a vietnamese-english cross-cultural study on the use of address forms to express formality = nghiên cứu về cách sử dụng từ xưng hô diễn tả sự trang trọng trong tiếng anh và tiếng việt

i
ABSTRACT

Mastering a new language does not only consist of the ability to master its system of
linguistic forms but also the ability to use them appropriately. This is because languages
differ from one another not only in their system of phonology, syntax and lexicon but
also in rules of speaking.

Addressing is, to various extents, formulaic, culture-specific and routinized in different
languages, including Vietnamese and English. The factors that govern the way one
person addresses another varies across languages and speech communities. The
selection of appropriate addressing forms largely depends on age, gender, position,
qualifications, power, the context of interaction and other social factors.

Addressing is also a product of culture and history. It reflects all the cultural values as
well as historical changes of a society. Vietnam and England embody two different
cultures - the one in Western, the other in the Eastern. Thus, their addressing forms are
much different. To successfully communicate cross culturally communicators should be
aware of these.

This study investigates the use of address forms to express formality in Vietnamese and
English, identifying similarities and differences between them. The factors that govern
the way speakers choose to address are also examined.





ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I wish to thank Mrs. Do Thi Mai Thanh, my supervisor, for her constant help
throughout the study.
I am indebted to all my lecturers in Vietnam National University, Hanoi, Post -
Graduate Department for their lectures that inspired me to write this study.
Also I would like to thank English and Vietnamese friends who spent their precious
time completing the questionnaires.
Finally, I owe the completion of this study to my mother, colleague, boyfriend and
friends who always encouraged me throughout the study and supported me with
everything I need


















iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS iii
ABBRIVIATIONS v
PART A: INTRODUCTION 1
1. Rationale 1
2. Aims of the study 1
3. Methods of the study 2
4. Scope of the study 2
5. Design of the study 2
PART B: DEVELOPMENT 4
Chapter I: Theoretical background 4
1.1. Addressing systems 4
1.1.1 Addressing system in English 5
1.1.2. Addressing system in Vietnamese 9
1.2. Use of Addressing system to express formality 14
1.2.1. Use of addressing system to express formality in working place in English 15
1.2.2 Use of addressing system to express formality in Vietnamese 16
1.2.3. Use of Addressing system to express formality in Vietnamese in working place 24
Chapter II: Findings and discussions 21
2.1. The survey questionnaire 21
2.2. The informants 21
2.3. Statistics research 22
2.4. Data analysis: Findings and discussions 31
2.4.1. Responses in English 22
2.4.1.1. Considerations in the selection of Address terms 22

iv

2.4.1.2. Frequency of address terms 23
2.4.1.3. Influence of hierarchical positions 25
2.4.1.4. Address term avoidance 27
2.4.2. Responses in Vietnamese 27
2.4.2.1. Considerations in the selection of Address terms 27
2.4.2.2. Frequency of address terms 29
2.4.2.3. Influence of hierarchical positions 31
2.4.2.4. Address term avoidance 31
2.5. Major Vietnamese-English cross-cultural differences 32
2.5.1. English findings 32
2.5.2. Vietnamese findings 32
2.5.3. Summary of the part 33
PART C: CONCLUSION 34
1. Summary 34
2. Some implications for using addressing terms in communication 35
3. Limitations of the study 36
4. Suggestions for further studies 37
BIBLIOGRAPHY 38
APPENDICES









v
ABBREVIATIONS

F Female
FN First name
LN Last name
M Male
M Mean
Ma Married
MNs Multiple names
N Number
P Power
St Staffs
S Single
TLN Title and last name
T Title


1
PART A: INTRODUCTION
1. Rational
Each country bears its own culture i.e. its own values, beliefs, assumptions,
communication styles, preferable verbal expressions etc. Therefore in intercultural
communication people from different cultural background feel very difficult.
Cultural shock and cultural conflicts may happen due to differences in culture and
language references. Among these, the use of addressing terms seems to pose an
outstanding threat to the process of intercultural communication. However, the
recent studies on intercultural and cross cultural communication between English
and Vietnamese language and culture appear beyond our expectation.
In Vietnam, especially in the Vietnamese workplace, bosses and staff are aware of
the fact that a suitable address term can establish and maintain a good relationship.

In international companies, there are many people from different nationalities work
together, so using appropriate address terms is a need and a must that one should
know to harmonize his working relationship. This will help him communicate
successfully.
With all the above necessity, the author finds this topic so inspiring that she decides
to carry out a study on the use of addressing terms by the bosses and the staff in the
workplace. It is hoped that the research would contribute to raise the awareness of
cultural and language differences in the use of addressing forms in English-
Vietnamese intercultural communication.
2. Aims of the study
The aims of the study are:
- To investigate major differences in which English, Vietnamese bosses and staff
address in their own language.
- To find out the socio cultural factors that govern the address terms.
- To propose some suggestions to avoid culture shock and communication
breakdown in intercultural communication.
The research questions can be formulated as:

2
Question 1: What are the major differences in the ways English and Vietnamese
bosses and staff address in their own language?
Question 2: What are socio cultural factors that govern the address terms?
Question 3: How should we do to avoid culture shock and communication
breakdown in intercultural communication?
3. Methods of the study
This is a qualitative and quantitative study, hence the author uses the following
steps to conduct the research:
- Studying relevant publications about background theories on addressing forms in
English and Vietnamese (mostly from the Internet, books and magazines).
- Conducting survey questionnaires.

The survey was carried out among employers and employees from the finance
company - SMBC Leasing in London and Vietnam Vinashin General Company in
Ha Noi.
- consulting the supervisor
- resorting to personal observation.
4. Scope of the study
The study focuses on the addressing terms used to by two groups of staff and bosses
in English and Vietnam. These address terms will be analyzed in some specific
situations in their workplaces to discover how the bosses and staff address each
other in English and Vietnamese. In the study, the author also studies some main
factors that exercise their influence on the use of addressing terms such as age,
gender, marital status, occupation, power, social status, situation of interaction,
academic qualification. Other linguistic and cultural factors are beyond this
research.
5. Design of the study
The study contains three parts
Part 1, the introduction, includes the rational, the aims of the study, the methods of
the study, the scope of the study and the design of the study.

3
Part 2, Development, is the most important part in the study, contains chapter 1 -
Theoretical background is an introduction to the theoretical background which is
designed to serve as the basic foundation of data analysis and discussion of findings
in chapter 2. Chapter 2 discusses the findings concerning the use of addressing in
formality in Vietnamese and English.
Part 3: Conclusion contains the Summary, Implications and limitation and
suggestion for further study. In this part, some conclusions on the use of addressing
are drawn. Simultaneously, the chapter also puts forward some implications for the
addressing in communication in English and Vietnamese. A statement of unsolved
problems and suggestions for further research beyond the limits of the paper is also

included in this chapter.



















4
PART B: DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER 1: Theoretical background
1.1. Addressing systems
In any act of communication, addressing is, unavoidable. Address forms not only
play an important role in scientific, legal and commercial documents but also
perform pragmatic functions. Use of addressing systems expresses the culture of a
community using that language. Depending on the subjects of communication that
an individual address term changes accordingly. The family, social, emotional
relationships in communication are the causes of different address. The use of

addressing terms also changes when communicative situation, emotion and attitude
change.
According to Jack C. Richards, J. Platt and H. Platt (1999:6), addressing systems
(address form, address term) are understood as:
The word and words used to address somebody in speech or writing. The way in
which people address one another usually depend on their age, sex, social group,
and personal relationship.
For example, in the family, British people use the person pronouns and kinship
terms to call the above generation, use the first name to call the below generation. In
society, they use formal terms to address such as title, first name, respected and
intimated words. In Vietnam, people use almost the kinship terms to address in
family and in society, in formal communicated situation they use title and respected
words.
According to Khang, N. V. (2008), addressing terms are words used to call self and
others, which used to address or call the hearer or speaker in the communication.
In comparison with English terms, the use of Vietnamese terms of address in actual
communication is more intricate.
Luong (1990) points out: “Both the use and the meanings of Vietnamese person-
referring forms are saliently and inextricably linked to the power, solidarity, and
formality dimensions in the relations among the addressor, addressee, as well as

5
the referred parties.” . Actually, the appropriate choice of Vietnamese addressing
forms involves a consideration of wide range of sociolinguistic factors such as age,
sex, social status, relationship (blood, intimate or distant), attitudes (respectful or
arrogant), feelings of the speakers and addressee as well as the formality of the
communication context. English addressing forms, unlike Vietnamese ones, content
“prefabricated units”, such as I, we and you, in communication. It means that these
units can be used in any context and with everyone. English addressing forms don’t
include in themselves any information of sociolinguistic factors or the formality of

the communication.
If in English "You" is used as second person pronoun in singular and plural as well
as to show formality or informality, e.g. Sir, Mr. Brown, Brown, Bill, etc. In
Vietnamese second person pronouns are used "Bạn, anh, chị " in singular, but in
plural we have to add numerals before them e.g. các anh, các chị The addressing
forms in Vietnamese are used to show formality or informality which depend on the
speaker's context, position, gender, age, mood
In some languages, such as Chinese dialects and Japanese, words expressing
relationship e.g. father, mother, aunt or position e.g. teacher, lecturer, are used as
address forms to show respect and/ or signal the formality of the situation.
The factors that determine language forms of address terms vary from culture to
another. Brown & Gilman, (1960) show that the determining factors that may be
most common to many cultures are speaker-hearer power differences, interactional
situations and how people are introduced to each other. The address forms of a
language are arranged into a complex address system, which its own rules that
need to be acquired if a person wants to communicate appropriately.
1.1.1. Addressing system in English
Brown & Ford (1961) remark that in English "proper names constitute a nearly
universal language of relationship; the semantic dimensions involved serve to relate
to one another or all of the members of the society".

6
In investigating the connection between language and social relations, English does
not grammatize such distinctions. Realization tends to be scattered throughout a
text, so that one may have to assess an entire text for its total configuration of
relevant markers in order to determine the exact nature of the interpersonal relations
obtaining between speaker and addressee, keeping in mind that such relations are
constantly being negotiated in the course of interaction.
Ervin-Tripp (1969) observes that English address system is "asymmetrical
exchanges which were found "where there was age of occupational rank

differences" and that "at official meetings where status is clearly specified speech
style is rigidly prescribed, and the form of address of each person is derived from
his social identity". In this system, no distinction in address is made to equals or
subordinates and since both receive first name, age difference is not significant until
it is nearly the size of a generation.
People address one another reveals their relationship, their attitude and feelings
towards each other. English addressing system shows a strong tendency of
socialization. To express 'solidarity semantic' or intimacy, the English speakers
often call the hearer with first name, but in showing formality, they call each other
with title and last name.
In English people do not use any address terms at all when they are in doubt how to
address another, for example, Good morning or Good afternoon However, in
other languages when we avoid using so that which is impolite or deficient, for
example, in France, you cannot say Bonjour, Au revoir, Merci, or Pardon without
attaching an address term.
Forms of address do not only vary across cultures but also according to specific
types of social situation: individual or group confrontation; formality or informality
of the occasion; prior acquaintance or not of the party; conventional emotional
quality ascribed to the occasion; face-to-face or distant communication (Firth,
1972). They are also modified by the role situation, and the type of address
restricted to it accordingly.

7
Evans-Pritchard (cited in Hymes, 1964) remarks that the ways a speaker addresses
people around him "symbolize his social position in the relation to the people
around him, so that, by the use of one or other of them, the status of the speaker to
the person addressed is readily recognized".
Under the influence of individualism, westerners think highly of personal ability
and achievement more than relationship. They seldom use kinship terms to refer to
non-family members because it may be considered quite rude. For example,

addressing an older woman "grandma" might cause offense, since in western
cultures, "old" means aged and useless. On the contrary, they usually use general
social terms of address to refer to those non-family members.
With I-YOU we can communicate without knowing the age, gender, social status of
the hearer, the relationships between the hearer and speaker, attitude and feelings
that speakers need to show through addressing forms. Besides, people also use
personal pronouns, title, names, address form avoidance, kinship terms, kinship
term with first name They use these address forms to show the different emotion
and attitude. Basically, the following terms are used as popular addressing terms in
English:
1. Title alone (T): Mr, Mrs, Ms, Professor, Dr, Madam
Social title: Mr, Mrs, Madam
Career title: Professor, Doctor
In social communication, it is inevitable to use social terms of address to show
politeness or respect. Therefore, it is very important to understand different
meanings that social terms of address have, especially in inter-cultural
communication. Social terms of address are greatly affected by social class and
traditional ethical concept which are essential parts in deciding which term to use.
This is the most formal and the least intimate form. It is used in the first meetings,
in formal situations or nonreciprocal addressing form used by a person of a lesser
status to a person who is superior to him.

8
2. Title with full name: Dr. David Baker, Mrs. Brown Clair : use in formal
introductions only. It will be changed into other forms in a short time.
3. Full name: James Smith : used in more casual introductions, e.g. among
youngsters.
4. Last name alone (LN): Michael Nixon, Mary King
It is less formal than TLN but more intimate than first name. however, it is used
frequently. Except the special situations (e.g. to call a person who is rarely seen by

someone), TLN is preferable. (Nguyen Quang, 2001:85)
5. Title with last name (TLN): Professor Brown, Mr. Clinton
This kind is a little bit less formal than the title alone, but they both can be applied
in the same situations.
6. First name (FN): Michael Nixon, Mary King : used in informal
communication. Actually, it is used in most of the conversations. When an
American asks you to address him by first name, he wants to make friend with you,
in other words, to be close, to be friendly to you.
- Diminutive: (it is a kind of linguistic economicality. For example, Rebecca is
reduced to Beck, Elizabeth to Liz). This form is used mostly among family
members (grandparents, parents, older brothers, sisters call the younger); or among
close friends.
- Terms of endearment: parents call their children and lovers call each other in this
way. For example: Amy, Audrey, Betty, Dorothy, Emily
However, there are only two main selections: first name and title with last name.
When people want to show the solidarity semantic, they usually address the partners
by first name. When they want to show the power semantic, they used TLN to
address the hearers. These two address forms are divided into three groups:
- Mutual exchange of FN
- Mutual exchange of TLN: Title includes Mr, Mrs, Miss, Ms
- Nonreciprocal exchange of TLN and FN: older, higher position person addresses
the hearer by FN and this person addresses that person by TLN.

9
According to Wardhaugh (1986): using TLN to express inequality of power, but
using mutual exchange of TLN to express the equality and insolidarity; using
mutual exchange of FN to show the equality and solidarity between the partners.
Brown and Ford (1964) affirm that the two address terms (Mutual exchange of FN,
Mutual exchange of TLN) are influenced by the time the interlocutors know each
other and the solidarity. Wardhaugh (1986:260) states: using first name of someone

[ ] is expressed the solidarity. FN can use among the close colleagues (even they
do not like each other). FN is even used for the officials, or when expressing the
disdain or admiration.
7. Kinship terms: Kinship terms, according to E. R. Leach , are “category words by
means of which an individual is taught to recognize the significant groupings in the
social structure into which he is born” (as cited in Leach,1958, p. 143). All
languages have kinship terms, which are clearly highlighted in addressing forms of
a language. Without exception, all kinship terms make use of such factors as age,
sex, generation, blood and marriage in their society. English people use this kind
and kinship terms + first name in family and social address. According to Schneider
& Hormans, addressing terms are kinship terms in American English used to show
mutual inreciprocal relationship. Kinship terms are used as addressing terms in
family and in some addressing cases in society. For example, Mother (Mother
Superior), Father, Son (The Father, the Son) in English there are 10 words used in
address such as grandfather, grandmother, father, mother, son, daughter, brother,
sister, aunt, uncle.
8. Title with husband's LN: Mrs. Baker : English women after marriage are called
by this way.
9. Multiple names (MNs): Brown & Ford (1964) explain that when talking with an
object "sometimes using TLN, FN or LN or nickname, sometimes creating variables
of phonetics of FN or nickname". They are used in close relationships.
1.1.2. Addressing system in Vietnamese

10
Addressing forms are an interesting phenomenon in the study on cross-cultural
communication. Addressing terms are words used to addressee or call the hearers or
speakers in the communication. There exist numerous addressing systems in
different cultures and languages. Like many other Eastern languages, Vietnamese
language has a complicated addressing system. Address terms depend on the factors
such as age, gender, social status, occupation and relatives. Vietnamese has a

system of vocabularies which are very abundant, specially addressing system. It
may be said that addressing system in Vietnamese is one of the most interesting
phenomenon of this linguistic.
Wardhaugh (1986:262) when studied about kinship terms comments that:
In fact, some languages use the kinship terms as addressing forms. [ ] One person
addresses the others by some address terms such as "uncle", "older sister",
"younger brother" Even pronoun "I" can be seen as a kinship term. Therefore, in
any or every social relation, the interlocutors have to manage to identify themselves
and others, and use some factors such as the relation, social position and age to
select the suitable addressing terms.
Addressing systems in Vietnamese are known as a means of politeness. In
Vietnamese personal pronouns show the clear border between politeness and
impoliteness. According to Nguyen Van Chien, to show category of personal names
[category "Politeness" - Ng. Q], South - Eastern languages use a different language
from Indian-European languages such as Russian - general and inflectional
language, English, American, Australian - analysable and inflectional languages.
Besides original personal pronouns appearing the personal factors such as kinship
terms, personal nouns, title and occupation, first name, other terms.
In Vietnamese addressing system, there is no equivalent to I-YOU in English that is
used as a prefabricated units). The addressing term I-YOU itself does not imply age,
gender, social power, kinship relation, attitudes and feeling While, kinship terms
are used to address in Vietnamese at the different levels show the above factors. The
kinship terms are used to replace personal pronouns (except for the cases such as

11
daughter-in-law, son-in-law, wife, husband, father-in-law ) with other factors as
addressing and convention in addressing. The selection of addressing terms in
communication depends on the factors: age, gender, social status, occupation,
solidarity. When addressing people usually show politeness, impoliteness, nuances:
solemn, neutral, informal, overfamiliar, crude, normal Kinship and family

relationships in Vietnam are more accurately described as an intricate network and
complicated pattern of relationships. Firstly, Vietnam is a family-centered tradition
country. Vietnamese people treasure the close family relationship highly and they
usually live in a family with many generations. Complicated Vietnamese family
hierarchy is the dominant factor in choosing the right addressing term. Secondly,
Vietnamese kinship emphasizes patrilineal relationship. Vietnamese people attach
much importance to consanguineous relations and affinal ones, which connotes by
kinship terms apparently. There are the difference of kinship terms between paternal
lineages and maternal ones, such as : cháu nội/cháu ngoại, ông nội/ ông ngoại and
ba vợ/ ba chồng. Thirdly, Vietnamese culture emphasizes “superior controls junior”.
The descendant is not allowed to call the elderly by name is considered against the
traditional morality and social order. Therefore, exact kinship forms are necessary
in addressing to distinct elderly kins. Fourthly, the gender of the relative is
distinguished in Vietnamese culture. For example, title for “father’s brother’s son”
(anh/em con nha bac/ chu) is strictly distinguished from that for “father’s brother’s
daughter” (chi/em con nha bac/ chu). Technically, Vietnamese kinship terms are
used for all first, second and third person reference in structural sentences.
In Vietnamese addressing system there are some address forms as follows:
1. Title: comrade, director : has the equivalent usage with T in English. It is used
by soldiers
2. Title with proper name: used in formal communication.
3. Full name: the case is seen in referring to historical characters only, say, Trần
Quốc Toản, Hồ Chí Minh We may come across a first name or full name going

12
with an "A" or "B" at the end. In this case, "A" and "B" and so on are added to
people who have identical names in a small group.
4. First names only: used in most cases (both formal and informal), to show the
intimacy: among friends, people of older generations call children, the seniors call
the inferiors. This way is also used by people of any ages or status when they want

to put a slight on the name bearer.
5. Kinship term with first name: for example, anh, chi, em, bác, chú, cô, dì, ông,
bà, ect + first name: this is the most usual case in the Vietnamese addressing
system. It shows the strong tendency of familialisation of the Vietnamese culture. It
may be used in calling leaders of a country who contributed so much for the sake of
that country, and is beloved by the population.
6. Middle name and first name: is not the way of addressing formally. It is only
heard in some particular cases:
- When many people have the same first name in the same place. Example: Bảo
Linh, Diệu Linh, Thảo Linh, Tuệ Linh In informal talk, people may call the
person with the middle name or middle name and first name.
- When a person's first name combines with his/her middle name making a
compound meaningful one, or when the first name only sounds meaningless or
worse.
- When a person's first name combines with his/her middle name making a beautiful
(evenfictitious) name.
- When people try to tease a person's name.
7. Last name + first name: used to discriminate two people having the same middle
and first name.
8. Nicknames only: in informal circumstances
- among close friends
- among children, adults, mates
- uncles, aunts, grandparents call their nephews

13
9. Kinship terms with husband's proper name: women after getting married may
be called by her husband's first name as in the case of English women. However, it
is not a major trend and just old Vietnamese women are called in such a way.
10. Addressing terms on behalf of a child: also, when having (a) child/children
(and being at the upper-middle age), a woman can be named by her first or last

child.
11. Scornful terms with proper name: "thằng cha, tên, con mẹ, thị " + first name:
this way is used when addressing a person that the caller scorns. There's no need to
be polite and thus, no need to regard to the age.
In Vietnamese social communication, the pairs of kinship terms are used to address
actively. According to Nguyen Quang (2002:159), in the Northern areas, there are
34 kinship terms as follows:
Table 1:
STT
KINSHIP TERMS AS ADDRESS FORMS

The first personal pronouns
The second personal pronouns
1
CỐ
CHÍT/CON
2
CHÍT/CON
CỐ
3
KỴ
CHÚT/CON
4
CHÚT/CON
KỴ
5
CỤ
CHẮT/CON
6
CHẮT/CON

CỤ
7
ÔNG
CHÁU/CON
8
CHÁU/CON
ÔNG
9
BÀ
CHÁU/CON
10
CON/CHÁU
BÀ
11
BÁC
CHÁU/CON
12
CHÁU/CON
BÁC
13
BỐ
CON

14
14
CON
BỐ
15
MẸ
CON

16
CON
MẸ
17
CHÚ
CHÁU/CON
18
CHÁU/CON
CHÚ
19
CÔ
CHÁU/CON
20
CHÁU/CON
CÔ
21
THÍM
CHÁU/CON
22
CHÁU/CON
THÍM
23
CẬU
CHÁU/CON
24
CHÁU/CON
CẬU
25
DÌ
CHÁU/CON

26
CHÁU/CON
DÌ
27
DƯỢNG
CHÁU/CON
28
CHÁU/CON
DƯỢNG
29
MỢ
CHÁU/CON
30
CHÁU/CON
MỢ
31
ANH
EM
32
EM
ANH
33
CHỊ
EM
34
EM
CHỊ
According to Nguyen Tai Can (1975), the addressing system in Vietnamese is very
abundant because in Vietnamese kinship system has distinctions as follows:
- the higher vs. lower positions: Bác - chú, Anh - em, Chị - em

- the blood relatives vs. relative - in - law: Bác/chú - Cậu, Cô - Dì
- the father's relatives vs. the mother's relatives: Bác/chú/Cậu - Dượng, Cô/dì -
Thím/mợ
1.2. Use of addressing system to express formality

15
1.2.1. Use of addressing system to express formality in working place in
English
The form of address people use when speaking to each other is dictated by the
nature of the relationship between them. The address terms in English exchanged
between intimates ("familiar pronoun," first name, etc.) is the same term used in
addressing social inferiors, and that the term exchanged between nonintimates
("polite pronoun," title and last name, etc.) is also used to address social superiors.
Brown has observed that relative positions of individuals on these two social
dimensions of solidarity and status account for the forms of address used in any
given dyad. In English first name—FN, title and last name—TLN use to: status
(position in the formal hierarchy, age), presumed familiarity (equality of status, time
in organization), intimacy (self-disclosure), and personality (status seeking, self-
assurance). Address behavior may reveal symptomatic and diagnostic aspects of the
general nature of an organization, its structure, climate, and pattern of
communications; conversely, comparative studies may demonstrate that these
organizational variables influence the choice of address term. the greater the status
difference between individuals the greater should be the probability of
nonreciprocal address, the higher-status individual receiving TLN and the lower-
status individual receiving FN. Given the dominance of achieved over ascribed
status in determining forms of address in American English, the expected
nonreciprocal address pattern should hold true even if the person of lower status is
the elder. In cases of mutual TLN or nonreciprocal address, the person of lower
status should be more motivated to establish mutual FN address than should the
person of higher status, for such an act of association enhances the value of the

former while diminishing that of the latter (Brown, 1965). However, the former is
presumed to hold back from directing FN upward, for, as Brown and Ford (1961)
proposed: If the person of lesser value were to initiate associative acts, he would
run the risk of rebuff; if the person of higher value initiates such acts there is no
such risk. The superior, then, must be the pacesetter in progression to intimacy. . . .

16
The person of higher status is the pacesetter not in linguistic address alone, but in
all acts that increase intimacy. There is, however, one sort of relatively intimate
associative act which a person of lower status might engage in without serious fear
of rebuff—namely, limited disclosure of attitudes about his job, interests, opinions,
and personal problems. It is predicted that an individual is relatively more self-
disclosing to his boss than to his subordinates, in the hope of drawing the higher-
status person into mutual self-disclosure, thereby increasing intimacy with the
superior and enhancing status in the organization.
In short, the use of first name (FN) and title and last name (TLN) in communicating
with superiors, fellow workers, and subordinates revealed aspects of organizational
structure: FN was used between equals and in addressing subordinates; unequal
status was often reflected in a nonreciprocal address pattern in which the superior
received TLN and the subordinate FN. This is consistent with previous findings that
the address term exchanged between equals and intimates is the same one directed
towards inferiors. Age and time in firm were not related to reported address
patterns; neither were measures of status motivation and self-assurance. Informants
reported greatest willingness to make self-disclosures to fellow workers, and greater
self-disclosure to immediate superiors than to immediate subordinates—even if the
superior were addressed by TLN. It is proposed that confiding in one's boss reflects
an attempt to establish intimacy with him. This is interpreted as Brown and Ford's
suggestion that the individual of higher status must initiate all steps towards
increased intimacy.
1.2.2 Use of addressing system to express formality in Vietnamese

When communicating each other people have to use addressing system. Addressing
in communication depends on situation, relationship, position between speaker and
hearer. Vietnamese have the tradition about politeness and courteousness in
addressing. The expression of politeness within the language behaviour is attracting
the interests of the linguistics in general and pragmatic linguistics in particular.
Politely addressing in Vietnamese communication is under the strong pressure of

17
community politeness which has clear and reasonable expressions. Modesty in
addressing, which is considered the principle of addressing politely in
communication, is the way to show the community politeness. In Vietnamese, polite
addressing shows the respect with older, higher position and prestigious person.
Speaker has to select formal addressing terms in accordance with communicative
role, communicative situation, relative - stranger relationship between speaker
and hearer. Polite and moderate addressing creates respected politeness in
communication.
In Vietnamese address forms are used mainly by kinship terms in family and
society. According to Wardhaugh (1986:262), some languages use 'kinship terms' as
addressing forms. [ ] For example, in Vietnamese someone addresses other by
words in equivalent English such as 'uncle' (chú/bác), 'elder sister' (chị), 'younger
brother' (em trai) and so on. Even that is like pronoun 'I' in English is 'kinship term'.
Therefore, in every social relationship the communicators have to classify
themselves and classify other ones to use the factors such as kinship, social status,
age to choose addressing term suitably.
The use of kinship terms to address in society depends on involved factors in
communicative progress such as purpose, subject, object, situation and
communicative rules of addressing. In Vietnamese culture kinship terms are used
widely and finely. Pattern of addressing is fixed in communication, so when
someone addresses incorrectly they will make hearer feel uncomfortable or they
will feel guilty when addressing faultily.

Besides, addressing forms as personal pronouns, title, post, name, academic title,
academic distinction are also used in Vietnamese. When communicating in formal
places such as the meeting, diplomatic setting, working places the formality,
respect, politeness, etc, are paid attention specially, so people usually select
addressing forms to be suitable for communicative situation, time, position and
distance between speaker and hearer. Wardhaugh (1986) states: a series of social
factors always governs the selection of addressing forms: a certain occasion, other

18
one's social position or social rank; gender; age; family relationship; hierarchy in
occupation; transaction context (e.g. a meeting in serve activity, or relationship
between doctor-patient, religious-believer); race; or intimate level. The selection is
sometime very clear: in society, when race origin or rank play an important role,
this thing is attended more easily; when family relationships are very strong, that
thing can be more respected.
1.2.3. Use of addressing system to express formality in working place in
Vietnam
In Vietnamese culture in working place people still have tendency to use widely and
finely kinship terms with first name to address each other. Model of address brings
fixedness in communication, so people will feel uncomfortable when someone
address incorrectly. For example:
In Vietnamese
A: Em chào chị.
B: Cháu phải gọi cô bằng cô chứ.
(A: Hello
B: You must call me by "aunt")
In this conversation the speaker (A) is younger than the hearer (B). At first, the
speaker greets the hearer B in the position of a younger person with an older sister,
but the hearer wants to lengthen the distance of age between two people.
The Vietnamese live mostly in communities, village community, groups so,

society need to be controlled by hierarchy, person with lower position need to
respects person with higher position, person with higher position has to concede
person with lower position.
In Vietnamese society, age and occupational status play an important role in
communication in working place. A person with lower position but older, they tend
to address "TÔI" and call another with title to show the respect and politeness,
otherwise, a person with higher position but younger they tend to address "TÔI" and
call the other one "BÁC, ANH, CHỊ " (depend on distance of age between them)

19
with the same goal. According to Nguyen Quang, in the case both conversational
partners want to gain solidarity, depending on distance of age "TÔI" will be
replaced by " ANH, CHỊ, BÁC", title is replaced by "EM, CHÁU, CON" (older
person but lower position); and "TÔI" is replaced by "EM, CHÁU, CON" (younger
person but higher position). In the case, kinship term "ÔNG, BÀ,CỤ" are not hardly
ever used here because these people, who leader calls, have not worked any more.
In the fact, Process "solidarity" is process transfers from compromise in address to
"Circle relationship". This is a table about the conflict compromise between age
and position in Vietnamese addressing system:

ADDRESSEE
I
YOU
older person and lower position
TÔI
Title
older person and higher position
TÔI
Kinship terms above "ego"

In Vietnamese culture-language, after communicating in a short time, people can
transfer from dyad TÔI-TITLE to CHÁU/EM-TITLE to show self-abasement and
familiarity, otherwise, still maintaining the other one's the upper position.
e.g: Xin thủ trưởng cho tôi hai ngày để hoàn thành bản báo cáo này
But after a certain time, the staff can say:
Xin thủ trưởng cho em hai ngày để hoàn thành bản báo cáo này.
Sometimes Vietnamese people skip the stage TÔI-TITLE to come straightly the
stage EM/CHÁU-TITLE to express the familiarity with respect in relationship.
Person who starts with this transference is the one with lower position or higher
position, but one with higher position starts the transference, he/she will transfer to
"Circle relationship". For example:
At that time, person with higher position can say:
- Cô (Chị) đánh cho tôi bản báo cáo này nhé! (Aunt/ Older Sister type this for me)
After a certain time, he/she can say:

20
- Em (Cháu) đánh cho anh (chú) bản báo cáo này nhé. (Younger sister/ niece type
this for older brother/ uncle)
With the common tendency, in Vietnamese the first and second personal pronouns
are used as kinship relationship "familialisation". However, in relationships people
can address and communicate by ranks. In working place relationships relate to
post, rank which are social assignments with the close institutions of law. Therefore,
in working place we have to address appropriately, we shouldn't use too much
excessively kinship terms in communication in working place. In formal
environment as working place we should address title, title and first name, first
name with person at the same age, use pronouns "ÔNG, BÀ-TÔI" to address old
person, specially, in meetings, conferences