It wasn’t so much thee and thou as the fact that “youse” features pretty prominently around Philadelphia, which was founded by and for Quakers.
I’m still confused. Why is “we” ever problematic?
4 Likes
Clearly. Otherwise it would never have lost its 2nd person plural pronoun (or technically its singular). It’s also clear, however that speakers want unambiguity in many cases, which is where constructs such as y’all come from.
Interestingly enough other languages that have undergone a similar shift of the plural replacing the singular as a signifier of politeness have overcome this problem by jumping person. So in the formal register of German the 3rd person plural became the 2nd person singular rather than this job being done by the 2nd person plural like in English. This means that there is a higher chance of picking up context clues to disambiguate between formal 2nd person singular and informal 3rd person plural.
Interesting. I’ve never seen it used in that context. But then I rarely speak to native speakers of dialects that use “y’all” and thus can be considered productive users. I mostly speak English to British people. Is this a recent trend or has the singular use always been part of the word?
1 Like
It is distinguishable:
When in S. Carolina and I was bid “y’all have a good day” when I was on my own, I asked what the plural of y’all was.
Puzzled look for a few seconds and then “I guess it must be y’all, y’all”.
2 Likes
“Tha knows” is probably more accurate
5 Likes
Not a linguist, and not a native southerner. I’ve never been to Oklahoma.
1 Like
Wheear 'as ta bin sin ah saw thee
On Ilkla Moor bar t’at?
1 Like
I’m so glad you asked!
If you were designing a language from scratch, it would be be far from obvious that you need a pronoun just for the purpose of speaking on behalf of other people. You might think that would bake some sinister authoritarian and in-group thought patterns into the foundations of the language, and you’d be right.
Imagine a politician saying “we don’t want more immigrants”. Without the first person plural, they’d have to say “you don’t want” – which is the same statement, but fails to hide that they’re telling you what to think – or “I don’t want”, which is more honest but requires them to convince you, instead of just coopting your agreement.
I don’t think “we” should be found-and-replaced with some other word (that would be silly). But I do think there’s a case for rooting it out completely, and forcing oneself to be explicit about the biases and presumptions it’s used to conceal.
I can’t imagine Marain has such a pronoun.
1 Like
Youse was not uncommon in rural Ontario in the past (heavy Scottish immigration in the 18-19th centuries), but was considered uneducated. I don’t know how much it persists.
And is very very Dublin. Or “yiz” which is the same word. Much to the absolute disgust of our southern kin who insist that “ye” is correct and we speak an abomination that will damn us eternally.
As an aside there are large parts of Ireland where “the lads” is a term for a group of women: “me and the lads are off out tonight”. Guys not so much.
4 Likes
I’ve heard “All y’all” many times as the plural form.
7 Likes
Not in much of the Midwest. Guys = people, not male people.
4 Likes
But when someone speaks on behalf of a group, legitimately, rather than as in your assumption ‘we’ is mainly used to tell other people what they want, the first person plural is very necessary. I think you’ve found an edge case that glosses over the fact that it is a very useful part of speech.
If my partner and I plan to go to Timbuktu, I’d tell my sister, ‘we plan to go to Timbuktu next year’ and there’s absolutely nothing wrong with the use of ‘we’ there and I’m not sure what alternative you’d propose.
4 Likes
Yes, that may be what I misheard - “all y’all”
2 Likes
That’s a very narrow example of the use of the word. As @anothernewbbaccount points out, it is perfectly okay to say, “I am the spokesperson for X, and we want to see a carbon tax.”
Consider:
“We are having drinks in Room 231 after the conference . Would you like to join us?”
vs.
“I am having drinks in Room 231 after the conference . Would you like to join me?”
Speculation about a made-up language that has never actually been tried is not a convincing argument.
3 Likes
I’m not sure I’ve followed the plot of this topic very well, but I do enjoy Hannah Gadsby’s observation about y’all:
3 Likes
Beat me to it! Came to post just this. The pull quote:
“I’m taking 'y’all,” she says. "I love y’all. Because y’all is the best, most-inclusive second person pronoun in the English-speaking world. Thank you The South, what an ally!
3 Likes
They aren’t. The Quakers say thou knows, not thou knowest.
2 Likes
Well that’s a shame. Might as well get rid of the thou at that point.
1 Like
Except in poetry and the KJB. Modern translations of both sound terrible.
2 Likes
