this post was submitted on 21 Dec 2023
767 points (95.7% liked)

People Twitter

5283 readers
475 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a tweet or similar
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] lugal@lemmy.ml 101 points 11 months ago (3 children)

There are languages with a 4th person pronoun. The 3rd person is kind of the main character and the 4th someone else. That helps to disambiguate sentences like "The criminal shot the cop and drove away on his (own or the cop's) bike".

Or the "gay fanfiction problem": "He looked at him and lay his hands on his lap". Is it a happy ending or a sad one? That's one theory why gender in pronouns is so resilient: more often than not, the gendered pronoun can disambiguate which person is talked about. It doesn't always work, a 3rd/4rd person distinction is superior.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 23 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

You can have an alternate third person pronoun I suppose in order to distinguish two third person individuals, but that doesn't mean there's a fourth person pronoun. The general definition is:

  • first person - the speaker
  • second person - the audience, whether present or not present
  • third person - someone or something other than the audience

So things like "chat" and "breaking the fourth wall" are second person pronouns. There is no fourth person pronoun, because anything other than first and second is covered under third person.

[–] lugal@lemmy.ml 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

That still sounds like a special type of third person, though I guess that's just disagreeing about terminology.

[–] lugal@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 months ago

I see why you would analyze it that way but I also see that it deserves a term in its own rights. As you said, it's all terminology. There are no objective definitions, at least not in linguistics

[–] SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Isn't 'chat' essentially treated as a name, except that it refers to a group of people instead of an individual?

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I think you're right, and the pronoun for it would be the second person plural (you in English).

[–] SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 months ago

Yes that makes sense

[–] GuybrushThreepwo0d@programming.dev 6 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Also solved by a reflexive pronoun, as in Russian

[–] lugal@lemmy.ml 3 points 11 months ago

Northern Germanic languages like swedish do the same trick btw

[–] SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 months ago

Now that is clever. I forgot my Slavic language had this feature

[–] Phoenix3875@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Fourth pronoun was doing well, until the fifth person enters the scene.

[–] Baines@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

missed opportunity to say enters the chat