 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / January 2010Usage of "thou/thee/thy"
Does anybody in the English speaking world still use these terms outside of a conversational context? I'm aware that in German, the "du" is somehow similar to the "thou". > Does anybody in the English speaking world still use these terms > outside of a conversational context? > > I'm aware that in German, the "du" is somehow similar to the "thou". Certainly - these pronouns are still current in Yorkshire dialect. My wife (in her 50s) sometimes switches into dialect to make a point (unconsciously, I'm sure). And "tha" for "you" is common in North East English (Newcastle and the surrounding area).  SignatureDavid >> Does anybody in the English speaking world still use these terms >> outside of a conversational context? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > wife (in her 50s) sometimes switches into dialect to make a point > (unconsciously, I'm sure). That's pretty much the definition of a conversational context, though, isn't it? Does she use "thou" in writing as well? Regards, Ekkehard >>> Does anybody in the English speaking world still use these terms >>> outside of a conversational context? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > That's pretty much the definition of a conversational context, though, isn't > it? Does she use "thou" in writing as well? No, but she's an educated Yorkshirewoman who has lived two-thirds of her life away from the county. SignatureDavid > Does anybody in the English speaking world still use these terms > outside of a conversational context? They're still alive (though not in quite with the old meetings) among some Quakers, though even there they've gotten pretty rare. [...] > They're still alive (though not in quite with the old meetings) among > some Quakers, though even there they've gotten pretty rare. Who (when they do use them) curiously do not use them as was once normal when they _were_ common usages. (The case forms got tangled somewhere along the line.) SignatureCordially, Eric Walker, Owlcroft House http://owlcroft.com/english/ > [...] > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > when they _were_ common usages. (The case forms got tangled somewhere > along the line.) That's what I meant to say with "not quite with the old meanings", but I managed to mangle that parenthetical. >> [...] >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > That's what I meant to say with "not quite with the old meanings", but > I managed to mangle that parenthetical. Is the usage really current, though? I have met almost weekly with British Quakers for a few years, and have never heard it. An American Friends thing, perhaps? SignatureMike. >>> [...] >>> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > British Quakers for a few years, and have never heard it. An American > Friends thing, perhaps? It may be an American thing. Looking at quaker.org, I do see a few things outside of quotes, like "Thank Thee!" and Fox and company likewise affirmed the subordination of women to men, servants to masters, and rank-and-file Quakers, such as thee and me, to the "weightier" elders and ministers, like themselves, especially those with money. http://www.quaker.org/quest/issue16-fit-for-freedom01.htm When Wallis and I visited San Carlos, Mexico, all the houses we went to had piped running water, but it wasn't drinkable. Instead, everyone also had water coolers, and trucks would deliver bottled drinking water everywhere. I imagine this is a step between the third world situation thee envisions and what we have here in the US (although a lot closer to what we have than to what they would have). But the point is, their system works, even though it is different from ours. http://www.quaker.org/clq/2002/TQE053-EN-Water.html (Perhaps, one hopes, thee was too busy calling square dances and pursuing Robin to notice these?) http://www.quaker.org/clq/2002/TQE058-EN-Business.html and an interesting one that might explain why you may not have noticed it Listen to the narrator from her 1967 novel, I Roberta, fingering the way old-time Friends had turned the plain language, originally used as a blow for equality, completely inside out: "Some Quakers have a way, which I dislike, of saying _thee_ to other Quakers and _you_ to outsiders. If there's a roomful of Friends and non-Friends, they'll sort it out quick as lightning, _thee_ing the sheep and _you_ing the goats in the same breath." http://www.quaker.org/fqa/types/t16-vining.html > Does anybody in the English speaking world still use these terms > outside of a conversational context? > > I'm aware that in German, the "du" is somehow similar to the "thou". Am not shewer what tha's on abaht owd lad. There is the West Yorkshire dialect which uses these old forms, as in a conversation that would be heard on many a doorstep in Heckmondwike: "What's tha got wi thi nah"? "Nowt" "Well it dunt look like nowt t'me, it looks a reyt mullock". "Ah fan it aht laikin". "Look at at the state of thi, tha'd better get thissen t'bed afore thi fatther cums ooam". "Am bahn nah. Neet". It would be understood by most northerners ( and probably a lot of non- northerners in the UK) in speech, in real life , a dramatic presentation or in writing. What other situations were you thinking about? Actually I was mistaken by conversational context. I was under the assumption that people no longer use those three words in everyday English, but it seems that it's still used in a few dialects in everyday speech. Thanks for your answers! >Does anybody in the English speaking world still use these terms >outside of a conversational context? > >I'm aware that in German, the "du" is somehow similar to the "thou". Not much, SignatureSteve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk Steve Hayes skrev: > >I'm aware that in German, the "du" is somehow similar to the "thou". > Not much, Would you care to explain? I have been told that in the old days the everyday form was "thou" while "you" was the polite form. This would correspond to the German "du" and "Sie" (Danish "du" and "De"). Is that wrong? It surprised me when I found out, becase "thou/thee/thy" to my ear sound much more impressive than "you/your". SignatureBertel, Denmark >Steve Hayes skrev: > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >Is that wrong? No, you've got it exactly right. >It surprised me when I found out, becase "thou/thee/thy" to my >ear sound much more impressive than "you/your". For some reason English has generally opted for the polite (plural) form, so that the intimate "Thou/Thee/Thy" form looks a bit quaint and old-fashioned. It has lasted longer in addressing the Deity than in addressing close friends and family, leading some to mistakenly think that it is somehow more polite, and that it is used to show greater respect, but it is actually for a theological reason that maintains that God is a loving father who can be addressed thus intimately by his children, and not as if he were an earthy employer or social superior. But because the latter meaning of "you" has been lost, "thou" is frequently assumed to be somehow more polite and respectful. The Quakers had a different take on it. For ideological reasons, to assert human equality, they addressed even their supposed betters as "thee" to show that they regarded them as no better than anyone else. But they also reserved the nominative "Thou" for God, and for other human beings used only the accusative "thee". Hence the joke about the little old Quaker lady who had just been given a ticket for a traffic offence, and said to the traffic cop: "When thee gettest back to thee kennel, I hope that thee mother bitest thee." SignatureSteve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk > Steve Hayes skrev: > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Is that wrong? It's almost right. The thing to be aware of is that for many centuries "you" was the *plural* and "thou/thee" was the singular. You'll see that in the King James bible. Then for a century or two, including the age of Shakespeare, the plural "you" was used as the polite honorific, leaving "thou" for a range of informal uses, from loving intimacy to rude brawling. I used Rhymezone to look for a scene in Shakespeare with "thou rogue". I found this one, in _King Henry IV, part II_, Act II, scene I , where the characters shift back and forth, such as: MISTRESS QUICKLY: Throw me in the channel! I'll throw thee in the channel. Wilt thou? wilt thou? thou bastardly rogue! Murder, murder! Ah, thou honeysuckle villain! I can see reasons for most of the switching in the scene, though not all. > It surprised me when I found out, becase "thou/thee/thy" to my > ear sound much more impressive than "you/your". It was much later, when "thou" was used pretty much only in religion and poetry, that it acquired such a dignified tone. There's a summary here: "Thou, Thee & Archaic Grammar" -- a brief overview by AUE members: http://www.alt-usage-english.org/pronoun_paradigms.html SignatureBest -- Donna Richoux Donna Richoux skrev: > It's almost right. The thing to be aware of is that for many centuries > "you" was the *plural* and "thou/thee" was the singular. That's funny. The polite way of addressing people in Danish, German, French and Spanish (and probably other languages as well) is also achieved by using the plural form. > > It surprised me when I found out, becase "thou/thee/thy" to my > > ear sound much more impressive than "you/your". > It was much later, when "thou" was used pretty much only in religion and > poetry, that it acquired such a dignified tone. I haven't read much of either in English (and not much more in Danish). It's the sound of the words I mean. SignatureBertel, Denmark >Donna Richoux skrev: > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >German, French and Spanish (and probably other languages as well) >is also achieved by using the plural form. That's not really funny. What's funny is that in English is has almost reversed. SignatureSteve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk > Donna Richoux skrev: > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > I haven't read much of either in English (and not much more in > Danish). It's the sound of the words I mean. There's the 'royal we', a way of using the plural to indicate formality - "We are not amused", as Queen Victoria supposedly said. SignatureCheryl Cheryl skrev: > There's the 'royal we', a way of using the plural to indicate formality > - "We are not amused", as Queen Victoria supposedly said. That is possible in Danish too, but our queen's "we's" are more real "we's" than royal ones because she includes Number Two - prince Henri/Henrik (whom we like to tease because he would prefer to be king). I think the royal we was used in the olden days. SignatureBertel, Denmark >> Donna Richoux skrev: >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >There's the 'royal we', a way of using the plural to indicate formality >- "We are not amused", as Queen Victoria supposedly said. There is also the AUE royal we, or the mouse-in-our-pocket syndrome, as I usually think of it. For example, "We have another way of saying..." or "We don't use the word that way, we blah blah blah". SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, An American who lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE > There's the 'royal we', a way of using the plural to indicate formality > - "We are not amused", as Queen Victoria supposedly said. "I was using the royal 'we'". "I'm sorry, your Majesty, I didn't realise you were on the throne." SignaturePeter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org For an e-mail address, see my web page. > > There's the 'royal we', a way of using the plural to indicate formality > > - "We are not amused", as Queen Victoria supposedly said. > > "I was using the royal 'we'". > "I'm sorry, your Majesty, I didn't realise you were on the throne." There's a somewhat renowned WWI book titled "Her Privates We". An Aussie ex-gf of mine's parents had the following conversation at least yearly (he was a veteran and a serious student of military history, and a fairly stoic sort of man): Him (addressing someone he'd met recently): You really ought to read "Her Privates We". Her: [stifled cackling] I'm sure they do. Him (dismayed): It's not funny! It's about the Queen's privates! Her: [deep belly laughs, preventing speech] Him (apoplectic): We are her privates! Her: [near death from asphyxiation due to gut-wrenching laughter] To be fair, the mother was prone to fits of laughter--I'd often leave the Fanny Farmer cookbook in a prominent location just to cheer her up. http://www.amazon.com/Her-Privates-We-Frederic-Manning/dp/1852427175/ref=sr_1_1? ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1264631526&sr=8-1 > Donna Richoux skrev: > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > I haven't read much of either in English (and not much more in > Danish). It's the sound of the words I mean. "Thou" only has two sounds, the ordinary "th" of "the, there, this, that" and the "ow" of "cow, sow, chow." Neither strikes me as impressive. Maybe it's a Danish viewpoint thing. SignatureBest -- Donna Richoux > > Donna Richoux skrev: > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > -- > Best -- Donna Richoux The West Riding (of Yorkshire) pronunciations would be tha and thi for the subjective and objective respectively. NB.We are not so grammatically precise when using these forms with certain verbs. For instance the modern form of the verb to be would be used. We would say thas (thou is) and not thart (thou art). > Does anybody in the English speaking world still use these terms > outside of a conversational context? > > I'm aware that in German, the "du" is somehow similar to the "thou". Fundamentalist Mennonites still might. Ray O'Hara filted: >> Does anybody in the English speaking world still use these terms >> outside of a conversational context? >> >> I'm aware that in German, the "du" is somehow similar to the "thou". > >Fundamentalist Mennonites still might. You're not going to find many on Usenet to ask....r SignatureA pessimist sees the glass as half empty. An optometrist asks whether you see the glass more full like this?...or like this? > Ray O'Hara filted: >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > You're not going to find many on Usenet to ask....r They won't answer the phone either. >> Ray O'Hara filted: >>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > They won't answer the phone either. What phone? SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, An American who lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE >>> Ray O'Hara filted: >>>> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >> > What phone? FWIW, both the Old-Order (buggy-driving) and "Black Bumper" (car-driving) "plain" Mennonites whom I have met in Pennsylvania speak English that sounds to me just like the speech of others in the area, and it does not include "theeing and thouing". Their German, on the other hand -- even the Hochdeutsch of their hymns and scriptures as they pronounce it -- certainly isn't the schoolbook version I learned. By the way, I don't think "fundamentalism" is a very useful category in relation to Mennonite groups and their beliefs and practices. SignatureRoland Hutchinson He calls himself "the Garden State's leading violist da gamba," ... comparable to being ruler of an exceptionally small duchy. --Newark (NJ) Star Ledger ( http://tinyurl.com/RolandIsNJ ) >>>> Ray O'Hara filted: >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >By the way, I don't think "fundamentalism" is a very useful category in >relation to Mennonite groups and their beliefs and practices. One time when Big George and I were canoeing in Pennsylvania, Mennonites had us over for a group dinner in their village. I agree with you that their English is most ordinary, with no thees or thous. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, An American who lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE > Does anybody in the English speaking world still use these terms outside > of a conversational context? In almost every Church of England church, sometimes on a weekly basis or even more often. Daily in Cathedrals. Unless worship is talking to God which makes it conversational? > Does anybody in the English speaking world still use these terms > outside of a conversational context? Knowledge of thee/thou is kept alive by well-known poems, e.g. "Shall I compare thee to a summer's day?" > I'm aware that in German, the "du" is somehow similar to the "thou". Yes, as in French (tu = singular or intimate, different = plural or formal) and other languages e.g. Dutch or Spanish. It seems a mere accident that modern English does not indicate by sound or spelling any difference between singular you and plural you, but grammarians maintain the difference is real. SignatureDon Phillipson Carlsbad Springs (Ottawa, Canada) |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.