Formal vs Informal In English Language

While you are 99.9% correct, I can think of a few examples where you completely change the form. To answer Olentzero’s question, “would you like something to drink” is one of the sentences that follows Cosmic Relief’s general rule, although it’s a little trickier, because “would you like” is a different verb ending (nomimasu becomes nomitai).

However, for instance, when introducing yourself for the first time, the more formal way is to say Hajimimashite, Cerowyn to moshimasu. The more casual form is Hajimimashite, watashi-wa Cerowyn desu, or even more casually Hajimimashite, Cerowyn desu.

Hmmm… on second thought, perhaps introductions are a bad example. That’s not keigo – it’s more akin to English’s approach to changing the wording (“Hi, nice to meet you” vs. “Hello, I’m pleased to meet you.”). I’ll think of a better example in a bit.

That’s a bit of an apples-and-oranges comparison, though. You’re comparing the keigo way of saying “I’m called Cerowyn” with the casual form of “I’m Cerowyn”. There is a casual way of expressing “I’m called Cerowyn” (to iimasu), though admittedly it’s not as commonly used.

Hmmm…let’s say you’re taking Aunt Edna to the store in your car, along with one other person you’ll pick up on the way.

To your very proper mother: “Aunt Edna’s a little gassy, isn’t she?”

To your coworkers: “My aunt suffers a bit from flatulence.”

To your siblings: “Aunt Edna farts like a motherfuck.”

To yourself: “Who died in here?”

Yeah, literally, they’re not the same. I should have said watashi no namae wa Cerowyn desu, but in reality, you do actually change what you say. (Or, at least, I do, which is by no means reflective of what you should do.) Anyway, I realized that it wasn’t an ideal example after I’d posted it, which is why I added the little comment at the bottom.

More apologies later, when I have time to type 'em out…

I do not know about japanese, but as a native american with a french mother, I would be careful with foreign polite forms.
In french tu, vous are singular and plural forms of “you”; the plural “vous” is used as a “polite” form when respect is required, but also when a (social) distance is desired, as in a contractor-to-client relationship. Though difficult to describe in a few words, the distinction is quite powerful.
I do suppose that in more distant languages the difference and use is quite subtle, and certainly difficult to use.
In english, the formal you (thee, thou, thy) seems to be limited to references to god in religious context.

French and German also have an equivalent (tu/vous ; du/Sie), and it does make translating from English somewhat more complicated than it should at times. Do these people know each other enough to use “tu” ? At what point in that budding romance does the “vous” go away" ? Was that a polite “you” or a friendly"you" ? etc…

But I don’t understand how Markxxx could wonder whether English has formal and informal registers. Of course it does. They’re not as dissimilar, complex and codified as Japanese registers, but still : would you tell your friends “Excuse me sir, would you mind bringing me a beverage please ?” ? Of course not.

Now give us a beer, mate.

English had exactly the same sort of formal and informal forms for "you " as German and the rest of the cited languages. We chucked the informal forms in English a couple hundred years ago. We now use exclusively the formal form, “you”, and the attending verb conjugations.

The informal forms “thou” and “ye”, their inflected forms (“thee”,“thy”, etc), and the attendant verb conjugation (“art”, etc) survive only at renfaires, in archaic documents, and in a few isolated regional dialects.

One is predisposed to use correct grammar rather than colloquialisms, and utilize more grandiloquent vocabulary while speaking in formal situations. However, such speech is not necessarily formal, and might even be considered an affectation by some.

See the wiki entry for “Thou” for one theory of how we lost the informal form.

Well the English 2nd person formal/informal distinction was always bastardized. It took over from having thou mean “you, just the one” and you meaning “all of you”, which makes a whole lot more sense.

From Surely You’re Joking, Mr. Feynman, by Richard Feynman:

Sorry about the terrible formatting, I got the quote from a text file.

Stick with physics, Dickie; leave the languages to us polyglots. :smiley:

Actually Thou and You are the English equivalents of Tu and Usted (or the other way round, I forget which). When my dad was taught French at school that is the translation he was taught.