Calling another by name when one is exasperated
In my English-speaking culture, when two people are in conversation, usually we don't bother addressing each other by name—or even by any substitutive term of address, like ‘sir’/‘ma'am’ (formal) or ‘bud’ (informal)—once we have each other's attention, unless there's a power/status differential and the subservient party is leaning into the bowing and scraping.
But there's one exception that's interesting to me that happens among equals: when one party is exasperated, they can express this by using the other party's name where it would otherwise not be needed or used. I do it reflexively; I can't really articulate why or how it communicates ‘my patience is thin’. (Ex: ‘Don't forget about the Smiths visiting tomorrow.’ ‘Yes, Alex, I won't forget about the Smiths! You've reminded me six times today!’)
Does this phenomenon have a name? How widespread is it among Anglophones, and how old is it? Does it occur in other languages or is it specific to some subset of Anglophone cultures?
2 answers
You are accessing this answer with a direct link, so it's being shown above all other answers regardless of its score. You can return to the normal view.
This usage seems to be common not only in English, but in Western cultures in general. (The two parties do not need to be on first name terms for this pattern to work: "Oh, Mister Bennet! Have some compassion on my poor nerves!" and so the availability of the pattern is unaffected by T-V distinctions common to many European languages.)
If you choose to treat substitutes like "sir" or "my dear" on par with personal names, the pattern is probably universal. However, there seem to be cultures (and thus languages) where the use of a person's name to address them is considered impolite, i.e., where the applicable "substitutes" are no longer substitutes for personal names, but rather the only unmarked way to address people.
The part of linguistics that is concerned more with the context of an utterance than with its own "structure" and (inherent) "meaning", is called pragmatics. Then there is conversation analysis, either considered a part of pragmatics (and thus linguistics), or a field adjacent to pragmatics, part of sociolinguistics which lies on the boundary between linguistics and sociology.
In the terminology of this article, there are two main types of vocatives within a conversation structure: a summons, or an address. The pattern you have in mind is a special kind of an address.
In a conversation among several people, an address is often used as part of a turn taking protocol; the speaker is expected to "pass the turn" to the named person at the end of the utterance. This particular function is not needed in a dyadic conversation (just two people), so other common functions of the address dominate the usage: to show politeness, to show intimacy, to show power differential, to reflect on the other person's identity.
If either party is exasperated, it's eventually going to show in some way; if it doesn't, they were merely annoyed. I am not sure whether "showing exasperation" is always a communication objective in itself; in certain conversational situations involving exasperation, an address of the other party could sometimes be showing intimacy in an attempt to reset a fruitless discussion; in another situation, an address could be used to make room for a "repair" sequence if there are hopes that the other party might salvage the conversation by amending or disambiguating some part of what they already said.
Personal names, in particular, are some of the more attention catching forms of address, and thus especially attractive ones in the contingency of exasperation, but they are not alone in that group. "I beg you, sir," or "you bastard" can, where applicable, provide the attention catching function just as well. Such a phrase can serve the various other functions of the address mentioned previously as well as a personal name can, depending on the circumstances.
0 comment threads
I can confirm that that usage is also common in Italian, but not only to show exasperation. It's a way to "boost" the emotional connection between the speakers and emphasize a sentence. It's a way to say "Pay attention to what I'm saying now" or "What I'm saying is particularly important".
Compare all these usages that could be used in Italian, translated into an equivalent English sentence (I cannot say if the same exact emotional meaning is conveyed, though. I hope you get the point anyway).
A high-school teacher to a worried parent, in a "soothing", almost joyful tone:
Listen, Mr.Bianchi, I know you are worried about your son, but I think he will pass the exam. He is smarter than he looks.
A medical doctor to a scared patient, with a grave but supporting tone:
You are scared, Ms.Rossi, and that's understandable. The operation is a difficult one, but I'll assure you Dr.Neri is the best surgeon in this field and she has done this successfully dozens of times.
A friend during a party in a playful tone:
Come on, Laura, ask him out! I know him, he's not one of those guys who think women asking men out are sluts!
A company manager to a subordinate employee in a stern tone:
I'm sorry, Silvio, I can somewhat understand your point of view, but your behavior was completely inappropriate for a work environment.
A mother to a 10yo child who's being pouty:
OK, Mario, stop it now. I know you want to go out and play with Luigi, but it's already 8 o'clock in the evening and dinner is almost ready. Say no to Luigi and go wash your hands.
A football (that is "soccer" for USA people ;-) coach to a player during the interval in a compelling tone:
They are getting dangerous, Giulio, so I want you to stick to that number 10 like a stamp to a letter.
As an aside, I think there is also some kind of marketing practice exploiting this "emotional connection" effect. I often find that telemarketers and commercial call-center operators keep on repeating your name in almost any sentence (sometimes so much to be ridiculous):
— What can I do for you, Mr.Roberto?
— I'd like to file a complaint for that laptop I purchased yesterday.
— I'm sorry, Mr.Roberto. What was wrong with that?
— There was no charger in the box.
— I understand, Mr.Roberto. Is this a big problem for you?
— Sure! I can't power up the laptop!
— That's really inconvenient, Mr.Roberto. May we be of any help?
— Yes! I need the power supply!
— I see, Mr.Roberto. Would you accept a partial refund for the item?
— No! You don't understand. The laptop is useless without its charger. I need one!
— Ah, that's unfortunate, Mr.Roberto, we don't sell any.
(Does this fictional dialogue reminds you of something?)
0 comment threads