Papers by Kris Helincks
Revista Internacional de Lingüística Iberoamericana, Jul 2012
El voseo, una fórmula de tratamiento frecuente en las variantes hispanoamericanas, también es car... more El voseo, una fórmula de tratamiento frecuente en las variantes hispanoamericanas, también es característico del habla en Chile. El uso de su forma verbal pertenece a la norma culta informal y expresa solidaridad y confianza mientras que la forma pronominal vos refleja sobre todo vulgaridad y ofensa. Al analizar sistemáticamente su uso en la dimensión estilística, aspiramos a ampliar el conocimiento del fenómeno. Averiguamos el uso del voseo, tuteo y ustedeo en 12 géneros televisivos aplicando una metodología sociolingüística. Además de los resultados televisivos globales, examinamos la frecuencia de las tres variantes en función de factores sociales, diafásicos y lingüísticos (morfológicos, léxicos y pragmáticos). Enriquecemos estas comprobaciones cuantitativas con microanálisis de usos voseantes concretos. Finalmente, el conjunto de estos datos nos permite reflexionar sobre la vitalidad, los valores y la aceptación del voseo en Chile.
Conference Presentations by Kris Helincks
This lecture focuses on the negotiation and variation of the three pronominal terms of address (T... more This lecture focuses on the negotiation and variation of the three pronominal terms of address (ToAs) in ongoing interaction in Chilean Spanish. The Chilean address system contains three pronominal ToAs with corresponding verbal forms: ustedeo (usted+3rd p.sg.), tuteo (tú+2nd p.sg.) and voseo (vos+archaic 2nd p.pl.). Since the 1960, this threefold system undergoes a linguistic change with an increasing use of verbal voseo opposed to a persistent stigmatization of pronoun vos (Torrejón 1986). This evolution has recently prompted some sociolinguistic studies which supply the first systematic empirical data on familiar voseo vs. normative tuteo (Stevenson 2007, Rivadeneira 2009, Bishop & Michnowicz 2010, Helincks 2012). As a natural consequence of this linguistic change in progress, shifts between these ToAs are common, even within the same interaction. Moreover, according to Hummel (2010: 134-135), interactional shifting between all three ToAs is particularly common in Chile: “the great richness of Chilean Spanish is its marked culture of change of address […]. The fact that some types of change have names (usted of tenderness, usted of anger, vos of insult or anger, flattering tú, academic tú, military/virile tuteo, etc.), demonstrates its diffusion and acceptance as socially acknowledged address schemes”. However, due to their mainly sociolinguistic focus, the above mentioned studies comment only anecdotally on these shifts or explain them unsatisfactorily as ‘free’.
In this lecture I present the preliminary quantitative results of a wider sociopragmatic-oriented research on this topic. The data come from a corpus of spontaneous conversations in everyday private, public and institutional situations. I concentrate on the most prominent social, relational and situational features, taking into account whether the ToAs express direct address, reported speech or impersonal use. The following research questions will be answered: how frequent are shifts between the three ToAs within an act, intervention, exchange, conversation or different encounter between two interlocutors?; which shifts are most common?; do some situations trigger more shifts than others?; and, does age (difference), gender (difference) and type of relationship of interlocutors influence the amount of shifting? This analysis contributes to verify Hummel’s suggestion of the existence of ‘acknowledged address schemes’ and a rich ‘culture of change of address’ in Chile.
References:
Bishop, Kelley, Michnowicz, Jim (2010): “Forms of Address in Chilean Spanish”, Hispania 93 (3): 413-429.
Helincks, Kris (2012): “La variación social y estilística del voseo chileno en diferentes géneros televisivos”, Revista Internacional de Lingüística Iberorománica 19: 185-211.
Hummel, Martin (2010): “Reflexiones metodológicas y teóricas sobre el estudio de las formas de tratamiento en el mundo hispanohablante, a partir de una investigación en Santiago de chile”, in M. Hummel, B. Kluge, M.E. Vázquez Laslop, (eds.): Formas y fórmulas de tratamiento en el mundo hispánico. México D.F./Graz: El Colegio de México/Karl Franzens Universität: 101-162.
Rivadeneira, Marcela (2009): El voseo en medios de comunicación de Chile. Descripción y análisis de la variación dialectal y funcional. PhD dissertation. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
Stevenson, Jeffrey (2007): The sociolinguistic variables of Chilean voseo. PhD dissertation. Seattle: University of Washington.
Torrejón, Alfredo (1986): “Acerca del Voseo Culto de Chile”, Hispania 69, 3, 677-83.
This lecture will focus on intraspeaker alternations of pronominal and verbal terms of address (T... more This lecture will focus on intraspeaker alternations of pronominal and verbal terms of address (ToAs) in Chilean Spanish. It is well known that Chilean Spanish contains a threefold address system: the ‘normative’ ustedeo (usted + 3rd p.sg. conj.) and tuteo (tú + 2nd p.sg. conj.), and an informal voseo (vos + conj. derived from 2nd p.pl.). Due to a revitalization of verbal voseo since the 1960, this system is currently experiencing a linguistic change which results in a interesting linguistic reality with complex sociolinguistic and pragmatic variability. Besides characterizing a marked contrast between verbal and pronominal voseo as to socio-pragmatic meaning and usage frequency, the Chilean variety presents habitual intraspeaker alternations of ToAs, even within the same interaction, implying diverse, subtle, context-specific values (Hummel 2010: 105). Depending on the context, the aforementioned ToAs may indicate both an increase and decrease of intimacy/solidarity in relation to the other two ToAs (e.g. usted of tenderness vs. usted of anger; cultivated voseo vs. insulting vos).
This evolution of Chilean ToAs has newly prompted the first systematic and empirically well-based investigations, principally examining its frequency and social acceptance from a sociolinguistic perspective (Stevenson 2007, Rivadeneira 2009, Bishop & Michnowicz 2010, Helincks 2010, Torrejón 2010). My own previous study based on a stylistic corpus of 9 television program genres , concludes that 9 main factors stimulate voseo usage, of which ‘age’ and ‘formality degree’ most significantly. However, common intraspeaker shifts between tuteo and voseo which seemed unconditioned and certain additional types of alternations and specific voseo uses were noticed (e.g. impersonal voseo use in formal genres).
The goal of this lecture is to examine these particularities through a –for this topic novel– sociopragmatic approach based on theories of politeness. Since ToAs directly concern the hearer, its use has strong interactional implications fundamentally related to notions of social roles, politeness, and socio-cultural norms. Through an exploratory, qualitative, interpretive examination, I will verify the validity of contemporary models which include notions like face threatening acts vs. face flattering acts (Kerbrat-Orecchioni 1996), appropriate vs. (im)polite behaviour (cf. Watts’ Relational Work theory 2003), a nuanced view of gender in relation to (im)politeness (Mills 2003), and Spencer-Oatey’s face and sociality rights management (2000, 2008) in order to contribute to the explanation of the intraspeaker variability of Chilean ToAs.
References
Bishop, K. and Michnowicz, J. (2010): “Forms of Address in Chilean Spanish”, Hispania 93 (3): 413-429.
Helincks, K. (2010). La variación estilística y social del voseo chileno. Un estudio sociolingüístico cuantitativo y cualitativo basado en géneros televisivos. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Ghent: Ghent University.
____ (forthcoming): “La variación social y estilística del voseo chileno en diferentes géneros televisivos”, Revista Internacional de Lingüística Iberorománica 19.
Hummel, M. (2010): “Reflexiones metodológicas y teóricas sobre el estudio de las formas de tratamiento en el mundo hispanohablante, a partir de una investigación en Santiago de chile” In: Hummel M., Kluge B. & Vázquez Laslop M. E. (eds.) Formas y fórmulas de tratamiento en el mundo hispánico, México/Graz: El Colegio de México/Karl Franzens Universität, 101-162.
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C. (1996). La conversation. Paris: Seuil.
Mills, S. (2003). Gender and Politeness, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rivadeneira, M. (2009). El voseo en medios de comunicación de Chile. Descripción y análisis de la variación dialectal y funcional. PhD dissertation, Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
Spencer-Oatey, H. (2000). Culturally Speaking. Managing rapport through talk across cultures. London/New York: Continuum.
___ (2008). Culturally Speaking: culture, communications and politeness theory. (2nd ed.) London/New York: Continuum.
Stevenson, J. (2007). The Sociolinguistic Variables of Chilean Voseo. PhD dissertation, Washington: University of Washington.
Torrejon, A. (2010): “Nuevas observaciones sobre el voseo en el español de Chile” In: Hummel M., Kluge B. and Vázquez Laslop M. E. (eds.) Formas y fórmulas de tratamiento en el mundo hispánico, México/Graz: El Colegio de México/Karl Franzens Universität: 755-770.
Watts, Richard J. (2003). Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Uploads
Papers by Kris Helincks
Conference Presentations by Kris Helincks
In this lecture I present the preliminary quantitative results of a wider sociopragmatic-oriented research on this topic. The data come from a corpus of spontaneous conversations in everyday private, public and institutional situations. I concentrate on the most prominent social, relational and situational features, taking into account whether the ToAs express direct address, reported speech or impersonal use. The following research questions will be answered: how frequent are shifts between the three ToAs within an act, intervention, exchange, conversation or different encounter between two interlocutors?; which shifts are most common?; do some situations trigger more shifts than others?; and, does age (difference), gender (difference) and type of relationship of interlocutors influence the amount of shifting? This analysis contributes to verify Hummel’s suggestion of the existence of ‘acknowledged address schemes’ and a rich ‘culture of change of address’ in Chile.
References:
Bishop, Kelley, Michnowicz, Jim (2010): “Forms of Address in Chilean Spanish”, Hispania 93 (3): 413-429.
Helincks, Kris (2012): “La variación social y estilística del voseo chileno en diferentes géneros televisivos”, Revista Internacional de Lingüística Iberorománica 19: 185-211.
Hummel, Martin (2010): “Reflexiones metodológicas y teóricas sobre el estudio de las formas de tratamiento en el mundo hispanohablante, a partir de una investigación en Santiago de chile”, in M. Hummel, B. Kluge, M.E. Vázquez Laslop, (eds.): Formas y fórmulas de tratamiento en el mundo hispánico. México D.F./Graz: El Colegio de México/Karl Franzens Universität: 101-162.
Rivadeneira, Marcela (2009): El voseo en medios de comunicación de Chile. Descripción y análisis de la variación dialectal y funcional. PhD dissertation. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
Stevenson, Jeffrey (2007): The sociolinguistic variables of Chilean voseo. PhD dissertation. Seattle: University of Washington.
Torrejón, Alfredo (1986): “Acerca del Voseo Culto de Chile”, Hispania 69, 3, 677-83.
This evolution of Chilean ToAs has newly prompted the first systematic and empirically well-based investigations, principally examining its frequency and social acceptance from a sociolinguistic perspective (Stevenson 2007, Rivadeneira 2009, Bishop & Michnowicz 2010, Helincks 2010, Torrejón 2010). My own previous study based on a stylistic corpus of 9 television program genres , concludes that 9 main factors stimulate voseo usage, of which ‘age’ and ‘formality degree’ most significantly. However, common intraspeaker shifts between tuteo and voseo which seemed unconditioned and certain additional types of alternations and specific voseo uses were noticed (e.g. impersonal voseo use in formal genres).
The goal of this lecture is to examine these particularities through a –for this topic novel– sociopragmatic approach based on theories of politeness. Since ToAs directly concern the hearer, its use has strong interactional implications fundamentally related to notions of social roles, politeness, and socio-cultural norms. Through an exploratory, qualitative, interpretive examination, I will verify the validity of contemporary models which include notions like face threatening acts vs. face flattering acts (Kerbrat-Orecchioni 1996), appropriate vs. (im)polite behaviour (cf. Watts’ Relational Work theory 2003), a nuanced view of gender in relation to (im)politeness (Mills 2003), and Spencer-Oatey’s face and sociality rights management (2000, 2008) in order to contribute to the explanation of the intraspeaker variability of Chilean ToAs.
References
Bishop, K. and Michnowicz, J. (2010): “Forms of Address in Chilean Spanish”, Hispania 93 (3): 413-429.
Helincks, K. (2010). La variación estilística y social del voseo chileno. Un estudio sociolingüístico cuantitativo y cualitativo basado en géneros televisivos. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Ghent: Ghent University.
____ (forthcoming): “La variación social y estilística del voseo chileno en diferentes géneros televisivos”, Revista Internacional de Lingüística Iberorománica 19.
Hummel, M. (2010): “Reflexiones metodológicas y teóricas sobre el estudio de las formas de tratamiento en el mundo hispanohablante, a partir de una investigación en Santiago de chile” In: Hummel M., Kluge B. & Vázquez Laslop M. E. (eds.) Formas y fórmulas de tratamiento en el mundo hispánico, México/Graz: El Colegio de México/Karl Franzens Universität, 101-162.
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C. (1996). La conversation. Paris: Seuil.
Mills, S. (2003). Gender and Politeness, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rivadeneira, M. (2009). El voseo en medios de comunicación de Chile. Descripción y análisis de la variación dialectal y funcional. PhD dissertation, Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
Spencer-Oatey, H. (2000). Culturally Speaking. Managing rapport through talk across cultures. London/New York: Continuum.
___ (2008). Culturally Speaking: culture, communications and politeness theory. (2nd ed.) London/New York: Continuum.
Stevenson, J. (2007). The Sociolinguistic Variables of Chilean Voseo. PhD dissertation, Washington: University of Washington.
Torrejon, A. (2010): “Nuevas observaciones sobre el voseo en el español de Chile” In: Hummel M., Kluge B. and Vázquez Laslop M. E. (eds.) Formas y fórmulas de tratamiento en el mundo hispánico, México/Graz: El Colegio de México/Karl Franzens Universität: 755-770.
Watts, Richard J. (2003). Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
In this lecture I present the preliminary quantitative results of a wider sociopragmatic-oriented research on this topic. The data come from a corpus of spontaneous conversations in everyday private, public and institutional situations. I concentrate on the most prominent social, relational and situational features, taking into account whether the ToAs express direct address, reported speech or impersonal use. The following research questions will be answered: how frequent are shifts between the three ToAs within an act, intervention, exchange, conversation or different encounter between two interlocutors?; which shifts are most common?; do some situations trigger more shifts than others?; and, does age (difference), gender (difference) and type of relationship of interlocutors influence the amount of shifting? This analysis contributes to verify Hummel’s suggestion of the existence of ‘acknowledged address schemes’ and a rich ‘culture of change of address’ in Chile.
References:
Bishop, Kelley, Michnowicz, Jim (2010): “Forms of Address in Chilean Spanish”, Hispania 93 (3): 413-429.
Helincks, Kris (2012): “La variación social y estilística del voseo chileno en diferentes géneros televisivos”, Revista Internacional de Lingüística Iberorománica 19: 185-211.
Hummel, Martin (2010): “Reflexiones metodológicas y teóricas sobre el estudio de las formas de tratamiento en el mundo hispanohablante, a partir de una investigación en Santiago de chile”, in M. Hummel, B. Kluge, M.E. Vázquez Laslop, (eds.): Formas y fórmulas de tratamiento en el mundo hispánico. México D.F./Graz: El Colegio de México/Karl Franzens Universität: 101-162.
Rivadeneira, Marcela (2009): El voseo en medios de comunicación de Chile. Descripción y análisis de la variación dialectal y funcional. PhD dissertation. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
Stevenson, Jeffrey (2007): The sociolinguistic variables of Chilean voseo. PhD dissertation. Seattle: University of Washington.
Torrejón, Alfredo (1986): “Acerca del Voseo Culto de Chile”, Hispania 69, 3, 677-83.
This evolution of Chilean ToAs has newly prompted the first systematic and empirically well-based investigations, principally examining its frequency and social acceptance from a sociolinguistic perspective (Stevenson 2007, Rivadeneira 2009, Bishop & Michnowicz 2010, Helincks 2010, Torrejón 2010). My own previous study based on a stylistic corpus of 9 television program genres , concludes that 9 main factors stimulate voseo usage, of which ‘age’ and ‘formality degree’ most significantly. However, common intraspeaker shifts between tuteo and voseo which seemed unconditioned and certain additional types of alternations and specific voseo uses were noticed (e.g. impersonal voseo use in formal genres).
The goal of this lecture is to examine these particularities through a –for this topic novel– sociopragmatic approach based on theories of politeness. Since ToAs directly concern the hearer, its use has strong interactional implications fundamentally related to notions of social roles, politeness, and socio-cultural norms. Through an exploratory, qualitative, interpretive examination, I will verify the validity of contemporary models which include notions like face threatening acts vs. face flattering acts (Kerbrat-Orecchioni 1996), appropriate vs. (im)polite behaviour (cf. Watts’ Relational Work theory 2003), a nuanced view of gender in relation to (im)politeness (Mills 2003), and Spencer-Oatey’s face and sociality rights management (2000, 2008) in order to contribute to the explanation of the intraspeaker variability of Chilean ToAs.
References
Bishop, K. and Michnowicz, J. (2010): “Forms of Address in Chilean Spanish”, Hispania 93 (3): 413-429.
Helincks, K. (2010). La variación estilística y social del voseo chileno. Un estudio sociolingüístico cuantitativo y cualitativo basado en géneros televisivos. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Ghent: Ghent University.
____ (forthcoming): “La variación social y estilística del voseo chileno en diferentes géneros televisivos”, Revista Internacional de Lingüística Iberorománica 19.
Hummel, M. (2010): “Reflexiones metodológicas y teóricas sobre el estudio de las formas de tratamiento en el mundo hispanohablante, a partir de una investigación en Santiago de chile” In: Hummel M., Kluge B. & Vázquez Laslop M. E. (eds.) Formas y fórmulas de tratamiento en el mundo hispánico, México/Graz: El Colegio de México/Karl Franzens Universität, 101-162.
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C. (1996). La conversation. Paris: Seuil.
Mills, S. (2003). Gender and Politeness, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rivadeneira, M. (2009). El voseo en medios de comunicación de Chile. Descripción y análisis de la variación dialectal y funcional. PhD dissertation, Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
Spencer-Oatey, H. (2000). Culturally Speaking. Managing rapport through talk across cultures. London/New York: Continuum.
___ (2008). Culturally Speaking: culture, communications and politeness theory. (2nd ed.) London/New York: Continuum.
Stevenson, J. (2007). The Sociolinguistic Variables of Chilean Voseo. PhD dissertation, Washington: University of Washington.
Torrejon, A. (2010): “Nuevas observaciones sobre el voseo en el español de Chile” In: Hummel M., Kluge B. and Vázquez Laslop M. E. (eds.) Formas y fórmulas de tratamiento en el mundo hispánico, México/Graz: El Colegio de México/Karl Franzens Universität: 755-770.
Watts, Richard J. (2003). Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.