Language about Aging
Names And Forms Of Address
In interpersonal communication, forms of address and names define social relationships. The use of a person's first name indicates a close, long-standing relationship, hence the expression "to be on a first name basis." Nevertheless, there are circumstances in which the use of an appropriate title (Mr., Mrs., Miss, Doctor, etc.) and surname is necessary because of the formal nature of the discourse; these include job interviews, initial contact with a person, and so forth. This use of forms of address and personal names, though not formalized, derives from implicit rules of discourse that set the stage for ongoing social relationships. Their use thus reveals much about personal associations (e.g., the use of a formal form of address by one conversational participant and an informal one by the other signals the dominant and subordinate speaker). The inappropriate use of forms of address and names may have the effect of infantilizing older adults. Such patronizing and demeaning usage often occurs in health care and geriatric facilities.
Negative linguistic ageism frequently manifests itself in the names and in the forms of address used with older adults. This sort of language behavior is a verbal indication of the infantilizing process. There are five common examples of this subtle form of linguistic abuse. The first one involves the use of an older adult's first name, especially by a younger person, without first asking permission to do so. This tactic immediately establishes power relationships in a conversation. It should be noted, however, that there is a tendency in contemporary U.S. society to use a person's name without seeking permission though many older adults are not accustomed to this practice. Second, the use of diminutive forms of first names, such as Johnny or Annie, with older individuals is a more degrading usage than using the first name—these are forms that are generally reserved for speaking with small children. A third example involves the inappropriate use of terms of affection and endearment (dear, honey, poor dear, good girl, good boy) by people who have no claim to their use. Diminutive forms (dearie, sweetie) of these words only add to this infantilizing humiliation. A fourth example of names used with older people includes such generic names as gramps or granny, which are frequently employed by small children with their older relatives. The fifth form of this kind of linguistic ageism is anonymity. Not using the name of an older person at all marks them as nonentities whose worth is negligible. Two additional examples of linguistic ageism that often take place in health care environments involve pronominal forms. In the first instance, a third person pronominal reference (he, she) is used in the presence of the person being spoken about as if they were unworthy of conversational inclusion (e.g., "he's having a bad day"). A second instance involves the use of the first-person plural pronoun (we) as a subordinating communicative act, such as in the expression "How are we doing today?" It is clear in this usage that there is no sense of solidarity with the older person.
ARLUKE, A., and LEVIN, J. "Old Age as a Second Childhood." Aging 346 (1984): 7–11.
BARBATO, C. A., and FEEZEL, J. D. "The Language of Aging in Different Groups." The Gerontologist 27 (1987): 527–531.
BECKETT, S. Krapp's Last Tape and Other Dramatic Pieces. New York: Grove Press, Inc., 1960, Pages 7–28.
BUTLER, R. N. "Age-ism: Another Form of Bigotry." The Gerontologist (1969): 243–246.
BYTHEWAY, B. Ageism. Buckingham, U.K.: Open University Press, 1995.
COUPLAND, N.; COUPLAND, J.; and GILES, H. Language, Society, and the Elderly. Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell, 1991.
DILIBERTI, W., and ECCLES, M., eds. Thesaurus of Aging Terminology, 5th ed. Washington, D.C.: Research Information Center, American Association of Retired Persons, 1994.
KENYON, G. M.; BIRREN, J. E.; and SCHROOTS, J. J. F., eds. Metaphors of Aging in Science and the Humanities. New York: Springer, 1991.
LAKOFF, G., and JOHNSON, M. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980.
MIEDER, W.; KINGSBURY, S. A.; and HARDER, K. B., eds. A Dictionary of American Proverbs. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.
NUESSEL, F. "The Language of Ageism." The Gerontologist 22 (1982): 273–276.
NUESSEL, F. "Ageist Language." Maledicta 8 (1984–1985): 17–28.
NUESSEL, F. "Letter to the Editor." The Gerontologist 27 (1987): 809.
NUESSEL, F. The Image of Older Adults in the Media: An Annotated Bibliography. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1992a.
NUESSEL, F. The Semiotics of Ageism. Monograph Series of the Toronto Semiotic Circle, No. 10. Toronto: Toronto Semiotic Circle, 1992b.
NUESSEL, F. "Metaphors of Aging." Semiotica 97 (1993): 177–188.
NUESSEL, F. "Metaphorical Constructs, Aging, and Health Care Delivery." Signifying Behavior: A Journal of Research in Semiotics, Communications and Cognitive Science 1 (1994): 201–213.
NUESSEL, F. "Future Directions for Research on the Media Depiction of Older Adults: A U.S. Perspective." In Images of Aging in Western Societies. Edited by Cornelia Hummel and Christian J. Lalive D'Epinay. Geneva, Switzerland: Centre for Interdisciplinary Gerontology, University of Geneva, 1995. Pages 287–319.
NUESSEL, F. "The Depiction of Older Adults and Aging in Italian Proverbs." Proverbium 17 (2000a): 299–314.
NUESSEL, F. "The Use of Metaphor to Comprehend and Explicate Scientific Theory." In Semiotics as a Bridge between the Humanities and the Sciences. Edited by Paul Perron, Leonard G. Sbrocchi, Paul Colilli, and Marcel Danesi. Ottawa, Ontario: Legas Press, 2000b. Pages 479–500.
NUESSEL, F., and STEWART, A. V. "Research Summary: Patronizing Names and Forms of Address Used with Older Adults." Names 47 (1999): 401–409.
PALMORE, E. B. Ageism: Negative and Positive, 2d ed. New York: Springer Publishing Co., 1999.
WARD, R. A. The Aging Experience: An Introduction to Social Gerontology. New York: J. P. Lippincott Co., 1979.