Abstract
This chapter explores address terms in Korean from the perspective of Cultural Linguistics. Cultural conceptualisations are utilised as an analytical framework to examine the Korean cultural schema of jangyuyuseo [There must be order between seniors and juniors] and its extension into the cultural metaphor of community members as kin. A dataset of approximately 540 minutes of conversation was collected from the Korean reality TV show, The return of superman. The findings reveal that the schema of jangyuyuseo governs Koreans’ choice of address terms by rigorously identifying the addresser’s relative position in the Korean hierarchical social structure. It is also observed that the schema of jangyuyuseo prohibits a lower-status speaker from using first names or pronouns when referring to a higher-status addressee. Consequently, terms of address are finely encoded in person deixes with a highly stratified set of linguistic codes, including the employment certain cultural categories (kinship terms, teknonymy and geononymy) as a means of precisely designating individuals such as ‘Seoul uncle’. The findings suggest that Korean linguistic practices in constructing address terms are closely drawn from Korean cultural conceptualisations, and offer implications for a potential cause of misunderstanding between Korean and non-Korean interlocutors.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Brown, L. (2011). Korean honorifics and politeness in second language learning. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Choi, M. (1997). Korean students in Australian universities: Intercultural issues. Higher Education Research & Development, 16(3), 263–282.
Deuchler, M. (1992). The Confucian transformation of Korea: A study of society and ideology. USA: Harvard University Asia Center.
Dunn, J. (2013). The global teacher status index is now. http://www.edudemic.com/global-teacher-status-index. Accessed Mar 3, 2015.
Hwang, S. (1991). Terms of address in Korean and American cultures. Intercultural Communication Studies, 1(2), 117–136.
Kang, S. (1986). On the recent uses of address terms. Kugo Saenghwal, 7, 131–137.
Kang, S., & Jun, E. (2013). The Korean language education: The current status and problems of terms of address and reference education in Korean [한국어 교육학:한국어 교육에서 호칭어, 지칭어 교육 현황과 개선 방안]. New Korean Education [새국어교육], 95, 363–389.
Kim, K. (2015a). Korean culture says buy these gifts. http://seoulistic.com/living-in-korea/korean-culture-says-buy-these-gifts. Accessed April 5, 2015.
Kim, M. (2015b). Women’s talk, mothers work: Korean mothers’ address terms, solidarity and power. Discourse Studies, 17(5), 551–582.
King, R. (2006). Korean kinship terminology. In H. Sohn (Ed.), Korean language in culture and society (pp. 101–117). USA: University of Hawaii Press.
Kirkpatrick, A. (2015). World Englishes and local cultures. In F. Sharifian (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of language and culture. London: Routldege.
Koh, H. (2006). Usage of Korean address and reference terms. In H. Sohn (Ed.), Korean language in culture and society (pp. 146–154). USA: University of Hawaii Press.
Lee, K., & Harvey, Y. (1973). Teknonymy and geononymy in Korean kinship terminology. Ethnology, 12(1), 31–46.
Lee, S., & Lee, S. (2013). Korean and Japanese teachers’ use and attitudes towards address terms of teacher [한.일 교원의 선생님 호칭 사용에 관한 실태와 의식]. Journal of North-East Asian Cultures [동북아 문화 연구], 34(1), 279–291.
Lee, T., Yu, J., & Nah, S. (2011). A Confucianism observed in disaster films of East Asia. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 5(5), 39–47.
Lee, Y. (2009). Perceptions of time in Korean and English. Human Communication, 12(1), 119–138.
Midori, G. (2013). A study on obstacles of the communication between Korean and Japanese students in Korea—Focused on address form and greetings [한국인과 재한 일본인 유학생 간의 의사소통 걸림돌에 관한 고찰]. Eomunlogjib [어문론집], 54, 137–153.
Nakada, M., & Tamura, T. (2005). Japanese conceptions of privacy: An intercultural perspective. Ethics and Information Technology, 7, 23–27.
Okamura, A. (2009). Do English speakers address their Japanese colleagues by their first name, while talking in English in Japan? Multilingua, 28(4), 355–377.
Park, E. (2013). A Socio-linguistic study on the usage of ‘Seonsaengnim’ as a form of address in Korean [호칭어 ‘선생님’ 에 대한 사회언어학적 연구]. Ulimalgeul [우리말글], 59, 1–24.
Park, I., & Cho, L. (1995). Confucianism and the Korean family. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 26(1), 117–134.
Park, J. (1997). Address terms in Korean (한국어 호칭어 체계). The Sociolinguistic Journal of Korea (사회언어학), 5(2), 507–527.
Scollon, R., & Scollon, W. (2001). Discourse and Intercultural communication. In D. Schiff & H. Hamilton (Eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 538–547). Oxford: Blackwell Wiley.
Sharifian, F. (2011). Cultural conceptualisations and language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Sharifian, F. (2013). Cultural linguistics and intercultural communication. In: F. Sharifian & M Jamarani (Eds.), Language and intercultural communication in the new era. New York: Routledge, pp. 60–79.
Sharifian, F. (2015a). Cultural linguistics. In F. Sharifian (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of language and culture (pp. 473–492). London: Routledge.
Sharifian, F. (2015b). Cultural linguistics and world Englishes. World Englishes, 34(4), 515–532.
Sharifian, F. (Ed.). (2015c). The Routledge handbook of language and culture. London: Routledge.
Sharifian, F. (2017). Cultural Linguistics. Amsterdam, Philadephia: John Benjamins.
Sharifian, F., & Jamarani, M. (Eds.). (2013). Language and intercultural communication in the new era. New York: Routledge.
Sohn, H. (2006). Korean language in culture and society. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Wierzbicka, A. (2015). A whole cloud of culture condensed into a drop of semantics: The meaning of the German word Herr as a term of address. International Journal of Language and Culture, 2(1), 1–37.
Wolf, H. (2008). A cognitive linguistic approach to the cultures of World Englishes: The emergence of a new model. In G. Kristiansen & R. Dirven (Eds.), Cognitive sociolinguistics: Language variation, cultural models, social system (Vol. 39, pp. 353–388). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Wong, J. (2006). Contextualizing aunty in Singaporean English. World Englishes, 25(3/4), 451–466.
Xu, Z. (2010). Chinese English: A future power? In K. Andy (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of World Englishes (pp. 282–298). Abingdon: Routledge.
Xu, Z. (2014). A Cultural Linguistics approach to Asian Englishes. Asian Englishes, 16(2), 173–179.
Yoo, I., & Chae, S. (2011). Language typology of using the names of occupations as titles and address terms. Hankuk University of Foreign Studies Language Research Centre [한국외국어대학교 언어연구소], 50, 148–169.
Yoon, K. (2004). Not just words: Korean social models and the use of honorifics. Intercultural Pragmatics, 1(2), 189–210.
Yum, J. (2009). The impact of Confucianism on interpersonal relationships and communication patterns in East Asia. Communications Monographs, 55(4), 374–388.
Zhang, Q., & Li, D. (2013). Confucianism: A modern interpretation. Singapore: Zhejiang University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ahn, H. (2017). Seoul Uncle: Cultural Conceptualisations Behind the Use of Address Terms in Korean. In: Sharifian, F. (eds) Advances in Cultural Linguistics. Cultural Linguistics. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4056-6_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4056-6_19
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-4055-9
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-4056-6
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)