Transcending the senpai ‘senior’/kōhai ‘junior’ boundary through cross-speaker repetition in Japanese

Abstract

This study explores the role of cross-speaker repetition in creating interpersonal connections between interactants in Japanese. The analysis focuses on Japanese non-reciprocal conversations between senpai ‘senior’ and kōhai ‘junior’ interactants, where the kōhai are normatively expected to speak using the honorific desu/masu markers. The analysis demonstrates that in such conversations, the kōhai sometimes drop the honorific markers while repeating the senpai’s utterances, thereby momentarily transcending the vertical boundary separating them from the senpai. Two types of plain form repetition are presented: (1) the kōhai repeat the senpai’s funny and/or questionable comments to savor the expressions, and (2) the kōhai repeat the senpai’s ideas, wishes or assessments to synchronize with the senpai. The analysis explicates how cross-speaker repetition allows the kōhai to drop the honorific markers in a way that is acceptable to the senpai. This study underscores the significance of the cross-speaker repetition device for creating harmonious relationships in Japanese.

Keywords:
Publication history
Table of contents

1.Introduction

Repeating the utterances of another speaker, or cross-speaker repetition,11.Also known as “other-repetition” and “allo-repetition.” is one of the linguistic practices commonly seen in Japanese conversations. Japanese speakers repeat each other’s utterances not only to engage in verbal play but also to perform various interactive behaviors that involve dynamically adjusting the interpersonal closeness between speakers (Machi 2019Machi, Saeko 2019 “Managing Relationship through Repetition: How Repetition Creates Ever-shifting Relationships in Japanese Conversation.” Pragmatics 29 (1): 57–81.Google Scholar, 2021 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.Google Scholar). In fact, the act of repeating another’s utterances is a much more versatile practice than it seems, and there is more to be revealed about this device to better understand how Japanese speakers engage in conversation.

Building on previous research, this study examines how cross-speaker repetition builds and reinforces interactants’ interpersonal connections during a conversation. Specifically, the study focuses on how cross-speaker repetition in non-reciprocal conversations, where there is a mild vertical relationship (i.e., a relationship in which younger interactants are expected to observe wakimae or discernment – see 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.Google Scholar, 2012 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar – by speaking politely to older interactants), allows interactants to momentarily transcend the vertical boundary and dynamically create and enhance communicative bonds. For this purpose, the study mainly examines conversations between people who work in the same field and are within the Japanese senpai ‘senior’/kōhai ‘junior’ relationship.

First, the study shows how cross-speaker repetition in peer conversations creates and enhances bonds between interactants by allowing them to collaboratively develop a story, share utterances and messages, and empathize with each other. Next, the study examines how this function of cross-speaker repetition applies to non-reciprocal conversations. It demonstrates how kōhai ‘junior’ interactants, who are normatively expected to speak in the honorific form using the desu/masu markers, sometimes drop the markers while repeating senpai ‘senior’ interactants’ utterances, and thereby momentarily transcend the vertical boundary and dynamically create bonds in a conversation.22.This phenomenon can be also explained through the concept of stance, especially how interactants align themselves in a given context (Du Bois 2007Du Bois, John W. 2007 “The Stance Triangle.” In Stancetaking in Discourse: Subjectivity, Evaluation, Interaction, ed. by Robert Englebretson, 139–182. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar). Du Bois (2007Du Bois, John W. 2007 “The Stance Triangle.” In Stancetaking in Discourse: Subjectivity, Evaluation, Interaction, ed. by Robert Englebretson, 139–182. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar, 144) states that interactants display their alignment – either convergent or divergent – by stance markers like yes or no, gestures like a nod or a headshake, or any other forms that index some degree of alignment. It is possible to think of cross-speaker repetition and the dropping of the desu/masu markers as examples of a shift in interactants’ stance or alignment. Two types of plain form cross-speaker repetition33.I use the term “plain form” in contrast to the “honorific form,” which characterizes the honorific desu and masu markers. are presented: (1) the kōhai repeat or echo the senpai’s funny and/or questionable comments to savor the expressions,44.I use the word “savor” in the sense that the kōhai not only display appreciation (as shown in Tannen 1989Tannen, Deborah 1989Talking Voices: Repetition, Dialogue, and Imagery in Conversational Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar, 64) but also examine the funny or questionable expression produced by the senpai. and (2) the kōhai repeat the senpai’s ideas, wishes, or assessments to synchronize with the senpai. Lastly, the study accounts for how cross-speaker repetition allows the kōhai to drop the honorific markers provided that certain conditions are met. In addition to the casualness of the conversations, the study addresses the synergistic effect of the nature of cross-speaker repetition and the kōhai’s speech style shift that displays heightened empathy and intimacy. Along with various conversation data and analysis, the study underscores the significance of the cross-speaker repetition device in terms of creating harmonious relationships in Japanese.

2.Previous studies

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.Google Scholar, Tannen (1989)Tannen, Deborah 1989Talking Voices: Repetition, Dialogue, and Imagery in Conversational Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar, Brown (1999)Brown, Penelope 1999 “Repetition.” Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 9 (1–2): 223–226. DOI logoGoogle Scholar, and Johnstone (1987Johnstone, Barbara 1987 “An Introduction.” Text 7 (3): 205–214. (Special issue on “Perspectives on Repetition”)Google Scholar, 2002 2002Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar). 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.Google Scholar; 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: CSLIGoogle Scholar; 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar, 2018 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.Google Scholar; Kim 2014Kim, Myung-Hee 2014 “Why Self-deprecating? Achieving ‘Oneness’ in Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 69: 82–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar; Machi 2019Machi, Saeko 2019 “Managing Relationship through Repetition: How Repetition Creates Ever-shifting Relationships in Japanese Conversation.” Pragmatics 29 (1): 57–81.Google Scholar, 2020 2020 “ ‘Braid Structure’ Conversations: Development of Informal Triadic Conversation in Japanese.” The Japanese Journal of Language in Society 22 (2): 15–29.Google Scholar, 2021 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.Google Scholar). In Machi (2021) 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.Google Scholar, 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: CSLIGoogle Scholar) 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar, 2018 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.Google Scholar).

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.Google Scholar; Johnstone 1987Johnstone, Barbara 1987 “An Introduction.” Text 7 (3): 205–214. (Special issue on “Perspectives on Repetition”)Google Scholar, 2002 2002Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar; Tannen 1989Tannen, Deborah 1989Talking Voices: Repetition, Dialogue, and Imagery in Conversational Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar; Brown 1999Brown, Penelope 1999 “Repetition.” Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 9 (1–2): 223–226. DOI logoGoogle Scholar; 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar, 2018 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.Google Scholar; Machi 2020 2020 “ ‘Braid Structure’ Conversations: Development of Informal Triadic Conversation in Japanese.” The Japanese Journal of Language in Society 22 (2): 15–29.Google Scholar, 2021 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.Google Scholar). 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: CSLIGoogle Scholar; Kim 2014Kim, Myung-Hee 2014 “Why Self-deprecating? Achieving ‘Oneness’ in Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 69: 82–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar; Machi 2020 2020 “ ‘Braid Structure’ Conversations: Development of Informal Triadic Conversation in Japanese.” The Japanese Journal of Language in Society 22 (2): 15–29.Google Scholar, 2021 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.Google Scholar).

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.Google Scholar, 2021 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.Google Scholar), 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 2020 2020 “ ‘Braid Structure’ Conversations: Development of Informal Triadic Conversation in Japanese.” The Japanese Journal of Language in Society 22 (2): 15–29.Google Scholar, 2021 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.Google Scholar). 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar; Kim 2014Kim, Myung-Hee 2014 “Why Self-deprecating? Achieving ‘Oneness’ in Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 69: 82–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar; Machi 2021 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.Google Scholar), 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar; 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar; 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.Google Scholar). 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.Google Scholar). 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar and Ide (2012) 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar 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.Google Scholar, 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar; 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar; 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar; Okamoto 1999Okamoto, Shigeko 1999 “Situated Politeness: Manipulating Honorific and Non-honorific Expressions in Japanese Conversations.” Pragmatics 9 (1): 51–74.Google Scholar; 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.Google Scholar). 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar), 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar), 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar). (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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar) 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.Google Scholar 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.Google Scholar).

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.

3.Data

The data for this study were taken from a Japanese television talk show, “Bokura no Jidai (Our Generation),” produced by Fuji TV. This is a weekly talk show that is broadcast on Sunday mornings. Every week, three guests1212.The TV show invites guests from various backgrounds. They include not only celebrities, such as actors, comedians, announcers, athletes, and musicians, but also renowned writers and comic artists who may not often appear on TV. – often close friends, but also people who are meeting for the first time – are invited to talk freely about what is on their minds without a set format. No host or interviewer is present to control the conversation. The three guests talk freely in a relaxed setting, enjoying a cup of coffee and sometimes drinking alcohol. This study analyzes four conversations carried out by the triads as follows:

Conversation 1:

A peer conversation between three women of the same age. Mio, Minami, and Marie are all 30 years old. All of them speak in the plain form throughout the conversation.

Conversation 2:

A non-reciprocal conversation between three women. Naoko (43 years old), Kyoko (45 years old), and Yū (46 years old) are all actors. Only Naoko continues to speak in the honorific form.

Conversation 3:

A non-reciprocal conversation between three men. Toshiaki (51 years old) and Koji (46 years old) are comedians, and Shinobu (48 years old) is an actor. Koji continues to speak in the honorific form to the other two men, who mix the honorific and plain forms.

Conversation 4:

A non-reciprocal conversation between three men. Osamu (28 years old), Ryuta (30 years old), and Kenta (30 years old) are all actors. Only Osamu continues to speak in the honorific form.

Figure 1.Image of a triadic conversation from “Bokura no Jidai
Figure 1.