This chapter explores how the participants of a multi-party research interview create an informal context within the formality of a research interview. The qualitative analysis of the data reveals that formality/informality is not only indexed by the desu/masu and plain forms but also is interactionally coordinated with a change of participation framework (Goffman 1981). When the interviewer asks a question, the interviewees often answer her question by carrying out an informal conversation among themselves rather than answering directly to the interviewer. This move changes the participation framework and constructs an embedded frame within the frame of interview (a dual communicative frame). The chapter demonstrates that this simultaneous multilevel reframing is an effective way to incorporate informality within the formal frame of a research interview.

This chapter demonstrates that even in institutional and formal contexts, participants can and do make emotional connections with each other. In my data of two-party research interviews, I observed some recurrent linguistic elements in moments of such connection: (1) reported speech, (2) repetition, and (3) eccentric metaphors. However, these linguistic strategies did not create emotional connections in isolation. Rather, extralinguistic factors such as the interlocutors’ mutual familiarity as members of the same professional networks and camaraderie based on similar professional and personal experiences, and accompanying semiotic features such as empathetic facial expressions, smiles, and laughter helped the interview participants make stories come alive and engage the other participant more fully. In other words, the participants successfully achieved emotional connection because they employed multilevel and multimodal (extralinguistic, visual, paralinguistic, and linguistic) resources in a concerted manner.

Speakers stylistically depart from general expectations of formality and use (non)linguistic expressions that are more closely associated with informal or intimate interactions for reasons as various as the devices that are used. In many instances, the speaker intentionally frames what is being talked about as something familiar and quotidian. Such quotidian framing is accomplished through linguistic and non-linguistic cues that are consonant with informal and intimate situations. By examining examples in three different formal settings (1) a retelling of a doctor-patient exchange to a first-time acquaintance, (2) a TV talk show and (3) Twitter postings by a political party, the styling practice of indexing closeness in formal contexts is seen from the perspective of quotidian (re-)framing of the communicative context (e.g. Matsumoto 2011) as a means to evoke rapport among the participants of the interaction and to present the subject of discussion as being informal and usual.

This chapter explores how an instructor at a Japanese business manners training camp utilizes Standard Japanese (SJ) desu/masu (honorific) forms, SJ plain (non-honorific) forms, and Kansai Japanese (KJ). The study focuses on how the instructor’s stancetaking and style-shifting express his shifting relationships to the trainees. The analysis reveals that both SJ and KJ convey epistemic stance, but in different types of talk, during training sessions. Additionally, although the SJ plain forms and KJ are considered to share some indexical meanings, in this setting KJ tends to index more emotionally charged interpersonal stances than the SJ plain form. By elucidating how KJ encroaches on the indexical values of the SJ plain form, the study argues for regional dialects’ power to reconfigure the indexical fields of both SJ and the dialects themselves. This study thus contributes to understanding the complexities of style shifts in relation to indexicality in Japanese and other languages.

This study examines interactions observed in two Japanese news shows, focusing on their participants’ use and non-use of honorifics along with other linguistic and multimodal elements that constitute various ranges and layers of formality. The two programs follow a similar “news show” format. Overarching formality across the two programs can be observed: the introduction of a new news item is often offered in honorifics with the anchor’s gaze on the camera. The study shows that formality and informality are fluid constructs. A variety of linguistic and non-linguistic elements are mobilized to display formality and informality. In various ways, formality can be displayed to add different layers of meaning to ongoing talk, which contributes to the viewer’s sense of closeness between participants.

This chapter analyzes style shifts in a business telephone call between two companies in Kansai, Japan from the perspectives of indexicality, frame analysis, footing, and stance. By tracing modulations in usage of style and Kansai dialect, I demonstrate how two participants create nested, informal frames within a formal conversation to resolve several problems. While the male participant uses plain style predicates with Kansai forms almost exclusively, the female speaker’s stylistic and dialect choices are more dynamic. Her use of the masu form indexes an on-stage, self-presentational stance, which she assumes when representing her company. In contrast, her use of the plain style with affect keys and occasional dialect forms indexes an off-stage, informal stance, conveying surprise, solidarity, empathy, and humor.

Drawing on the Japanese broadcast of the Tokyo 2020 Summer Olympics skateboarding event, this chapter examines how a sports commentator’s use of a vernacular honorific speech style served to distinguish dual roles they assumed during the event. While a large body of work has demonstrated style shifting with the addressee honorific desu/masu style and the non-honorific plain style signal shifts in speaker stance (Cook 1996ab, 1997, 1998, 2008a; Geyer 2008ab; Enyo 2015), relatively few works have investigated style shifting with the vernacular honorific style marked by su (cf. Nakamura 2021, Nakamura this volume). The analysis reveals that, as a variant of the desu/masu style, the su style can create a third space in a formal context within which a speaker can construct situationally relevant distinctions in the public presentation of self. The findings of this study contribute to emerging work on the su style, question the dichotomous paradigm of (non-)honorific speech style, and put a spotlight on innovative speaker identity construction in Japanese.

This chapter examines a Japanese live TV Olympic broadcast and explores how the speaker employs a vernacular form negotiating with the standard variety norm, what interactional effect vernacularization brings to the broadcast, and what sociolinguistic change is promoted by the vernacular usage. Investigating the uses of the honorific, plain, and vernacular forms within the normative sequences of Olympic broadcastings, the analysis demonstrates that the occurrence of the vernacular form is mostly limited to the evaluation element of the normative sequences in which the personal comment is expected. The finding implies: (1) the speaker negotiates with the standard norm of broadcasting by the distinctive use of the standard and vernacular forms within the normative sequences, (2) vernacularization can be employed as a resource to personalize the context of interaction, and (3) whether the specific broadcast leads to a sociolinguistic change is ambiguous and calls for further longitudinal research.

When thinking about Japanese workplace culture, hierarchies and their associated linguistic forms are often emphasized. However, the reality within the context of the modern workplace in Japan goes beyond the rigid, simplistic rules of old-fashioned textbooks. This chapter examines how the deeply entrenched ideological tropes of the “traditional” workplace relationship between bosses and their subordinates can be understood more fully through the examination of short videos on social media. While shifts between honorifics and plain forms occur, suprasegmentals (such as intonation and volume shifts) alongside pragmalinguistic features such as imperatives and interjections also play a significant role. Additionally, the use of impoliteness, contextualized through entextualization, and the limited consequences within frames of interaction, showcase how workplace relationships, social media platforms, and digital editing contribute to a unique communication style. This study highlights the subtle negotiation between solidarity and formality, demonstrating how the context of social media influences workplace communication and challenges traditional perceptions of social rules in Japan.

This chapter discusses the theoretical and methodological issues raised by the preceding chapters. It focusses on issues concerning: (a) styling as a process shaped by multi-level and multimodal semiotic resources, (b) styling as an ideological process that shapes a style as a matter of degree, and (b) multiplicity, variability, and indeterminacy in the interpretation of styles. It discusses the contributions of each chapter as well as the outstanding issues that require further research. The latter discussion emphasizes the need to pay more attention to the complexity of styling and the variability and indeterminacy of indexical meanings and the need for reconsidering interactional norms.

This chapter explores how the participants of a multi-party research interview create an informal context within the formality of a research interview. The qualitative analysis of the data reveals that formality/informality is not only indexed by the desu/masu and plain forms but also is interactionally coordinated with a change of participation framework (Goffman 1981). When the interviewer asks a question, the interviewees often answer her question by carrying out an informal conversation among themselves rather than answering directly to the interviewer. This move changes the participation framework and constructs an embedded frame within the frame of interview (a dual communicative frame). The chapter demonstrates that this simultaneous multilevel reframing is an effective way to incorporate informality within the formal frame of a research interview.

This chapter demonstrates that even in institutional and formal contexts, participants can and do make emotional connections with each other. In my data of two-party research interviews, I observed some recurrent linguistic elements in moments of such connection: (1) reported speech, (2) repetition, and (3) eccentric metaphors. However, these linguistic strategies did not create emotional connections in isolation. Rather, extralinguistic factors such as the interlocutors’ mutual familiarity as members of the same professional networks and camaraderie based on similar professional and personal experiences, and accompanying semiotic features such as empathetic facial expressions, smiles, and laughter helped the interview participants make stories come alive and engage the other participant more fully. In other words, the participants successfully achieved emotional connection because they employed multilevel and multimodal (extralinguistic, visual, paralinguistic, and linguistic) resources in a concerted manner.

Speakers stylistically depart from general expectations of formality and use (non)linguistic expressions that are more closely associated with informal or intimate interactions for reasons as various as the devices that are used. In many instances, the speaker intentionally frames what is being talked about as something familiar and quotidian. Such quotidian framing is accomplished through linguistic and non-linguistic cues that are consonant with informal and intimate situations. By examining examples in three different formal settings (1) a retelling of a doctor-patient exchange to a first-time acquaintance, (2) a TV talk show and (3) Twitter postings by a political party, the styling practice of indexing closeness in formal contexts is seen from the perspective of quotidian (re-)framing of the communicative context (e.g. Matsumoto 2011) as a means to evoke rapport among the participants of the interaction and to present the subject of discussion as being informal and usual.

This chapter explores how an instructor at a Japanese business manners training camp utilizes Standard Japanese (SJ) desu/masu (honorific) forms, SJ plain (non-honorific) forms, and Kansai Japanese (KJ). The study focuses on how the instructor’s stancetaking and style-shifting express his shifting relationships to the trainees. The analysis reveals that both SJ and KJ convey epistemic stance, but in different types of talk, during training sessions. Additionally, although the SJ plain forms and KJ are considered to share some indexical meanings, in this setting KJ tends to index more emotionally charged interpersonal stances than the SJ plain form. By elucidating how KJ encroaches on the indexical values of the SJ plain form, the study argues for regional dialects’ power to reconfigure the indexical fields of both SJ and the dialects themselves. This study thus contributes to understanding the complexities of style shifts in relation to indexicality in Japanese and other languages.

This study examines interactions observed in two Japanese news shows, focusing on their participants’ use and non-use of honorifics along with other linguistic and multimodal elements that constitute various ranges and layers of formality. The two programs follow a similar “news show” format. Overarching formality across the two programs can be observed: the introduction of a new news item is often offered in honorifics with the anchor’s gaze on the camera. The study shows that formality and informality are fluid constructs. A variety of linguistic and non-linguistic elements are mobilized to display formality and informality. In various ways, formality can be displayed to add different layers of meaning to ongoing talk, which contributes to the viewer’s sense of closeness between participants.

This chapter analyzes style shifts in a business telephone call between two companies in Kansai, Japan from the perspectives of indexicality, frame analysis, footing, and stance. By tracing modulations in usage of style and Kansai dialect, I demonstrate how two participants create nested, informal frames within a formal conversation to resolve several problems. While the male participant uses plain style predicates with Kansai forms almost exclusively, the female speaker’s stylistic and dialect choices are more dynamic. Her use of the masu form indexes an on-stage, self-presentational stance, which she assumes when representing her company. In contrast, her use of the plain style with affect keys and occasional dialect forms indexes an off-stage, informal stance, conveying surprise, solidarity, empathy, and humor.

Drawing on the Japanese broadcast of the Tokyo 2020 Summer Olympics skateboarding event, this chapter examines how a sports commentator’s use of a vernacular honorific speech style served to distinguish dual roles they assumed during the event. While a large body of work has demonstrated style shifting with the addressee honorific desu/masu style and the non-honorific plain style signal shifts in speaker stance (Cook 1996ab, 1997, 1998, 2008a; Geyer 2008ab; Enyo 2015), relatively few works have investigated style shifting with the vernacular honorific style marked by su (cf. Nakamura 2021, Nakamura this volume). The analysis reveals that, as a variant of the desu/masu style, the su style can create a third space in a formal context within which a speaker can construct situationally relevant distinctions in the public presentation of self. The findings of this study contribute to emerging work on the su style, question the dichotomous paradigm of (non-)honorific speech style, and put a spotlight on innovative speaker identity construction in Japanese.

This chapter examines a Japanese live TV Olympic broadcast and explores how the speaker employs a vernacular form negotiating with the standard variety norm, what interactional effect vernacularization brings to the broadcast, and what sociolinguistic change is promoted by the vernacular usage. Investigating the uses of the honorific, plain, and vernacular forms within the normative sequences of Olympic broadcastings, the analysis demonstrates that the occurrence of the vernacular form is mostly limited to the evaluation element of the normative sequences in which the personal comment is expected. The finding implies: (1) the speaker negotiates with the standard norm of broadcasting by the distinctive use of the standard and vernacular forms within the normative sequences, (2) vernacularization can be employed as a resource to personalize the context of interaction, and (3) whether the specific broadcast leads to a sociolinguistic change is ambiguous and calls for further longitudinal research.

When thinking about Japanese workplace culture, hierarchies and their associated linguistic forms are often emphasized. However, the reality within the context of the modern workplace in Japan goes beyond the rigid, simplistic rules of old-fashioned textbooks. This chapter examines how the deeply entrenched ideological tropes of the “traditional” workplace relationship between bosses and their subordinates can be understood more fully through the examination of short videos on social media. While shifts between honorifics and plain forms occur, suprasegmentals (such as intonation and volume shifts) alongside pragmalinguistic features such as imperatives and interjections also play a significant role. Additionally, the use of impoliteness, contextualized through entextualization, and the limited consequences within frames of interaction, showcase how workplace relationships, social media platforms, and digital editing contribute to a unique communication style. This study highlights the subtle negotiation between solidarity and formality, demonstrating how the context of social media influences workplace communication and challenges traditional perceptions of social rules in Japan.

This chapter discusses the theoretical and methodological issues raised by the preceding chapters. It focusses on issues concerning: (a) styling as a process shaped by multi-level and multimodal semiotic resources, (b) styling as an ideological process that shapes a style as a matter of degree, and (b) multiplicity, variability, and indeterminacy in the interpretation of styles. It discusses the contributions of each chapter as well as the outstanding issues that require further research. The latter discussion emphasizes the need to pay more attention to the complexity of styling and the variability and indeterminacy of indexical meanings and the need for reconsidering interactional norms.