In human language, there exists a great deal of address terms that make interacting flexible。 As culture-loaded words, they express different cultural discrepancies。 As we all know, misunderstands can’t be completely avoided in inter-cultural communication, it’s of practical significance to know these differences for language learner。 Thus, making a comparative study on address terms will benefit cross-cultural communication and help avoid embarrassment in the process of communication。 

2。 Literature Review

2。 1 Politeness Principle

Address terms are not correct or wrong themselves。 But as social product they have strict standard to obey in use。 In this standard, we can evaluate whether this use of address forms is correct or not。 One of these standards is politeness。 Politeness, as a social phenomenon, is a universal issue。 British linguist Leech defined politeness as “forms of behavior that are aimed at the establishment and maintenance of comity, i。e, the ability of participants in a socio-communicative interaction in the atmosphere of relative ‘harmony’。” (Leech 104) Politeness can reveal one’s personal moral cultivation and respect for other people。 It is mainly embodied in the forms of behavior, attitude and choice of words and expressions, and so on。 

Politeness Principle, generally speaking, is reported in courtesy expressions and appropriate manner。 Chinese scholar Gu gave an definition to Politeness Principle as“a sanctioned belief that an inpidual’s social behavior ought to live up to the expectations of respectfulness, modesty, attitudinal warmth and refinement。”(Gu 245)

Since politeness is one of the hottest issues in pragmatic researches, many scholars are busy in studying it so that the books about Politeness Principle are abundant。 Lakoff tried to combine politeness and cooperative principle and pointed out that the essence of politeness includes three parts:don’t invade other people’s space;the hearers make decisions by themselves;avoid conflicts with hearers at anytime。(Lakoff 460) Afterwards, Penelope Brown and Stephen Levinson expatiated face theory。 They thought all rational social members have face, and it has two mutually linking aspects: negative face and positive face。(Brown and Levinson 174)

English linguist Leech mentioned in Principles of Pragmatics that “The CP itself cannot explain why people are often so direct in conveying what they mean and what is the relation between sense and force when non-declarative types of sentence are being considered。 ”(Leech 80) Thus, he put forward Politeness Principle based on P。 Brown&S。 Levinson’s face theory, and to supplement cooperative principle。 It includes six maxims:文献综述

(a)The Tact Maxim

Minimize the cost to others; Maximize the benefit to others

(b)The Generosity Maxim

Minimize the benefit to self; Maximize the cost to self

(c)The Approbation(or flattery) Maxim

Minimize dispraise of others; Maximize praise of others

(d)The Modesty Maxim

Minimize praise of self; Maximize dispraise of self

(e)The Agreement Maxim

Minimize disagreement between self and others;Maximize agreement between self and others

(f)The Sympathy Maxim

Minimize antipathy between self and others;Maximize sympathy between self and others

The study of Politeness Principle that Chinese scholars made focus on the discussion and evaluation of Leech’s politeness and P。 Brown&S。 Levinson’s face theory。 In 1987, Liu Runqing introduced Leech’s Politeness Principle in detail in About Leech’s Politeness Principle。 He regarded it as a great contribution to pragmatics but need supplement。 In 1997, Qian Lianguan presented another eleven pragmatic strategies according to realities of Chinese language culture in Pragmatics of Chinese Culture。 Among these studies, Gu Yueguo’s Politeness Principle is the most influential one。 It contains the following five maxims。  礼貌原则下英汉称谓语的差异(2):http://www.youerw.com/yingyu/lunwen_83929.html