Analyisis of horison relation in conversation in the aspect of prâgmtics

Due to the differences in the cultures of different language communities, speech signals, and manners and gestures reflecting respect or deference, and friendliness and closeness or dist

I would also like to express my particular gratitude to Mr Ng« §×nh

Ph-¬ng (M.A.), who gave me enthusiastic encouragement and insightful criticism over the work, especially his reading of the work

My special thanks are also owned by Mrs Hång Minh and Mrs Thu Hµ who offered me quite a lot of references and advice

My thanks also go to my family and my friends who have been of great help to me, especially towards the end of the work

Last but not least, my thanks are also due to those who will give shortcomings and comments concerning this aspect of study

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Part I Introduction 4

1.Background 6

2.Aims of the study 7

3.Scope of the study 7

4.Methods of the study 8

5.Design of the study 8

Part II Investigation 10

Chapter 1 Theoretical preliminaries Brief overview on the theory of conversation. I Characteristics of a conversation

1 Internal characteristics

1.a Interaction 10

1.b Unity of turns 11

1.c Purpose 11

1.d The cooperative principle 12

2 External characteristics. 2.a Number of interlocutors 12

2.b Personal relation in conversation 13

II Politeness 13

III Types of social-personal relation 14

IV Differences in the concept of conversation between the Anglicists and the Asians 15

Chapter 2 Analysis of Horizontal relation

I Definition of Horizontal relation 1 Linguists' definition/conception of horizontal relation 18

2 The author's deeper view on the relation 18

II.Analysis of the relation 19

II.1.Speech signals reflecting horizontal relaion Address forms-a contrastive analysis in English and Vietnamese. 1.a Productiveness of “I” and “You.” 19

* Cultural differences 20

1.b First name 22

*Cultural differences 25

1.c Multiple names 29

1.d.Title + Last name 30

1.e Conversation topics 31

*Some remarks on the cultural differences in the Address forms 35

II.2.Gestures and manners reflecting the relation 37

2.a Conversational distance 38

2 2.b Handshake and eye-contact 40 2.c Facial expression 43

Chapter 3. Some questions made for the cultural differences drawn from the field of study 45

Part III Conclusion 54

References 56

It is common knowledge that language is the man’s most important means of communication considered a mirror reflecting the psychology, the customs and culture of each community and country as a whole In other words, people use language as a means to express their feelings, ideas and experiences The various ways of expressing things in different languages are confined to the culture through the way of speaking and behaving Hence culture of each language is inseparable from communication It is, therefore, crucial to pay attention to speech signals, and manners and gestures to know how people (interlocutors) communicate or interact with each other Only by doing in this way can we know something about their culture as well as the relationship between the speaker and the addressee

According to Kerbat-Orechioni, interpersonal relation in conversation is considered in the three aspects as follows:

-Horizontal relation.

-Vertical relation( also called power or status relation in society).

-Hierarchy relation in the family.

Of the three aspects above, Horizontal relation expressed by speech signals, and manners and gestures reflects personal relation most clearly Due to the differences in the cultures of different language communities, speech signals,

and manners and gestures reflecting respect or deference, and friendliness and closeness or distance in conversation (Horizontal relation) are therefore various,

Vietnamese and Anglicist (the English speaking countries’) cultures are also different because of different origins, different traditions and historical background, etc The cross-cultural differences in conversation between Vietnam

and Anglicist countries have, as a matter of fact, led to some differences in the usage of language and to misunderstanding

For these reasons, considering this aspect of study, we shall find it easy to explain the reasons for culture shocks so that we can rule out possibility of making pitiful ones

Up to now, the problems of analyzing one relation as a part of the 3 relations in conversation has not been studied much and systematically There appears, perhaps, to be only general studied and mentioned a little bit detailedly, such as "Mèi quan hÖ ngang" (NguyÔn §øc D©n- Ng÷ dông häc, tËp NXB Gi¸o dôc 2000); Saville-Troike's research on "solidarity relation in society" in "the Ethnography of communication: An introduction" While in communication, the Vietnamese students' understanding of Horizontal relation is still limited As what we eye-witnessed from the interaction between a native speaker and students, the students always stand quite far apart from the teacher, opening their mouth with words "Ms Jody"(American native speaker) or "teacher!" in a very polite way even in informal situation While the teacher attempts to be called by

"first name" or "last name" and to stand close to students with the aim of creating an open talk Some similar examples are the native speaker's talks to our teachers As a result, many students have confusion to reach the conclusion that

native speakers are pretentious or look down on them This might create culture shocks So in communication, Horizontal relation (degree of closeness, friendliness or distance; respect or deference) plays a crucial role in

establishing and maintaining relation in the process of an interaction That encouraged us to have great passion on choosing the topic " Analysis of Horizontal Relation in the Aspect of Pragmatics"

AIMS OF THE STUDY

On the basis of analyzing cultural differences in expressing speech

signals, we center on contrastive analysis of Vietnamese and English address forms, the most productive means of expressing personal social relation in conversation, and some manners and gestures in order to:

-Help learners and native speakers alike get more knowledge of behavioural culture of the Vietnamese and that of the Anglicists

- Help learners avoid false conception of the relation: the distinction

between closeness and distance, respect and deference in inter-cultural

communication

- Help learners avoid culture shocks

- Offer some gestures and manners reflecting Horizontal relation in communication

- Help interlocutors know some tacts of establishing and maintaining a conversation

SCOPE OF THE STUDY

- Studying some problems leading to false conception on closeness and distance, respect and deference (Horizontal relation) in conversation

- Studying some cultural differences in vocative using in the form of contrastive analysis

- Studying some common gestures and manners reflecting the relation

- Finding out some remarks drawn from the field of study

METHODS OF THE STUDY

In the course of the study, some techniques and methods employed to achieve the goals are:

3 Collecting and analyzing data.

4 Seeking advice on the subject.

5 Reviewing related literature:

References and natural conversations used in the course are faithfully

reported

DESIGN OF THE STUDY

The research's content is composed of 3 parts : introduction, content and conclusion.

In part one, the Introduction is presented with 5 items: background, aims of the study, scope of the study, methods of the study and design of the study

In part two, we subdivide it into 3 chapters, in Chapter 1, stating a brief overview on theoretical preliminaries of conversation, including characteristics

of a conversation, conversational formality, the cooperative principles, theory of politeness in conversation, types of interpersonal relation in conversation, and differences in the concept of conversation between the Asians and the Anglicists, etc in order to draw on premise for the analysis

In Chapter 2, focusing on analysis of the relation with regard to analyzing

speech signals, especially English and Vietnamese address forms, with the aim

of finding out cultural differences in behavioural culture, especially remarks on the cultural differences in the Address forms Some gestures and manners are also included in the chapter as a productive means to reflect Horizontal relation

Chapter 3 concentrates on some questions made for the cultural differences

drawn from the field of study

In part three, we state some interesting findings and come to some useful conclusion

PART TWO : INVESTIGATION

Brief overview on the theory of conversation

-Horizontal relation

-Vertical relation

-Agreement and controversy axis

They typically involve the relative status of the participants, based on social

values tied to such things as age and power For example, the speaker who sees himself as lower status in distance uses address forms that include a title and a last name , but not the first name (for example, Mr Hussein, professor Smith called vertical relation (also called status relation)

Unlike vertical relation, Horizontal relation is considered in a popular aspect, such as amount of imposition or degree of friendliness and closeness which are often negotiated during an interaction in conversation These are internal to the interaction and can result in the initial social distance changing They may result, for distance, in participants moving from a title plus last name to a first name or last name only

1.b Unity of turn

Most of the time, conversation consists of two, or more participants taking turns, and only one participant speaking at any time Smooth transition from one

speaker to the next seems to be avulsed Transitions with a long silence between turns or with substantial overlap (i.e both speakers trying to speak at the same time) are felt to be awkward Therefore, speech turns are not obviously identified, interlocutors take turns to speak automatically and naturally However, this is willingness to create united turns.

1.c Purpose

A conversation is always created with certain purposes, i.e each interlocutor has his own purpose in his interactional conversation For instance: if A interviews B, then A's purpose is to find out information, or to discover something, and B's is to answer all questions made by A most beneficially for his interest

Conversation topics and purposes may manifest explicitly or implicitly via utterances

Conversational purpose may also be external to one's utterance such as "small talk", speakers may initiate small talk with the aim of making friends, apologizing, or expressing sentiment to achieve another purpose, sometimes small talk can also be made for such other purposes as talking to entertain, to waste time, to chat etc

1.d The cooperative principle

Only when each interlocutor honors the cooperative principle does a conversation go on successfully

The cooperative principle:

Make your conversational contribution such as is required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged

The maxims.

Quantity:

- Make your contribution as informative as is required (for the current purposes

of the exchange)

-Do not make your contribution more informative than is required

Quality: Try to make your contribution one that is true.

- Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence

2.a Number of interlocutors

Any conversation has the certain number of people engaged to enable the talk exchange If there are 3 people engaged in conversation, then there maybe official conversation to comment, discuss, exchange ideas and sometimes reannounce some matter

The conversation in which more than 5 or 6 interlocutors talk at the same time about the same topic (polylogue) is also popular such as conversation at farewell parties, at birthday parties, wedding etc They may cheer, talking about the same topic at the same time

2.b Personal relation in conversation

The process of interacting may create interpersonal relation So personal relation is usually obviously unknown Among interlocutors, who do not know each other beforehand, meeting in a lounge at a railway station may talk about the same topic, not obviously known, to create relation.

If you say something that represents a threat to another person's self-image, that is called a face-threatening act For example, if you use a direct speech act to order somebody to do something (Give me that paper!), you are acting as if you have more social power than the other person (Power/status relation, also called vertical relation) IF you do not actually have that social power, then you are performing a face-threatening act An indirect act, in the form of a question (Could you pass me that paper, please? ), removes the assumption of social power You appear to be asking about ability This makes your request less threatening to the other person's sense of self Whenever you say something that lessens the possible threat to another's face, it is called a face-saving act You have both a negative face and a positive face Your negative face is the need to be independent and to have freedom

from imposition Your positive face is your need to be connected to belong to be a member of the group Thus, a face-saving act that emphasizes a person's negative face will show concern about imposition (I'm sorry to bother you ; I know you are…busy, but ) A face-saving act that emphasizes a person's positive face will show…solidarity and draw attention to a common goal (let's do this together ; you and I…have the same problem, so ) i.e., it reflects Horizontal relation.…

Ideas about the appropriate language to mark politeness differ substantially from one culture to the next If we have grown up in a culture that has directness as a valued way of showing solidarity (horizontal relation) and you use direct speech acts (give me a hand !) to people whose culture is more oriented to indirectness and avoiding direct imposition, then you will be considered impolite

For all the theoretical preliminaries, it's note worthy that understanding how people communicate is actually a process of interpreting not just what speakers say, but what they intend to mean This is paramount to recognize solidarity (friendliness and closeness), or distance, and respect or deference in conversation

III Types of social-personal relation

For participants who have fixed personal-social relation, this type of relation plays decisive part in making decision on the roles and forms of addressing in communication process The personal-social relation and the relation of role in communication are complex ones but all related to the 3 relations as follows:

- Solidarity relation in society (also called horizontal one)

- Power or status relation in society

- Hierarchy relation in the family

We go briefly into the two last relations, the first is all the content concerned

of the study

* Power or status relation in society:

This is the relation of social address making lower or upper position that is classified, accordingly characterized, by power factors and distance unlike hierarchy

in the family, power relation has relative characteristics

Simultaneously, between the two people, A may have a higher status than B in one aspect but in another one B is higher Let's take the following example In administrative term, A is the chief of B (member of staff), but in academic term (for degree/title), B is a doctor, A is a Master of Arts (post-graduate student of B) Therefore, the relation of status must change Status relation depends on social factors like social position, gender and age These factors are connected in individual relation, so there are a number of embarrassing situations which force addresser and addressee to use a communicative strategy, an addressing strategy, in order to make it effective and flexible For example, in term of age, X is order than Y but in term of social position, Y is the chief of X Consequently, for a normal way of addressing, X may call Y "em" and address himself "anh" but in administrative communication

IV Differences in the concept of conversation between the Anglicists and the Asians

When the Anglicists hold a conversation, it seems like they are having a ping pong game (NguyÔn Quang-Intercultural communication, p.43) This means one

person has the ball and then hits it to the other side of the table The other player hits the ball back and the game continues If one person does not return the ball, then the game stops Each part of the conversation follows this pattern: the greeting and the opening, the discussion of a topic, and the closing One impatient feels that the other

is monopolizing the conversation Similarly, if one person does not say enough or ask enough questions to keep the conversation moving, the conversation stops

Many Anglicists are impatient with culturally different conversation styles simply because the styles are unfamiliar For example, to many of them, it seems that some Latin Americans monopolize conversations, or hold the ball too long When one talks with them, she or he might become tense, find it so hard to participate It’s because they seem to take such a long time to express themselves, they may give you a lot of unnecessary details and in return, you just can’t get a word in edgewise Yet make sure that when they talk to each other, nobody seemed

uncomfortable or left out.( Esther Wanning, Culture Shock USA- Graphic center

“pulling teeth” in conversations

The Anglicist who is used to the “ping- pong” style of communication is probably going to have some difficulty with someone whose conversational style is like a bowling game According to some Japanese, the Americans ask too many

questions and do not give the other person enough time to formulate a careful answer The Anglicists are, however, not doing anything “wrong” or insensitive on purpose The Japanese feel that the Anglicists are pushy and overly inquisitive because of the difference in cultural conditioning.

To many Anglicists, the Asian speakers, especially the Vietnamese, the Chinese, the Japanese, appear passive and uninterested in the conversation Their style takes too long for the average Anglicist Asian people are not doing anything

“wrong” and are not less interested in conversation Each person has misjudged the other because neither is familiar with their culturally different conversational styles Conversely, to many people having “high involvement” style of communication, the Anglicist does not seem pushy and inquisitive From their view point, he seems more passive

Chapter 2: Analysis of Horizontal relation

I Linguists' definition of the relation:

1 Horizontal relation is one which reflects amount of imposition or degree of friendliness and closeness, which are often negotiated during an interaction These are internal to the interaction and can result in the initial social distance changing

and being marked as less, or more, during its course (Kerbrat-Orechioni:

Interaction, page 153)

2 Quan hệ ngang là kiểu quan hệ trong tơng tác hội thoại ở đó các cá nhân thể hiện ngữ nghĩa đoàn kết hay nói cách khác là tỏ ra thân mật, gần gũi Mối quan hệ này đợc đặc trng bằng yếu tố khoảng cách, có thể thay đổi, điều chỉnh trong quá

trình tơng tác (Nguyễn Đức Dân: Ngữ dụng học, tập 1-NXB Giáo dục 2000)

* Deep view on the definition:

From the two definitions above, we can understand that Horizontal relation is typical one in interactional conversation in which each interlocutor express their

friendliness and closeness It is characterized by the so-called "distance", which

can be changed during an interaction: from distance to closeness (being marked less during its course), from respect to despite (being marked more during its course) and vice versa

II Signals reflecting Horizontal relation:

II.1.Speech signals :

Address form- a contrastive analysis:

1.a Productiveness of I and You “ ” “ ”

How you address a person is considered important and shows how the level of respect and friendship between the two parties Vietnamese culture accords people

different status levels, and how they are addressed reflects this If you are doubtful over how should address a person, it is better to adopt a more formal form of address rather than an informal one Always treat older people or those in higher positions of authority with respect and deference, and greet them before the others in group.

In conversation, Horizontal relation is clearly reflected by vocatives In other

words, degree of distance or closeness and friendliness ; degree of respect or despite

of the persons engaged in conversation is clearly reflected by vocatives In many languages, there are series of word pairs reflecting the relation between the speaker and the hearer in the conversation However, in English only one word pair (I-you) is used and it is considered a good way to create distance between interlocutors Because participants in conversation simply use the vocative “I” and “you” to communicate without distinction in age, sex, social status (of course, other forms of vocatives in English are also widely used, in stead of “I” and “you”) Unlike the vocatives of the English language, those of Vietnamese used to express the relationship between the speaker and the hearer in conversation has various different shades of meaning as follows :

tao mµy

«ng : to an older or important man( grand father)

anh: to a younger man( brother, husband)

chó: to a man younger than your father but old than you ( uncle)

bµ; to an older or important woman( grand mother)

chÞ: to an old woman( sister)

c«: to a younger woman( aunt)

em: to a child, male or female ; someone subordinate to you ; or someone close, such

as a husband(wife) or very good friend

b¹n- cËu : to a friend of your age

m×nh- tí: ( the speaker) to a friend of your age.

This addressing system is called kinship terms In some certain contexts, each

form of vocative used by interlocutors expresses different attitude and sentiment It

might be a respect or deference, and distance or closeness and friendliness.

According to folklore, all Vietnamese are related to each other and this belief is reinforced by their language Every form of address is based on a family relationship, such as uncle, aunt or little sister

The following examples help see how different the vocative of English is from that of Vietnamese

-Brother :Where do you know Mum is ? -Anh trai : Em cã biÕt mÑ ®©u kh«ng

I want to ask her for some money Anh muèn hái mÑ xin Ýt tiÒn.-Younger sister : You are always asking -Em g¸i : Lóc nµo anh còng xin

her for money.Waste quite a lot ! tiền mẹ Hoang phí vừa thôi !

-Brother :You, close your mouth -Anh trai : Mày câm mồm đi

-Sister: I keep saying that You, do not -Em gái : Tôi cứ nói đấy Ông

Indeed, family relationship whose vocatives seem formal should be obeyed, but

in the example above, it is flouted It here means that the change in personal relation

is changed from high rank to low rank and finally to Horizontal relation, for family relationship, it might be a deference and impoliteness, because the attitude and sentiment is clearly reflected by the vocatives and in Vietnamese, the form carries with it different meanings This is the diversity of shades of meaning in vocatives of the Vietnamese language

However, for social relationship The vocatives (I = mày, tao) is widely used in Vietnam and some other English speaking countries and it is seen as close and friendly relationship between interlocutors, especially colleagues or friends at work, etc

1.b First name.

Apart from the vocatives pair (I- you), the English language has many other forms of vocatives whose use for attitude and sentiment expression is complicated However, basically speaking, addressing system in English takes the forms as follows :

-Title alone : professor, Dr, Sir, Madam

-Title with last name :Mr Smith

-First name : John , Mary

Some other titles.

Dr (Doctor): Medical doctors (those with an M.D degree), professor, scientists and

Mrs.: Married women only( some married women prefer Ms.)

Miss: Unmarried women only( some unmarried women prefer Ms.).

Ms : Married or unmarried women.

Mr Married or unmarried men.

Professor: College or university teachers( used with or without the last name).

Teacher: as a form of address only used by children

In the aspect of Horizontal relation analysis, special attention should be paid

to the vocative “first name”

Wardhaugh, when doing research on addressing system in American English,

pointed out that “interlocutors always use first name to express their closeness and

friendliness and the use for that purpose also spreads to the situation in which the two persons engaded in conversation agree that they have interest in common,

meaning “solidarity”.

Indeed, the Americans in particular and the Anglicists generally in modern

times tend to use first name only to express their friendliness and closeness without

any distinction in social status and age

For example

Employee : How was your visit to Dawoo, Johnson ?

(chuyÕn th¨m tËp ®oµn Dawoo thÕ nµo, Johnson ?)

Boss : Good !Tom (Tèt ! Tom ¹)

However, to Vietnamese people, the vocative, exactly the same as the situation

above, is unacceptable because Vietnamese people attach much importance to social status and age This is the reason leading to quite a lot of culture shocks in Vietnam-

America cross-cultural settings As a matter of fact that an American can call his

President with first name, and even on mass media President can be called “first name” While in Vietnam, we can not call Prime Minister Phan Văn Khải [Khải].

As we said above, the addressing system of Vietnamese is different from that

of English and each form of vocative is closely related to a different shade of meaning via which interlocutors express their closeness or distance and respect or deference First name, to the Anglicists, is widely used and is not thought of as distance in social status or power and even in age Conversely, the utterance sounds friendly and close

For example,

-Son in law : Wilson, out for a drink ?

-Father in law : Yeah ! Great !

Only in formal situations, he calls his wife’s father with title “Mr.” (Mr Wilson)

(Nguyễn Quang, Hình thức xng hô trong tiếng Anh-Mỹ, page 6 )

In Vietnam, surely, we never hear such an utterance, if true, it is extremely unacceptable

-Con rể : Sơn, đi uống rợu đi ?

-Bố vợ : A! Hay đấy !

Normally, Son in law is never allowed to call his wife’s father by first name,

and those who are considered “father figures” (bậc cha chú) and called by first

name feel very angry and annoyed

Similarly, the following examples given to illustrate the difference in forms of vocatives between American English and Vietnamese also tell how important AGE

is to Vietnamese people

-Accountant ( 50 years old ) : Hello, my name is Bob Thomas

(Xin chào, tôi tên là Bob Thomas )

(Vui mừng đợc gặp ông, tha ông Thomas) -Accountant : Please, just call me Bob

(Xin cứ gọi tôi là Bob)

(Source: Levine and Adehmain,1982, page 24)

With the same situation, in Vietnamese, the vocative is quite different

-Ngời kế toán (50 tuổi) :Xin mời vào Tôi là Thành

-Sinh viên (20 tuổi ) : Cháu chào bác (Thành ) ạ

-Ngời kế toán : Khách sáo làm gì; cứ gọi mình là anh cho thân mật

(Nguyễn Quang, Hình thức xng hô trong Anh-Mỹ, trang 5 ).

Often when there is a difference in a status or age between two individuals, formal titles and last names are used unless the person of lower status is told to use the first name

In many cases where respect is really in need, Vietnamese people usually use honorifics ( tôn ngôn) such as “ạ, dạ, th a ”

Normally, when Vietnamese people want to express their closeness and friendliness to the interlocutors, they use one of the three following cases :

-Moving the vocative from title to kinship terms above ego“ ”

ex : thủ trởng chú, anh

-Moving from high rank kinship to low rank kinship

(see the example on page 24)

-Moving from Horizontal type II to type I.

ex: tôi - chị/anh mình/tớ – cậu

On the contrary, the Anglicists usually use the address form title + last name

to create distance and formality in formal situation, and in informal situation they

use first name to address each other without distinction in age, sex, and status to

create closeness and friendliness in communication

Some exceptions might be created by the Vietnamese who use the English language, but the utterance is made in some certain contexts

For example,

(I) Could you please look at my (I) Thầy có thể xem bài tập hộ em

homework, John ? đợc không tha thầy John ?

(II) John, I need your help to do my (II) John, tớ nhờ cậu làm bài tập hộ

homework I’m so tired tớ nhé Tớ mệt quá.

(III) I’m not relatives with you, John (III) Tao không anh em gì với mày

It’s bad of you cả, John ạ Mày thật tồi

The way in which you call someone in accordance with their first name, surname, proper name, nick name or full name also expresses Horizontal relation or respect and deference.

For example, the way you call your teacher such as John, my beloved teacher,

John Armire or Mr John has various shades of meaning Supposing that you were John’s pupil, the way you call your teacher John seems friendly and close because the teacher is funny and friendly, and is always on good terms with his pupils, so the example (I) still remains OK but it can be understood differently if the pupil shows his despite towards John Here we mean that the Horizontal relation can be identified

"teacher" as Vietnamese students do Only young children call their teacher like

that

In Vietnam, it's very rude if students call their teachers by first names, so they

tend to use the title + honorifics like "tha c«, thÇy!" without first name So in many

cases, teachers feel very annoyed indeed if they are called by first name

On the contrary, if you call a classmate “Mr Meeting” in this case, the speaker might not show his respect even though the title “Mr.” is included, but the speaker

wants to hint that the classmate attends quite a lot of meetings but does not spend much time on study.

Some other example of this case are as follows:

Normally, Vietnamese students who do not know forms of addressing the Anglicists address the teacher and introduce themselves as they would in their own culture The following interaction shows the students address the teacher and introduce themselves as Anglicists students would This interaction does not show wrong way of communicating, it shows culturally different ways

Rose Arno : “I would like to introduce myself My name is Rose Arno If

you want, you can use Mrs or Ms with my name”

Naima Moud : “Mrs Arno how do you spell your name?”

Rose Arno : “ A-R-N-O Now I’d like you to give your name Let’s start

with the first person in the front row”

Yoshi Imada : “My name is Yoshi Imada”.

Rose Arno : Imada, could you also give us your last name?

Rose Arno : Thank you Let’s continue with the second student “What is

your name?”

Nguyen Binh : “My name is Nguyen Binh and people call me Binh That’s my

name, not my family name”

Rose Arno : “O.K Binh”.

(The teacher continues asking the students to introduce themselves) ( The example taken from Nguyen Quang s research on Intercultural ’

Communication)

Indeed, it isn’t always easy to change one’s way of addressing people For some people, it can take years In the US, one of the most difficult things for many

newcomers to do is to use people’s first names As in the above example, the Vietnamese student will surely find it extremely difficult to call his teacher by his first name for the first introduction.

Some cross-cultural notes on this form of address

- Often Anglicist people call each other by their first names while in other countries people use last names For instance, many American employees call their bosses (supervisors or managers) by their first names This is not considered rude Many bosses prefer this Even though they are in higher position than the employees, bosses sometimes want to be treated as equal

- In Japan, co-workers or classmates do not usually call each other by their first names They use the last name followed by a title “San”

- In North Africa, men often call each other “Mister”(As-sa-id) with the first name Sometimes when Americans are in North Africa, they are addressed in this way, for example, “Mister Michael” This is often the case in Vietnam

1.c Multiple names.

Horizontal relation is also clearly reflected by the vocative “multiple name” Multiple name is a form of vocative used to refer to an object in conversation to express closeness and friendliness, the interlocutor can call his partner either with

title plus last name or with first name / last name or nick name Sometimes interlocutors create phonetic variants either in first name or in nick name.

For example :

X has a close friend named NguyÔn TiÕn Sometimes X calls “anh TiÕn”,

“TiÕn”, sometimes “TiÕn Tïng”, “TiÕn Cß”, “TiÕn S¾c”, etc

However, this addressing type, in English, only takes two forms :first name and title plus last name