xliv involved in a conversation. Thus, the addresser-addressee of unequal
rank including wealth, social stratification, age, are more formal and less relaxed than those between equals. And this brings the different
forms of address caused by different degrees of status and intimacy. From the quotation above, it can be seen that there are a lot of factors that
influencing the usage of address forms. They are wealth, social status, age and the situation involved in the conversation.
Meanwhile, Parkinson states that “Knowledge of the proper use of terms of address is…as important to the overall success of communication as knowledge of the
conjugation of verbs would be”. It implies that the appropriate choice in using address forms is needed in order to build a successful communication. Inappropriate use of
address forms can cause a failure in establishing a good relationship. For example, Indonesians are not familiar calling older people using name only. It can be seen that
the usage of address forms are the reflection of politeness of the speaker to the interlocutors.
3. The Dimensions Related to the Usage of Address Forms
Related to the use of address forms, Brown and Gilman in Fasold, 1990 propose
the study of the usage of address forms and their social relationships which was governed by two semantics called power and solidarity. Here, power semantic is non-
reciprocal. It is called non-reciprocal because two people cannot have power over each other in the same area. This power semantic governs the non-reciprocal use of the two
pronouns called T familiar form and V polite form pronouns. Here, the T and V pronouns are taken from the Latin tu and vos. The choice of
pronouns is determined by the dimension of power and solidarity in the relationship
xlv between the speakers and the addressee. The less powerful person says vous V to the
more powerful one and receives tu T. It can be seen that power has an influence in deciding the usage of those address forms.
For example, older people are assumed to have power toward younger people; parents toward children etc. Power semantic would be sufficient if there is
stratification in the society in which each person has an asymmetrical relationship toward each other.
Meanwhile, Solidarity relates to the degrees of closeness and intimacy. Here, solidarity semantic is reciprocal. It came into play if the power of the speaker and the
addressee is equally powerful. However, V pronoun will be used if the participants equally powerful but not ‘solidary’ just like the noble classes did in the past. T
pronoun will be used if the power of addresser and the addressee were equal and close to each other, even if they were members of the higher classes.
Diagram 3 The two-dimensional semantic in equilibrium
Brown and Gilman in Fasold 1990: 5 Superiors
Equal and Solidary ------T------
Equal and not Solidary ------V------
Inferiors From the diagram above, Brown and Gilman explain how the speakers decide
what pronoun to use with the person they are talking to. First, a speaker will determine hisher power relationship to the addressee. Then, the speaker will use T familiar
form if heshe has more powerful than the addressee and expect to receive V polite
xlvi form. The speaker will give V if heshe has less powerful and get T. If there is no
power difference, they can use T or V depends on their closeness. However, problems may come up from the dimension of power and solidarity.
For instance, the relationship between parents and children will be more close to each other if both used mutual T. However, the power semantic requires a child to address
hisher parents with V. Another is between a customer and waiter. Logically, a customer is more
powerful than the waiter, so, the customer addresses the waiter with T. However, the relationship between them is not solider, so the customer dictate V. Brown and Gilman
illustrate this kind of conflict in the diagram below, Diagram 4
The two dimensional semantic under conflict Brown and Gilman in Fasold 1990: 60
Superior and Solidary T V Superior and not Solidary
Equal and Solidary ßTà
Equal and not Solidary ßVà
Inferior and Solidary T V Inferior and not Solidary
From the the diagram above, the top right part, a superior and not solidary addressee should receive V, similarly power and solidary call for T to the inferior and
solidary addressee in lower left part. So far, there is no conflict between the two in either case. Nevertheless, in the two remaining parts, the two semantics call for the
opposite choice. The addressee defined by the upper left part is superior therefore, heshe should receive T by the power semantic but is also solidary therefore, heshe
xlvii should receive T by the solidarity semantic. The opposite conflict can be seen in the
lower right part. Similar to the Brown and Gilman theory, the usage of address forms in
Indonesia is related to the reciprocal and non reciprocal relationship. As stated by Kridalaksana 1982 that second person address forms consist of two dimensions; they
are reciprocal and non reciprocal relationship. Reciprocal relationship means the status of the participants is equal. This dimension has its own form of address. For example,
A and B are men who have the same job in their office as lecturers. A addresses B with Bapak
or Pak and vice versa. Meanwhile, nonreciprocal relationship means the participants have a different social status or positions. It makes the forms of address
are different. For example, a lecturer will address hisher students by using name, while the students should address hisher lecturer by using title such as Bapak or Ibu.
3. Type of English Address Forms
