I was reading the "Dictionary of Japanese Grammar" series, and I found the way it uses the term formality vs. politeness contradictory and confusing, so I wanted some clarifications.

Here are some examples:

From the "Basic" volume, page 43:

enter image description here

From the "Advanced" volume, page 35:

enter image description here

In the "Basic" volume, だ is said to be informal, while です is said to be formal. On the other hand, the "Advanced" volume defines だ<->です as a plain<->polite pair, but they both are categorized as informal. To add to the confusion, there is this quote:

enter image description here

Which once again contradicts the chart from the first volume of the series. This is especially confusing, because in every resource that I have read (including the verb conjugation chart at the end of the "Basic" volume), the -ます form is the formal form of a verb.

And it never mentions how all of this fits into the 丁寧語・尊敬語・謙譲語 framework either.

So can anyone help me reconcile these contradictions? Also if possible, can anyone point me to a detailed resource on Japanese formality & politeness and how it fits into the 敬語 framework, preferably in English? I tried to look around, but all of them tends to be really shallow and contains few examples. I liked the in-depth style of DoJG explanations, but the contradictions above plus the fact that they completely excluded 敬語 left me wanting for more.

  • 1
    Yeah I think the terms are confused in this case. You should read "formal" and "informal" in the first book as "polite" and "plain" in the other. Mar 28 '21 at 5:38
  • 1
    The main reason your quotes and tables are confusing is because they fail to make any distinction between spoken language and written language. The way I see it, spoken language can be divided in casual/familiar, neutral/polite, and "overtly polite" forms. The last of which can be subdivided into humble and honorific forms, depending on whether the verb applies to yourself or the other person. である is a form mostly seen in impersonal (books, reports, papers, etc) written language, which while arguably somewhat formal, has very little to do with politeness.
    – Will
    Mar 28 '21 at 5:51
  • Thanks, I guess the terms were just confused in the first book. And I found that -ます is actually listed as a polite form in Jisho.org, so I guess they were also confused about that. @Will Yeah, the first volume covered that, and it seems to line up with what you're saying.
    – what the
    Mar 28 '21 at 11:15

If these are really from two volumes of the same edition, I have to say this is indeed confusing and misleading. 食べた is perfectly valid in formal articles. As for the terminology, I see the following names most often:

  • だ: Plain form (can be formal or informal)
  • です: Polite form (usually formal, too)
  • (である: Literary/stiff form)

In Japanese, だ/である is called 常体 and です/ます is called 敬体.

Regarding the formality vs politeness, I think formality is easier because English has this distinction, too (child vs kid, yes vs yeah). However, Japanese has two styles even in formal settings.

In formal settings, politeness is a sign of humanity and friendliness, so you need it when you communicate with your business partners and customers. On the other hand, the plain form in formal settings is a sign of dignity, academicity and matter-of-factness, and you use it to write a plain news article, an academic manuscript, a rule book, a Wikipedia article, etc.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.