Kinship terminology in Dutch and Japanese:

Evolution of connotations of respect during the twentieth century

Name: Guan van Zoggel

Studentnumber: 0822507
Study: Talen en Culturen van Japan
Email: g.m.a.g.van.zoggel@umail.leidenuniv.nl
Course: Focus 5a: Sociolinguistics and discourse I
Instructor: Dr. R.J. Länsisalmi
Word count: 3385
Datum: December 9th, 2010

Talen en Culturen van Japan

Universiteit Leiden
This paper presents a comparison between the connotations of respect in kinship terminology in
both the Dutch and Japanese language. In addition, an attempt will be made to compare the
evolution of these connotations in both languages from the early twentieth century and up until the
present day.

Introduction
After several aerial bombardments during World War II,1 including the atomic bombings of
Hiroshima and Nagasaki, both nations were devastated in every aspect. Subsequently, although the
circumstances differed greatly, both the Netherlands and Japan have faced militarily occupation by
respectively Germany and the United States of America, which can be considered as important, if
not the most important, events during the twentieth century.
The severe trails left by World War II and occupations are evident from various documents
that deal with these historical events and have been subjected to studies numerous times. However,
not much has been written about these periods of hardship on the interaction of people from a
sociolinguistic perspective, while it is reasonable to suggest that these could have had a certain
influence. It could have been either beneficial to the sentiment of nationalism, reconcilement and
respect towards each other, or, due to oppression, it could have provoked misanthropical feelings
not only towards inhabitants of the opposing nation, but also towards close relatives.
Therefore it might be relevant to analyze kinship terminology within nuclear families early
and late twentieth century, two periods separated by a devastating global war, in both the Dutch and
Japanese language. Although discovering the immediate cause of conceivable changes between
kinship terminology in both periods and language is not the aim of this paper, an attempt will be
made to unveil possible relations with the hardships of World War II and occupations.

Methodology
The data that will be used to analyze kinship terms for contemporary terminology is drawn mainly
from previous studies, and for prewar terminology the data is, due to the lack of primary sources,
drawn from early twentieth century literature. The selected works consist of Van oude menschen, de
dingen, die voorbij gaan...(1906) by Louis Couperus and De Nachtbruid (1909) by Fredrik van
Eeden as sources of Dutch kinship terms, and Botchan (1906) by Natsume Sōseki and the first
volume of Ie (1911) by Tōson Shimazaki, as literary works to draw Japanese kinship terms from.

1 It should be noted that, according to official terminology, there are differences between World War II, in which the
Netherlands was involved, and the Pacific War, the Asia-Pacific theater of World War II in which Japan was
involved. While World War II spans from September 1st 1939 until September 2nd 1945, the Pacific War began
December 7th 1941 and ended simultaneously with World War II.

2
 In order to be representative of life in early twentieth century, these works were not
primarily selected by their canonical weight, but had to meet certain predetermined requirements.
First, the literary works had to be published at the beginning of the twentieth century, within five
years of each other. Second, the authors had to be native-born citizens to reduce the distortion of
dialectical and foreign influences, such as Flemish (Belgian Dutch), as much as possible. Third, the
style in which the texts have been written, should be realistic, a definition that Morris relates to
mimesis: “The meaning of mimesis has gradually widened to encompass the general idea of close
artistic imitation of social reality” (Morris, 2003: 5). And fourth, the narrative point of view should
be first-person, so the story revolves around a protagonist, the ego, who is not only using terms to
address his or her relatives, but also may refer to relatives in a non-verbal manner, such as in
thoughts.
Kinship terms used in the four literary works were drawn by, while reading, registering the
Dutch or Japanese equivalent, mark whether these were being used as a reference or addressing
term, and by indicating the frequency of the term appeared throughout the indicated part of the text
(see Appendix A and B). In order to limit the scope of the research, terms to indicate relatives from
equal or younger generations are omitted, thus this paper will be focused on the usage of kinship
terms by the ego to indicate his kins from direct older generations.
Preceding the comparison between Dutch and Japanese kinship terminologies, a brief
introduction to the languages and corresponding cultural aspects will be given. As the Dutch
language has a 54 percent correlation with English regarding identical kinship terminology
(Edmonson, 1957: 402), which can be considered as relatively high among the languages spoken in
Europe, the emphasis of this introduction will be on the Japanese sociolinguistic system, due to its
complex nature and context-dependency. A distinction within the terminology of kinship that one
should take into account is reference terms, used by the speaker to refer to someone who is not
present at the time of the conversation, and address terms, which are used by the speaker to address
the listener.

Introduction to Dutch language

Like English, Dutch belongs to the West Germanic language family, that is, according to the Dutch
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, “the mother tongue of more than 22 million people in the Netherlands
and Belgium”.2 When Dutch is mentioned in this paper, it refers to standardized Dutch language as
it is taught in schools, and used by authorities and media. Next, the Dutch kinship terminology will

2 Retrieved from: http://www.minbuza.nl/en/You_and_the_Netherlands/About_the_Netherlands/General_information/

The_country_and_its_people, accessed on November 20th 2010

3
be analyzed by describing various contemporary situations in which the father of the speaker is
being either referred to or addressed directly.
In general, the father will be referred to by the honorific term vader, preceded by a
possessive adjective, such as mijn ('my'), jouw ('your'), zijn ('his') and onze ('our'), similar to the
system used in English. If the speaker omits one of these possessive adjectives, the listener may
comprehend the sentence, although it can be considered as rather obsolete. In this particular
situation, the speaker will automatically refer to his own father. When the speaker addresses his
father, more colloquial terms, such as pap ('dad') or pappa ('daddy'), are often used. If the relation
between speaker and father is as strong as actual friendship, it is not unlikely that the speaker
addresses the father with his first name. This sociolinguistic structure of reference and addressing of
the mother is identical. When referring to both parents by using a 'cover-term', “the gender
distinction is being neutralized: ouders ('parents')” (Broeder and Extra, 1991: 212).
A similar sociolinguistic structure is being used to indicate grandparents, which closely
resembles the English equivalent. In the case of referring to a grandfather, the term vader is
preceded by the appropriate possessive adjective and directly by groot ('grand'). The outcome is,
once again, equal to the English variant: mijn grootvader ('my grandfather'). Colloquial terms, most
often opa ('grandpa') and oma ('grandma'), are being used to address the grandparents of the speaker
individually, often followed by their first or last name, such as opa Gerard or oma Van Wijk. Unlike
parents, the cover-term grootouders ('grandparents') is rarely used; opa en oma ('grandpa and
grandma') are usually used to indicate grandparents as a couple. As Mestheneos and Svensson-
Dianellou (2004: 4) point out, sometimes the diminutive opaatje ('little grandpa') or omaatje ('little
grandma') are being used, but these can be considered as “either insulting or used to emphasise
some kind of weakness, rather than a term of endearment”.
Table 1 contains a full survey of basic kinship terms in the Dutch language, derived from the
conceptual distinctions given above, including kinship terms that have not yet been discussed in this
paper and are of no relevance to the research topic.

Table 1: Kinship terms for male and female relatives in the Dutch language (Broeder and Extra, 1991: 212).

Male Female Cover-terms

+3 overgrootvader grootopa, opa [name] overgrootmoeder, grootoma, oma [name] overgrootouders
+2 grootvader, opa, opa [name] grootmoeder, oma, oma [name] grootouders
+1 pa*, pap*, pappa, vader, [name]* ma*, mam*, mamma, moeder, [name]* ouders
0 broer, [name] zus(ter), [name]
-1 zoon, [name] dochter, [name] kind, kinderen (pl.)
-2 kleinzoon, [name] kleindochter, [name] kleinkinderen

4
 -3 achterkleinzoon, [name] achterkleindochter, [name] achterkleinkinderen
Bold indicates both (R) and (A); plain indicates (R) only; * asterisks indicates (A) only.

Introduction to Japanese language

According to MITA,3 the Japanese language is spoken by approximately 120 million inhabitants of
Japan and, although part of the Japonic language family, it is “the only major world language whose
genetic affiliation to other languages of language has not been conclusively proven” (Shibata, 1990:
94). If the Japanese language is mentioned in this paper, it refers to hyôjungo ( 標準語, 'standardized
Japanese'), as it is taught in schools and used in official communication, and disregards regional
differences which may affect the terminology of indicating kins.
Before moving on to the topic of analyzing Japanese kinship terms, one should be aware of
the Japanese perception of social groups. The Japanese make a clear distinction between people that
are in their so-called uchi (うち, 'in-groups'), which in most cases refer to family members, and soto
( そと , 'outside') or sometimes indicated as yoso ( よそ , 'another place'), people outside the family of
the speaker.
Yamaguchi divides this system of terminology in five basic relationships, illustrated by
additional scenarios to support her examples: “(i) out → in (R), (ii) in → in (R), (iii) in → out (R),
(iv) out → in (A), and (v) in → in (A),” (2007: 139), in which (R) refers to reference terms and (A)
to address terms. Similar to the situations provided for Dutch, the Japanese sociolinguistic structure
of kinship terminology will be analyzed by using a speaker referring to or addressing the father.
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 one being more polite. In (ii)
and (v), otōsan is used for either addressing and referring to the father. 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 one being more polite. 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. 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.
In order to explain this structure in more detail, its usage will be placed within a context by
using data from Table 2. In case the listener belongs to the out-group, for example a teacher, the
speaker will use either chichi or oyaji to refer to his or her father (iii). If the listener belongs to the
speaker’s in-group, such as siblings, otōsan is used to refer to the speaker’s father (ii). The same
3 Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Retrieved from: http://web.mit.edu/jpnet/articles/JapaneseLanguage.html,
accessed on November 20th 2010

5
term is used when the speaker addresses his or her father directly (v). The third situation is when a
person that belongs to one’s out-group, like the teacher mentioned before, refers to (i) or addresses
someone who belongs to the speaker’s in-group, such as the father, either otōsan or otōsama can be
used.
The common Japanese perception of respecting elders can therefore not only be applied to
behavior, but also to kinship terminology. As can be observed in Table 2, all kins from group B are
in general younger than the speaker and are referred to or addressed by their first name within their
in-group. Relatives listed in group A, however, are often older than the speaker and are being
referred to or addressed by lexical terms that include the prefix of politeness, o- (お) within their in-
group, which may be considered as an additional layer of respect.4
The complete list of Japanese kinship terminology can be found in Table 2:

Table 2: Kinship terms for relatives in the Japanese language (Yamaguchi, 2007: 141)

In → Out In → In Out → In Meaning

そふ おじいさん おじいさん grandfather

そぼ おばあさん おばあさん grandmother

ちち・おやじ おとうさん おとうさん・おとうさま father

はは・おふくろ おかあさん おかあさん・おかあさま mother

elder brother A
あに・あにき おにいさん おにいさん
あね・あねき おねえさん おねえさん elder sister

おじ おじいさん おじいさん uncle

おば おばあさん おばあさん aunt

おとうと [name] おとうとさん younger brother

いもうと [name] いもうとさん younger sister

むすこ [name] ごしそくさま・むすこさま・むこさん・ son

むすめ [name] おじょうさま・むすめさん・おむすめさん daughter

おい [name] nephew
B
めい [name] niece

しゅじん・ *あなた・おとうさん・ ごしゅじんさま・ごしゅじん・ husband

おっと・だんな・ [name]
ていしゅ・ハズ
かない・つま・ *おまえ・おかあさん・ おくさん・おくさま wife
ワイフ [name]
Bold indicates both (R) and (A); plain indicates (R) only; * asterisks indicates (A) only

4 The honorific prefix go- (ご or 御) is used in most cases for Sino-Japanese words, although this a rule of thumb.

6
Comparing and analyzing
For comparing kinship terminology in the contemporary Japanese and Dutch language, I shall draw
the data from Table 1 and 2, which have been discussed in the first section of this analysis. The
horizontal line marks the point where Table 4.4 and Table 4.5 from Yamaguchi's book (Yamaguchi,
2007: 141) have been fused together and separates terms used for kins older than the speaker and
those who are younger. As stated before, in this paper the priority is given to kinship terms used
towards older than the speaker.
By comparing Table 1 and 2, one will notice that about half of the Japanese kins within the
'in → in' group refer to and address each other with their name, while the Dutch can virtually
address every kin by name, although it is highly unlikely the name is being used to indicate the
speaker’s parents. Occasionally, it is preceded by a prefix like opa, followed by his first of last
name. This makes the usage of kinship terms in Dutch more personal than in Japanese, where
kinship terms arguably seem to inherently feature a social status or function.
In Japanese, there is a high level of consistency within 'in → in' conversations between
address and reference terms. In the list of terms to refer to or address a family member, only anata
( あなた , lit. ‘you’ used for someone of equal or lower status) and omae ( お前 , lit. ‘you’, formerly
honorific, now sometimes derogatory term referring to an equal or inferior), for husband and wife
respectively, are exclusively used for the 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 neglected for now. The consistency of
usage of kinship terms in Dutch is much lower than their Japanese equivalents.
By observing 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 listed under 'in → in', which features a
honorific or respectful connotation (keigo, 敬 語 ). For addressing or referring to one's mother
according to the third column, one should be using either okaasan or okaasama (お母さま), of which
the latter feature an even higher level of honor or respect by replacing the suffix -san with -sama,
which is a fixed expression to make words more polite. 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 in group B, 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

7
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 3:

Table 3: Classification of kinship terms for social groups in comparison to the age of the speaker in Japanese

In → Out In → In Out → In Age

humble/colloquialism honorific/respectful honorific/respectful Older than ego
humble name (colloquialism) honorific/respectful Younger than ego

A similar pattern of classification can be found in Dutch, though it depends on generation instead of
age. According to Table 1, kins who are, in comparison to the speaker, from a previous generation
are referred to or addressed by a kinship term, sometimes succeeded by their name. It is highly
unlikely one will address or refer to their parents by their respective names. Family members from
the same or a younger generation are always addressed by their name and referred to by either the
proper kinship term or name (depending on whether the listener knows the kin).
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 or sister by name. This pattern is used
for every family member but father and mother. These structures will be summarized in Table 4:

Table 4: Classification of kinship terms in comparison to the generation of the speaker in Dutch

Address Reference Generation

term term Parents
term [name] term [name] Older than ego
[name] term, [name] Younger than ego

Comparison prewar and contemporary terminologies

In this final section, kinship terminologies used in modern Dutch and Japanese will be compared to
their prewar equivalents, of which the data, as stated before, is drawn from early twentieth century
literary works and can be found in Appendix A and B respectively. Subsequently, this paper will be
concluded by providing an answer to the research questions posed in the introduction.
Like mentioned before, omitting the possessive adjective when addressing the father and
mother of the speaker may be considered as rather obsolete in modern times, but this type of

8
addressing is regularly used in prewar Dutch, as can be seen in Table 5. It appears that throughout
this particular literary work, only vader and mother without possessive adjectives were being used
as address terms. This is considered highly respectful, especially in contrary to the terms papa,
mama ('mommy') and analogous terms, such as mam ('mom'), are often considered as infantile.
Unlike contemporary Dutch, in which they seem to function as rather insulting terms, diminutives,
such as papaatje ('little dad') and moedertje ('little mother') were considered terms of endearment
and used on a regular basis throughout the respective analyzed work.
An excerpt of Appendix A can be found in Table 5 to illustrate the above mentioned:

Table 5: Kinship terminology data in the prewar Dutch language, Van oude menschen, de dingen, die voorbij gaan...
(1906, Louis Couperus, excerpt from Appendix A)

Kinship Term Type Frequency

Father (mijn) vader Ref. 76
(je/zijn/haar) vader Ref. 5
vader Add. 12
Mother (mijn/mijner) moeder Ref. 97
(je/zijn/haar) moeder Ref. 11
moeder Add. 13

According to History of Japan ( 日 本 の 歴 史 ; 1985), a manga highlighted by Yamaguchi, subtle

differences can be distinguished regarding 'in → in' kinship terms in manga that have been
published shortly after World War II (Yamaguchi, 2007: 413). . When the father returns from his
work, his son refers to him with tōsan ( 父さん ), which, in contrary to its contemporary counterpart,
lacks the prefix of politeness, o- (see p.6). An identical construction is the way in which a mother
refers to herself in the presence of her children by using kaasan ( 母さん ). This is no different from
the grandfather who appears in the manga and addresses his grandson by his name Susume ( 進め ),
without the usual addition of a suffix (for example: -san (-さん) or -kun (-くん)).
The kinship terminologies drawn from the Japanese literature confirm these omissions and
indicate that not only the usage of kanji for several kinship terms, but also their readings have been
slightly changed during the twentieth century. For example, the term to refer to the speaker’s father,
ottosan (父親さん) was used, while this in the contemporary Japanese language is read as chichioya,
completely neglecting the suffix -san.
In addition, two remarkable and noteworthy terms for referring to parents, were chichiue (父
上) and okkasama ( 母上様 ), which were used within samurai families prior to the Meiji period and

9
therefore indicate an additional layer of politeness.5 Based on their readings, it may appear that
terms to indicate a grandmother feature a prefix of politeness, but when the corresponding kanji is
taken into account, there appears to be no form of consistency, as can be seen in Table 6:

Table 6: Kinship terminology data in the prewar Japanese language, Ie, Volume 1 (1911, Tōson Shimazaki).

Kinship Term Reading Transcription Type

Father 父 ちち chichi Ref.

父親さん おっとさん ottosan Ref.

父上 ちちうえ chichiue Ref.

父さん とうさん tōsan Add.

父親さん おっとさん ottosan Add.

阿父さん おっとさん ottosan Add.

Mother 母 はは haha Ref.

母親さん おっかさん okkasan Ref.

母さん かあさん kaasan Ref.

母親 おっか okka Ref.

母上様 おっかさま okkasama Ref.

母親さん おっかさん okkasan Add.

Grandmother 老祖母さん おばあさん obaasan Ref.

祖母さん おばあさん obaasan Ref.

小母さん おばさん obasan Ref.

祖母様 おばあさま obaasama Ref.

祖母さん おばあさん obaasan Add.

Conclusion
In conclusion, I will present my findings regarding the comparison of prewar kinship terminologies
with their contemporary equivalents based on this paper.
Based on the kinship terminology of the Dutch language, it seems that there has been a
decrease of respect towards elders during the twentieth century. In the prewar period, parents were
addressed by terms of politeness and respectfulness, which were considered as ordinary by
contemporaries, but obsolete in modern times. Instead, nowadays colloquial and even infantile
terms are used to address one’s parents, terms which would have been strictly unacceptable in early
twentieth century. In Japan, however, an opposite change has occurred. Before World War II, a
speaker would address his parents by terms that were neither respectful nor colloquial. Soon after
the war ended, however, these terms were directly preceded by a prefix of politeness, resulting in

5 Retrieved from: http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jwb/cgi-bin/wwwjdic.cgi?1C, accessed on November 23rd, 2010

10
terms with an honorific or respectful connotation, which are being used up until present day.
Thus, while connotations of respect towards elders in kinship terminologies in the Dutch
language have been weakened, if not completely disappeared, the Japanese became more respectful
towards their elders in terms of kinship. Arguably, World War II would have had influence on these
developments, though current evidence is too insignificant to state this with certainty.

11
Appendix A: Kinship terminology data in the prewar Dutch language
1. Van oude menschen, de dingen, die voorbij gaan... (1906, Louis Couperus) pp. 1-132.
Kinship Term Type Frequency
Father papa Ref. 36
(je/zijn/haar) vader Ref. 26
(mijn) vader Ref. 3
(je/zijn/haar) papa Ref. 1
papa Add. 7
vader Add. 4
papaatje Add. 1
Mother mama Ref. 176
(je/zijn/haar) moeder Ref. 73
mama Add. 13
moedertje Add. 4
Grandfather grootpapa Ref. 20
grootpapa Add. 13
grootvader Ref. 5
opa Ref. 4
opa Add. 4
Grandmother grootmama Ref. 52
grootmama Add. 1
oma Ref. 1
(je/zijn/haar) grootmoeder Ref. 1

2. De nachtbruid (1909, Frederik van Eeden).

Kinship Term Type Frequency
Father (mijn) vader Ref. 76
(je/zijn/haar) vader Ref. 5
vader Add. 12
Mother (mijn/mijner) moeder Ref. 97
(je/zijn/haar) moeder Ref. 11
moeder Add. 13

12
Appendix B: Kinship terminology data in the prewar Japanese language
1. Botchan (1906, Natsume Sōseki).
Kinship Term Reading Transcription Type Frequency
Father お父さん おとうさん otōsan Ref. 2

お父様 おとうさま otōsan Ref. 1

親父 おやじ oyaji Ref. 1

Mother 母 はは haha Ref. 11

おっ母さん okkasan Ref. 4

おっかさん
御っ母さん
お母さん おかあさん okaasan Ref. 3

2. Ie, Volume 1 (1911, Tōson Shimazaki).

Kinship Term Reading Transcription Type Frequency
Father 父 ちち chichi Ref. 34

父親さん おっとさん ottosan Ref. 18

父上 ちちうえ chichiue Ref. 3

父さん とうさん tōsan Add. 10

父親さん おっとさん ottosan Add. 4

阿父さん おっとさん ottosan Add. 2

Mother 母 はは haha Ref. 82

母親さん おっかさん okkasan Ref. 25

母さん かあさん kaasan Ref. 15

母親 おっか okka Ref. 4

母上様 おっかさま okkasama Ref. 1

母親さん おっかさん okkasan Add. 17

Grandmother 老祖母さん おばあさん obaasan Ref. 14

祖母さん おばあさん obaasan Ref. 3

小母さん おばさん obasan Ref. 3

祖母様 おばあさま obaasama Ref. 1

祖母さん おばあさん obaasan Add. 1

Uncle 叔父さん おじさん ojisan Ref. 39

叔父さん おじさん ojisan Add. 3

Aunt: 伯母さん おばさん obasan Ref. 30

叔母さん おばさん obasan Ref. 12

叔母 おば oba Ref. 1

13
Texts examined:
Couperus, Louis. 1988. Van oude menschen, de dingen, die voorbij gaan... (Volledige Werken Louis
Couperus, deel 25, ed. Karel Reijnders, Ernst Braches, Jan Fontijn, Marijke Stapert-
Eggen, H.T.M. van Vliet en Oege Dijkstra). Veen, Utrecht/Antwerpen.
Eeden, Frederik van. 1909. De nachtbruid. W. Versluys, Amsterdam.
Shimazaki, Tōson. 1955. Ie (Jō). Shinchōsa, Tokyo
Sōseki, Natsume. 1987. Natsume Sōseki zenshû 2. Rondontō gen'ei no tate botchan. Chikuma
Shobō, Tokyo.

References:
Broeder, Peter & Extra, Guus. 1991. Acquisition of kinship reference: A study on word-formation
processes of adult language learners. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 1:2, pp.
209-225.
Edmonson, Munro S.1957. Kinship Terms and Kinship Concepts. American Anthropologist 59:3.
pp. 393-433.
Mestheneos E. and Svensson-Dianellou A. 2004. Naming grandparents. Generations Review, pp.
10-13.
Morris, Pam. 2003. Realism. Routledge, London.
Shibatani, Masayoshi. 1990. The Languages of Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Yamaguchi, Toshiko. 2007. Japanese Language in Use: An Introduction. London: Continuum. pp.
121-168.

14