Cover not available

Article published In: English Text Construction
Vol. 7:1 (2014) ► pp.53–83

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Vocatives galore in audiovisual dialogue

Evidence from a corpus of American and British films

Published online: 28 April 2014
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/etc.7.1.03for
The paper explores the use of vocatives in a corpus of 24 American and British films (the Pavia Corpus of Film Dialogue) by comparing film dialogue with spontaneous speech. A systematic quantitative and qualitative analysis of empirical data is provided to assess how address forms used by English speakers in natural verbal exchanges are reproduced on screen, and to identify patterns of address that can be regarded as distinctive of film dialogue. The findings show a higher frequency of vocatives in film dialogue, which serve diegetic and extradiegetic functions. From a qualitative point of view, filmic speech effectively reproduces interpersonal functions and sociolinguistic variation associated with vocatives in spontaneous interactions; on the other hand, it is characterized by a sophisticated use of address strategies accounted for in terms of authorial expressivity.
References (72)
Agha, Asif. 1994. Honorification. Annual Review of Anthropology 231: 277–302. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Allerton, D.J. 1996. Proper names and definite descriptions with the same reference: A pragmatic choice for language users. Journal of Pragmatics 25 (5): 621–633. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Alvarez-Pereyre, Michael. 2011. Using film as linguistic specimen: Theoretical and practical issues. In Telecinematic Discourse: Approaches to the Language of Films and Television Series, Roberta Piazza, Monika Bednarek and Fabio Rossi (eds.). Amsterdam and Philadelphia:John Benjamins, 47–67. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Aston, Guy and Lou Burnard. 1998. The BNC Handbook: Exploring the British National Corpus with SARA. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Azzaro, Gabriele. 2005. Four-Letter Films: Taboo Language in Movies. Roma: Aracne.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bargiela, Francesca, Corinne Boz, Lily Gokzadze, Abdurrahman Hamza, Sara Mills and Nino Rukhadze. 2002. Ethnocentrism, politeness and naming strategies. Working Papers on the Web 3. URL [URL](Last accessed on 7 February 2013).
Bednarek, Monika. 2011a. The stability of the televisual character: A corpus stylistic case study. In Telecinematic Discourse: Approaches to the Language of Films and Television Series, Roberta Piazza, Monika Bednarek and Fabio Rossi (eds.). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 185–204. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2011b. Expressivity and televisual characterization. Language and Literature 20 (1): 3–21. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad and Edward Finegan. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Pearson.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Braun, Frederike. 1988. Terms of Address: Problems of Patterns and Usage in Various Languages and Cultures. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brown, Penelope and Stephen C. Levinson. 1987. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brown, Roger and Marguerite Ford. 1961. Address in American English. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 62 (2): 375–385. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bruti, Silvia and Elisa Perego. 2008. Vocatives in subtitles: A survey across genres. In Ecolingua: The Role of E-Corpora in Translation and Language Learning, Christopher Taylor (ed.). Trieste: EUT, 11–51.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2010. Audiovisual genre and the translation of vocatives in interlingual subtitles. In Perspectives on Audiovisual Translation, Łukasz Bogucki and Krzysztof Kredens (eds.). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 61–75.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bruti, Silvia and Serenella Zanotti. 2012. Orality markers in professional and amateur subtitling: The case of vocatives and address pronouns. In Film Translation from East to West: Dubbing, Subtitling and Didactic Practice, Claudia Buffagni and Beatrice Garzelli (eds.). Bern: Peter Lang, 167–193.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bubel, Claudia M. 2006. The linguistic construction of character relations in TV drama: Doing friendship in Sex and the City. Ph.D. dissertation, Universität des Saarlandes.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2008. Film audiences as overhearers. Journal of Pragmatics 40 (1): 55–71. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2011. Relationship impression formation: How viewers know people on the screen are friends. In Telecinematic Discourse: Approaches to the Language of Films and Television Series, Roberta Piazza, Monika Bednarek and Fabio Rossi (eds.). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 225–247. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bucholtz, Mary. 2011. Race and the re-embodied voice in Hollywood film. Language and Communication 31 (3): 255–265. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bucholtz, Mary and Qiuana Lopez. 2011. Performing blackness, forming whiteness: Linguistic minstrelsy in Hollywood film. Journal of Sociolinguistics 15 (5): 680–706. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carney, Ray and Leonard Quart. 2000. The Films of Mike Leigh: Embracing the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clayman, Steven E. 2010. Address terms in the service of other actions: The case of news interview talk. Discourse and Communication 4 (2): 161–183. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clyne, Michael, Catrin Norrby and Jane Warren. 2009. Language and Human Relations: Styles of Address in Contemporary Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dunkling, Leslie. 1990. A Dictionary of Epithets and Terms of Address. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eggins, Suzanne and Diana Slade. 1997. Analysing Casual Conversation. London: Cassell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Forchini, Pierfranca. 2012. Movie Language Revisited: Evidence from Multi-Dimensional Analysis and Corpora. Bern: Peter Lang. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Formentelli, Maicol. 2007. The vocative mate in contemporary English: A corpus-based study. In Language Resources and Linguistic Theory, Andrea Sansò (ed.). Milano: Franco Angeli, 180–199.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Freddi, Maria and Maria Pavesi. 2009. The Pavia Corpus of Film Dialogue: Research rationale and methodology. In Analysing Audiovisual Dialogue: Linguistic and Translational Insights, Maria Freddi and Maria Pavesi (eds.). Bologna: CLUEB, 95–100.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2011. Further insights into corpora and AVT: Developing a corpus of film dialogue. Paper presented at the 4th International Media for All Conference “Audiovisual Translation: Taking Stock”, London, 28 June-1 July 2011.
Goodwin, Marjorie Harness. 1990. He-Said-She-Said: Talk as Social Organization among Black Children. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gramley, Stephan and Kurt-Michael Pätzold. 2004. A Survey of Modern English. London and New York: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gregory, Michael and Suzanne Carroll. 1978. Language and Situation: Language Varieties and their Social Contexts. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Guillot, Marie-Noelle. 2010. Film subtitles from a cross-cultural pragmatics perspective: Issues of linguistic and cultural representations. The Translator 16 (1): 67–92. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heyd, Theresa. 2010. How you guys doin’? Staged orality and emerging plural address in the television series Friends. American Speech 85 (1): 33–66. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Holmes, Janet. 2001. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jaworski, Adam and Dariusz Galasiński. 2000. Vocative address forms and ideological legitimisation in political debates. Discourse Studies 2 (1): 65–83. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Catherine. 2008. Le fonctionnement des termes d’adresse dans certaines situations de parole publique (petits commerces, débats médiatiques). In Atti del 70 Congresso dell’Associazione Italiana di Linguistica Applicata [AitLA], Cristina Bosisio, Bona Cambiagli, Emanuela Piemontese and Francesca Santulli (eds.). Perugia, Italy: Guerra Edizioni, 67–88.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kiesling, Scott F. 2004. Dude. American Speech 79 (3): 281–305. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kozloff, Sarah. 2000. Overhearing Film Dialogue. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey. 1999. The distribution and function of vocatives in American and British English conversation. In Out of Corpora: Studies in Honour of Stig Johansson, Hilde Hasselgård and Signe Oksefjell (eds.). Amsterdam and New York: Rodopi, 107–118.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McCarthy, Michael J. and Anne O’Keeffe. 2003. “What’s in a name?”: Vocatives in casual conversation and radio phone-in calls. In Corpus Analysis: Language Structure and Language Use, Pepi Leistyna and Charles F. Meyer (eds.). Amsterdam and New York: Rodopi, 153–185. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McConnell-Ginet, Sally. 2003. “What’s in a name?”: Social labelling and gender practices. In The Handbook of Language and Gender, Janet Holmes and Miriam Meyerhoff (eds.). Oxford: Blackwell, 69–97. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Murray, Thomas E. 2002. A new look at address in American English: The rules have changed. Names 50 (1): 43–61. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Norrick, Neal R. and Claudia Bubel. 2009. Direct address as a resource of humor. In Humor in Interaction, Neal R. Norrick and Delia Chiaro (eds.). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 29–47. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oakes, Michael P. 1998. Statistics for Corpus Linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Palma-Fahey, María. 2011. Exploring the representation of orality: The use of vocatives in two Spanish-speaking films, Machuca and Volver. Sociolinguistic Studies 5 (1): 103–126.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pavesi, Maria. 1996. L’allocuzione nel doppiaggio dall’inglese all’italiano. In Traduzione multimediale per il cinema, la televisione e la scena, Christine Heiss and Rosa Maria Bollettieri Bosinelli (eds.). Bologna: CLUEB, 117–130.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2005. La traduzione filmica: Aspetti del parlato doppiato dall’inglese all’italiano. Roma: Carocci.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2012. The enriching functions of address shift in film translation. In Audiovisual Translation and Media Accessibility at the Crossroads, Aline Remael, Pilar Orero and Mary Carroll (eds.). Amsterdam and New York: Rodopi, 335–356.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Piazza, Roberta, Monika Bednarek and Fabio Rossi (eds.). 2011. Telecinematic Discourse: Approaches to the Language of Films and Television Series. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Poynton, Cate. 1984. Names as vocatives: Forms and functions. Nottingham Linguistics Circular 131: 1–34.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1989a. Terms of address in Australian English. In Australian English: The Language of a New Society, Peter Collins and David Blair (eds.). St. Lucia: University of Queensland Press, 55–69.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1989b. Language and Gender: Making the Difference. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rendle-Short, Johanna. 2007. “Catherine, you’re wasting your time”: Address terms within the Australian political interview. Journal of Pragmatics 39 (9): 1503–1525. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2009. The address term mate in Australian English: Is it still a masculine term? Australian Journal of Linguistics 19 (2): 245–268. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rodríguez Martín, María Elena. 2010. Comparing parts of speech and semantic domains in the BNC and a micro-corpus of movies: Is film language the ‘real thing’? In Corpus Linguistics in Language Teaching, Tony Harris and María Moreno Jaén (eds.). Bern: Peter Lang, 147–175.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rodríguez Martín, María Elena and María Moreno Jaén. 2009. Teaching conversation through films: A comparison of conversational features and collocations in the BNC and a micro-corpus of movies. The International Journal of Learning 16 (7): 445–458.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rossi, Fabio. 1999. Le parole dello schermo: Analisi linguistica del parlato di sei film dal 1948 al 1957. Roma: Bulzoni.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2011. Discourse analysis of film dialogue: Italian comedy between linguistic realism and pragmatic non-realism. In Telecinematic Discourse: Approaches to the Language of Films and Television Series, Roberta Piazza, Monika Bednarek and Fabio Rossi (eds.). Amsterdam and Philadelphia:John Benjamins, 21–46. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rühlemann, Christoph. 2007. Conversation in Context: A Corpus-Driven Approach. London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sutton, Laurel A. 1995. Bitches and skankly hobags: The place of women in contemporary slang. In Gender Articulated: Language and the Socially Constructed Self, Kira Hall and Mary Bucholtz (eds.). London and New York: Routledge, 279–296.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Szarkowska, Agnieszka. 2010. Why are some vocatives not omitted in subtitling? A study based on three selected Polish soaps broadcast on TV Polonia. In Perspectives on Audiovisual Translation, Łukasz Bogucki and Krzysztof Kredens (eds.). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 77–92.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taylor, Christopher. 1999. Look who’s talking: An analysis of film dialogue as a variety of spoken discourse. In Massed Medias: Linguistic Tools for Interpreting Media Discourse, Linda Lombardo, Louann Haarman, John Morley and Christopher Taylor (eds.). Milano: LED Edizioni Universitarie, 247–278.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wales, Katie. 1996. Personal Pronouns in Present-Day English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weatherall, Ann. 1996. Language about women and men: An example from popular culture. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 15 (1): 59–75. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wolfson, Nessa and Joan Manes. 1980. Don’t ‘dear’ me! In Women and Language in Literature and Society, Sally McConnell-Ginet, Ruth Borker and Nelly Furman (eds.). New York: Praeger Publishers, 79–92.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zago, Raffaele. 2011. The pragmatic functions of vocatives in a corpus of British and American films. Poster presented at the 12th International Pragmatics Conference , Manchester, 3–8 July 2011.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zwicky, Arnold M. 1974. “Hey, Whatsyourname!”. In Papers from the Tenth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, Michael W. La Galy, Robert A. Fox and Anthony Bruck (eds.). Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 787–801.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (18)

Cited by 18 other publications

Bianchi, Francesca
2025. Learning English From Videogame Characters. In Exploration of the Intersection of Corpus Linguistics and Language Science, ► pp. 157 ff. DOI logo
Formentelli, Maicol, Liviana Galiano & Maria Pavesi
2025. Grammatical complexity in film dialogue. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 30:1 ► pp. 51 ff. DOI logo
Goutsos, Dionysis
2025. Language change and (im)politeness in film discourse. Journal of Language and Pop Culture 1:2 ► pp. 177 ff. DOI logo
Needle, Jeremy M. & Sali A. Tagliamonte
2025.  Buddies , Dudes , and Bros of Ontario: Trends and Patterns of Vocative Change . Journal of English Linguistics 53:2 ► pp. 107 ff. DOI logo
Flesch, Marie
2023. “Dude” and “Dudette”, “Bro” and “Sis”: A Diachronic Study of Four Address Terms in the TV Corpus. Anglica. An International Journal of English Studies :32/2 ► pp. 23 ff. DOI logo
Galiano, Liviana & Alfonso Semeraro
2023. Part-of-Speech and Pragmatic Tagging of a Corpus of Film Dialogue: A Pilot Study. Corpus Pragmatics 7:1 ► pp. 17 ff. DOI logo
Palacios Martínez, Ignacio M.
2023. A syntactic and pragmatic study of nominal vocatives in the Twitter exchanges of rappers’ fans. Journal of Pragmatics 207 ► pp. 93 ff. DOI logo
Bączkowska, Anna
2022. Forms of Address in Polish Nonprofessional Subtitles. In Language Use, Education, and Professional Contexts [Second Language Learning and Teaching, ], ► pp. 71 ff. DOI logo
Formentelli, Maicol & John Hajek
2022. Address practices in academic interactions in a pluricentric language. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) ► pp. 631 ff. DOI logo
Formentelli, Maicol & Maria Pavesi
2022. The pragmatic functions of tu and lei in films: Converging patterns of address across translated and original Italian dialogue. Journal of Pragmatics 201 ► pp. 15 ff. DOI logo
Minutella, Vincenza
2021. Americans, Brits, Aussies, Etc.: Native Varieties of English in Italian Dubbing. In (Re)Creating Language Identities in Animated Films, ► pp. 217 ff. DOI logo
Ghia, Elisa
2019. (Dis)aligning across different linguacultures: Pragmatic questions from original to dubbed film dialogue. Multilingua 38:5 ► pp. 583 ff. DOI logo
Ghia, Elisa
2019. Representing orality through questions in original and translated film dialogue. In Reassessing Dubbing [Benjamins Translation Library, 148], ► pp. 211 ff. DOI logo
Moyna, María Irene, Bettina Kluge & Horst J. Simon
2019. Address and address research. In It’s not all about you [Topics in Address Research, 1], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Urichuk, Matthew & Verónica Loureiro-Rodríguez
2019. Brocatives. In It’s not all about you [Topics in Address Research, 1], ► pp. 355 ff. DOI logo
Schneider, Klaus P. & María Elena Placencia
2017. (Im)politeness and Regional Variation. In The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness, ► pp. 539 ff. DOI logo
Meister, Lova
2016. The T/V dilemma: Forms of address as a stylistic resource in English-Swedish subtitling. Perspectives 24:4 ► pp. 527 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2021. Nominal and Pronominal Address in Jamaica and Trinidad [Topics in Address Research, 3], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 9 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue