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