Cultural values and 'cultural scripts' of Malay (Bahasa Melayu) ${}^{\ast }$${}^{\ast }$^(**){ }^{*}
馬來語（Bahasa Melayu）的文化價值觀與 「文化腳本」 ${}^{\ast }$${}^{\ast }$^(**){ }^{*}

Received May 1995; revised version February 1996
1995 年 5 月收到；1996 年 2 月修訂版

Though the study of culture-specific ‘ways of speaking’ has been undertaken from many different approaches (such as ethnography of communication, contrastive pragmatics, and linguistic anthropology), scholars generally agree on the need to go beyond purely behavioural description. The greater challenge is to explore and uncover the links between particular ways of speaking and the cultural values and attitudes of the people concerned. Most studies of discourse-in-culture invoke constructs such as ‘rules of speaking’, ‘norms of interaction’, or ‘discourse strategies’ to characterise shared understandings hypothesised to exist within the speech community.
儘管對特定文化「說話方式」的研究已經從許多不同的方法（例如溝通民族學、對比語用學和語言人類學）進行，學者們普遍同意有必要超越純粹的行為描述。更大的挑戰是探索和揭示特定的說話方式與相關人群的文化價值和態度之間的聯繫。大多數文化中的說話研究都會引用「說話規則」、「互動規範」或「說話策略」等建構來描述假設存在於說話社群中的共同理解。

Certain methodological difficulties beset such inquiries: how to describe speech pattems with rigour and precision, how to identify the relevant cultural values and priorities independently of the speech patterns themselves, and overarching both of
這些研究在方法上遇到了一些困難：如何嚴謹而精確地描述語言表達模式，如何獨立於語言表達模式本身來識別相關的文化價值和優先順序，以及如何將語言表達模式與文化價值和優先順序相結合。

The conventional metalanguage used to describe cultural norms of communication consists of an open-ended set of technical (and semi-technical) terms such as ‘directness’, ‘formality’, ‘politeness’, ‘involvement’, ‘face’ and so on. Though valuable and useful up to a point, such terms can be criticised as being somewhat vague, and they are used with different meanings by different authors. For instance, when Japanese speech patterns are contrasted with English ones, the Japanese are described as ‘indirect’ and the English as ‘direct’, but when English is compared with Hebrew, it is the English speech patterns which are ‘indirect’ and the Hebrew ‘direct’. These differences are not merely quantitative; that is, it is not simply the case that there is a cline of ‘directness’ on which English is situated midway between Japanese and Hebrew (cf. Wierzbicka, 1991). Rather, the differences are qualitative. Cultures differ on what one should be ‘indirect’ about, on how to be ‘indirect’, and, most importantly perhaps, on why to be ‘indirect’. Similar critiques of the notions of ‘formality’, ‘politeness’, and ‘involvement’ can be found in Irvine (1979), Janney and Arndt (1993), and Besnier (1994), among others.
用來描述溝通文化規範的傳統金屬語言，包含了一組開放式的技術性（和半技術性）詞彙，例如「直接」、「正式」、「禮貌」、「參與」、「面子」等等。儘管這些詞彙在某個程度上是有價值和有用的，但也會被批評為有點含糊不清，而且不同的作者在使用這些詞彙時會有不同的含義。舉例來說，當日語語言模式與英語語言模式比較時，日語被形容為「間接」，而英語則是「直接」；但當英語與希伯來語比較時，英語語言模式則是「間接」，而希伯來語則是「直接」。這些差異不只是量的差異；也就是說，不只是英語在日語與希伯來語的中間有一條「直接性」的稜線 (cf. Wierzbicka, 1991)。相反，差異是質性的。不同的文化對於什麼應該「間接」、如何「間接」，以及最重要的，也許是為什麼要「間接」，都有不同的看法。Irvine (1979)、Janney and Arndt (1993)和Besnier (1994)等人也對 「正式」、「禮貌 」和 「參與 」等概念提出類似的批判。

Furthermore, relying on terms like ‘directness’, ‘formality’, and ‘politeness’ as analytical constructs introduces an element of ethnocentrism into our analyses, because the relevant concepts are not usually found in the cultures being described and cannot be translated easily into the languages involved. In an attempt to overcome this difficulty, ethnographers of communication typically incorporate indigenous terms into their descriptions, but then the difficulty of translation arises in reverse. Without a sound methodology for lexical semantic analysis, they seldom succeed in explaining the full conceptual content of the indigenous terms.
此外，依賴「直接」、「正式」、「禮貌」等詞語作為分析建構，會在我們的分析中引入民族中心主義的元素，因為相關的概念通常不見於被描述的文化中，也不容易翻譯成相關的語言。為了克服這個困難，溝通的民族學家通常會在他們的描述中加入原住民的術語，但翻譯的困難卻反過來出現了。如果沒有一套完善的詞彙語義分析方法，他們很少能成功解釋土著詞彙的完整概念內容。

I believe that the key to overcoming these problems is the ‘natural semantic metalanguage’ developed by Anna Wierzbicka and colleagues over many years of crosslinguistic semantic research (cf. Wierzbicka, 1972, 1980, 1992, 1996; Goddard and Wierzbicka, 1994; Goddard, in press). This consists of a small set of simple meanings which evidence suggests can be expressed by words or bound morphemes in all languages; for example, PEOPLE, SOMEONE, SOMETHING, THIS, SAY, THinK, WANT, KNOW, GOOD, BAD, NO. These appear to be lexical universals, that is, meanings which can be translated precisely between all languages. They combine according to a small set of universal grammatical patterns, comprising a mini-language which is an ideal tool for cross-linguistic semantics. A large body of empirical semantic research has been conducted using the NSM approach, much of it focusing on cultural ‘key words’, speech acts, and discourse particles (cf. among others: Wierzbicka, 1991, 1992, 1996; Goddard, 1992, 1994, 1996; Ameka, 1987, 1992; Hasada, in press).
我相信克服這些問題的關鍵在於 Anna Wierzbicka 及其同事在多年的跨語言語義研究中發展出來的「自然語義金屬語言」(參閱 Wierzbicka, 1972, 1980, 1992, 1996; Goddard and Wierzbicka, 1994; Goddard, in press)。這包括一小群簡單的意義，證據顯示這些意義可以用所有語言中的字詞或結合語素來表達，例如：PEOPLE、SOMEONE、SOMETHING、THIS、SAY、THINK、WANT、KNOW、GOOD、BAD、NO。這些似乎是詞彙的普遍性，也就是可以在所有語言間精確翻譯的意義。它們根據一小套通用語法模式組合起來，構成了一種小型語言，是跨語言語義學的理想工具。大量的實證語義研究都是使用 NSM 方法進行的，其中大部分都是針對文化「關鍵字」、語言行為和語篇顆粒（參見 Wierzbicka, 1991）：Wierzbicka, 1991, 1992, 1996; Goddard, 1992, 1994, 1996; Ameka, 1987, 1992; Hasada, in press）。

Now, the metalanguage of lexical universals can be used not only for semantic analysis, but also to formulate cultural ‘rules’, which Wierzbicka proposes to call ‘cultural scripts’. Because they are phrased in simple and translatable terms, such scripts can achieve a high degree of precision while at the same time minimising the danger of ethnocentric bias creeping into the very terms of the description. To take a simple example, the script below (cf. Wierzbicka, 1994a) is intended to capture a Japanese cultural norm.
現在，詞彙普遍性的金屬語言不僅可以用於語義分析，也可以用於制定文化「規則」，Wierzbicka 建議稱之為「文化腳本」。由於它們是以簡單且可翻譯的詞彙來表達，因此這些腳本可以達到高度的精確性，同時也可以將民族中心主義的偏見潛入描述詞彙本身的危險降到最低。舉個簡單的例子，下面的腳本 (cf. Wierzbicka, 1994a) 旨在捕捉日本的文化規範。
if something bad happens to someone because of me
如果有人因為我而遭遇不幸
I have to say something like this to this person:
我必須對這個人說這樣的話：
‘I feel something bad because of this’
我覺得這件事很糟糕
This represents a hypothesis about a cultural value or norm which is characteristically (though not exclusively) Japanese. It is linked, of course, with the often noted tendency of the Japanese to ‘apologise’ very frequently and in a broad range of situations, but it does so without relying on the culture-bound English speech-act verb apologise. The script is also more accurate and explicit than the English term in not implying any admission that ‘I did something bad to you’, which would be inappropriate for the Japanese ‘apology’: one is expected to perform the speech-act in question whenever one’s action leads someone else to suffer harm or inconvenience, no matter how indirectly. The script is readily translatable into Japanese, and is thus directly accessible to the intuitions of Japanese speakers.
這代表了一種關於日本特有的文化價值或規範的假設。當然，這與日本人經常注意到的「道歉」傾向有關，日本人會在各種情況下頻繁「道歉」，但這並不依賴受文化束縛的英文語言行為動詞「道歉」。此語句也比英語用語更準確、更明確，沒有暗示任何「我對您做了不好的事」的承認，這對於日語「道歉」來說是不適當的：當一個人的行為導致他人遭受傷害或不便時，無論是多麼間接，都應該執行相關的言語行為。這個腳本很容易翻譯成日文，因此可以直接使用日語使用者的直覺。

Cultural scripts are an improved method for stating ‘rules for speaking’, equally compatible with the search for broad generalisations about discourse and with attention to the particularities of individual cultures. Of course, cultural scripts framed in independently established lexical universals cannot, in themselves, eliminate ethnocentrism but they can eliminate one source of it, namely, reliance on English-specific concepts as analytical tools. Likewise, cultural scripts cannot, in themselves, eliminate inaccuracy and imprecision but they can eliminate one source of it, namely, reliance on complex and vague technical (and semi-technical) terms.
文化腳本是陳述 「說話規則 」的一種改良方法，它與尋求關於說話的廣泛概括以及對個別文化特殊性的關注同樣相容。當然，以獨立建立的詞彙普遍性為框架的文化腳本本身並不能消除民族中心主義，但它們可以消除民族中心主義的一個來源，即依賴英語特定的概念作為分析工具。同樣地，文化腳本本身也無法消除不準確性和不精確性，但它們可以消除不準確性和不精確性的一個來源，即對複雜而含糊的技術（和半技術）術語的依賴。

Adopting a standardised metalanguage for semantic explications and cultural scripts, does not mean, of course, that one must forsake conventional English altogether. For example, in the present paper, I introduce, discuss, and justify the proposed explications and scripts using conventional academic English. One can therefore imagine a sceptic asking: Aren’t the explications and scripts merely paraphrases of the explanations given in ordinary prose? To this, the answer must be: Yes and no. In a sense they are paraphrases, but not ‘mere’ paraphrases. They are paraphrases which (it is claimed) can be transposed without change of meaning from English into Malay, or into any human language. They do not rely on any English-specific words such as ‘dignity’, ‘consideration’, ‘sensitivity’, or ‘refinement’, which may seem convenient for expository purposes (with English speakers), but which embody Anglo-cultural attitudes and which are not precisely translatable.
採用標準化的金屬語言來進行語意闡釋和文化腳本，當然並不意味著我們必須完全放棄傳統英語。例如，在本論文中，我使用傳統學術英語來介紹、討論和證明所建議的闡釋和腳本。因此，我們可以想像一個懷疑者會問："這些闡釋和腳本難道不是傳統英語嗎？這些闡釋和腳本不就是普通散文中的解釋嗎？對於這個問題，答案一定是是，也不是。在某種意義上，它們是轉述，但不是「純粹」的轉述。它們是（聲稱）可以在不改變意思的情況下從英語轉換到馬來語或任何一種人類語言的意譯。它們不依賴任何英語特有的詞彙，例如「尊嚴」、「考量」、「敏感」或「細緻」，這些詞彙對於說明目的 (以英語為母語的人) 似乎很方便，但卻體現了英國文化的態度，而且無法精確地翻譯。

Using the same ‘natural semantic metalanguage’ both for lexical semantics and for cultural scripts makes it possible to draw links between indigenous cultural
使用相同的「自然語意金屬語言」來處理詞彙語義和文化腳本，就有可能在原住民文化之間建立起聯繫。
values and cultural rules of speaking. Thus, in this paper I will propose in Section 2 semantic explications for the Malay social emotion of malu ‘(roughly) shame, propriety’, the Malay personal qualities of maruah ‘dignity’ and harga diri ‘selfesteem’, and the Malay ideal of senang hati ‘(lit.) easy heart’. Then in Section 3 we will see how these cultural values help account for aspects of the preferred traditional discourse style, as depicted in a series of cultural scripts. Concluding remarks form Section 4.
價值觀和說話的文化規則。因此，在本文的第 2 節中，我將提出馬來人的社會情感 malu「(大致) 羞恥、禮貌」、馬來人的個人特質 maruah「尊嚴」和 harga diri「自尊」，以及馬來人的理想 senang hati「(升) 容易的心」的語義闡釋。然後，在第 3 節中，我們會看到這些文化價值觀如何幫助解釋一系列文化腳本所描繪的偏好傳統說話風格的各個方面。第 4 節為結語。

Present-day Malaysia is one of the most industrialised nations in South East Asia, but traditionally the Malays were a village people, relying on fishing, market gardening and rice cultivation. They have long been Muslims, and Malay traditions (adat) co-exist, more or less comfortably, with Islam. European observers generally describe Malay culture as valuing ‘refined restraint’, cordiality, and sensitivity and Malays themselves as courteous, and charming (and less positively, as fatalistic, and easy to take offence).
今天的馬來西亞是東南亞工業化程度最高的國家之一，但傳統上馬來人是一個村莊民族，依靠捕魚、市場園藝和水稻種植為生。他們長期以來都是穆斯林，馬來傳統 (adat) 或多或少地與伊斯蘭教共存。歐洲觀察家普遍認為馬來文化重視「高雅的克制」、親切和敏感，而馬來人本身也很有禮貌和魅力 (較不正面的看法是宿命主義和容易冒犯)。

The culture places great importance upon proper (patut) conduct - as Mahathir (1970: 157) puts it: “there is always a proper way to do things”. One of the most salient social distinctions is between behaviour which is halus ‘refined’ as opposed to that which is kasar ‘crass, coarse’. Among themselves, Malays evaluate each other along this dimension, according to how well and to what extent a person adheres to certain ideals of speech and action. In comparison with other cultures and peoples, such as the Chinese and Europeans, Malays generally tend to regard themselves as halus and others as kasar (Wilson, 1967: 132).
文化非常重視適當的行為 (patut) - 正如 Mahathir (1970: 157) 所說：正如 Mahathir (1970: 157) 所說：「總有一種正確的行事方式」。其中一個最明顯的社會區別是 halus「高雅」的行為與 kasar「粗俗、粗糙」的行為之間的區別。在馬來人之間，他們會根據一個人在多大程度上遵守了某些言行的理想，從這個層面上互相評價。與其他文化和民族（如中國人和歐洲人）相比，馬來人一般傾向於將自己視為 halus，而將他人視為 kasar（Wilson，1967：132）。

A great deal of what it means to be halus hinges on one’s speech, and much of this paper is devoted to specifying the linguistic norms involved and placing them in the context of Malay cultural values. It is important to stress, however, that halus behaviour applies to a range of non-verbal behaviour as well; for instance, removing the shoes before entering a home, consuming some of whatever refreshment is offered, adopting a specific posture when passing between people who are seated, using only the right hand in eating or in passing things, avoiding physical contact with the opposite sex, beckoning in a certain way.
halus 的意義很大程度上取決於一個人的言語，而本文的大部分篇幅都用於具體說明所涉及的語言規範，並將其放在馬來文化價值觀的背景中。然而，必須強調的是，halus 行為也適用於一系列非語言行為；例如，進門前脫鞋、享用任何提供的茶點、在坐著的人之間穿過時採取特定姿勢、進食或遞送物品時只使用右手、避免與異性有身體接觸、以特定方式招手。

Malay culture is richly verbal, with a large stock of sayings (peribahasa), short evocative verses (pantun), and narrative poems (syair). The importance of speech (bahasa) to proper conduct is attested by the fact that bahasa has a secondary meaning of ‘courtesy, manners’. For instance, the collocation tahu bahasa (lit. ‘know speech’) is explained by Hussain (1990: 26f.) as sopan santun ‘well mannered’. Other similar expressions are melanggar bahasa (lit. ‘attack speech’) ‘breach etiquette’ and kurang bahasa (lit. ‘less/under-speech’) ‘ill-mannered’.
馬來文化語言豐富，有大量的諺語 (peribahasa)、令人回味的短詩 (pantun) 和敘事詩 (syair)。bahasa 的第二個含義是「禮貌、禮儀」，這證明了言語 (bahasa) 對正確行為的重要性。例如，搭配 tahu bahasa（lit. 'know speech「）被 Hussain (1990: 26f.) 解釋為 sopan santun 」well mannered'。其他類似的表達方式有 melanggar bahasa (lit.'attack speech「)「違反禮儀」和 kurang bahasa (lit.」less/under-speech')「ill-mannered」。

Among the cultural concepts fundamental to Malay interaction is the social emotion of malu ‘shame, propriety’. It is usually glossed in bilingual dictionaries as ‘ashamed’, ‘shy’, or ‘embarrassed’, but these translations don’t convey the fact that Malays regard a sense of malu as a social good, somewhat akin to a ‘sense of propriety’. Swift (1965: 110) equates malu with “hypersensitiveness to what other people are thinking about one” (though note the ethnocentric perspective reflected in the prefix ‘hyper-’). Desire to avoid malu has been identified by some anthropologists as the primary force for social cohesion - not to say conformism - in the Malay village.
在馬來人互動的基本文化概念中，malu 是一種「羞恥、禮貌」的社會情感。在雙語字典中，它通常被詮釋為「慚愧」、「害羞」或「尷尬」，但這些翻譯並沒有傳達一個事實，就是馬來人將 malu 視為一種社會好感，有點類似「禮貌感」。Swift (1965: 110) 將 malu 等同於「對別人對自己的看法過於敏感」(但請注意前綴「hyper-」所反映的民族中心主義觀點)。一些人類學家認為，避免 malu 的慾望是馬來村莊社會凝聚力的主要力量，更不用說是順從主義。

Essentially, malu is a negative reaction to the idea that other people could think something (anything) bad about one, a prospect which is powerfully unpleasant to Malay sensibilities. I suggest it can be explicated as follows; for detailed justification see Goddard (1996).
基本上，malu 是一種負面反應，意指其他人可能會對自己有不好的看法，而這種看法對馬來人來說是非常不愉快的。我認為它可以解釋如下；詳細理由請參閱 Goddard (1996)。
(1) Person-X rasa (‘feels’) malu=
(1) Person-X rasa (「感覺」) malu=

X thinks something like this: people can know something about me
X 的想法是這樣的：人們可以知道我的一些事情
people can think something bad about me because of this people can say something bad about me because of this I don’t want this
人們可能會因為這個而對我有不好的看法 人們可能會因為這個而對我有不好的看法 我不想這樣
because of this X wants not to be near people
因為這個原因，X 不願意接近人們
because of all this X feels something bad
因為這一切，X 感到有些不妙
A related social concept is that of a person’s maruah, variously glossed in bilingual dictionaries as ‘dignity’, ‘self-respect’, ‘pride’, and the like. As the range of translation equivalents suggests, maruah involves both what others think about one and what one thinks about oneself. Though the usual translations don’t bring this to the fore, it is a notion resonant with moral implications: a person with maruah would not lower him or herself to knowingly do something wrong. I would propose the explication in (2) below.
一個相關的社會概念是一個人的 maruah，在雙語字典中有不同的解釋，如「尊嚴」、「自尊」、「驕傲」等。正如翻譯對應詞的範圍所顯示的，maruah 既涉及他人對自己的看法，也涉及自己對自己的看法。儘管一般的翻譯並不突出這一點，但它是一個具有道德含義的概念：一個有 maruah 的人不會自降身價，故意做錯事。我建議以下第(2)項的闡釋。
(2) Person-X ada (‘has’) maruah $=$$=$==
(2) Person-X ada ('has') maruah $=$$=$==

X can think something like this
X 可以這樣想
I know people can’t think about me:
我知道人們不能為我著想：
‘this person is not a good person’
這個人不是好人
‘this person does bad things’
這個人會做壞事
it is good for a person if a person can think things like this
如果一個人能夠這樣想，對他是有好處的
This portrays maruah as a kind of whole-some confidence in one’s moral standing in the eyes of others. Other closely related concepts are harga diri ‘self esteem’ (harga ‘value’, diri ‘self’) and nama baik ‘(one’s) good name’. This cluster of concepts is of primary concern to Malay social ideology. As Vreeland (1977: 113) remarks: “an individual’s amour propre [is] in many respects his most treasured and jealously defended possession”.
這將 maruah 描繪成一種對自己在他人眼中的道德地位的整體信心。其他密切相關的概念是 harga diri「自尊」（harga「價值」，diri「自我」）和 nama baik「（一個人的）好名聲」。這組概念是馬來社會意識形態最關注的。正如 Vreeland (1977: 113) 所說：「一個人的愛情在許多方面都是他最珍貴和捍衛的財產」。

Maruah and a concern for one’s harga diri bear a clear relationship to the emotion of malu. Feeling malu ‘shame’ implies a threat to one’s maruah ‘dignity’, because malu is induced by the prospect that other people are thinking things about one; conversely, maintaining one’s maruah will largely pre-empt any unpleasant sense of malu. The relationship is similar to that remarked upon by Jacoby (1991: 24) in a discussion of the psychology of shame, ‘shame-anxiety’, and dignity in the European context:
Maruah 和對自己 harga diri 的關注與 malu 的情感有明顯的關係。感到malu「羞恥」意味著一個人的maruah「尊嚴」受到威脅，因為malu是由其他人對自己的看法所引起的；相反地，維持一個人的maruah在很大程度上可以預防任何不愉快的malu感。這種關係與 Jacoby (1991: 24) 在歐洲討論羞恥心理學、「羞恥焦慮」和尊嚴時所提到的關係相似：
“… one could regard shame as a ‘guardian’ of dignity. Shame-anxiety puts us on guard against ‘undignified’ behaviour, sensitising us to whether or not a given event will be experienced as ‘degrading’.”
"......我們可以將羞愧視為尊嚴的「守護者」。羞恥憂慮使我們對「不尊嚴」的行為保持警惕，使我們對某一特定事件是否會被視為「有損尊嚴」感到敏感"。

What do such concepts have to do with characteristic Malay speech patterns? The answer is suggested by this observation by Vreeland (1977: 117):
這些概念與馬來人特有的語言模式有何關聯？Vreeland (1977: 117) 的觀察提出了答案：
“The social value system is predicated on the dignity of the individual and ideally all social behaviour is regulated in such a way as to preserve one’s own amour propre and to avoid disturbing the same feelings of dignity and self-esteem in others.”
「社會價值體系的前提是個人的尊嚴，在理想的情況下，所有社會行為的規範方式都是為了維護自己的愛好，並避免擾亂他人同樣的尊嚴感和自尊」。

That is to say, in ordinary conversation Malays cooperate to assist the safeguarding of each other’s maruah ‘dignity’ and to steer away from the possibility of incurring or inducing malu ‘shame’.
這也就是說，在一般的談話中，馬來人會互相合作，以協助維護彼此的 maruah 「尊嚴」，並避免招致或引發 malu 「羞恥」的可能性。

A third important Malay social ideal is senang hati ‘a heart at ease’ - an untroubled, relaxed state of mind, for which I would advance the following explication.
馬來人第三個重要的社會理想是「心安理得」（senang hati），即不受煩擾、輕鬆的心境，對於這個理想，我想提出以下的闡釋。
(3) Person-X senang hati $=$$=$==

X isn’t thinking (this) about anything:
X 沒有在想任何事情：
this is bad  這是壞的
X isn’t thinking:  X 沒有思考
maybe something bad will happen
也許會有壞事發生
X thinks something like this:
X 是這樣想的：
if I want to do something, I can do it
只要我想做，我就能做到
I don’t have to do anything
我什麼都不用做
because of all this, X feels something good
因為這一切，X 感覺很好
people think: it is good for people to be like this
人們認為：人們這樣做是好的
This depicts a person who is senang hati as untroubled by the present, not worried about the future, and feeling free to do as he or she chooses (without having to do anything). The final component adds a cultural endorsement. In support of the middle components, one can point to the make-up of the expression itself, that is, the word senang ‘easy, relaxed’, and also to the often noted Malays’ resistance to work (sometimes mistaken, especially by colonialists, for indolence; cf. Alatas, 1977).
這描述了一個人如果是 senang hati，就不會被當下所困擾，不會擔心未來，而且感覺可以隨心所欲（無需做任何事）。最後的成分則加入了文化背書。為了支持中間的成分，我們可以指出這個表達方式本身的構成，也就是 senang 一詞「輕鬆、放鬆」，也可以指出馬來人對工作的抗拒（有時會被誤解為懶惰，尤其是被殖民者誤解；參見 Alatas, 1977）。

Commenting on the salience of the senang hati concept Djamour (1965: 145146) stresses “the importance which Singapore Malays attach to personal happiness”:
Djamour (1965: 145146) 在評論 Senang hati 概念的顯著性時，強調「新加坡馬來人對個人幸福的重視」：
“It would be difficult to over-emphasize this attitude: it permeates all fields of human behaviour. When a Malay contemplates a change of residence, marriage, divorce, or the exercise of a profession, the primary consideration is serenity of mind.”
"這種態度很難過於強調：它滲透人類行為的所有領域。當馬來人考慮改變居住地、結婚、離婚或從事某項專業時，首要的考慮因素就是心靈的寧靜"。

There is a Malay saying senang hati, goyang kaki ‘easy at heart, swinging one’s heels’ which alludes to the casual relaxed state where one is content with life as it is. Consistent with senang hati being a culturally-endorsed attitude toward life, commentators (e.g. Djamour, 1965; Maeda, 1975) often note that Malays would rather disregard grievances or dissatisfactions than disturb their peace of mind. Friction and incompatibility are regarded not only as unpleasant, but, so to speak, as unhealthy.
馬來人有一句俗語 senang hati, goyang kaki 'easy at heart, swinging one's heels'，暗指一種隨意放鬆的狀態，滿足於生活的現狀。Senang hati 是一種文化認同的生活態度，評論者（例如 Djamour, 1965; Maeda, 1975）經常指出，馬來人寧願漠視怨氣或不滿，也不願打擾他們的平靜心境。摩擦和不相容不僅被視為不愉快，而且可以說是不健康的。

Let us then move to the topic of Malay conversational style, beginning with ordinary colloquial speech designated bahasa basahan ‘everyday language’ by Asmah (1987); it is also referred to as bahasa hari-harian (hari ‘day’). This is neither particularly halus ‘refined’ nor particularly kasar ‘crass’, and neither is it the ‘educated variety’ of Malay learnt in formal education, or the careful pronunciation style bahasa baku '(lit.) pure speech’ encouraged for use in the official media. According to Asmah (1987: 89), bahasa basahan is used “when there is no social distance. The interlocutors are familiar with each other and the topic they talk about is of a casual nature, and so is the mood”.
接下來讓我們討論馬來語的會話風格，首先是 Asmah (1987) 將普通口語稱為 bahasa basahan 「日常用語」；它也被稱為 bahasa hari-harian (hari 「日」)。這既不是特別 halus 「高雅」，也不是特別 kasar 「粗俗」，也不是在正規教育中學習的 'educated variety「 馬來語，或在官方媒體中鼓勵使用的發音謹慎的 bahasa baku 」(lit.)純正語言'。根據 Asmah (1987: 89)，bahasa basahan 是「在沒有社會距離時」使用。對話者彼此熟悉，他們談論的話題是隨意性的，情緒也是如此」。

Even in relaxed everyday interaction, it is a presumption of Malay social interaction that one should think before one speaks. There are many common sayings to this effect, for example: Kalau cakap fikir lah sedikit dulu ‘if you’re going to speak, think a little first’. But think about what? Firstly, consistent with the social values described above, one should be mindful not to present oneself in a bad light; secondly, one should adopt a considerate attitude toward the interlocutor’s feelings (cf. the saying jaga hati orang ‘mind people’s feelings’, and the expression bertimbang rasa ‘consider (lit. weigh feelings)’).
即使在輕鬆的日常互動中，馬來社會互動的一個假定是，一個人在說話之前應該先思考。有許多常見的諺語都有這個意思，例如Kalau cakap fikir lah sedikit dulu 「如果您要說話，請先想一下」。但想什麼呢？首先，根據上述的社會價值觀，我們應該注意不要讓自己的形象變得不好；其次，我們應該對對話者的感受採取體貼的態度（參見諺語 jaga hati orang 'mind people's feelings「 和 bertimbang rasa 」consider (lit. weigh feelings)' 一詞）。

These principles can be captured in the cultural script in (4). Notice that it is framed in the ‘first-person’, as a set of guidelines about how 4 i ’ should speak. It enjoins a kind of consideration for others and a concern for one’s standing in the eyes of other people.
這些原則可以用 (4) 中的文化腳本來捕捉。請注意，它是以 「第一人稱 」來構成的，是一套關於 4 i 應該如何說話的準則。它規定要為他人著想，並關心自己在他人眼中的地位。
(4) before I say something to someone, it is good to think:
(4) 在我對某人說話之前，最好先想一下：

I don’t want this person to feel something bad because of this
我不希望這個人因為這件事而感到不愉快
I don’t want this person to think something bad about me
我不希望這個人對我有不好的看法
I have to think about what I say
我必須考慮我說的話

People who don’t show the appropriate care when they speak are described disparagingly as gila bahasa ‘talk-crazy’. (It may be worth noting that some Anglo readers have commented that script (4) would apply to English also. “No-one wants to hurt anyone else’s feelings”, as I was once told. Even if this is a general moral imperative of Anglo culture, however, it is not the same thing as the rule of verbal caution embodied in script (4).)
說話時沒有表現出適當的細心的人會被貶為 gila bahasa 「說話瘋子」。(值得注意的是，有些英語讀者認為腳本 (4) 也適用於英語。我曾被告知：「沒有人想傷害別人的感情」。然而，即使這是英語文化的一般道德要求，它與腳本 (4) 所體現的謹言慎行規則也不是一回事）。

Another convention of ordinary Malay conversation is not to raise one’s voice unnecessarily. To do so is viewed as a sign of some negative emotion. Melay speakers are also careful not to say too much (cf. the common assurance dia cakap banyak tapi hati dia baik ‘She talks a lot but her heart is good’). These norms can be captured in the following simple scripts.
馬來語的另一個習慣是不要不必要地提高聲音。這樣做會被視為一種負面情緒的表現。說馬來語的人也很小心，不會說太多話（參照常見的保證 dia cakap banyak tapi hati dia baik 'She talks a lot but her heart is good'）。這些規範可以用以下簡單的腳本來捕捉。
(5) when I say something to someone
(5) 當我對某人說話時
if this person is near me it is not good to say it loudly
如果這個人就在我身邊，大聲說出來就不好了
if I say it loudly, this person might think I feel something bad
如果我大聲說出來，這個人可能會覺得我感覺不好
(6) when I say something to someone
(6) 當我對某人說話時
it is not good to say many things in a short time
一言難盡
if I do, this person might think something bad about me
如果我這樣做，這個人可能會對我有不好的看法

From the Malay point of view, the norms set out in scripts (4)-(6) above are simply taken for granted, and similar (but not identical) assumptions about speaking apply in many Asian cultures. For some readers with these cultural backgrounds, it may appear superfluous even to bother stating such obvious scripts. What has to be borne in mind, however, is that there are many cultures in which speaking loudly and saying a lot are regarded in a positive light, due to their being connected with altogether different cultural values, such as a positive view of self-assertion or a positive view of strong emotional expression. For examples, see Wierzbicka (1994b) on Polish and Wierzbicka (1292) on Russian, Schiffrin (1984) and Tannen (1981) on contemporary American Jewish culture, and Kochman (1981) on Black Americans.
從馬來人的觀點來看，上述腳本(4)-(6)所列出的規範根本就是理所當然的，而且許多亞洲文化中也有類似的(但不完全相同的)口語假設。對於一些有這些文化背景的讀者來說，即使贅述這些顯而易見的腳本也可能是多餘的。然而，我們必須記住的是，在許多文化中，大聲說話和多說是被正面看待的，這是因為它們與完全不同的文化價值相關，例如對自我肯定的正面看法或對強烈情緒表達的正面看法。舉例來說，請參閱 Wierzbicka (1994b) 關於波蘭人和 Wierzbicka (1292) 關於俄羅斯人、Schiffrin (1984) 和 Tannen (1981) 關於當代美國猶太文化，以及 Kochman (1981) 關於美國黑人。

The cultural scripts and social values discussed above are reflected in many ways in ordinary Malay conversational style. For example, script (4) makes it very difficult to voice criticisms of any kind directly. Suppose, for instance, I have done something to hurt a Malay friend’s feelings and she wants to say something about it to me (instead of putting it aside), the most explicit thing she might feel comfortable saying would be something like the sentence below (the name is used in place of a pronoun): ${}^1$${}^1$^(1){ }^{1}
以上所討論的文化腳本和社會價值觀，在一般馬來人的會話風格中有許多反映。例如，腳本 (4) 使我們很難直接提出任何形式的批評。舉例來說，假設我做了一些傷害馬來朋友感情的事，而她想對我說出來（而不是把它擱在一旁），她可能會覺得最明確的說法是類似下面的句子（用名字代替代名詞）： ${}^1$${}^1$^(1){ }^{1} 。

Notice that the evaluation of my behaviour is indirect (the term ‘bad’, or ‘not good’, is not used) and balanced by the favourable evaluation that I am usually ramah ‘agreeable, affable’.
請注意，對我的行為的評價是間接的（沒有使用「不好」或「不好」這個詞語），並且以我通常是 ramah「合群、和藹可親」這個有利的評價來平衡。

For a second example, suppose my child has been picking on yours in the playground. It would be out of the question to say outright that you didn’t like the way my child had been behaving lately. Instead, a question would be a better strategy, something like:
再舉一個例子，假設我的孩子在操場上一直挑釁你的孩子。如果您直截了當地說您不喜歡我的孩子最近的行為，那就不太合適了。相反，一個問題會是更好的策略，例如：

‘It isn’t usual for your child to pick on other boys, is it? Because today he hit this boy;’
'你的孩子不常挑釁其他男孩，對吧？因為今天他打了這個男孩；'

This kind of speech manœuvre can be described by the verb czev tegur, probably best glossed as something like ‘alert someone’ or ‘draw attention to something’. Coope’s (1991: 363) Malay-English Dictionary defines its more straightforward uses as ‘to address, greet; to accost, salutation’, but even a baby calling out for attention could be said to tegur. Coope also gives the meaning ‘criticise’, presumably in recognition of the indirect speech act described above.
這種說話方式可以用動詞 czev tegur 來描述，最好的解釋可能是「提醒某人」或「引起某人注意」。Coope's (1991: 363) 馬來英語詞典將它更直接的用法定義為「稱呼、問候；搭訕、致敬」，但即使是嬰兒叫人注意也可以說是 tegur。Coope 也給予「批評」的意義，大概是認同上述的間接語言行為。

Now let us shift our attention from casual speech among familiars to more formal situations or to speech between people who do not know each other well (orang lain ‘other people’). In such situations, one always feels people are liable to be watching and passing judgment, ready to disparage those who speak poorly as kurang ajar ‘uncouth, (lit.) under-taught’. (This is a slur on one’s upbringing, as well as on oneself, as the proper way of speaking is a skill learnt in the home.) The relevant complex of cultural attitudes can be represented as below.
現在，讓我們把注意力從家人間的隨便說話轉移到比較正式的場合，或是彼此不熟悉的人（orang lain 「其他人」）之間的說話。在這種情況下，人們總覺得人們可能會觀察並作出判斷，隨時會貶低那些說話差勁的人為 kurang ajar 'uncouth, (lit.) under-taught' (這是對一個人的毀謗)。(這是對一個人的教養的蔑視，也是對自己的蔑視，因為正確的說話方式是在家庭中學習的技能）。相關的複雜文化態度可表示如下。
(7) when people hear someone saying something
(7) 當人們聽到某人說話時
sometimes they think things like this:
有時他們會這樣想：
this person knows how to say things well to other people, this is good sometimes they think things like this:
這個人知道如何跟別人好好說話，有時候他們會這樣想，這很好：
this person doesn’t know how to say things well to other people, this is bad
這個人不知道如何對別人說好話，這是不好的
Notice that this portrays an awareness of people being judgmental not about one’s way of speaking per se (which might refer to one’s accent or standard of education) but about saying things ‘to other people’, that is, to speaking as seen in a social context.
請注意，這描繪出人們的判斷意識，不是針對一個人的說話方式本身 (可能是指口音或教育程度)，而是針對「對其他人」說話，也就是在社會情境中的說話。

The category orang lain ‘other people’, though somewhat vague, is a very salient one for Malay construals of social interaction. It invokes a dichotomy between ‘us’ and ‘them’ which may apply at different levels. ‘Strangers’ are orang lain from the
orang lain 「其他人 」這個類別雖然有點含糊，但對馬來人的社會互動構思而言卻是一個非常顯著的類別。它引申出「我們」和「他們」之間的二分法，可能適用於不同層面。陌生人 「是指來自馬來西亞的 」orang lain"。
point of view of people from the same village. The others in the village are orang lain from the point of view of a group of family friends and neighbours. The smallest unit of solidarity from which the ‘us/them’ dichotomy can be drawn is the household unit. Implicit in the phrasing of (7) is the idea that standards of good speaking are to be applied pre-eminently with ‘other people’ (and by implication, that they may be relaxed ‘among ourselves’; see Section 3.4).
同村人的觀點。從一群家庭朋友和鄰居的觀點來看，村子裡的其他人是 orang lain。從「我們/他們」二分法可得出的最小團結單位是家庭單位。第(7)節的措辭隱含了一個想法，就是良好的說話標準主要適用於 「其他人」（也暗示 「我們自己 」可以放寬標準；見第 3.4 節）。

One of the main dimensions of cultural variation in speaking concerns the expression of personal feelings. In general, it can be said that Malay culture discourages people from verbally expressing how they feel, the ideal demeanour being one of good-natured calm (cf. the discussion of senang hati above)? Karim (1990a) cites O’Brien (1883: 145) as summing up the Malay race as “externally impassive” and Banks (1983: 88) as saying that most social relationships cultivate “unemotional presentation”. On the other hand, everyone is expected to be sensitive to other people’s facial expressions and actions. People who do not show the expected sensitivity are deemed to be bodoh ‘thick, stupid’.
口語文化差異的其中一個主要層面是關於個人情感的表達。一般而言，可以說馬來文化不鼓勵人們以言語表達自己的感受，理想的舉止是一種善意的平靜（參照上文對 Senang hati 的討論）。Karim (1990a) 引用 O'Brien (1883: 145) 的話，將馬來人種概括為「無動於衷」；Banks (1983: 88) 則說，大多數的社會關係都在培養「無情緒的表現」。另一方面，每個人都應該對他人的臉部表情和動作保持敏感。沒有表現出預期敏感度的人會被視為「粗、笨」。

The script in (8) effectively discourages verbal explicitness about one’s feelings, while expressing confidence in the effectiveness of non-verbal signals.
(8)中的腳本有效地阻止了以言語明確表達自己的感受，同時對非言語信號的有效性表達了信心。
(8) when I feel something
(8) 當我有感覺時
it is not good to say something like this to another person:
對別人說這樣的話是不好的：
‘I feel like this’
我感覺就像這樣
if the other person can see me, they will know how I feel
如果對方能看到我，他們就會知道我的感受
The use of ‘meaningful looks’ (pandangan bermakna) is a favoured non-verbal strategy. For instance, the verb tenung (cf. bertenung ‘to divine’) depicts a kind of glare used to convey irritation with someone else’s behaviour, e.g. a child misbehaving or someone in the room clicking a pen in an irritating way. Widening the eyes mata terbeliak (lit. ‘bulging eyes’) conveys disapproval. Lowering the eyes and deliberately turning the head away (jeling) without speaking can convey that one is ‘fed up’ with someone. Pressing the lips together and protruding them slightly (menjuihkan bibir) conveys annoyance.
使用「有意義的眼神」(pandangan bermakna) 是一種常用的非語言策略。例如，動詞 tenung (cf. bertenung 'to divine')描繪了一種炯炯有神的眼神，用來傳達對他人行為的憤怒，例如孩子不乖或房間裡有人在惱人地按著筆。睜大眼睛 mata terbeliak（「鼓起的眼睛」）表示不贊同。低垂著眼睛，故意把頭轉向一邊（jeling）而不說話，可以表達出一個人對某人感到「厭煩」。把嘴唇壓在一起並稍微突出（menjuihkan bibir），表示惱怒。

Non-verbal expression is critical to the closest Malay counterpart of English ‘angry’, namely marah ‘offended, angry’. This is associated not with scenes of ‘angry words’ as sanctioned by Anglo cultural scripts of free self-expression, but by the sullen brooding performance known as merajuk (cf. Goddard, 1996).
非語言表達對於馬來語中與英語 「憤怒 」最接近的對應詞，即 marah 「冒犯、憤怒 」來說是非常重要的。這並非與自由自我表達的英國文化腳本所認可的「憤怒的說話」場景相關，而是與被稱為「merajuk」的沉悶的憂鬱表現相關（參考 Goddard, 1996）。

Malay reluctance to verbalise about feelings can also be seen if we consider the situation in which I realise that I have done something bad to someone else. It would be difficult to say outright “I’m sorry, I was wrong”. The preferred strategy is to be extra nice to the person in question; they will understand. If I must say something, it should be vague and there should be no direct reference to your feelings or to mine. One could say something like this:
如果我們考慮到我意識到自己對別人做了不好的事情的情況，也可以看出馬來人不願意用語言表達自己的感受。要直截了當地說「對不起，我錯了」是很難的。首選的策略是對當事人格外友善；他們會理解的。如果我一定要說些什麼，應該含糊其辭，不應該直接提到您或我的感受。可以這樣說：

Kalau semalam aku ada terbuat/tercakap yang kasar aku minta maaf yelah. ‘If yesterday I did/said something rough I ask for pardon, yes.’
If yesterday I did/said something rough I ask for pardon, yes.如果昨天我做了/說了一些粗暴的事，請原諒，是的。如果昨天我做了/說了粗魯的事，請原諒，是的。

Needless to say, there is no exact Malay equivalent to the English speech-act verb ‘apologise’. The speech-act above would be classed as pujuk, a word whose range also takes in ‘comfort, console’, that is to say, it is focused on making the other person feel better rather than on displaying one’s own regrets. The expression minta maaf ‘ask pardon’ sounds somewhat formal and does not correspond to English ‘saying sorry’.
毋庸置疑，馬來語中沒有與英語動詞「道歉」完全對等的動詞。上述言語行為可歸類為 pujuk，這個詞的範圍也包括「安慰、慰問」，也就是說，它的重點在於讓對方感覺好一些，而不是表達自己的歉意。minta maaf「請求原諒」這句話聽起來有點正式，與英文的'say sorry'不符。

Of course, both these examples involve the speaker’s ‘bad feelings’, and in scenarios in which the addressee too could conceivably feel something bad. There is abundant evidence, however, that Malay cultural ideology disfavours the verbalising about ‘good feelings’ also, particularly in formal situations. At a Malay wedding, for instance, it is bad form for the bride or groom to smile. They are supposed to maintain a composed, calm expression. Karim (1990a) cites Wilder (1982: 74) approvingly:
當然，這兩個例子都涉及說話者的 「壞感覺」，而在這些情況下，受話者也可能有壞感覺。然而，有大量證據顯示，馬來人的文化意識形態也不贊成說出 「好感覺」，尤其是在正式場合。例如，在馬來人的婚禮上，新娘或新郎微笑是不好的。他們應該保持沉著、冷靜的表情。Karim (1990a) 認同地引述 Wilder (1982: 74)：

The same applies during courtship. It is considered bad for the young people to give explicit signs of their affection for one another. As Karim (1990b: 29) says: “During courtship, a person regardless of sex, has to be careful to conceal his or her feelings in public”. To do otherwise would invite malu ‘shame’. When young people betray observable signs of infatuation or love, these are seen as ‘disorders’ (gila, also ‘craziness’).
求愛期間也是如此。年輕人明確表示對彼此的好感被認為是不好的。正如 Karim (1990b: 29) 所說：「在求愛期間，一個人不論性別，在大庭廣眾之下都必須小心隱藏自己的感情。否則會招致 malu 的「羞恥」。當年輕人表現出可察覺的迷戀或愛情時，這些會被視為「失常」（gila，又稱「瘋狂」）。

Interestingly, Karim (1990b: 30-32) highlights the role of the pantun in controlling the display of emotion during courtship. The pantun is a Malay poetic form, consisting of two rhyming couplets in which an emotion or mood is implied or evoked. Fauconnier (1990: 82 [1931]) places great emphasis on their role in traditional rural Malay life:
有趣的是，Karim (1990b: 30-32) 強調在求愛期間，pantun 在控制情緒表現方面所扮演的角色。pantun 是馬來詩歌的一種形式，由兩個押韻的對句組成，其中隱含或喚起一種情感或情緒。Fauconnier (1990: 82 [1931])非常強調其在傳統馬來農村生活中的作用：
“It is the play of words, the equivocations, the tenuous allusions, that constitute their special charm for the Malays. … They all know a large number of pantuns and are constantly inventing new ones. Their conversation is full of these poetic insubstantial images.”
"對馬來人來說，文字遊戲、含糊的詞句、虛渺的典故才是它們的特殊魅力所在。......他們都知道大量的 pantuns，並且不斷發明新的 pantuns。他們的談話充滿了這些詩意的非實質形象"。

One can easily appreciate how an abundance of pantuns, and of other evocative peribahasa ‘sayings’, would be a very serviceable resource for alluding to potentially sensitive matters. In traditional-style courtship they play a special role, providing the young man and woman with a compact written medium in which their feelings may be expressed with acceptable restraint. Karim (1990b: 32) describes how a series of such veiled messages will often be passed between the pair by a gobetween. She comments:
我們可以很容易地理解到，大量的 pantuns 和其他令人回味的 peribahasa 「諺語」，對於暗指潛在的敏感問題而言，是非常有用的資源。在傳統式的求愛關係中，它們扮演著特殊的角色，為年輕男女提供簡潔的書面媒介，讓他們可以在可接受的克制下表達感情。Karim (1990b: 32)描述了一連串隱晦的訊息如何經常由 「溝通者 」在雙方之間傳遞。她評論說：
“Like Japanese haiku, the brevity of verse attempts a controlled elegance over emotion. It is in this sense a mode of communication which guides passion into acceptable poise and restraint.”
"就像日本的俳句一樣，簡潔的詩句嘗試以一種受控制的優雅來表達情感。在這個意義上，它是一種溝通模式，能引導熱情進入可接受的姿態與克制"。

The comparison with the haiku is highly suggestive, Japanese culture being widely known as one which disfavours displays of emotion (cf. Honna and Honna, 1989).
與俳句的比較具有高度的暗示性，日本文化廣為人知，是一種不喜歡表達情感的文化 (參閱 Honna and Honna, 1989)。

Two situations where European norms would lead one to expect ‘good feelings’ to be expressed verbally are accepting a gift and in response to a compliment, but Malay cultural norms differ in both cases. On accepting a gift (after the appropriate refusals; see Section 3.5 below) one would never say anything like “Oh wow, how great!”, in the Anglo-American style. It would be good form instead to look a little to one side, perhaps smiling slightly, and to softly say terima kasih (terima ‘receive’, kasih ‘care’), which though usually translated as ‘thank you’ is better understood as an acknowledgment of the other person’s kindness.
在歐洲的規範中，有兩種情況會讓人預期「好感覺」會以口頭表達，一種是接受禮物，另一種是回應讚美，但馬來文化規範在這兩種情況下都有所不同。在接受禮物時（在適當的拒絕之後，請參閱下文第 3.5 節），我們絕對不會像英美人一樣說 「哇，太棒了！」。好的方式是稍微看向一邊，或許微微一笑，輕聲說 terima kasih (terima 'receive', kasih 'care「)，雖然通常翻譯為」謝謝'，但更能理解為對對方善意的肯定。

If someone says something nice about you, for instance, that your shirt or dress looks nice or looks new, one would deflect the remark as follows:
如果有人說您的好話，例如說您的襯衫或衣服看起來不錯或看起來很新，您會用以下的方式來轉移這句話：

‘This is nothing, I bought it years ago.’
這不算什麼，我幾年前買的。

‘This is nothing, it’s just ordinary.’
'這沒什麼，只是很普通而已。
Biasa-biasa saja.
‘Just same as ordinary.’
'和普通的一樣
If it is something more personal, such as that you are a good cook, or that you are skilled at your work, or (less common) that you are pretty, the right thing to do is not to say anything, and not to look directly at the other person either. One looks downward and a little to the side, perhaps smiling slightly (tersenyum sedikit). Of course, these responses could (and should) be spelt out in more specific scripts. My point here is just that the favoured mode of non-verbal response is consistent with a general restriction on directly verbalising one’s feelings.
如果是一些比較私人的事情，例如您的廚藝很好，或您的工作很有技巧，或（比較少見的）您很漂亮，正確的做法是什麼都不說，也不要直視對方。一個人會向下看，稍微向側邊看，也許會微微一笑（tersenyum sedikit）。當然，這些回應可以（也應該）用更具體的腳本來說明。我在此想說的是，非語言回應的偏好模式與直接以語言表達個人感受的一般限制是一致的。

Whenever people are together an obvious potential arena for personal conflict has to do with what each wants (or doesn’t want). What if A wants to do something but B doesn’t want A to do it? What if A wants B to do something but B doesn’t want to do it? Different cultures have evolved different ‘solutions’, so to speak, to such potential problems. In some parts of the world, the solution is that people don’t mind an overt clash of wills. It may even be welcomed in the interest of some other cultural value, such as intensity of personal interaction. Or openness of expression may be valued for its own sake.
每當人們在一起時，一個明顯的潛在個人衝突的場所就是每個人想要什麼（或不想要什麼）。如果 A 想要做某件事，但 B 不想要 A 做呢？如果 A 想讓 B 做某件事，但 B 不想做，那該怎麼辦？不同的文化對於這些潛在的問題有不同的「解決方法」。在世界上的某些地方，解決方法是人們不介意公開的意願衝突。為了其他文化價值的利益，例如個人互動的強度，這種衝突甚至可能會受到歡迎。或者開放的表達方式也可能因為其本身的原因而受到重視。

In traditional Malay society, however, an overt clash of wills is something to be avoided. Part and parcel of being brought up Malay is learning to anticipate others’ wishes and, as far as possible, to accommodate them. Among a list of the “values
然而，在傳統的馬來社會中，公開的意願衝突是應該避免的。在馬來人的成長過程中，最重要的是要學會預測他人的意願，並盡可能地遷就他人的意願。在一系列的「價值觀
inherent in the Malay view of the conduct and matter of social relationships” Wilson (1967: 131f.) includes the following: “showing consideration and concern, anticipating the other $\dots$$\dots$dots\ldots and, above all, being sensitive to the other person”. According to Mahathir (1970: 160), “The good Malay is always unobtrusive and self-effacing, unwilling to impose his will if it conflicts with others, and ever willing to compromise”.
Wilson (1967: 131f.)「馬來人對於社會關係的行為和事項的固有觀點」包括以下幾點：「表現出體貼和關心，預見對方 $\dots$$\dots$dots\ldots ，最重要的是，要對對方敏感」。Mahathir (1970: 160)指出：「優秀的馬來人總是不顯礙人、不卑不亢、不願意將自己的意願強加於他人，如果與他人有衝突時，總是願意妥協」。

As a first step to teasing out and making explicit the cultural assumptions underlying these observations, I would like to propose the cultural script below. This enjoins the ‘good Malay’, that is to say, the Malay who is conscious of the traditional values, to keep the other person in mind with a view to divining their intentions in order to decide how one should act oneself. (The script does not specify how one’s actions should be influenced, just that the other person’s wishes are important for knowing the right thing to do.)
作為闡明這些觀察所依據的文化假設的第一步，我想提出以下的文化腳本。這要求 「好馬來人」，也就是對傳統價值觀有意識的馬來人，將對方銘記於心，以便窺探對方的意圖，從而決定自己應該如何行動。(劇本沒有說明如何影響自己的行為，只是說明對方的意願對了解正確的行為很重要)。
(9) when I am with someone
(9) 當我和某人在一起時
it is good to think about this person
想想這個人是件好事
because it is good to know what this person wants
因為知道這個人想要什麼是件好事
if I know this, I will know what it will be good to do
如果我知道這一點，我就會知道做什麼是好的
It is not always easy for cultural outsiders to understand why it can be hard for a Malay to say outright what he or she wants even if it is obvious that the interlocutor wants to know. A Malay friend illustrated this for me by relating how she once unintentionally offended her husband’s grandfather, who is European. He had offered her some food and when she did not accept it at once, he asked her pressingly “do you want it or not?”. Though she did in fact want it, the closest she could come to saying so was “not really”, which he mistook for diffidence.
對於文化圈外人來說，要理解為什麼馬來人即使很明顯地想知道對方想要什麼，也很難直截了當地說出來並不是一件容易的事。我的一位馬來族朋友說，她有一次無意間得罪了她丈夫的歐裔爺爺。他給了她一些食物，當她沒有立即接受時，他逼迫地問她 "你到底要不要？儘管她事實上想要，但她最接近說的是 「不太想要」，他誤以為她不自信。

This small example suggests that along with (9), there is another script which constrains people from voicing any wishes they might have about other people doing things for them.
這個小例子說明，除了(9)之外，還有另一個腳本限制人們表達他們對其他人為他們做事的願望。
(10) it is not good to say something like this to someone:
(10) 對別人說這樣的話是不好的：
‘I want you to do something it will be good for me if you do’
我想讓你做一件事，如果你做了，會對我有好處

The phrasing of this script means that it forbids only the expression of explicitly selfinterested wishes. There is no proscription against expressing wishes of other sorts; for instance, giving directions to children or junior family members, helping to organise communal activities, or in giving instructions in accordance with one’s role, e.g. as a teacher or superior officer.
這段文字的措辭意味著它只禁止表達明確的自我利益願望。並沒有禁止表達其他種類的願望；例如，對孩子或年幼的家人給予指示、協助組織社區活動，或依據個人的角色給予指示，例如身為老師或上級官員。

In support of the above two scripts, I would adduce the following scenarios, volunteered by the same Malay consultant. The first concerned how she might speak to her husband if she wanted him to make dinner that evening. Rather than a direct request, or an Anglo-style hint such as saying how much she enjoys her husband’s cooking, she might say something like: “Are you hungry?” It was explained that
為了支持上述兩種說法，我要舉出以下由同一位 Malay 顧問主動提供的情境。第一個情境是，如果她希望她的丈夫在當晚做晚飯，她會如何對他說話。她不會直接提出請求，也不會用英式的暗示，例如說她有多喜歡丈夫做的菜，而是會這樣說：「你餓嗎？「你餓了嗎？」據解釋
this would be effective because her husband would realise that if she had intended to do it herself she would have simply said “What would you like for dinner?” From an Anglo point of view this is pretty subtle stuff, but it makes sense on the assumption that Malay interlocutors are actively ‘tuned in’ to divining each other’s desires.
這樣做會很有效，因為她的丈夫會意識到，如果她打算自己做，她會直接說："你晚餐想吃什麼？從英格蘭的觀點來看，這是相當微妙的事情，但假設馬來語的對話者是積極「調整」以窺探對方的慾望，這就說得通了。

To take a second example: if I would like you to come over to my house and help in preparing food for a kenduri (‘feast, food party’), I might just tell you that the party was on (besok ada kenduri ‘there’s a food party tomorrow’). Given Malay ‘community spirit’ and the tradition of helping each other out (tolong menolong), this would be sufficient.
舉第二個例子：如果我想請您來我家幫忙準備 kenduri（「宴會、美食派對」）的食物，我可能只會告訴您派對正在舉行（besok ada kenduri 「明天有美食派對」）。考慮到馬來人的 「社區精神 」和互相幫助的傳統（tolong menolong），這樣就足夠了。

One can also see evidence for the scripts proposed above in the linguistic routines which accompany the presentation and acceptance of a gift. The giver will downplay the value of the gift and urge the intended recipient to take it; the recipient will insist it is too good or not needed or that the giver can’t really want to give it. In a sense, both parties seem to be operating with a view to script (10). The following examples apply to an informal family setting.
在贈送和接受禮物的過程中，我們也可以看到上述腳本的證據。送禮者會淡化禮物的價值，並敦促收禮者接受禮物；收禮者會堅持禮物太好或不需要，或是送禮者不可能真的想要送禮。從某種意義上說，雙方似乎都是以腳本的方式在運作 (10)。以下的例子適用於非正式的家庭環境。

A: Ini bukan apa-apa. Ambil lah.
A: Ini bukan apa-apa.Ambil lah.
‘This isn’t anything. Take it!’
'這不算什麼。拿著！

B: Apa lah! Ini kan baru. Takkan nak kasi ini. Tak payah lah.
    'What! Isn't it new?' '(You) can't want to give this.' 'There's no need.'
    Jangan lah.
    'Don't. '

A: Takde lah. Biasa aje. Ambil lah.
A: Takde lah.Biasa aje.Ambil lah.
‘It’s nothing. (It’s) just ordinary; Go on take it!’
這沒什麼。(這)只是普通的；去拿吧！'
As mentioned several times already, it seems to be a Malay cultural imperative to avoid friction, that is, not to do or say anything which would clash with or interfere with the other person. This creates an obvious problem when you don’t want to do something your interlocutor wants you to do. Ideally such difficult moments would not arise, but when they do occur the basic strategy is to avoid saying the uncomfortable thing while still saying something else. As one Malay consultant put it: “Don’t say it straight, go around”. The other person will understand and not press the matter. This strategy is summed up in (11). The final component is necessary to rule out silence as an appropriate response.
如前所述，避免摩擦似乎是馬來文化的必要條件，也就是說，不要做或說任何會與對方發生衝突或干擾對方的事情。當您不想做對方希望您做的事時，這就產生了明顯的問題。在理想的情況下，這種困難的時刻是不會發生的，但是當這些時刻發生時，基本的策略是避免說令人不舒服的事情，同時仍然說一些其他的事情。正如一位 Malay 顧問所說的「不要直說，繞過來說」。對方就會明白，不會再追問。這個策略總結在 (11)。最後一個組成部分是排除沉默作為適當回應的必要條件。
(11) if someone wants me to do something
(11) 如果有人要我做某事
it is not good to say something like this to this person:
對這個人說這樣的話是不好的：
‘I don’t want to do it’
我不想這麼做
it is good to say something else
說別的好

Having canvassed a variety of value-laden scripts for verbal interaction, we are in a position to specify what it means to speak in a kasar ‘coarse’ or a halus ‘refined’
在探討了各種語言互動的價值腳本之後，我們就可以具體說明，以 kasar「粗俗」或 halus「精緻」的語言說話意味著什麼。
way. Essentially, kasar speech is that which disregards the normal standards and halus speech is that which shows exemplary adherence to them.
方式。基本上，kasar 語言是指那些漠視正常標準的言語，而 halus 語言則是指那些模範遵守標準的言語。

When and where can one disregard the normal standards? To approach this question it is necessary, firstly, to recognise the pivotal role of the household in Malay life. The household is virtually the only social grouping identified by observers as having any organic role in Malay social organisation. Maeda (1975) remarks that the village (kampong) is little more than “an amorphous gathering of people and houses”. Nor is the ‘family’ (keluarga) a clear-cut unit, since people commonly regard themselves as members of various, overlapping family circles. The household, on the other hand, is crucial. Wilson (1967: 116) describes the house as “the most highly valued material possession of the village Malay” and he goes on to say that “it is also the center and focus of all that is vital in his emotional, social and cultural life”; cf. Djamour (1965: 52), Vreeland (1977: 120).
何時何地可以不遵守正常標準？要探討這個問題，首先必須認識到家庭在馬來人生活中的關鍵角色。家庭幾乎是唯一被觀察家認為在馬來人社會組織中扮演有機角色的社會團體。前田 (Maeda, 1975) 指出，村莊 (kampong) 只不過是 「人與房屋的無定型聚集」。家庭」(keluarga) 也不是一個明確的單位，因為人們通常把自己視為不同的、重疊的家庭圈子的成員。另一方面，家庭則是關鍵。Wilson（1967：116）將房子形容為「鄉村馬來人最珍貴的物質財產」，他接著說，「房子也是他情感、社會和文化生活中所有重要事物的中心和焦點」；參考Djamour（1965：52）、Vreeland（1977：120）。

At home, out of the public eye, and in the company of those with whom one not only shares a roof but all the srnall intimacies of daily life, one can be truly relaxed. Familiar people, who one has ‘got used to’ (sudah biasa), are thought of in a similar light. These claims can be illustrated with the following common expressions, which could all be used to put someone at their ease: Buat lah macam rumah sendiri ‘Make like at home’, Kita kan dah biasa ‘We’ve (incl.) got used to each other’, Jangan malu-malu. Kita kan saudara ‘Don’t hold back (be “shy”). We’re kin’. To help put someone at ease in relation to the presence of a particular third person, one could say of him: Bukan orang lain, adik ‘(He’s) not other people, (he’s) a brother’.
在家中，遠離大眾的視線，和那些不僅與自己同住一屋，還與自己日常生活中所有親密關係的人在一起，可以真正地放鬆。熟悉的人，一個人已經「習慣」（sudah biasa）的人，也會有類似的想法。這些說法可以用以下常見的表達方式來說明，這些表達方式都可以讓人感到自在：Buat lah macam rumah sendiri 'Make like at home', Kita kan dah biasa 'We've (incl.) got used to each other', Jangan malu-malu.Kita kan saudara 'Don't hold back (be "shy").我們是親戚'。為了讓某人對某個第三者的出現感到安心，可以這樣說他：Bukan orang lain, adik 「（他）不是其他人，（他）是兄弟」。

The home, in other words, is the prime setting in which normal ‘public’ standards of behaviour may be relaxed. As Vreeland (1977: 119) notes:
換句話說，家庭是放寬正常「公眾」行為標準的主要場所。正如 Vreeland (1977: 119) 所說：

Asmah (1987: 89) concurs with this general observation, explaining that “the ‘coarseness’, as it were, of their language reflects their close intimacy”. I am not sure it is right to describe such behaviour as literally kasar, though it is certainly behaviour which could be seen (by outsiders) as kasar.
Asmah (1987: 89)同意這個普遍觀點，並解釋說，「他們語言的「粗糙」反映出他們之間的親密關係」。我不確定將這種行為描述為字面上的 kasar 是否正確，儘管這種行為肯定會被（外人）視為 kasar。

So, what is it to be kasar ‘coarse’? Like halus ‘refined’, it is a concept which revolves around the idea that there are standards for correct behaviour with other people. It is kasar to go against the standards, for whatever reason. (Interestingly, not everything which could cause others unpleasantness is classified as kasar. For instance, burping and breaking wind (wang angin) are not kasar behaviour, though they are tak sopan ‘not polite’.)
那麼，什麼是 kasar 「粗」呢？就像 halus 的「精緻」一樣，它是一個圍繞著這樣一個觀念的概念：人與人之間的正確行為是有標準的。不論原因為何，違反這些標準都是 kasar。(有趣的是，並非所有可能導致他人不快的行為都被歸類為 kasar。例如，打嗝和破風 (wang angin) 並不是 kasar 行為，儘管它們是 tak sopan「不禮貌」）。

I propose the following explication, which falls into three parts. First, the person speaking is depicted as not being mindful of the standards (how to say things well). Second, what was actually said would not have been said if the speaker had been mindful of those standards; thus, not everything said casually is kasar - only those utterances which do, as a matter of fact, offend the relevant standards. Third, there is an implicit negative value judgment attributed by the label kasar.
我提出以下的解釋，分為三個部分。首先，說話的人被描述為不注意標準（如何說好話）。第二，如果說話者有注意到這些標準，實際上就不會說出那些話；因此，不是所有隨便說的話都是 kasar - 只有那些事實上違反相關標準的說話才是。第三，"kasar "這個標籤隱含了一種負面的價值判斷。
(12) X said something to Y in a kasar way $=$$=$== X said something to Y
(12) X 以 kasar 方式對 Y 說了一些話 $=$$=$== X 對 Y 說了一些話
when X said it, X didn’t think something like this:
當 X 說時，X 並沒有這樣想：
I want to say things well to this person
我想對這個人好好說話
if X had thought this, X would not have said it like this
如果 X 有這樣的想法，X 就不會這樣說了
this is not good
這樣不好
Though this explication does not include any of the individual scripts discussed so far, it alludes to them all by referring to the idea that a person can ‘say things well’ to another person. It invokes the whole complex of cultural attitudes about good and bad ways of speaking to others. And, as expected, kasar speech is characterised by neglect of all the scripts proposed so far. For instance, it is loud and brash. It is garrulous. It is associated with open expression of emotion (cf. Asmah, 1987: 89).
儘管這個闡釋並不包括目前所討論的任何個別腳本，但它透過提到一個人可以對另一個人「說好話」的想法，暗示了所有這些腳本。它援引了關於對他人說話的好壞方式的整個複雜的文化態度。不出所料，卡薩爾語言的特點是忽略了迄今為止提出的所有規範。例如，它是大聲和粗魯的。嘮叨。它與情緒的公開表達有關（參見 Asmah, 1987: 89）。

Disregarding for a moment the overall negative evaluation embodied in the final component, it can readily be appreciated that kasar speech may come about for a variety of reasons. I may know the normal standards for speaking but disregard them because I don’t care about the other person’s reaction (if I am contemptuous or annoyed). Or perhaps I do not know the relevant standards or do not care about them (non-Malays are often regarded as speaking in a kasar fashion).
撇開最後部分所包含的整體負面評價不談，我們很容易就會了解到，卡薩爾語言可能是基於各種不同的原因而產生的。我可能知道說話的正常標準，但因為我不在意對方的反應（如果我是蔑視或惱怒），所以就不理會這些標準。又或者我不知道相關的標準或不在意這些標準（非馬來西亞人常被視為以 kasar 方式說話）。

Or perhaps because of our special relationship I trust that the other person is not going to be offended or to draw any damning conclusions, no matter how I speak. This explains why ‘kasar’ speech is sometimes indulged in at home, among close friends. This is not really kasar in the strict sense, however, because there is no negative evaluation attached to ‘coarse’ speech in these circumstances. Unguarded speech at home is recognised as like kasar speech in that the participants are not monitoring themselves, are not being mindful of community standards, and often do not conform to those standards, but to label this as literally kasar would be to adopt an inappropriately censorious perspective.
或者也許是因為我們之間的特殊關係，我相信對方不會被冒犯，也不會下任何不好的結論，不管我怎麼說。這也解釋了為什麼有時在家中、在親密的朋友間會縱容「kasar」的言論。然而，嚴格來說，這並非真正的「粗言穢語」，因為在這種情況下，「粗言穢語」並沒有附帶任何負面的評價。在家中不受監督的言論被認定為類似 kasar 言論，因為參與者沒有自我監督，沒有注意到社區標準，而且往往不符合這些標準，但將此標籤為字面上的 kasar 則是採取不適當的審查觀點。

If speaking in a kasar way is disregarding the usual care, it makes sense that halus ‘refined’ speech is taking extra care. According to (13), speaking in a halus way means complying in a conspicuous, exemplary, and skilled fashion to the underlying dictates of more ordinary conversation.
如果以 kasar 的方式說話是漠視一般的謹慎，那麼以 halus 'refined' 的方式說話就是格外謹慎。根據 (13)，以 halus 方式說話表示以顯著的、模範的和熟練的方式遵守一般會話的基本要求。
(13) X said something to Y in a halus way $=$$=$==
(13) X 以 Halus 的方式對 Y 說了一些話 $=$$=$==

X said something to Y
X 對 Y 說了些什麼
when X said it, X was thinking something like this:
當 X 說這句話時，X 是這樣想的：
I want to say things well to this person
我想對這個人好好說話
if X had not thought this, X would not have said it like this
如果 X 沒有這樣想，X 就不會這樣說了
X knows much about how to say things well to other people
X 非常瞭解如何向他人說好話
it is good if people can say things in this way
如果人們能這樣說就好了
As one might expect from the scripts proposed throughout, speaking in a halus way means using elegant phrases and traditional sayings (peribahasa) to allude to potentially sensitive matters, it means using a soft and gentle (lemah lembut) tone of
就像我們從始至終所建議的腳本所預期的一樣，以 halus 方式說話意味著使用優雅的詞句和傳統諺語 (peribahasa) 來暗指潛在的敏感問題，意味著使用溫柔的語氣 (lemah lembut) 來說話。
voice, not saying too much, paying careful attention to the other person’s moods and wishes, and so on.
聲音、不說太多話、細心注意對方的情緒和願望等等。

The script does not specify when halus speech is appropriate, but, again, this is probably as it should be. The fact that speech tends to be halus in formal situations, and with people one doesn’t know well, can be deduced from other principles of traditional Malay culture. After all, in a formal situation such as a marriage negotiation or a property settlement it is natural that everyone would be very mindful of the need to avoid the others present thinking anything bad about one. Similarly, when dealing with people one doesn’t know, or when speaking in public, the desire to avoid malu would make for conspicuously halus behaviour. In either case, it makes sense to speak in a halus fashion.
馬來文並沒有說明何時適合說 halus 語，但這也是應該的。在正式場合以及與不熟悉的人交談時傾向使用 halus 語言，這一點可以從馬來傳統文化的其他原則中推斷出來。畢竟，在正式的場合，例如談婚論嫁或解決財產問題時，每個人都會很自然地注意到要避免在場的其他人對自己有任何不好的看法。同樣地，當與不認識的人打交道，或在大庭廣眾之下發言時，避免馬婁的慾望也會讓人顯得很不自然。無論在哪種情況下，以 halus 方式說話都是合理的。

Toward the end of his monograph A Malay Village and Malaysia, Peter Wilson (1967: 147) observes that to make cultural sense of social relations “one must make explicit the ideological level … the less tangible level of values and emotions”. In line with this recommendation, my aim in this paper has been both to document some Malay speech conventions and to illuminate their connections with other aspects of Malay culture. I hope to have shown that the new theory of cultural scripts is conducive to both these goals. It allows us to formulate clear and testable hypotheses about speech patterns, and to see how these relate to the conceptual content of culturally important emotion and value terms.
Peter Wilson (1967: 147)在他的專題著作《馬來村落與馬來西亞》(A Malay Village and Malaysia)的結尾指出，要使社會關係具有文化意義，「必須明確表達意識形態層面......較不具體的價值與情感層面」。根據這項建議，我在本文中的目的是記錄一些馬來語的習慣，並闡明它們與馬來文化其他方面的關係。我希望能說明文化腳本的新理論有助於達成這兩個目標。它允許我們對語言表達模式提出清晰且可驗證的假設，並了解這些假設與文化上重要的情感和價值詞彙的概念內容之間的關係。

A parting caveat should perhaps be made about the use of the term ‘script’. Despite the possible connotations of the word, it is important to acknowledge that cultural scripts are not necessarily ‘binding’ on individuals. Cultural norms may be followed by some of the people all of the time, and by all of the people some of the time, but they are certainly not followed by all of the people all of the time. Whether or not they are being followed in behavioural terms, however, cultural norms are always in the background as an interpretive framework against which people make sense of and access other people’s behaviours.
對於 「腳本 」這個詞的使用，也許應該有一個臨別的警告。儘管這個詞可能有一些含義，但我們必須承認，文化規範不一定對個人有「約束力」。文化規範可能在某些時候會被某些人遵守，在某些時候會被所有人遵守，但肯定不會在所有時候都被所有人遵守。無論文化規範在行為上是否被遵守，文化規範總是在背景中作為一個詮釋的框架，人們根據這個框架來理解和接觸其他人的行為。

It should also be acknowledged that no-one knows, at this early stage in the development of the theory of cultural scripts, how many scripts would be needed for a comprehensive description of the ‘verbal culture’ of any society (just as no-one has yet produced a complete ethnography of communication in conventional terms). We may expect, however, that the number would be large. We can also expect to find both direct relationships between scripts (for example, some taking priority over others) and subtler forms of intertextuality. We can expect that many scripts will be tailored to particular classes of interlocutors and settings. The present short study must therefore be seen as fragmentary and programmatic.
我們也應該承認，在文化腳本理論發展的早期階段，沒有人知道全面描述任何社會的「言語文化」需要多少種腳本（就像沒有人製作過完整的傳統溝通民族志一樣）。然而，我們可以預期，這個數量將會非常龐大。我們也可以預期會發現腳本之間的直接關係（例如，某些腳本優先於其他腳本）以及更微妙的互文性形式。我們可以預期，許多腳本都是為特定類別的對話者和場景量身打造的。因此，本簡短研究必須被視為片段性和程式化的。

A final matter of general interest which bears mention is the question of whether there are certain formats which are characteristic of scripts from particular cultures. In this respect, it is noticeable that Malay cultural scripts lend themselves to formulations in terms of what is ‘good’ or ‘not good’, rather than in terms of what people
最後一個值得一提的普遍關心的問題是，是否有某些格式是特定文化的文字所特有的。在這方面，值得注意的是，馬來文化腳本適合以「好」或「不好」來表述，而不是以人們的行為來表述。
‘can’ or ‘cannot’ say or do, as seems appropriate for Anglo-American and Japanese scripts (cf. Wierzbicka, 1994a,b,c). The traditional Malay ‘cultural ideology’ of social relations seems to be constituted in moral or ethical terms, rather than in terms of freedoms, constraints, and social possibilities.
可以 「或 」不可以 "說或做，就像英美和日本的文字一樣（參考 Wierzbicka, 1994a,b,c）。馬來傳統的「文化意識形」的社會關係似乎是以道德或倫理的角度來構成的，而不是以自由、約束和社會可能性的角度來構成的。

Alatas, Hussein Syed, 1977. The myth of the lazy native. London: F. Cass.
Alatas, Hussein Syed, 1977.懶惰的本地人的神話。倫敦：F. Cass.
Ameka, Felix, 1987. A comparative analysis of linguistic routines in two languages: English and Ewe. Journal of Pragmatics 11: 299-326.
Ameka, Felix, 1987.兩種語言的語言慣例比較分析：英語和埃維語。語用學雜誌 11: 299-326。
Ameka, Felix, ed., 1992. Special issue on ‘Interjections’. Journal of Pragmatics 18(2/3).
Ameka, Felix, ed., 1992.插話 "特刊。語用學雜誌 18(2/3)。
Asmah, Haji Omar, 1987. Malay in its sociocultural context. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.
Asmah, Haji Omar, 1987.馬來語的社會文化背景。吉隆坡：Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka。
Banks, David J., 1983. Malay kinship. Philadelphia, PA: Institute for the Study of Human Issues.
Banks, David J., 1983.馬來人的親族關係。Philadelphia, PA：人類問題研究所。
Besnier, Niko, 1994. Involvement in linguistic practice: An ethnographic appraisal. Journal of Pragmatics 22: 279-299.
Besnier, Niko, 1994.參與語言實踐：人種學評估。語用學雜誌 22: 279-299。
Coope, A.E., 1991 [1976]. A Malay-English English-Malay dictionary. Revised edition. Kuala Lumpur: Macmillan Education.
Coope, A.E., 1991 [1976].馬來英英馬來字典。修訂版。吉隆坡：Macmillan Education.
Djamour, Judith, 1965 [1959]. Malay kinship and marriage in Singapore. London: Athlone Press.
Djamour，Judith，1965 [1959]。新加坡的馬來親族與婚姻。倫敦：Athlone Press。
Fauconnier, Henri, 1990. The soul of Malaya. Singapore: Oxford University Press. [Translated by Eric Sutton. First published 1931.]
Fauconnier, Henri, 1990.The soul of Malaya.新加坡：牛津大學出版社。[翻譯：Eric Sutton，1931 年首次出版]。
Goddard, Cliff, 1992. Traditional Yankunytjatjara ways of speaking - A semantic perspective. Australian Journal of Linguistics 12(1): 93-122.
Goddard, Cliff, 1992.傳統的 Yankunytjatjara 說話方式 - 從語義角度。Australian Journal of Linguistics 12(1)：93-122.
Goddard, Cliff, 1994. The meaning of lah: Understanding ‘emphasis’ in Malay (Bahasa Melayu). Oceanic Linguistics 33(1): 145-165.
Goddard, Cliff, 1994.Lah的意義：理解馬來語（Bahasa Melayu）中的「重點」。海洋語言學 33(1)：145-165.
Goddard, Cliff, 1996. The ‘social emotions’ of Malay (Bahasa Melayu). Ethos 24(3).
Goddard, Cliff, 1996.馬來語（Bahasa Melayu）的「社會情感」。Ethos 24(3).
Goddard, Cliff, ed., in press. Studies in the syntax of universal semantic primitives. Special issue of Language Science 19(2).
Goddard, Cliff, ed., in press.通用語義基元的句法研究。語言科學特刊 19(2)。
Goddard, Cliff and Anna Wierzbicka, eds., 1994. Semantic and lexical universals: Theory and empirical findings. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Goddard, Cliff and Anna Wierzbicka, eds., 1994.語義和詞彙的普遍性：理論與實證發現。阿姆斯特丹：Benjamins.
Hasada, Rie, in press. Some aspects of Japanese cultural ethos embedded in nonverbal communicative behaviour. In: F. Poyatos, ed., Nonverbal communication in translation. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Hasada, Rie, in press.非語言溝通行為中蘊含的日本文化精神的某些方面。In. F. Poyatos, ed., Nonverbal Communication in translation：F. Poyatos, ed., Nonverbal communication in translation.阿姆斯特丹：Benjamins.
Hussain, Abdullah, 1990. Kamus simpulan Bahasa. (Edisi Kedua). Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.
Hussain, Abdullah, 1990.Kamus simpulan Bahasa.(Edisi Kedua).吉隆坡：Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.
Honna, Nobuyuki and Bates Hoffer, eds., 1989. An English dictionary of Japanese ways of thinking. Tokyo: Yuhikaku.
Honna, Nobuyuki and Bates Hoffer, eds., 1989.An English dictionary of Japanese ways of thinking.東京：東京：Yuhikaku。
Irvine, Judith T., 1979. Formality and informality in communicative events. American Anthropologist 81(4): 773-790.
Irvine, Judith T., 1979.溝通事件中的正式性與非正式性。美國人類學家 81(4)：773-790.
Jacoby, Mario, 1991. Shame and the origins of self-esteem: A Jungian approach. Trans. in collaboration with the author by Douglas Whitcher. London and New York: Routledge.
Jacoby, Mario, 1991.羞恥與自尊的起源：A Jungian approach.Douglas Whitcher 與作者合作翻譯。倫敦和紐約：倫敦和紐約：Routledge.
Janney, Richard and Horst Arndt, 1993. Universality and relativity in cross-cultural politeness research: A historical perspective. Multilingua 12(1): 13-50.
Janney, Richard and Horst Arndt, 1993.跨文化禮貌研究中的普遍性和相對性：跨文化禮貌研究中的普遍性和相對性：歷史觀點。Multilingua 12(1)：13-50.
Karim, Wazir Jahan, 1990a. Introduction: Emotions in perspective. In: W.J. Karim, ed., Emotions of culture. A Malay perspective, 1-20. Singapore: Oxford University Press.
Karim, Wazir Jahan, 1990a.簡介：情感的角度。In：W.J. Karim, ed., Emotions of culture.A Malay perspective, 1-20.新加坡：牛津大學出版社。
Karim, Wazir Jahan, 1990b. Prelude to madness: The language of emotion in courtship and early marriage. In: W.J. Karim, ed., Emotions of culture. A Malay perspective, 21-63. Singapore: Oxford University Press.
Karim, Wazir Jahan, 1990b.瘋狂的前奏：求愛與早婚中的情感語言。In., W.J. Karim, ed., Emotions of culture：W.J. Karim, ed., Emotions of Culture.A Malay perspective, 21-63.新加坡：牛津大學出版社。
Kochman, Thomas, 1981. Black and white styles in conflict. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
Kochman, Thomas, 1981.衝突中的黑白風格。芝加哥，伊利諾州：芝加哥大學出版社。
Maeda, Narifumi, 1975. Family circle, community, and nation in Malaysia. Current Anthropology 16(1); 163-166.
前田成文，1975。馬來西亞的家庭圈、社群與國家。Current Anthropology 16(1)；163-166。
Mahathir, Mohammed, 1970. The Malay dilemma. Kuala Lumpur: Times Books International.
Mahathir, Mohammed, 1970.馬來人的困境。吉隆坡：Times Books International.
O’Brien, H.A., 1883. Malay amoks. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Straits Branch 11: 143-153.
O'Brien, H.A., 1883.Malay amoks.皇家亞洲學會期刊，海峽分會 11: 143-153.

Schiffrin, Deborah, 1984. Jewish argurnent as sociability. Language in Society 13: 311-335.
Schiffrin, Deborah, 1984.Jewish argurnent as sociability.社會中的語言 13: 311-335。
Swift, M.G., 1965. Malay peasant society in Jelebu. London: Athlone Press.
Swift, M.G., 1965.Jelebu 的馬來農民社會。倫敦：Athlone Press。
Tannen, Deborah, 1981. New York Jewish conversational style. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 30: 133-149.
Tannen, Deborah, 1981.紐約猶太人的會話風格。語言社會學國際期刊》30：133-149。
Vreeland, Nen, Glenn B. Dana, Geoffrey B. Hurwitz, Peter Just, Philip W. Moeller and R.S. Shinn, 1977. Area handbook for Malaysia. 3rd Edition. Glen Rock, NJ: Microfilming Corporation of America.
Vreeland, Nen, Glenn B. Dana, Geoffrey B. Hurwitz, Peter Just, Philip W. Moeller and R.S. Shinn, 1977.馬來西亞地區手冊。第 3 版。Glen Rock, NJ: Microfilming Corporation of America.
Wierzbicka, Anna, 1972. Semantic primitives. Frankfurt a.M.: Athenäum.
Wierzbicka, Anna, 1972.語義基元。法蘭克福：Athenäum。
Wierzbicka, Anna, 1980. Lingua mentalis: The semantics of natural language. New York: Academic Press.
Wierzbicka, Anna, 1980.Lingua mentalis：自然語言的語義學。紐約：學術出版社。
Wierzbicka, Anna, 1991. Cross-cultural pragmatics: The semantics of social interaction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Wierzbicka, Anna, 1991.跨文化語用學：社會互動的語義學。柏林：Mouton de Gruyter。
Wierzbicka, Anna, 1992. Semantics, culture and cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wierzbicka, Anna, 1992.語義、文化與認知。牛津：牛津大學出版社。
Wierzbicka, Anna, 1994a. ‘Cultural scripts’: A semantic approach to cultural analysis and cross-cultural communication. In: L. Bouton and Yamunu Kachru, eds., Pragmatics and language learning (Monograph Series, Vol. 5), 1-24. Urbana-Champaign, IL: University of Illinolois.
Wierzbicka, Anna, 1994a.文化腳本」：文化分析和跨文化溝通的語義方法。In. L. Bouton and Yamunu Kachru, eds：L. Bouton and Yamunu Kachru, eds., Pragmatics and language learning (Monograph Series, Vol. 5), 1-24.Urbana-Champaign, IL: University of Illinolois.
Wierzbicka, Anna, 1994b. ‘Cultural scripts’: A new approach to the study of cross-cutural communication. In: M. Pütz, ed., Language contact and language conflict, 67-87. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Wierzbicka, Anna, 1994b.文化腳本」：跨領域溝通研究的新方法。In. M. Pütz, ed., Language contact and language conflict, 67-87：M. Pütz, ed., Language contact and language conflict, 67-87.阿姆斯特丹：Benjamins.
Wierzbicka, Anna, 1994c. Emotion, language and cultural scripts. In: S. Kitayama and H. Markus, eds., Emotion and culture: Empirical studies of mutual influence, 130-198. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Wierzbicka, Anna, 1994c.情感、語言和文化腳本。In. S. Kitayama and H. Markus, eds：S. Kitayama and H. Markus, eds., Emotion and Culture：相互影響的經驗研究，130-198。華盛頓特區：美國心理學協會。
Wierzbicka, Anna, 1996. Semantics: Primes and universals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wierzbicka, Anna, 1996.語義學：Primes and universals.牛津：牛津大學出版社。
Wilder, W.D., 1982. Communication, social structure and development in rural Malaysia: A study of Kampung Kuala Bera. London: Athlone Press.
Wilder, W.D., 1982.馬來西亞農村的溝通、社會結構與發展：A study of Kampung Kuala Bera.倫敦：Athlone Press.
Wilson, Peter J., 1967. A Malay village in Malaysia. New Haven, CT: Hraf Press.
Wilson, Peter J., 1967.馬來西亞的馬來人村莊。New Haven, CT: Hraf Press.