Cover not available
Article published In:
Spanish in Context
Vol. 21:2 (2024) ► pp.312–341

(Im)polite uses of vocatives in present-day Madrilenian Spanish

ORCID logo | Ghent University
The present study aims to examine the socio-pragmatic scope of vocatives in present-day colloquial Spanish. As prototypical deictic markers, directly calling upon the addressee, vocatives are considered crucial mechanisms in the creation and maintaining of interpersonal relationships during interaction. This deictic potential makes them highly appropriate strategies at the service of face work and (im)politeness. However, the relation between (Spanish) vocatives and (im)politeness has scarcely been explored. In an attempt to fill this research gap, the present analysis empirically examines the socio-pragmatic functions related to the expression of (im)politeness that the Spanish vocative is able to fulfill in colloquial conversations. The results show that its socio-pragmatic multifunctionality needs to be evaluated in the broad context, not only by taking into account the hosting speech act and the vocative’s semantic features, but also extra-linguistic parameters, such as the interpersonal relationship and the speaker’s age.
Keywords: vocative, (im)politeness, corpus linguistics
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction: Vocatives and (im)politeness
  • 2.The vocative: Definition and characteristics
  • 3.The different faces of politeness
    • 3.1Politeness as a socio-pragmatic concept
    • 3.2Politeness as a sociocultural concept
  • 4.Data and methodology
  • 5.Analysis
    • 5.1How does the Spanish vocative contribute to the expression of (im)politeness?
    • 5.2To what degree does the vocative’s semantic core meaning prompt or sabotage particular (im)polite effects on the interlocutor’s face?
    • 5.3To what degree do contextual and socio-relational variables affect the vocative’s expression of (im)politeness?
  • 6.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 30 May 2024
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/sic.22008.del
References (47)
References
Agresti, Alan. 2002. Categorical data analysis, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aijmer, Karin. 2019. “Ooh whoops I’m sorry! Teenagers’ use of English apology expressions.” Journal of Pragmatics 1421: 258–269. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alonso-Cortés Manteca, Ángel. 1999. “Las construcciones exclamativas. La interjección y las expresiones vocativas.” In Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española, vol.31, ed. by Ignacio Bosque, and Violeta Demonte, 3993–4050. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe.Google Scholar
Albelda, Marta. 2004. “Cortesía en diferentes situaciones comunicativas. La conversación coloquial y la entrevista sociológica semiformal.” In Pragmática sociocultural: Estudios sobre el discurso de cortesía en español, ed. by Diana Bravo, and Antonio Briz, 109–134. Barcelona: Ariel.Google Scholar
Albelda, Marta, and Antonio Briz. 2010. “Aspectos pragmáticos. Cortesía y atenuantes verbales en las dos orillas a través de muestras orales.” La lengua española en América: normas y usos actuales: 237–260.Google Scholar
Arnett, Jeffrey Jensen. 2000. “Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties.” American psychologist 55(5): 469–480. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barros García, María Jesús. 2010. “Actos de habla y cortesía valorizadora: las invitaciones.” Revista electrónica de estudios filológicos 191: n.p.Google Scholar
Bernal, María. 2007. Categorización sociopragmática de la cortesía y de la descortesía. Un estudio de la conversación coloquial española. PhD dissertation. Stockholm University.
. 2008. “Do insults always insult? Genuine impoliteness versus non-genuine impoliteness in colloquial Spanish.” Pragmatics 18(4): 775 – 802.Google Scholar
Blas Arroyo, José Luis. 2003. “Perspectivas (socio)lingüísticas complementarias en el estudio de la variación y el cambio lingüístico en español.” Estudios de Sociolingüística 4(2): 653–692.Google Scholar
Bravo, Diana. 2003. “Actividades de cortesía, imagen social y contextos socioculturales: una introduccion.” In Actas del primer coloquio del programa EDICE, ed. by Diana Bravo, 98–108.Google Scholar
. 2005. Estudios de la (des) cortesía en español: categorías conceptuales y aplicaciones a corpora orales y escritos. Buenos Aires: Editorial Dunken.Google Scholar
Briz, Antonio. 2005. “Atenuación y cortesía verbal en la conversación coloquial: su tratamiento en la clase de ELE.” In Actas del programa de formación para profesorado de ELE 2006, 227–255.Google Scholar
. 2010. “La cortesía al hablar español.” III Jornadas de Formación de Profesores de ELE en China. Suplementos SinoELE 31: n.p.Google Scholar
Blanco, Ramiro Carlos H., and María Zulma M. Kulikowski. 2018. “Las formas de tratamiento como actividad estratégica y como índice de categorización de sociedades de aproximación o distanciamiento.” Texts in Process 4(2): 174–193.Google Scholar
Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C. Levinson. 1978. “Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena.” Questions and politeness: Strategies in social interaction: 56–311. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Brown, Penelope, and Stephen Levinson. 1987. Politeness. Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, Roger, and Albert Gilman. 1960. “The pronouns of power and solidarity.” Style in language: 252–281.Google Scholar
Castellano Ascencio, Milton Daniel. 2017. “Análisis pragmático de la función de los tratamientos nominales en actos de habla descorteses en Medellín (Colombia).” Forma y función 30(2): 139–162. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coulthard, Malcolm. 1977. An introduction to discourse analysis. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Cuenca, Maria J. 2004. “El receptor en el text: el vocatiu.” Estudis Romànics 261: 39–64.Google Scholar
Edeso Natalías, Verónica. 2005. “Usos discursivos del vocativo en español.” Español actual: Revista de español vivo 841: 123–142.Google Scholar
Eisenstein, Evelyn. 2005. “Adolescência: definições, conceitos e critérios.” Adolesc Saude 2(2): 6–7.Google Scholar
Fraser, Bruce, and William Nolen. 1981. “The association of deference with linguistic form.” International Journal of the Sociology of Language 271: 93–109. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1967. Interaction Ritual. Garden City, New York: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
Haverkate, Henk. 2004. “El análisis de la cortesía comunicativa: categorización pragmalingüística de la cultura española.” Pragmática sociocultural: estudios sobre el discurso de cortesía en español: 55–66.Google Scholar
Hernández Flores, Nieves. 2004. “Politeness as face enhancement.” Current trends in the pragmatics of Spanish: 265–284. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. “Facework: characteristics and typology in communicative interaction.” Pragmática Sociocultural 1(2): 175–198. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holmes, Janet. 2000. “Women at work: Analysing women’s talk at New Zealand Workplaces.” Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 22(2): 1–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jørgensen, Annette Myre, and Eli-Marie Drange. 2012. “La lengua juvenil de las metrópolis Madrid y Santiago de Chile.” Arena Romanistica 91: 74–96.Google Scholar
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Catherine. 1997. “A multilevel approach in the study of talk-in interaction.” Pragmatics 7(1): 1–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2004. “¿Es universal la cortesía?” Pragmática sociocultural: estudios sobre el discurso de cortesía en español: 39–54.Google Scholar
Kleinknecht, Friederike. 2013. “Mexican güey – from vocative to discourse marker: a case of grammaticalization?” In Vocative! Addressing between System and Performance, ed. by Barbara Sonnenhauser, and Patricia N. Aziz Hanna, 235–268. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kluge, Bettina, and María I. Moyna. 2019. It’s Not All about You: New Perspectives on Address Research. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Labov, William. 1972. Sociolinguistic Patterns. Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey. 1983. Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.Google Scholar
. 1999. “The distribution and function of vocatives in American and British English conversation.” In Out of corpora: studies in honour of Stig Johansson, ed. by Hilde Hasselgard, and Signe Oksefjiell, 107–118. Amsterdam: Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. The pragmatics of politeness. Oxford studies in sociolinguistics. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martínez-Lara, José A. 2009. “El uso del vocativo como estrategia de cortesía entre jóvenes universitarios de Caracas. Una primera indagación.” Lingua Americana XIII 251: 100–120.Google Scholar
Moreno Fernández, Francisco. 1996. “Metodología del Proyecto para el Estudio Sociolingüístico del Español de España y de América.” Linguistica 81: 257–287.Google Scholar
Portolés, José, and Ignacio Vázquez. 2000. “Mitigating or compensatory strategies in the expression of politeness in Spanish and English? Hombre/mujer as politeness discourse markers revisited.” In Transcultural Communication: Pragmalinguistics Aspects, ed. by Pilar Navarro Errasti et al., 219–226. Zaragoza: Ambar.Google Scholar
R Core Team. 2022. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienne, Austria. URL [URL]
Rendle-Short, Johanna. 2010. “ Mate as a term of address in ordinary interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics 42(5): 1201–1218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stenström, Anna-Brita, and Annette Myre Jørgensen. 2008. “A question of politeness? A contrastive study of phatic language in teenage conversation.” Special Issue of Pragmatics 18(4): 636–657.Google Scholar
Voorhees, Clay M., et al. 2017. “Service encounters, experiences and the customer journey: Defining the field and a call to expand our lens.” Journal of Business Research 791: 269–280. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zeileis, Achim, David Meyer, and Kurt Hornik. 2007. “Residual-based shadings for visualizing (conditional) independence.” Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics 16(3): 507–525. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zimmermann, Klaus. 2003. “Constitución de la identidad y anticortesía verbal entre jóvenes masculinos hablantes de español.” In La perspectiva no etnocentrista de la cortesía: Identidad sociocultural de las comunidades hispanohablantes, ed. by Diana Bravo, 47–59. Stockholm: Actas del Primer Coloquio del Programa EDICE.Google Scholar