Съобщения: 158
Език: English
adrianlfc9 (Покажи профила) 22 февруари 2013, 18:12:46
but is it socially acceptable to use 'ci' for the singular second person?
Roberto12 (Покажи профила) 22 февруари 2013, 18:30:25
adrianlfc9 (Покажи профила) 22 февруари 2013, 18:46:51
erinja (Покажи профила) 22 февруари 2013, 19:17:24
It doesn't really matter that other languages have this form. Lots of languages have things Esperanto doesn't have, and vice versa.
darkweasel (Покажи профила) 22 февруари 2013, 19:56:43
- They are trying to speak in a disrespectful way and to offend me.
- They are trying to express some kind of informality and friendship.
- They always use ci for singular.

So basically, don't use it, it just isn't common and certainly doesn't convey the same nuances conveyed by equivalent pronouns in other languages.
adrianlfc9 (Покажи профила) 22 февруари 2013, 20:28:24
RiotNrrd (Покажи профила) 23 февруари 2013, 00:31:40
adrianlfc9:point taken, vi it shall beYou have made the right choice.

fstphane (Покажи профила) 23 февруари 2013, 01:24:59
Djino (Покажи профила) 23 февруари 2013, 02:15:29
Mine is that the possibility to distinguish the second-person pronouns, singular and plural, is a good thing (especially for an international auxiliary language). As I see it, we should use "vi" just for deference (like in many languages).
Being informal doesn't sound insolent to me, but friendly. How does "intimate" sounds to you? Is it bad?
Breto (Покажи профила) 23 февруари 2013, 03:14:03
Kind of a shame, though. Even if it were not standard usage in day-to-day speech, it seems like it would be nice to have for literary translations from languages with a T-V distinction. It'd be nice to have distinct singular and plural forms, too. Even English dialects abound with workarounds like "y'all", "youse", "you guys", etc. How are these things usually handled in translations?
(As an afterthought: This is also the first I've heard of "thou" being used pejoratively. As far as I know, thou isn't used in most dialects at all, unless a person is being intentionally archaic, or needs the extra pronouns to adequately explain the grammar of a foreign language. Of course, I might just be misled by my native dialect, I suppose.)