Messages : 17
Langue: English
Miland (Voir le profil) 1 mars 2011 16:33:49
erinja:I am pretty sure that the Fundamento specifically says that "vi" is for both singular and plural.That is so.
The Fundamento has among the 16 rules: "5. The personal pronouns are: mi, „I”; vi, „thou”, „you”; li, „he”; ŝi, „she”; ĝi, „it”; si, „self”; ni, „we”; ili, „they”; oni, „one”, „people”, (French „on”)." So the rule makes it clear that vi applies to both the singular and plural second person.
The second example in section 16 of the Ekzercaro has Ci skribas (anstataŭ „ci” oni uzas ordinare „vi”). I translate the part in brackets: `instead of "ci" we usually use "vi"'.
danielcg (Voir le profil) 1 mars 2011 18:59:08
Regards,
Daniel
NothingHere:
I know that "Ci" exists as a singular second-person pronoun, and that it also indicates informality/familiarity. However, I've seen people say that it is very archaic and out-of-use. So I guess my question is: If I use "Ci" for either of those reasons(singular, or informality), will I sound like a fool, or will the majority of people get the point?
bartlett22183 (Voir le profil) 1 mars 2011 20:52:40
rdmiller3 (Voir le profil) 1 mars 2011 22:30:14
I got the impression that "ci" sort of means, "you and only you".
NothingHere (Voir le profil) 2 mars 2011 00:48:42
rafano:What confuses me a bit here is that the thread starter has posted their question in English. I don't know whether English is the mother tongue of the thread starter, but it seems as they're familiar enough with it to know that not even present-day English makes any distinction between the singular ‘you' and the plural ‘you'. So, I would like to ask if the thread starter thinks that English is just as confusing as Esperanto on this point.English is my first language, and I'm aware that English doesn't distinguish between singular and plural "you," (Unless you say y'all, youse, yez, etc) but I was more asking if, since there is a distinction in Esperanto, it is appropriate to use both words.
As for whether I find English to be confusing in that regard, I do think it can be in some cases, but overall, not particularly.
As for the rest of you, thanks for the advice. I guess I'll just use "Vi ĉiuj" in the future when necessary.
bartlett22183 (Voir le profil) 2 mars 2011 00:51:39
rdmiller3:The only way I have seen "ci" used with any frequency was in the novel "Hura!" by Baghy. It was only used two ways: to flatter an authority figure or to adore a lover.I am not familiar with this writing myself, but I suggest that in the manner of normal historical semantic drift "ci" be allowed to be used as a singular pronoun without any connotation of familiarity and "vi" as a plural. I am not suggesting any structural change as such, only a semantic drift to allow a useful construction.
I got the impression that "ci" sort of means, "you and only you".
erinja (Voir le profil) 2 mars 2011 01:55:06
bartlett22183:I am not suggesting any structural change as such, only a semantic drift to allow a useful construction.I don't know if I would even go so far as to call this semantic drift. Essentially you would be using the word "ci" exactly as it is defined in the Fundamento, as a singular form of "you", with no connotation of formality or familiarity. The only difference would be that you'd be ignoring the part of the Fundamento that says that this form isn't ordinarily used.
You could certainly use it if you wanted to, it would be breaking any rules to do so. People would think you were weird but I'm assuming you're ok with that. Maybe it would catch on, maybe it wouldn't. Probably not but you never know.
I had a close friend as a beginner who spoke a language that differentiates between singular and plural "you". He used "ci" for a while, and then he felt he didn't need it anymore, so he stopped.