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

People Twitter

4980 readers
2492 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.
  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 9 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 9 months ago* (last edited 9 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 9 months ago (1 children)
[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 6 points 9 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 9 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 9 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 9 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 9 months ago

Yes that makes sense

[–] GuybrushThreepwo0d@programming.dev 6 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Also solved by a reflexive pronoun, as in Russian

[–] lugal@lemmy.ml 3 points 9 months ago

Northern Germanic languages like swedish do the same trick btw

[–] SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml 1 points 9 months ago

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

[–] Phoenix3875@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] Baines@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

missed opportunity to say enters the chat