Address terms by Singapore Chinese in a multilingual context
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1558/eap.25351Keywords:
Singapore Chinese, address terms, multilingual, politeness, Confucian ethicsAbstract
Address terms in the Chinese context have been examined by many researchers. This paper examines address terms used by ethnic Chinese people in the multilingual context of Singapore. This study uses a sociopragmatic approach to gain a broader understanding of how the ethnic Chinese population in Singapore chooses between different languages and terms of address in different settings. It seeks to understand the underlying factors that affect one’s decision given the complex linguistic environment. The findings show that there is a diglossia situation in Singapore – a distinction between formal and informal settings (Keshavarz, 2001). In formal settings, only English and Mandarin are used, while southern Chinese dialects are used in informal settings such as with family, friends or in coffee shops. Other factors that affect terms of address include Confucian ethics of showing respect for one’s elders and people of higher positions and status as seen in Gu (1990), and in gaining favour with addressees such as sellers appealing to their customers (Liu, 2009).
References
Ballweg, J. A. (1969). Extensions of meaning and use for kinship terms. American Anthropologist, 71(1), 84–87. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1969.71.1.02a00100
Braun, F. (1988). Terms of address: Problems of patterns and usage in various languages and cultures. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813085
Brown, R., & Ford, M. (1961). Address in American English. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 62(2), 375–385. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0042862
Brown, R., & Gilman, A. (1960). The pronouns of power and solidarity. In R. Brown & A. Gilman, Readings in the Sociology of Language (pp. 253–276). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Brown, R., & Gilman, A. (1989). Politeness theory and Shakespeare’s four major tragedies. Language in Society, 18(2), 159–212. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0047404500013464
Cao, X. (2007). The effect of age and gender on the choice of address forms in Chinese personal letters. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 11(3), 392–407. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9841.2007.00329.x
Chao, Y. R. (1956). Chinese terms of address. Language, 32(1), 217–241.
Cheng, L. K. (2019). Bang trade specialisation of the Chinese community in Singapore. In C. G. Kwa & B. L. Kua (Eds.), A General History of the Chinese in Singapore (pp. 309–318). Singapore; World Scientific.
Chew, P. G. L. (2013). Sociolinguistic history of early identities in Singapore: From colonialism to Nationalism. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Clyne, M., Norrby, C., & Warren, J. (2009). Language and human relations: Style of address in contemporary language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dickey, E. (2004). Literal and extended use of kinship terms in documentary papyri. Mnemosyne, 57(2), 131–176. https://doi.org/10.1163/156852504773399169
Du, X. (2017). [A study on modern Chinese kinship term generalization]. Modern Chinese, 3, 119–122. https://doi.org/10.21192/scll.100..201911.010
Ervin-Tripp, S. M. (1972). Sociolinguistic rules of address. In J. B. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics: Selected Readings (pp. 225–240). Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
Feng, W., & Ren, W. (2019). “This is the destiny, darling”: Relational acts in Chinese management responses to online consumer reviews. Discourse, Context & Media, 28, 52–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2018.09.003
Friedrich, P. (1972). Social context and semantic feature: The Russian pronominal usage. In J. Gumperz & D. Hymes (Eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics: The ethnography of communication (pp. 270–300). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Gao, C. (2014). The vagueness in Chinese address terms. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4(3), 575–580. https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.4.12.2614-2618
Goh, C. T. (1997). National day rally speech. Singapore: Ministry of Education. https://www.nas.gov.sg/archivesonline/data/pdfdoc/199708240e.htm
Gu, Y. (1990). Politeness phenomena in modern Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics, 14(2), 237–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/03782166(90)90082O
Gupta, A. F. (1994). The step-tongue: Children’s English in Singapore. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
He, Z., & Ren, W. (2016). Current address behaviour in China. East Asian Pragmatics, 1(2), 163–180. https://doi.org/10.1558/eap.v1i2.29537
Honegger, T. (2003). “And if ye wol nat so, my lady sweete, thanne preye I thee, [...]” Forms of address in Chaucer’s Knight’s Tale. In I. Taavitsainen & A. H. Jucker (Eds.), Diachronic perspectives on address term systems (pp. 61–84). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Irvine, J. T. (1979). Formality and informality in communicative events. American Anthropologist, 81, 773–790. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1979.81.4.02a00020
Jiang, J. (2005). [Kinship term extension and its usage rules – take “da sao” as an example]. Research on Social Language Use, 10, 12–13.
Jucker, A. H., & Taavitsainen, I. (2003). Diachronic perspectives on address term systems: Introduction. In I. Taavitsainen & A. H. Jucker (Eds.), Diachronic perspectives on address term systems (pp. 1–25). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Keshavarz, M. H. (2001). The role of social context, intimacy, and distance in the choice of forms of address. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 2001(148). https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.2001.015
Kuo, E. C. Y. (1980). The sociolinguistic situation in Singapore: Unity in diversity. In E. A. Afendras & E. C. Y. Kuo (Eds.), Language and society in Singapore (pp. 39–62). Singapore: Singapore University Press.
Kuo, E. C. Y. (2019). The Speak Mandarin campaign. In C. G. Kwa & B. L. Kua (Eds.), A general history of the Chinese in Singapore (pp. 735–754). Singapore: World Scientific.
Lee, C. L. (2011). Politeness in Singapore. In D. Z. Kadar & S. Mills (Eds.), Politeness in East Asia (pp. 226–251). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lee, C. L. (2016). Grandmother’s tongue: Decline of Teochew language in Singapore. In W. Li (Ed.), Multilingualism in the Chinese diaspora worldwide: Transnational connections and local social realities (pp. 196–215). Abingdon: Routledge.
Lee, C. L., & Phua, C. P. (2020). Singapore bilingual education. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication, 30(1–2), 90–114. https://doi.org/10.1075/japc.00046.lee
Lee, C. L., & Phua, C. P. (2021). Examinations in Singapore’s bilingual policy. Journal of Multilingual Theories and Practices, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.1558/jmtp.13465
Lee, K. Y. (2011). Lee Kuan Yew, my lifelong challenge: Singapore’s bilingual journey. Singapore: Straits Times Press.
Lee-Wong, S. M. (1994). Imperatives in requests: Direct or impolite – observations from Chinese. Pragmatics 4(4), 491–515. https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.4.4.01lee
Lee-Wong, S. M. (2000). Politeness and face in Chinese culture. Oxford: P. Lang.
Li, S., & Yang, T. (2005). [A cultural psychological study on Chinese kinship term generalization]. Inner Mongolia Social Sciences, 3, 89–92. https://doi.org/10.12677/ml.2022.106172
Li, W., & Li, Y (1996). “My stupid wife and ugly daughter”: The use of pejorative references as a politeness strategy by Chinese speakers. Journal of Asian Communication, 7, 129–142.
Li, W., Saravanan, V., & Ng, J. L. H. (1997). Language shift in the Teochew community in Singapore: A family domain analysis. Journal of Multilingual and Multi-cultural Development, 18(5), 364–384. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434639708666326
Liu, Y. (2009). Determinants of stall-holders’ address forms to customers in Beijing’s low-status clothing markets. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(3), 638-–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.07.002
Ma, Y. (2003). [The Pragmatic principles and functions of generalized kinship terms in A Dream of Red Mansions]. Journal of Huainan Teachers College, 18(5), 12–14. https://doi.org/10.12677/cnc.2015.34010
Norbeck, E., & Befu, H. (1958). Informal fictive kinship in Japan. American Anthropologist, 1, 102–117. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1958.60.1.02a00090
O’Driscoll, J. (1996). About face: A deference and elaboration of universal dualism. Journal of Pragmatics, 25, 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(94)00069-x
Okada, F. E. (1957). Ritual brotherhood: A cohesive factor in Nepalese society. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology, 13(3), 212–222. https://doi.org/10.1086/soutjanth.13.3.3629147
Oyetade, S. O. (1995). A sociolinguistic analysis of address forms in Yoruba. Language in Society, 24(4), 515–535. https://doi.org/10.1017/s004740450001900x
Pan, P. (1998). [A study on the generalization of kinship terms]. Applied Linguistics, 2, 34–38. http://qikan.cqvip.com/Qikan/Article/Detail?id=1002373070
Pan, Y. (2000). Facework in Chinese service encounters. Journal of Asian Pacific Communications, 10, 25–61.
Pan, Y., & Kádár, D. Z. (2011). Historical vs. contemporary Chinese linguistic politeness. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 1525–1539. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.10.018
Placencia, M. E. (2015). Address forms and relational work in E-commerce: The case of service encounter interactions in MercadoLibre Ecuador. In M. Hernández-López & L. Fernández-Amaya (Eds.), A multidisciplinary approach to service encounters (pp. 37-64). Leiden: Brill.
Qin, X. (2008). Choices in terms of address: A sociolinguistic study of Chinese and American English practices. In M. K. M. Chan & H. Kang (Eds.), Proceedings of the 20th North American Conference on Chinese Linguistics (pp. 409–421). Ohio: Ohio State University.
Ren, J., & Chen, X. (2019). Kinship term generalization as a cultural pragmatic strategy among Chinese graduate students. Pragmatics and Society, 10(4), 613–638. https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.18009.ren
Tang, C. (2015). The influence of the addressers’ and the addressees’ gender identities on the addressers’ linguistic politeness behavior. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA), 477–499. https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.25.3.07tan
Wierzbicka, A. (1991). Cross-cultural pragmatics: The semantics of human interaction. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Wong, J. O. (2014). The culture of Singapore English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Xu, D., Cheng, H. C., & Chen, S. (2005). [Investigating the languages of Singapore’s Chinese community]. Nanjing: Nanjing University Publishing House.
Yang, N., & Wang, Z. (2022). Addressing as a gender-preferential way for suggestive selling in Chinese e-commerce live streaming discourse: A corpus-based approach. Journal of Pragmatics, 197, 43–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2022.05.014
You, C. (2014). Analysis on the generalization of the address term “teacher” in Chinese from the perspective of sociolinguistics. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4(3), 575–580. https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.4.3.575-580
Zhao, Q., & Xu, X. (2009). [A case study on unbalanced fictive use of kinship terms in northeastern dialect and Shanghai dialect]. Journal of Jilin Normal University, 37(1), 54–56. https://doi.org/10.12677/ml.2021.96213
