1887
Honorific language and linguistic politeness in Korean
  • ISSN 0257-3784
  • E-ISSN: 2212-9731
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

The use of honorifics in Korean and Japanese is generally dictated by social factors such as age, status, and gender (Sohn 1999, Kuno 1987). Honorifics are marked by a well-defined repertoire of linguistic elements, including address-terms, specialized vocabulary, and verbal suffixes. Depending on the relationship between the interlocutors, an honorific form is chosen over the other available forms. Recently, researchers have been questioning whether the choice is wholly dependent on the relative status, or if other factors play a role in the selection process (Strauss and Eun 2005, Dunn 2005, Yoon 2015). This study focuses on the honorifics productively encoded by verbal suffixes. Unexpectedly, continual shifts between verbal suffixes are observed in a single speech situation. Based on the analyses of media data, we identify a set of social meanings encoded by these shifts. Furthermore, we show that Silverstein’s notion of “indexical order” (Silverstein 2003) is crucial for accounting for suffix alternation.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/kl.17.2.03lee
2017-07-24
2019-09-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Brown, Lucien
    2010 Observations on Korean and Japanese Speech Style Shifting. Journal of Korean Culture14.65–102.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. 2011 Korean Honorifics and ‘Revealed,’ ‘Ignored,’ and ‘Suppressed’ Aspects of Korean Culture and Politeness. Politeness Across Culturesed. by F. Bargiela-Chiappini & Dániel Z. Kádár , 106–127. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. doi: 10.1057/9780230305939_6
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230305939_6 [Google Scholar]
  3. 2013 Teaching ‘Casual’ and/or ‘Impolite’ Language Through Multimedia: The Case of Non-honorific Panmal Speech Styles in Korean. Language, Culture and Curriculum26:1.1–18. doi: 10.1080/07908318.2012.745551
    https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2012.745551 [Google Scholar]
  4. Brown, Roger & Albert Gilman
    1960 The Pronoun of Power and Solidarity. Styles in Languageed. by Thomas A. Sebeok , 253–276. New York: Technology Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Cook, Haruko Minegishi
    1996 Japanese Language Socialization: Indexing the Modes of Self. Discourse Processes22.171–197. doi: 10.1080/01638539609544971
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539609544971 [Google Scholar]
  6. 1999 Situational Meanings of Japanese Social Deixis: The Mixed Use of the Masu and Plain Forms. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology8:1.87–110.  doi: 10.1525/jlin.1998.8.1.87
    https://doi.org/10.1525/jlin.1998.8.1.87 [Google Scholar]
  7. Dunn, Cynthia D
    1999 Public and Private Voiced: Japanese Style Shifting and the Display of Affective Intensity. InThe languages of Sentimented. by Gary Palmer & Debra Occhi , 107–130. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/aicr.18.06dic
    https://doi.org/10.1075/aicr.18.06dic [Google Scholar]
  8. 2005 Pragmatic Functions of Humble Forms in Japanese Ceremonial Discourse. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology15:2.213–238. doi: 10.1525/jlin.2005.15.2.218
    https://doi.org/10.1525/jlin.2005.15.2.218 [Google Scholar]
  9. Ikuta, Shoko
    1983 Speech Level Shift and Conversational Strategy in Japanese Discourse. Language Sciences5.37–54. doi: 10.1016/S0388‑0001(83)80012‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0388-0001(83)80012-6 [Google Scholar]
  10. Jung, Heeyoung
    2014 Does It Sound Rude?: Style Shift to –e/a or –ta Forms in Korean and to Naked Plain Forms in Japanese. Paper presented at the Annual American Association of Teachers of Korean conference . Boston University. June 20, 2014.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Kim-Renaud, Young-Key
    2009Korean: An Essential Grammar. London & New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Kuno, Susumu
    1987 Honorific Marking in Japanese and the Word Formation Hypothesis of Causatives and Passives. Studies in Language11:1.99–128. doi: 10.1075/sl.11.1.05kun
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.11.1.05kun [Google Scholar]
  13. Lee, Kiri & Young-mee Yu Cho
    2013 “Beyond ‘Power and Solidarity’”: Indexing Intimacy in Korean and Japanese Terms of Address. Korean Linguistics15:1.73–100.  doi: 10.1075/kl.15.1.04lee
    https://doi.org/10.1075/kl.15.1.04lee [Google Scholar]
  14. Lee, Jeong-bok
    1999 Kwuke kyengepep-uy cenlakcek yongpep-ey tayhaye. [On the Strategic Usage of Korean Honorifics]. Language Research35:1.91–121.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Maynard, Senko K
    1993Discourse Modality: Subjectivity, Emotion, and Voice in the Japanese Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.24
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.24 [Google Scholar]
  16. 1997Japanese Communication: Language and Thought in Context.Honolulu: University of Hawai’i.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Morford, Janet
    1997 Social Indexicality in French Pronominal Address. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology7:1.3–37. doi: 10.1525/jlin.1997.7.1.3
    https://doi.org/10.1525/jlin.1997.7.1.3 [Google Scholar]
  18. Okamoto, Shigeko
    2008 Speech Style and the Use of Regional (Yamaguchi) and Standard Japanese in Conversations. Style Shifting in Japaneseed. by Kimberly Jones & Tsuyoshi Ono , 230–249. Amsterdam: John Benjamines. doi: 10.1075/pbns.180.00spe
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.180.00spe [Google Scholar]
  19. Park, Mi Yung
    2012 Teachers’ Use of the Intimate Speech Style in the Korean Language Classroom. The Korean Language in America17.55–83.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Shibatani, Masayoshi
    1990The Languages of Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Sohn, Ho-min
    1999The Korean Language. The Cambridge Language Surveys.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Silverstein, Michael
    1992 The Uses and Utility of Ideology: Some Reflections. Pragmatics2:3.311–323. doi: 10.1075/prag.2.3.11sil
    https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.2.3.11sil [Google Scholar]
  23. 1996 Indexical Order and the Dialectics of Sociolinguistic Life. Proceedings of the Third Annual Symposium about Language and Soceity-Austin [SALSA]ed. by Risako Ide , Rebecca Parker , & Yukako Sunaoshi , 266–295. Austin: University of Texas, Department of Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. 2003 Indexical Order and the Dialectics of Sociolinguistic Life. Language and Communication23.193–229. doi: 10.1016/S0271‑5309(03)00013‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0271-5309(03)00013-2 [Google Scholar]
  25. Strauss, Susan & Jong Oh Eun
    2005 Indexicality and Honorific Level Choice in Korean. Linguistics43:3.611–651. doi: 10.1515/ling.2005.43.3.611
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2005.43.3.611 [Google Scholar]
  26. Strauss, Susan & Jhu Hyoung Youn
    2011 The Emergent Construction of Interpersonal Closeness and Distance in Problem-Solution Television Programs. Korean Language in America15.62–82.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Yoo, Song-young
    1994 Kwuke Chengca taewupep-uy him-kwa yutae [Power and Solidarity in Korean Addressee Honorification]. Kwukehak24 [Korean Linguistics]. 291–317.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Yoon, Sangseok
    2010 Situational Meanings and Functions of Korean Speech Styles. Doctoral Dissertation. University of Hawai’i.
  29. 2015 Korean Honorifics Beyond Politeness Markers: Change of Footing through Shifting of Speech Style. Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Im/politenessed. by Marina Terkourafi , 97–119. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/aals.14.06seo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.14.06seo [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/kl.17.2.03lee
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): honorifics , indexical order , indexicality and social meaning
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error