Cover not available
Part of
It's different with you: Contrastive perspectives on address research
Edited by Nicole Baumgarten and Roel Vismans
[Topics in Address Research 5] 2023
► pp. 197–219

Chapter 8
A comparative study of nominal forms of address in metropolitan French and British English service encounters

| University of Cambridge
This chapter investigates nominal forms of address in metropolitan French and British English service encounters. The study considers the different pragmatic functions they play in interaction, examining their relational and organisational properties, combining a politeness theoretic framework and a conversation analytic one. Nominal forms of address play an important part in the management of the interpersonal relationship between customer and shopkeeper. As attention-getting devices, they can be used to delineate different phases of the interaction. Although they frequently have the same function in both linguacultures, they index different positions within the social order.
Keywords: vocatives, politeness, interpersonal relationship, routinisation, cooperation, respect, consideration, requests, reciprocity
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.What are NFAs? Definition, functions and values
    • 2.1Definition
    • 2.2Form selection: T and V
    • 2.3Pragmatic function of NFAs
  • 3.Methodology and data
    • 3.1Service encounters (SEs)
    • 3.1The data
  • 4.Data analysis: Patterns of NFA use in SEs
    • 4.1Frequency of NFAs in opening and closing sequences
    • 4.2NFAs in the French data: Reciprocity of use
    • 4.3NFAs in the English data: Asymmetry and absence of use
    • 4.4The NFA mate as an egalitarian marker
    • 4.5NFAs in the transaction: Request prompts and organisational markers
  • 5.Discussion and concluding remarks
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 6 September 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tar.5.08gag
References (42)
References
Aijmer, Karin. 1996. Conversational routines in English: Convention and creativity. London, New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Baude, Olivier, Claire Blanche-Benveniste, Marie-France Calas, Paul Cappeau, Pascal Cordereix, Laurence Goury, Michel Jacobson, Isabelle de Lamberterie, Christiane Marchello-Nizia & Lorenza Mondada. Corpus oraux: Guide des bonnes pratiques. 2006. Paris, Orléans: CNRS.Google Scholar
Braun, Friederike. 1988. Terms of address: Problems of patterns and usage in various languages and cultures. Berlin, New York, Amsterdam: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, Penelope, & Stephen C. Levinson. 1987. Politeness. Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, Roger, & Albert Gilman. 1960. The pronouns of power and solidarity. In Thomas Albert Sebeok (ed.), Style in language, 253–276. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
Clayman, Steven E. 2010. Address terms in the service of other actions: The case of news interview talk. Discourse & Communication 4(2). 161–183. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012. Address terms in the organization of turns at talk: The case of pivotal turn extensions. Journal of Pragmatics 44(13). 1853–1867. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cook-Gumperz, Jenny. 2001. Cooperation, collaboration and pleasure in work. In Aldo Di Luzio, Susanne Günthner & Franca Orletti, (eds), Culture in communication: Analyses of intercultural situations, 117–140. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dunkling, Leslie. 1990. A dictionary of epithets and terms of address. London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Duranti, Alessandro. 1997. Universal and culture-specific properties of greetings. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 7(1). 63–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ervin-Tripp, Susan. 1972. On sociolinguistic rules: alternation and co-occurrence. In John J. Gumperz & Dell Hymes (eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics. The ethnography of communication, 213–50. Cambridge: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Fasold, Ralph W. 1990. The sociolinguistics of language. Oxford: Blackwell, 1990.Google Scholar
Formentelli, Maicol. 2007. The vocative mate in contemporary English: A corpus based study. In Andrea Sansò (ed.), Language resources and linguistic theory, 180–99. Milan: Franco Angeli.Google Scholar
Gagne, Christophe. 2018. Indirectness and entitlement in product requests in British service encounters. Journal of Pragmatics 133. 1–14. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1967. Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face behavior. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, Anchor Books; Chicago, IL: Aldine.Google Scholar
. 1981. Forms of talk. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hmed, Neijete. 2003. Analyse comparative des interactions: Le cas de trois commerces: français, tunisien et franco-maghrébin. Université de Lyon 2. Unpublished doctoral thesis.
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Catherine. 1992. Les Interactions verbales II. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar
. 2005. Le discours en interaction. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar
. 2010a. Pour une approche contrastive des formes nominales d’adresse. Journal of French Language Studies 20(1). 3–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010b. (ed.), S’adresser à autrui: Les formes nominales d’adresse en français. Chambéry: Université de Savoie.Google Scholar
2014. (ed.), S’adresser à autrui: Les formes nominales d’adresse dans une perspective comparative interculturelle. Chambéry: Université de Savoie.Google Scholar
. 2017. Les débats de l’entre-deux-tours des élections présidentielles françaises: constantes et évolutions d’un genre. Paris: Editions L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Catherine & Véronique Traverso (eds.), 2009. Les interactions en site commercial. Lyon: ENS Editions.Google Scholar
Kluge, Bettina. 2019. On translating pronominal and nominal terms of address. In Bettina Kluge & María Irene Moyna (eds.), It’s not all about you: New perspectives on address research 1: 47. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey. 1999. The distribution and function of vocatives in American and British English conversation. Language and Computers 26. 107–20.Google Scholar
. 2014. The pragmatics of politeness. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lepésant, Géraldine. 2003. Interactions verbales dans un magasin de chaussures. Université de Lyon 2. Unpublished master’s thesis.
Lerner, Gene H. 2003. Selecting next speaker: the context-sensitive operation of a context-free organization. Language in Society 32(2). 177–201. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liddicoat, Anthony J. 2006. Learning the culture of interpersonal relationships: Students’ understandings of personal address forms in French. Intercultural Pragmatics 3(1). 55–80. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011. An Introduction to conversation analysis 2nd: Second Edition. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
McCarthy, Michael & Anne O’Keeffe. 2003. What’s in a name?’ Vocatives in casual conversations and radio phone-in calls. In Pepi Leistyna & Charles F. Meyer Ch. (eds.), Corpus analysis: Language structure and language use, 153–185. Amsterdam: Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perret, Delphine. 1968. Termes d’adresse et injures. À propos d’un dictionnaire des injures. Cahiers de lexicologie, n° 12. varia. 5–16.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff & Gail Jefferson. 1974. A simplest systematics for the organization of turn taking for conversation. Language 50(4). 696–735. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. & Harvey Sacks. 1973. Opening up closings. Semiotica 8(4). 289–327. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sifianou, Maria. 2000. Politeness phenomena in England and Greece. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Stanger, Ted. 2003. Sacrés Français: Un Américain nous regarde. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Thomas, Jenny. 1983. Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Applied Linguistics 4(2). 91–112. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traverso, Véronique. 2006. Aspects of polite behaviour in French and Syrian service encounters: A data-based comparative study. Journal of Politeness Research. Language, Behaviour, Culture 2(1). 105–122. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. Cadres, espaces, objets et multimodalité. In Catherine Kerbrat-Orecchioni & Traverso Véronique (eds.), Les interactions en site commercial, 45–76. Lyon: ENS Editions.Google Scholar
Tsakona, Villy & Maria Sifianou. 2019. Vocatives in service encounters: evidence from Greek. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 51(1): 60–89. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wierzbicka, Anna. 2016. Making sense of terms of address in European languages through the Natural Semantic Metalanguage (NSM). Intercultural Pragmatics 13(4). 499–527. DOI logoGoogle Scholar