In:It's different with you: Contrastive perspectives on address research
Edited by Nicole Baumgarten and Roel Vismans
[Topics in Address Research 5] 2023
► pp. 13–34
Chapter 1Comparing address practices in the Finnish and Hungarian “Got Talent” TV
programmes
Published online: 6 September 2023
https://doi.org/10.1075/tar.5.01lap
https://doi.org/10.1075/tar.5.01lap
Abstract
This chapter compares address practices in “Got Talent”
TV programmes, in which contestants present their talents in front of a
jury. We aim to show how the judges address contestants and how these
practices differ in episodes of Finnish and Hungarian “Got Talent”. Our
study shows that T forms are favoured in both languages. Overall, the
repertoire of addressing is wider in the Hungarian dataset, in which both
T/V opposition and nominal forms are used to express increasing familiarity
between participants. On Finnish “Got Talent”, variation only emerges in the
frequency of personal pronouns and first names, used to make successful
contestants visible. Although television is a special context, address
practices on the “Got Talent” shows can reflect ongoing changes more
generally in address practices vis-à-vis informality.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Address practices in Finland and Hungary
- 3.Data and methods
- 4.Analysis of address practices in the Finnish and Hungarian “Talent”
shows
- 4.1T or V
- 4.2Nominal forms
- 5.Conclusions
Acknowledgements Notes References Appendix
References (43)
Ainiala, Terhi, Minna Saarelma & Paula Sjöblom. 2012. Names
in focus: An introduction to Finnish
onomastics. Translated
by Leonard Pearl. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society.
Andersson, Helen. 2002. TV:s nyhetsprogram som
interaktion [TV news
programme as
interaction]. Uppsala: Institutionen för nordiska språk vid Uppsala universitet.
Bartsch, Jeff. 2014. Beware
the
frankenbite. ThePowerEdit. [URL] (5.3.2020).
Bencze, Lóránt. 2005. Politeness
in Hungary: Uncertainty in a changing
society. In Leo Hickey & Miranda Stewart (eds.), Politeness
in
Europe, 234–246. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Bresin, Agnese, John Hajek & Heinz L. Kretzenbacher. 2019. Transition
from V to T address among restaurant customers and waiters in
Italy. In Bettina Kluge & María Irene Moyna (eds.), It’s
not all about ‘you’: New research perspectives on address
research, 221–250. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Clyne, Michael, Catrin Norrby & Jane Warren. 2009. Language
and human relations: Address in contemporary
language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Deme, László, László Grétsy & Imre Wacha (eds.). 1999. Nyelvi
illemtan. [Guidebook of
language
etiquette]. Budapest: Szemimpex Kiadó.
Domonkosi, Ágnes. 2002. Megszólítások és beszédpartnerre utaló elemek
nyelvhasználatunkban [Address forms and elements referring to the interlocutor in
Hungarian language
use]. Debrecen: A Debreceni Egyetem Magyar Nyelvtudományi Intézete.
. 2018. The
socio-cultural values of Hungarian V forms of
address. ERUDITIO –
EDUCATIO 13(3). 61–72.
Etelämäki, Marja, Markku Haakana & Mia Halonen. 2013. Keskustelukumppanin kehuminen suomalaisessa
keskustelussa [Compliments in everyday Finnish
conversation]. Virittäjä 117. 460–493.
Fremer, Maria. 2015. At
the cinema: The Swedish ’du-reform’ in advertising
films. In Catrin Norrby & Camilla Wide (eds.), Address
practice as social
action, 54–74. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, Pilar & Nuria Lorenzo-Dus. 2013. Reality
Television: A discourse-analytical
perspective. In Nuria Lorenzo-Dus & Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich (eds.), Real
talk. Reality television and discourse analysis in
action, 9–22. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Gunter, Barrie. 2014. I
want to change my life: Can reality TV competition shows trigger
lasting career
success? Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars.
Havu, Eva, Johanna Isosävi & Hanna Lappalainen. 2014. Les stratégies d’adresse en finnois: Comparaison entre
deux types de corpus oraux
institutionnels [Address strategies in Finnish: comparison between two types of
spoken institutional
corpora]. In Catherine Kerbrat-Orecchioni (ed.), S’adresser
à autrui: les formes nominales d’adresse dans une perspective
comparative
interculturelle, 303–336. Chambéry: Publication Chambéry.
Hearn, Alison. 2014. Producing
“reality”: Branded content, branded selves, precarious
futures. In Laurie Ouellette (ed.), A
companion to reality
television, 437–455. Oxford: Wiley & Sons.
Hill, Annette. 2014. Reality
TV experiences: Audiences, fact, and
fiction. In Laurie Ouellette (ed.), A
companion to reality
television, 116–133. Oxford: John Wiley & Sons.
Isosävi, Johanna & Hanna Lappalainen. 2015a. First
names in Starbucks: A clash of
cultures? In Catrin Norrby & Camilla Wide (eds.), Address
practice as social
action, 97–118. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
(eds.). 2015b. Saako sinutella vai täytyykö teititellä? Tutkimuksia
eurooppalaisten kielten
puhuttelukäytännöistä [Addressing people with T or V? Studies on Address Practices in
European
Languages]. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society.
Kluge, Bettina & María Irene Moyna (eds.). 2019. It’s
not all about ‘you’: New perspectives on address
research. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Kovács, Magdolna & Outi Tánczos. 2015. Hapuilua pimeässä? Unkarin muuttuvat
puhuttelukäytännöt [Fumbling in the dark? Changing addressing practices in
Hungarian]. In Johanna Isosävi & Hanna Lappalainen (eds.), Saako
sinutella vai täytyykö teititellä? Tutkimuksia eurooppalaisten
kielten
puhuttelukäytännöistä, 241–261. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society.
Laitinen, Lea. 2006. Zero
person in Finnish: A grammatical resource for construing human
reference. In Marja-Liisa Helasvuo & Lyle Campbell (eds.), Grammar
from the human perspective: Case, space and person in
Finnish, 209–231. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Lappalainen, Hanna. 2015. Sinä
vai te vai sekä että? Puhuttelukäytännöt suomen
kielessä [T or V
or both? Addressing practices in
Finnish]. In Johanna Isosävi & Hanna Lappalainen (eds.), Saako
sinutella vai täytyykö teititellä? Tutkimuksia eurooppalaisten
kielten
puhuttelukäytännöistä, 72–104. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society.
. 2020. Millaista kohteliaisuutta suomalaiset arvostavat
asiakaspalvelussa? [What kind of politeness do Finns appreciate in
customer
service?]. In Kaarina Hippi, Hanna Lappalainen & Pirkko Nuolijärvi (eds.), Suomalaisten
kielellistä elämää: Sata suomalaista kielellistä elämäkertaa
-hankkeen
satoa, 253–287. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society.
Lin, Chih-Ying. 2020. Exploring
judges’ compliments and criticisms on American, British, and
Taiwanese talent shows. Journal of
Pragmatics 160. 44–59.
Lorenzo-Dus, Nuria & Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich (eds.). 2013. Real
talk: Reality television and discourse analysis in
action. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Lorenzo-Dus, Nuria, Patricia Bou-Franch & Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich. 2013. Impoliteness
in US/UK talent shows: A diachronic study of the evolution of a
genre. In Nuria Lorenzo-Dus & Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich (eds.). Real
talk. Reality television and discourse analysis in
action. 199–215. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Norrby, Catrin & Jane Warren. 2012. Address
practices and social relationships in
Europe. Language and Linguistic
Compass 6(4). 225–235.
Norrby, Catrin & Camilla Wide (eds.). 2015. Address
practice as social
action. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Nuolijärvi, Pirkko & Liisa Tiittula. 2001. ”Rakas Tarja” ja ”hyvä ystävä”: Puhuttelu minän ja
sosiaalisten suhteiden esittämisen keinoina
televisiokeskustelussa [Terms of address as a means of self and social
relations in television
debates]. Virittäjä. 105. 580–601.
Penzhorn, Heidi & Magriert Pitout. 2007. A
critical-historical genre analysis of reality
television. Communicatio 33(1). 62–76.
Peterson, Elizabeth. 2010. Perspective
and politeness in Finnish
requests. Pragmatics 20. 401–423.
Sayers, Dave. 2014. The
mediated innovation model: A framework for researching media
influence in language change. Journal
of
Sociolinguistics 18. 185–212.
Seppänen, Eeva-Leena. 1989. Henkilöön viittaaminen
puhetilanteessa [Person references during
conversations]. In Auli Hakulinen (ed.), Suomalaisen
keskustelun keinoja
1, 195–222 (Kieli
4). Helsinki: Helsingin yliopiston suomen kielen laitos.
. 1998. Läsnäolon pronominit: Tämä, tuo, se
ja hän viittaamassa keskustelun
osallistujaan [Pronouns
of participation: The Finnish pronouns tämä,
tuo, se and
hän as devices for referring to co-participants
in
conversation]. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society.
Sidnell, Jack. 2013. Basic
conversation analytic
methods. In Jack Sidnell & Tanya Stivers (eds.), The
handbook of conversation
analysis, 77–99. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
Szita, Szilvia & Tamás Görbe. 2010. Gyakorló
magyar nyelvtan. A practical Hungarian
grammar. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
Vásquez, María Eugenia. 2019. Pragmatic
and grammatical categories for the analysis of forms of address in
presidential election
debates. In Bettina Kluge & María Irene Moyna (eds.), It’s
not all about ‘you’: New research perspectives on address
research, 221–250. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Vecsernyés, Ildikó. 2021. Kuinka pääministeriä puhutellaan? Puhuttelu Suomen ja
Unkarin pääministereiden Facebook-päivitysten
kommenteissa [How
to address a Prime Minister? Forms of address in comments to posts
from the Prime Ministers of Finland and
Hungary]. Virittäjä 125. 92–122.
Vismans, Roel. 2015. Negotiating
address in a pluricentric language:
Dutch/Flemish. In Catrin Norrby & Camilla Wide (eds.), Address
practice as social
action, 13–32. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Wide, Camilla, Hanna Lappalainen, Anu Rouhikoski, Catrin Norrby, Camilla Lindholm, Jan Lindström & Jenny Nilsson. 2019. Variation
in address practices across languages and nations: A comparative
study of doctors’ use of address forms in medical consultations in
Sweden and
Finland. Pragmatics 29. 595–621.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
Domonkosi, Ágnes
2025. Social meanings of Hungarian T and V forms. In Beyond Binaries in Address Research [Topics in Address Research, 6], ► pp. 96 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 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.
