Post History
It is tempting for a foreigner, but perhaps not accurate to identify "Sie" as the polite (respectful) pronoun and to identify "du" as the impolite (less respectful) one, and it could be more accura...
Answer
#4: Post edited
by
Jirka Hanika
·
2022-07-01T08:48:21Z (over 2 years ago)
It is tempting for a foreigner, but perhaps not accurate to identify "Sie" as the polite (respectful) pronoun and to identify "du" as the impolite (less respectful) one, and it could be more accurate to describe the distinction as one of distance[^1] ("Sie" indicates a more distant relationship than "du"), whereas the use of the unexpected pronoun can be grossly impolite (offending, disrespectful) either way, unless you can play the cute language learner card.- [This page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%E2%80%93V_distinction_in_the_world%27s_languages#German) suggests that "Siezen" came into some limited use prior to 1700 in the courts of some German-speaking countries. The spoken direct salutations aren't well recorded, so we don't have a good understanding of the regional and temporal spread. During the 18th century, correspondence between mutually respected gentlemen would often be mixing "Ihrzen" and "Siezen" rather freely even in the same letter (along with gradually simplifying styles over the time). Nobility thus started this. The 19th century is the time when the usage started to trickle down to the bourgeoisie, and later to the peasants. Some niche social groups such as students of particular universities maintained the universal in-group use of "du" (i.e., even between complete strangers) until the early 20th century.
- So nobility started this. You have mentioned that usage of 3rd person strikes you as rude. Let's look at the modern ways of addressing a monarch in English. The least rude way to start your letter would [reportedly](https://www.nobility-association.com/etiquetteaddressingroyals.htm) be like this: "Unto Her Majesty, the Queen of Canada, gmcgath sends his greetings." Not only you would be referring yourself in the 3rd grammatical person, but the 2nd person is avoided even when addressing the recipient of your letter as a "majesty" (a noun). My interpretation is that following this tradition shows not only unidirectional respect, but also mutual distance (through indirectness). On the other hand, if the same indirectness of addressing is taken to another social context, it may become depersonalizing and exceptionally rude.
- [^1]: It used to be so even in English, in my opinion. I believe that the somewhat recently persisting usage of "thou" when speaking to God, or in marriage ceremonies (e.g., by the priest talking to the bride and groom), was never meant to show disrespect or to be an intentional linguistic anachronism, but rather to express closeness of the long term relationship and intimacy of the present occasion.
- It is tempting for a foreigner, but perhaps not accurate to identify "Sie" as the polite (respectful) pronoun and to identify "du" as the impolite (less respectful) one, and it could be more accurate to describe the distinction as one of distance[^1] ("Sie" indicates a more distant relationship than "du"), whereas the use of the unexpected pronoun can be grossly impolite (offending, disrespectful) either way[^2], unless you can play the cute language learner card.
- [This page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%E2%80%93V_distinction_in_the_world%27s_languages#German) suggests that "Siezen" came into some limited use prior to 1700 in the courts of some German-speaking countries. The spoken direct salutations aren't well recorded, so we don't have a good understanding of the regional and temporal spread. During the 18th century, correspondence between mutually respected gentlemen would often be mixing "Ihrzen" and "Siezen" rather freely even in the same letter (along with gradually simplifying styles over the time). Nobility thus started this. The 19th century is the time when the usage started to trickle down to the bourgeoisie, and later to the peasants. Some niche social groups such as students of particular universities maintained the universal in-group use of "du" (i.e., even between complete strangers) until the early 20th century.
- So nobility started this. You have mentioned that usage of 3rd person strikes you as rude. Let's look at the modern ways of addressing a monarch in English. The least rude way to start your letter would [reportedly](https://www.nobility-association.com/etiquetteaddressingroyals.htm) be like this: "Unto Her Majesty, the Queen of Canada, gmcgath sends his greetings." Not only you would be referring yourself in the 3rd grammatical person, but the 2nd person is avoided even when addressing the recipient of your letter as a "majesty" (a noun). My interpretation is that following this tradition shows not only unidirectional respect, but also mutual distance (through indirectness). On the other hand, if the same indirectness of addressing is taken to another social context, it may become depersonalizing and exceptionally rude.
- [^1]: It used to be so even in English, in my opinion. I believe that the somewhat recently persisting usage of "thou" when speaking to God, or in marriage ceremonies (e.g., by the priest talking to the bride and groom), was never meant to show disrespect or to be an intentional linguistic anachronism, but rather to express closeness of the long term relationship and intimacy of the present occasion.
- [^2]: Some speakers will consequently avoid using either personal pronoun (I mean "ihr" or "Sie") when speaking to a group of people when they are on "du" terms with some of them and on "Sie" terms with others. Such speakers will rather express themselves in imperative infinitive for requests, in passive voice for statements, and in any other ways which can fully neutralize the distinction while remaining grammatical.
#3: Post edited
by
Jirka Hanika
·
2022-07-01T08:37:37Z (over 2 years ago)
It is tempting for a foreigner, but perhaps not accurate to identify "Sie" as the polite (respectful) pronoun and to identify "du" as the impolite (less respectful) one, and it could be more accurate to describe the distinction as one of distance ("Sie" indicates a more distant relationship than "du"), whereas the use of the unexpected pronoun can be grossly impolite (offending, disrespectful) either way[^1], unless you can play the cute language learner card.- [This page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%E2%80%93V_distinction_in_the_world%27s_languages#German) suggests that "Siezen" came into some limited use prior to 1700 in the courts of some German-speaking countries. The spoken direct salutations aren't well recorded, so we don't have a good understanding of the regional and temporal spread. During the 18th century, correspondence between mutually respected gentlemen would often be mixing "Ihrzen" and "Siezen" rather freely even in the same letter (along with gradually simplifying styles over the time). Nobility thus started this. The 19th century is the time when the usage started to trickle down to the bourgeoisie, and later to the peasants. Some niche social groups such as students of particular universities maintained the universal in-group use of "du" (i.e., even between complete strangers) until the early 20th century.
- So nobility started this. You have mentioned that usage of 3rd person strikes you as rude. Let's look at the modern ways of addressing a monarch in English. The least rude way to start your letter would [reportedly](https://www.nobility-association.com/etiquetteaddressingroyals.htm) be like this: "Unto Her Majesty, the Queen of Canada, gmcgath sends his greetings." Not only you would be referring yourself in the 3rd grammatical person, but the 2nd person is avoided even when addressing the recipient of your letter as a "majesty" (a noun). My interpretation is that following this tradition shows not only unidirectional respect, but also mutual distance (through indirectness). On the other hand, if the same indirectness of addressing is taken to another social context, it may become depersonalizing and exceptionally rude.
- [^1]: It used to be so even in English, in my opinion. I believe that the somewhat recently persisting usage of "thou" when speaking to God, or in marriage ceremonies (e.g., by the priest talking to the bride and groom), was never meant to show disrespect or to be an intentional linguistic anachronism, but rather to express closeness of the long term relationship and intimacy of the present occasion.
- It is tempting for a foreigner, but perhaps not accurate to identify "Sie" as the polite (respectful) pronoun and to identify "du" as the impolite (less respectful) one, and it could be more accurate to describe the distinction as one of distance[^1] ("Sie" indicates a more distant relationship than "du"), whereas the use of the unexpected pronoun can be grossly impolite (offending, disrespectful) either way, unless you can play the cute language learner card.
- [This page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%E2%80%93V_distinction_in_the_world%27s_languages#German) suggests that "Siezen" came into some limited use prior to 1700 in the courts of some German-speaking countries. The spoken direct salutations aren't well recorded, so we don't have a good understanding of the regional and temporal spread. During the 18th century, correspondence between mutually respected gentlemen would often be mixing "Ihrzen" and "Siezen" rather freely even in the same letter (along with gradually simplifying styles over the time). Nobility thus started this. The 19th century is the time when the usage started to trickle down to the bourgeoisie, and later to the peasants. Some niche social groups such as students of particular universities maintained the universal in-group use of "du" (i.e., even between complete strangers) until the early 20th century.
- So nobility started this. You have mentioned that usage of 3rd person strikes you as rude. Let's look at the modern ways of addressing a monarch in English. The least rude way to start your letter would [reportedly](https://www.nobility-association.com/etiquetteaddressingroyals.htm) be like this: "Unto Her Majesty, the Queen of Canada, gmcgath sends his greetings." Not only you would be referring yourself in the 3rd grammatical person, but the 2nd person is avoided even when addressing the recipient of your letter as a "majesty" (a noun). My interpretation is that following this tradition shows not only unidirectional respect, but also mutual distance (through indirectness). On the other hand, if the same indirectness of addressing is taken to another social context, it may become depersonalizing and exceptionally rude.
- [^1]: It used to be so even in English, in my opinion. I believe that the somewhat recently persisting usage of "thou" when speaking to God, or in marriage ceremonies (e.g., by the priest talking to the bride and groom), was never meant to show disrespect or to be an intentional linguistic anachronism, but rather to express closeness of the long term relationship and intimacy of the present occasion.
#2: Post edited
by
Jirka Hanika
·
2022-07-01T08:36:40Z (over 2 years ago)
It is tempting for a foreigner, but perhaps not accurate to identify "Sie" as the polite (respectful) pronoun and to identify "du" as the impolite (less respectful) one, but it would be more accurate to describe the distinction as one of distance ("Sie" indicates a more distant relationship than "du"), whereas the use of the unexpected pronoun can be grossly impolite (offending, disrespectful) either way[^1], unless you can play the cute language learner card.- [This page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%E2%80%93V_distinction_in_the_world%27s_languages#German) suggests that "Siezen" came into some limited use prior to 1700 in the courts of some German-speaking countries. The spoken direct salutations aren't well recorded, so we don't have a good understanding of the regional and temporal spread. During the 18th century, correspondence between mutually respected gentlemen would often be mixing "Ihrzen" and "Siezen" rather freely even in the same letter (along with gradually simplifying styles over the time). Nobility thus started this. The 19th century is the time when the usage started to trickle down to the bourgeoisie, and later to the peasants. Some niche social groups such as students of particular universities maintained the universal in-group use of "du" (i.e., even between complete strangers) until the early 20th century.
- So nobility started this. You have mentioned that usage of 3rd person strikes you as rude. Let's look at the modern ways of addressing a monarch in English. The least rude way to start your letter would [reportedly](https://www.nobility-association.com/etiquetteaddressingroyals.htm) be like this: "Unto Her Majesty, the Queen of Canada, gmcgath sends his greetings." Not only you would be referring yourself in the 3rd grammatical person, but the 2nd person is avoided even when addressing the recipient of your letter as a "majesty" (a noun). My interpretation is that following this tradition shows not only unidirectional respect, but also mutual distance (through indirectness). On the other hand, if the same indirectness of addressing is taken to another social context, it may become depersonalizing and exceptionally rude.
- [^1]: It used to be so even in English, in my opinion. I believe that the somewhat recently persisting usage of "thou" when speaking to God, or in marriage ceremonies (e.g., by the priest talking to the bride and groom), was never meant to show disrespect or to be an intentional linguistic anachronism, but rather to express closeness of the long term relationship and intimacy of the present occasion.
- It is tempting for a foreigner, but perhaps not accurate to identify "Sie" as the polite (respectful) pronoun and to identify "du" as the impolite (less respectful) one, and it could be more accurate to describe the distinction as one of distance ("Sie" indicates a more distant relationship than "du"), whereas the use of the unexpected pronoun can be grossly impolite (offending, disrespectful) either way[^1], unless you can play the cute language learner card.
- [This page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%E2%80%93V_distinction_in_the_world%27s_languages#German) suggests that "Siezen" came into some limited use prior to 1700 in the courts of some German-speaking countries. The spoken direct salutations aren't well recorded, so we don't have a good understanding of the regional and temporal spread. During the 18th century, correspondence between mutually respected gentlemen would often be mixing "Ihrzen" and "Siezen" rather freely even in the same letter (along with gradually simplifying styles over the time). Nobility thus started this. The 19th century is the time when the usage started to trickle down to the bourgeoisie, and later to the peasants. Some niche social groups such as students of particular universities maintained the universal in-group use of "du" (i.e., even between complete strangers) until the early 20th century.
- So nobility started this. You have mentioned that usage of 3rd person strikes you as rude. Let's look at the modern ways of addressing a monarch in English. The least rude way to start your letter would [reportedly](https://www.nobility-association.com/etiquetteaddressingroyals.htm) be like this: "Unto Her Majesty, the Queen of Canada, gmcgath sends his greetings." Not only you would be referring yourself in the 3rd grammatical person, but the 2nd person is avoided even when addressing the recipient of your letter as a "majesty" (a noun). My interpretation is that following this tradition shows not only unidirectional respect, but also mutual distance (through indirectness). On the other hand, if the same indirectness of addressing is taken to another social context, it may become depersonalizing and exceptionally rude.
- [^1]: It used to be so even in English, in my opinion. I believe that the somewhat recently persisting usage of "thou" when speaking to God, or in marriage ceremonies (e.g., by the priest talking to the bride and groom), was never meant to show disrespect or to be an intentional linguistic anachronism, but rather to express closeness of the long term relationship and intimacy of the present occasion.
#1: Initial revision
by
Jirka Hanika
·
2022-07-01T08:34:52Z (over 2 years ago)
It is tempting for a foreigner, but perhaps not accurate to identify "Sie" as the polite (respectful) pronoun and to identify "du" as the impolite (less respectful) one, but it would be more accurate to describe the distinction as one of distance ("Sie" indicates a more distant relationship than "du"), whereas the use of the unexpected pronoun can be grossly impolite (offending, disrespectful) either way[^1], unless you can play the cute language learner card.
[This page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%E2%80%93V_distinction_in_the_world%27s_languages#German) suggests that "Siezen" came into some limited use prior to 1700 in the courts of some German-speaking countries. The spoken direct salutations aren't well recorded, so we don't have a good understanding of the regional and temporal spread. During the 18th century, correspondence between mutually respected gentlemen would often be mixing "Ihrzen" and "Siezen" rather freely even in the same letter (along with gradually simplifying styles over the time). Nobility thus started this. The 19th century is the time when the usage started to trickle down to the bourgeoisie, and later to the peasants. Some niche social groups such as students of particular universities maintained the universal in-group use of "du" (i.e., even between complete strangers) until the early 20th century.
So nobility started this. You have mentioned that usage of 3rd person strikes you as rude. Let's look at the modern ways of addressing a monarch in English. The least rude way to start your letter would [reportedly](https://www.nobility-association.com/etiquetteaddressingroyals.htm) be like this: "Unto Her Majesty, the Queen of Canada, gmcgath sends his greetings." Not only you would be referring yourself in the 3rd grammatical person, but the 2nd person is avoided even when addressing the recipient of your letter as a "majesty" (a noun). My interpretation is that following this tradition shows not only unidirectional respect, but also mutual distance (through indirectness). On the other hand, if the same indirectness of addressing is taken to another social context, it may become depersonalizing and exceptionally rude.
[^1]: It used to be so even in English, in my opinion. I believe that the somewhat recently persisting usage of "thou" when speaking to God, or in marriage ceremonies (e.g., by the priest talking to the bride and groom), was never meant to show disrespect or to be an intentional linguistic anachronism, but rather to express closeness of the long term relationship and intimacy of the present occasion.