Int[ J[ Intercultural Rel[ Vol[ 11\ No[ 2\ pp[ 140Ð165\ 0887Þ 0887 Elsevier Science Ltd[ All rights reserved\ Pergamon Printed in Great Britain

9036Ð0656:87 ,08[99¦9[99

PII] S9036Ð0656"87#99996Ð7

NORMS OF APOLOGY DEPICTED IN U[S[ AMERICAN

AND JAPANESE LITERATURE ON MANNERS AND

ETIQUETTE

NAOMI SUGIMOTO�

Ferris University\ Japan

ABSTRACT[ In this study\ a cross!cultural comparison was made of "a# types ofsituations requiring apology and "b# principles for constructing and personalizingapology messages\ drawing examples of culturally idealized notions from Japaneseand U[S[ American conduct manuals[ The survey _rst revealed that] "a# Japaneseconduct manuals are more concerned with private apologies given for actions of agreater number of people in their in!group\ while U[S[ American conduct manualsfocus more on apologies primarily for their own actions in the public places and"b# U[S[ American readers are told to offer a {{sincere|| apology\ while Japanesecounterparts strive to give a {{sunao!na|| "indicative of amenable character# apology[While U[S[ American conduct manuals stress spontaneity and originality of the wordsused in apology\ conformity to the linguistic formulas is strongly emphasized inJapanese conduct manuals[ When personalizing their apology\ U[S[ Americans seemto {{individualize|| the message\ while Japanese seem to {{relationalize|| the message[Þ 0887 Elsevier Science Ltd[ All rights reserved[

{{To err is human\ to forgive divine[|| If this statement holds true in anyculture\ the act of attaining forgiveness by appropriately apologizing forthe error may require more than divine skills[ Literature on manners\ socalled conduct manuals and etiquette books\ are one type of culturalresources available in many cultures to people who _nd themselves in theposition of needing to apologize[ While the degree to which these peopleactually apologize according to the norms depicted in this type of literaturemay not be directly inferred from these works\ the advice given in thesebooks clearly reveals {{what a dominant segment of the population viewed

An earlier version of this paper was presented at the eighty!_rst annual meeting of the SpeechCommunication Association "San Antonio\ 0884#[ This study was conducted as part of theauthor|s doctoral dissertation at the University of Illinois and was partially supported by theUniversity of Illinois Dissertation Research Grant[ The author is grateful to Professor RuthAnne Clark for her assistance in all aspects of this study[�Ferris University\ 2!5!7\ Kugenuma!Kaigan\ Fujisawa\ Kanagawa\ 140!9926 Japan[ Tel[]¦70!355!23!4945^ Fax] ¦70!355!25!6667^ E!mail] naomi[Ýcity[fujisawa[kanagawa[jp

140

141 N[ Sugimoto

as being proper manners and desirable deportment] the behavioural codesand\ more important\ the behavioural ideals|| "Wouters\ 0876\ pp[ 395Ð396\ emphasis original#[

Books on manners and etiquette\ many of which are written for womenas their primary audience\ are often criticized as one of the cultural meansof perpetuating the status quo\ or inequalities based on class\ race\ orgender "Foster!Dixon\ 0882#[ Yet\ this power as a cultural agent alone canwarrant a careful analysis of this type of literature[ {{Through a culturalanalysis of the symbols of the etiquette book\ we may begin to unravel theideological campaign of the quest for "utopic# tasteful behavior|| "Foster!Dixon\ 0882\ p[ 79#[ A cross!cultural comparison of these books\ then\ willprovide insight into cultural similarities and di}erences in idealized notionsof apology between the cultures compared[

It should be noted\ however\ conduct ideals depicted in books on eti!quette are just that and cannot necessarily be taken to re~ect actualpractices of apology in the respective cultures[ Thus\ it is naive to build anargument about cultural practices of apology by treating {{do|s|| as whatevery member of the culture does and {{don|ts|| as what every member ofthe culture never does[ {{Do|s|| and {{don|ts|| in conduct manuals some!times reveal just the opposite[ If every member of the culture apologizesuniformly and appropriately\ there would be no need for etiquette books[Rather\ the fact that books do o}er advice suggests that variations andcon~icts exist within the culture[ These books show {{the appropriate||but not uniformly executed ways of accomplishing communicative tasksincluding apology[ Likewise\ the advice in conduct manuals on how notto apologize or the list of {{don|ts|| should be taken as behaviors that arediscouraged but certainly constitute part of the actual performance ofapology in the culture[ The fact that these options are mentioned in theconduct manuals suggests that the behaviors are within the range of the{{imaginable|| in the culture[ Thus\ hereafter\ advice on\ and examples of\apology given in conduct manuals are referred to as conduct ideals\ andtreated as examples of culture!speci_c norms which re~ect the actualpractices in each culture to a great extent\ but not completely[

In this study\ a large number of conduct manuals were consulted assources of information to investigate culture!speci_c idealized notionsabout apology in Japan and in the U[S[ Thirty!four books were chosenfrom both current and historical holdings of a variety of academic andpublic libraries as well as general bookstores in a Mid!Western town inthe U[S[ and a Tokyo suburb in Japan[ Publication dates of most of thebooks consulted range from 0859|s to 0889|s[ A special e}ort was madeto create a balance between cultures in terms of time\ targeted use andaudience[ Although a larger volume of etiquette literature in Japan thanin the U[S[ addresses written apologies\ an e}ort was made to limit thecross!cultural comparison of apology texts to the same modality "spoken

142Apology\ Manners\ Japan and USA

versus written# as much as possible in order to avoid biases due to thedi}erence in the means of communication[

Overall\ Japanese conduct manuals give far more attention to apologythan do their U[S[ American counterparts[ Almost all of Japanese conductmanuals\ especially books on letter!writing\ spend an entire chapter onapology[ In contrast\ only one "Martin\ 0871# of U[S[ American conductmanuals surveyed has an independent chapter on apology\ with the excep!tion of books on letter!writing[ Even when the books contain some ref!erences to {{apology||\ there are often some marginal comments onperfunctory apology "e[g[ a note of {{regrets|| to party invitations# inchapters on entertaining "Clark + Quigley\ 0816^ Hathaway\ 0817^ Boykin\0837^ Vanderbilt\ 0847^ Miller\ 0856^ Fleming\ 0871#\ conversations "Allen+ Briggs\ 0849a\ 0849b^ Post\ 0854^ Leslie\ 0861^ Glass\ 0880#\ or accidents"Clark + Quigley\ 0816^ Hathaway\ 0817^ Boykin\ 0837^ Watson\ 0837^Allen + Briggs\ 0849a\ 0849b^ Miller\ 0856^ Martin\ 0871^ Whitcomb\0875#[ In general\ mere perfunctory apologies and apologies exchanged insituations other than interpersonal contexts "e[g[ business\ diplomatic# areexcluded from this study[

This cross!cultural analysis focuses on two major areas[ In the _rst part\general cultural norms of apology re~ected in the conduct ideals arecompared[ These norms include "a# speci_cations of situations that aresaid to require apology and "b# goals in apology[ The second part concernswhat kinds of guidelines are given as to "a# how apology messages shouldbe constructed and "b# how these messages should be personalized[

Situations Anticipated to Require Apolo`y

One of the major functions of conduct manuals is to tell their readerswhen to perform a particular communicative task such as apology[ Sig!ni_cant di}erences are found in the types of situations that are said torequire apology in U[S[ American and Japanese conduct manuals[ Thesedi}erences are found in two areas\ setting for apology and the extentof personal responsibility in apology\ both of which re~ect norms ofinterpersonal communication in each culture[

The _rst major cultural di}erence lies in the public conduct versuspersonal relation distinction in setting for apology[ On the one hand\conduct ideals depicted in Japanese etiquette books deal mainly withsituations involving people who know each other "e[g[ friends\ neighbors\colleagues# rather than strangers[ On the other hand\ U[S[ Americanconduct manuals mostly contain model apologies exchanged in publicplaces[ The relationships between the involved are often transient ones\such as strangers saying {{excuse me|| to each other while passing throughthe theater aisles[ Even when the locale of apology shifts from public toprivate\ such as someone|s home for a dinner party and the relationships

143 N[ Sugimoto

between the involved become closer\ many of the examples in U[S[ conductmanuals are so!called {{perfunctory|| apologies o}ered for minor o}enseslike clumsiness at the table[

The second major cultural di}erence lies in the issues of who apologizesfor whose wrongdoing[ Etiquette books suggest that Japanese are expectedto apologize for actions of a far greater number of people than are U[S[Americans[ In U[S[ American conduct manuals\ people apologize only fortheir own mistakes\ with the exception of women|s apologizing for themishaps of their spouses\ young children or pets "Rosenfeld + Cass\ 0845#[By contrast\ in Japanese conduct manuals\ the readers are told to apologizefor o}enses committed by a greater range of people beyond themselves[In addition to examples of women|s apologizing for the mishaps of theirhusbands "Waga\ 0889#\ children "Shimoju\ 0879^ Kato\ 0874\ 0877^ Waga\0889^ Fujii\ 0881^ Komatsu\ 0881^ Kusumoto\ 0881^ Saishin hagaki\ 0881^Takahashi\ 0881# and pets "Waga\ 0889#\ Japanese conduct manuals con!tain numerous examples of people apologizing for others| misconduct suchas] "a# parents| apology for o}enses committed by their adult children\ insituations such as a car accident "Waga\ 0889# or not keeping in touchwith a former school teacher "Fujii\ 0881#^ "b# matchmakers| apology toone party for the delay in reply by the other party or for their rejection ofthe match "Maruyama + Sakurai\ 0889^ Fujii\ 0881^ Ikushima\ 0881# and"c# apology for recommendees| misconduct by those who recommendedthem for employment\ when the recommendees quit the job or embezzledthe company money "Shimoju\ 0879^ Nogi\ 0889^ Waga\ 0889^ Takahashi\0881#[

These cultural di}erences in the types of situations requiring apologycan be attributed to unique pro_les of each culture[ A Japanese conductmanual author\ Sakai "0881# mentions that people in post World War IIJapan were amazed by how frequently U[S[ American G[I[|s used phraseslike {{thank you|| and {{excuse me|| to strangers in public places[ Heattributes this greater concern of U[S[ Americans with public actions todiversity in the U[S[] {{U[S[ Americans need to rely heavily on this {publicconduct apology| as a survival skill to avoid unnecessary con~icts in sucha heterogeneous society|| "Sakai\ 0881\ p[ 06\ translated#[ This observationexplains why U[S[ conduct manuals pay less attention to apology[ Theinteractions with strangers in public places carry less signi_cance in anyculture[ After all\ the relationship between the involved is very transient\if any[ That is probably the reason why many of these apologies in U[S[American conduct manuals are perfunctory {{excuses me|s|| and {{I|msorry|s|| which do not require much instruction and therefore do notreceive much emphasis in conduct manuals[

The seemingly less concern of Japanese conduct manuals with these{{public conduct apologies|| likely re~ects a stronger in!group "uchi# versusout!group "soto# distinction in Japan[ When the distinction is sharply

144Apology\ Manners\ Japan and USA

drawn and people are generally concerned with interactions with membersof their in!group\ proper public conduct dealing with strangers may be ofless concern[

Furthermore\ the di}erent range of people for whom U[S[ Americansand Japanese are expected to apologize results from culturally di}erentapplications of relational categories of in!group "uchi# and out!group"soto#[ Both cultures seem to agree that people are expected to apologizefor the misconduct of only those who belong to them[ In U[S[ Americanculture\ that includes only self and small children and pets that supposedlylack the reason of mature adult humans[ U[S[ Americans may apologizefor other members of their family "e[g[ spouse#\ but the apology is limitedto the situations when the other member temporarily lost the reasons ofmature adult humans\ like being incapacitated by alcohol or excitementor when the apologizer and the real o}ender are strongly recognized asone unit "e[g[ a married couple#[ For the most part\ U[S[ American conductmanuals seem to consider adult individuals as autonomous and thereforeas not requiring others to apologize for their acts[ In contrast\ the groupof people Japanese are expected to apologize for seems to encompass alarger part of their social network\ ranging from their immediate familyand distant relatives\ to friends "mostly peers and juniors# from school orwork and to members of any other social networks to which they arestrongly connected[ This group could even include people they help witharranged marriage or employment[

Tavuchis "0880# introduces one such example of Japanese apology[After the 0861 massacre at Lod Airport in Israel by three Japanese terror!ists\ many Japanese youth visited the Israeli embassy in Tokyo to apologizefor the incident[ President of Kyoto University\ {{summoned to the Min!istry of Education\ bowed low|| "Tavuchis\ 0880\ p[ 32# to apologize forthe fact that two of the terrorists had attended the university[ Further\ theJapanese Education Minister at the time apologized for the shortcomingsof the educational system\ while Foreign Minister of Japan {{spoke ofthe dishonor to the nation|| "Tavuchis\ 0880\ p[ 32#[ Finally\ Japaneseambassador appeared on Jerusalem television to apologize to Israelis onlyto burst into tears at the end of his apology[ Being held accountable for afar greater number of people as such\ an average Japanese naturally hasfar more occasions to apologize than does an average U[S[ American[

{{SINCERE|| AND {{SUNAO||] THE GOALS IN APOLOGY

Conduct manuals not only tell their audience when to apologize\ butalso how to apologize in these situations[ By prescribing {{ideal apologies||\these books reveal what characteristics an apology message should possessin order to be e}ective in that culture[ In this section\ the adjectivesand adverbs used to modify the words {{apology|| and {{apologize|| were

145 N[ Sugimoto

analyzed to see which modi_er is most frequently used to describe a modelapology[

In U[S[ American conduct manuals\ there were 28 counts of the {{apol!ogy modi_ers|| and the most frequently used word\ {{sincere|| appearednine times\ followed by {{brief|| "seven counts#[ Occupying about a quarterof all counts of the {{apology modi_ers|| within the U[S[ American sample\{{sincere|| can be assumed as a cultural ideal in U[S[ American apology[According to Webster|s Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary of the EnglishLanguage "0878\ p[ 0229#\ meanings of {{sincere|| include] "a# free fromdeceit\ hypocrisy\ or falseness^ earnest^ "b# genuine\ real^ "c# pure\ unmixed^unadulterated and "d# sound\ unimpaired[ These meanings suggest purity\or lack of vicious intention[ From a theoretical perspective\ Schlenkerand Darby "0870\ p[ 161# speculate on why sincerity is the goal in U[S[American apology]

If apology is viewed as sincere by the audience\ the actor appears to haverepented\ appears not to require further rehabilitative punishment and shouldbe forgiven[ The social interaction can then return to its normal course and theactor has minimized the negative repercussions[

In Japanese conduct manuals\ out of 68 counts of the {{apology modi!_ers||\ the word\ {{sunao||\ appeared 08 times\ followed by {{seii o motte||"{{in good faith\ with sincerity||# and {{kokoro kara|| "{{from the heart||#which appeared ten times each[ Used one out of four times in the Japanesesample\ {{sunao|| seems to best re~ect the cultural ideal for Japanese apol!ogy[ {{Sunao|| is typically translated into English as gentle\ submissive\compliant\ yielding\ meek\ obedient\ pliable and with good grace"Kenkyusha|s New Japanese English Dictionary\ 0879\ p[ 0568#[ {{Sunao||shares the {{untainted|| image of sincerity] {{Sunao is\ like purity\ an admix!ture of di}erent attributes] obedient but straightforward\ pliable buthonest\ gentle but truthful to self\ and so on|| "Lebra\ 0881\ p[ 008#[{{Sunao|| is a childlike quality\ one of the traits frequently used to describethe ideal preschooler by teachers and administrators in Japan "Tobin etal[\ 0878#[

However\ {{sincere|| and {{sunao|| are not identical notions] {{Sincerityof apology[[[ has di}erent connotations in the two cultures\ with theAmericans preoccupied with the problematics of wholeheartedness andthe Japanese focused on the more attainable externality of submission toorder and return to harmonious relationship|| "Wagatsuma + Rosett\0875\ pp[ 361Ð362#[ {{Wholeheartedness|| and {{submission to order|| bothre~ect the distinctive qualities of {{sincere|| and {{sunao|| depicted in de_!nitions in the dictionaries[ Wholeheartedness seems to refer to genuinenessin apology\ whereas submission to order seems to suggest the yieldingaspect of {{sunao||[

Furthermore\ these two notions di}er in two ways that are critical to

146Apology\ Manners\ Japan and USA

our understanding of cultural idealism about apology[ First\ while both{{sincere|| and {{sunao|| imply truthfulness\ the basis of truth might bedi}erently understood by U[S[ Americans and Japanese[ In {{sincere||\ thebasis of truthfulness is physical reality[ Apologizers need to be truthful towhat they know about the situation\ or at least present themselves assuch for their apology to be taken as sincere[ U[S[ Americans dislikeinconsistency with physical truth as they see it as neither right nor fair[ In{{sunao||\ however\ the basis becomes relational truthfulness rather thanphysical reality[ Japanese apologizers need to be true to the recipient|sperception of the situation\ or at least present themselves as such\ in orderto come across as {{sunao||[ In order to create an image of {{sunao||\ theo}ender could] "a# describe the damage as more severe than he or shethinks\ closer to the victim|s perception of the damage or "b# humblehimself or herself or beg for forgiveness to a greater extent than he or shemight have originally done based on his or her own assessment of thesituation[ In the eye of a U[S[ American\ this act of adjusting to the victim|sfeelings and perception\ sometimes against one|s own belief or physicalreality\ may seem deceptive and therefore insincere[ Yet in the eye of aJapanese\ this act is a highly valued method of {{perspective!taking|| inapology[

Secondly\ {{sunao|| has a stronger tone of {{sel~ess surrender|| than does{{sincere||[ A {{sunao!na|| apologizer throws himself or herself at the mercyof the victim without thinking twice about the consequence of the uncon!ditional surrender "or at least he or she has to project such an image intheir apology#[ This connotation of {{sunao|| is closely tied to the notion of{{isagi yoi||\ another frequently used apology modi_er in Japanese conductmanuals[ Etymologically\ {{isagi yoi|| can be roughly equated with {{clean||or {{neat|| and was traditionally used to describe heroic deeds of samurai"Japanese warriors#[ Now\ the word is used to refer to some sel~ess actwith no hesitation about what might happen to self as a result of theact[ Thus\ {{isagi yoi|| is often used to describe sel~ess acts of suicide orresignation to take responsibility for some wrongdoing by self or othersin one|s in!group[ The U[S[ American notion of {{sincere|| in apologycertainly implies taking responsibility and expressing remorse\ but not tothis extent of unconditional {{sel~ess surrender||[

CREATING {{SINCERE|| AND {{SUNAO!NA|| APOLOGY

In addition to telling when and how the readers should apologize\conduct manuals show how to construct apology messages[ This sectiondiscusses two of these principles in apologizing found in the books onetiquette in the U[S[ and Japan] message construction principles and per!sonalization principles[

147 N[ Sugimoto

Messa`e Construction Principles of Apolo`y in the U[S[ and Japan

Conduct ideals depicted in etiquette literature indicate that messageconstruction principles of apology di}er in Japan and the U[S[ In general\Japanese prefer to use formulaic expressions\ while U[S[ Americans strivefor spontaneous and original messages in apology[

The following section identi_es general message construction principlesof apology in each culture[ Then\ it shows how these principles are appliedto actual apology messages[ This part is divided for two di}erent parts ofan apology and discusses how these principles are applied to each part[For the purpose of the following discussion\ all elements of an apologymessage will be divided into two broad components] apology markerand apology elaboration[ These are often overlapping within an actualutterance\ but this distinction is drawn for clarity of the followingdiscussion[ The apology marker refers to a phrase or sentence that indicatesthat a particular message unit is intended as an apology[ Without thiscomponent\ the message may not be perceived as apology[ In both cultures\the apology marker usually contains some _xed expressions[ In U[S[ Amer!ican English\ it is often {{I|m sorry||[ In Japanese\ it is either {{Gomennasai||"literally\ {{Please forgive me||#\ {{Moushiwake arimasen|| "{{I have noexcuse||#\ or {{Sumimasen|| "{{Cannot be ended or excused|| referring tothe obligation to the victim incurred by the o}ensive act#[ The apologyelaboration refers to {{optional|| features in an apology message\ such as{{repair|| "e[g[ {{I|ll pay for the repair||#\ {{accounts|| "e[g[ {{I missed thebus||# or {{promise|| "e[g[ {{I will never do this again||#[ This componenthas a greater degree of freedom in its form and content than the apologymarker in both U[S[ American and Japanese cultures[

Be Ori`inal] U[S[ American Messa`e Construction Principles

Conduct ideals presented in U[S[ American books on etiquette suggestthat sincerity is often communicated through originality in words used inU[S[ American apology[ Consequently\ U[S[ Americans are generally toldto avoid the use of cliche� in their apology[ The readers are explicitlydiscouraged from formal usage of apology expressions "Boykin\ 0837^Post\ 0854#[ This is\ {{as if Americans are relying upon the words themselvesto communicate their feelings to the listener and therefore _nd the verbalformulas inadequate|| "Clancy\ 0875\ p[ 195#[ Instead\ a simple and directapology is strongly encouraged "Post\ 0854\ p[ 14#[ Spontaneity of themessage is another favored alternative to readily available expressions]{{The manner and the tone in which an apology is o}ered are moreimportant than the words|| "Miller\ 0856\ p[ 09#[ Miller "0856# contendsthat spontaneous exclamation of sincere concern is equally su.cient toconvey genuineness of an apology in many occasions[ Agonizing over

148Apology\ Manners\ Japan and USA

wording of apology is discouraged as it {{could sti~e the spontaneity thatis always helpful in expressing your sincerity|| "Whitcomb\ 0875\ p[ 6#[

Sincerity Conveyed in the Marker Component of U[S[ AmericanApolo`y

Sincerity in U[S[ American apology is conveyed through the spon!taneous use of original expressions rather than the use of patternedexpressions[ {{Americans do value the personal comment above the form\do establish connection and intimacy in this manner and do create theimpression they wish to give by manipulating words in standard situationsto convey a desired image|| "Goldstein + Tamura\ 0864\ p[ 69#[ Yet\ thisemphasis on originality creates some con~ict with a requirement imposedby communicative needs of the apology marker component[ This com!ponent must contain some readily recognizable features in order to func!tion as an apology marker[ In U[S[ American apology\ the most typicalapology marker is {{I|m sorry||\ which\ used alone\ may not satisfy theU[S[ American overall preference for originality in message] {{A brusque{I|m sorry| ful_lls the form but not the spirit of an apology|| "Miller\ 0856\p[ 09#[

One way to add originality to the apology marker while preserving itsrecognizable feature is to insert phrases like {{awfully|| or {{terribly|| in theapology marker like {{I|m sorry||[ This insertion is not so obtrusive to alterthe form of the apology marker beyond recognition\ yet enhances theperceived sincerity in the message[ While insertion is a viable option inU[S[ American apology\ repetition is generally discouraged "Allen +Briggs\ 0849a\ 0849b#[ This is mainly because repetition often con~ictswith the U[S[ American preference for originality[ Excessive repetition ofthe same words or phrases may make an apologizer sound unoriginal andthus less sincere[

Sincerity Conveyed in the Elaboration Component of U[S[American Apolo`y

The apology elaboration seems to receive more emphasis in U[S[ Amer!ican apology than in Japanese apology[ In fact\ conduct ideals depicted inU[S[ American books on etiquette seem to suggest that an apology is notcomplete without sincerity expressed in this component] a bare statementof remorse in the apology marker {{may sound ~at to the hearer in U[S[American English unless some more personal statement of circumstancesprecedes or follows the standard phrase|| "Goldstein + Tamura\ 0864\ p[58#[ Therefore\ inclusion of the apology elaboration is a preferred andwidely encouraged practice as a means to convey sincerity in U[S[ Amer!ican apology[ In U[S[ American apology\ there really is no rigid require!

159 N[ Sugimoto

ment for forms to be used in this component[ There are only options\ someof which most clearly highlight culturally di}erent approaches to sincerityin apology in Japan and in the U[S[ Expressions of genuine intent torestore the relationship\ providing factual information about the situation\and castigating the self are three of such options discussed below[

As discussed earlier\ genuineness is one of the two elements in U[S[American perception of sincerity and is communicated by showing howremorseful the apologizers are and how much they wish to restore andmaintain the relationship with the apologizee[ In U[S[ American apology\this task is often accomplished through the use of positive face rather thannegative face[ Brown and Levinson "0876\ p[ 51# de_ne positive face as{{the want of every member that his ðor herŁ wants be desirable to at leastsome others|| and negative face as {{the want of every {{competent adultmember|| that his ðor herŁ actions be unimpeded by others||[ As a meansto appeal to the victim|s positive face wants\ U[S[ American conductmanuals suggest their readers make use of the rhetoric of solidarity whenapologizing[

For instance\ in a sample letter of apology in Whitcomb "0875\ p[ 00#\the hypothetical writers of the letter emphasize the positive ties they havewith the victims throughout the letter[ The letter is written for the situationwhere the lack of supervision of their son on one couple|s part resulted intheir neighbors| daughter|s illness[ The couple start the letter by citing anIrish saying\ {{You can live without your friends\ but not without yourneighbors||[ Immediately following the proverb\ the writers emphasize thefact that the other couple are both their neighbors and friends[ When theletter approaches its conclusion\ the writers again reinvoke the friendlyrelationship between the two couples by saying\ {{Life on Latches Lanewill be empty indeed without you all as friendly neighbors and neighborlyfriends|| "Whitcomb\ 0875\ p[ 01#[ Again\ this phrase emphasizes the posi!tive relationship the two couples hold with each other and expresses thewriters| genuine wish to restore and maintain it[ The author of this book"Whitcomb\ 0875\ p[ 02# asserts that this letter contains all the necessaryfactors that go into a sincere apology with {{an unmistakable tone ofsincerity||\ to which the extensive appeal to positive face wants seems togreatly contribute[

The other element of sincerity in the U[S[ is based on physical truth!fulness[ Thus\ o}ering an account for the o}ending behavior is a popularoption in U[S[ American apology[ No explicit references to discourage theuse of accounts in apology were found in U[S[ American conduct manuals\except for those against untruthful justi_cations and excuses[ By providingfactual information that is unique to the particular situation\ U[S[ Amer!ican apologizers explain external forces that resulted in the o}ense andemphasize the lack of vicious intention[ As long as the apologizers do notdistort the facts in order to present them to their advantage\ or at least as

150Apology\ Manners\ Japan and USA

long as the accounts are convincing enough with enough details andrealism\ U[S[ American apologizers are free to include accounts in theirapology messages[

Unlike these two options\ self!castigation in apology is generally dis!couraged in U[S[ American conduct manuals[ Fleming "0871\ p[ 095#advises her readers not to {{spend the next two hours talking about thedopey thing you did||[ Even when U[S[ Americans may say things like\{{I|m a total idiot||\ or {{How careless of me;||\ they are told to do so withmoderation[ In U[S[ American apology\ excessive self!castigation is onlytaken as to impinge on the requirement of truthfulness to physical realityand by no means help maximize the perceived sincerity level in the apologymessage[

Observe Standard Forms] Japanese Messa`e ConstructionPrinciples

In contrast\ Japanese conduct manuals\ re~ecting the Japanese overallpreference for formulaic expressions\ provide many readily usable apologyexpressions available in the culture and the use of these routine expressionsis not so strongly discouraged in Japanese culture0[ Japanese highly regard{{sunao||\ which Japanese conduct manuals emphasize through the use ofthe right formula for both marker and elaboration components of apology[In order to convey the {{sunao!na|| image\ these books suggest\ a Japaneseapologizer needs to monitor carefully appropriateness of the patternedexpressions used in apology "Kobayashi\ 0880^ Komatsu\ 0881^ Saishinhagaki\ 0881#[

This emphasis on the use of formulas\ however\ should not be mistakento suggest that Japanese interpersonal communication is rather rigid andimpersonal[ To the contrary\ {{the Japanese speaker can easily retainrespect forms and still make usage quite informal|| "Goldstein + Tamura\

0However\ any number of examples cannot actually cover all possible situations that mayrequire apology[ Or the example in the book may not be written in the language appropriatefor the reader|s gender[ In Japanese culture\ where languages for men and women arenoticeably di}erent\ this could create a major problem[ In order to deal with types ofcontingencies\ many Japanese etiquette books surveyed provide a list of alternatives for boththe marker component "Waga\ 0889^ Kobayashi\ 0880# and the elaboration component ofapology "Kato\ 0877^ Kato\ 0889^ Miyagawa\ 0889^ Nogi\ 0889^ Waga\ 0889^ Komatsu\ 0881^Shima\ 0881#[ These lists of expressions help the readers learn the boundary of personalchoices within the particular context[ A couple of Japanese conduct manuals even take careto use an intricate system of showing how to substitute an expression in a sample apologywith an alternative in the list "Hinuma\ 0881^ Ikushima\ 0881#[ They divide an apology"mostly letters# into di}erent segments such as opening\ body and closing[ The readers canchoose alternate expressions from the list right underneath the example and substitute thesample phrase with the alternatives with corresponding numbers[

151 N[ Sugimoto

0864\ p[ 75#[ Thus\ the use of formulaic expressions has little stigmaattached to it in Japanese culture\ in so far as the usage is appropriate"Clancy\ 0875#[

Japanese conduct manuals assure their readers that they can still projectthemselves as {{sunao|| while using patterned expressions[ Some authors ofJapanese conduct manuals argue that apology should be a matter of heart\rather than that of form "Waga\ 0889^ Saishin hagaki\ 0881#[ What isinteresting is\ however\ within the same paragraph\ these authors make apoint about observing standard forms of apology "Waga\ 0889\ p[ 002^Saishin hagaki\ 0881\ p[ 243#[ This seemingly contradicting statements maysuggest that the pursuits of {{heart|| and {{form|| are di}erent matters\ butnot exclusive goals\ therefore could be accomplished simultaneously inJapanese apology1[

The form in Japanese apology\ then\ is as important as\ if not morethan\ the content[ In fact\ the use of appropriate forms seems not justencouraged\ but almost required\ in Japanese culture] {{people who fail touse these standard expressions in Japanese are referred to as mono noiikata o shiranai hito "free translation] {{those who don|t know how to saythings properly||#\ people who are\ in other words\ ill!bred|| "Goldstein +Tamura\ 0864\ p[ 75#[ In essence\ a Japanese apologizer can be stigmatizedby not knowing how to observe standard forms of apology[ This fearof {{stepping out of the boundary||\ along with the absence of culturalmechanisms to reward originality in messages\ is a very powerful force tomake Japanese adhere to formulas[ This tendency permeates both themarker and elaboration components of Japanese apology[

{{Sunao|| Conveyed in the Marker Component of JapaneseApology

The overall Japanese preference for formulaic expressions accords withthe identi_cation requirement of the apology marker[ Thus\ conformity isfurther facilitated in the marker component of Japanese apology[ Japaneseconduct manuals urge their readers to conform to the norms rather thanto deviate from them[ This tendency is not unique to Japanese conductmanuals since convergence to the norms is one of the primary purposesfor which these manuals are published[ Yet\ the emphasis on conformityseems greater and more explicit in Japanese conduct manuals than in theirU[S[ American counterparts[ Some of the conduct manuals even provide

1Many U[S[ Americans seem to have a preconception that associates formality with negativevalues in their culture\ such as rigidity and impersonality\ without realizing that this equationdoes not always hold true outside of the U[S[ In reality\ this misconception may be largelydue to the di.culty in U[S[ American interpersonal communication to invoke desirablequalities\ such as intimacy\ through the use of formulas alone[

152Apology\ Manners\ Japan and USA

lists of expressions to be used in the apology marker "Waga\ 0889^ Kobay!ashi\ 0880#[ The titles of these lists\ such as {{a list of readily usable phrasesand expressions|| or {{routine terms for apology||\ indicate that Japaneseare less concerned about using cliche� in their apology messages[

However\ Japanese cannot simply use the linguistic formulas\ but needto make their apology _t the severity of the o}ense[ To this end\ conductideals presented in Japanese books on etiquette o}er two kinds of commonoptions] insertion and repetition[ Just like U[S[ Americans\ Japanese caninsert some adverbs to indicate the magnitude of their sorrow withoutchanging the form of the apology marker beyond recognition[ {{Sum!imasen|| "literally\ {{Cannot be excused||# and {{Gomennasai|| "{{Please for!give me||# often take up {{hontoni "�really#|| and become {{Hontonisumimasen|| and {{Hontoni gomennasai||[ {{Taihen "�a great deal#|| or{{makoto ni "�truly#|| can be inserted in {{Moushiwake arimasen|| "literally\{{I have no excuse||# and therefore make {{Taihen:makoto ni moushiwakearimasen||[ Regardless of the adverb used\ the forms are still recognizable[Unlike U[S[ Americans\ Japanese can also repeat the same statementwithin the message[ In Japanese apology\ {{repetition of individual wordsor forms does not result in a feeling of weakness or cliche�|| "Goldstein +Tamura\ 0864\ p[ 84#[ In general\ Japanese apologizers frequently takeadvantage of this repetition option because the repetition does not alwaysmake them sound insincere in their culture[ Furthermore\ the cost ofdeviation\ which is far greater than the cost of repetition\ makes repetitionan attractive option in Japanese apology[ Several Japanese authors ofconduct manuals argue that Japanese tend to apologize more than do U[S[Americans "Kato + Rozman\ 0877^ Kitagawa\ 0889^ Naotsuka\ 0889#[This perception may be due to the Japanese tendency of repetition "whichinevitably makes the apology lengthy#\ which takes place even when theyare speaking English with U[S[ Americans[

{{Sunao|| Conveyed in the Elaboration Component of JapaneseApology

The apology elaboration is less stressed in Japanese apology than inU[S[ American apology[ In general\ Japanese feel less pressure to includethis component in their apology compared to the need U[S[ Americansfeel\ especially when the apology marker successfully accomplishes thetask of conveying {{sunao!sa||[ Yet\ this does not mean that the elaborationcomponent is not important in Japanese apology[ It is important whenthe component is included in the apology[

The apology elaboration\ by de_nition\ has fewer restrictions than doesthe apology marker in both cultures[ But this does not mean that theelaboration component in Japanese apology is totally free in its form[ Itdoes employ more patterned expressions than does its U[S[ American

153 N[ Sugimoto

counterpart and there are still some restrictions on this component inJapanese apology[ Whether a particular option successfully conveys thedesired image of {{sunao|| works as a criterion by which suitability of theoption is determined in Japanese apology[ Three of such options\ express!ing remorse\ accounting for the incident\ and self!castigation\ are discussedbelow[

The basis of truthfulness in {{sunao|| is relational reality or the other|sfeelings about\ and perception of\ the situation[ Thus\ Japanese apologizersstrive to tailor their messages to the victim|s de_nition of reality[ If theapologizers underestimated the victim|s perceived magnitude of theo}ense\ they could further aggravate the victim[ In this practice ofrelational truthfulness\ the notion of negative face plays a great role[ It issafer for Japanese apologizers to emphasize their violation of the victim|snegative face wantÐwish to not be impeded by others "Brown + Levinson\0876\ p[ 51#[

Conduct ideals depicted in Japanese etiquette books illustrate the useof negative facework in apology[ In sample apologies given for not beinghome when the other just dropped in without advance notice\ the apo!logizer "i[e[ the person who was not home# emphasizes the inconveniencehe or she must have imposed on the visitor "Kato\ 0877^ Ozaki\ 0877^Miyagawa\ 0889^ Waga\ 0889^ Fujii\ 0881^ Hinuma\ 0881^ Komatsu\ 0881^Takahashi\ 0881^ Yamauchi\ 0881#2[ One type of this emphasis on negativeface threat regards the trouble the visitor must have endured to attemptto visit the person[ Eight examples out of twenty employ this tact by sayingthings like the visitor came all the way] {{for such a long distance|| "Kato\0874^ Hinuma\ 0881^ Yamauchi\ 0881#\ {{in the rain|| "Shima\ 0881^Takahashi\ 0881#\ {{in the rain and wind|| "Kato\ 0889#\ {{in the cold||"Miyagawa\ 0889^ Takahashi\ 0881# or {{in the heat|| "Maruyama + Saku!rai\ 0889#[ Through these examples\ the readers learn how to {{sassuru||\or empathically infer the other|s perspective[ Another type of emphasis onnegative face threat is found in the examples where the apologizer specu!lates on what important reasons the visitor might have had to come allthe way to see him or her\ such as {{it could have been an emergency||"Yamauchi\ 0881#[ By magnifying the importance of reasons for the visit\the apologizer implicitly maximizes the consequences of his or her notbeing home[ Yet another emphasis on negative face is to maximize themagnitude of the loss due to the apologizer|s absence "Hinuma\ 0881^

2While this might be a genre of apologies U[S[ Americnas rarely o}er\ it seems quite popularin Japanese apology[ Out of the 100 examples of apoloy found in Japanese etiquette books\19 examples concern this type of situation[ In Japan\ dropping by is not uncommon andhence not necessarily considered to be a grave o}ense[ Nonetheless\ it is remarkable that theperson who was not home\ rather than the visitor\ would go so far as to apologize for notbeing home to greet the unexpected visitor[

154Apology\ Manners\ Japan and USA

Shima\ 0881^ Takahashi\ 0881^ Yamauchi\ 0881#[ For instance\ phraseslike\ {{it was the _rst time we could have seen each other in _ve years||\ areused extensively[ Or the apologizer makes a conscious e}ort to relate tothe visitor|s upset feelings by saying {{I|ve been in the same situation myselfbefore[ So I can totally understand how disappointed you were when youfound out that I was not home|| "Takahashi\ 0881\ p[ 019#[ Regardless ofthe option employed\ there is a great degree of emphasis on negative face!threat\ or {{imposition|| assumed by the apologizer in sample apologiesgiven in Japanese etiquette books[ Notice that this is a situation where theapologizer|s responsibility for the incident is relatively small compared tothat of the visitor\ yet the apologizer magni_es the {{imposition|| to thisextent[ When their responsibility is larger\ Japanese o}enders may exag!gerate the negative aspects of the situation to a greater degree[ To a U[S[American\ this may seem extremely humbling and submissive[ Yet to aJapanese\ this is one way of projecting the {{sunao!na|| image in apology[

Related to the emphasis on negative face is the Japanese use of self!castigation[ Though a couple of Japanese etiquette book authors"Komatsu\ 0889^ Waga\ 0889# warn their readers against excessive use ofhumility and castigation in apology\ it is still a widely chosen optionin the elaboration component because it conveys the image of {{sel~esssurrender||\ one of the elements of {{sunao||\ better than other optionsavailable in the elaboration component of Japanese apology[ This {{sel~esssurrender|| plays an important role in Japanese apology because]

At a deeper psychological level\ the restoration of a harmonious relationship isattained by the denial of one|s self!serving and self!preserving tendencies[ Inthis context\ the external act of apology becomes signi_cant as an act of self!denigration and submission\ which of itself is the important message[

"Wagatsuma + Rosett\ 0875\ pp[ 361Ð362#

This sentiment towards self!castigation is shared by the apology modi!_ers found in Japanese conduct manuals[ The list of frequently usedmodi_ers other than {{sunao|| includes words like\ {{kenkyo ni|| "humbly#\{{herikudatte|| "in humility#\ {{hitasura|| "profusely#\ {{hira!ayamarini||"abjectly# and {{mujoukenni|| "unconditionally#[ All of these modi_ers sug!gest the {{sel~ess surrender|| image of Japanese model apology[

Further\ examples in these books showcase the use of self!castigation inthe apology elaboration[ Inclusion of self!castigating statements is mostcommon at the sentence level as in {{I|m such a sluggard\ standing out insharp contrast to you\ a very faithful person|| inserted in a letter toapologize for being remiss in writing "Kato\ 0877\ p[ 295\ translated#[ Orthe unit of self!castigation can be as small as a word as in {{I stupidly forgotabout our meeting||\ instead of {{I completely forgot about our meeting||[Regardless of its magnitude\ self!castigation seems to be a dependable wayfor Japanese apologizers to convey the sel~ess surrender image[

155 N[ Sugimoto

In comparison to these two options to communicate remorse and sur!render\ o}ering an account for the o}ending behavior seems more con!troversial in Japanese conduct manuals[ Some authors strongly discouragethe use of accounts\ while others advise their readers to use only certainacceptable kinds of accounts in apology[ Yet others show how to presentthose accounts without sounding too o}ensive[

Traditionally\ accounts were regarded as {{anti!apology markers|| inJapanese apology] regardless of what else goes in an apology\ the existenceof accounts will cancel the e}ect of apologizing and turn an otherwise _neapology into something rather rude[ Thus\ Japanese parents used to telltheir children that while {{I|m sorry|| is an apology\ {{I|m sorry\ but[[[|| isback talk[ Re~ecting this traditional view\ of forty!two pieces of advicefound with reference to accounts\ twelve of them insist that accounts haveno place in apology "Shimoju\ 0879^ Kato\ 0877\ 0889^ Miyagawa\ 0889^Fujii\ 0881^ Hinuma\ 0881^ Ikushima\ 0881^ Komatsu\ 0881^ Kusumoto\0881^ Saishin hagaki\ 0881#[ Three of them "Ikushima\ 0881^ Komatsu\0881^ Saishin hagaki\ 0881# take care to say that the readers should noto}er accounts even when the other is obviously at fault and responsiblefor the incident[ Rather\ they recommend the readers take the blame forit[ Fujii "0881\ p[ 149# even takes a stronger stance against accounts andsays a lengthy excuse is {{the most disgraceful conduct|| in which a humanbeing can be engaged[ He warns his readers that the other person willreally look down upon them if they try to give some excuse[ Kitagawa"0889\ p[ 000\ translated# echoes Fujii|s sentiment by saying {{only thosewho have low motives would tell the excuse without being asked[ Theyunconsciously hope to escape the responsibility by convincing the otherthat the incident was triggered by an act of God\ but not their fault||[ Inhis view\ nothing but expressions of remorse and begging for forgivenessbelongs to an apology[

Accounts are strongly discouraged in Japanese apology because theJapanese image of accounts goes against both of the elements of {{sunao||\relational truthfulness and sel~ess surrender[ Accounts are seen as incon!sideration for the victim|s feelings about\ and perception of\ the o}ensiveincident[ To a Japanese\ accounts are cruel rationalization with no respectfor the other|s feelings[ Further\ Japanese view accounts as the exactopposite of the unconditional sel~ess surrender[ They typically sense theo}ender|s attempt to maintain some control over the situation rather thanto throw himself or herself at the mercy of the apologizee[ This kind ofact is far from {{unconditional|| and thus interpreted as a sign that theo}ender does not really trust the apologizee[ Therefore\ an apology withaccounts generally runs the higher risk of aggravating the recipient thanother types of defective apologies do[

However\ some of the conduct ideals depicted in Japanese books onetiquette do contain accounts\ suggesting a con~ict within the culture[

156Apology\ Manners\ Japan and USA

While accounts have been traditionally discouraged in Japan\ the modernJapanese\ especially the younger generation\ seem more inclined to useaccounts in their apologies[ Such a generational gap is found in a surveyreported in one of the Japanese conduct manuals[ In the survey\ themajority of the Japanese college students insisted that accounts werenecessary in apology "Kitagawa\ 0889#[ Responding to this trend\ someauthors of Japanese conduct manuals acknowledge the need to includeaccounts in apology[ Yet\ they do not necessarily approve the use of justany type of accounts[ Rather\ conduct ideals depicted in these books showthe readers] "a# what kinds of accounts are acceptable in apology and "b#how they should be included in apology[

The _rst type of advice on accounts concerns acceptable kinds ofaccounts in apology[ Maruyama + Sakurai "0889# go so far as to provide{{an almighty list of expressions for excuses|| in their etiquette book sothat their readers can feel assured that their accounts will have the leastnegative consequences[ Overall\ the three most frequently used types ofaccounts in conduct ideals depicted in Japanese etiquette books are] "a#one|s own misfortune "sudden illness or accident#\ "b# family emergency"death or unpredictable illness such as heart attack or stroke# and "c#emergency at work[ These examples imply that\ unless the readers havethese legitimate excuses "or can fabricate one#\ they will be far better o}by o}ering no accounts[ Further\ regardless of the types of acceptableaccounts used\ the readers are told to keep their accounts brief "Nogi\0889^ Kobayashi\ 0880^ Hinuma\ 0881^ Saishin hagaki\ 0881#[ They arewarned against {{kudo!kudo|| accounting for the situation "Shimoju\ 0879^Waga\ 0889^ Kobayashi\ 0880^ Fujii\ 0881^ Komatsu\ 0881^ Shima\ 0881^Takahashi\ 0881#[ {{Kudo!kudo|| is an adverbial onomatopoeia in theJapanese language that has a tedious connotation[ {{Kudo!kudo|| can besometimes equated with being meek and humble\ and therefore a sign ofweakness "Komatsu\ 0881\ p[ 166#[

Japanese conduct manuals also show their readers what are unac!ceptable types of accounts\ either explicitly or by example[ These booksindicate that {{tanin o semeru||\ or blaming the third party\ is absolutelyunacceptable "Shimoju\ 0879^ Maruyama + Sakurai\ 0889^ Miyagawa\0889^ Waga\ 0889^ Fujii\ 0881^ Ikushima\ 0881^ Saishin hagaki\ 0881#[Any attempt to present the damage smaller than it actually is equallyunacceptable[ {{Iinogare|| "dodge# or {{iiwake|| "excuse#\ explaining someexternal forces that resulted in the o}ense are both generally looked downupon "Shimoju\ 0879^ Hinuma\ 0881^ Kusumoto\ 0881^ Saishin hagaki\0881#[ Finally\ {{setsumei|| "explanation# or stating only the objective factsis the only acceptable kind of accounts in Japanese apology according tothese conduct manuals "Kato\ 0877^ Komatsu\ 0889^ Saishin hagaki\ 0881#[However\ the range of what can be counted as {{explanation|| is verynarrow in Japanese apology[ Suppose a student were late for a meeting

157 N[ Sugimoto

because he or she had a class right before the meeting[ {{I thought themeeting started at four|| is not an explanation but a {{dodge||[ By theJapanese standard\ even {{the class went over time|| or {{I had to talk tothe professor after class|| is not an explanation but an {{excuse||[ Only anexplanation with an explicit statement to take responsibility such as{{I underestimated how long it takes to walk over here from the class||\ oran {{acceptable excuse|| like {{I was attacked and robbed on my way here||will be acceptable[ The criterion for acceptable accounts is stricter inJapanese than in U[S[ American apology[

The second type of advice on accounts given in Japanese conduct man!uals concerns two acceptable ways to include accounts in apology whileavoiding to project self!serving or self!preserving images] "a# markingaccounts and "b# using anti!self!serving devices[ Marking is to explicitlymark accounts as such\ as in {{this is just an excuse[[[|| or {{this is no excusebut[[[||\ which is not uncommon in U[S[ American apology[ By markingaccounts like this\ Japanese apologizers can emphasize that they are notusing them for the self!serving purpose[ Hence\ many examples of accountsin the Japanese conduct ideals are hedged or marked within a sentence ora paragraph[

Another way to handle accounts in Japanese apology is to employ awide variety of {{anti!self!serving devices|| that immediately precede and:orfollow accounts in apology[ These devices can be anything to counter!balance the potential self!serving image of excuses[ The most direct deviceis the statement of one|s willingness to take responsibility\ such as {{my~ight was canceled but it is still my fault that I did not make it to themeeting and I realize that I inconvenienced you tremendously|| "Kato\0889#[ Such references to the apologizers| accountability makes it clearthat they are still willing to take responsibility for the event while providingaccounts[ By making it clear\ the apologizers can dissociate themselvesfrom the horrible self!serving image of using accounts "Ikushima\ 0881^Saishin hagaki\ 0881#[ Moreover\ self!castigation and begging for forgive!ness are the two other popular {{anti!self!serving devices|| to prevent thefall from grace of {{sel~ess surrender||[ Many phrases of accounts used inJapanese conduct ideals of apology are heavily saturated with these kindsof anti!self!serving devices[

PERSONALIZATION PRINCIPLES OF APOLOGY INTHE U[S[ AND JAPAN

Conduct ideals depicted in Japanese and U[S[ American books onetiquette indicate that apologies not only need to include necessary mess!age features discussed above\ but also need to be adjusted to speci_csituations underlying them[ Conduct manuals from both cultures emph!asize making apologies personal and appropriate\ yet their methods of

158Apology\ Manners\ Japan and USA

personalizing and appropriating the message seem to di}er[ The U[S[Americans seem to {{individualize|| the message\ while Japanese {{relation!alize|| it[

Various situational factors a}ect personalization principles in both cul!tures[ Some belong to the factual dimension of the situational factors suchas] "a# the object of o}ense "e[g[ bicycle\ reputation#^ "b# the magnitude ofdamage "e[g[ a dent in the car bumper\ totaling a car#^ "c# the cause of theo}ense "e[g[ intentional\ accident# or "d# the degree of reparability "e[g[repairable\ permanent#[ Other factors belong to the relational dimensionof the situation such as] "a# the type of relationship "e[g[ sibling\ neighbor#^"b# intimacy level "e[g[ spouse\ casual acquaintance#^ "c# the power distance"e[g[ boss\ child#^ "d# age di}erence "e[g[ 19 years senior\ 2 years junior#^ "e#relational history "e[g[ friend of 19 years\ stranger#^ "f # general personalchemistry "e[g[ best friends\ arch enemies# or "g# the frequency of contact"e[g[ colleague\ cousin who lives in another state#[ U[S[ Americans andJapanese seem to react to the factual dimension in a relatively similarmanner\ while they respond to di}erent qualities of the relational dimen!sion when personalizing the apology[ Moreover\ the extent to which peopledi}erentiate various contexts along the relational dimension di}ersbetween U[S[ American and Japanese cultures[ These personalization prin!ciples are compared and contrasted below[

Individualization] The U[S[ American Personalization Principles

Two of the unique features of the U[S[ American personalization prin!ciples re~ect their overall approach to interpersonal communication[ First\U[S[ Americans react to the individual aspect of the relational dimensionof context to a greater extent than do Japanese[ This individualization isbelieved to help convey genuineness through the use of originality[ Manyconduct manuals in the U[S[ suggest that their readers add a {{personaltouch|| to their apology\ or any other messages "Reid\ 0849^ Goldstein +Tamura\ 0864#[ In other words\ U[S[ Americans are expected to tailortheir apologies to personal qualities of their individual audience "e[g[ Mary\Bob or John#[ The basis of this individualization lies in the apologizee|scharacteristics that distinguish him or her from other individuals[ Forinstance\ if U[S[ Americans are apologizing to their old friend\ Mary\ theytailor their message to Mary|s values\ beliefs and character\ or whateverthey know about her[ For instance\ they may say to Mary\ {{Mary\ I|mterribly sorry we missed the movie[ I know how much you wanted to seeit||[ After su.cient and adequate individualization\ these apologies seempersonalized and sincere and therefore e}ective[ This individualizationusually permeates both the marker and elaboration components of U[S[American apology[

The second unique feature of the U[S[ American personalization prin!

169 N[ Sugimoto

ciples is that\ beyond the individual aspect\ U[S[ Americans do not needto make major adjustments to the apology to re~ect their relationships tothe victim as much as Japanese do[ That does not mean U[S[ Americans areinsensitive to aspects of the relational dimension other than the individualcharacteristics[ They do react to aspects like intimacy and power[ It is justthat U[S[ Americans do not need to modify their messages to re~ect theseaspects in the actual message as much as Japanese do[ For instance\ thereare only a few broad categories of relationships depicted in conduct idealsin U[S[ American etiquette books] stranger\ co!worker\ neighbor\ casualacquaintance\ friend and family[ No explicit advice is given on whetherthe apologizers need to di}erentiate their apologies for each of theserelationships[ Beyond these primary categories\ no reference is made tofurther di}erentiation of relationships and consequent adjustment of themessages to the di}erentiation[ This suggests that U[S[ Americans may\but do not need to\ further di}erentiate contexts along the relationaldimension such as a subtle age di}erence between the involved[

The extensive use of maxims\ rather than examples\ in U[S[ Americanconduct manuals can be explained from this perspective[ When theemphasis lies in individualization of messages\ there is really no valuein providing extensive examples of apology in U[S[ American conductmanuals[ Without knowing the apologizee personally\ it is impossible forthese authors to show exactly how the readers should individualize theirmessage[ Further\ maxims are su.cient and appropriate means of instruc!tion in U[S[ American conduct manuals[ The ground rules of conductusually su.ce for the purpose of etiquette books where the _ne distinctionin relationships does not always need to be re~ected during the messageproduction process[

Relationalization] The Japanese Personalization Principles

The Japanese personalization principles contrast with those of U[S[Americans[ To achieve the image of {{sunao||\ Japanese\ too\ need to{{personalize|| their apology messages[ Yet\ instead of the U[S[ Americanmethod of individualization\ Japanese employ a method that can be called\{{relationalization||[ Japanese often tailor their messages to the types ofrelationships between the speaker and the audience "e[g[ best friends\ boss!subordinate# rather than the personal qualities of individual audience[This\ however\ should not be taken to indicate that Japanese are imper!sonal message producers[ It is just a di}erent method of personalization[The Japanese version of {{personalization|| is based on codi_cation ofrelationships\ or what kinds of people they are in relation to each other[So\ for example\ if Japanese are going to apologize to their old friend\Mari\ they may take their long!term friendship into consideration whenformulating their apology[ They might even mention\ or elaborate on\ the

160Apology\ Manners\ Japan and USA

personal debt they feel toward Mari such as {{I|m sorry we missed themovie[ I feel bad because you|ve never done this to me ever since webecame friends||[ Only after adequate adjustment is made in terms of bothform and content of apology\ the apologizers will come across as {{sunao||and their message appropriate[ Moreover\ this relationalization is oftenclearly marked by linguistic forms employed in the message and re~ectedin both of the marker and elaboration components of apology[

The second feature of Japanese personalization principles is found inthe degree to which various relationships are di}erentiated in Japaneseapology[ While the U[S[ American mode of individualization is not foundin conduct ideals in Japanese conduct manuals\ they provide a greaternumber of examples and advice for more highly indexed relational cate!gories[ For instance\ what U[S[ Americans may categorize as {{friends|| arefurther divided into {{peers|| and {{seniors||[ Each of these sub!categoriesis then divided into friends {{from college||\ {{from work||\ {{from one|shometown|| and so on "Kato\ 0889#[ Sample apologies are provided foreach of these small categories in many Japanese conduct manuals[ Manyof these books also explicitly explain the need to relationalize the apologymessages[

The cultural motivation for this seemingly complex codi_cation ofrelationships manifested in the message is that it is one of the criticalmeans through which the image of {{sunao|| is conveyed[ The appropriateuse of linguistic forms falls among {{sunao|| devices in Japanese apology"Goldstein + Tamura\ 0864#[ Thus\ encoding the codi_cation at thelinguistic level is as important as\ if not more than\ encoding it at thecontent level in Japanese apology[

CONCLUSION

In this study\ a cross!cultural comparison was made of "a# types ofsituations requiring apology and "b# principles for constructing and per!sonalizing apology messages\ drawing examples of culturally idealizednotions from Japanese and U[S[ American conduct manuals[ The survey_rst revealed that Japanese conduct manuals are more concerned withprivate apologies given for actions of a greater number of people in theirin!group\ while U[S[ American conduct manuals focus more on apologiesprimarily for their own actions in the public places[ Moreover\ U[S[ Amer!icans are told to o}er a {{sincere|| apology\ while their Japanese counter!parts strive to give a {{sunao!na|| apology[ These notions get instantiatedin actual apology messages in several di}erent ways[

While constructing apology messages\ the U[S[ American strive fororiginality of the words used\ and thus use insertions "e[g[ {{I|m terriblysorry||# but little repetition in apology markers[ When elaborating theirapology\ U[S[ Americans often include accounts for their o}ending

161 N[ Sugimoto

behavior and expressions of their desire to maintain the relationship withthe apologizee\ but not self!castigation[ In Japanese apology messageconstruction\ conformity to the linguistic formulas is strongly emphasized[Thus\ repetition "e[g[ {{Sorry\ sorry||# is often used in the apology markeralong with insertion[ When apology gets elaborated\ self!castigation andreferences to the apologizer|s violation of the victim|s negative face wantsare often included[ The acceptability of including accounts seems con!troversial in Japanese apology[

The ways in which U[S[ Americans and Japanese are told to personalizetheir apologies also seem to di}er across cultures[ On the one hand\U[S[ Americans strive to adapt their apology messages to their individualrecipient of apology[ On the other hand\ Japanese adapt their apologymessages to the nature of the relationship they have with the recipient[

From the _ndings in this study\ it can be assumed that these culture!speci_c norms of apology a}ect the ways in which Japanese and U[S[Americans actually formulate and communicate an apology[ However\as discussed earlier\ these norms are {{conduct ideals|| and cannot beautomatically equated with actual apology behavior in the two cultures[These prescriptions in the conduct manuals can only be validated infuture empirical research on situations requiring apology and messageconstruction principles in apology in Japan and the U[S[

REFERENCES

Allen\ B[\ + Briggs\ M[ P[ "0849a#[ Behave yourself;] Etiquette for American youth[Chicago] J[ B[ Lippincott[

Allen\ B[\ + Briggs\ M[ P[ "0849b#[ If you please; "Revised#[ Chicago] J[ B[ Lippin!cott[

Baldrige\ L[ "0874#[ Letitia Bladrige|s complete guide to executive manners[ NewYork] William Morrow[

Bartelt\ P[ W[\ Hutter\ M[\ + Bartelt\ D[ W[ "0875#[ Politics and politesse] Genderdeference and formal etiquette[ Studies in Symbolic Interaction\ 6A\ 088Ð117[

Bevans\ M[ "0859#[ McCall|s book of everyday etiquette[ New York] Golden Press[Bovone\ L[ "0882#[ Ethics as etiquette] The emblematic contribution of Erving

Go}man[ Theory\ Culture\ and Society\ 09\ 14Ð28[Boykin\ E[ "0837#[ This way\ please; New York] MacMillian[Brown\ P[\ + Levinson\ S[ C[ "0876#[ Politeness] Some universals in language usage[

Cambridge\ U[K[] Cambridge University Press[Burket\ G[ B[ "0838#[ Manners please[ Chicago] Beckley!Cardy[Carson\ G[ "0855#[ The polite Americans] a wide!angle view of our more or less good

manners over 299 years[ New York] William Morrow[Cass\ A[ W[ "0845#[ Write your own letters] Simple letters for adults[ New York]

Noble and Noble[Clancy\ P[ M[ "0875#[ The acquisition of communicative style in Japanese[ In B[

B[ Shie}elin + E[ Ochs\ "Eds[#\ Language socialization across cultures "pp[ 088Ð101#[ Cambridge\ U[K[] Cambridge University Press[

162Apology\ Manners\ Japan and USA

Clark\ M[ E[\ + Quigley\ M[ C[ "0816#[ Etiquette\ Jr[ Garden City\ NY] Doubleday!Page[

Correct social usage] A course of instruction in good form\ style and deportment byeighteen distinguished authors "0896#[ New York] The New York Society of Self!Culture[

Dariaux\ G[ A[ "0869#[ Accent on elegance] etiquette at home and abroad[ GardenCity\ NY] Doubleday[

De Mente\ B[ "0870#[ The Japanese way of doing business[ Englewood Cli}s\ NJ]Prentice!Hall[

De Mente\ B[ "0878#[ How to do business with Japanese] A complete guide toJapanese customs and business practices[ Lincolnwood\ IL] NTC Business Books[

Diescher\ V[ H[ "0812#[ The book of good manners] A guide to polite usage for allsocial functions[ New York] Social Culture Publications[

Drobot\ E[ "0871#[ Class acts] etiquette for today[ New York] Van NostrandReinhold[

Egawa\ H[ "0881#[ Kokoro to hito o ugokasu hanashikata ðspeaking skills to movepeople and their emotionsŁ[ Tokyo] Takahashi Shoten[

The new Esquire etiquette] a guide to business\ sports\ and social conduct "0848#[Philadelphia] J[ B[ Lippincott[

Farrar\ E[ W[ R[ "0863#[ The young lady|s friend "reprint ed[#[ Boston] AmericanStationer|s[

Fleming\ A[ "0871#[ What to say when you don|t know what to say[ New York]Charles Scribner|s Sons[

Foster!Dixon\ G[ "0882#[ Troping the body] etiquette texts and performance[ Textand Performance Quarterly\ 02\ 68Ð85[

Fujii\ R[ "0881#[ Suguni yakudatsu jitsuyou tegami shin!hyakka ðnew practicalencyclopedia for letter writing for quick referenceŁ[ Tokyo] Nitto Shoin[

Glass\ L[ "0880#[ Say it[[[ right[ New York] G[ P[ Putnam|s Sons[Goldstein\ B[ Z[ + Tamura\ K[ "0864#[ Japan and America] a comparative study of

language and culture[ Tokyo] Charles E[ Tuttle[Hathaway\ H[ "0817#[ Manners] American etiquette[ New York] E[ P[ Dutton[Hinuma\ K[ "0881#[ Inyo!oyou jizai] Tegami\ hagaki no kakikata jiten ðencyclopedia

for letter and postcard writing for free citation and applicationŁ[ Tokyo] Obunsha[Hiraoka\ M[ "0875#[ Tegami jitsuyo jiten ðpractical guide to letter!writingŁ[ Tokyo]

Seitosha[Ikushima\ S[ "0881#[ Pattern katsuyou mijikai tegami no kakikata ðpattern practice

for short letter writingŁ[ Osaka] Sogensha[Katei kosai jiten "0851#[ ðEncyclopedia for entertainingŁ[ Tokyo] Jitsugyono

Nipponsha[Kato\ I[ "0889#[ Atarashii tegamibun no kakikata ðnew letter!writingŁ[ Tokyo] Goto

Shoin[Kato\ K[ + Rozman\ M[ "0877#[ Kotobade saguru America ðthe American mentality

through languageŁ[ Tokyo] Japan Times[Kato\ T[ "0874#[ Gendai tegami no kakikata ðmodern letter writingŁ[ Tokyo] Goto

Shoin[Kato\ T[ "0877#[ Atarashii tegamibun no hyakka ðnew encyclopedia of lettersŁ[

Tokyo] Goto Shoin[Kenkyusha|s New Japanese English Dictionary "0879#[ Tokyo] Kenkyusha[

163 N[ Sugimoto

Kitagawa\ K[ "0889#[ How to 090] Otonano aisatsu ðhow to 090] greetings foradultsŁ[ Tokyo] Nippon Jitsugyo Shuppan[

Kobayashi\ M[ "0880#[ Wakai joseino tegamino kakikata ðletter!writing for youngwomenŁ[ Tokyo] Nippon Bungeisha[

Komatsu\ M[ "0881#[ Shin!tegami jozu] Manner\ rule kara bunrei made ðnew betterletter!writing] From manners\ rules\ to actual examplesŁ[ Tokyo] JitsugyounoNipponsha[

Kusumoto\ K[ "0881#[ Iinikui\ kommatta tokino jozuna hanashikata ðeffectivespeaking for when you really at a loss with wordsŁ[ Tokyo] Nagaoka Shoten[

Landers\ A[ "0867#[ The Ann Landers encyclopedia] A to Z[ Improve your lifeemotionally\ medically\ sexually\ socially\ spiritually[ Garden City\ NY] Double!day[

Lebra\ T[ S[ "0881#[ Self in Japanese culture[ In N[ R[ Rosenberger "Ed[#\ Japanesesense of self "Chap[ 5\ pp[ 094!019#[ Cambridge\ U[K[] Cambridge UniversityPress[

Leslie\ E[ "0861#[ Miss Leslie|s behavior book] a guide and manual for ladies"reprinted from the 0748 ed[ of the same title#[ Philadelphia] T[ B[ Peterson andBrothers[

Martin\ J[ "0871#[ Miss Manner|s guide to excruciatingly correct behavior[ NewYork] Atheneum[

Maruyama\ T[\ + Sakurai\ N[ "0889#[ Tegami to hagaki no shin!hyakka ðnewencyclopedia for writing letters and postcardsŁ[ Tokyo] Soukousha[

Mason\ J[ E[ "0824#[ Gentlefolk in the making] Studies in the history of EnglishCourtesy Literature and related topics from 0420 to 0663[ Philadelphia] Uni!versity of Pennsylvania Press[

Miller\ L[ "0856#[ The encyclopedia of etiquette[ New York] Crown[Miyagawa\ S[ "0889#[ Mohan josei tegamibun no kakikata ðmodern exemplar of

letter writing for ladiesŁ[ Tokyo] Goto Shoin[Nakajima\ B[ "0852#[ Japanese etiquette[ Tokyo] Japan Travel Bureau[The New Seventeen Book of Etiquette and Young Living "0869#[ New York]

Triangle[Naotsuka\ R[ "0889#[ Ohbeijin ga chinmoku surutoki ðwhen Westerners become

silentŁ[ Tokyo] Taishukan[Nicolson\ H[ "0844#[ Good behavior[ London] Constable[Nieda\ R[ "0863#[ Tatemae to honne[ Tokyo] Diamondsha[Nogi\ M[ "0889#[ Wakai danseino tegamino kakikata ðletter!writing for young menŁ[

Tokyo] Nippon Bungeisha[Ordway\ E[ B[ "0802#[ The etiquette of to!day "2rd ed[#[ New York] George Sully[Ozaki\ F[ "0877#[ Suguni yakudatsu hagaki no jitsuyou hyakka ða practical encyc!

lopedia for postcard writingŁ[ Tokyo] Seibido Shuppan[Pakira House "0889#[ Chottoshita monono iikata ðlittle phrases for proper speakingŁ[

Tokyo] Kodansha[Phillips\ L[ + Phillips\ W[ "0889#[ The concise guide to executive etiquette[ New

York] Doubleday[Pierson\ I[ "0851#[ Campus cues[ Danville\ IL] University of Illinois[Post\ E[ L[ "0854#[ Emily Post|s etiquette[ New York] Funk and Wagnalls[Reid\ L[ N[ "0849#[ Personality and etiquette[ Boston] D[ C[ Heath[

164Apology\ Manners\ Japan and USA

Roosevelt\ E[ "0851#[ Eleanor Roosevelt|s book of common sense etiquette[ NewYork] MacMillian[

Rosenfeld\ J[ B[\ + Cass\ A[ W[ "0845#[ Write your own letters] simple letters foradults[ New York] Noble and Noble[

Saishin hagaki\ tegami\ jitsurei jiten "0881#[ ðThe latest encyclopedia for letter! andpostcard!writing with actual examplesŁ[ Tokyo] Shufu to seikatsusha[

Sakai\ H[ "0881#[ Hanashijozu ninaru hon ða guide to better speakingŁ[ Tokyo]Nitto Shoin[

Sakai\ M[ "0872#[ Anata o utsukushiku miseru manner ðmanners that will make youlook beautifulŁ[ Tokyo] Nihon Keiei Shido Center[

Sato\ S[ "0875#[ Sumato na nihonjin ðwell!mannered Japanese touristsŁ[ Tokyo]Nihon Kotsukosha Shuppan Jigyokyoku[

Schlenker\ B[ R[\ + Darby\ B[ W[ "0870#[ The use of apologies in social predica!ments[ Social Psychology Quarterly\ 33"2#\ 160Ð167[

Shima\ Y[ "0881#[ Tegami] kimari monku to youreishu ðexemplar of cliche for letterwritingŁ[ Tokyo] Nippon Bungeisha[

Shimoju\ A[ "0879#[ Chotto chitekina kaiwano miryokugaku] hanashi joju\ kiki jojuni naru 264 no hiketsu ða little intelligent\ and attractive ways of talking] 264secrets of becoming a good speaker and listenerŁ[ Tokyo] Jiyu gendaisha[

Shinoda\ E[ "0877#[ Shinnyu shain no kiso chishiki 2] Hanashikata no ABC ðbasicknowledge for new hires "�college graduates# 2] ABC to speakingŁ[ Tokyo]Recruit Shuppan[

Stratton\ D[ C[ + Schleman\ H[ B[ "0839#[ Your best foot forward] social usage foryoung moderns[ New York] Whittlesey House[

Takahashi\ T[ "0881#[ Shitsurei ni naranai hagaki no bunreishu ðpostcard!writingwithout being rudeŁ[ Tokyo] Goto Shoin[

Tavuchis\ N[ "0880# Mea Culpa] A sociology of apology and reconciliation[ Stanford\CA] Stanford University Press[

Tobin\ J[ J[\ Wu\ D[ Y[ H[\ + Davidson\ D[ H[ "Eds[# "0878#[ Preschool in threecultures] Japan\ China and the United States[ New Haven NJ] Yale UniversityPress[

Uris\ A[ "0866#[ The blue book of broadminded business behavior[ New York]Thomas Y[ Crowell[

Vanderbilt A[ "0847#[ Amy Vanderbilt|s complete book of etiquette] A guide togracious living[ Garden City\ NY] Doubleday[

Waga\ E[ "0889#[ Hagakibun nandemo hyakka ðalmighty guide to postcard writingŁ[Tokyo] Chukei Shuppan[

Wagatsuma\ H[\ + Rosett\ A[ "0875#[ The implications of apology] Law andculture in Japan and the United States[ Law and Society Review\ 19"3#\ 350Ð387[

Watson\ L[ E[ "0837#[ The standard book of etiquette[ Garden City\ NY] GardenCity Publishing[

Webster|s Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language "0878#[New York] Portland House[

Whitcomb\ M[ "0875#[ {{Dear Meg|| tells you how to write the most important lettersof your life[ New York] Warner Books[

Wilson\ M[ "0836#[ The new etiquette] the modern code of social behavior[ Phi!ladelphia] J[ B[ Lippincott[

165 N[ Sugimoto

Wouters\ C[ "0876#[ Developments in the behavioural codes between the sexes]The formalization of informalization in the Netherlands\ 0829Ð0874[ Theory\Culture\ and Society\ 3\ 394Ð316[

Yamaguchi\ W[ "0841#[ Nichijo aisatsu no shikata ðguide to proper daily greetingsŁ[Tokyo] Kojinsha[

Yamauchi\ M[ "0881#[ Tegamibun no kakikata ðhow to write lettersŁ[ Tokyo]Kinensha[

Yoshida\ Y[\ + Beppu\ K[ "0806#[ Kokoroete oranebanaranu shako sahou ðsocialetiquette all "diplomats# should knowŁ[ Tokyo] Jitsugyono Nipponsha[