Is there any place left which still uses 'thou'? I should like to lead a revival of this pronoun, what do you think are my chances?
thou revival
Тhou hast lost the plot, I'm afraid. Everyone will simple laugh at thee and spit on thine idea.
I`m neither laughing nor spitting. As I said in the "By who" thread, I`m ready to start using "thou", "thee", "thy", "thine", and "ye". One thing English sorely needs is a legit plural form of "you". Of course, then you`d need to do the "thou hast"-"you have" thing, which I`m all for.
I understand that English once had an extensive case system, so maybe we could revive some of that too. There MUST be a few other archaic (and awesome!) Germanic words which haven`t been used for centuries in the spoken language. It`s high time they made a comeback, IMO.
One more thing...if we`re doing this, we need to get some type of spelling reform in place on down the line. That can wait, though.
I understand that English once had an extensive case system, so maybe we could revive some of that too. There MUST be a few other archaic (and awesome!) Germanic words which haven`t been used for centuries in the spoken language. It`s high time they made a comeback, IMO.
One more thing...if we`re doing this, we need to get some type of spelling reform in place on down the line. That can wait, though.
THOU, THEE, THY are still used in parts of Northern England (around Yorkshire). Generally speaking, THOU, THEE, THY is obsolete, regional and/or poetic, just like TU is in Brazilian Portuguese (which prefers você for informal-to-neutral you, formal you is: o senhor) or in Argentinuan Spanish (which prefers vos for informal-to-neutral you, formal you is: Usted)
>>I`m neither laughing nor spitting. As I said in the "By who" thread, I`m ready to start using "thou", "thee", "thy", "thine", and "ye". One thing English sorely needs is a legit plural form of "you". Of course, then you`d need to do the "thou hast"-"you have" thing, which I`m all for.<<
You do realize that a good few English dialects have created new second person plural pronouns (universally making "you" the second person singular pronoun). These include things such as "you guys", "y'all", "yous", "you'uns", and "yins", with the most standard being "you guys" (but with "y'all" also being extremely common in NAE).
Even for dialects without such, "you" is almost universally considered to be singular by default today". Aside from northern English English dialects which still preserve "thou" as "tha", forget about trying to actually get people to use "thou" as the default second person singular pronoun and to consider "you" to be plural by default.
You do realize that a good few English dialects have created new second person plural pronouns (universally making "you" the second person singular pronoun). These include things such as "you guys", "y'all", "yous", "you'uns", and "yins", with the most standard being "you guys" (but with "y'all" also being extremely common in NAE).
Even for dialects without such, "you" is almost universally considered to be singular by default today". Aside from northern English English dialects which still preserve "thou" as "tha", forget about trying to actually get people to use "thou" as the default second person singular pronoun and to consider "you" to be plural by default.
I would love it, it would liven English up a lot. English seems a bit stale to me.
It is used in parts of Yorkshire, but generally used wrongly. For a start, the pronunciation is more likely to be tha' than thou. And the verbs are not conjugated correctly with it: does tha' know where Leeds is? Instead of dost thou know? or knowest thou?
Well y'all and youse etc are sub-standard. Travis is a passionate supporter of the degradation of the English language. Just because some people in NA speak like that doesn't make it correct. Standard English was clearly illustrated in the writings of Dickens, Austen and Hardy.
>>It is used in parts of Yorkshire, but generally used wrongly. For a start, the pronunciation is more likely to be tha' than thou. And the verbs are not conjugated correctly with it: does tha' know where Leeds is? Instead of dost thou know? or knowest thou?<<
Well, in such dialects, it *is* "tha", not "thou", period; saying "tha" is not "wrong" but rather simply what is used in such dialects. Likewise, such dialects as a whole have more modern northern English English-type verb conjugation; it is not "wrong" that they do not preserve *southern* Early New English verb conjugation, unlike what you say here.
>>Well y'all and youse etc are sub-standard. Travis is a passionate supporter of the degradation of the English language. Just because some people in NA speak like that doesn't make it correct. Standard English was clearly illustrated in the writings of Dickens, Austen and Hardy.<<
You are just a reactionary prescriptivist, it seems. You do realize that people have not spoken like in Dickens, Austen, or Hardy for a *long* time, have you? And just because people today do not speak like that does not make their speech "substandard", unlike what you seem to indicate here...
Well, in such dialects, it *is* "tha", not "thou", period; saying "tha" is not "wrong" but rather simply what is used in such dialects. Likewise, such dialects as a whole have more modern northern English English-type verb conjugation; it is not "wrong" that they do not preserve *southern* Early New English verb conjugation, unlike what you say here.
>>Well y'all and youse etc are sub-standard. Travis is a passionate supporter of the degradation of the English language. Just because some people in NA speak like that doesn't make it correct. Standard English was clearly illustrated in the writings of Dickens, Austen and Hardy.<<
You are just a reactionary prescriptivist, it seems. You do realize that people have not spoken like in Dickens, Austen, or Hardy for a *long* time, have you? And just because people today do not speak like that does not make their speech "substandard", unlike what you seem to indicate here...
I`m aware of the variations people have come up with for a plural "you". My paternal grandparents were from Virginia, and they used "you`uns". Be that as it may, I HATE "y`all", "yins", etc. As "Guest" said, adding all the words I mentioned earlier would liven up the language. I agree that English is stale (and boring). Heaven forbid that a native English speaker would have to conjugate a verb.
Travis, thou thinkest that 'yins' is proper English? That's just ridiculous and I can't believe thou saidst that, I've never heard it in my life, even more common ones like 'y'all' are unacceptable in most parts.
English speakers would also benefit from it. Also it would improve translation into English from all the languages which make the distinction, that is one great flaw of English translations.
English speakers would also benefit from it. Also it would improve translation into English from all the languages which make the distinction, that is one great flaw of English translations.
You can always just use "all of you." It's used in formal and colloquial speech.
In formal, proper speech one says 'you' with no added clarification, as it's obvious from the context to whom thou art addressing thyself.
>>You can always just use "all of you." It's used in formal and colloquial speech.<<
Not really. In the dialect here, for instance, "you guys" is distinct from "you all" and "all of you", and acts as a true second person plural pronoun, unlike "you all" and "all of you". "You all" and "all of you" refer to all of those present, but "you guys" acts as a more general-purpose second person plural pronoun which does not necessarily refer to all of those present (and conversely may actually refer to people not present).
Not really. In the dialect here, for instance, "you guys" is distinct from "you all" and "all of you", and acts as a true second person plural pronoun, unlike "you all" and "all of you". "You all" and "all of you" refer to all of those present, but "you guys" acts as a more general-purpose second person plural pronoun which does not necessarily refer to all of those present (and conversely may actually refer to people not present).
Why is it necessary to distinguish between one or more than one people. English does that fine. What it needs is a distinction in formality. Thou - intimate, you - formal.