Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Did English ever have a formal version of “you”?

english.stackexchange.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 200 posts

Re: Did English ever have a formal version of “you”?

#181

Post by slurry »

davidw wrote: post #84
davedx wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. So the way we learned the Lord's Prayer, it seems to use the informal: "Thy will be done". But that doesn't correlate with addressing God as "LORD", does it? Edit: I looked this up and found this page: http://brandplucked.webs.com/theeandye.htm It seems to infer that "thou, thee" etc. are only about distinguishing between singular and plural. There's no mention of them being an informal form, at least no…

In Italian, the informal 'tu' is used. No idea why, or what the history of that is.

Biblical Greek has no formal, only singular/plural. Same with vulgar Latin. Latin and Greek are rude languages and the our father is a rude prayer, so tu/toi/thou are perfectly appropriate.

Re: Did English ever have a formal version of “you”?

#182

Post by slurry »

_ZeD_ wrote: post #16

As an aside note, italian has "two" formal versions of "you". The informal one, "tu", is common on all the peninsula. The formal version "voi" (2nd person plural) is more common in the south of the Italy (it's a reminiscent of the spanish invasions). The formal version "lei" (3rd person singular) is more common in the north of the Italy.

I remember Massimo d'Alema (a former prime minister and minister) using "ella" which is some kind of regional/archaic form of "lei".

Re: Did English ever have a formal version of “you”?

#184

Post by hajile »

stan_rogers wrote: post #132
davedx wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. So the way we learned the Lord's Prayer, it seems to use the informal: "Thy will be done". But that doesn't correlate with addressing God as "LORD", does it? Edit: I looked this up and found this page: http://brandplucked.webs.com/theeandye.htm It seems to infer that "thou, thee" etc. are only about distinguishing between singular and plural. There's no mention of them being an informal form, at least no…

The "our Father" part (in English) is the problem. The consensus is that the Aramaic word used in the original (whether or not one believes that the original ever issued from the mouth of a particular person; this is linguistic rather than religious) would have been abba (transliterated, of course), which is more like "Papa" or "Dad" than "Father", at least in relatively modern usage. A familiar form of address, in o…

When that translation was made, father was not considered formal. Words like papa weren't in use and dad was considered baby talk.

Any formalness ascribed is due solely to changes in the vernacular.

Re: Did English ever have a formal version of “you”?

#185

Post by eridius »

Gigablah wrote: post #89
eridius wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You say barriers to participation, I say anti-spam measures. Have you really never used any StackExchange site, though? Once you've used one, you get 100 free rep when signing up on any other StackExchange site, which is enough to perform all the basic actions (posting, commenting, voting, etc).

I have an account on StackOverflow and I linked it to my new english.stackexchange.com account, but I didn't get any free rep.

Do you have any StackOverflow rep? I would assume it only gives you MIN(100, otherAccountRep), so if your SO rep is 0 I'm guessing your new account also gets 0.

Re: Did English ever have a formal version of “you”?

#186

Post by DanBC »

mattlutze wrote: post #156
ronaldx wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this case acronym is not being used jargonistically, it's being used to avoid writing out "Proto-Indo-European language" and perhaps more importantly acts as a useful indicator that this is not a novel concept in the field. It is seen frequently and unambiguously in any discussion about linguistics. I recommend you avoid throwing around accusations of laziness: if you're genuinely not aware that PIE stands for Pro…

(I hadn't intended to make this such a conversation, apologies to tikwidd for building a mountain...) I've assistant edited academic journals and spent years as a copywriter/editor at a consulting firm that worked in many specialized industries. That accusation was leveled with purpose and from experience. This is not only about the acronym above, though PIE does have many meanings[1]. That an acronym has a specific…

What should people do? Write it out in full once then use the initialism? Once per post or per thread?

Does it make any difference that it is spelt in full in the linked question?

> From the top of my head, Danish "de" (practically never used), German "Sie", Chinese "您", French "vous", Spanish "usted" are a formal way of addressing someone, especially if one isn't familiar with the addressee. Did English ever have this? It sounds as though Proto-Indo-European might have had this (based on my 4 examples), but perhaps someone can enlighten me?

You think the use of PIE is bad, just wait until they bust out the ASCII IPA.

(I am thick as 2 short planks but I've heard of PIE. HN should be a place where people like me need to work hard to keep up.)

Re: Did English ever have a formal version of “you”?

#187

Post by eru »

GFK_of_xmaspast wrote: post #165
randallsquared wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using "sir" everywhere you'd say "you" feels like the same sort of high respect that merkitt was describing in Sinhalese. I think the reason it comes across as rude is that the only context in which you'd be likely to hear someone do that in person is to mock. In the same way, some men become offended if you refer to them as "sir" at all, even upon first greeting, possibly out of a suspicion that they are being mocke…

You also get that kind of thing at snobby restaurants / hotels / other services that cater to the rich, "would sir like to see the wine list", etcetcetc.

Or if you are white in South East Asia..

Re: Did English ever have a formal version of “you”?

#188

Post by kjs3 »

jychang wrote: post #34
cobralibre wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fellow Texan here. "Y'all" is plural, but certainly not formal. I hasten to add that "y'all" is clearly not used exclusively by Texans.

Y'all is singular. "All y'all" is plural.

Y'all is most certainly plural where I'm from (Southeast US).

Re: Did English ever have a formal version of “you”?

#190

Post by mattlutze »

phaemon wrote: post #147
mattlutze wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What value does abbreviation "PIE" add to a discussion for relative laymen? I'm guessing it stands for "Proto-Indo-European", a phrase I'll bet nearly no one outside advanced degree word nerds (invoked lovingly) uses or has heard. Sorry for the soapbox.

I knew what it meant and don't have any advanced degree. I suspect that's because the very first comment to the linked question is, literally, "PIE = Proto-Indo-European" If you don't read the page people are talking about, don't be surprised if you can't follow the conversation.

That comment was added after this thread started, as I read through the comments before adding my own.
Post reply on HN