Jordanian Association of Translators and Applied Linguists, Jordan
2017年第5卷第2期（总第7期）
84-117
2017-12-07
People in speech communities are unique, and so are their behaviours. This study aims at investigating how husbands coming from the northern rural Jordanian speech community address their wives when spouses are (not) alone, and for what functions. Data were collected from a purposive sample of husbands through a discourse completion task which focused on the use of address forms (AFs) as an entry point into situations of complaint, invitation, greeting and request. Data were categorized and analyzed qualitatively, and drawn upon Brown and Gilman’s (1960) two-dimensional model and Hymes’ (1962, 1964, 1972) ethnography of (cultural) communication-approach. Results showed that husbands used ‘teknonyms, epithets, forenames, zero form and endearment terms’. Results showed significant impact of relative academic background and length of marriage period on husbands’ employment of AFs. AFs reflected stereotypic and cautious communication which showed that AFs in rural settings were not selected randomly, but rather for a practical value in managing spouse relationships. Laden with situation-governed functions, AFs introduced a culturally distinctive system of ways to intelligently maintain the relative politeness, power, solidarity, status and intimacy relations, consistently with the socio-cultural context. This study provides implications for linguistic ethnography and further sociolinguistic research on AFs.
form, function, sociocultural, politeness, power, solidarity
doi:10.26478/ja2017.5.7.5
Afful, J. 2006. Address terms among university students in Ghana: The case of descriptive phrases [J]. The International Journal of Society and Culture, 20 (5): 1-6.
Afzali, K. 2011. The address terms of spouses in different social strata in Iran and its sociolinguistic implications [J]. International Journal of Linguistics, 3 (1):10.
Agha, A. 2007. Language and Social Relations [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Aliakbari, M. and Toni, A. 2008. The realization of address terms in modern Persian in Iran: A socio linguistic study [J]. Linguistik Online, 35 (3): 3-12.
Brown, G. and Yule, G. 1989. Discourse Analysis [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, P. and Levinson, S. 1987. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Studies in Interactional Sociolinguistics [M]. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, R. and Ford, M. 1961. Address in American English [J]. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 62: 375-85.
Brown, R. and Gilman, A. 1960. Pronouns of Power and Solidarity [A], in P. Giglioli (ed.), Language and Social Context [C]. London: Cox and Wyman. 252-282.
Buss, S. 1999. Appearing respectful: The moral significance of manners [J]. Ethics, 109 (4): 795-826.
Cameron, D. 1992. Feminism and Linguistic Theory [M]. New York: Palgrave Publishers.
Chaika, E. 1982. Language: The Social Mirror. Newbury House Publications [M]. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Ervin-Tripp, S. 1972. On Sociolinguistic Rules: Alternation and Co-occurrence. Directions in Sociolinguistics [J]. The Economic Journal of Takasaki City University of Economics, 45 (1): 71-94.
Farghal, M. Shakir, A. 1994. Kin terms and titles of address as relational social honorifics in Jordan Arabic [J]. Journal of Anthropological Linguistics, 36 (2): 240-253.
Fasold, R. 1990. Sociolinguistics of Language [M]. Oxford: Blackwell.
Fitch, K. 1991. The interplay of linguistic universals and cultural knowledge in personal address: Colombian Madre terms [J]. Communication Monograph, 58: 254-272.
Friedrich, P. 1972. Social context and semantic future: The Russian pronominal usage [A], in J. Gumperz and D. Hymes (eds.), Direction in Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of Communication [C]. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. 407-434.
Giles, H., Bourhis, R. and Taylor, D. 1977. Towards a theory of language and ethnic group relations [A], in H. Giles (ed.). Language, Ethnicity and Intergroup Relations: European Monographs in Social Psychology [C]. London: Academic Press. 307-348.
Goodenough, W. 1965. Rethinking “status” and “role”: toward a general model of the cultural organization of social relationships [A], in Banton M. (ed.) The Relevance of Models for Social Anthropology Monographs [C]. London: Tavistock.
Goyvaerts, D. 1972. Linguistic behaviour and the acquisition of social roles: one aspect of linguistic performance [J]. Studia Linguistica, 26 (1): 1-13.
Holmes, J. 1992. An Introduction to Linguistics [M]. London: Longman.
Holmes, J. 1995. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics: Learning About Language [M]. London: Longman.
Hudson, R. 2001. Sociolinguistics [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hymes, D. 1962. The ethnography of speaking [A], in T. Gladwin and W. Sturtevant (eds.), Anthropology and Human Behaviour [C]. Washington, DC: Anthropological Society of Washington. 13-53.
Hymes, D. 1964. Modes of Address, Language in Culture and Society: A Reader in Linguistics and Anthropology [M]. NY: Harper and Row.
Hymes, D. 1972. Editorial introduction [J]. Language in Society, 1: 1-14
Keshavarz, H. 2001. The role of social context, intimacy, and distance in the choice of forms of address [J]. International Journal Social Language, 148: 5-18.
Labov, W. 1972. Sociolinguistic patterns [M]. Chap. 3, The isolation of contextual styles (70-100); Chap. 5, Hypercorrection by the lower middle class as a factor in linguistic change (122-142). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Levinson, S. 1983. Pragmatics [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Masson, L. 2001. Ask an expert: Explaining the etiquette effect [J]. CA Magazine, 134 (3): 18.
Mehrotra, R. 1985. Sociolinguistics in Hindi Contexts: Contributions to the Sociology of Language [M]. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Okamura. A. 2002. How do English speakers address their Japanese colleagues?[J]. Multilingua, 28: 355- 377.
Owen, L. 1995. The role of teachers’ education in nurturing honorable and principled teaching [J]. Educational Horizons, 74: 43-48.
Oyetade, S. 1995. A sociolinguistic Analysis of address terms in Yoruba [J]. Journal of Language and Society, 24: 515-53.
Parkinson, D. 1985. Constructing the Social Context of Communication: Terms of Address in Egyptian Arabic [M]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Philipsen, G. 1975. Speaking “like a man” in Teamsterville: Culture patterns of role enactment in an urban neighborhood [J]. Quarterly Journal of Speech. 61 (1): 13–22. doi:10.1080/00335637509383264.
Philipsen, G. and Huspek, M. 1985. A Bibliography of Sociolinguistic Studies of Personal Address [J]. Anthropological Linguistics, 27 (1): 94-101.
Ruhlemann, C. 2007. Conversation in Context [M]. London: Continuum.
Saville-Troike, M. 1997. The Ethnographic Analysis of Communicative Events [A], in N. Coupland and A. Jaworski (eds.), Sociolinguistics [C]. London: Macmillan press Ltd. 126-145.
Taavitsainen, I. and Jucker, H. 2003. Diachronic Perspective on Address Term Systems [M]. Philadelphia: John Benjamins North America.
Thome-Williams, A. 2004. Sociolinguistic aspects of forms of address in Portugal and Brazil: Tu or Voce?[J]. Intercultural Communication Studies, 13 (3): 85-99.
Wang, J. 2003. A Comparative Analysis for Sino-English Appellation of Social Intercourse [J]. Journal of Harbin University, 8: 48-50.
Watts, R. 2005. Linguiostic politeness research: Que vadis?[A] In R. Watts, S. Ide and K. Ehlich (eds.), Politeness in Language: Studies in its History and Practices [C]. xi-xivii. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Wierzbicka, A. 2010. Experience, Evidence, and Sense: The Hidden Cultural Legacy of English [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Winchatz, M. 2001. Social meanings in social interactions: An ethnographic analysis of the second person pronoun Sie’[J]. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 34 (3): 337-369.
Wood, L. and Kroger, R. 1991. Politeness and forms of address [J]. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 3: 145-68.
World Bank. 2015. Collection of development indicators [OL]. Retrieved from Jordan - Rural population https://tradingeconomics.com/jordan/rural-population-wb-data.html.
Yang, C. 2010. Translation of English and Chinese addressing terms forms the cultural aspect [J]. Journal of Language Teaching And Research, 1 (5): 738-742.
Yang, X. 2010. Address terms of English: rules and variations [J]. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 1 (5): 743-745. Academy Publisher: Finland. doi:10.4304/jltr.1.5.
Yule, G. 2006. The Study of Language [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
友情链接: