HONORIFICS IN ACTION: A SOCIOLINGUISTIC EXPLORATION  OF JAPANESE LANGUAGE USE AMONG INDONESIAN  UNIVERSITY STUDENTS

Mhd Pujiono; Abdul Gapur; Taulia Taulia; Syafrizal Azzali

doi:10.24071/llt.v28i1.9453

HONORIFICS IN ACTION: A SOCIOLINGUISTIC EXPLORATION OF JAPANESE LANGUAGE USE AMONG INDONESIAN UNIVERSITY STUDENTS

Mhd Pujiono^(1*), Abdul Gapur⁽²⁾, Taulia Taulia⁽³⁾, Syafrizal Azzali⁽⁴⁾,

(1) Universitas Sumatera Utara, Medan, Indonesia.
(2) Universitas Harapan Medan, Medan, Indonesia.
(3) Universitas Harapan Medan, Medan, Indonesia.
(4) Universitas Sumatera Utara, Medan, Indonesia.
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract

This study investigates the use of Japanese honorific language variants (keigo)—teineigo, kenjougo, and sonkeigo—among university students studying Japanese, emphasizing the progression of ability throughout academic levels. The study intends to examine patterns in honorific usage and explore factors affecting students’ application of keigo. A Japanese Literature program was executed utilizing a descriptive qualitative approach and sociolinguistic theory, resulting in data gathering through questionnaires administered to 30 students (10 sophomores, 10 juniors, and 10 seniors). The data indicate that 80% of sophomores utilize teineigo, whereas 40% of juniors employ both sonkeigo and at least 40% of another form. Senior citizens favor sonkeigo and kenjougo due to their extensive cultural-linguistic understanding. Key characteristics encompass formal engagement with elders, maintaining esteemed standards, and readiness for professional settings. These results underscore the imperative for keigo training that is customized to the specific developmental stage of learners, prioritizing pragmatic skill and cultural awareness. The study advocates incorporating sociolinguistic contexts into Japanese language courses to connect classroom instruction with practical communication.

Keywords

Japanese, kenjougo, language variety, sonkeigo, teineigo

Full Text:

PDF

References

Akagi, N., Bryce, M., & Suzuki, H. (2020). Maji ssu ka? Isn’t that honorific? Pragmatics and Society, 11(4), 505–523. https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.16002.aka

Andriyani, A. A. A. D., Ardiantari, I. A. P. G., & Saddhono, K. (2024). Exploration of honorifics in Japanese-Balinese intercultural marriages. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 14(7), 2242–2250. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1407.32

Arikunto, S. (2014). Prosedur penelitian suatu pendekatan praktik. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.

Barešova, I. (2015). On the categorization of the Japanese honorific system keigo. Topics in Linguistics, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2015-0001

Carroll, T. (2005). Beyond keigo: Smooth communication and the expression of respect in Japanese as a foreign language. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 2005(175–176). https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.2005.2005.175-176.233

Chaer, A. (2003). Psikolinguistik: Kajian teoretik. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.

Chang, F., Tatsumi, T., Hayakawa, H., Yoshizaki, M., & Oka, N. (2021). The role of parental input in the early acquisition of Japanese politeness distinctions. Collabra: Psychology, 7(1), 18989. https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.18989

DiBello Takeuchi, J. (2021). Language ideologies among Japanese foreign language teachers: Keigo and L2 speakers. Foreign Language Annals, 54(3), 589–606. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12575

Djafri, F., & Wahidati, L. (2020). Study in Japan and the motivation of Japanese language learners in higher educational institutions in Indonesia. IZUMI, 9(2), 112–120. https://doi.org/10.14710/izumi.9.2.112-120

Fishman, J. A. (1972). The sociology of language. Rowley: Newbury House.

Goundar, P. R. (2020). Bridging the gap for English language testing study in Fiji: Proposing an evaluation of the writing proficiency level of pre-first year and post-first year undergraduate students. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 11(3), 351–358. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1103.02

Guo, S.-W., Wen, Y.-C., Yu, J.-L., & Fan, Y.-C. (2024). JH-Ranker: Enhancing keigo recognition in Japanese sentences through multi-task learning. 2024 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/IJCNN60899.2024.10651022

Gyogi, E. (2015). Voices from the Japanese language classroom: Honorifics do far more than politeness. In B. Pizziconi & M. Locher (Eds.), Teaching and Learning (Im)Politeness (pp. 53–78). Boston: De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501501654-004

Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar (3rd ed.). London: Hodder Arnold.

Haristiani, N., Septiana, A., Nor, N. F. M., & Ryota, N. (2023). The politeness of criticism speech acts in Japanese and Minangkabau films. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13(1), 131–148. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v13i1.58272

Hymes, D. (1996). Ethnography, linguistics, narrative inequality. London: Taylor and Francis.

Imai, T. (2024). Saying “thanks” and “sorry” in a Japanese workplace: Expressing gratitude and apologies functions as an effective politeness strategy. Communication Research Reports, 41(4), 253–264. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2024.2407593

Kabaya, H. (1998). Keigo hyōgen. Tokyo: Taishūkan Shoten.

Kashima, E., Di Garbo, F., Singer, R., & Khanina, O. (2025). The design principles of a sociolinguistic typological questionnaire for language contact research. Language Dynamics and Change, 15(1), 1–103. https://doi.org/10.1163/22105832-bja10035

Kaur, G., & Yamada, A. (2022). Honorific (mis)matches in allocutive languages with a focus on Japanese. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 44(1), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.7669

Keigo no shishin. (2007). Retrieved from https://www.bunka.go.jp/seisaku/bunkashingikai/kokugo/hokoku/pdf/keigo_tosin.pdf

Kim, J. (2016). Descriptive study of honorific use in Korean email discourse. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 6(1), 99–111. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v6i1.2742

Kim, M. (2023). Between honorifics and non-honorifics: A study of the Korean semi-honorific style and a comparison with Japanese. Discourse Studies, 25(5), 664–691. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614456231184090

Kitahara, Y. (2002). Meikyō kokugo jiten. Tokyo: Taishūkan Shoten.

Kridalaksana, H. (2010). Pembentukan kata dalam bahasa Indonesia. Jakarta: PT Gramedia Pustaka Utama.

Kusumawati, M. (2019). An inquiry on Japanese language education in Indonesia: A focus on the curriculum and its’ implementation. JAPANEDU: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pengajaran Bahasa Jepang, 4(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.17509/japanedu.v4i1.16658

Lee, N. H. (2025). Sociolinguistic variation. In N.H. Lee (Ed.), Language in society (pp. 22–46). London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781032621517-2

Liu, G., & Zhang, X. (2021). The meaning-shift unit of Chinese intensifiers: A corpus-based study. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 12(1), 111–119. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1201.12

Lubis, T. (2019). Learning Nandong in schools as a medium to inform the simeuluenese local wisdom: An anthropolinguistics approach. Studies in English Language and Education, 6(2), 262–272.https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v6i2.14066

Lubis, T., & Purba, A. (2020). Metaphor and parallelism in political

advertisements. Cogency, 12(2), 71–88. https://doi.org/10.32995/cogency.v12i2.360

Marszalenko, J. E. (2023). Politeness matters: What honorifics can tell us about accuracy in Japanese-English court interpreting. In J. Engberg (Ed.), Between text, meaning and legal languages (pp. 91–116). Boston: De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110799651-007

Martin, J. (1987). Variety of language. London: Longman.

Maruki, Y. (2022). Keigo to use and to be used: Reevaluation of keigo learning in Japanese language classes. Journal of Japanese Language Education and Linguistics, 6(2), 142–153. https://doi.org/10.18196/jjlel.v6i2.14874

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Minami, M. (1990). Keigo: Kyouiku no kihon mondai (jou). Tokyo: Ookurashou.

Miura, A., & McGloin, H. (2008). An integrated approach to intermediate Japanese. Tokyo: The Japan Times.

Moleong, L. J. (2014). Metode penelitian kualitatif (edisi revisi). Bandung: PT. Remaja Rosdakarya.

Nagata, T. (2022). 10 Japanese honorifics. In Y. Asahi, M. Usami, & F. Inoue (Eds.), Handbook of Japanese sociolinguistics (pp. 295–326). Boston: De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501501470-011

Nashruddin, N., Setiawan, S., & Suhartono, S. (2024). Language discord and language attitude among EFL learners: Insights from an Indonesian university. LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching, 27(2), 757–779. https://doi.org/10.24071/llt.v27i2.9003

Obana, Y., & Haugh, M. (2021). (Non-)propositional irony in Japanese – Impoliteness behind honorifics. Lingua, 260, 103119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2021.103119

Okamoto, S., & Shibamoto-Smith, J. S. (2016). Keigo: Diversity in attitudes and practice. In S. Okamoto & J.S. Shibamoto-Smith (Eds.), The social life of the Japanese language (pp. 154–200). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139680400.005

Okumuraa, M., & Onthanee, A. (2022). Effectiveness of authentic learning on Japanese honorific speaking skills of Japanese major students in Thailand. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 43(2), 329‒336. https://doi.org/10.34044/j.kjss.2022.43.2.09

Pramesti, P. D. M. Y., Beratha, N.L.S., Budiarsa, M., & Sudipa, I. N. (2019). Speech level shift in the domain of the elderly care in Japan by the Indonesian caregivers. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 10(5), 1010‒1017. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1005.13

Pujiono, M. (2015). Interferens linguistik dan budaya dalam kalangan pelajar Indonesia yang belajar bahasa Jepun sebagai bahasa kedua (Universiti Sains Malaysia). http://eprints.usm.my/30512/

Pujiono, M. (2022). Interferensi leksikal bahasa Indonesia terhadap bahasa Jepang (studi kasus pada mahasiswa bahasa Jepang di Indonesia). Surabaya: Pustaka Aksara.

Rahayu, E. T. (2018). Japanese honorific language in various domains. Proceedings of the Fourth Prasasti International Seminar on Linguistics (Prasasti 2018), 25–34. Paris: Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/prasasti-18.2018.5

Rahayu, E. T., & Hartati, H. (2024). The shift in the use of keigo by migrant care workers on TikTok social media. Studies in Media and Communication, 12(3), 310–324. https://doi.org/10.11114/smc.v12i3.6975

Sagino, S. (2008). Keigo no kihon oshiemasu. Tokyo: Riyonsha.

Saraswati, G., Hartoyo, H., & Fadwati, A. (2018). The role of local culture in English speaking classes. LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching, 21(2), 183–190. https://doi.org/10.24071/llt.v21i2.934

Shaumiwaty, S., Lubis, M. A., Lubis, T., Dardanila, Purba, A., Nasution, T., … Hasrul, S. (2020). Teacher performance toward students’ mathematical literacy in teaching linear program mathematical models. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1663, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1663/1/012066

Sudaryanto, S. (2015). Metode dan aneka teknik analisis bahasa. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University Press.

Sudjianto, S., & Dahidi, A. (2007). Pengantar linguistik bahasa Jepang. Jakarta: Kesain Blanc.

Takiura, M. (2022). 11 intersection of traditional Japanese honorific theories and Western politeness theories. In Y. Asahi, M. Usami, & F. Inoue (Eds.), Handbook of Japanese sociolinguistics (pp. 327–354). Boston: De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501501470-012

Tomioka, S., & Ishii, K. (2022). Being polite and subordinate: Morphosyntax determines the embeddability of utterance honorifics in Japanese. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 44(1), 1–37. https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.7684

Tomisaka, Y. (1997). Nihongo no dansei to josei no kotoba. Tokyo: Aruku.

Yu, R. (2020). Culture in second or foreign language acquisition. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 11(6), 943–947. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1106.10

Zandy, M. P. (2014). Peggunaan ragam bahasa hormat (keigo) dalam drama Attention Please karya Sato Yuichi (Undergraduate thesis, Universitas Brawijaya). https://repository.ub.ac.id/id/eprint/101221/

DOI: https://doi.org/10.24071/llt.v28i1.9453