Address practices in academic interactions in a pluricentric language: Australian English, American English, and British English

Maicol Formentelli and John Hajek


Following the recent development of address research in pluricentric languages (Clyne et al. 2006), the present study describes address practices in English-speaking academic settings and pursues two main objectives: (a) to provide a profile of address patterns in academic interactions in Australian English; and (b) to compare address practices in higher education across the three dominant varieties of English, namely American English, Australian English, and British English. The data on Australian English are drawn from 235 questionnaires completed by students, who reported on the address strategies adopted by students and teaching staff in classroom interactions in an Australian university. Data on American and British academic settings were retrieved from the research literature on the topic. The findings show a high degree of informality and familiarity in student-teacher relations in Australia, where reciprocal first names are the default pattern of address at all levels. By contrast, in American academia the hierarchical organization of roles and the different professional positions are foregrounded and reinforced through an asymmetrical use of titles, honorifics and first names. Finally, the British university setting displays a non-reciprocal usage of first names and titles between lecturer and students, which gradually evolves into a more generalised reciprocal use of first names, usually after extended contact and collaboration. We argue that the distinctive patterns of address observed in the three varieties of English reflect diverse social and cultural values systems at work in different speech communities.

Quick links
A browser-friendly version of this article is not yet available. View PDF
Afful, Joseph Benjamin Archibald, and Isaac Nuokyaa-Ire Mwinlaaru
(2012) When Sir and Madam are not: Address terms and reference terms students use for faculty in a Ghanaian university. Sociolinguistic Studies 6.3: 491–517.Google Scholar
Allan, Keith
(2015) When is a slur not a slur? The use of nigger in ‘Pulp Fiction’. Language Sciences 52: 187–199. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Banks, Melissa, and Alan Olsen
(2011) Australia’s international students: Characteristics and trends. In D. Davies, and B. Mackintos (eds.), Making a Difference. Australia International Education. Sydney: University of South Wales Press, pp. 91–113.Google Scholar
Bargiela, Francesca, Corinne Boz, Lily Gokzadze, Abdurrahman Hamza, Sara Mills, and Nino Rukhadze
(2002) Ethnocentrism, politeness and naming strategies. Working papers on the web 3. http://​extra​.shu​.ac​.uk​/wpw​/politeness​/bargiela​.htm. (Accessed 16th October 2015).Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad, and Edward Finegan
(1999) The Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Bousfield, Derek
(2008) Impoliteness in interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brown, Roger, and Albert Gilman
(1960) The pronoun of power and solidarity. In T.A. Sebeok (ed.), Style in language. Cambridge, MA: Technology Press of Massachusetts Institute of Technology, pp. 253–276.Google Scholar
Burt, Susan Meredith
(2015) ‘There’s not a lot of negotiation’. Address terms in an academic department. In M. Terkourafi (ed.), Interdisciplinary perspectives on im/politeness. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 71–90. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clyne, Michael
(1992) Pluricentric languages – Introduction. In M. Clyne (ed.), Pluricentric languages. Differing norms in different nations. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter, pp. 1–9.Google Scholar
(2006) Some thoughts on pragmatics, sociolinguistic variation, and intercultural communication. Intercultural Pragmatics 3: 95–105. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2009) Address in intercultural communication across languages. Intercultural Pragmatics 6.3: 395–409. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clyne, Michael, Catrin Norrby, and Jane Warren
(2009) Language and human relations. Styles of address in contemporary language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clyne, Michael, Heinz-Leo Kretzenbacher, Catrin Norrby, and Doris Schüpbach
(2006) Perceptions of variation and change in German and Swedish address. Journal of Sociolinguistics 10.3: 287–319. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cook, Manuela
(2014) Beyond T and V – Theoretical reflections on the analysis of forms of address. American Journal of Linguistics 3.1: 17–26.Google Scholar
Dickey, Eleanor
(1997) Forms of address and terms of reference. Journal of Linguistics 33.2: 255–274. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dunkling, Leslie
(1990) A dictionary of epithets and terms of address. London: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Formentelli, Maicol
(2007) The vocative mate in contemporary English: A corpus based study. In A. Sansò (ed.), Language resources and linguistic theory. Milan: Franco Angeli, pp. 180–199.Google Scholar
(2009a) Address strategies in a British academic setting. Pragmatics 19.2: 179–196. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2009b) Academic interactions in English as a Lingua Franca of communication: Address strategies and patterns of deference. Poster presented at 11th International Pragmatics Conference , Melbourne, Australia, 12-17 July 2009. Abstract available at: http://​ipra​.ua​.ac​.be​/main​.aspx​?c​=.CONFERENCE11​&n​=1387 (Accessed 16th October 2015).
(2014) Vocatives galore in audiovisual dialogue. Evidence from a corpus of American and British films. English Text Construction 7.1: 53–83. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Formentelli, Maicol, and John Hajek
(2013) Italian L2 address strategies in an Australian university setting: A comparison with L1 Italian and L1 English practice. In B. Peeters, K. Mullan, and C. Béal (eds.), Cross-culturally speaking, speaking cross-culturally. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, pp. 77–106.Google Scholar
(2015) Address in Italian academic interactions: The power of distance and (non-)reciprocity. In C. Norrby, and C. Wide (eds.), Address practice as social action. European perspectives. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 119–140. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fuller, Janet M
(2005) The uses and meanings of the female title Ms.. American Speech 80.2: 180–206. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goddard, Cliff
(2012) ‘Early interactions’ in Australian English, American English, and English English: Cultural differences and cultural scripts. Journal of Pragmatics 44: 1038–1050. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hajek, John, Leo Kretzenbacher, and Robert Lagerberg
(2013) Towards a linguistic typology of address pronouns in Europe - Past and present. In J. Henderson, Marie-Eve Ritz, and C. Rodríguez Louro (eds.), Proceedings of the 2012 Conference of the Australian Linguistic Society (Perth, 5-7 December 2012). https://​sites​.google​.com​/site​/als2012uwa​/proceedings. (Accessed on 16th October 2015).Google Scholar
Helmbrecht, Johannes
(2013) Politeness distinctions in pronouns. In M.S. Dryer, and M. Haspelmath (eds.), The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://​wals​.info​/chapter​/45. (Accessed on 16th October 2015).Google Scholar
Hughson, Jo-anne
(2009) Diversity and changing values in address. Spanish address pronoun usage in an intercultural immigrant context. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Kachru, Braj B
(1997) World Englishes and English-using communities. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 17: 66–87. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kotzin, Miriam N
(2009) Young lady. On a seemingly polite but nevertheless questionable title. The smart set from Drexel University 11/10/2009 http://​thesmartset​.com​/article11100901/ (Accessed on 16th October 2015).Google Scholar
Kretzenbacher, Leo, John Hajek, and Catrin Norrby
(2013) Address and introductions across two pluricentric languages in intercultural communication. In R. Muhr, C. Amorós Negre, C. Fernández Juncal, K. Zimmermann, N. Hernández, and E. Prieto (eds.), Exploring linguistic standards in non-dominant varieties of pluricentric languages. Explorando estándares lingüísticos en variedades no dominantes de lenguas pluricéntricas. Frankfurt Am Main: Peter Lang, pp. 259–274.Google Scholar
Murray, Thomas E
(2002) A new look at address in American English: The rules have changed. Names 50.1: 43–61. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Norrby, Catrin, and Camilla Wide
(2015) Address practice as social action. European perspectives. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Norrby, Catrin, and Jane Warren
(2012) Address practices and social relationships in European languages. Language and Linguistics Compass 6.4: 225–235. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Norrby, Catrin, and Leo Kretzenbacher
(2014) National variation in address in pluricentric languages: The examples of Swedish and German. In A. Soares da Silva (ed.), Pluricentricity: Language variation and sociocognitive dimensions. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter, pp. 243–270.Google Scholar
(2014) Education at a glance 2014: OECD indicators. OECD Publishing. Crossref logo. (Accessed 16th October 2015). Google Scholar
Patterson, Troy
(2013) I’m an older gentleman. Why do clerks love to call me young man? Sir, buddy, youngblood, hoss: What to call someone whose name you don’t know. The Slate 21/8/2013 http://​www​.slate​.com​/articles​/life​/gentleman​_scholar​/2013​/08​/advice​_for​_men​_how​_do​_you​_refer​_to​_a​_gentleman​_whose​_name​_you​_don​_t​_know​.html. (Accessed on 16th October 2015).Google Scholar
Pauwels, Anne
(2001) Spreading the feminist word. The case of the new courtesy title Ms in Australian English. In M. Hellinger, and H. Bussmann (eds.), Gender across languages. The linguistic representation of women and men. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 153–176. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Placencia, María Elena, Catalina Fuentes Rodríguez, and María Palma-Fahey
(2015) Nominal address and rapport management in informal interactions among university students in Quito (Equador), Santiago (Chile) and Seville (Spain). Multilingua 34.4: 547–575. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, Edgar
(2013) The pluricentricity of English today – and how about non-dominant varieties? In R. Muhr, C. Amorós Negre, C. Fernández Juncal, K. Zimmermann, E. Prieto, and N. Hernández (eds.), Exploring linguistic standards in non-dominant varieties of pluricentric languages. Explorando estándares lingüísticos en variedades no dominantes de lenguas pluricéntricas. Frankfurt Am Main: Peter Lang, pp. 45–54.Google Scholar
Schneider, Klaus P
(2008) Small talk in England, Ireland, and the USA. In K.P. Schneider, and A. Barron (eds.), Variational pragmatics: A focus on regional varieties in pluricentric languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 99–139. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schüpbach, Doris, John Hajek, Jane Warren, Michael Clyne, Heinz Leo Kretzenbacher, and Catrin Norrby
(2007) A cross-linguistic comparison of address pronoun use in four European languages: Intralingual and interlingual dimensions. In I. Mushin, and M. Laughren (eds.), Selected papers from the 2006 annual meeting of the Australian Linguistic Society. Brisbane: University of Queensland, pp. 1–12.Google Scholar
Vismans, Roel
(2015) Negotiating address in a pluricentric language: Dutch/Flemish. In C. Norrby, and C. Wide (eds.), Address practice as social action. European perspectives. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 13–32. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wierzbicka, Anna
(2003) Cross-cultural pragmatics. The semantics of human interaction (2nd ed.). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wright, Saundra K
(2009) Forms of address in the college classroom. In W. Ahrens, S. Embleton, and A. Lapierre (eds.), Names in multilingual, multicultural and multiethnic contact: Proceedings of the 23rd International Congress of Onomastic Sciences. Toronto: York University, pp. 1079–1087.Google Scholar