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"? (2011)

english.stackexchange.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 441 posts

Re: Did English ever have a formal version of "you"? (2011)

#201

Post by em-bee »

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #176
derriz wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you explain. I'd guess "Arschloch"? The translation of "bad language" is very tricky. English is my mother tongue but I live in a German (sort-of, it's complicated) speaking country. I've learned that "scheisse" is not a very good translation for the English word "sh*t". It seems to me that the English word is much stronger/more offensive than the common German translation at least where I'm from. German "schei…

Words change roles, and shit is a very good contemporary example. Among my children's generation (mid-20s to mid-30s) it is now just as much as stand-in for "stuff" as it is an expression of anger or insult. "Where am I going to put all this shit?" does still carry a hint of a negative tone (directed towards the stuff), but barely any.

ismo explains shit:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igh9iO5BxBo

Re: Did English ever have a formal version of "you"? (2011)

#202

Post by tacker2000 »

brnt wrote: post #99
NewsyHacker wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If negotiating the tu / vous distinction takes major mental effort, are you on the spectrum? Difficulty with understanding social cues and (these distinctions are also about creating distance) other people’s space is a typical trait of autism. These linguistic innovations wouldn't spread – and often quickly, within a couple of generations – if the neurotypical masses found them burdensome. I'm in a country with this…

In the Netherlands, it is very regional whether or not you use the polite form. In the capital region, it is not used, and use is a signifier you are from the countryside, if your accent wasn't enough. There are courses on how to get rid of your accent (or rather, get one of the capital region), and ceasing the employ of the polite form is featured.

Thats funny because in Austria it’s the other way around. People in Vienna are used to being overpolite and will use the formal “Sie” abundantly, whereas on the countryside everyone is always almost “Du”. There is the saying: “Am Land sind alle per Du”.

Re: Did English ever have a formal version of "you"? (2011)

#203

Post by FromTheSteppe »

blowski wrote: post #162
FromTheSteppe wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is speaking to someone formally considered ending up in an inferior position in all cultures? In Persian if someone expects to be spoken with formally, they have to speak formally themselves. So when you speak formally you're kinda bringing both parties up. You can even flirt by speaking formally.

How does the “flirting by speaking formally” work? “I say, does Madam visit this establishment frequently”.

Different cultures. Persian has 1100 years of literature and recent media for this.

On the other hand you can't dirty talk with a straight face in Persian, since nobody has ever heard or read about it, it sounds super funny.

Re: Did English ever have a formal version of "you"? (2011)

#205

Post by em-bee »

ffgjgf1 wrote: post #137
NewsyHacker wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If negotiating the tu / vous distinction takes major mental effort, are you on the spectrum? Difficulty with understanding social cues and (these distinctions are also about creating distance) other people’s space is a typical trait of autism. These linguistic innovations wouldn't spread – and often quickly, within a couple of generations – if the neurotypical masses found them burdensome. I'm in a country with this…

> If negotiating the tu/vous distinction takes major mental effort, are you on the spectrum For me it’s the fact that these days it’s very inconsistent. The “rules” were pretty clear 20-30+ years ago. Now it’s a bit of a mess and there is a lot of overlap. > Saying people like myself aren't worth your time sounds like sour grapes I mean.. you’re somebody who just claimed that a random person is autistic because he do…

indeed inconsistency is the problem. using the informal among colleagues at work, and especially with superiors is often the sign of a more relaxed work atmosphere, which is something people want and is thus becoming more common. especially in international companies where multiple languages are used.

there is never a question what to use when i am talking to cashiers, clerks, etc. but when i am at a tech meetup or an informal gathering of people from different companies then the way to address people is very much in question. you never know how people like to be addressed. and while using the formal option may seem like the safe choice, it really isn't because it forces others to be formal with me too, and when i am the only one doing that it puts me into an odd position. the only safe option is to avoid any choice until the other makes their choice.

Re: Did English ever have a formal version of "you"? (2011)

#206

Post by poszlem »

This is kind of interesting when you think of what would happen if someone decided to "impose" the use of "you" instead of "thou". In English it happened organically. Take communist Poland, for example. The ruling party was all about changing how people talked, pushing words like "comrade" and all. But their attempt to make people use the plural form for a single person totally backfired (as did the use of "comrade"). It felt so out of place that when communism fell, the old way of speaking came roaring back and the distinction between "thou" and "you" is now stronger than ever before. Just goes to show, some things you just shouldn't be forced. Language change is definitely one of those things.

Makes me wonder in what interesting ways the current wave of English language manipulation (neo-pronouns, "blocklists" etc.) will backfire.

Re: Did English ever have a formal version of "you"? (2011)

#208

Post by mderazon »

mewpmewp2 wrote: post #68

I'm from a country where there is a different version and I hate it because it makes me overthink every time about which one is appropriate to use now with people I don't know. Maybe I should completely ditch it, and use the informal one with everyone new, just with the hopes of building immediate rapport. I must not be the only one to hate it, and surely those people who would mind me using the informal one are not…

Wouldn't you always need to think a little on how to engage with formal vs informal even if the language didn't have it built in ? I wouldn't address a child the same as a stranger or a boss even in English

Re: Did English ever have a formal version of "you"? (2011)

#209

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

em-bee wrote: post #201
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Words change roles, and shit is a very good contemporary example. Among my children's generation (mid-20s to mid-30s) it is now just as much as stand-in for "stuff" as it is an expression of anger or insult. "Where am I going to put all this shit?" does still carry a hint of a negative tone (directed towards the stuff), but barely any.

ismo explains shit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igh9iO5BxBo

he's wrong that "shit" is the most complicated word in english. That would be "jawn" - an adjective, noun, verb and more all in one little 4-letter package, which is also true of "shit", except that nobody not raised in Philadelphia knows the true scope of "jawn".

Re: Did English ever have a formal version of "you"? (2011)

#210

Post by JoshTriplett »

amanaplanacanal wrote: post #73
bxparks wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, wat? I always thought that "y'all" was a contraction of "you all", so meant the "plural you" instead of the "singular you".

I think you have to say “all y’all” for the plural.

This often comes up in such discussions, but no, both "y'all" and "all y'all" are plural. They're useful for distinguishing between smaller and larger groups. For instance, if a couple of members of a family are visiting, you could say "you" (the person you're speaking to), "y'all" (the whole group visiting), or "all y'all" (you and the rest of your family who aren't here). Or if multiple groups are visiting, "y'all" might be one group and "all y'all" might be everyone.
Post reply on HN