Contrastive Analysis of English and Chinese of Modest Title and Honorific Title

王雪源

摘要：本文主要是从英汉对比的角度运用利奇的礼貌原则中的谦虚原则和赞扬原则对谦称和敬称加以分析。由于社会文化的差异，东西方对于谦称和敬称的使用上有很大的不同。谦称和敬称均属于社会指示语，能表示说话者的社会地位和他们之间的关系。根据不同的语境，使用谦称时常常表达的是对于自己的贬损，而使用敬称时常常表达的是对对方的尊敬和赞扬的一种夸大。尤其是在中国文化中，对于谦称和敬称的使用更加常见，且常常以第二人称的形式出现。本文把原理和大量例子结合起来，从英汉对比的角度对谦称和敬称进行详细的分析。

关键词 英汉对比；谦称；敬称；谦虛原则；赞扬原则

Abstract

The focus of this paper is to present the contrastive analysis of English and Chinese of modest title and honorific title with the theories of Leechs Maxim of Approbation and Maxim of Modesty. As the cultural diversities， there is a big difference between English and Chinese of modest title and honorific title. They are all social deixis， which can show people their social position and the relationship between them. According to different contexts， the use of modest title often deliver the dispraise of oneself， while the use of honorific title often convey the exaggerated express of respect and praise to others. Especially in Chinese culture， modest title and honorific title are used more often， and usually in the second person form. The further analysis aims at the comparison of English and Chinese of modest title and honorific title， with the combination of theories and a amount of examples.

Key words contrastive analysis of English and Chinese modest title honorific title Maxim of Approbation Maxim of Modesty

Chapter 1 Introduction

Modest title and honorific title belong to both English and Chinese， and the use of them is quite different. The focus of this paper is to present the pragmatic analysis of modest title and honorific title with the theories of Leechs Maxim of Approbation and Maxim of Modesty.

In our modern society， we are more and more frequently communicating with people abroad. We are not only talking about something of our daily life， but also cooperating with each other on economy， culture， science and so on. The most basic thing that the situation requires us to do is getting more knowledge about different language applying. As there is a lot of differences between Chinese and English， we should analysis them as to understand each other clearly. Otherwise， we may misunderstand others， which can lead to some undesirable result or even bigger lost.

Modest title and honorific title are both deixis. Deixis is an important part in pragmatic linguistic， and S.C.Levison （ S.C.Levison 1983， 54 ） limits social deixis as to react the social identity of the speakers in language structure， and the social relationship between the speaker and the hearer， as well as the relationship between the people or the thing that they are talking about. Linguist Fillmore （ Fillmore， 1971 ） catalogues social deixis information into seven part and the second part involves the modest title and honorific title. His major task is to analysis the pragmatic equivalence of the communicative function of social deixis. Meanwhile， when discussing the rule of social language and trans-cultural communication， Thomas （ Thomas ， 1983 ） points out that pragmatic failure is caused by pragmatic transfer， which means that when people from different culture communicating with each other， they may directly translate their original language as target language without considering the rules that language must obey.

In my thesis， I will state Leechs Maxim of Approbation and Maxim of Modesty as the theoretical information. At the same time， I will give my method and some examples to make the thesis more reliable. Of course， the purpose of my thesis is to reduce the mistake when people from different country are communicating with each other and avoid pragmatic failure that people may make.

Chapter 2 Pragmatic analysis

2.1 Theoretical contribution

This chapter mainly provides certain theories for pragmatic analysis of modest title and honorific title ---- theories of Leechs Maxim of Approbation and Maxim of Modesty. The following detailed analysis is based on those linguistic theories. The tact maxim states： 'Minimize the expression of beliefs which imply cost to other； maximize the expression of beliefs which imply benefit to other.' The first part of this maxim fits in with Brown and Levison's negative politeness strategy of minimizing the imposition， and the second part reflects the positive politeness strategy of attending to the hearer's interests， wants， and needs. Leech's Generosity maxim states： 'Minimize the expression of beliefs that express or imply benefit to self； maximize the expression of beliefs that express or imply cost to self.' Unlike the tact maxim， the maxim of generosity focuses on the speaker， and says that others should be put first instead of the self.

2.1.1 Maxim of Modest

According to Modest Maxim， self-degradation will bring no harm. The Modesty maxim states： 'Minimize the expression of praise of self； maximize the expression of dispraise of self.' Comparing with Gu Yueguos Censures Oneself to Revere the Person Criterion （ 貶己尊人原则 ）， which colored by our Chinese culture and act as the heart of Chinese politeness. Usually， when facing with others praise， instead of accepting it by expressing his thanks， Chinese will show others his self-degradation and refuse the praise at the same time. Culture in different countries often regards modest as the expression of politeness. However， there are big differences between Chinese and English when they abiding by the rule. English also respect others， but they dont underestimate themselves and generally accept peoples praise with pleasure. While， Chinese will not behave like that.

Example 1：

When someone said to the parent of an excellent student： “ How outstanding your son is！” Then the parent answer： “ just so-so.” After that， the parent exhort their child： “ Do not so proud of yourself. As conceit makes one lag behind， so modesty helps one make progress.

People from English will be surprised when they hear how Chinese reply to such questions. As they think， accepting others praise actively can avoid to make harm to others positive face which is regarded as being polite. In the cross-international communication， if the hearers do not understand those culture， they may misunderstand each other. Chinese may think that English are too conceited and arrogant， while English may think that Chinese are speaking insincerely.

2.1.2 Maxim of Approbation

According to Approbation Maxim， you should praise others when it is necessary and avoid saying unpleasant things about others. So “What a marvelous meal you cooked” Is highly valued， while “What an awful meal you cooked” is not. The Approbation maxim states： 'Minimize the expression of beliefs which express dispraise of other； maximize the expression of beliefs which express approval of other.' It is preferred to praise others and if this is impossible， to sidestep the issue， to give some sort of minimal response （possibly through the use of euphemisms）， or to remain silent. The first part of the maxim avoids disagreement； the second part intends to make other people feel good by showing solidarity.

Example 2：

In China， students cannot directly call their teachers name， and they should add honorific titles before teachers family name. However， English students are not required to do like this， instead， they can directly call their teacher name without adding anything.

2.2 Method and Mode

For the modest title and honorific title， its own features have pragmatic value of analysis. The uttering of them sometimes cannot be understood by its literal meaning， so the above-mentioned theories lead hearers to find out its implicit meaning hidden behind the surface structure.

Example 3：

My place （ 敝處 ）

When we first mention my place， it will be translated to my home or my country. However， I believe only a small part of people will associate it with the translated meaning of Chinese. From the word itself， we can taste the speakers modest and it involves Leechs Maxim of Modesty. In China， the use of modest title is not just an unassertive address of oneself； it also shows the speakers respect to the hearer. The features of Chinese words are more vivid and exaggerated， with which peoples dialogue becomes more serious.

Chapter 3 The contrastive analysis of English and Chinese of modest title

3.1 Introduction

In terms of modest title， the implicit meaning convey the meaning of dispraise refers to that it has contain self-modest. In fact， the modest title beyond the literal meaning of itself， and this implied meaning should be in accordance with current context or speaking environment.

3.2 The convey of dispraise

In English， this kind of phenomenon is not that obvious and the meaning is often delivered without so much implied idea. English like to express their thoughts in a direct way， so that the hearer can quickly grasp the speakers idea. While the modest titles in Chinese are much more than that of in English， and an important reason is the serious feudal patriarchal system of China. In ancient time， there is some thoughts as “the most outstanding bird would be shot first”， which deeply influences our Chinese people. In general， Chinese do not like to be the most excellent one， and in this way they can protect themselves best. However， English respected peoples personal value since many years ago and they like to express themselves as to show people their characteristics.

For another， five-thousand-years Chinese culture accumulates a lot of tradition. Chinese often treat others with polite and modest attitude that Chinese tradition contributes much to the formation of that. While western countries often pay their attention on democratic and equal concepts that the concepts are gradually spread widely. With the rights and influences of English royal became weaker and weaker， such kind of titles are no longer used.

Example 5：

Your majesty （ 寡人：表帝王之意 ）

This word is translated as“寡人”which means the kings self-modesty and expresses that he is not that qualified for the title. Yet English kings or queens admit their high position and accept other peoples honorific titles without such kind of feeling. In China， politeness is treated as a sincere expression of some sort of kind. In fact， Chineses modest is the real reaction of their inner-heart and their honest thoughts.

Chapter 4 The contrastive analysis of English and Chinese of Honorific Title

4.1 Introduction

The features of Chinese language are brief， reserved and euphemistic， which pay great attention to the form of language. At the same time， Chinese think highly of “face” and “politeness”. With considering of Polite Maxim， Chinese often try to find a way to express themselves in a modest way. As the deep meanings in speakers words require the hearer to taste. English often behave in the opposite way.

4.2 The convey of respect and praise

Usually， there are two methods when calling somebody. One is the ordinal address， and another is honorific address. In general， honorific titles are generated with emotional colors， even sometimes with dense colors. As a result， the use of them is depending on. On the contrary， you may lose to respect others.

Even though English has more honorific titles than other western language， comparing to Chinese， their honorific titles are insignificant to mention. Especially in translation， there are a lot of honorific titles in Chinese text， but when they are translated into English， they may lose their lingering charm. With the speakers deeply respect or praise， they often use so many honorific titles in their dialogues.

Example 7：

故此求老先生致令郎， 請将琪官放回。

———《红楼梦》

A： He therefore politely and urgently requests you to influence your esteemed son to relinquish young Chi.

——Florence and Isabel Mchugh 译 The Dream of the Red Chamber

B： I beg you， therefore， to ask your noble son to send Chi Kuan back.

——The Dream of the Red Mansion 杨宪益夫妇译

In the example， both of translators change “令郎” to your esteemed son or your noble son. Such kind of address is speakers honorific titles to the hearers son. Both translators professionally control a proper method of translation. They borrow the English expression， which makes the translated text more vivid and form the same atmosphere as the original text.

Chapter 5 Conclusion

Both speaker and hearer should pay highly attention to cultural diversity in the cross-cultural communication. Besides， we should not take others different polite custom too serious， or require them in our polite standard. For the first， we must have such a point of view that different cultures are all equal and their differences are originated from different traditions and values. Peoples greetings in Chinese are like “Have you eaten？” while English greetings are “How are you？” or “Hello”. In different cultural background， they are all appropriate， and they show their cultural characteristics and charms at the same time. Then， both communicators should work hard to get to know others pragmatic criterion of politeness. Only if understand both sides criterion， can we better pass on our own culture.

The use of polite language is limited by cultural tradition. If we want to successfully communicate， wed better grasp the essence of Politeness Maxim and apply them flexibly in different occasions. At the same time， making use of others polite criterion is the best. In this way， we can deliver our respect and our willing to cooperate with others without too much explanation of our own language using custom.

In our further study， we should learn how to make the modest titles and honorific titles more appropriate in their using. They are not only some tools for communication， but also the symbol of a countrys culture and progress. Polite criterion and strategy is a exoteric system and can never be totally summarized. With the advance of our era， the whole world will change as follow， even Chinese polite criterion will develop at the same time. With the Reform and Opening-up， cross-cultural communication happens more frequently which requires Chinese know more about western culture as to master them. Only if understand them， will us avoid to misunderstand each other in communication.

References：

Bi， W. （1999）. In aspects of international communication. Beijing： Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.

Deng， Y. & Liu， R. （2001）. Language and culture（ In Chinese）. Beijing： Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.

Fillmore， C. （1971）. Santa cruz lectures on deixis. Indiana： Indiana University Linguistic Club.

Guo， Y. （1990）. Politeness phenomenon in modern Chinese[J]. Journal of pragmatics.

He， S. （2002）. Contrastive studies of English and Chinese language（In Chinese）. Shanghai： Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.

He， Z. （1997）. Pragmatics and English learning（In Chinese）. Shanghai： Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.

He， Z. （2000）. A new survey on pragmatics（In Chinese）. Shanghai： Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.

Leech， G. （1983）. Principles of pragmatics. London： Longman.

Levison， S. （1983）. Pragmatics. Cambridge： Cambridge University Press.

Wolfson， N. （1989）. Sociolinguistics and TESOL： Perspectives. Newbury House Publishers.