1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Korean Linguistics
  4. Volume 18, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 18, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0257-3784
  • E-ISSN: 2212-9731
EPUB
PDF

Abstract

Abstract

This paper analyzes how vendors and customers in Korean marketplaces use three distinct levels of addressee honorifics: the deferential ‑ style, the polite ‑ style and the so-called ‘half speech’ style. The frequencies of these forms to some extent pattern with the relative ages of the participants; for example, vendors are more likely to use towards customers who are relatively younger. However, the majority of interactions feature dynamic variation between different styles, which cannot be adequately explained by relative age. Rather, we see that participants use ‑ style and ‑ to index that they are speaking in their prescribed roles as “vendors” or “customers”. Meanwhile, was found to index two main forms of social meaning. It was used to mark stages of the interaction that were conversational, playful, or intimate, but also when speakers strategically indexed their authority or power as they tried to take the upper hand in price negotiations. This authoritative use of was accompanied by non-verbal behaviors such as large body postures, high chin positions and the withholding of gaze and bodily orientation. The paper contributes towards a growing body of research adopting an indexical approach to the use of honorifics, and demonstrates the importance of including analysis of multimodal features alongside the honorific forms themselves.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Available under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/kl.20007.lee
2022-03-28
2024-10-13

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/kl.20007.lee
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/kl.20007.lee.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/kl.20007.lee&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Barke, Andrew
    2010 Manipulating honorifics in the construction of social identities in Japanese television drama. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 14(4). 456–476. 10.1111/j.1467‑9841.2010.00451.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9841.2010.00451.x [Google Scholar]
  2. Biber, Douglas and Edward Finegan
    1994 Sociolinguistic Perspectives on Register. New York: OUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Bousfield, Derek
    2008 Impoliteness in Interaction. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.167
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.167 [Google Scholar]
  4. Brown, Lucien
    2011 Korean Honorifics and Politeness in Second Language Learning. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.206
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.206 [Google Scholar]
  5. 2013a “Mind your own esteemed business”: Sarcastic Honorifics Use and Impoliteness in Korean TV Dramas. Journal of Politeness Research, 9(2). 159–186. 10.1515/pr‑2013‑0008
     https://doi.org/10.1515/pr-2013-0008 [Google Scholar]
  6. 2013b “Oppa, hold my purse”: A Sociocultural Study of Identity and Indexicality in the Perception and Use of Oppa ‘Older Brother’ by Second Language Learners. The Korean Language in America, 18. 1–22. 10.2307/korelangamer.18.2013.0001
     https://doi.org/10.2307/korelangamer.18.2013.0001 [Google Scholar]
  7. 2013c Teaching ‘Casual’ and/or ‘Impolite’ Language through Multimedia: The Case of Non-Honorific Panmal Speech Styles in Korean. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 26(1). 1–18. 10.1080/07908318.2012.745551
     https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2012.745551 [Google Scholar]
  8. 2015 Revisiting “polite” –yo and “deferential” –supnita speech style shifting in Korean from the viewpoint of indexicality. Journal of Pragmatics, 79. 43–59. 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.01.009
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.01.009 [Google Scholar]
  9. Brown, Lucien and Pilar Prieto
    2017 (Im) politeness: Prosody and gesture. InJonathan Culpeper, Michael Haugh and Daniel Kadar, eds., 357–379. 10.1057/978‑1‑137‑37508‑7_14
     https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-37508-7_14 [Google Scholar]
  10. Brown, Lucien and Bodo Winter
    2019 Multimodal indexicality in Korean: “Doing deference” and “performing intimacy” through nonverbal behavior. Journal of Politeness Research, 15(1). 25–54. 10.1515/pr‑2016‑0042
     https://doi.org/10.1515/pr-2016-0042 [Google Scholar]
  11. Chang, Kyung-Hee
    1995 Kwuke yangthay pemcwu-uy selceng-kwa ku cheykyey. Ene (Korean Journal of Linguistics), 20. 191–205.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Choo, Miho
    2006 The Structure and Use of Korean Honorifics. InSohn, ed., 132–154.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Cook, Haruko
    2011 Are honorifics polite? Uses of referent honorifics in a Japanese committee meeting. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(15). 3655–3672. 10.1016/j.pragma.2011.08.008
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.08.008 [Google Scholar]
  14. 2013 A scientist or salesman? Identity construction through referent honorifics on a Japanese shopping channel program. Multilingua-Journal of Cross-Cultural and Interlanguage Communication, 32(2). 177–202. 10.1515/multi‑2013‑0009
     https://doi.org/10.1515/multi-2013-0009 [Google Scholar]
  15. Culpeper, Jonathan
    2005 Impoliteness and entertainment in the television quiz show: The Weakest Link. Journal of Politeness Research, 1(1). 35–72. 10.1515/jplr.2005.1.1.35
     https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2005.1.1.35 [Google Scholar]
  16. Culpeper, Jonathan, Haugh, Michael & Kadar, Daniel
    2017 The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/978‑1‑137‑37508‑7
     https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-37508-7 [Google Scholar]
  17. Dunn, Cynthia
    1999 Public and private voices: Japanese style shifting and the display of affective intensity. InGary Palmer and Debra Occhi, eds., 107–127. 10.1075/aicr.18.06dic
     https://doi.org/10.1075/aicr.18.06dic [Google Scholar]
  18. 2010 Information structure and discourse stance in a monologic “public speaking” register of Japanese. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(7). 1890–1911. 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.12.024
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.12.024 [Google Scholar]
  19. Eun, Jong-oh and Susan Strauss
    2004 The primacy of information status in the alternation between deferential and polite forms in Korean public discourse. Language Sciences, 26. 251–272. 10.1016/j.langsci.2003.02.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2003.02.003 [Google Scholar]
  20. George, Johnny
    2011 Politeness in Japanese Sign Language (JSL): Polite JSL expression as evidence for intermodal language contact influence. Berkeley, CA: University of California dissertation.
  21. Geyer, Naomi
    2013 Discernment and variation: The actionoriented use of Japanese addressee honorifics. Multilingua, 32(2). 155–176. 10.1515/multi‑2013‑0008
     https://doi.org/10.1515/multi-2013-0008 [Google Scholar]
  22. Haugh, Michael
    2010 Jocular mockery and face in Anglo-Australian interactions. Journal of Pragmatics42(8). 2106–2119. 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.12.018
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.12.018 [Google Scholar]
  23. Hwang, Juck-ryoon
    1990 “Deference” versus “politeness” in Korean speech. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 82: Aspects of Korean Sociolinguistics. 41–55. 10.1515/ijsl.1990.82.41
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.1990.82.41 [Google Scholar]
  24. Jo, Jaehyun
    2018 Korean ‘Formality’endings ‘–supnita/–supnikka’and ‘–eyo’in the negotiation of interactional identity in the news interview. Journal of Pragmatics, 136. 20–38. 10.1016/j.pragma.2018.08.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.08.004 [Google Scholar]
  25. Kim, Minju
    1998 Cross-adoption of language between different genders: The case of the Korean kinship terms hyeng and enni. Proceedings from the Fifth Berkeley Women and Communication Conference, 271–284. Berkeley, CA: University of California.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Kim, Hye Ri Stephanie
    2010 A high boundary tone as a resource for a social action: The Korean sentence-ender–ta. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(11). 3055–3077. 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.04.022
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.04.022 [Google Scholar]
  27. Kim, Soung-U.
    2013 Language attitudes on Jeju Island – an analysis of attitudes towards language choice from an ethnographic perspective. London: SOAS (University of London) dissertation.
  28. Kim, Eun Hye
    2006 Hankwuke senemal emi ‘-si-’uy samwul contay kinung: paykhwacem, tayhyengmathu, caylaysicang phanmaywen-uy palhwa-lul cwungsim-ulo [The inanimate object function of Korean verb ending ‘-si-’: focussing on the utterances of sales personnel in department store, supermarkets and markets]. Sahoyenehak [The Sociolinguistic Journal of Korean] 24(1). 91–113.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. 2006 Hankwuke senemal emi ‘-si-’uy samwul contay kinung: paykhwacem, tayhyengmathu, caylaysicang phanmaywen-uy palhwa-lul cwungsim-ulo [The inanimate object function of Korean verb ending ‘-si-’: focussing on the utterances of sales personnel in department store, supermarkets and markets]. Sahoyenehak [Sociolinguistics] 24(1). 91–113.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Kim, Young-Jin and Douglas Biber
    1994 A corpus-based analysis of register variation in Korean. InDouglas Biber and Edward Finegan, eds., 45–70.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Kim, Kyu-hyun and Kyung-Hee Suh
    2007 Style shift in Korean pedagogical discourse. Sahoyenehak [The Sociolinguistic Journal of Korean], 15(2). 1–29.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. King, Ross and Jaehoon Yeon
    2000 Elementary Korean. Boston, Mass: Tuttle.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Lee, Hyo Sang
    1999 A discourse-pragmatic analysis of the committal-ci in Korean: A synthetic approach to the form-meaning relation. Journal of Pragmatics, 31(2). 243–275. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(98)00066‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00066-6 [Google Scholar]
  34. Lee, Chang Soo
    2000 A Frame-based analysis of Korean talk shows. Ene-wa Enehak [Language and Linguistics], 25, 177–197.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Lee, Hyo Sang
    1991 Tense, aspect and modality: A discourse pragmatic analysis of verbal affixes in Korean from a typological perspective. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of California, Los Angeles.
  36. Lee, Jungbok
    2010 Sanghwang cwuchey nophim ‘-si-’ uy hwaksan-kwa paykyeng [The Diffusion of Honorific Ending ‘ -si-’ for the Situation Subject and its Backgrounds]. Enekwahakyenkwu [The Journal of Linguistic Science] 55. 217–246.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Lee, Jung-bok
    2001 Kwuke kyengepep sayong-uy cenlyakcek thukseng (The Characteristics of the Strategic Use of Korean Honorifics). Seoul: Thaehaksa.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Lee, Keunyoung
    2020 Impoliteness, identity and power in Korean: Critical discourse analysis and perception study of impoliteness. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon PhD dissertation.
  39. Lee, Kiri and Young-mee Yu Cho
    2015 Social meanings of honorific/non-honorific alternations in Korean and Japanese. Korean Linguistics, 17(2). 207–241. 10.1075/kl.17.2.03lee
     https://doi.org/10.1075/kl.17.2.03lee [Google Scholar]
  40. Lee, Iksop and S. Robert Ramsey
    2000 The Korean Language. Albany, NY: Suny Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Lukoff, Fred
    1982 An Introductory Course in Korean. Seoul: Yonsei University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Martin, Samuel
    1992 A Reference Grammar of Korean: A Complete Guide to the Grammar and History of the Korean language. Boston, Mass: Tuttle.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Mason, Paul, Juan Domínguez, Bodo Winter and Andrea Grignolio
    2015 Hidden in plain view: degeneracy in complex systems. Biosystems, 128. 1–8. 10.1016/j.biosystems.2014.12.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystems.2014.12.003 [Google Scholar]
  44. Ochs, Elinor
    1993 Constructing Social Identity: A Language Socialization Perspective. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 26(3). 287–306. 10.1207/s15327973rlsi2603_3
     https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi2603_3 [Google Scholar]
  45. Okamoto, Shigeko
    1998 The use and non-use of honorifics in sales talk in Kyoto and Osaka: Are they rude or friendly. Japanese/Korean Linguistics, 7. 141–157.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Palmer, Gary and Debra Occhi
    2010 The Languages of Sentiment. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/aicr.18
     https://doi.org/10.1075/aicr.18 [Google Scholar]
  47. Park, Yong-Yae
    1998 A discourse analysis of the Korean connective ketun in conversation. Crossroads of Language, Interaction, and Culture, 1. 71–89.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Park, Mi Yung
    2012 Teachers’ use of the intimate speech style in the korean language classroom. Korean Language in America, 17. 55–83. 10.2307/korelangamer.17.2012.0055
     https://doi.org/10.2307/korelangamer.17.2012.0055 [Google Scholar]
  49. Paxton, Alex, Lucien Brown and Bodo Winter
    2018 Complex coordination: How power dynamics and task demands shape interpersonal motor synchrony. Paper presented atCogSci2018, Madison, WI.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Raymond, Chase Wesley
    2016 Linguistic reference in the negotiation of identity and action: Revisiting the T/V distinction. Language, 92(3). 636–670. 10.1353/lan.2016.0053
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2016.0053 [Google Scholar]
  51. Sherr-Ziarko, Ethan
    2018 Prosodic properties of formality in conversational Japanese. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 49(3). 331–352. 10.1017/S0025100318000117
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025100318000117 [Google Scholar]
  52. Silverstein, Michael
    2003 Indexical order and the dialectics of sociolinguistic life. Language & Communication, 23(3–4). 193–229. 10.1016/S0271‑5309(03)00013‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0271-5309(03)00013-2 [Google Scholar]
  53. Sohn, Ho-min
    2006 Korean Language in Culture and Society. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Strauss, Susan and Jong-oh Eun
    2005 Indexicality and honorific speech level choice in Korean. Linguistics, 43(3). 611–651. 10.1515/ling.2005.43.3.611
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2005.43.3.611 [Google Scholar]
  55. Suh, Cheong-soo
    1984 Contaypep yenkwu. Seoul: Hanshin.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Sung, Ky-chull
    1985 Hyentay taywupep yenkwu (Research on Contemporary Honorifics). Seoul: Kaymwunsa.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Winter, Bodo and Sven Grawunder
    2012 The phonetic profile of Korean formality. Journal of Phonetics, 40. 808–815. 10.1016/j.wocn.2012.08.006
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2012.08.006 [Google Scholar]
  58. Winter, Bodo, Paula Pérez-Sobrino and Lucien Brown
    2019 The sound of soft alcohol. PLOS ONE, 14(8). e0220449.   10.1371/journal.pone.0220449
     https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220449 [Google Scholar]
  59. Yoon, Kyung-joo
    2004 “Not just words: Korean social modes and the use of honorifics.” Intercultural Pragmatics, 1(2). 189–210. 10.1515/iprg.2004.1.2.189
     https://doi.org/10.1515/iprg.2004.1.2.189 [Google Scholar]
  60. Yoon, Sangseok
    2010 Situational Meanings and Functions of Korean Speech Styles. Manoa, Hawaii: University of Hawaii dissertation.
  61. Yoon, Sang-Seok
    2015 Korean honorifics beyond politeness markers. InMarina Terkourafi (Ed.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Im/politeness, 97–120. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/aals.14.06seo
     https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.14.06seo [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/kl.20007.lee
Loading
Honorifics in the marketplace
Korean Linguistics 18, 76 (2022); https://doi.org/10.1075/kl.20007.lee
/content/journals/10.1075/kl.20007.lee
/content/journals/10.1075/kl.20007.lee
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Contaymal; honorifics; indexicality; marketplace; multimodality; Panmal; speech-styles

Most Cited

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