Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-tn8tq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-29T20:49:12.610Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Stereotypes and registers of honorific language

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2012

Asif Agha
Asif Agha
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Linguistics, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1531agha@humnet.ucla.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Honorific registers are formally discrete but functionally stratified systems, in the sense that an apparently bounded set of linguistic forms allows language users to calculate many concurrent aspects of the pragmatic context of language use. This paper argues that native stereotypes about language structure and use play a critical role in formulating the pragmatic value(s) of register systems. The linguist can neither isolate the forms belonging to a register, nor explain their significance in use, independently of appeal to native stereotypes about language. The paper discusses methods for the empirical study and analysis of such stereotypes. Stereotypes that formulate the social identity of language users play a special role within register systems, grounding the significance of pragmatic acts in the attributes of pragmatic actors. Much of the discussion focuses on how such stereotypes are formulated and what their social consequences are. (Honorifics, pragmatics, meta-pragmatics, stereotypes, registers, deference, identity, Tibetan)

Type
Research Article
Information
Language in Society , Volume 27 , Issue 2 , April 1998 , pp. 151 - 193
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Agha, Asif (1993a). Structural form and utterance context: Grammar and indexicality in a non-configurational language. New York: Lang.Google Scholar
Agha, Asif (1993b). Grammatical and indexical convention in honorific discourse. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 3:131–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agha, Asif (1994). Honorification. Annual Review of Anthropology 23:277–302.Google Scholar
Burke, Kenneth (1962). What are the signs of what? A theory of “entitlement”. Anthropological Linguistics 4:1–23.Google Scholar
Das, Sarat Chandra. 1902. Journey to Lhasa and central Tibet. London: Murray. [Reprinted as Lhasa and Central Tibet. New Delhi: Cosmo, 1988.]Google Scholar
Duranti, Alessandro (1992). Language in context and language as context: The Samoan respect vocabulary. In Duranti, Alessandro & Goodwin, Charles (eds.), Rethinking context, 77–99. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Errington, J. Joseph (1988). Structure and style in Javanese: A semiotic view of linguistic etiquette. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Ferguson, Charles (1985). Editor's introduction. Discourse Processes 8:391–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferguson, Charles (1994). Dialect, register and genre: Working assumptions about conventionalization. In Biber, Douglas & Finegan, Edward (eds.), Sociolinguistic perspectives on register, 15–30. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Geertz, Clifford (1960). The religion of Java. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Gregory, Michael (1988). Generic situation and register: A functional view of communication. In Benson, James D. et al. (eds.), Linguistics in a systemic perspective, 301–29. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. (1964). The users and uses of language. In Halliday, M. A. K. et al. (eds.), The linguistic sciences and language teaching, 75–110. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotic. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Hendry, Joy (1992). Honorific as dialect: The expression and manipulation of boundaries in Japanese. Multilingua 11:341–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hervey, Sandor (1992). Registering registers. Lingua 86:189–206Google Scholar
Hijirada, Kyoko, & Sohn, Ho-min (1986). Cross-cultural patterns of honorifics and sociolinguistic sensitivity to honorific variables: Evidence from English, Japanese, and Korean. Papers in Linguistics 19:365–401.Google Scholar
Hwang, Juck-Ryoon (1990). “Deference” vs. “politeness” in Korean speech. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 82:41–55.Google Scholar
Irvine, Judith (1989). When talk isn't cheap: Language and political economy. American Ethnologist 16:248–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Irvine, Judith (1990). Registering affect: Heteroglossia in the linguistic expression of emotion. In Lutz, Catherine A. & Abu-Lughod, Lila(eds.), Language and the politics of emotion, 126–61. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Irvine, Judith (1992). Ideologies of honorific language. Pragmatics 2:251–62.Google Scholar
Irvine, Judith (1997). Honorifics. In Blommaert, Jan et al. (eds.). Handbook of Pragmatics, to appear. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Milner, G. B. (1961). The Samoan vocabulary of respect. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 91:296–317.Google Scholar
Mugglestone, Lynda (1995). “Talking proper”: The rise of accent as a social symbol. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Paulston, Christina B. (1976). Pronouns of address in Swedish: Social class semantics and a changing system. Language in Society 5:359–86.Google Scholar
Philips, Susan U. (1991). Tongan speech levels: Practice and talk about practice in the cultural construction of social hierarchy. In Blust, Robert (ed.), Currents in Pacific linguistics: Papers on Austronesian languages and ethnolinguistics in honor of George W. Grace (Pacific Linguistics, C-117), 369–82. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
Poedjosoedarmo, Soepomo (1968). Javanese speech levels. Indonesia 6:54–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, Hilary (1975). The meaning of “meaning”. In his Philosophical papers, vol. 2, Mind, language and reality, 215–71. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward (1921). Language. New York: Harcourt Brace.Google Scholar
Shibamoto, Janet (1987). The womanly woman: Manipulation of stereotypical and non-stereotypical features of Japanese female speech. In Philips, Susan et al. (eds.), Language, gender and sex in comparative perspectives, 26–49. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silverstein, Michael (1981a). The implications of (models of) culture for language. Paper presented at the conference “Conceptions of culture and its acquisition”, organized by the Social Science Research Council,New York City, May.Google Scholar
Silverstein, Michael (1981b). The limits of awareness. (Sociolinguistic working papers, 84). Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.Google Scholar
Silverstein, Michael (1987). Cognitive implications of a referential hierarchy. In Hickman, Maya (ed.), Social and functional approaches to language and thought, 125–64. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Silverstein, Michael (1996a). Indexical order and the dialectics of sociolinguistic life. In Ide, Risako et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd Annual Symposium about Language and Society-Austin (SALSA), 266–95. Austin: University of Texas.Google Scholar
Silverstein, Michael (1996b). Monoglot “Standard” in America: Standardization and metaphors of linguistic hegemony. In Brenneis, Donald & Macaulay, Ronald (eds.), The matrix of language, 284–306. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Smith-Hefner, Nancy (1988). Women and politeness: The Javanese example. Language in Society 17:535–54.Google Scholar
Uhlenbeck, E. M. (1970). The use of respect forms in Javanese. In Wurm, Stephen A. & Laycock, Donald C. (eds.), Pacific linguistic studies in honor of Arthur Capell (Pacific Linguistics, C-13), 441–466. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
Ure, Jean (1982). Approaches to the study of register range. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 35:5–23.Google Scholar
Wang, Hahn-Sok (1990). Toward a description of the organization of Korean speech levels. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 82:25–39.Google Scholar