Re: A question

I don't know.  English borrowed "are" from the Danes, I seem to
remember, so I wouldn't put it past further English to borrow a second
person plural pronoun.  But you correctly perceive that different
communities have attempted to create second person plurals because we
haven't got one anymore.  All it would take is for one of those to
achieve prestige status for it to become official.


Ed Heil
.. edheil@postmark.net
.... http://edheil.iwarp.com
...... "Heads of state who ride and wrangle
       Who look at your face from more than one angle
       Can cut you from their bloated budgets
       Like sharpened knives through Chicken McNuggets."
         --Cake, "Nugget"

Patrick Dunn wrote:

> On Fri, 13 Aug 1999, Ed Heil wrote:
>
> > Pat,
> >
> > I can't answer your question, cause I don't know, but I do have an
> > idea.  Why not assume that due to massive cross-emigration, English
> > gets into an areal group with some very different language(s) such as
> > Japanese, and there's lots of cross-influence?  Maybe the features of
> > each language which are most difficult to the others get wiped out --
> > such as extensive conjugations, or English's baroque syllable
> > structures (CCCCVCC or what have you, compared to Japanese's which is
> > closer to CV(N)).  A lot of the vocabulary stays the same, given the
> > new limitations, but a certain amount is borrowed.  It'd be a lot
> > easier if you had a built-in direction for change to proceed in than
> > if you had to do it by mere extrapolation of existing tendencies.
> >
> > Imagine that the Japanese play William the Conqueror to the American
> > Saxons, I guess I'm saying.  But not exactly. :)
> >
> > Just an idea.
>
> That had occurred to me, and with that very language!  One other question
> on that score: since English lacks a 2nd personal plural pronoun, is it
> likely to borrow one from another language or modify the existing pronoun?
> What's more common?  Juzgaiz?  Jal?  Or something Japanese?
>