Professional Documents
Culture Documents
This paper presents a comparison between the usage of kinship terms of address and
reference in the Japanese and Dutch language. In the first part of the paper, an outline will be
given regarding the uses of kinship terms in both Japanese and Dutch, emphasizing the
former one due to its complex nature and dependence on the context. In the second part, an
attempt will be made to compare kinship terms from both languages in order to determine to
what extent respect in attitude towards kins in its terminology can be distinguished. The scope
of this paper will be limited to kinship terminology within families, disregarding related terms
used in companies.
When the Japanese language is discussed in this paper, it refers to Standard Japanese
(hyōjungo, 標 準 語 ), as it is taught in schools and used in official communication, and
disregards regional differences which may affect the terminology of relationships. The
foremost reason why Dutch will be used as the second language is because it is my mother
tongue and a language I am utmost familiar with as I have been raised in a Dutch
environment. In addition, Dutch has a 54 percent correlation with English regarding identical
kinship term-types, which can be considered relatively high (Edmonson, 1957: 402). It might
be relevant to include my own experiences with Dutch kinship terms, for I do not have to
depend solely on data collected in researches conducted by other scholars.
2
shall be introducing the kinships terms of father next (see Table 1).
めい [name] niece
In the case of (i) and (iv), a person from the out-group will address or refer to
someone's father with either otōsan ( お父さん ) or otōsama ( お父様 ), the latter more polite
than the former. In (ii) and (v), otōsan will be used for either addressing and referring to the
father. Finally, in the case of (iii), the speaker shall be using chichi ( 父 ) or oyaji ( 親 父 ) to
refer to his or her own father, the former more polite than the latter one. In other words, the
kinship terms for 'out → in' and 'in → in' can basically be used for both addressing and
referring, while the terms for 'in → out' can only be used for reference.
If we move on to the second table (Table 1, below the horizontal line) published by
Yamaguchi, a remarkable difference can be found in the list for 'in → in' terms. The words
used for addressing or referring to younger brother and sister, son and daughter, nephew and
niece, and husband and wife (group B) are being replaced by his or her name, in contrary to
the more formal and less personal terms used to indicate father and mother, elder brother and
sister, grandfather and grandmother, and uncle and aunt (group A).
1 Yamaguchi, Toshiko, 2007. Japanese Language in Use: An Introduction, p. 141
3
Yamaguchi gives no further explanation for this change of terms, but it can be
assumed this is related to the common Japanese perception of respecting elders, in both
behavior and words. For example, all kins from group B, however, are in general younger
than the speaker and addressed of referred to by their first name within their in-group. Kins
listed in group A are in most cases older than the speaker and are being addressed or referred
to by lexical terms that include the prefix of politeness, o- (お) within their in-group. As a side
note, the honorific prefix go- (ご, 御) is used in most cases for Sino-Japanese words, although
this a rule of thumb.
This prefix, however, can be considered to be relatively new to the Japanese language.
According to History of Japan ( 日本の歴史 ; 1985), a manga highlighted by Yamaguchi in her
book, subtle differences can be distinguished regarding 'in → in' kinship terms in manga that
have been published shortly after World War II (Yamaguchi, 2007: 413-144) . When the father
returns from his work, his son refers to him with tōsan ( 父 さ ん ), which lacks the prefix of
politeness. A similar construction is the way in which a mother refers to herself in the
presence of her children by using kaasan ( 母さん ). A grandfather addresses his grandson by
susume (進め), without the standard addition of a suffix (for example: -san (-さん) or -kun (-く
ん)).
The foremost reason why I put such an emphasis on this particular column of 'in →
in' of Yamaguchi's table is because it is related to the research question posed earlier in this
paper and bears relevance to the comparison with Dutch kinship terms.
4
kinship terms is less consistent than the Japanese equivalents.
5
purpose of addressing. A high level of consistency can also be found in the list of 'out → in'
groups. As mentioned before, there is no possibility to address someone in the situation of 'in
→ out', so this column will be ignored for now. The consistency of usage of kinship terms in
Dutch is much lower than their Japanese equivalents.
A Dutch person will most likely address his elder brother or sister by their respective
names, while this person will refer to these by mijn broer (my brother) or mijn zus (my sister),
unless talking to someone who actually knows the speaker's brother of sister by name. This
pattern is used for every family member but father and mother. It is unlikely to address or
refer to your own or someone else's parents by their name.
Another, purely linguistic consistency that can be derived from the table of Japanese
kinship terms is the amount of morae for each term: until the horizontal line, all terms from
'in → in' and 'out → in' category consist of five morae, of which the first mora is in all cases
the prefix of politeness o- and final two morae either the suffix -san or -sama (様). Therefore,
the second and third morae from each term express the actual meaning of the word and which
are often written in Chinese characters or kanji (disregarded in Table 1). In the terms from the
'in → out' group a similar consistency of two morae per term can be observed, neglecting the
given alternatives. After the break, the overall consistency is missing albeit terms can still be
vertically divided into groups of two by sorting the morae.
In Dutch no such consistency can be found in the family kinship terms. A significant
reason for this is the classification of languages: although it is unanimously accepted that the
Dutch language belongs to the West Germanic languages and shows strong resemblance with
other languages from the same classification (as shown in Table 3 below), linguists have yet
to agree unanimously to what category the Japanese languages belong (Shibatani, 1990: 94).
By comparing both appendices horizontally, more research question related data can be
derived from the tables. If we take a look at the terms used to refer to one's mother from the
'in → out' group, we can see both haha ( 母 ) and ofukuro ( お 袋 ) are being used, the former
categorized as humble (kenjōgo, 謙譲語 ) and latter as colloquial. Only okaasan ( お母さん ) is
6
listed under 'in → in', which features a honorific or respectful connotation (keigo, 敬語). For
addressing or referring to one's mother according the third column, one should be using either
okaasan or okaasama (お母さま), of which the latter features an even higher level of honor or
respect. Basically, this pattern of classification (humble or colloquialism for 'in → out' and
honor or respect for both 'in → in' and 'out → in') is utilized for all family members older than
the speaker.
A change can be distinguished from the second part of the table, which will be
illustrated by the example of younger brother. In the case of 'in → out', he is referred to with
otōto ( 弟 ), a humble term. His name is used to both address and refer to him according the
column for 'in → in', usage which may be related to the level of colloquialism. In the third
column for 'out → in', one will use otōtosan ( 弟 さ ん ), a honorific term. Albeit some minor
alterations can be observed in the table, this pattern of classification (humble for 'in → out',
name (colloquialism) for 'in → in' and honorific for 'out → in') is used for kins younger than
the speaker. This analysis of classification will be summarized in Table 4:
7
CONCLUSION
So far, data drawn from various sources regarding kinship terminology in the Japanese and
Dutch language has been analyzed, discussed and compared in order to determine to what
extent respect in attitude towards kins in its terminology can be distinguished. In conclusion, I
will present my findings based on this paper.
The distinction between in- and out-groups in Japan has proven to be of significant
importance while researching the subject of kinship terminology. According to the data,
people from the out-group will in all times approach members of the in-group in a honorific
and respectful manner of speech. Within the in-group, the speaker proves to share the same
level of respect towards kins elder than him or her, while a more colloquial and personal level
of speech is used towards family members that are younger. When the speaker refers to a
family member, most likely a humble term is used to indicate both kins older and younger
than the speaker, although occassionally a colloquial term is used.
The lack of this strong perception of social groups makes it less difficult to research
the topic of kinship terminology in Dutch. It is highly unlikely the speaker will address or
refer to his or her parents by their names, so virtually in every case the respective term is
used. When the speaker addresses or refers to kins from a previous generation (other than
parents, that is), either a term or a term followed by a name is being used. When the listener is
engaged in a conversation while not knowing the person in question, the name will be
omitted. This is the same for referring to family members from the same or a younger
generation, although these will be addressed by merely their name. In general, addressing a
kin by using a term is considered to be more respectful than name only.
8
REFERENCES
Edmonson, Munro S., 1957. “Kinship Terms and Kinship Concepts” in American
Anthropologist, 343-372.
Shibatani, Masayoshi. (1990). The languages of Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press. p 94.
Yamaguchi, Toshiko, 2007. Japanese Language in Use: An Introduction. London:
Continuum. pp. 121-168.