Cover not available
Part of
Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Im/politeness
Edited by Marina Terkourafi
[AILA Applied Linguistics Series 14] 2015
► pp. 7–40

Social deixis in motion

The case of ‘COMRADE’ in Russian and Mandarin Chinese

The address term COMRADE in the 20th century Russian and Mandarin Chinese presents an attempt to neutralize and compress the category of formal address by collapsing in a single lexeme the dimensions of power, social distance, age, and gender differentials. This situation-dependent variability of politeness-import proved to be of limited efficacy on the more global, paradigmatic scale. With COMRADE falling out of use in the late 20th century, the current tendency in Russian and Mandarin is to reinforce novel forms of address and/or recover select obsolescent ATs. Both strategies suggest the contemporary address systems of these languages show a trend against reduction and towards populating the paradigm of generic address with ATs whose politeness import is specific and stable.
Published online: 28 May 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.14.02luc
References (39)
References
Alleton, V. 1981. Terms of address in contemporary Chinese. Diogenes 29(40): 40–69. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Altmann, E.G. Pierrehumbert, J.B. & Motter, A.E. 2011. Niche as a determinant of word fate in online groups. PLoS ONE 6(5): e19009, 1–12. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bargiela-Chiappini, F. 2003. Face and politeness: New (insights) for old (concepts). Journal of Pragmatics 35(10–11): 1453–1469. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blum-Kulka, S., House, J. & Kasper, G. 1989. Investigating cross-cultural pragmatics: An introductory overview. In Cross-cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies, S. Blum-Kulka, J. House & G. Kasper (eds), 1–34. Norwood NJ: Ablex. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Braun, F. 1988. Terms of Address. Problems of Patterns and Usage in Various Languages and Cultures. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, R. & Gilman, A 1960. The pronouns of power and solidarity. In 1960 Style in Language, T.A. Sebeok, (ed.), 253–76. Cambridge MA: The MIT press.Google Scholar
Brown, P. & Levinson, S.C. 1978/1987. Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. In Questions and Politeness: Strategies in Social Interaction, E. Goody (ed.), 56–289. Cambridge: CUP. Reprinted as Brown, P. & Levinson S. C. 1987. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Studies in Interactional Sociolinguistics. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cao, X. 2007. The effect of age and gender on the choice of address forms in Chinese personal letters. Journal of Sociolinguistics 11: 392–407. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chao, Y.R. 1956. Chinese terms of address. Language 32(1): 217–241. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clyne, M., Kretzenbacher, H.L., Norrby, C. & Schüpbach, D. 2006. Perceptions of variation and change in German and Swedish address. Journal of Sociolinguistics 10(3): 287–319. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Comrie, B., Stone, G. & Polinsky, M. 1996. The Russian Language in the Twentieth Century. Oxford: Clarendon Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eelen, G. 2001. A Critique of Politeness Theories. Manchester: St Jerome.Google Scholar
Goffman, E. 1955. On face work: An analysis of ritual elements in social interaction. Psychiatry 18: 213–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gogol, V. 1951. Complete works by N.V. Gogol (Н. В. Гоголь. Собрание художественных произведений в пяти томах. Том второй), Moscow: USSR Science Academy Publishing House.Google Scholar
Ide, S. 1989. Formal forms and discernment: two neglected aspects of universal linguistic politeness. Multilingua 82(3): 223–248. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kohnen, T. 2008. Linguistic politeness in Anglo-Saxon England? Journal of Historical Pragmatics 9(1): 140–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, R. 1973. The logic of politeness: or, minding your p’s and q’s. Papers from the Ninth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society , 292–305.
Lee-Wong, S.M. 1994. Address forms in modern China: Changing ideologies and shifting semantics. Linguistics 32: 299–324. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leech, G.N. 1983. Principles of Pragmatics. New York NY: Longman. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1999. The distribution and function of vocatives in American and British English conversation. In Out of Corpora: Studies in Honour of Stig Johansson, H. Hasselgård & S. Oksefjell (eds), 107–118. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Levinson, S.C. 1979. Pragmatics and social deixis. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society, Vol. 5. Berkeley CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society.
Liu, Y. 2009. Determinants of stall-holders’ address forms to customers in Beijing’s low status clothing markets. Journal of Pragmatics 41: 638–648. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Morand, D.A. 1996. What’s in a name? An exploration of the social dynamics of forms of address in organizations. Management Communication Quarterly 9: 422–451. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005. Black holes in social space: The occurrence and effects of name-avoidance in organizations. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 35(2): 320–334. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Myers Scotton, C. & Wanjin, Z. 1983. Tóng zhì in China: Language change and its conversational consequences. Language in Society 12: 477–494. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nunberg, G., Wasow, T. & Sag, I.A. 1994. Idioms. Language 70(3): 491–538. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pan, Y. & Kadar, D.Z. 2011a. Historical vs. contemporary Chinese linguistic politeness. Journal of Pragmatics 43: 1525–1539. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011b. Politeness in Historical and Contemporary Chinese. London: Continuum. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Terkourafi, M. 2011. From Politeness1 to Politeness2: Tracking norms of im/politeness across time and space. Journal of Politeness Research 7(2): 159–185. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005. Beyond the micro-level in politeness research. Journal of Politeness Research 1: 237–262. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, E.C. & Dasher, R.B. 2002. Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vogel, E.F. 1965. From friendship to comradeship: The change in personal relations in communist China. China Quarterly 21(54): 46–60. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wagner, L.C. 2004. Positive – and negative – politeness strategies: Apologizing in the speech community of Cuernavaca, Mexico. Intercultural Communication Studies 13: 19–27.Google Scholar
Wah-shan, C. 2000. Tongzhi: Politics of Same-Sex Eroticism in Chinese Societies. New York NY: Haworth Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Watts, R.J., Ide, S. & Ehrlich, K. (eds) 1992. Politeness in Language. Studies in its History, Theory and Practice. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Watts, R.J. 2003. Politeness. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wong, A. 2005. The reappropriation of tongzhi . Language in Society 34: 763–793. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Q. 2005. A Chinese yuppie in Beijing: Phonological variation and the construction of a new professional identity. Language in Society 34: 431–466. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Korostenskienė, Julija
2020. The hit or miss guesswork figuring the deictic centre of the Russian patronymic. Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association 8:1 ► pp. 99 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.