Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter Mouton May 7, 2015

Nominal address and rapport management in informal interactions among university students in Quito (Ecuador), Santiago (Chile) and Seville (Spain)

  • María Elena Placencia EMAIL logo , Catalina Fuentes Rodríguez and María Palma-Fahey
From the journal Multilingua

Abstract

Nominal and pronominal address forms, which play a central role in the construction of interpersonal relations (cf. Bargiela et al. 2002; Clyne et al. 2009), have been the focus of attention in different linguistics subfields for several decades now. Less attention, however, has been paid to these forms from a variational pragmatics (Schneider and Barron 2008) perspective, particularly in Spanish. Using a corpus of role play interactions, we examine the impact of region and gender on nominal address usage among male and female university students from Quito (Ecuador), Santiago (Chile) and Seville (Spain). We look at how these forms are employed in rapport management (Spencer-Oatey 2008 [2000]) in two situations: giving advice and making a direct complaint (Boxer 1993). Building on work on nominal forms (cf. Leech 1999; McCarthy and O’Keeffe 2003), we examine similarities and differences in their use across the three varieties of Spanish. Among the findings recorded was a larger repertoire of nominal forms in the Santiago and Quito data sets relative to the Seville corpus, with the highest frequency of use in Santiago. We suggest that address usage in the dyadic contexts examined is connected to the expression of affect and involvement, with Chileans (Santiago) and Ecuadorians (Quito) displaying more affect than Spaniards (Seville). Contrary to early research suggesting that women employ more affiliative language than men (cf. Lakoff 1975), overall, males in the present study were found to use address forms more frequently than females across the three locations.

Acknowledgements

We are very grateful to Anne Barron and two anonymous reviewers for their comments on an earlier version of this paper.

Transcription conventions (adapted from Jefferson 1984)

:

Prolongation of the sound preceding the symbol

?

Rising intonation

.

Falling intonation

,

Continuing intonation

!

Exclamatory tone

CAPITALS

Raised volume

(.)

A brief pause that cannot be readily measurable

( )

Word or utterance was unintelligible

[

Beginning of overlap

Abbreviations

wordF

‘F’ stands for female

wordM

‘M’ stands for male

wordD

‘D’ stands for diminutive suffix

wordAug

‘Aug’ stands for augmentative suffix

References

Alonso-Cortés, Angel. 1999. Las construcciones exclamativas. La interjeción y las expresiones vocativas. In IgnacioBosque & VioletaDemonte (eds.), Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española, 39934050. Madrid: Espasa.Search in Google Scholar

Bañón, Antonio Miguel. 1993. El vocativo: propuestas para su análisis lingüístico. Barcelona: Octaedro.Search in Google Scholar

Bargiela, Francesca, CorinneBoz, LilyGokzadze, AbdurrahmanHamza, SaraMills & NinoRukhadze.2002. Ethnocentrism, politeness and naming strategies. Working Papers on the Web 3. http://extra.shu.ac.uk/wpw/politeness/bargiela.htm (accessed 22 May 2014).Search in Google Scholar

Barron, Anne.2005. Variational pragmatics in the foreign language classroom. System33. 519536.10.1016/j.system.2005.06.009Search in Google Scholar

Barron, Anne.2008. Contrasting requests in Inner Circle Englishes: A study in variational pragmatics. In MartinPütz & JoanneNeff-van Aertselaer (eds.), Developing contrastive pragmatics: Interlanguage and cross-cultural perspectives, 355402. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Barron, Anne.2015. Explorations in regional variation: A variational pragmatic perspective. Multilingua. doi: 10.1515/multi-2014-010210.1515/multi-2014-0102Search in Google Scholar

Barron, Anne & Klaus P.Schneider.2009. Variational pragmatics: studying the impact of social factors on language use in interaction. Intercultural Pragmatics6(4). 425442.10.1515/IPRG.2009.023Search in Google Scholar

Boxer, Diana.1993. Social distance and speech behavior: The case of indirect complaints. Journal of Pragmatics19. 103125.10.1016/0378-2166(93)90084-3Search in Google Scholar

Braun, Friederike1988. Terms of address. Problems of patterns and usage in various languages and cultures. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110848113Search in Google Scholar

Briz Gómez, Antonio (ed.) 1995. La conversación coloquial (Materiales para su estudio). Cuadernos de Filología, Anejo XVI. Valencia: Universitat de València.Search in Google Scholar

Brown, Penelope & Stephen C.Levinson.1987 [1978]. Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511813085Search in Google Scholar

Cameron, Deborah.1992. Feminism and linguistic theory, 2nd edn. Basingstoke: Macmillan.10.1007/978-1-349-22334-3Search in Google Scholar

Carrasco Santana, Antonio. 2002. Los tratamientos en español. Salamanca: Ediciones Colegio de España.Search in Google Scholar

Chen, Yuan-shan, Chun-yin DorisChen & Miao-HsiaChang. 2011. American and Chinese complaints: Strategy use from a cross-cultural perspective. Intercultural Pragmatics8. 253275.10.1515/iprg.2011.012Search in Google Scholar

Clayman, Steven E.2012. Address terms in the organization of turns at talk: The case of pivotal turn extensions. Journal of Pragmatics44. 18531867.10.1016/j.pragma.2012.08.001Search in Google Scholar

Clyne, Michael, CatrinNorrby & JaneWarren.2009. Language and human relations: Styles of address in contemporary language. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511576690Search in Google Scholar

Cortés, Saide. 2009. Expresiones zoonímicas en el habla popular chilena. Boletín de Filología44. 243261.10.4067/S0718-93032009000100009Search in Google Scholar

Edeso Natalías, Verónica. 2005. Usos discursivos del vocativo en español. Español Actual84. 123142.Search in Google Scholar

Eisenchlas, Susana A.2012. Gendered discursive practices online. Journal of Pragmatics44. 335345.10.1016/j.pragma.2012.02.001Search in Google Scholar

Enajas, Raquel.2004. El vocativo amoroso en el lenguaje juvenil almeriense. Tonos Digital 7. http://www.um.es/tonosdigital/znum7/estudios/eelvocativo.htm (accessed 22 May 2014).Search in Google Scholar

Félix-Brasdefer, J. César. 2003. Validity in data collection methods in pragmatics research. In PaulaKempchinsky & CarlosEduardo Piñeros (eds.), Theory, practice, and acquisition: Papers from the 6th Hispanic linguistics symposium and the 5th conference on the acquisition of Spanish and Portuguese, 239257. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Search in Google Scholar

Fishman, Pamela.1997 [1978]. Interaction: The work women do. In NikolasCoupland & AdamJaworski (eds.), Sociolinguistics: A reader and coursebook, 416429. New York: St Martin’s Press.10.1007/978-1-349-25582-5_33Search in Google Scholar

Fitch, Kristine L.1998. Speaking relationally: Culture, communication, and interpersonal connection. New York: Guilford Press.Search in Google Scholar

Flórez, Luis. 1975. Del español hablado en Colombia: Seis muestras de léxico. Bogotá: Instituto Caro y Cuervo.Search in Google Scholar

Fuentes Rodríguez, Catalina & Antonio M.Bañón Hernández. forthcoming. Gender and political discourse: State of the art. In CatalinaFuentes Rodríguez & Gloria AlvarezBenito (eds.), A gender-based approach to parliamentary discourse.Search in Google Scholar

García Dini, Encarnación. 1998. Algo más sobre el vocativo. Actas del XVII congreso de la associazione Ispanisti Italiani (AISPI), 57–62. Centro Virtual Cervantes. http://cvc.cervantes.es/literatura/aispi/pdf/10/10_055.pdf (accessed 22 May 2014).Search in Google Scholar

Goldsmith, Daena J. & Kristine L.Fitch. 1997. The normative context of advice as social support. Human Communication Research23. 454476.10.1111/j.1468-2958.1997.tb00406.xSearch in Google Scholar

Hernández Flores, Nieves. 1999. Politeness ideology in Spanish colloquial conversation: The case of advice. Pragmatics9. 3749.10.1075/prag.9.1.04herSearch in Google Scholar

Hickey, Leo.2005. Politeness in Spain: Thanks but no thanks. In LeoHickey & MirandaStewart (eds.), Politeness in Europe, 317330. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781853597398-024Search in Google Scholar

Holmes, Janet.1995. Women, men and politeness. New York: Longman.Search in Google Scholar

Hummel, Martin, BettinaKluge & María EugeniaVázquez Laslop. 2010. Formas y fórmulas de tratamiento en el mundo hispánico. México D. F./Graz: El Colegio de México/Karl Franzens Universität.Search in Google Scholar

Jefferson, Gail.1984. Transcript notation. In JohnAtkinson & Maxwell J.Heritage (eds.), Structures of social interaction: Studies in conversation analysis, ixxvi. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Jørgensen, Annette Myre & GunnAarli. 2011. Los vocativos en el lenguaje juvenil de Santiago de Chile y Madrid. In CarmenGarcía & María ElenaPlacencia (eds.), Estudios de variación pragmática en español, 141166. Buenos Aires: Dunken.Search in Google Scholar

Kasper, Gabriele.2008 [2000]. Data collection in pragmatics research. In HelenSpencer-Oatey (ed.), Culturally speaking. Culture, communication and politeness theory, 279303. London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar

Kasper, Gabriele & MereteDahl.1991. Research methods in interlanguage pragmatics. Studies in Second Language Acquisition13. 215247.10.1017/S0272263100009955Search in Google Scholar

Lakoff, Robin.1975. Language and woman’s place. New York: Harper and Row.Search in Google Scholar

Laver, John.1975. Communicative functions of phatic communion. In AdamKendon, Richard M.Harris & MaryRitchie Key (eds.), Organization and behavior in face-to-face interaction, 215238. The Hague: Mouton.10.1515/9783110907643.215Search in Google Scholar

Leech, Geoffrey N.1999. The distribution and functions of vocatives. In HildeHasselgård, StigJohansson & SigneOksefjell (eds.), Out of corpora: Studies in honour of Stig Johansson, 107118. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Search in Google Scholar

Levinson, Stephen C.1979. Activity types and language. Linguistics17. 365399.10.1515/ling.1979.17.5-6.365Search in Google Scholar

Locher, Miriam A.2006. Advice online: Advice-giving in an American internet health column. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.149Search in Google Scholar

MartínezLara, JoséAlejandro. 2009. El uso del vocativo como estrategia de cortesía entre jóvenes universitarios de Caracas. Lingua Americana25. 100120. http://www.scielo.org.ve/scielo.php?pid=S0798-97092009000100003%26script=sci_arttext (accessed 22 May 2014).Search in Google Scholar

McCarthy, Michael & AnneO‘Keeffe. 2003. ‘What’s in a name?’ Vocatives in casual conversations and radio phone-in calls. In PepiLeistyna & Charles F.Meyer (eds.), Corpus analysis: Language structure and language use, 153185. Amsterdam: Rodopi.10.1163/9789004334410_010Search in Google Scholar

Morrow, Phillip. 2012. Online advice in Japanese: Giving advice in an internet discussion forum. In HolgerLimberg & MiriamLocher (eds.), Advice in discourse, 255280. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.221.16morSearch in Google Scholar

Palma-Fahey, Maria. 2011. Exploring the representation of orality: The use of vocatives in two Spanish-speaking films, Machuca and Volver. Sociolinguistic Studies5. 103126.Search in Google Scholar

Placencia, María Elena. 1997. Address forms in Ecuadorian Spanish. Hispanic Linguistics9. 165202.Search in Google Scholar

Placencia, María Elena. 2005. Pragmatic variation in corner store interactions in Quito and Madrid. Hispania88. 583598.10.2307/20063161Search in Google Scholar

Placencia, María Elena. 2011. Regional pragmatic variation. In GisleAndersen & KarinAijmer (eds.), Pragmatics of society [Handbook of pragmatics 5], 79113. Berlin: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110214420.79Search in Google Scholar

Placencia, María Elena, CatalinaFuentes Rodríguez and Maria Palma-Fahey. Forthcoming. La dimensión interactiva de las formas de tratamiento nominales en Quito (Ecuador), Santiago (Chile) y Sevilla (Spain).Search in Google Scholar

Puga Larraín, Juana. 1997. La atenuación en el castellano de Chile: Un enfoque pragmalingüístico. Valencia: Tirant Lo Blanch Libros, Universitat de València.Search in Google Scholar

Ramírez Gelbes, Silvia & AndreaEstrada. 2003. Vocativos insultivos vs. vocativos insultativos: Acerca del caso de boludo. Anuario de Estudios FilológicosXXVI. 335353.Search in Google Scholar

Rampton, Ben.2009. Crossing, ethnicity and code-switching. In NikolasCoupland & AdamJaworski (eds.), The new sociolinguistics reader, 287298. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1007/978-1-349-92299-4_20Search in Google Scholar

Rojas, Darío. 2012. Huevón como marcador del discurso en el español de Chile: Huellas de un proceso de gramaticalización. Revista de Humanidades25. 145164.Search in Google Scholar

Sáez-Godoy, Leopoldo. 1983. Una familia léxica del español común e informal de Chile: Hueva y sus derivados. In LeopoldoSáez-Godoy (ed.), Estudios lingüísticos en memoria de Gastón Carrillo-Herrera, 133152. Bonn: Romanistischer Verlag.Search in Google Scholar

Schegloff, Emanuel A. & HarveySacks. 1974 [1973]. Opening up closings. In RoyTuner (ed.), Ethnomethodology, 233264. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin Education.Search in Google Scholar

Schneider, Klaus P.2010. Variational pragmatics. In MirjamFried, Jan-OlaÖstman & JefVerschueren (eds.), Variation and change: Pragmatic perspectives [Handbook of Pragmatics Highlights 6], 239267. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/hoph.6.18schSearch in Google Scholar

Schneider, Klaus P. & AnneBarron. 2008. Where pragmatics and dialectology meet: Introducing variational pragmatics. In Klaus P.Schneider & AnneBarron (eds.), Variational pragmatics: A focus on regional varieties in pluricentric languages, 132. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.178.02schSearch in Google Scholar

Spencer-Oatey, Helen. 2008 [2000]. Face, (im)politeness and rapport. In HelenSpencer-Oatey (ed.), Culturally speaking: Culture, communication and politeness theory. 1147. London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar

Tannen, Deborah.1991. You just don’t understand: Women and men in conversation. London: Virago.Search in Google Scholar

Terkourafi, Marina.2012. Between pragmatics and sociolinguistics. Where does pragmatic variation fit in? In J. CésarFélix-Brasdefer & DaleApril Koike (eds.), Pragmatic variation in first and second language contexts: Methodological issues, 295318. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/impact.31.11terSearch in Google Scholar

Thurén, Britt-Marie. 1988. Left hand left behind: The changing gender system of a barrio in Valencia, Spain. Stockholm: University of Stockholm.Search in Google Scholar

Torrejón, Alfredo. 2010. El voseo en Chile: Una aproximación diacrónica. In MartinHummel, BettinaKluge & María EugeniaVázquez Laslop (eds.), Formas y fórmulas de tratamiento en el mundo hispánico, 413427. México, D.F./Graz: El Colegio de México/Karl-Franzens-Universität Graz.Search in Google Scholar

Toscano Mateus, Humberto. 1953. El español en el Ecuador. Revista de Filología Española, Anejo 61.Search in Google Scholar

Travis, Catherine E.2006. The communicative realisation of confianza and calor humano in Colombian Spanish. In CliffGoddard (ed.), Ethnopragmatics. Understanding discourse in cultural context, 199229. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110911114.199Search in Google Scholar

ZhuHua.2011. Studying language and intercultural communication: Methodological considerations. In HuaZhu (ed.), The language and intercultural reader, 389407. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Zimmermann, Klaus.2002. La variedad juvenil y la interacción verbal entre jóvenes. In FélixRodríguez González (ed.), El lenguaje de los jóvenes, 137163. Barcelona: Ariel.Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2015-5-7
Published in Print: 2015-7-1

©2015 by De Gruyter Mouton

Downloaded on 3.2.2023 from https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/multi-2014-0107/html
Scroll Up Arrow