Types of Honorific
Honorifics in Japanese are broadly referred to as keigo (敬語, literally "respectful language"), and fall under three main categories: sonkeigo (尊敬語), respectful language; kenjōgo (謙譲語), humble language (or "modest language"); and teineigo (丁寧語), polite language. Linguistically, the former two are referent honorifics, used for someone being talked about, and the last is an addressee honorific, used for someone being talked to. Sometimes two more categories are also used, for five categories total: teichōgo (丁重語) "courteous language" and bikago (美化語), "word beautification", but more often these are included in the above three: teichōgo as a kind of kenjōgo (humble), bikago as a kind of teineigo (polite)—these two other categories use the same forms as the general categories, but are used in different contexts, hence differentiated by some linguists. Each type of speech has its own vocabulary and verb endings.
For example, the standard form of the verb "to do" is suru (する). This form is appropriate with family members and close friends. The polite form of suru, the addressee honorific, is shimasu. This form is appropriate in most daily interactions. When showing respect, such as when talking about a customer or a superior, however, the respectful word nasaru and its polite form nasaimasu are used, and when referring to one's own actions or the actions of a group member, the humble word itasu and its polite form itashimasu are used. These respectful and humble words are referent honorifics, and thus can coexist with addressee honorific -masu.
Read more about this topic: Honorific Speech In Japanese
Famous quotes containing the words types of and/or types:
“Our children evaluate themselves based on the opinions we have of them. When we use harsh words, biting comments, and a sarcastic tone of voice, we plant the seeds of self-doubt in their developing minds.... Children who receive a steady diet of these types of messages end up feeling powerless, inadequate, and unimportant. They start to believe that they are bad, and that they can never do enough.”
—Stephanie Martson (20th century)
“As for types like my own, obscurely motivated by the conviction that our existence was worthless if we didn’t make a turning point of it, we were assigned to the humanities, to poetry, philosophy, painting—the nursery games of humankind, which had to be left behind when the age of science began. The humanities would be called upon to choose a wallpaper for the crypt, as the end drew near.”
—Saul Bellow (b. 1915)