LL-L: "Pronouns" [E] LOWLANDS-L, 03.JUN.1999 (04)

Thu Jun 3 15:08:39 UTC 1999

 ==========================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 03.JUN.1999 (04) * ISSN 1089-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
 Posting Address: <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>
 Web Site: <http://www.geocities.com/~sassisch/rhahn/lowlands/>
 User’s Manual: <http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html>
 ==========================================================================
 You have received this because your account has been subscribed upon
 request. To unsubscribe, please send the command "signoff lowlands-l"
 as message text from the same account to
 <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or sign off at
 <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
 ==========================================================================

From:  "Richard Dury" <richard at spm.it>
Subject: Pronouns

Dear Henno & Reinhard,

Many thanks to Henno for his clarifications of forms. (Is Kloeke's
article: 'De beleefde Friese aansprak...' (1941)?)

It seems, then, that the order of events was (i) use of ji-ju as polite
singular (OFris), (ii) development of a new plural jem(ma) (OFris), (iii)
spread of obj. jou/jo to subject ('already in 1774' - is that it's first
recognition in a Grammar? - if so, it was probably normal in the spoken
language considerably earlier)

The tantalisingly-similar development in English is (i) use of ye-you as
polite singular (1250- ), and then as unmarked singular (from c. 1550?)
(ii) spread of you to subject roles (1300- , completed c. 1530), (iii)
development of new plurals (you guys, yous, you 'uns etc.) in dialects (I'm
not sure from when).

Apart from Dutch *u*, do you know if any other modern Lowland languages
have a cognate of *jo* and *you* functioning as both subject and object?

What about the spread of object to subject forms for other personal
pronouns (or vice versa - but it seems to be mainly in that direction)? (I
know of Dutch 3rd person pl. ze-hun ('they'-'them') being replaced by just
hun in the spoken language and of the similar case in Swedish, where de-dem
is being replaced by just dem.)

Thanks again for your help,

Richard Dury

----------

From:  Brandsma <brandsma at twi.tudelft.nl>
Subject: Pronouns

Hi you'all..

>Dear Henno & Reinhard,
>
>Many thanks to Henno for his clarifications of forms. (Is Kloeke's
>article: 'De beleefde Friese aansprak...' (1941)?)

It is. I have it at home.

>It seems, then, that the order of events was (i) use of ji-ju as polite
>singular (OFris), (ii) development of a new plural jem(ma) (OFris), (iii)
>spread of obj. jou/jo to subject ('already in 1774' - is that it's first
>recognition in a Grammar? - if so, it was probably normal in the spoken
>language considerably earlier)

There are no contemporary grammars of Middle Frisian, and there are not
that many texts as well. They are now making a grammar and a dictionary,
and all the known texts have now been edited and published, though they are
hard to get (I have a few of them). The bulk is Gysbert Japicxs, and some
plays. The above form is from such a play, so it should be close to spoken
speech.

>The tantalisingly-similar development in English is (i) use of ye-you as
>polite singular (1250- ), and then as unmarked singular (from c. 1550?)
>(ii) spread of you to subject roles (1300- , completed c. 1530), (iii)
>development of new plurals (you guys, yous, you 'uns etc.) in dialects (I'm
>not sure from when).
>
>Apart from Dutch *u*, do you know if any other modern Lowland languages
>have a
>cognate of *jo* and *you* functioning as both subject and object?

I think there are some (Frisian influenced, I think) dialects of Groningen
Low Saxon that have it, according to the same paper (it gives references
for this, I believe). Plus there might be some other Frisian dialects in
Germany that do it, Saterlandic doesn't, anyway. So no clear examples that
I know of.

>What about the spread of object to subject forms for other personal
>pronouns (or vice versa - but it seems to be mainly in that direction)? (I
>know of Dutch 3rd person pl. ze-hun ('they'-'them') being replaced by just
>hun in the spoken language and of the similar case in Swedish, where de-dem
>is being replaced by just dem.)

Well, there is norwegian Hun (for "they", related to Dutch "hun", zo there
it already happened...), Afrikaans (and dialects from Zeeland in the
Netherlands) that have "ons" for "we", and Afrikaans "hulle", Dutch
(western dialects) hullie, from "hun + lieden" (so object form!) or analogy
to "jullie" ("zullie" is also heard occasionnaly).

>Thanks again for your help,

Pleasure..

>Richard Dury

Henno Brandsma

==================================END=======================================
 * Please submit contributions to <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>.
 * Contributions will be displayed unedited in digest form.
 * Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
 * Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l") are to
   be sent to <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or at
   <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
 * Please use only Plain Text format, not Rich Text (HTML) or any other
   type of format, in your submissions
 ========================================================================