Anything odd?
Moderators: Dimitris, maneki neko2, Lorikeet, Enrico Palazzo, superpeach, cecil2, Mr. Kalgukshi2
-
Stephen Jones
- Posts: 1421
- Joined: Sun May 18, 2003 5:25 pm
Yes, I know that, but why is it different from "America will not abandon our friends"?Stephen Jones wrote:When a speaker refers to himself in the third person singular he is attempting to create a sense of distance. Accordingly the 'my' is quite out of place as it defeats the purpose of using the third person singular in the first place.
-
Anuradha Chepur
- Posts: 234
- Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 8:33 am
- Location: India
America will not abandon our friends.Yes, I know that, but why is it different from "America will not abandon our friends"?
David will not let my name be used in vain.
America and our have subtly different referents - America (the government, the White House) and our (the country, the people).
David and my have a common referent.
-
Anuradha Chepur
- Posts: 234
- Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 8:33 am
- Location: India
1. We, the government.
2. We, the people.
We in 1 includes Bush and the government that he is a part of, but not the people he is addressing.
We in 2 includes both Bush and the people he is addressing.
For me, if America stands for 'we' then it is 'we, the government'.
Our = the peoples', the country's
His sentence makes me think Bush subconsciously considers himself belonging to both groups - the government and the people.
The sentence would look clearer in languages, like Telugu, where we have distinct addressee included (manamu 'we'/mana 'our') and addressee excluded (memu 'we'/ma 'our') first person plural pronouns
2. We, the people.
We in 1 includes Bush and the government that he is a part of, but not the people he is addressing.
We in 2 includes both Bush and the people he is addressing.
For me, if America stands for 'we' then it is 'we, the government'.
Our = the peoples', the country's
His sentence makes me think Bush subconsciously considers himself belonging to both groups - the government and the people.
The sentence would look clearer in languages, like Telugu, where we have distinct addressee included (manamu 'we'/mana 'our') and addressee excluded (memu 'we'/ma 'our') first person plural pronouns
I've heard "we the government and people of America". Have you?Anuradha Chepur wrote:1. We, the government.
2. We, the people.
We in 1 includes Bush and the government that he is a part of, but not the people he is addressing.
We in 2 includes both Bush and the people he is addressing.
For me, if America stands for 'we' then it is 'we, the government'.
Our = the peoples', the country's
His sentence makes me think Bush subconsciously considers himself belonging to both groups - the government and the people.
The sentence would look clearer in languages, like Telugu, where we have distinct addressee included (manamu 'we'/mana 'our') and addressee excluded (memu 'we'/ma 'our') first person plural pronouns
Americans, not Englishmen
Hey all.
I have to repeat a bit what I said above, that is, we Americans are taught that our country is ours and thus we often use "we" and "our" in speaking about America. That a presidential candidate would use such language would bring him closer to the people who, as he, believe that the USA is home-grown, home-made and can not, will not belong to anyone else. On reading the original sentences, I did not find anything odd about them, though I would find it odd to say "her" though I'm sure it's been used as well as "its".
Shouldn't generalize, I suppose, but on leaving the US for emotional and political reasons, it took me a couple of years to stop using "we" (as in "We are usually friendly, generous people.") and begin using "they" ("The Americans (they) are usually friendly, generous people.") in an effort to distance myself from the American reality. Perhaps it is, as Juan points out, because of my use of Spanish as my main communicative tool for those first (and the following) years. However, at least in the case of Americans, we, no, they are not humble enough to always be sure to speak in 3rd person. "Everyone" has an aluminum flag pole holder screwed on the front of their porch!
peace,
revel.
I have to repeat a bit what I said above, that is, we Americans are taught that our country is ours and thus we often use "we" and "our" in speaking about America. That a presidential candidate would use such language would bring him closer to the people who, as he, believe that the USA is home-grown, home-made and can not, will not belong to anyone else. On reading the original sentences, I did not find anything odd about them, though I would find it odd to say "her" though I'm sure it's been used as well as "its".
Shouldn't generalize, I suppose, but on leaving the US for emotional and political reasons, it took me a couple of years to stop using "we" (as in "We are usually friendly, generous people.") and begin using "they" ("The Americans (they) are usually friendly, generous people.") in an effort to distance myself from the American reality. Perhaps it is, as Juan points out, because of my use of Spanish as my main communicative tool for those first (and the following) years. However, at least in the case of Americans, we, no, they are not humble enough to always be sure to speak in 3rd person. "Everyone" has an aluminum flag pole holder screwed on the front of their porch!
peace,
revel.
-
Anuradha Chepur
- Posts: 234
- Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 8:33 am
- Location: India
I've heard "we the government and people of America". Have you?
I can't recall, nor can I find it on the net.
It sounds the oddest of them all.
But having come across it right here, I'd say the 'we' is not an absolute we and has a naughty break up.
It sounds like a lame and contrived attempt to unify the people and the government, because if that were the intent, it would just suffice to say 'we the people of America'. It actually achieves the opposite effect - it divides the government and the people.