----- Original Message -----
From: "Benct Philip Jonsson" <bpjonsson@...>
> Some languages of course have a whole different set of
> vocabulary to be used in formal/honorific situations,
> including how you refer to yourself in the presence of
> a 'honorable' person --
Right, and I think I gave you an example in Teonaht.
> yes, the language changes in the
> presence of such a person, even if s/he is not an inter-
> locutor, and often even when talking *about* them in
> their absence! The Sohlob languages (my conlang family)
> actually tends to this side of the scale. I guess
> things may get more and more complicated if I would
> write/translate texts involving such distinctions.
>> Another form of the honorific in Teonaht is to address the person by his
>> title, constantly: Does the Sir/Madam wish to examine another coat? May
>> I interest the Sir/Madam in an accompanying belt? etc. Have I offended
>> the Sir/Madam?
>
> Swedish, until some forty years ago, did that, but went
> one step further, using not only Sir/Madam, but the
> persons occupational title as a word of address.
Would a shopkeeper know that, though?
> I for instance would have been adressed as Kandidaten
> (i.e. the academic Candidate degree9 for most of
> my life. In fact _min Herre/Herrn_ or _Frun_ was used
> only with people so lowly as to not have any occupational
> tiles, although servants would address their employers
> with these titles, and _Frun_ of course was the correct
> address for a housewife, so there were proportionally
> more women addressed _Frun_ than there were men adressed
> _Herrn_ -- once you knew their occupation that is.
Interesting. Sounds like the "Sehr geerhter Herr Doktor Professor Wilhelm
Wolfgang."
Too cumbersome in T; everybody is Hmeo if you are being respectful. Although
maybe I'll adapt that for formal letters.
> One interresting aspect of this is that when the system
> eventually was abolished people started using the familiar
> second person singular pronoun _du_ to everyone. There
> had been some use of the second person plural _ni_
> with singular reference on the French model, but this
> had been associated with people who didn't wish to
> draw attention to their 'lowly' occupation, yet be
> formal towards one another, and so this usage was
> frowned upon by practitioners of the occupational
> title addressing system. FWIW the use of singular
> _ni_ has bcome in vogue in later years among younger
> people who want to affect social distance or
> 'uppity'. I and many with me frown on it as being
> stuck-up rather than polite. I usually answer such
> address in the first person plural, and AFAIK none
> of these pompous brats has understood what I was
> doing. Of course they don't know about the
> _pluralis majestatis_ any more than they know about
> the real stylistic value of the "V-forms" in Swedish.
>
> This said I have a real hard time not to perceive
> the use of polite forms in other languages as
> pompous...
Which in itself is a kind of reverse pomposity. It's still judgmental, and
raising the Du form to the "new" standard of correct speaking. When in
Germany I use Sie not out of pomposity but respect.
Sally