Print

Print


On 12/4/14, Kjell Rehnström <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Stephen Rice skrev 2014-12-04 04:44:

>> Here Ido has a better idea with vu/vi, though I wish they would drop
>> tu. Romance speakers of LFN will surely be bothered by the Latin use
>> of tu/vos.

> We are products of our native
> languages, so Steve's preference
> for a you-pronoun instead of a "tu"
> is understandable.

But that would imply that I wouldn't distinguish between singular and
plural in the second person. My dialect of English does not.

I remember the
> heavy use of "mister" and title,
> profession,  if any, am very happy
> that I can nearly always use "du"
> when speaking swedish. In Polish
> you can use 2ty" only when
> addressing God or when corporations
> talk to you through their ads. It
> is clumsy, and an encreasing number
> of Poles seem to think in the same
> direction, but it will take a
> looooong time till they will use
> the Scandinavian way, if ever :-) I
> think the use of pronouns is much
> mor unstable over time in a
> language than we generally tend to
> think.

And that's my actual reason for not liking the familiar/formal
distinction: the rules determining their use vary widely from language
to language. So it's better to drop the distinction, though doing so
will distort some texts. It would probably be better to have formal
(even honorific) and informal particles--subtlety would suffer, but
one could clearly convey the required nuances as needed. By contrast,
the male/female distinction is objectively verifiable, so merely
allowing it should occasion no confusion.

Steve