Academic
Exchange Quarterly Spring 2007
ISSN 1096-1453 Volume 11, Issue 1
To cite, use
print source rather than this on-line version which may not
reflect print copy format requirements or text lay-out and
pagination.
Married Women’s Address Forms Variation in
Miao
Yang,
Yang,
MA TESOL, is English lecturer in the Foreign
Languages Department of
Abstract
The
tradition that married women in
Introduction
By tradition, married women in Chaoshan in southern
Women’s social status reflected
by the address forms:
Power and solidarity, two
governing factors
Language does more than helps people understand the speaker’s thoughts
and feelings. By using language in a subtle way, people define their
relationship to each other and identify themselves as part of a social group. “In
no area of sociolinguistics is this second function of language more clearly
highlighted than in address forms.” (Fasold, 1984:1)
So there is an increasing emphasis on the study of the second person pronouns
and address systems in different languages. One of the most influential study
was conducted by Brown and Gilman in 1960, which, for the first time, brought
the concept of “power and solidarity” into the field of sociolinguistics and identified
their correlation and the pronominal usage. Their research was confirmed and
developed by other scholars in different languages (e.g. Friedrich, 1966; Bates
and Benigni, 1975; Paulston,
1976).
Brown and Gilman (1968) found that the use of
the familiar pronoun T and the deferential pronoun V in European languages were
governed by two forces: power and solidarity. If one person has power over
another in the degree that he is able to control the behavior of the other, he
may give T and receive V. The bases of power can be physical strength, wealth,
age, sex, institutionalized role in the church, the state, the army or within
the family. On the other hand, solidarity implies intimacy and “shared fate”
and is reciprocal. If the interlocutors are close or intimate to each other,
they will mutually exchange T or V.
The address system of American English has
been analyzed by Brown & Ford (1961/1964) and Ervin-Tripp (1972). According
to Brown and Ford’s study, the principal choices in American English are between
first name (FN) and title with last name (TLN). There are two reciprocal
patterns which are governed by a single dimension, ranging from acquaintance to
intimacy. And the third pattern, a nonreciprocal one, is governed by two
dimensions: age and occupational status. If we interpret the dimension ranging
from acquaintance to intimacy as scales of “solidarity” and age and
occupational status the manifestation of power, the main pattern are remarkably
similar to Brown and Gilman’s earlier work. Ervin-Tripp (1972) uses a flow
chart to present the address form system as a series of choices. Her modal
includes decision points on whether the addressee is an adult, whether “status
marked settings” are involved, whether the addressee’s name is known. Most importantly,
it requires the speaker to decide whether the addressee is a “friend or
colleague”, and whether the addressee is in higher rank or older. Again the
address system falls into the pattern of “power and solidarity”.
Thus address forms can be regarded as
linguistic signals of the power-solidarity relations between the interlocutors.
Such relations can also be regarded as “a special case of a more general
phenomenon, concerning the speaker’s relation of power and solidarity with the
world at large” (Hudson, 1980:128). The norms of address systems are formed in
our speech and then turn to govern our speech. When thinking of how to address
a person, we are forced to follow the norms. Thus the linguistic signaling of
power and solidarity can be seen as the way in which speakers locate themselves
in the social world.
Ages and ranks in Chinese
address system
One of the
bases of power is the institutionalized role within the family. “The V of
reverence entered European speech as a form of address to the principal power
in the state and eventually generalized to the powers within that microcosm of
the state----the nuclear family.” (Brown and Gilman, 1968:256) The connotation
of power has changed in response to social changes. A more commercialized
society tends to attach more importance to occupational ranks in business
organizations, as is revealed in Brown & Ford’s and Ervin-Tripp’s study.
But family is still an important field where power practices.
As Brown
and Gilman (1968) state, the power semantic was closely tied with the feudal
and manorial system. The patriarchal-feudal society lasted for more than 2000
years in
Inside the families, the relations between the
older and the younger, the senior and the junior are very important. These
relations contribute to a very complicated kin terms system (Chen Ke, 1993). An elder brother is called “gë
ge”, a little brother “dì di”, an elder sister “jiê jie”, and a little sister “mèi
mei”. When there are several elder brothers, more subtle distinctions are made:
“dà gë” (frist elder brother), “èr gë”(second elder brother), and so on. Men’s dominating
status inside the family is reflected in the clear distinction made between
relatives on father’s side and mother’s side. Relatives of mother’s side are
considered to be less close and are addressed differently. For example, the
male relatives on father’s side are “bó fù”, “shü fù”
and “gü fù”, those on
mother’s side are “jiù jiu”
and “yí fù”. These terms
are equal to “uncle” in English. Moreover, there are different terms among
cousins: the children of the father’s brother are called “táng”,
and the children of the father’s sister and the mother’s brother or sister are
called “biâo”. In contrast, the English kin terms
system is comparatively simple. “brother” or “sister” has no implication of age
distinction. “Uncle” and “Aunt” refer to all the collateral relatives of one’s
parents’ generation.
Such a complicated kin terms system naturally
leads to an address system focusing on ages and ranks. Further evidence comes
from Zhu Wanjin’s study. Zhu follows Ervin-Tripp’s
study modal and designs a computer flow chart to generalize the Chinese address
system. The chart shows that ages and positions in family hierarchy are of
utmost importance in the determination of choice to name a person among the
Chinese (Zhu Wanjin, 1990).
Women’s social status reflected
by the address forms
The following is “a scene on a public street in contemporary US”
mentioned by Ervin-Tripp in her discussion of American rules and address:
“What’s your name, boy?” the policeman asked…
“Dr Poussaint. I’m a physician…”
“What’s your first name, boy?…”
“
According to Ervin-Tripp, the policeman insulted Dr Poussaint three
times. He treated TLN as failure to answer his question and demanding FN. And
he used the term “boy” twice to address a physician, which is a social
stigmatic term used only for “a child, youth, or menial regarded as a
non-person “. By addressing a black adult “boy”, the policeman reveals the
racial discrimination: “Blacks are wrong to claim adult status or occupational
rank. You are children.” (Ervin-Tripp, 1972:230)
So there seems to be a norm of treating children differentially.
Children are deprived of reverential treatment adults usually receive. The
first selector in Ervin-Tripp’s computer flow chart checks whether the
addressee is a child or not. If he/she is a child, only first name will be
used. If the first name is not known, no name will be used. The present study
of women’s address forms in Chaoshan areas is actually the study of women’s
social status in a traditional society. When required to use the same address
forms as their children, women are more or less stripped of adult status,
similar to Dr Poussaint’s being called “boy”. In this way, such a tradition is
a powerful evidence of placing women in the same subordinate position as
children.
Explanation to the change and
investigation
The synchronic research of
linguistic change in progress
Language
change used to be regarded as unobservable by the majority of linguists.
Leonard Bloomfield stated that “the process of linguistic change has never been
directly observed----we shall see that such observations with our present
facilities are inconceivable.” (Bloomfield, 1933: 347, quoted from Aitchison,
1991:12) But it has been realized that language change is observable: the
diachronic linguistic change is reflected in the synchronic change of language
and thus can be studied through the synchronic change.
The pioneer in this field is William Labov.
His study in
Apparent Time Research of Language Change in
Progress
William Labov’s
research in the Vineyard is a famous example showing how to study language
change in progress through linguistic variation in different ages. The 69
subjects are subdivided into 5 age groups in every 15 years. Labov’s study
shows that from the over-seventy-five age group down to the
thirty-one-to-forty-five age group, the percentage of the centralization of
vowels rises. The negative correlation of vowel change and age change reflects
that the centralization of vowels is in progress. This synchronic research
through linguistic variation in different age groups is called apparent time
research by Labov.
A preliminary inquiry of the present study
shows that the tradition of using the same address forms as children is being
discarded by some young married women. In order to prove that there is change
in progress, Labov’s modal of apparent time research is followed. The selection
of subjects is based on the following principle: half of the subjects must live
in the countryside, the other half in the urban areas; they must be with
different professions and in different ages varying from 20s to 50s.
Altogether, 74 local married women are investigated, who are subdivided into 4
age groups: 20—29, 30—39, 40—49 and 50—59. The questionnaire analyzed with SPSS
11.0 (Statistics Package for Social Science) reflects a positive correlation
between age groups and the percentage of married women using the same address
forms as their children: the percentage declines from the 50-to-59 age group
down to the 20-to-29 age group. So there is indeed a change in progress: less
and less married women follow the traditional way of addressing.
The Causation of Language Change
Sociolinguists have found that the change of language is not simply
initiated by the internal structure of a language such as assimilation,
simplification, etc. and that every language change is triggered by certain
social factors so that it happens in a specific historical time (Aitchison,
1991; Xu, al. et. 1997; Holmes, 2001). Taken Labov’s study in the Vineyard again. The centralization of
some vowels used to exist in the dialect of the island for several hundred
years but almost disappeared in the 1930s’. Its revival was connected with the
rise in popularity of the island as a tourist resort after World War Two and
the disapproval of the summer people by the old inhabitants, especially the
fishermen. They exaggerated the centralization of vowels to distinguish
themselves from the despised summer visitors. This was followed by the staunch
defenders of the island’s way of life, mostly in the 30-to-45 age group. As for
those in the 14-to-30 age group, most of them planned to leave the island and
live on the mainland and thus adopt a more standard form of pronunciation.
Then, what has caused some married women to
abandon the age-old tradition in Chaoshan? Economic development is a possible
reason. In
Another possible
reason is educational background. Nowadays the Chinese society is getting more
and more open and equalitarian with more and more women receiving higher
education and taking up professions as men. “The development of open societies
with an equalitarian ideology acted against the non-reciprocal power semantic
and in favor of solidarity.” (Brown & Gilman, 1968:230) If women are more
status-conscious than men (Trudgill, 1974:88), then
educated women are more conscious of their social status implied by the
linguistic choice. When being asked to address her husband’s families in the
same way as their children, well-educated women will inevitably identify themselves
as being in a subordinate position as children. The equalitarian ideology will then
be aroused, leading to the abandonment of this tradition. In short, higher
education leads to stronger consciousness of equality. Such consciousness
contributes to the dropping of the tradition that places women in the same
position as children.
The subjects’
educational background (ranging from doctor/master degree holder to illiterate)
was stratified and scored. The lower the index was, the higher the educational
level. In this way the average education index of each age group was
calculated. Analysis shows positive correlation between the percentage of women
following the tradition and the average education index, confirming the
assumption that higher education leads to higher possibility of abandoning the
tradition. Education is the social factor that actuates the change in the
address system of married women in Chaoshan areas.
Conclusion and Implication
The traditional
value that women are regarded as a subordinate group in the society is
reflected by their use of address forms. This is especially the case when we
observe how married women in Chaoshan areas address the family members from
their husbands’ side. The fact once again confirms that language is the mirror
of social values. And the change that such a requirement is being discarded
indicates the co-variation between social change and linguistic choice. With
the development of the society, more and more married women receive higher
education and their consciousness of equality becomes stronger, thus more and more
married women abandon the tradition that requires them to address the family
members from their husbands’ side as their children.
The present study
might not provide significant insight into the teaching of language skills, but
it can serve as a good case in language classroom discussion so that classroom
activities can become content-based and authentic. For example, when the
English learners were involved in a unit about sex-role revolution in
contemporary society, the researcher introduced the study and suggested the
learners to conduct surveys of address systems in different parts of
References
Aitchison,J. (1991) Language
Change: Progress of Decay?
Bates, E. & Benigni,
L. (1975) “Rules of Address in
Brown, R. & Gilman, A. (1968) “The
Pronouns of Power and Solidarity”, Fishman
J. (ed.)
Chen Ke (1993) Chinese Linguistic Folk Culture,
Chen Naigang (1990)
Lingnan Culture,
Ervin-Tripp, S. M. (1972) “Sociolinguistic
Rules of Address”, Pride J. B. & J. Holmes (ed.) Sociolinguistics, Penguin books.
Fasold, R. (1984) The Sociolinguistics of Society, Basil Blackwell.
Friedrich, P. (1966) Structural Implications
of Russian Pronominal Usage, In Bright (1966).
Holmes, J. (2001) An Introduction to Sociolinguistics (2nd Edition),
Longman.
Labov, W. (1968) “The Reflection of Social
Processes in Linguistic Structures”, Fishman
J. (ed.)
Paulston, C. B. (1976) “Pronouns of Address in
Swedish: SocialClass Semantics and a Changing System”,
Language in Society, 5(3): 359-386.
Trudgill, P. (1974) Sociolinguistics: An Introduction to Language and Society, Penguin
Books Ltd.
Xu Daming, Tao hongyen & xie Tianwei (1997) Contemporary
Sociolinguistics,
Zhu Wanjin (1990) “A
Study of Chinese Address Forms: a flow chart in sociolinguistics”, Journal of Beijing University.