The aims of this thesis are to explore featUes of aPo1ogy in WE & SE, and toexamine Iexicogrammatical characteristics of WE & SE. Since Hal1iday’ssystemic--functional grammar emphasizes the idea/of "function" of language, thisthesis chooses his theory of interpersonal function, especially mood, modality andtheir metaphor, to tackle the problem. Considering that any illustration isolated fromthe sociocultura1 context may lead to linguistic curiosities and do not achieve the..communicative purposes, this thesis also explains features of aPology in WE & SEfrom the social context poini of view.IntroductionTO err is human. Each one needs to make an apo1ogy in daily life. A suitableaPology ’.ot only shows good manner, but also keeps good social relationship.TherefOre, the introductory part deals with the definition of apology and explains whythe comparative study of aPo1ogy in Written English and Spoken English is needed.For the purpose of i11ustration, this thesis sets up a database of aPology texts, whichconsists of l00 written personal or business letters and 100 face to face, simultaneousconversatlons.Chapter OneChapter One attempts to give the theoretica1 fOundation of aPology. To beginwith is the speech act theory. The re1ationship of structUIe and function determines theuse of direct or indirect speech act. Indirect speech acts are generally associated withgreater politeness in English than direct speech act. After the speech act theory aretwo terms c1osely connected with aPology: face and politeness. The principles of facewants and pQliteness guide the participants involved in aPology. Since the middle ofthe tWentieth century, there has been a considerable literature attempting to definedifferences between written language and spoken language. It is necessaIy to make angeneral introduction to views of different linguists./Chapter TWoChapter TWo is the discussion of interpersonal function in aPology. Thediscussion is made with Halliday’s interpersonal function in his systemic-functionalgrammar. Interpersonal function is specified through choices of mood, modalitysystem, metaphor of mood, modality etc. Language is the key to a society of which itis a part. Interpersonal function refers to the ped which language shows itssignificance in keeping social re1ationship. Apology in essence, is a remedy and itsmain purpose is to preserve relations.Chapter ThreeChapter Three makes a comparative study of apology between WE & SE interms of apology strategies, apology patterns (syntactic-semantic patterns used fOrapology), seriousness of apology and socia1 distance of participants. Basic statisticsare made to help the exp1oration. The finding proves that although WE and SE areindependent of each other, they are by no means mutual1y exclusive.ConcIusionThe thesis attempts to make a comparative study of apology in WE & SE.Through an analysis of three chapters, involving theoretical fOundations, theinterpersonal function of apology and different features of apology in WE & SE, boththe 1inguistic characteristics and social function of apology are made clear. It stands tostress that careful consideration should be given to the most common linguisticphenomenon like apology. It is a1so intended to help language leamers to gain adeeper insight into Ha1liday’s 1inguistic theory and hope that the finding is beneficialto the learning of English, and can give some guides to the communication of peoplein society.