situation, more than half of INs and ELs give higher respect to the professor by addressing himher by using at least one alerter in the subcategory of title.
474
Meanwhile, in almost every high-status and equal-status situation, more than half of INs and ELs simply use alerter strategy in the subcategory of name to
address every favor giver in lower or equal-status level with respect to INs as the thankers.
475
It confirms what Kasper stated that the evidence of pragmatic transfer is identified when, a statistically significant trend of NSs of learners‘ L1 toward
one alternative is paralleled by a significant trend of language learners toward the same alternative in L2 context, reflected by there is a strategy which is used by
more than half of NSs and language learners in every situation which structurally draws one alternative which is significantly chosen.
476
1. Type of Pragmatic Transfer
Specifically, it is sociopragmatic transfer which is found by the fact that ELs transfer their L1-based social perception of non-egalitarian, represented by INs, to
their social perception on how they vary their preference of the subcategories of alerter strategy which is functioned as address term title and name based on the
assessment of the social status of the favor givers when accompanying their use of thanking strategy in L2 contexts. According to Kasper, sociopragmatic transfer
occurs when language learners‘ assessment which is subjectively equivalent to the
474
Table 5.2, 5.3, 5.5, 5.8, 5.10 and 5.13 INs Appendix 5
475
Table 5.1, 5.4, 5.6, 5.7, 5.9, 5.12, 5.14-5.16, and 5.18 INs Appendix 5
476
Gabriele Kasper 1986, op.cit,. p.223.
social perceptions in their L1 contexts underlies and influences their social perception in interpreting and performing linguistic action in L2.
477
As non-egalitarians who believe that people are unequal, INs extremely feels inappropriate to address a professor by simply mentioning hisher name. But,
it is appropriate to address junior student, classmate or student in the same batch by simply mentioning hisher name. Similar to INs, in every low-status situation
except situation 3, in accompanying thanking strategy, more than half of ELs address the professor by using at least one alerter strategy in the subcategory of
title.
478
But, in every high-status situation except in situation 1, 4 and 17 and in every equal-power situation except in situation 6 and 11, in accompanying
thanking strategy, similar to INs, more than half of ELs address the junior student, classmate or student in the same batch by simply using one alerter in the
subcategory of name included abbreviation of name, or endearment term.
479
In general, similar to INs, in addressing every favor giver to accompany the use of thanking strategy, ELs tend to give higher respect to the professor by
addressing hisher by using at least one alerter strategy in the subcategory of title, whereas they simply using alerter in the subcategory of name when they address
junior student, classmate or student in the same batch. Exhibited by the way how ELs vary their selection of the subcategories of alerter strategy which is
functioned as address term, similar to INs, ELs are also as non-egalitarians who are sensitive to status differences.
477
Ibid. pp. 209-210.
478
Table 5.2, 5.5, 5.8, 5.10 and 5.13 ELs Appendix 5
479
Table 5.7, 5.9, 5.12, 5.14-5.16 and 5.18 ELs Appendix 5
Thus, the evidence of sociopragmatic transfer is clear by the fact that, in addressing the favor givers to accompany their use of thanking strategy,
ELs‘ assessment of social status of the interlocutors which is equivalent to non-
egalitarian value orientation of their L1 contexts, represented by INs, influences their social perception on how to vary their selection of the subcategories of
alerter which is functioned as address term title or name in addressing the favor givers with different status in L2 contexts.
2. Manifestation of Pragmatic Transfer
