 12.654

Possession

Close

Relationship

2493.350 114 21.871

Skill Close

Relationship

1809.950 114 15.877

Trait Close

Relationship

951.400 114 8.346

Appearance

Stranger

1799.850 114 15.788

Possession

Stranger

2417.150 114 21.203

Skill Stranger 4116.050 114 36.106

Trait Stranger 850.950 114 7.464

Appearance

Power Status

1007.600 114 8.839

Possession

Power Status

2548.700 114 22.357

481

Skill Power

Status

3283.550 114 28.803

Trait Power

Status

1006.900 114 8.832

Total Appearance

Close

Relationship

3996.000 120

Possession

Close

Relationship

8677.000 120

Skill Close

Relationship

6589.000 120

Trait Close

Relationship

4704.000 120

Appearance

Stranger

5773.000 120

Possession

Stranger

11485.000 120



Appearance

Power Status

3564.000 120

Possession

Power Status

8274.000 120

482

Skill Power

Status

11229.000 120

Trait Power

Status

3544.000 120

Corrected Total Appearance

Close

Relationship

1493.467 119

Possession

Close

Relationship

2810.992 119

Skill Close

Relationship

1888.992 119

Trait Close

Relationship

1007.700 119

Appearance

Stranger

1885.592 119

Possession

Stranger

3465.325 119



Appearance

Power Status

1061.467 119

Possession

Power Status

3409.867 119

483

Skill Power

Status

4523.925 119

Trait Power

Status

1131.967 119

a. R Squared = .034 (Adjusted R Squared = -.008)

b. R Squared = .113 (Adjusted R Squared = .074)

c. R Squared = .042 (Adjusted R Squared = .000)

d. R Squared = .056 (Adjusted R Squared = .014)

e. R Squared = .045 (Adjusted R Squared = .004)

f. R Squared = .302 (Adjusted R Squared = .272)

g. R Squared = .246 (Adjusted R Squared = .213)

h. R Squared = .090 (Adjusted R Squared = .051)

i. R Squared = .051 (Adjusted R Squared = .009)

j. R Squared = .253 (Adjusted R Squared = .220)

k. R Squared = .274 (Adjusted R Squared = .242)

l. R Squared = .110 (Adjusted R Squared = .071)

484

Appendix S – Ethics Approval

The Influence of the Evil Eye Belief on Complimenting ...

Documents

Transcript of The Influence of the Evil Eye Belief on Complimenting ...