Interesting thing is, this is happening right now in Brazil too. “Você” is the formal, and like “you” it is now used (in many parts of Brazil) exclusively. “Tu” is the informal, but because people only know it from the bible they are starting to use it to sound formal. The funny thing is that they don’t know how conjugate the verbs for “tu”, so they get those wrong. At the moment this is happening more and more among the (half-) illiterate poor, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the trend continued.
Another funny thing is that they adopted a new formal form (although I think it was in use before, but more formal even than você and not used much), as they had an opening following the informalising of você. The new formal way of addressing became “o senhor” or “a senhora”, so “the gentleman” or “the lady”. However, because it makes people seem old it is almost universally abhorred. So now that is something of an insult too.
Spanish and Catalan normally use the informal versions, nowadays. Note that the versions of prayers where God was addressed in the formal are from times when your own father would also be addressed formally; it simply follows general societal trends.
Now I am wondering how it works in Swedish. When I learned Swedish (more than 10 years ago now) I was told that the formal “Ni” had fallen almost completely into disuse, to the extent that if you addressed someone as “Ni” it would come across as an insult.
In talking to God, would you use “du” or “Ni”? What about addressing other saints such as Mary? (I’m aware the issue wouldn’t arise much for Protestant Swedes but I presume there are at least some Swedish-speaking Catholics.)
You’re right. So that blows my theory out of the water and now I don’t know why the informal “thee” was used for God. Does anybody know where this originates?
Formality means establishing social distance.
Informality means lack of social distancing.
God is supposed to be your best bud. Not distant; e.g., Naḥnu aqrabu ilayhi min ḥabli [sup]a[/sup]l-warīd ‘We are nearer to a person than the jugular vein’. (Sūrat Qāf: 16)
In the Scripture, God is addressed in straight 2nd person singular. AIUI, the evolution in many modern Western languages of a distinct 2d Person Formal vs 2d Person Familiar is a relatively late phenomenonr(*). The KJV translators (or in Spanish the Reyna-Valera translators) were using what at the time would be considered respectful but not stilted or unnatural speech.
In the old days, when you wanted to address someone of rank you switched to an semi-impersonal construction such as “Your Majesty” or “Milady”, BUT even so you could say either “I shall do My Liege’s bidding” OR “My Liege, I shall do thy bidding” and the latter would not be considered disrespectful since you included the formal antecedent.
(*and meanwhile, Vernacular English has virtually reverted to a single 2nd Person form with the near extinction of “thou”)
So in English I feel the lack of a distinction between singular and plural for the 2nd person pronoun. Since you is firmly and permanently established as a singular pronoun, I favor “yous” for the plural. It works in Dublin; why not the whole English-speaking world?
Leaving aside for now the exclusive and inclusive “we,” but that’s another feature lacking in English that would be useful to have…
All three languages I know ( Finnish, Swedish and English ) use informal. The formal is also plural in those languages, so better not to use it, since that might cause some confusion to ignorant peasants…
I know how wrong it is, but I have a weird love of “y’all”. I was in a production of A Midsummer Night’s Dream a few years ago with a girl from Texas. She got the English accent right but she kept saying “thou’all”. It was hilarious!
Y’know, I could have sworn this wasn’t always true, and that aap was used on occasion, but I can’t dig up any internet sources to the contrary
I’d wager that the tradition of using ‘tu’ comes post the bhakti reform movements in Hinduism, and their emphasis on using the vernacular. I don’t know enough Sanskrit to be able to tell whether it uses the formal version. In “Tvamev mata, schpita tvamev” for instance, is tvamev the formal version of ‘tu’?
What really surprises me is that most of the hindi prayers that google is serving up are just translated versions of the Lords prayer - thy kingdom come on heaven as on earth etc.
That’s right—it was more than anything the bhakti movements that established the modern Indo-Aryan vernaculars as literary languages. I don’t know, I guess before that it was all ślokas all the time?
No, it’s simply the Sanskrit word for tu followed by the demonstrative particle iva ‘so, just so, exactly’—it’s used as sort of the equivalent of bhi in Hindi. Tu bhi, thou only art my mother, thou only art my father.
Yeah, they really push that stuff, don’t they?
I had just been half-remembering an Urdu folk mantra from South India that began something like Jall tu, jalal tu, sahib-e kamal tu…
