Print

Print


I've experimented with optional something-like-clusivity in the second person in one of my Romance conlangs: "vous-uns" is "you all, including a previously addressed person or persons" and "vous-altres" (by formal analogy with French "vous-autres" and Spanish "vosotros") is "you all, specifically not including a previously addressed person or persons".

mostly this was a thought experiment (what would second person forms by analogy with the first person "nous-uns" and "nous-altres", which express normal clusivity, look like), but it's the kind of thing where I can imagine specific circumstances where it would be useful to have the distinction (say you've just been berating one group of people and now need to turn your attention to another — "e vous-altres ne son del tout meljòrs!").

le gach dùrachd,
Nathaniel

> Le 16 Samh 2016 à 06:23, R A Brown <[log in to unmask]> a écrit :
> 
>> On 16/11/2016 09:46, Pete Bleackley wrote:
>> I think it's plausible as long as there's a cultural
>> reason to distinguish between groups of people who are
>> all present and groups which include absent people.
> 
> Yes.
> 
>> Maybe your language's speakers are particular about who
>> they trust with certain information. If you use 2nd
>> person exclusive, what you say is "for your ears only".
> 
> Yes, and there are occasions when we feel we have to
> explicitly make that clear.  I looked at the Wikipedia
> article on Clusivity and I find John Henderson's argument
> that a language with 2nd person plural clusivity "would be
> quite literally unspeakable."
> 
> If Bernard Comrie is correct a language with 2nd person
> plural clusivity is spoken in southeastern Ambrym; I assume
> he is referring to Teveak, but I can't find any description
> of the language.
> 
> -----Original Message----- From: Brian Weekes
> [snip]
>> Hi everyone.
>> 
>> 
>> My name is Brian and this is my first post.
>> 
>> I am a very inexperienced beginner in this field and and
>> working on my first conlang.
> 
> Welcome - there was a time when each of us was inexperienced
>  :)
> 
>> I am just wondering if anyone has experimented at all
>> with using exclusive/inclusive forms within the second
>> person.
> 
> Not that I know of.  But one of things that many conlangers
> do is to try out new ideas or unusual ideas and see how they
> work out.   Go for it, I say!
> 
> Ray