Forms of address and terms of reference

Dickey, Eleanor

doi:10.1017/s0022226797006488

Cited by 102 publications

(64 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…On the other hand, some children did not use kinship terms for their parents. These children did not acknowledge their parent-child relationships (Dickey, 1997). Because parent-child relationships have fundamental effects on children's mental health, the unacknowledged forms of address to their parents were relevant to their mental problems (Yokotani, in press;Yokotani & Hasegawa, 2011b).…”

Section: Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Yokotani (in press) sampled 329 Japanese college students and found that acknowledged kinship terms predicted participants' frequent communication and their satisfaction with father-child relationship. Dickey (1997) interviewed native speakers of English, German, Italian, Czech, Swiss, and Greek. He found that acknowledged kinship terms were used within acting parent-child relationships but not within stepparent-child relationships.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Acknowledged Spousal Forms of Address Predict Couple Communication Patterns

Yokotani

2013

PSYCHOLOGIA -An International Journal of Psychological Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How one spouse addresses the other spouse predicts their couple communication. The present study focuses on the spousal forms of address with acknowledgement and investigates the link between the forms of address and couple communication patterns. The pilot study sampled 161 university students in Japan and surveyed semantic differences of the spousal forms of address. The main study sampled 76 married women and 55 married men in Japan. They answered the communication patterns questionnaire and their daily forms of address. Results showed that arrogant meaning of husbands' forms of address for their wives was a significant negative predictor of mutual constructive communication and a significant positive predictor of mutual avoidance. On the other hand, wives' form of address for their husbands did not predict couple communication patterns. Husbands' arrogant forms of address with wives' acknowledgement might predict negative couple communication patterns.Key words: forms of address with acknowledgement; semantic differential method; communication patterns questionnaire; husbands' arrogant forms of address.How one spouse addressed the other spouse predicts their couple communication (Keltner, Young, Heerey, Oemig, & Monarch, 1998). Previous study defined forms of address as the words, titles, or names used in addressing someone and found the link between the forms of address and daily communication (Brown & Levinson, 1987;Brown & Gilman, 1960;McConnell-Ginet, 2003). The present study focused on one spouse's use of forms of address with the other's acknowledgement. The forms of address without the other's acknowledgement predict only one spouse's expectation of the daily communication, whereas the forms with the acknowledgement predict shared expectation of the communication between the one and the other spouses. Therefore, spousal forms with the acknowledgement would predict their daily couple communication.Many studies found that forms of address in long-term relationships predict daily communication between speaker and listener. For example, Brown and Gilman (1960) analyzed forms of address in Indo-European languages and found that lower ranking

show abstract

Section: Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Acknowledged Spousal Forms of Address Predict Couple Communication Patterns

Yokotani

2013

PSYCHOLOGIA -An International Journal of Psychological Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Braun also covers a wide variety of variables e.g., family members, addressing God, children, animals, neighbors, places of employment, university, which branches out from Brown and Gilman's concentration on power and solidarity. Dickey (1997) works with experimental data and focuses on the factors which influence the way one can be referred to stating "[the ways] are virtually infinite" (259). Her aim is to explain "how does the way that speaker A addresses B differ from the way that A refers to B, and what are the factors affecting this difference?"…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

T/V Pronouns in L2 Acquisition of Spanish

Sams

2015

IJLL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Many languages display a pronominal system in which there are both formal and informal forms to address others.In the L2 Spanish classroom, many English-speaking students unfamiliar with the T/V pronoun system (which is no longer present in English) often are only exposed to a generic set of rules (in the text and by the instructor) governing their usage. The system is a highly complex pragmatic phenomenon and can vary significantly based on factors such as dialect, familiarity, solidarity, emotion, and dispensation right. Lambert (1976) surveyed the phenomenon in Spanish and French and took into account familiarity, solidarity, and dispensation right. This study reports on a survey which tested the validity and reliability found in Lambert (1976) and furthered the study by examining the knowledge L2 Spanish students have about the use of the system of informal and formal pronouns and in addition to the parameters examined by Lambert, took dialect and emotion into account. The purpose of this study was to show that while a general rule governing T/V usage in L2 Spanish is sufficient to begin with, exposure to the natural language, explicit awareness of the phenomenon on the part of the instructor, and study abroad can all improve students' mastery of this pragmatic phenomenon. This information can be useful to language educators of all levels.

show abstract

“…Establishing and maintaining social relationships. Dickey (1997), same as Zwicky, compared vocative noun phrases and referential noun phrases. She focused on the status relationship between the interlocutors.…”

Section: Vocative Interjection and Honorificsmentioning

confidence: 99%