UDK 811.163.6'271.1'367.626.1:314.743(=163.6)
SECOND PERSON PRONOUNS USED BY SLOVENE AND AMERICAN SLOVENE SPEAKERS AS LINGUISTIC MARKERS OF PERSONAL AND
SOCIAL (IN)EQUALITY
Nada Sabec
Abstract
This paper discusses the use of second person pronouns in Slovene as linguistic markers of personal and social (in)equality in face-to-face interaction. In addition to the fundamental social dimensions of power/status and solidarity that are usually associated with the choice of a particular pronoun in such interactions, I explore some other dimensions such as formality and casualness that may also contribute to the choice.
The focus is on the comparison of the use of Slovene second person pronouns in their native and diaspora contexts. While the rules for their use in Slovenia are relatively well established and observed in a fairly consistent manner, especially by older speakers, their use in the North American context is quite different. The questionnaire responses by Slovenes and their descendants living in the United States and Canada show that these pronouns are often used almost as if at random and that, especially with younger speakers, the predominant form has become "ti". It is possible that this is due to the diminishing knowledge of Slovene and the speakers' uncertainty as to which form to use, but also to the very strong influence of English with its exclusive use of you. The growing tendency of younger speakers in Slovenia toward ti is also addressed as a possible indication of a language change under way.
1. Introduction
Slovene, like the majority of other European languages, has a binary system of second person pronouns, where a single interlocutor can be addressed either as ti or vi. At first sight, the choice of a proper second person pronoun may seem fairly simple and straightforward for a native speaker to make, but on closer examination it becomes clear that this is not always the case. In as far as the proper choice of a pronoun depends on a number of social and discourse factors, this may be in fact quite complex. The addresser may therefore be in doubt as to which form to employ, especially in face-to-face encounters between speakers that don't fit neatly the categories such as old vs. young or superior vs. inferior.
The first study to address the issue of second person pronoun usage in various Indo-European languages was the often cited Pronouns of Power and Solidarity by
115
Brown and Gilman (1960). The authors analyze the use of second person pronouns in terms of two semantic dimensions, power and solidarity, which are, according to them, universal, applicable to all interactional dyads and fundamental to the analysis of all social life (1960:252). They examine three interactional dyads, two symmetrical ones and one asymmetrical. In the first two, the use of ti or vi is symmetrical, i.e. both interlocutors give and receive either ti or vi reciprocally with ti being a more familiar and vi a more polite form. In the third dyad one interlocutor employs vi and the other ti, which is a clear sign of inequality between them. The one with the power "in the degree that he is able to control the behavior of the other" (1960:255) uses ti to address the one who is inferior to him in that respect. To sum up, the reciprocal or symmetrical use of both vi and ti signals the speakers' solidarity and equality based on their likeness by membership in the same social group, school, profession and the like, while the non-reciprocal or asymmetrical use of the two pronouns is indicative of the inequality of the interlocutors.
Brown and Gilman's study provided the necessary framework for further study of second person pronouns, which showed that the issue is far from being black and white and that the choice of pronoun may also be affected by other factors such as the degree of (in)formality, intimacy and strangeness among the interlocutors, to mention just a few. Furthermore, the usage may evolve through time depending on the special dynamics of social relations that exist within a given cultural environment. In that sense the usage of second person pronouns may serve as an interesting indicator of the way a particular society is organized in terms of interpersonal relations among its members.
2. Methodology
In light of the complexity of second person pronoun usage and its considerable social significance, I therefore decided to compare the situation in Slovenia with the one among Slovene speakers in the United States and in Canada. My objective was to find whether speakers in both environments follow the same rules in choosing their pronouns and if not, why not. What are the underlying causes of any potential differences between speakers in Slovenia and in North America?
In order to obtain as accurate and current data as possible, I decided to prepare a questionnaire on the usage of second person pronouns and administer it to speakers in the United States, Canada, and Slovenia. The questionnaire consisted of two parts. The first part had just one question that asked about the kind of pronoun (ti or vi) used in different social situations and with different interlocutors. The respondents were given 41 different options and had to circle the pronoun that they use when interacting in a particular situation with a particular person as well as to give the pronoun employed by their interlocutors.
The options had to do mostly with different status, age and varying degrees of familiarity of the interlocutors and will be presented in detail in the next section. The second part of the questionnaire consisted of eight questions, some open-ended, some
116
multiple-choice, asking about the respondents' views and preferences as to the use of ti and vi and will also be discussed in the findings section.
120 subjects participated in the study, 40 from each of the countries in question. In all three cases a point was made of including an equal number of respondents representing both genders and two age groups (under and over 30, as I expected some variation along those lines). There was also diversity in the educational background from which they came, but that variable could not be controlled in any systematic way. The US participants were from Cleveland, Fontana and Los Angeles, the Canadian ones from Toronto, and the Slovene ones mostly from Maribor, but also from some other places in Slovenia.
The questionnaire responses were analyzed, percentages calculated and the three groups compared for differences and similarities, which then served as a basis for the interpretation of results.
3. Data Analysis and Interpretation
Parti
3.1.	Nuclear family
The first question with its many options asked about the use of ti or vi with different interlocutors. The first option focused on members of nuclear family: mother, father, and siblings. This was one area that showed very little variation across the sample. Slovene speakers used ti when addressing their parents almost uniformly. The only exception were two cases of vi with one male and one female respondent over 30 years of age. Slovene Americans were very similar in this respect with three cases of vi used by males over 30. Slovenes in Canada, however, showed greater variation. Half of them used ti and half vi with their parents, again in the category of those over 30, while younger speakers consistently used ti. The use of ti was symmetrical in all cases, while the use of vi was asymmetrical with children using vi and parents ti. All the respondents used ti with their brothers and sisters.
3.2.	Extended family
The next question asked about the use of vi or ti with grandparents and the responses in that category are more interesting in that they point to the importance of the age factor. Slovene speakers over 30 years of age mostly use vi when speaking to their grandparents (there were only 2 exceptions, again one male and one female), while those under 30 use ti (3 male exceptions). This seems to be indicative of a shift toward less formal and perhaps more affectionate relationships of the young with their grandparents in recent times. A comparison with the situation in the USA shows greater variation in the category of those over 30, where a little over half of the respondents (64 %) use vi and the others ti, and an even more radical situation in the case of
117
younger speakers, where ti is the only pronoun used. The situation in Canada is very similar in the case of older speakers (with a slightly higher percentage of those using vi - 72 %), but definitely more conservative in the case of younger speakers, where all responded that they use vi with their grandparents. It goes without saying that the respondents' use of either ti or vi with their grandparents is always reciprocated with ti.
The next seven options focused on other members of the extended family: uncles, aunts, and other elderly relatives and, in addition, introduced the time factor indicating the frequency of the respondents' contact with them.
The respondents were first asked which pronoun they use with aunts and uncles who they see on a regular basis. The responses by Slovene speakers from Slovenia again showed the age gap between those under and over 30. Those over 30 used predominantly vi (83 %) and only rarely ti (more females than males), while those under 30 used ti much more often (males somewhat less - 43 % and females almost exclusively - 91 %). The next four options tried to establish how important the frequency of contact is and also whether it makes a difference if the addressee is a male or a female. The gender factor did not prove to be of significance, as the respondents treated both their aunts and uncles in approximately the same way (with only a very slight bias in favor of ti with aunts), the frequency of contact, however, did. The respondents used ti considerably more often than vi with those uncles and aunts who they had last seen 10 years ago (42 % vs. 58 %) than with those who they hadn't seen for 20 years (26 % vs. 74 %). Again, the age division between those under 30 and those over 30 is very clear, with those over 30 using almost exclusively vi and those under 30 somewhat less.
The last two options asked about the pronouns used with elderly relatives with whom the respondents had regular or only very rare contact. The results were similar to those with aunts and uncles, but predictably showed a greater tendency toward the use of vi, probably because of the greater age of the addressees. Those over 30 used exclusively vi in both cases, while those under 30 used vi half of the time in the case of regular contact and some 71 % in the case of infrequent contact.
A comparison with the situation in the United States shows a greater uniformity of answers in the first category, where practically all the respondents regardless of their age use ti in regular contact with their aunts and uncles. This is in contrast with Slovenes in Slovenia, whose use of one or the other pronoun is greatly determined by their age. Similar to speakers in Slovenia, however, they make no distinction with regard to the gender of the addressee. There is a difference in as far as the frequency of contact is concerned, though, only on a smaller scale. The responses by those over 30 seem almost random with somewhat greater frequency of vi in the case of rarer contact, while the responses of those under 30 definitely show a preference for ti (with several respondents citing ti as the only pronoun used). A similar tendency is observed in the case of elderly relatives with an interesting twist in the very last option, where all males under 30 report using only ti and all females under 30 only vi (purely random choice or perhaps a case of hypercorrection?)
A similar situation is found in the case of Canadian speakers with a somewhat greater use of vi by younger speakers compared to those in the USA. In general, however, we observe very diverse and at times seemingly contradictory answers where, for
118
instance, the same person uses ti with elderly relatives who he or she only rarely sees, but vi with aunts and uncles who they see on a regular basis. The consistency of pronoun use based on the frequency of contact and the resulting degree of familiarity/ closeness observed in the case of Slovene speakers in Slovenia seems to be lacking in the case of most Slovene speakers in the immigrant environment.
3.3.	Friends
With the next options I moved from the family sphere into the sphere of friends, exploring various degrees of closeness. The respondents were first asked to provide the pronouns they use with friends of the same age who they see on a regular basis, then childhood friends whom they hadn't seen in 10 or 20 years, and finally friends of their friends to whom they had just been introduced.
The answer to the first question was completely uniform. Everybody uses ti to address friends of approximately the same age. Whether or not they socialize with them regularly or see them only every 10 or 20 years seems to make no difference -they are still addressed as ti. In that sense friendship ties seem to override the time factor proving to be a more powerful factor than family hierarchy, where infrequent contact with members of the extended family often warrants the use of vi. Friends of friends, however, are a different story. There the division between younger and older speakers appears once more, with the former using only ti and the latter splitting approximately half way (43 % of ti vs. 57 % of vi).
The situation among Slovenes in the USA and in Canada is more diversified. Friends of the same age with whom they socialize regularly are addressed exclusively as ti by females under 30 and males over 30, while the others use predominantly ti, but also an occasional vi.
With friends whom they hadn't seen for 10 or 20 years they are no longer certain as to what to use. They still opt predominantly for ti, but vi is beginning to creep in as well, especially in the case of a 20-year absence. The age and gender of the respondents plays no significant role in this respect. With friends of friends the split between ti and vi is fairly equal again for all the speakers.
3.4.	Acquaintances
The answers to the four previous questions showed the importance of the friendship factor in choosing a pronoun of address, which is why my next objective was to examine less intimate, casual relationships. The following six options thus ask about addressing casual acquaintances/neighbors of approximately the same age as the respondents, then twice their age and half their age.
The answers to the first two questions are predictable, as we are dealing with approximately the same age of the interlocutors. With the exception of a couple of females over 30, all use ti. Ti is also used for both male and female acquaintances that are half the respondents' age, whereas in the case of those who are twice their age, vi
119
is the preferred form for most respondents. Exceptions are young male speakers with 59 % of ti vs. 41 % of vi and one female respondent who uses ti as well. The age again seems to be the determining factor in the choice of pronoun.
Typical of Slovenes in both the USA and Canada is the overwhelming use of ti by younger speakers in all contexts (with a single exception of a female speaker in addressing an older interlocutor). Older speakers, on the other hand, distinguish between the two pronouns and use them with about the same frequency with those of approximately the same age and older (47 % of ti vs. 53 % of vi). They are consistent, though, in using ti to address those that are half their age.
3.5. Strangers
A further move in the direction of complete lack of familiarity between interlocutors (asking strangers for directions in the street) showed a uniform use of vi by practically all Slovene respondents from Slovenia. The only exceptions were strangers that were half the respondents' age, who were addressed as ti, and some cases strangers of about the same age as the respondents when the latter were in their late teens or early twenties themselves.
The results for the USA and Canada show a more diverse picture, with the respondents using both pronouns seemingly randomly with a somewhat greater frequency of ti also in those cases where the strangers were the same age or older than them.
PART II
The second part of the questionnaire was designed to explore the respondents' attitudes toward the use of ti or vi as well as to test the consistency of their reported choices from the first part of the questionnaire with the answers provided in the second part. I thus asked them to predict who, according to them, is likely to initiate a switch to ti in the following pairs: man - woman; boss - employee; a younger - older person. I further asked about the appropriate age of starting to address young people as vi, about using different pronouns for the same person depending on the circumstances and about possible abuses of pronoun use on the part of the speakers deliberately employing an inappropriate pronoun to signal anger, contempt, sarcasm, patronizing attitude and the like.
A detailed analysis of the participants' responses to these questions, however, would exceed the scope of this article1, which is why I decided to focus on only two items from this part: the first one having to do with the respondents' reaction to being addressed inappropriately and the second with their personal preferences with regard to the use of ti or vi.
1 It will be included in future reports on this ongoing study. 120
3.6. How do you feel when someone addresses you as ti when you feel entitled to vi ? What do you do?
The responses by Slovene speakers show a tendency for older speakers to feel insulted or annoyed when addressed as ti instead of vi. Only a small percentage say that ti does not bother them and some that their feelings depend on who the person is and on the nature of their prospective relationship. Some don't do anything about it and simply ignore it, but most are quite explicit in showing their displeasure. They either ask to be addressed as vi or switch to ti, but in such a way as to show their indignation (some also by facial expression and body language).
Younger speakers seem to be more tolerant in this respect. Most say that they have never been in the mentioned situation, but that they generally do not mind being addressed as ti. A few feel that using ti creates a good basis for forming friendships, which is why they prefer it. One respondent says that she is bothered by the use of vi, but that is perhaps understandable because of her age (and confirmed by the view of another respondent in his twenties, who says that it doesn't bother him if everybody addresses him as ti as long as he is not expected to reciprocate with vi. He would find that totally unacceptable, though, if a person expecting vi from him were younger than him). In as far as reacting to being inappropriately addressed, the majority does nothing ("Sem zadovoljna s tikanjem, ker vikanje pomeni, da si starejši ali celo star."), only two say that they, too, switch to the use of ti if they feel that they are being patronized.
The predominant response provided by both Slovene Americans and Canadians is that they are not bothered by the use of ti. There are some who express their shock at being addressed wrongly with body language and feel that the wrong use shows a lack of manners, especially among the elderly and those born in Slovenia, but the great majority of the respondents place no special emphasis on it. Some even find it amusing. Some typical responses illustrate their attitudes nicely:
•	It doesn't matter to me how they address me - if I lived in Slovenia where this courtesy is used, I may have a different opinion.
•	I really don't mind if I am addressed in the ti form, there are other things to worry about.
•	I feel relieved that I won't have to worry about vikanje.
•	I am not conscious about this status behavior.
It comes as no surprise then that most don't react to it at all or if they do, they simply use ti in return instead of the initially intended vi.
3.7. What do you think of the use ofti and vi? Which do you prefer?
Most Slovene respondents say that they prefer to be addressed as ti, as that is an indication of greater closeness, but they hasten to point out that it is good to have two forms in order to show respect for the elderly and superiors on the one hand and to be more personal on the other. Thus one person says that he prefers ti, but that he would definitely feel uncomfortable using ti with his boss.
121
American and Canadian respondents are predictably in favor of ti, only some older speakers prefer vi and those are mostly Slovene-born. Some believe that each has its time and place and some say that they like vi because it shows respect, "but it is hard to use when you didn't grow up with it", but the majority feel that it is "confusing and unnecessary" and that "this is not an important issue here in the USA." Other interesting points are revealed by the following responses given by younger respondents:
•	Ti and vi are both just words used to communicate.
•	At this point, I prefer being referred to as ti, after all, I am still young and nobody of significant importance.
•	Perhaps if one pronoun would be used as the universal and the other obliterated, it would relieve the world of the belief in the importance of status - we are all human anyway, right?
•	I prefer it because in English there is no longer the distinction between thou and you and using vi makes me feel alienated from the person whom I must address as such.
Finally, I mention one interesting and rather surprising suggestion by a Slovene-born American who says that "Vi could be used as the universal you, as it is more comfortable for me." A clear analogy with the English you, which is "neutral, colourless, and has no meaning other than to indicate that another person is addressed ... empty of affective content" (Siriwardena 1992: 30)?
If we compare speakers in Slovenia with those in the USA and Canada, we see that Slovenes in Slovenia while they prefer ti, nevertheless recognize the function of both pronouns and judge their presence in the language as absolutely necessary, but that this is not the case with the other two groups, where most respondents see vi as redundant and a remnant of the past.
4. Conclusion
The analysis shows a relatively stable situation with regard to the use of vi and ti in Slovenia, especially if we take into consideration only middle-aged and older speakers, who adhere fairly consistently to the rules of proper pronoun use. The situation in North America, however, is quite different and shows signs of a rapidly declining competence and/or willingness on the part of the speakers' to maintain the distinction between ti and vi.
A closer look at the situation in Slovenia reveals that there are primarily two determining factors in choosing the appropriate pronoun: the age factor whereby younger speakers address older ones with vi on the one hand and the factor of strangeness vs. intimacy/familiarity on the other. The latter seems to be in competition with the former and gaining in importance, as seen in the case of grandparents, for instance, where the asymmetrical use of ti by grandparents and vi by grandchildren has been largely replaced by the symmetrical dyad of the informal ti indicating closeness. This could be interpreted as a sign of affection taking precedence over authority and could be, in addition, attributed to a smaller age difference between the present gen-
122
erations of grandchildren and grandparents compared to those in the past. Another minor, but interesting aspect is the somewhat more conservative attitude of female speakers, who in general use vi more often than their male counterparts.
The most striking finding, however, has to do with the linguistic behavior of younger speakers, who are definitely moving in the direction of less formal ways of addressing others. Understandably, they see ti as natural choice for addressing their peers, but frequently also for addressing those who are superior to them either in age or status. This goes hand in hand with their use of fairly informal greetings such as zdravo/zivijo/adijo instead of more formal ones such as Dober dan and Na svidenje used by older speakers. Their shift in the direction of more casual pronoun use is thus in marked contrast with the views expressed by most speakers over 30 who, while stating their personal preference for ti, nevertheless all recognize the importance of having and using both pronouns appropriately in order to express various degrees of intimacy, respect, politeness and the like as required by each individual situation.
Compared to Slovenia, the situation in the USA and Canada is much less stable in that second person pronouns there often seem to be used almost at random and with a very strong bias in favor of ti in addition. The distinction between ti and vi is partly observed only by some Slovene-born speakers, while the American-born use the two with no consistency, or openly state that the distinction no longer matters to them and that they prefer ti in all circumstances. There are several possible explanations for such attitudes: the exclusive use of ti that the early immigrants brought with them from the old country2, the uncertainty as to which pronoun to choose when they did not grow up with them in the case of all other speakers, and finally the influence of the English language with you as the only pronoun used. The responses provided by the participants in the study confirm this last view at least to some extent. Especially younger speakers believe that the more formal vi is redundant and that the less formal, casual ti better serves their needs in addressing others on an equal footing. Compared to the Slovene situation, where the ti vs. vi distinction reflects various degrees of both personal and social (in)equality among the speakers, Slovenes in the USA and Canada use predominantly ti, which is in line with the very dynamic relations of a fairly egalitarian and socially mobile society. The growing tendency to address people by first names only can be understood in this light as well.
The relatively relaxed approach to the use of pronouns on the part of Slovene Americans and Canadians on the one hand and the deeply-rooted adherence to the more conservative and consistent use of pronouns by speakers in Slovenia on the other makes for potentially slippery ground in communication between individuals coming from different environments. Speakers from Slovenia might be easily offended when addressed as ti, when no familiarity is called for, and Slovenes from diaspora might be puzzled as to the cause of their resentment and the resulting misunderstanding. The risk of this happening is lower with younger speakers in Slovenia, who are increasingly beginning to use ti in the contexts where we would normally expect vi. Whether or not such use is just a temporary phenomenon that will disappear with their aging remains to be seen. It is equally possible that we are dealing with language change
2 Ti as the only pronoun used by lower classes such as peasants.
123
under way. The ever more frequent use of the so-called partial vi/ na pol vikanje (Toporišič 2000: 390) as well as the combination of titles such as gospod and gospa with first rather than last names by the majority of all speakers, regardless of age, indicates the possibility of such a change.
The results of the study are significant for at least three reasons: they shed light on the nature of determining factors in the choice of second person pronoun, they point to the growing trend in the use of the less formal pronoun among younger speakers, and show marked differences in pronoun use between speakers in native and diaspora contexts. They are not doubt very revealing in terms of social dynamics and cultural values as mirrored in the use of second person pronouns in different environments. At the same time they also allow for an interesting insight into a potential language change in Slovene, a phenomenon well worth exploring.
WORKS CITED
Brown, R. and Gilman, A. The pronouns of Power and Solidarity. In: T. A. Sebeok (ed.), Style and
Language. Cambridge, Ma.: The MIT Press, 1960. Siriwardena, R. Addressing the Other: A Three Language Study in Power, Personal Relations and Second Person Pronouns. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Centre for Ethnic Studies, 1992. Toporišič, J. Slovenska slovnica. Maribor: Založba Obzoija, 2000.
APPENDIX QUESTIONNAIRE3
The following is a questionnaire for research on the use of Slovene in the United States and in Canada. Please answer the questions without discussing them with others. Thank you.
PERSONAL INFORMATION
Age: Gender: Occupation: Education: Place of birth:
If not US-born, how long have you lived in the States?
/Use the second column to check the form used by the addressees when speaking to you./
1. Imagine that you live in a Slovene-speaking environment. Which pronoun would you use in speaking
University of Maribor
PARTI
to
your mother your father your grandparents
TI VI TI VI TI VI
TI VI TI VI TI VI
3 Respondents from Slovenia were given a Slovene version of the questionnaire.
124
your uncles/aunts who you see on a regular basis	TI	VI	TI	VI
your uncle who you haven't seen in 10 years	TI	VI	TI	VI
your aunt who you haven't seen in 10 years	TI	VI	TI	VI
your uncle who you haven't seen in 20 years	TI	VI	TI	VI
your aunt who you haven't seen in 20 years	TI	VI	TI	VI
an elderly relative who you see on a regular basis	TI	VI	TI	VI
an elderly relative who you see very rarely	TI	VI	TI	VI
a male neighbor of approximately the same age as you	TI	VI	TI	VI
a female neighbor of approximately the same age as you	TI	VI	TI	VI
a male neighbor half your age	TI	VI	TI	VI
a female neighbor half your age	TI	VI	TI	VI
a male neighbor twice your age	TI	VI	TI	VI
a female neighbor twice your age	TI	VI	TI	VI
a casual male acquaintance the same age as you	TI	VI	TI	VI
a casual female acquaintance the same age as you	TI	VI	TI	VI
a friend the same age who you see regularly	TI	VI	TI	VI
a childhood friend who you haven't seen in 10 years	TI	VI	TI	VI
a childhood friend who you haven't seen in 20 years	TI	VI	TI	VI
a friend of your best friend (to whom you were just introduced)	TI	VI	TI	VI
a female visitor from Slovenia of approximately the same				
age as you whom you see for the first time4	TI	VI	TI	VI
a male visitor from Slovenia of approximately the same				
age as you whom you see for the first time	TI	VI	TI	VI
a male visitor from Slovenia who is older than you				
and who you see for the first time	TI	VI	TI	VI
a female visitor from Slovenia who is older than you				
and who you see for the first time	TI	VI	TI	VI
a male visitor from Slovenia who is younger than you				
and who you see for the first time	TI	VI	TI	VI
a female visitor from Slovenia who is younger than you				
and who you see for the first time	TI	VI	TI	VI
a relative/family member visiting from Slovenia	TI	VI	TI	VI
a male waiter in a restaurant who has given excellent service	TI	VI	TI	VI
a waitress in a restaurant who has given excellent service	TI	VI	TI	VI
a waiter in a restaurant who has given a lousy service	TI	VI	TI	VI
a waitress who has given a lousy service	TI	VI	TI	VI
a boss (or other superior)	TI	VI	TI	VI
an employee (or other inferior)	TI	VI	TI	VI
a co-worker of approximately the same age	TI	VI	TI	VI
a co-worker much younger than you	TI	VI	TI	VI
a co-worker much older than you	TI	VI	TI	VI
a stranger (approximately the same age as you)				
whom you ask for directions in the street	TI	VI	TI	VI
a stranger (older than you)				
whom you ask for directions in the street	TI	VI	TI	VI
a stranger (younger than you)				
whom you ask for directions in the street	TI	VI	TI	VI
PART II
1. Who is more likely to initiate a switch from VI to TI (underline one in each group)
•	a man	• a boss	• a younger person
•	a woman	• an employee	• an older person
4 For lack of space, some questions such as those dealing with visitors from Slovenia and those exploring the relationships involving domination/superiority vs. subordination/inferiority in the workplace and in service situations had to be omitted at this time.
125
2.	How do you initiate a switch to TI? (ask for permission, just do it...)
3.	What do you do when someone switches to TI and you don't want them to?
4.	How do you feel when someone addresses you as TI when you feel entitled to VI?
•	insulted
•	pleased
•	other:
5.	At what age does it become appropriate to address young people as VI?
6.	Do you ever address the same person as TI once and VI on another occasion? Under what circumstances?
7.	Do people ever intentionally misuse TI or VI? When and why?
8.	What do you think of the use of TI and VI? Which do you prefer?
126