Deference Indices

Deference indices encode deference from one interlocutor to another (usually representing inequalities of status, rank, age, sex, etc.) [9]. Some examples of deference indices are:

• T/V Deference Entitlement

The T/V deference entitlement system of European languages was famously detailed by linguists Brown and Gilman [2]. As previously mentioned, T/V deference entitlement is a system by which a speaker/addressee speech event will lead to perceived disparities of ‘power’ and ‘solidarity’ between interlocutors.

T-forms are used in systems where the speaker is

1) superior and solidary,

2) equal and solidary, and

3) inferior and solidary to his addressee.

V-forms are used when the speaker perceives themselves to be

1. superior and not solidary,

2. equal and not solidary, and

3. inferior and not solidary.

Silverstein comments that while exhibiting a basic level of first-order indexicality, the T/V system also employs second-order indexicality vis-à-vis 'enregistered honorification' [8]. He cites that the V-form can also function as an index of valued “public” register and the standards of good behavior that are entailed by use of V-forms over T-forms in public contexts. Therefore, people will use T/V deference entailment in

1) a first-order indexical sense that distinguishes between speaker/addressee interpersonal values of ‘power’ and ‘solidarity’ and

2) a second-order indexical sense that indexes an interlocutor’s inherent “honor” or social merit in employing V- forms over T-forms in public contexts.

In sociolinguistics, a T-V distinction describes the situation wherein a language has second-person pronouns that distinguish varying levels of politeness, social distance, courtesy, familiarity, or insult toward the addressee.

History and Usage

The expressions T-form (informal) and V-form (formal) were introduced by Brown and Gilman, with reference to the initial letters of these pronouns in Latin, tu and vos. In Latin, tu was originally the singular, and vos the plural, with no distinction for honorific or familiar. According to Brown and Gilman, usage of the plural to the Roman emperor began in the fourth century AD. They mention the possibility that this was because there were often two or more emperors at that time as augusti, caesars and other titles, and later separate rulers in Constantinople and Rome, but also that "plurality is a very old and ubiquitous metaphor for power". This usage was extended to other powerful figures, such as Pope Gregory I (590-604). However, Brown and Gilman note that it was only between the twelfth and fourteenth centuries that the norms for the use of T- and V-forms crystallized. Less commonly, the use of the plural may be extended to other persons, such as the "royal we" (majestic plural) in English.

Brown and Gilman argued that the choice of form is governed by either relationships of 'power' and/or 'solidarity', depending on the culture of the speakers, showing that 'power' had been the dominant predictor of form in Europe until the twentieth century. Thus, it was quite normal for a powerful person to use a T-form but expect a V-form in return. However in the twentieth century the dynamic shifted in favour of solidarity, so that people would use T-forms with those they knew, and V-forms in service encounters, with reciprocal usage being the norm in both cases.

One other use of the distinction that occurs in some languages is the expression of "mock respect", essentially a humorous way of expressing disapproval, by the use of the formal form to address people with whom one would not normally use it, such as children or close friends.

Modern English has no T-V distinction, except in dialects and the retention of thou etc. in traditional prayers addressed to God. It can often be confusing for an English speaker learning a language with a T-V distinction to assimilate the rules surrounding when to call someone with the formal or the informal pronoun. Students are often advised to err on the side of caution by using the formal pronouns. However, this risks sounding snobbish or ridiculous.

Though English has no syntactic T-V distinction, there are semantic analogues, such as whether to address someone by first name or last name (or using sir and ma'am). However the boundaries between formal and informal language differ from language to language, and most languages use formal speech more frequently, and/or in different circumstances than English. In some circumstances, it is not unusual to call other people by first name and the respectful form, or last name and familiar form. For example, German teachers use the former construct with upper-secondary students, while Italian teachers typically use the latter (switching to a full V-form with university students). This can lead to constructions denoting an intermediate level of formality in T-V-distinct languages that sound awkward to English-speakers. For example, the catchphrase of "Be careful, Michael" from Knight Rider was usually dubbed "Seien Sie vorsichtig, Michael" in German, implying both formality (use of Sie) and familiarity (use of first name).

The use of these forms calls for compensating translation of dialogue into English. For example, a character in a French film or novel saying "Tutoie-moi!" ("Use [the informal pronoun] tu when addressing me!") might be translated "Do not be so formal!"

Examples of T-V Distinctions

In many languages, the formal singular pronoun derives from a plural form. Some Romance languages have familiar forms derived from the Latin singular tu and formal forms derived from Latin plural vos, sometimes via a circuitous route. Sometimes, singular V-form derives from a third person pronoun. Some languages have separate T- and V-forms for both singular and plural; others have the same form; others have a T-V distinction only in the singular.

Different languages distinguish pronoun uses in different ways. Even within languages, there are differences between groups (older people and people of higher status tending both to use and to expect more formal language) and between various aspects of one language. For example, in Dutch, u is slowly falling into disuse in the plural, and thus one could sometimes address a group as jullie (which clearly expresses the plural) when one would address each member individually as u (which has the disadvantage of being ambiguous). In Latin American Spanish, the opposite change has occurred – having lost vosotros, Latin Americans address all groups as ustedes, even if the group is composed of friends whom they would call tú or vos (mostly in Argentina and Uruguay). In Standard Peninsular Spanish, however, vosotros is still regularly employed in familiar conversation. In some cases, V-forms are likely to be capitalized when written.

Anglo-Saxon (Old English) had no distinction between formal and informal "you". In the 13^th century, the term "ye" was used as a formal version of "thou" (to superiors or non-intimates) — however, this use was often contextually-dependent (i.e., changing dynamically according to shifting nuances in the relationship between two people), rather than static. By the 17th century, "thou" increasingly acquired connotations of contemptuous address, or of addressing one's social inferiors (so the prosecutor in Sir Walter Raleigh's 1603 trial declaimed "I thou thee, thou traitor!"). Therefore, the frequency of use of "thou" started to decline, and it was effectively extinct in the everyday speech of many dialects by the early 18th century. The Quakers could still cause huge offence by addressing all individuals as "thou" for religious reasons (and refusing to remove hats or bow). Its use is now archaic except in certain regional dialects, usually as "tha", and Modern English today makes no T-V distinction.

The use of the term "thou", however, survives in some Christian liturgical language when addressing God, most notably in popular translations of the Lord's Prayer and the Ten Commandments. It is also found in liturgical dialogue (for example, "The Lord be with you. And with thy spirit"). This is not an indication of familiarity but retention of the original distinction between singular "thou/thee/thy" and plural "ye/you/your", reflecting the corresponding singular and plural Greek forms in the original texts.

In Latter-day Saint prayer tradition, the terms "thee" and "thou" are often used to address God as a mark of respect.

Originally "ye" and "thou" were nominative pronouns, while "you" and "thee" were accusative forms, but by the 15th century, "you" had started being used as a subject pronoun, and only "thee" survived into Quaker "Plain Speech".

• Honorifics

An honorific (sometimes honorable) is a word or expression that conveys esteem or respect when used in addressing or referring to a person. Sometimes the term is used not quite correctly to refer to a title of honor (honorary title). It is also often conflated with systems of honorific speech in linguistics, which are grammatical or morphological ways of encoding the relative social status of speakers.

Typically honorifics are used for second and third persons; use for first person is less common. Some languages have anti-honorific or despective first person forms (meaning something like "your most humble servant" or "this unworthy person") whose effect is to enhance the relative honor accorded a second or third person.

Modern English Honorifics

The most common honorifics in modern English are usually placed immediately before the name of the subject. Honorifics which can be used of any adult of the appropriate sex include "Mr", "Mrs", "Miss", and "Ms". Other honorifics denote the honored person’s occupation, for instance "Doctor", "Coach", Officer, "Father" (for a priest), or "Professor". Abbreviations of academic degrees, used after a person's name, may also be seen as a kind of honorific (e.g. "Jane Doe, Ph.D.")

Some honorifics act as complete replacements for a name, as "Sir" or "Ma'am", or "Your Honour". Subordinates will often use honorifics as punctuation before asking a superior a question or after responding to an order: "Yes, Sir" or even "Sir, yes Sir."

A judge is addressed as "Your Honour" when on the bench, and may be referred to as "His/Her Honour"; the plural form would be "Your Honours". Similarly, a monarch (ranking as a king or emperor) and his consort may be addressed or referred to as "Your/His/Her Majesty", "Their Majesties", etc. (but there is no customary honorific accorded to a female monarch's consort, as he is usually granted a specific style). Monarchs below kingly rank are addressed as "Your/His/Her Highness", the exact rank being indicated by an appropriate modifier, e.g. "His Serene Highness" for a member of a princely dynasty, or "Her Grandducal Highness" for a member of a family that reigns over a grand duchy. Verbs with these honorifics as subject are conjugated in the third person (e.g. "you are going" vs. "Your Honour is going" or "Her Royal Highness is going").

Opposition

People who have a strong sense of egalitarianism, such as Quakers and certain socialists, eschew honorific titles. When addressing or referring to someone, they will use the person's name, an informal pronoun, or some other style implying social equality, such as "brother", "friend", or "comrade". This was also the practice in Revolutionary France which used Citoyen (Citizen) as the manner of address.

Japanese Honorifics

Japanese honorifics (called KeiSyou) are similar to English titles like "Mister" and "Miss". "Kimi" (君), "ﾞTono" (殿), "Kata" (方), "Uhe" (上), "Phime" (姫), etc. It takes KeiSyou after his/her name. For example, (TennOu) "HeiKa", (Royal family) "DenKa". In Japanese, which has many honorifics, their use is mandatory in many formal and informal social situations. Japanese grammar as a whole tends to function on hierarchy — honorific stems are appended to verbs and some nouns, and in many cases one word may be exchanged for another word entirely with the same verb- or noun-meaning, but with different honorific connotations. The Japanese personal pronouns are a good example of the honorific hierarchy of the Japanese language — there are five or more words that correspond to each of the English words, "I" and "you".

Japanese provides an excellent case study of honorifics. Honorifics in Japanese can be divided into two categories:

• addressee honorifics, which index deference to the addressee of the utterance;

• referent honorifics, which index deference to the referent of the utterance.

Cynthia Dunn claims that “almost every utterance in Japanese requires a choice between direct and distal forms of the predicate” [4]. The direct form indexes intimacy and “spontaneous self-expression” in contexts involving family and close friends. Contrarily, distal form index social contexts of a more formal, public nature such as distant acquaintances, business settings, or other formal settings.

Japanese also contains a set of humble forms (Japanese kenijyoogo) which are employed by the speaker to index their deference to someone else. There are also suppletive forms that can be used in lieu of regular honorific endings (for example, the subject honorific form of taberu [to eat]: meshiagaru). Verbs that involve human subjects must choose between distal or direct forms (towards the addressee) as well as distinguish between either no use of referant honorifics, use of subject honorific (for others), or use of humble form (for self). The Japanese model for non-referential indexicality demonstrates a very subtle and complicated system that encodes social context into almost every utterance.