2.1Cross-speaker repetition in Japanese conversations

Despite the fact that the act of repeating the words of another is generally viewed negatively–as lacking in originality, sincerity or productivity–and not encouraged in conversations in some Western languages including English,55.The gap between the negative folk attitude towards repetition and the device’s helpful functions in conversations has been presented by Western researchers, including Norrick (1987)Norrick, Neal R. 1987 “Functions of Repetition in Conversation.” Text 7 (3): 245–264., Tannen (1989)Tannen, Deborah 1989 Talking Voices: Repetition, Dialogue, and Imagery in Conversational Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press., Brown (1999)Brown, Penelope 1999 “Repetition.” Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 9 (1–2): 223–226. , and Johnstone (1987Johnstone, Barbara 1987 “An Introduction.” Text 7 (3): 205–214. (Special issue on “Perspectives on Repetition”), 2002Johnstone, Barbara 2002 Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell.). Japanese conversations have an abundance of cross-speaker repetition. Its high frequency and effectiveness in terms of the development of smooth conversation as well as interactants’ harmonious relationships in Japanese has been reported by researchers (Ishikawa 1991Ishikawa, Minako 1991 “Iconicity in Discourse: The Case of Repetition.” Text 11 (4): 553–580.; Strauss and Kawanishi 1996Strauss, Susan, and Yumiko Kawanishi 1996 “Assessment Strategies in Japanese, Korean, and American English.” Japanese/Korean Linguistics 5: 149–165. Stanford, CA: CSLI; Fujii 2012Fujii, Yoko 2012 “Differences of Situating Self in the Place/ba of Interaction between the Japanese and American English Speakers.” Journal of Pragmatics 44 (5): 636–662. , 2018Fujii, Yoko 2018 “ ‘Ko o kitai to suru gengo koodoo’ to ‘ba o kitai to suru gengo koodoo’: Eigo, chuugokugo, nihongo, kankokugo, taigo no hikaku yori” [“Agent-based language use and “ba-based language use”: From the discourse perspectives of English, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, and Thai]. The Japanese Journal of Language in Society 21 (1): 129–145.; Kim 2014Kim, Myung-Hee 2014 “Why Self-deprecating? Achieving ‘Oneness’ in Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 69: 82–98. ; Machi 2019Machi, Saeko 2019 “Managing Relationship through Repetition: How Repetition Creates Ever-shifting Relationships in Japanese Conversation.” Pragmatics 29 (1): 57–81., 2020Machi, Saeko 2020 “ ‘Braid Structure’ Conversations: Development of Informal Triadic Conversation in Japanese.” The Japanese Journal of Language in Society 22 (2): 15–29., 2021Machi, Saeko 2021 “Cross-speaker Repetition in Japanese: The Development of Conversation and Participant Relationships.” PhD diss. The English Department of the Graduate School of Japan Women’s University.). In Machi (2021)Machi, Saeko 2021 “Cross-speaker Repetition in Japanese: The Development of Conversation and Participant Relationships.” PhD diss. The English Department of the Graduate School of Japan Women’s University., in comparing peer conversations between Japanese pairs (speaking Japanese) and American pairs (speaking English), I reported that repetition occurs 2.6 times more frequently in Japanese pairs than in American counterparts. Other comparative studies report the same tendency by stating that repetition in Japanese is “exceptionally rich” (Strauss and Kawanishi 1996Strauss, Susan, and Yumiko Kawanishi 1996 “Assessment Strategies in Japanese, Korean, and American English.” Japanese/Korean Linguistics 5: 149–165. Stanford, CA: CSLI) and “much more frequent” than in other languages (Fujii 2012Fujii, Yoko 2012 “Differences of Situating Self in the Place/ba of Interaction between the Japanese and American English Speakers.” Journal of Pragmatics 44 (5): 636–662. , 2018Fujii, Yoko 2018 “ ‘Ko o kitai to suru gengo koodoo’ to ‘ba o kitai to suru gengo koodoo’: Eigo, chuugokugo, nihongo, kankokugo, taigo no hikaku yori” [“Agent-based language use and “ba-based language use”: From the discourse perspectives of English, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, and Thai]. The Japanese Journal of Language in Society 21 (1): 129–145.).

What is more significant than frequency is the role of repetition. Cross-speaker repetition fulfills many important functions to manage both smooth conversation and interactants’ relationships. Those functions include showing agreement, ratifying participation, asking and answering questions, confirming information, connecting utterances and linking stories across speakers, filling space, opening and closing a conversation, and so forth (Norrick 1987Norrick, Neal R. 1987 “Functions of Repetition in Conversation.” Text 7 (3): 245–264.; Johnstone 1987Johnstone, Barbara 1987 “An Introduction.” Text 7 (3): 205–214. (Special issue on “Perspectives on Repetition”), 2002Johnstone, Barbara 2002 Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell.; Tannen 1989Tannen, Deborah 1989 Talking Voices: Repetition, Dialogue, and Imagery in Conversational Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.; Brown 1999Brown, Penelope 1999 “Repetition.” Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 9 (1–2): 223–226. ; Fujii 2012Fujii, Yoko 2012 “Differences of Situating Self in the Place/ba of Interaction between the Japanese and American English Speakers.” Journal of Pragmatics 44 (5): 636–662. , 2018Fujii, Yoko 2018 “ ‘Ko o kitai to suru gengo koodoo’ to ‘ba o kitai to suru gengo koodoo’: Eigo, chuugokugo, nihongo, kankokugo, taigo no hikaku yori” [“Agent-based language use and “ba-based language use”: From the discourse perspectives of English, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, and Thai]. The Japanese Journal of Language in Society 21 (1): 129–145.; Machi 2020Machi, Saeko 2020 “ ‘Braid Structure’ Conversations: Development of Informal Triadic Conversation in Japanese.” The Japanese Journal of Language in Society 22 (2): 15–29., 2021Machi, Saeko 2021 “Cross-speaker Repetition in Japanese: The Development of Conversation and Participant Relationships.” PhD diss. The English Department of the Graduate School of Japan Women’s University.). While these functions are commonly seen in other languages to some extent, one that is uniquely prominent and significant in Japanese is displaying empathy. It has been observed that Japanese speakers spontaneously refer to interlocutors’ subjective and internal states such as how they think and feel (e.g., “surprised,” “anxious,” and “feeling sorry”), and repeat them to display empathy and mutual awareness, consequently maintaining a high level of rapport during a conversation (Strauss and Kawanishi 1996Strauss, Susan, and Yumiko Kawanishi 1996 “Assessment Strategies in Japanese, Korean, and American English.” Japanese/Korean Linguistics 5: 149–165. Stanford, CA: CSLI; Kim 2014Kim, Myung-Hee 2014 “Why Self-deprecating? Achieving ‘Oneness’ in Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 69: 82–98. ; Machi 2020Machi, Saeko 2020 “ ‘Braid Structure’ Conversations: Development of Informal Triadic Conversation in Japanese.” The Japanese Journal of Language in Society 22 (2): 15–29., 2021Machi, Saeko 2021 “Cross-speaker Repetition in Japanese: The Development of Conversation and Participant Relationships.” PhD diss. The English Department of the Graduate School of Japan Women’s University.).

Various functions of Japanese repetition, including the unique empathizing function, contribute to interactants’ harmonious relationships. For example, in Machi (2019Machi, Saeko 2019 “Managing Relationship through Repetition: How Repetition Creates Ever-shifting Relationships in Japanese Conversation.” Pragmatics 29 (1): 57–81., 2021Machi, Saeko 2021 “Cross-speaker Repetition in Japanese: The Development of Conversation and Participant Relationships.” PhD diss. The English Department of the Graduate School of Japan Women’s University.), I demonstrated a case where interactants maintain a peaceful relationship through repeating each other’s utterances, even when they assume different positions regarding the conversation topic. I further presented many cases where interactants frequently incorporate each other’s words into their own utterances through repeating and collaboratively unfold a single story as if weaving a braid (I called this phenomenon “‘braid structure’ conversation”; see Machi 2020Machi, Saeko 2020 “ ‘Braid Structure’ Conversations: Development of Informal Triadic Conversation in Japanese.” The Japanese Journal of Language in Society 22 (2): 15–29., 2021Machi, Saeko 2021 “Cross-speaker Repetition in Japanese: The Development of Conversation and Participant Relationships.” PhD diss. The English Department of the Graduate School of Japan Women’s University.). During this process, the interactants become bonded as cross-speaker repetition indicates that they approve of and empathize with each other’s utterances, ideas, and feelings. Therefore cross-speaker repetition is considered to be a consequential linguistic device in Japanese conversations (Fujii 2012Fujii, Yoko 2012 “Differences of Situating Self in the Place/ba of Interaction between the Japanese and American English Speakers.” Journal of Pragmatics 44 (5): 636–662. ; Kim 2014Kim, Myung-Hee 2014 “Why Self-deprecating? Achieving ‘Oneness’ in Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 69: 82–98. ; Machi 2021Machi, Saeko 2021 “Cross-speaker Repetition in Japanese: The Development of Conversation and Participant Relationships.” PhD diss. The English Department of the Graduate School of Japan Women’s University.), as the device not only facilitates smooth conversation but also builds and reinforces interactants’ connections.

In this study, I will explore whether such repetition functions that build and reinforce interactants’ connections apply to non-reciprocal conversations, that is, conversations that consist of a mild vertical relationship. Specifically, I will analyze conversations between the senpai ‘senior’ and the kōhai ‘junior’ in the same work field, where a certain level of linguistic politeness is required, especially from the latter’s side. I will focus on cases where the kōhai repeat the senpai’s utterances without using any honorific desu/masu markers, which I will call “plain form repetition” hereafter. I will illustrate how the kōhai momentarily transcend the vertical boundary that generally exists between the senpai and the kōhai through plain form cross-speaker repetition, dynamically creating a friendly atmosphere and relationships.

2.2The honorific desu/masu markers in Japanese

Since this study focuses on the relation of cross-speaker repetition and the dropping of the honorific desu/masu markers, it is crucial to review how these markers are used in natural conversations in Japanese. Desu and masu are called “speech-level markers” that are used in clause-final positions to represent formal and honorific speech style (Maynard 1991Maynard, Senko K. 1991 “Pragmatics of Discourse Modality: A Case of Da and Desu/masu Forms in Japanese.” Journal of Pragmatics 15: 551–582. ; Cook 1999Cook, Haruko Minegishi 1999 “Situational Meaning of Japanese Social Deixis: The Mixed Use of the Masu and Plain Forms.” Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 8 (1): 87–110. ; Ishida 2007Ishida, Kazutoh 2007 “Developing Understanding of How the Desu/masu and Plain Forms Express One’s Stance.” In Selected Papers from Pragmatics in the CJK the Classroom: The State of the Art, ed. by Dina R. Yoshimi, and Haidan Wang, 97–120. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i, National Foreign Language Resource Center.). They are also called “addressee honorifics.” Desu often functions like a polite copula and is attached to nominal and adjective clauses, whereas masu is a polite suffix that is attached to verbal clauses. A widely prevailing explanation is that the choice of using or not using such honorific markers is based on the static contextual features such as the speaker’s social status or age vis-à-vis the status and/or age of the interactant (Ishida 2007Ishida, Kazutoh 2007 “Developing Understanding of How the Desu/masu and Plain Forms Express One’s Stance.” In Selected Papers from Pragmatics in the CJK the Classroom: The State of the Art, ed. by Dina R. Yoshimi, and Haidan Wang, 97–120. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i, National Foreign Language Resource Center.). Some researchers reveal the correlation between the speakers’ use of the desu/masu markers and the categories of interactants. Hill et al. (1986)Hill, Beverly, Sachiko Ide, Shoko Ikuta, Akiko Kawasaki, and Tsunao Ogino 1986 “Universals of Linguistic Politeness: Quantitative Evidence from Japanese and American English.” Journal of Pragmatics 10: 347–371. and Ide (2012)Ide, Sachiko 2012 “Roots of the Wakimae Aspect of Linguistic Politeness: Modal Expressions and Japanese Sense of Self.” In Pragmaticizing Understanding: Studies for Jef Verschueren, ed. by Meeuwis, Michael, and Jan-Ola Ostman, 121–138. John Benjamins Publishing Company. claim that to interactants who are in the outgroup (“soto”),66.According to Ide (2012, 129), this category includes people whom one encounters and interacts with in everyday life but has no strong bond with. They are, for example, one’s supervisor at one’s university or workplace, staff members one encounters at cafés, supermarkets, and department stores, and so forth. speakers use desu and masu, while speaking to people in the ingroup (“uchi”),77.Ide (2012, 128–129) explains that this category includes people whom one interacts with frequently in a relaxed and informal manner, such as family members, close friends, co-workers, and teammates. they drop the honorific markers. This choice reflects the Japanese cultural notion of wakimae or discernment, which, as Ide (1992Ide, Sachiko 1992 “On the Notion of Wakimae: Toward an Integrated Framework of Linguistic Politeness.” Mosaic of Language: Essays in Honor of Professor Natsuko Okuda. Mejiro Linguistic Society (MLS): 298–305., 299) explains, refers to “sets of social norms of appropriate behavior people have to observe in order to be considered polite in the society they live.” Generally, it is critical for Japanese speakers to observe wakimae by indexing their sense of status or position relative to the characteristics of interactants (i.e., their status, age, gender, etc.), the topic (i.e., serious or casual, etc.), and the setting (i.e., formal or informal, etc.), and to express the right degree of politeness.

Such static contextual features help speakers appropriately choose the use or non-use of the honorific markers. It has been discussed, however, that Japanese speakers in naturally occurring conversations mix the honorific and plain forms, dynamically shifting back and forth between the two in most speech situations (Ikuta 1983Ikuta, Shoko 1983 “Speech Level Shift and Conversational Strategy in Japanese Discourse.” Language Science 5 (1): 37–53. ; Maynard 1991Maynard, Senko K. 1991 “Pragmatics of Discourse Modality: A Case of Da and Desu/masu Forms in Japanese.” Journal of Pragmatics 15: 551–582. ; Cook 1999Cook, Haruko Minegishi 1999 “Situational Meaning of Japanese Social Deixis: The Mixed Use of the Masu and Plain Forms.” Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 8 (1): 87–110. ; Okamoto 1999Okamoto, Shigeko 1999 “Situated Politeness: Manipulating Honorific and Non-honorific Expressions in Japanese Conversations.” Pragmatics 9 (1): 51–74.; Ishida 2007Ishida, Kazutoh 2007 “Developing Understanding of How the Desu/masu and Plain Forms Express One’s Stance.” In Selected Papers from Pragmatics in the CJK the Classroom: The State of the Art, ed. by Dina R. Yoshimi, and Haidan Wang, 97–120. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i, National Foreign Language Resource Center.). In order to support this claim, researchers have shown cases where a speaker mixes the two forms while conversing with the same interactant(s) in the same setting as a strategy to do the following: signaling attitudes88.Examining a television interview program, Ikuta (1983)Ikuta, Shoko 1983 “Speech Level Shift and Conversational Strategy in Japanese Discourse.” Language Science 5 (1): 37–53. observes a case where an interviewer, who normally speaks in the honorific form, drops the desu/masu marker when she shows strong agreement with or admiration for the interlocutor, which, as a result, signals more genuineness. (Ikuta 1983Ikuta, Shoko 1983 “Speech Level Shift and Conversational Strategy in Japanese Discourse.” Language Science 5 (1): 37–53. ), foregrounding and backgrounding information (Maynard 1991Maynard, Senko K. 1991 “Pragmatics of Discourse Modality: A Case of Da and Desu/masu Forms in Japanese.” Journal of Pragmatics 15: 551–582. ), producing certain effects99.These include adding freshness, liveliness, and comical touch to the interaction (Cook 1999Cook, Haruko Minegishi 1999 “Situational Meaning of Japanese Social Deixis: The Mixed Use of the Masu and Plain Forms.” Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 8 (1): 87–110. ). (Cook 1999Cook, Haruko Minegishi 1999 “Situational Meaning of Japanese Social Deixis: The Mixed Use of the Masu and Plain Forms.” Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 8 (1): 87–110. ) or constructing a desired context1010. Okamoto (1999)Okamoto, Shigeko 1999 “Situated Politeness: Manipulating Honorific and Non-honorific Expressions in Japanese Conversations.” Pragmatics 9 (1): 51–74. shows an example where a vendor at the marketplace mixes the plain and honorific forms to show some deference to the customer while trying to create the casual atmosphere of the marketplace simultaneously. (Okamoto 1999Okamoto, Shigeko 1999 “Situated Politeness: Manipulating Honorific and Non-honorific Expressions in Japanese Conversations.” Pragmatics 9 (1): 51–74.).

Most conversations examined in this study, except for one peer conversation, consist of a mild vertical relationship,1111.It is difficult to decide whether one’s senpai should be classified into the ingroup or outgroup as some senpai/kōhai relationships are friendly while others are hierarchical. Furthermore, even within friendly relationships, the kōhai usually speak using the desu/masu markers, which makes the conversation sound somewhat formal. This is another reason why I use the term “mild vertical relationship” to describe these equivocal relationships between the interactants in this study, instead of classifying them as ingroup or outgroup relationships. and they do in fact show the two aspects of the language use presented above: the kōhai normatively speak in the desu/masu form to observe wakimae in front of the senpai, yet also sometimes deviate from the norm and drop the desu/masu markers to create some effects and new relationships dynamically. I will examine how this shift is often prompted by cross-speaker repetition in order to better understand the way Japanese speakers make use of the device to adjust the speech style as well as how it affects the interactants’ relationships.

5.1The kōhai repeat the senpai’s funny and/or questionable comments

The first type is where the kōhai repeat the senpai’s funny and/or somewhat questionable comments in the plain form to savor the expressions, like an echo, as shown in Excerpt (5).

   01 Koji:      …datte ore kyoo bikkuri shimashita mon, haitte kite[, futari tomo
                 senzoku no meiku san ga irassharu janai desu ka
                ‘I was surprised today, when I came in, both of you have your 
                 personal makeup artists’
   02 Shinobu:                                                      [Hai2121.Shinobu’s speaking style is most fluid, as (1) he has had a different career path from the other two men, and has not had many opportunities to talk with them before, and (2) he is in the middle position in terms of age in this conversation (older than Koji, and younger than Toshiaki). Because of this complication, Shinobu constantly shifts back and forth between the honorific and plain forms.
                                                                    ‘Yes’
   03 Megumi:   Un
                ‘Yeah’
   04 Koji:     Ore sore ni bikkuri shiteru n desu mon
                ‘I’m surprised at that’
   05 Toshiaki: Nande?
                ‘Why?’
   06 Shinobu:  E, datte, tsukereba ii janai desuka
                ‘Why not just hire one?’
   07 Toshiaki:  Un, haraeba ii jan
                ‘Yeah, why not just pay for it?’
   08 Shinobu:  Hai
                ‘Yes’
=> 09 Koji:     {laughter} Haraeba ii jan?
                {laughger} ‘Why not just pay for it?’
-----Omission-----
   19 Shinobu:  Dakara, kechi tteru [dake desu yo
                ‘So (you are/he is) just being stingy’
   20 Toshiaki:                     [Nanka koo
                                    ‘Like…’
=> 21 Koji:     Kechi tteru dake! {laughter}
               ‘Just being stingy!’ {laughter}
   22 Shinobu: Soo {laughter}
               ‘Right’ {laughter}

In this conversation between Koji, Shinobu, and Toshiaki, the three men talk about hiring a personal makeup artist. As background information of this excerpt, both Shinobu and Toshiaki have their personal makeup artists, for whom these men pay for themselves. Koji, who does not have a makeup artist, thinks that such artists are provided by Shinobu’s and Toshiaki’s agents because both men are big TV celebrities. Not knowing the truth about hiring, in 01 and 04, Koji says that he is surprised to find out that both his interlocutors have their own personal makeup artists. Note that, being the youngest, Koji maintains the desu/masu form. Then, Shinobu and Toshiaki suggest to Koji that he should also hire a makeup artist by saying haraeba ii jan ‘why not just pay for it?’ in a matter-of-fact tone. On hearing that, in 09, Koji repeats the phrase in a surprised and questioning tone with laughter. The second repetition in 21 is similar. During the omitted part (lines 10–18), Koji learns that both Shinobu and Toshiaki hire their personal makeup artists with their own money, and if he wants one, all he needs to do is to hire one himself. In 19, Shinobu jokingly mentions that after all, Koji is kechi tteru dake ‘just being stingy’ for not hiring a makeup artist, which is again repeated by Koji in 21, in a surprised and animated tone accompanied by laughter.

What is noteworthy is that Koji repeats the two senpais’ funny and slightly challenging comments – haraeba ii jan ‘why not just pay for it’ and kechi tteru dake ‘(you are/he is) just being stingy’ – without adding any modification. In other words, those repetitions maintain the casual wordings of the originals, which the kōhai usually do not use towards the senpai. If Koji wishes to maintain the desu/masu form, he can turn his interlocutors’ phrases into a quotative question by adding a quotative marker (tte) and a question marker (ka). For example, he can say haraeba ii jan tte nan desu ka ‘What is it that ‘why not just pay for it’<polite>?’ and kechi tteru dake tte nan desu ka ‘What is it that (I’m) just being stingy<polite>?’ or more simply, kechi tte masu ka ‘(Am I) being stingy<polite>?’ Nonetheless, Koji simply echoes the exact casual expressions produced by the two senpais (this is akin to what Cook 1999Cook, Haruko Minegishi 1999 “Situational Meaning of Japanese Social Deixis: The Mixed Use of the Masu and Plain Forms.” Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 8 (1): 87–110. terms “echo response”)2222.Similarly, Cook (1999)Cook, Haruko Minegishi 1999 “Situational Meaning of Japanese Social Deixis: The Mixed Use of the Masu and Plain Forms.” Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 8 (1): 87–110. examines a television interview program and observes cases where the interviewer, who primarily speaks in the desu/masu form, shifts to the plain form as he repeats (or paraphrases) and summarizes the interviewees’ responses. and momentarily breaks his honorific speech style.2323.This is partly explained by Okamoto (1999Okamoto, Shigeko 1999 “Situated Politeness: Manipulating Honorific and Non-honorific Expressions in Japanese Conversations.” Pragmatics 9 (1): 51–74., 62), who remarks that a speaker uses the plain forms for exclamatory expressions. This style shift prompted by cross-speaker repetition indicates that Koji is amused by the two senpais’ comments, while at the same time, it also creates a jocular atmosphere in a conversation.

Examining my data reveals that plain form repetition produced by the kōhai is almost always accompanied by laughter (and the laughter is often shared with the senpai). This is because, as can be seen in (5), the kōhai are amused by funny lines produced by the senpai and hence, purely savor the wordings without adding any honorific markers. The next example shows a similar case.

   01 Yū:   Kaifuku ryoku ga ochita ne
            ‘Slower recovery (than before)’
   02 Naoko: Aa, [soo desu ne
            ‘Ah, that’s true’
   03 Kyoko:     [Nee
                 ‘Yeah’
   04 Yū:    Tsugi no hi[, zenzen heiki datta no ni[,
             ‘(I/we) used to fully recover on the next day (before)’
   05 Naoko:            [Dame desu yo nee          [Nn
                        ‘(It) doesn’t work (that way now), right?’ ‘Yeah’
   06 Kyoko: Ano, ji ga yome nai mitai na
             ‘Like, (I) can’t read’
   07 Naoko: {laughter} xxx Yokujitsu desu ka?
             {laughter} ‘You mean on the next day?’
   08 Kyoko: Soo, tsukare sugi te[, tairyoku tsukai sugi te[, mie nai,
             [pasokon no gamen toka moo nani ka mie nai tte nattari {laughter}
             ‘Right, being too tired and worn out, (I) can’t see, like, a computer 
             screen, or (I) just can’t see things’ {laughter}
   09 Yū:                                                [Kasumi me
                                                         ‘Dim eyes’
=> 10 Naoko:                     [Nn 
                                 ‘Yeah’                       
             [Mie nai {laughter}, mie nai {laughter}
             ‘(I/we/you) can’t see {laughter}, (I/we/you) can’t see {laughter}

The three women in (6) discuss aging, mentioning that compared to when they were young, they now need more time to recover from a hangover. In 08, Kyoko confesses that after a night of drinking, she has blurry vision (“mie nai”). In 10, Naoko repeats the phrase, mie nai ‘can’t see’ in the plain form twice. Although it is not explicitly marked in the transcript, Naoko’s repetitions are accompanied by hearty laughter as she is amused by Kyoko’s funny and slightly embarrassing confession about her condition. These plain form repetitions and her laughter indicate that Naoko is at ease and enjoying the conversation without being too concerned about the necessity of honorific language use. She purely savors the funny expression produced by Kyoko as well as joining Kyoko in creating and maintaining a funny atmosphere.

5.2The kōhai repeat the senpai’s ideas, wishes or assessments

The second type of the kōhai’s plain form repetition is seen when the kōhai show agreement or empathy with the senpai’s ideas, wishes or assessments. Through such repetition, the kōhai momentarily transcend the vertical boundary and become in sync with the senpai in terms of the ideas, wishes, or assessments, as demonstrated in Excerpt (7).

   01 Kenta: Kono, reeboo ga monosugoi, gachi atari[, suru n de,
             ‘(I)’ve been over-exposed to air conditioning, so,’
   02 Ryuta:                                       [A, naruhodo, naruhodo ne
                                                   ‘Oh, I see, I see’
   03 Kenta: Chotto kazamuki o kaete itadakeru to[, chotto,
             ‘It would be nice if (anyone) can slightly adjust the airflow’
   04 Osamu:                                     [A, ikinari kureemu kara
             hairu kanji desu ka
                                        ‘Oh, (you) start out by complaining’
   05 Kenta: {laughter}
   06 Ryuta: Soo desu
             ‘That’s right’
   07 Kenta: {laughter} me ga sugoi…
             {laughter}‘(My) eyes are really…’
   08 Ryuta: Soo yuu tokoro ari masu yo ne
             ‘That’s just like (him), isn’t it?’
=> 09 Osamu: Soo yuu toko aru, soo yuu toko aru {laughter}
            ‘That’s Just like (him), just like (him)’ {laughter}.
   10 Kenta: {laughter} Cho, matte, omotta koto iuteko 
             {laughter} Wait, let’s be honest with what (we) think

This excerpt is seen at the beginning of the conversation, where three men, Kenta, Ryuta, and Osamu enter the café and take a seat. Once they sit down, Kenta, whose seat is near an air conditioning unit, mentions that he is over-exposed to air conditioning and he wants the air flow to change. Focusing on Kenta’s request, Osamu teasingly mentions “Oh, (you) start out by complaining” in 04. It leads to Ryuta’s further teasing, Soo yuu tokoro ari masu yo ne ‘That’s just like (him), isn’t it?’ in 08. Hearing this, Osamu agrees by repeating Ryuta’s comment in the plain form twice, as in Soo yuu toko aru, soo yuu toko aru ‘That’s just like (him), just like (him),’ accompanying it with laughter. As shown in 04, being the youngest of the three, Osamu mainly speaks in the desu/masu form throughout this conversation with the two senpais. However, when Ryuta teases Kenta for his straightforwardness, Osamu repeats the comment without using any honorific markers and joins Ryuta in teasing Kenta. This is an interesting example because Ryuta’s original comment in 08 has the honorific marker masu; probably to index that his critical comment on Kenta is a humorous tease (cf. Haga 1962Haga, Yasushi 1962 Kokugo hyoogen kyooshitsu [Japanese expression classroom]. Tokyo: Tookyoodoo.;2424.Maynard (1991Maynard, Senko K. 1991 “Pragmatics of Discourse Modality: A Case of Da and Desu/masu Forms in Japanese.” Journal of Pragmatics 15: 551–582. , 555) states that, citing Haga (1962)Haga, Yasushi 1962 Kokugo hyoogen kyooshitsu [Japanese expression classroom]. Tokyo: Tookyoodoo., in a discourse where the plain form is dominant with occurrences of sporadic desu/masu form, the latter form expresses “humor and an insertion of personal comment, as well as sarcasm.” Likewise, Ryuta’s use of masu in 08 (and desu in 06 also) can be explained as the expression of humor and sarcasm. Maynard 1991Maynard, Senko K. 1991 “Pragmatics of Discourse Modality: A Case of Da and Desu/masu Forms in Japanese.” Journal of Pragmatics 15: 551–582. ). This means that if Osamu had produced exact repetition, it would have been soo yuu toko ari masu, soo yuu toko ari masu ‘That’s just like (him)<polite>, just like (him)<polite>.’ However, Osamu drops the masu marker and simply repeats the core of the tease to be in sync with Ryuta’s idea. In this moment, Osamu transcends the vertical boundary and teases his senpai–Kenta–as if he were a peer, consequently reinforcing their bond.

The next example is similar to (7), in a way that the kōhai’s plain form repetition contains a jocular and playful touch.

   01 Shinobu: E, demo “Sukkiri”2525.A morning news program in which Koji appears as a personality. tte nan-pun nan desu ka, ichijikan nan-pun
               desu [ka
               ‘How long is “Sukkiri” (name of a TV show)? One hour and how many minutes?’
   02 Koji:         [Ni-jikan han desu
                    ‘It’s two and a half hours’
   03 Shinobu: Ni-jikan han? E, “Hiruobi”2626.A midday news program in which Toshiaki appears as a personality.wa?
               ‘Two and a half hours? How about “Hiruobi” (name of a TV show)?’
   04 Toshiaki:“Hiruobi” wa, maa, san-jikan [koosu
               ‘“Hiruobi” is, well, three hours long’
   05 Koji:                                 [San-jikan desu yo nee
                                            ‘It’s three hours long, right?’
   06 Shinobu: Soo nan daa. Don-gurai moratteru-n daroo, shiri tai
               ‘Is that so. (I) wonder how much (Toshiaki) is getting, (I) wanna know’
=> 07 Koji:    Ore Megumi-san2727.Toshiaki’s last name. no gyara shiri tai {laughter}
               ‘I wanna know Megumi-san’s fee’ {laughter}

In this excerpt, the three men talk about the TV shows on which each man appears as a personality (All of them work as a personality in a daily news program respectively). When Shinobu finds out that Toshiaki’s show, “Hiruobi,” is three hours long, he teasingly refers to Toshiaki’s stipend, saying Don-gurai moratteru-n daroo, shiri tai ‘(I) wonder how much (Toshiaki) is getting, (I) wanna know.’ Upon hearing this comment, Koji, the youngest, joins and synchronizes with Shinobu by saying Ore Megumi-san no gyara shiri tai ‘I wanna know Megumi-san’s fee,’ accompanying it with laughter. Note that Koji repeats Shinobu’s phrase shiri tai ‘(I) wanna know’ without adding desu as in shiri tai desu ‘I wanna know<polite>.’ Considering that people do not usually disclose their incomes to each other, especially in a public space such as on a TV talk show, it is readily interpreted that both Shinobu’s and Koji’s comments are intended as a joke. Still, even as a joke, it is natural for Koji to speak in the desu/masu form. The fact that Koji nevertheless drops the honorific marker is meaningful, as he once again momentarily transcends the vertical boundary between his two senpais and attempts to create a bond. It is also a sign that Koji is relaxed–relaxed enough to be playful–and feels safe with the senpai in this conversation.

The last example is where a kōhai repeats the senpai’s assessments and ideas in the plain form to synchronize with them.

   01 Yū:    Nanka suteki na hito da yo ne=
             ‘(He) is so attractive, isn’t (he)?’
   02 Kyoko:                              =[Soo
                                          ‘Right’
=> 03 Naoko:                              =[Sutekiii. Suteki desu yo [nee
                                          ‘(He’s) attractive. (He’s) attractive,                           
                                           right?’
   04 Kyoko:                                                         [Un
                                                                     ‘Yeah’
   -----Omission-----
   14 Kyoko: Soo, omoshiroi. Yuumoa aru yo [nee, nee
            ‘Right, (he) is interesting. (He) has a good sense of humor, right?’
   15 Naoko:                               [Sugoi desu yo nee
                                           ‘(He) is great, right?’
   16 Kyoko: Yappa otoko no hito wa yuumoa nai to [nee
            ‘A man must have a good sense of humor, right?’
=> 17 Naoko:                                      [Nai to ne. Tsumara-nai desu
             yo [nee
            ‘(He) must have (it), (otherwise) it’s boring’
   18 Kyoko:    [Hontoo
                ‘Indeed’
   19 Yū:   Honto da yo [nee
            ‘It is, indeed’
   20 Kyoko:            [Suugoi omoshiroi shi yasashii [shi, shinshi de
                        ‘(He) is really funny, kind, and a gentleman’
=> 21 Naoko:                                           [Yasashii shi, un
                                                       ‘(He) is kind and, yeah’

The three women in (9) talk about a famous actor. They all know him personally, and in 01, Yū mentions that she finds the actor suteki ‘attractive.’ Hearing Yū’s assessment, “suteki,” in 01, Naoko swiftly and empathetically2828.Empathy is partly expressed by the lengthening of the last mora in suteki in 03. repeats it twice in 03; once in the plain form and the second time along with the desu marker as in suteki desu yo nee ‘(He) is attractive <polite>, isn’t he?’ to be in sync with the senpai. A similar pattern is seen in 16 and 17. When Kyoko indicates the importance of a good sense of humor for a man, saying yuumoa nai to ‘must have a good sense of humor,’ Naoko overlaps and repeats part of Kyoko’s statement nai to ‘must have (it)’ in the plain form with a particle ne 2929.While the particle ne fulfills various functions, Naoko’s use of ne and nee (a long version) in 17 is considered to show friendliness and intimacy as well as to signal and solicit agreement (Maynard 2005Maynard, Senko K. 2005 Expressive Japanese: A Reference Guide to Sharing Emotion and Empathy. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.). to synchronize with Kyoko’s idea. Right after the plain form repetition, Naoko adds another phrase, Tsumara-nai desu yo nee (a long version of ne) ‘(Otherwise) it’s boring <polite>,’ with the desu marker attached this time. What is common in 03 and 17 is that after producing plain form repetition, Naoko supplements the repetition with another phrase with the desu marker as if to adjust the level of politeness. This endorses the fact that the desu/masu form is the norm for her. Regardless, she sometimes drops the honorific markers and produces plain form repetition when she agrees and empathizes with the senpai. In 21, Naoko once again repeats Kyoko’s assessment of the actor in the plain form – yasashii shi ‘(He) is kind and,’ – to display agreement and empathy. As a result of displaying agreement in a less formal, empathetic manner in 03, 17, and 21, Naoko smoothly becomes in sync with the senpai and enhances the bond between themselves.

5.3Summary of the kōhai’s plain form repetition of the senpai’s utterances

Previous sections illustrated the cases where kōhai ‘junior’ interactants deviate from the norm–speaking in the desu/masu form to observe wakimae–and repeat the utterances of senpai ‘senior’ interactants in the plain form without adding any honorific modification. The sections showed two types of such repetition.

The first type, which was shown in Section 5.1, is that the kōhai repeat the senpai’s funny and/or somewhat questionable comments like an echo to savor the expressions. In such cases, the kōhai are usually amused by the senpai’s comments and purely savor and enjoy the wording by repeating them without being too concerned about the vertical boundary. This is endorsed by the fact that those repetitions in my data are almost always accompanied by laughter.

The second type of the kōhai’s plain form repetition, which was shown in Section 5.2, takes place when the kōhai agree to or empathize with the senpai’s ideas, wishes, or assessments. By repeating the senpai’s utterances as they are in a straightforward manner, the kōhai synchronize with the senpai in terms of ideas, wishes, or assessments. As a consequence, communicative bonds are created and/or enhanced between the interactants regardless of the vertical boundary between them.

Whereas these two types of the kohai’s plain form repetition differ in some ways, they also have some similarities. Firstly, by breaking the normative honorific speech for a short moment, the kōhai’s plain form repetition indicates that they are at ease and enjoying the conversation with the senpai–at least, while producing the repetition. As shown in Naoko’s three repetitions in Excerpt (4), it is possible and quite natural for the kōhai to repeat the senpai’s utterances while maintaining the desu/masu markers. This means that the kōhai in Excerpts (5) to (9) made a choice of dropping the honorific markers in those repetitions. We can assume that the kōhai could make this choice because they are less concerned about the vertical boundary in the given context. Secondly, and closely associated with the first point, the kōhai’s plain form repetition maintains and enhances an amicable and amusing atmosphere among the interactants, and therefore invigorates the conversation. As shown in Excerpts (5) to (9), the kōhai’s plain form repetition usually takes place when the conversation is already jocular and/or intimate with teases, jokes, or funny confessions. Therefore, the kōhai’s joining the jocular and/or intimate mode with plain form repetition maintains and even elevates the level of amicability.