Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Comments on Why does German use the third person plural for the second person polite?

Parent

Why does German use the third person plural for the second person polite?

+9
−1

German has three sets of pronouns for the second person: the familiar singular (du), the familiar plural (ihr), and the polite singular or plural (Sie). The polite form is identical with the third person plural, except that the pronouns are capitalized. It's different from the third person feminine singular, which is also "sie" in the nominative but differs in the other cases.

This is a relatively recent development; as far as I can pin it down, it started in the 19th century. In earlier times the second person plural was used for polite address, as in French. My question is how it came to be the way it is now.

Addressing a person with a third-person pronoun seems impersonal and rude to me. In fact, at one time German used the third person singular (er) as the second person for addressing underlings. This occurs, for example, in Hofmannsthal's libretto for the opera Der Rosenkavalier, where it may be an intentional anachronism.

It's also confusing; I've found in my personal experience that it's sometimes hard in conversation to tell whether "Sie" means "you" or "they." Yet the "Sie" form somehow became the preferred form of polite address. What process led to this?

History
Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

1 comment thread

Isn't this the same question as - [Why isn't plural ihr used for Formal instead of Sie?](https://... (1 comment)
Post
+4
−0

You may be interested in Head, Brian F. (1978). 'Respect Degrees in Pronominal Reference', in Joseph H. Greenberg, Charles A. Ferguson, and Edith A. Moravcsik (eds.), Universals of Human Language, vol. 3: Word Structure. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

On pages 167–171 he discusses use of the third person for address in Amharic, Bemba, Danish, Eastern Pomo, Efatese, German, Harari, Italian, Janger, Kashmiri, Kefa, Lala, Lamba, Norwegian, Nsenga, Sotho, Swedish, Tagalog, and Welamo. Not all of these are like German in that they use a non-singular pronoun; some use a third person singular.

Head also suggests a distinction between languages that only allow the third person when it is endophoric (discourse-bound), as in French Monsieur veut-il?, and languages like German, where the third person can be used in exophoric (discourse-free) contexts as well. In at least German, Danish, Norwegian, Swedish, and Italian, the exophoric use would be derived from the endophoric use. This was at a time that these languages used a third person singular for address. The shift to plural occurred only later in German, Danish, and Norwegian, and did not happen at all in Italian and some forms of Swedish.

So the development would have been:

  1. Mein Herr, möchtest du ...
  2. Mein Herr, möchte er ... (endophoric; cf. French Monsieur veut-il)
  3. Mein Herr, möchten sie ... (shift to plural like in the second person in many other languages)
  4. Möchten Sie ... (reanalysis of 3PL as polite 2SG leads to exophoric use)
History
Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

1 comment thread

Possibly overgeneralized (3 comments)
Possibly overgeneralized
Jirka Hanika‭ wrote almost 2 years ago · edited almost 2 years ago

That article doesn't seem to be covering German with any examples or timelines, does it? In German, ihrzen was way older than siezen. (The oldest known instance of ihrzen is from 865. Some dialects use ihrzen even today.) The early written examples of siezen are mixing siezen and ihrzen (by the same writer toward the same recipient), while we don't seem to have any identified period or dialect with "endophoric Sie" and without "exophoric Sie" (stage 3) as proposed here. To add to it, exophoric "erzen" did exist in German, too - thus contradicting the 1/2/3/4 timeline given here - and, due to pronominal homonymy, the feminine form of it was actually "sie" (not capitalized and always distinct from siezen).

Keelan‭ wrote almost 2 years ago

Jirka Hanika‭ it doesn’t cover German in any detail, no, so it’s entirely possible / probable that it’s oversimplified. This is common in more typological papers. Multiple developments can have happened in parallel and strengthened each other, though. I mainly posted this for its broader perspective on other languages.

Jirka Hanika‭ wrote almost 2 years ago

It's certainly interesting to look at other languages, too.