Sociolinguistic Analysis of Address Usage in General Educational Institutions in Latvia

202 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 82 ANDA BLŪMANE Liepāja Uni e si y, La ia SOCIOLINGUISTIC ANALYSIS OF ADDRESS USAGE IN GENERAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS IN LATVIA The add ess is o g ea impo ance in e e y pe son’s communica ion. I e- e s o communica ion be ween s uden s, eache s and school adminis a- ion. Thei communica ion would be di icul wi hou a ious add ess o ms. Thei success ul choice in luences u he communica ion and mu- ual unde s anding. The e y i s wo ds we say o o he s show ou a i ude. Mo e o en han no hese a e he wo ds we add ess hem by o a ac hei a en ion, o make hem lis en o us o ac in some way. Ve y o en he e y i s wo ds de e mine people’s u he ela ions and s a o he e alua ion o he add esse . The i s wo ds a eache says o his/he s uden s a e es- sen ial, o hey exe in luence on u he in e ac ion in classes. The add ess canno be esea ched in i s linguis ic aspec alone. I has o be s udied in ela ion wi h a eas o esea ch like psychology, e hnolinguis- ics, educa ion, e hics, sociology, and semio ics. Discou se analysis is also o g ea impo ance o esea ching he add ess. Explo ing single ph ases o sen ences does no o e a holis ic pe spec i e on he communica ion, pa - ne s’ ela ions o on he signi icance o such social ac o s as social dis ance and age in he use o he add ess. As ea ly as 1958, wo publica ions iden i- ied a new s age in s udying discou se. One o hem was R. B own and A. Gilman’s a icle The P onouns o Powe and Solida i y which laid he heo e ical basis o he p esen in es iga ion o a g ea ex en (B auns, Gil- mans 2003: 124–147). The analysis o spon aneous speech is i al o s udying speech e hno- g aphy. The p esen a icle is based on esea ch conduc ed in nume ous schools in La ia. The au ho is a eache he sel and can make di ec and sha ed unbiased obse a ions on e e yday communica ion among s uden s, eache s and school adminis a ion. A. BLŪMANE. Sociolinguis ic analysis o add ess usage in gene al educa ional ins i u ions in La ia 203 The aim o he p esen a icle is o s udy he di e si y o add ess o ms in school wi h a ocus on he adi ional add ess o ms ha ha e been passed om gene a ion o gene a ion as well as hose which can be conside ed in- no a i e o he language. The a icle also analyses symme y and asymme- y o add ess o ms be ween di e en le el language use s a school. The esea ch is based on ques ionnai es comple ed by 718 s uden s, 125 eache s ep esen ing 11 schools and 48 school p incipals om 48 o he schools. S uden s and eache s om all egions o La ia ha e been ques- ioned. The majo i y o he s uden s li e in owns and ci ies (562), only 153 li e in he coun yside. The s uden s’ ques ionnai es we e g ouped acco d- ing o he age o he esponden s. One g oup included he 10–14 age span and he o he 15–19 (see Figu e 1). FIGURE 1. The numbe o su eyed s uden s acco ding o hei age REVIEW OF ADDRESS MODELS USED IN LATVIA IN THE PAST The mode o add essing people and add ess o ms e lec he ime we li e in, ou na ional adi ions and cul u e, he cha ac e is ic ea u es o ou e h- nos. Wo ld languages show di e en s a egies o es ablishing poli e and Age 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 3 19 49 82 89 57 100 119 50 41 1 2 Yea s o age Numbe 130 204 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 82 espec ul ela ions. Schola s explo ing languages ha e concluded ha na- ions ha e bo h simila i ies and di e ences in he usage o add ess o ms (B aun 1988; B auns, Gilmans 2003; E ina-T ipa 2003). E e y na ion has i s own pa icula add ess models o his o ical o igin, al hough in he cou se o ime hey can be modi ied. One o he ea u es o any add ess sys em is he possibili y o inhe i i by e e y new gene a ion. The Ame ican linguis E. Sapi closely ocused on he links be ween lan- guage, on he one hand, and social ac o s and cul u e, on he o he . The essence o Sapi -Who hypo hesis is ha language de e mines no ms o hinking and beha iou . E e y language moulds i s own speci ic unde - s anding o eali y o i s speake s (Sepī s 1999: 87). Also R. B own and A. Gilman ha e examined he use o he pe sonal p onouns hou and you in di e en coun ies and ha e come o a conclusion ha he seman ics o he p onouns and hei s ylis ic usage a e de e mined by he language hey a e used in (B auns, Gilmans 2003). I is highly plausible ha he use o diminu i es (Peļuks, Lāčuks, Saldumiņš, Mīļums, Smiekliņš, Pekucī is, Gundiņ, Jānī , Pauliņ) in communi- ca ion be ween s uden s and eache s as well as using names o animals, bi ds, plan s, and ees (B iedis, Lapsa, Gliemezis, Žubī e, Ciela a, Gulbis) as nicknames in s uden s’ communica ion a e ela ed o old adi ions o he La ian na ion in language usage. The s uden s’ nicknames we e analyzed in mo e de ail in he a icle A Nickname o E e y S uden ? (Blūmane 2008). As nume ous o he na ions ha e always li ed on he e i o y o La ia, hei cul u es ha e le aces in he usage o he La ian language and add ess o ms, oo. This is why i is di icul o isola e he ea u es o add ess usage cha ac e is ic o he La ian e hnos om he bo owings om o he e h- noses. The poin o e e ence could be olklo e. Nowadays La ian olklo e ma e ials a e he sou ce o econs uc ing e hnical adi ions in he usage o add ess o ms and hei adi ions. Changes in he his o ical and poli ical si ua ion in La ia ha e also in lu- enced he usage o add ess o ms. The e is a g ea di e ence, o ins ance, in he choice o add ess o ms a he end o he 19 h cen u y when he use o i les was widesp ead be ween social classes and hose used in he 20s and 30s o he 20 h cen u y when La ia was an independen coun y. He e a e a ew examples o add esses in le e s w i en in 1899: Viņa Augs ībai kņazam / i s am / he cogam N. N. (‘ o His Highness G and Duke / P ince / Coun N. N.’); Viņas Augs ībai kņazienei / i s ienei / he cogienei (‘ o He Highness A. BLŪMANE. Sociolinguis ic analysis o add ess usage in gene al educa ional ins i u ions in La ia 205 G and Duchess / P incess / Coun ess’); G ā iem, ba oniem un on kungiem (muižniekiem) (‘ o Coun s, Ba ons and on Gen lemen (coun y noble- men)’); Viņa Godībai g ā am (‘ o Honou able Coun ’); Augs dzimušam un dižcil īgam ba onam N. N. kungam (‘ o Highly Bo n and Noble Ba on M N. N.’); Augs igodājamai dižcil īgai ba onie ei on N. N. kundzei (‘ o High- ly Honou able Noble Ba oness on N. N.’); Augs igodāmajam ba ona on N. N. lielkungam / lielmā ei (‘ o Highly Honou able Ba on on N. N. Lo d o he Mano / Ba oness on N. N. Lady o he Mano ’). The mos cha ac- e is ic add ess o ms in he 20s and 30s o he 20 h cen u y we e kungs / kundze (‘si /madam’). People we e also add essed by he name o hei a m because e y o en bo h he a m and i s owne had he same name. The add ess o ms used in he 40s o he end o he 80s o he 20 h cen u y (bie- d s (‘com ade’), bied i (‘com ades’), pilsonis (‘ci izen’), pilsoņi (‘ci izens’)) di e g ea ly om hose used a he beginning o he 21s cen u y when he in luence o English is pa icula ly ma ked in he way young people use ad- d ess o ms. In So ie imes in La ia he e was one add ess o m he au- ho i ies had dec eed: bied i, bied e (‘com ade’ – bo h masculine and emi- nine) which was used alone o oge he wi h he pe son’s i s name, su - name, p o essional o hono a y i le (Blinkena 1968: 4). The wo d kungs (‘si ’), he same as he Li huanian wo d ponas we e o ced ou o o icial communica ion. They we e eplaced by he wo d com ade–d augas in Li huanian and bied s in La ian. Recen esea ch has shown ha he wo d kungs in La ian is used much mo e o en han ponas in Li huanian (K ašī e, Čepai iene, Župe ka 2003: 11). When analyzing he ques ionnai es com- ple ed by eache s and school p incipals, we can main ain ha such o ms o add ess, like bied i, bied e, pilsonis, pilsone, a e no used any mo e. Ad- d ess o ms used in La ia in he 20s and 30s like su name + kungs, su name + kundze a e gaining in popula i y. So he poli ical sys em lea es i s aces in he usage o add ess o ms. Howe e , he e a e no s ic bo de lines be ween he wo abo e-men ioned pe iods, hough he main endencies in add ess usage in hose pe iods can s ill be aced. Taking in o conside a ion he abo e condi ions, we can p e- dic he add ess o ms and hei models used in school nowadays. School is an in e es ing en i onmen o esea ch because his is a place whe e ancien language adi ions me ge wi h inno a ions. Olde adi ions in he La ian language include he di e se use o diminu i es bo h in e ms o hei lexical meaning and hei o m by all age g oups, also by s uden s, 206 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 82 as well as he use o he p o essional i le skolo āj ( eache ) and di ec o (p incipal) which his o ically we e used as he add ess o ms skolmeis a a kungs / kundze (‘M Schoolmas e /M s Schoolmis ess’). The use o he p onoun Jūs (‘you’) has also long-las ing language adi ions in La ian. P o esso And ejs Veisbe gs o he Uni e si y o La ia conside s ha u (‘ hou’) and jūs (‘you’) a e aluable in ou language because hey allow us o exp ess shades o meaning. We can show ou emo ions by using u o jūs, we can humilia e o honou he pe son we communica e wi h. Language is e y sub le. I hese o ms did no ha e any meaning, language would d op hem (Puķe 2000: 15). USE OF THE PRONOUNS TU AND JŪS IN THE LATVIAN LANGUAGE As an inno a ion in he La ian language, we could men ion he expansion o he use o he p onoun u in si ua ions whe e he espec ul and e e en- ial add ess o m Jūs was used a ew decades ago. Younge language use s choose o add ess hei eache s o class eache s by he p onoun u. Fluc- ua ions be ween he usage o u and jūs exis among adul s, oo, and no only a school. Some imes in a magazine o newspape , ele ision and a- dio in e iews he e a e de ia ions om he accep ed add ess o m Jūs (Lauze 2003: 344; E ns sone 2005: 27). So he e a e si ua ions when people who know each o he e y li le o do no know a all choose o use he o m u ecip ocally. They do no obse e he age and social s a us hie a - chy which ha e been s ic ly obse ed up o now. Simila obse a ions can be made in e e ence o he communica ion in school en i onmen be- ween eache s and he p incipal, some imes also be ween s uden s and eache s. Wha could he easons be o his phenomenon in La ia? One o he easons is he in luence o o he cul u es, because he e a e na ions ha ha e d opped one o he p onouns as, o ins ance, in English he sin- gula p onoun hou was los long ago and is used only in a chaic s yle. Ano he eason could be he wa e o democ a iza ion in socie y which s a ed a ound 1990 in La ia. All language use s in La ia om ime o ime eel unsu e abou he choice be ween u and jūs, especially when communica ion akes place in an in o mal se ing and bo h he add esse and he add essee a e no as close A. BLŪMANE. Sociolinguis ic analysis o add ess usage in gene al educa ional ins i u ions in La ia 207 as o use he add ess o m Tu. Poli eness, good iendly ela ions, powe , solida i y— hese a e he c i e ia de e mining he choice o he p onouns u o jūs. We can ag ee wi h he linguis A. Veisbe gs’ opinion ha in case o doub i is sa e o use he add ess o m Jūs. In La ian he p onoun Jūs has old usage adi ions da ing back o se - e al cen u ies ago. The p onoun Jūs is o g ea alue in he language as his o m o add ess enables us o exp ess espec , o dis ance ou sel es om he o he pe son, o pass o e o using u which in La ian has a no e o mu ual in imacy and iendship. The las aspec is impossible in he languages lack- ing his o m. The usage o he p onoun u can be conside ed a means o communica ion ha ing es ic ed possibili ies o exp ess social nuances and di e ences. ADDRESS MODELS Among young people a ious nicknames and phone ic modi ica ions o i s names o su names a e e y popula , like Siņča, Sindžs, Eļuka, An ucī e, Lindočka, San očka, A čiks, Ā čijs, Zaņuks, Megucis, Ilžuks, Renčs, Giņčs, Janka, Janķels, Valčs, Kal els, Dančiks, as well as con ac ed o ms o pe - sonal names, o example, Rēne ( om he name Renā e), Sola ( om Sol ei- ga), Mona ( om Monika), Ruža ( om Rudī e). As he ques ionnai e was o be comple ed in w i ing, i con i med an ex emely g ea in luence o Eng- lish on he spelling and p onuncia ion o hose names, o ins ance, Pingy, Snoopy, W-man, Hen ix, Džonis, Džas ons. The o ms mos o en used in schools in La ia a e nominal and p o- nominal add ess o ms: a name, a nickname, an associa i e nickname (a phone ic modi ica ion o a name o a su name), a con ac ed o m o a name o a su name, he use o a su name alone (which is e y popula as an add ess o m among 15–19 yea olds), he use o a name and a pa onymic, a diminu i e o m o a name o a su name, an add ess in e sion (mei (‘daugh e ’), dēls (‘son’), combined add ess o ms: an in e jec ion + an add ess, kolēģī (‘colleague’) + Tu, kolēģī + Jūs, d augs (‘ iend’) + Tu, Jūs + he name, skolo āj (‘ eache ’) + he name, skolo āj + he su name, di ek o (‘p incipal’) + he su name, di ec o + he name and o he simila o ms. Some imes he e b o m indica es he add ess chosen, o example, lūdzu, pasakie ! (‘could you ell me, please?’). 208 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 82 Thi d pe son o ms a e used, oo. I a pe son is no su e abou he close- ness o mu ual ela ions, he lis ene is add essed using he hi d pe son singula o m (Lauze 2004: 28). The au ho o he p esen a icle has ob- se ed such add ess o ms in he communica ion among eache s du ing he b eaks o when he lec u e g ee s he audience. Co ela ion ules in school a e ealized bo h on a e ical and ho izon al le el. The e ical ela i i y becomes appa en in he ope a ion o he p in- ciples o powe , he ho izon al—in coope a i e ies. The e ical dimension is ealized be ween a s uden and a eache , a s uden and he p incipal, a eache and he p incipal, he ho izon al dimension—be ween s uden s o eache s. The e ical add ess model is mainly used in o mal communica- ion, and he ho izon al in in o mal communica ion. Va ia ions in he o ms o add ess a e mos ly iden i ied on he ho izon al le el. The add ess o ms exis ing be ween a eache and he p incipal o he g ea es pa a e asymme ic. Teache s add ess he p incipal by such o ms as you, di ec o (p incipal), you + su name. Bu p incipals add ess eache s by using hei i s names, saying hou o hem which poin s o hie a chy and social dis ance (see Figu es 2, 3, and 4). FIGURE 2. Fo ms o add ess used by he school p incipal wi h young eache s Add ess o ms 46 35 67 23 4 15 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 1 Numbe TU JŪS Fi s name SKOLOTĀJ ( eache ) Fi s name, su name Diminu i e o m de i ed om pe sonal name A. BLŪMANE. Sociolinguis ic analysis o add ess usage in gene al educa ional ins i u ions in La ia 209 FIGURE 3. Fo ms o add ess used by he school p incipal wi h olde eache s FIGURE 4. Fo ms o add ess used by eache s wi h he school p incipal 10–14 yea old s uden s add ess hei classma es mainly by hei i s name, nickname and by he second pe son singula p onoun u. 85% o he youngs e s in his age g oup use he i s name. The add ess o ms used du ing school yea s su i e in mu ual communica ion o e e . When class- ma es and iends mee a e long yea s, in in o mal communica ion hey use he old add ess o ms. Among 15–19 yea old eenage s, he domina ing add ess o ms a e he i s name, nickname (66% o cases) and he second pe son singula p o- noun u. Qui e o en s uden s use diminu i e o ms de i ed om hei pe - sonal names. 71 52 6 29 23 13 613 0 20 40 60 80 1 Add ess o ms Numbe JŪS Fi s name Fi s name, su name SKOLOTĀJ ( eache ) SKOLOTĀJ ( eache ) + i s name SKOLOTĀJ ( eache ) + su name Diminu i e o m de i ed om pe sonal name TU 55 41 56 22 32 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 1 Add ess o ms Numbe JŪS Fi s name DIREKTOR (p incipal) TU Fi s name, su name SKOLOTĀJ ( eache ) 210 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 82 Fo he communica ion be ween a s uden and a eache in mos cases he asymme ic add ess model is used. The dominan wo d among 10–14 yea old s uden s o add ess hei eache s is skolo āj (‘ eache ’) (37%), he add ess you is used no so o en (25%) (see Figu e 5). FIGURE 5. Fo ms o add essing eache s a school The eache add esses a 10–14 yea old by u and his o he i s name. Symme ic add ess o ms be ween a eache and a s uden appea , oo. A s uden add esses a eache by he ollowing o ms: skolo āj (‘ eache ’) + he i s name, he i s name, u. I he eache and he s uden use symme ic add ess o ms, a supp essed con lic migh be mani es ed in one o ano he o m. I such add ess o ms a e used, i is he eache who may eel psychological discom o i he sug- ges ion o choose ecip ocally symme ic add ess o ms has no come om him/he . The choice o ecip ocally symme ic add ess o ms be ween eache s, a eache and he p incipal usually is no he eason o con lic s be ween communica ion pa ne s. Bu he use o ecip ocally symme ic o ms be ween a s uden and a eache may cause con lic s in communica- ion. They a e esol ed by mu ual ag eemen on he add ess o ms. In sym- me ic add ess o ms be ween eache s he e is no dis ance; o i he e is, i is concealed, “silen ” dis ance. When asymme ic add ess o ms a e used, he dis ance is ob ious. Powe asymme y can be exp essed no only by he p onoun you, bu also by he i le, he plu al o m o a e b o o he means. SKOLOTĀJ ( eache ) 37% SKOLOTĀJ ( eache ) + su name 12% SKOLOTĀJ ( eache ) + i s name 17% TU 3% Fi s name 4% Pe name 2% JŪS 25% SKOLOTĀJ ( eache ) + su name SKOLOTĀJ ( eache ) + i s name SKOLOTĀJ ( eache ) JŪS TU Fi s name Pe name