ArticlePDF Available

A Sociolinguistic Study on the Development of Grammar System of Treatment Expression

Authors:

Abstract

Analysis of the language in which honorific expressions are developed has revealed various findings. The social and cultural background can be considered by analyzing the history of the honorifics, etc., but the honorifics are often used in colloquial language. Is also an issue of this research. Since honorifics reflect not only their practical aspects but also society, culture, and ideas, it is one clue to know from the history and usage of honorifics, and there is room for sociolinguistic analysis and consideration. Is an area where there are still many.
1
Copyright © 2020, Journal La Sociale, Under the license CC BY-SA 4.0
JOURNAL LA SOCIALE
VOL. 01, ISSUE 01 (001-004), 2020
A Sociolinguistic Study on the Development of Grammar System of
Treatment Expression
Akira Yonemoto
Faculty of Environment and Information Studies,
Keio University, Japan
Corresponding Author: Akira
Email: hbkrkzk@gmail.com
Article Info
Article history:
Received 08 January 2020
Received in revised form 15
January 2020
Accepted 22 January 2020
Keywords:
Honorific Expression
Culture
Society
Abstract
Analysis of the language in which honorific expressions are developed
has revealed various findings. The social and cultural background can be
considered by analyzing the history of the honorifics, etc., but the
honorifics are often used in colloquial language. Is also an issue of this
research. Since honorifics reflect not only their practical aspects but also
society, culture, and ideas, it is one clue to know from the history and
usage of honorifics, and there is room for sociolinguistic analysis and
consideration. Is an area where there are still many.
Introduction
The honorific is a special expression for expressing respect or politeness by changing the way
to state the same thing, and is one of the treatment expressions. Expressions of respect can be
expressed in any language, but not many languages have grammatical and lexical systematic
expressions. Typical languages include Japanese, Korean, Javanese, Vietnamese, Tibetan,
Bengali, and Tamil. In order for treatment expressions to become grammatically and lexically
systematically form, not only the influence of the original language but also the need for various
respect expressions from the social background have emerged as honorific expressions. it is
conceivable that. For this reason, in this paper, Japanese is an isolated word, Korean is also an
isolated word, Javanese is a Malay-Polynesian Sunda-Sulawesi group, and Pet-Muong is an
Austro-Asian Mon-Khmer group. Focusing on honorifics, we look at the treatment expressions
in five languages of all different languages of Vietnamese as a group of words, Sina-Tibetan
Chinese, and the Chinese as a Sino-Chinese language. Factors and processes that develop the
treatment expressions as a grammatical system I would like to analyze and discuss the cultural
and social background.
Of these, Chinese has not developed grammatical and lexical treatment expressions, but it is
listed as a comparison object. In addition, the other four languages are all different languages,
and because of the large number of speakers, etc., the treatment expressions and honorific
expressions of each language are relatively popular, and there are many materials etc., so these
four languages were selected.
2
Copyright © 2020, Journal La Sociale, Under the license CC BY-SA 4.0
In the following, we will look at the characteristics of honorifics in each language, focusing on
comparisons with other languages and historical research based on previous research.
Japanese
Japanese is an isolated word used mainly in Japan, and has about 125 million speakers. The
first book written is currently available and can be traced back to the Wei Zhi-Wajin biography,
written in the third century. The Japanese that was formed at that time was the modern
Japanese, then used Japanese, medieval Japanese, modern Japanese, and then the current
Japanese (Miyachi, 1981).
Honorifics in modern Japanese are largely divided into honorific, humble, and courteous. (In
the "Guidelines for Honorifics" issued in 2007 by the Agency for Cultural Affairs and the
Council for Cultural Affairs, polite and beautified words were added. 5). Ichikyo Kaneda and
others point out that the distinctive parts of Japanese honorifics are relative honorifics and
grammar.
Korean
Korean is an isolated language used mainly in the Republic of Korea and the Democratic
Republic of Korea, and has about 80 million speakers. The ancient Korean language, the origin
of modern Korean language, has been preserved since the Unification Shilla era of 668-900.
Korean honorifics are classified into three categories: interpersonal honorifics, subject
honorifics, and object honorifics, which are roughly equivalent to Japanese polite, humble, and
honorific. Another characteristic feature is that Japanese honorifics are relative to the concepts
of Uchi and Soto, while Korean honorifics are relative to the hierarchy.
Javanese
Javanese is a language mainly spoken in central and eastern Java, Indonesia, and belongs to
the Austronesian Malay-Polynesian Sunda Sulawesi group. Although the number of speakers
is 75 million, the official language in Indonesia is currently set to be Indonesian of the
Austronesian language, and in addition to speaking the native language as Javanese, most
people also speak Indonesian as a second language Learn and talk. At present, the number of
speakers, especially young people, is gradually decreasing, and language has been changing.
The oldest document is written in the 9th century.
Honorifics in Javanese are separated from normal (Ngoko) and polite (Krama) .Nagoko is used
for close friends and the present, and Krama is used for superiors and in other words use
(Restali, 2010). In addition, there are other Madya bodies with a degree of respect between
ordinary and polite bodies, and Ngoko bodies and Krama bodies have different degrees of
Krama Inggil body (or Krama Alus body/high degree) and Krama Andhap body (medium).
Degree), Krama Lugu body (low degree), Ngoko Alus body (high degree), Ngoko Lugu (low
degree), etc. These words are partially different and distinguished by the use of words of each
honorific degree.
Vietnamese
Vietnamese is a language mainly spoken in the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, and belongs to
the Pet Khmer language group of the Austro-Asian tribe of Mon Khmer. There are about 70
million speakers. One of the earliest books was a collection of 1440 Kuon poems.
The distinctive feature of Vietnamese honorifics is that, like Japanese and Korean, it is an
unusual language that combines all respected, humble, and polite words, but differs mainly in
3
Copyright © 2020, Journal La Sociale, Under the license CC BY-SA 4.0
that respect is expressed in nouns (Thu, 2016). Ishiyama (2014) attributed this to the influence
of Chinese.
Chinese
Chinese is a language mainly spoken in the People's Republic of China, Singapore, etc., and
belongs to the Sina-Tibetan Sina language group. There are about 1.3 billion speakers. Chinese
has a long history, and it is said that the skeletal script, which was the basis of Chinese
characters, was established in the 15th century BC.
Although it is difficult to say that modern Chinese has an honorific system as a grammar,
respectful expressions at the word level, such as using the personal pronoun “” or adding a
verb “Seki” to express politeness, are not (Ying, 2006; Bridge, 1989)
Comparative Study and Consideration
In the previous section, we saw the formation of each language and the characteristics of
honorifics. Honorifics are a grammar system for expressing respect, and it can be seen that the
grammar system is formed in each language in a different form and usage.
One of the trends is that all languages are Asian languages. Although the languages are all
different, this is thought to reflect Oriental thought, which has a deep respect for superiors. At
the same time, we can see the influence of Chinese, especially Vietnamese. In modern Chinese,
it is difficult to say that honorifics are established as a grammatical system, but this is limited
to modern Chinese, and traditional Chinese has a complicated honorific system, which is
Ishiyama (2014) states that it has influenced other languages in East Asia, and appears in
respectful expressions like words in modern Vietnamese. In addition, in modern Indonesian,
the descriptive sentence ends with “pak” meaning “father” and “bu” meaning “mother” to show
respect for men and women, respectively. There is a usage like that, and it is known as the
influence of Chinese (De Casparis, 1975).
Although both are common grammatical expressions that express the concept of honorifics and
respect for superiors, there are differences in grammatical expressions. Specifically, for
example, comparing Japanese and Korean, there is a difference between relative honorifics and
absolute honorifics (Self-righteousness, 1993). Originally, Japanese used absolute honorifics,
but with the passage of time and language changes, the use of relative honorifics gradually
changed. In fact, conversations within the royal family still use absolute honorifics, and this is
not to say that absolute honorifics do not exist at all. Rather, both Japanese and Korean are
used depending on the situation, but the tendency is that one of them is frequently used. On the
other hand, it is also a fact that there is a bias in the frequency of use, which is a difference
between the honorifics of the two. This is thought to reflect the difference in social and cultural
ideas between the two. According to Bai (1993), "In the case of younger bosses, honorifics
seem to be used very naturally in Japan, but in Korea there is often some resistance to using
honorifics. In the case of the superiors, it seems that there is not much unnaturalness in the case
of honorifics in Japan, but there is a great hesitation in doing so in Korea. Differences in the
use of honorifics are caused by differences in cultural ideas.
In addition, the transition from Chinese to modern Chinese in China, and the change from Java
and other languages to Indonesian, have been reduced and reduced in honorific terms. This is
a typical example in which the language is gradually simplified. Even in the language in which
the honorific language is currently maintained, the simplification of the honorific language and
a decreasing trend are seen.
4
Copyright © 2020, Journal La Sociale, Under the license CC BY-SA 4.0
Conclusion
Analysis of the language in which honorific expressions are developed has revealed various
findings. Due to the background of Oriental thought, grammatical differences and differences
in usage, there are minor differences in culture and society, and the tendency to simplify and
omit honorific terms. On the other hand, in this paper, only the prior studies were analyzed
after analysis, and there may be some deviations from the actual usage. The social and cultural
background can be considered by analyzing the history of the honorifics, etc., but the honorifics
are often used in colloquial language. Is also an issue of this research. Since honorifics reflect
not only their practical aspects but also society, culture, and ideas, it is one clue to know from
the history and usage of honorifics, and there is room for sociolinguistic analysis and
consideration. Is an area where there are still many.
References
Bridge, W. R. (1989) Honorific Expressions in Modern Chinese I Comparison with Japanese
I, Language and Culture, No. 2.
De Casparis, J. G. (1975). Indonesian Palaeography: A History of Writing in Indonesia from
the Beginnings to CAD 1500 (Vol. 4, No. 1). Brill.
Ishiyama, T. (2014). A Study on Modern Honorifics in Japanese and Vietnamese. Studies in
Modern Japanese Studies, 46.
Miyachi, H. (1981). History of Honorific Languages. Lecture Japanese Studies 9, Meiji Shoin,
Restali, S. B. (2010). Descriptive Research on Honorifics in Javanese-Focusing on Third-Party
Honorifics. (Doctoral Dissertation) Tokyo University of Foreign Studies.
Self-righteousness. (1993). Comparison of Absolute Honorific and Relative Honorific
Japanese-Korean Honorifics", "Japanese Language Education in the World"
Thu, N. H. (2016). Japanese and Vietnamese-Comparison of the Ways to Travel. Lecture
Japanese Studies.
Uchino, B. N., Cacioppo, J. T., & Kiecolt-Glaser, J. K. (1996). The relationship between social
support and physiological processes: a review with emphasis on underlying
mechanisms and implications for health. Psychological bulletin, 119(3), 488.
Vanclay, F. (2002). Conceptualising social impacts. Environmental Impact Assessment Review,
22(3), 183-211.
Ying, D., H. (2006). Honorific Expressions in Modern Chinese. Chiba University Studies in
Social and Cultural Science.
... They are a specific expression for conveying respect or politeness by modifying the style of saying the same thing. However, not many languages have grammatical and lexical systematic expressions (Yonemoto, 2020). In the same way, Tsuisui (2021), posited that the use of honorifics is governed by norms, and their use is influenced by several social factors. ...
... Honorific styles indeed reflect the society, culture, and ideas of the ethnolinguistic communities as these are developed because of social and cultural influence (Yonemoto, 2020). More specifically, it is intrinsically linked to societal and individual beliefs about languages (Lytra, 2016). ...
Article
Full-text available
The purpose of this descriptive-qualitative study with ethnographic design was to explore the extant honorific styles of the identified ethnolinguistic communities. Data from 37 selected participants from the Mandaya, Kagan, and Mansaka Tribes of Tagum City who took part in the KII and FGD interview using validated qualitative interview guide pointed to insight. Based on the analyses of data, the findings reveal the existence of the following appellative honorifics: Kinship, Sub-kinship, Rank, Aged, Professional, No Naming, and Identity Honorifics in the Mandaya, Kagan, and Mansaka Tribes of Tagum City. Moreover, it is also found that bound morpheme markers such as ma, dag, da, pyag, an, gi, on, ka, di, and ba exist in the dialects of the ethnolinguistic communities which describe and define the person’s characteristics and abilities in the honorific styles.
Article
Full-text available
In this review, the authors examine the evidence linking social support to physiological processes and characterize the potential mechanisms responsible for these covariations. A review of 81 studies revealed that social support was reliably related to beneficial effects on aspects of the cardiovascular, endocrine, and immune systems. An analysis of potential mechanisms underlying these associations revealed that (a) potential health-related behaviors do not appear to be responsible for these associations; (b) stress-buffering effects operate in some studies; (c) familial sources of support may be important; and (d) emotional support appears to be at least 1 important dimension of social support. Recommendations and directions for future research include the importance of conceptualizing social support as a multidimensional construct, examination of potential mechanisms across levels of analyses, and attention to the physiological process of interest.
Article
The conceptual framework based on environmental function evaluation of Slootweg et al. [Impact Assess. Proj. Appraisal 19 (2001) 19–28.] is used as the basis for conceptualising social impacts. Existing lists of social impact variables, such as those of the Interorganizational Committee for Guidelines and Principles for Social Impact Assessment, are examined and found to be inadequate and contradictory. A new listing of some 80-odd indicative social impacts is developed reflecting a change from project-based thinking to inclusion of the impacts of policies and programs, from thinking only about negative impacts to including positive benefits, and from thinking about unintended consequences to including intended consequences. The importance of differentiating between social impacts and social change processes is highlighted. Many of the variables typically measured in social impact assessment (SIA) studies are not in themselves impacts, but rather represent the measurable outcomes of social change processes, which may or may not cause impacts depending on the situation. Caution is expressed in the use of the list of impacts as a checklist.
Honorific Expressions in Modern Chinese I Comparison with Japanese I, Language and Culture
  • W R Bridge
Bridge, W. R. (1989) Honorific Expressions in Modern Chinese I Comparison with Japanese I, Language and Culture, No. 2.
History of Honorific Languages
  • H Miyachi
Miyachi, H. (1981). History of Honorific Languages. Lecture Japanese Studies 9, Meiji Shoin, Restali, S. B. (2010). Descriptive Research on Honorifics in Javanese-Focusing on Third-Party Honorifics. (Doctoral Dissertation) Tokyo University of Foreign Studies.
Comparison of Absolute Honorific and Relative Honorific Japanese-Korean Honorifics
Self-righteousness. (1993). Comparison of Absolute Honorific and Relative Honorific Japanese-Korean Honorifics", "Japanese Language Education in the World"
Japanese and Vietnamese-Comparison of the Ways to Travel
  • N H Thu
Thu, N. H. (2016). Japanese and Vietnamese-Comparison of the Ways to Travel. Lecture Japanese Studies.
Honorific Expressions in Modern Chinese
  • D Ying
Ying, D., H. (2006). Honorific Expressions in Modern Chinese. Chiba University Studies in Social and Cultural Science.