Editor for this issue: T. Daniel Seely <dseely
emunix.emich.edu>
Look, it is more complicated than you think. Hudson is right as far as he goes here, but it is not far enough. Men tend to use 'son' and the like for expressing an intimacy that is not exactly bonding. For instance, it can be used to attract attention when the father is annoyed, though that *may* amount to a kind of bonding. Mothers, in standard English speaking communities do not generally use 'daughter' the same way, but why? I suggest there are (at least) two factors at work here. And he can also, in the US at east, use 'kid', or 'kiddo', in these contexts (add that to the list), even if, nominally, 'kid' is gender neutral (he doesn't use it to a daughter). First, women feel more comfortable bonding with directly affective terms, so they will use 'honey', 'dear' and the like (Hudson will recognise the somewhat affected 'dear boy' that a certain, often Oxbridgian kind of man will use to sons, to younger men in general and so on), which she also uses more widely (to husbands, other women, and *possibly* but rarely to sons, to whom she does not want to seem to be bonding in this way). Second, it seems that 'daughter' has a much more formal, legalistic-descriptive, technical usage flavour than does 'son'. This may be confirmed, up to a point, by the observation that there is no diminutive for 'daughter' corresponding to 'sonny' for 'son'. But a mother *will* use 'daughter' vocatively to daughters and quasi daughters in the community of speakers of American Black English; my daughter-in-law, who is Black, uses it readily, for instance, to her daughter, though chiefly as an attention getter and not in pure affection. There is, in the US at least, a minor current of usage according to which a man will use 'honey' or the like to a daughter and a woman to her son, though in the latter case the boy tends to feel awkward and embarrassed I believe. It is interesting at least to speculate further about the absence of a vocative equivalent for 'brother' in English. In many languages (in Burmese, which is the one I grew up with, for example) one always addresses brother with a term meaning either 'elder brother' (if that is right) or yonger sibling of same sex (when that is right). Of course we may say that this is just part of th general scheme according to which we tend to use terms of relationship, titles and the like to replace names in speaking to or of just about anyone; we at least prefix the name, in referential use, with one of the standard titles derived from kinship terms. Never the less,in Burmese social context, there are definite legalistic connexions between siblings. Elders siblings of same sex are potential parent surrogates for their younger same-sex siblings, and, correspondingly, the younger owes the other enduring respect similar to that owed a father. In standard English speaking communities, I submit, what some Social Anthropoligsts used to call the 'solidarity of the sibling group' is notoriously absent. Brothers may or may not be friends, but, in family context they are simply rivals often as not. Bonding is not what one should expect here. On the other hand, 'sis' is a common vocative for sisters, and in this same society it is, or used to be, the case that a brother was expected to take a protective attitude to his sister, although this vocative is also not uncommon in use to an elder sister who acts as a sort of mother surrogate for her little brothers (and here 'sis' replaces 'mum' and the like); bonding in any case. But enough; this could go on forever. Cheers, Kris Lehman (Chit Hlaing)Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
In writing about the lack of a single syllable vocative for "brother" (a la mom, dad, and sis), Allan C Wechsler notes that perhaps the BVE term "bro" is something to consider. Maybe I'm too young to know, but is "bro" a term that is particulatly BVE? I have no problem using 'bro' to refer to my own brother, though I wouldn't use it to refer to other males my age or younger. (Then again, I wouldn't use SIS for female other than my [non-existent] sister...) I, by the way, am not African-American--I come from a Portuguese immigrant family that lived in the greater Boston area. Could 'bro' be an urban thing? (With origins in the Black community?) As for the 'son' thing, I would note that in the European Portuguese (I don't speak for my Brazilian colleagues), it's common for fathers/grandfathers to refer / call their sons -rapaz- 'boy'. (The use of the term 'my son' [meu f filho] seems to be for those more tender moments.) This practice caused some problems when my Grandfather lived with us for a while, as he constantly re0 ferred to me as "boy" in English. Now where I come from, when somebody says "hey, boy..." or "listen, boy..." it's a put-down. My mother explained this situation to my grandad, and suggested to him that I be called by my given name, David. For whatever reason, he didn't like that solution (apparently David wasn't a Portuguese-enough name for his grandson), and so took to calling me "Mr. Boy"--and it stuck. - David "Mr. Boy" Silva University of Texas at ArlingtonMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue