Prithee

Last updated

Prithee is an archaic English interjection formed from a corruption of the phrase pray thee ([I] ask you [to]), which was initially an exclamation of contempt used to indicate a subject's triviality. [1] The earliest recorded appearance of the word prithee listed in the Oxford English Dictionary is from 1577, while it is most commonly found in works from the seventeenth century. [2] The contraction is a form of indirect request that has disappeared from the language. [3]

Prithee is the most widely known example of second person object enclitics. Linguists consider it to have been the final step in the grammaticalisation of the verb pray. [4] The eventual use of prithee outside the thee/ thou usage signalled its transition into a discourse particle. [5]

There has been extensive scholarship investigating the difference in usage of prithee as opposed to pray you, both in terms of politeness and grammaticalisation. [6] Because prithee eventually came to be used in the same context with the word you, it is considered to have developed into a monomorpheme. [7] Prithee was almost always used as a parenthesis in order to introduce indirect questions and requests.

Prithee and pray you often coincide in Early Modern English texts, and the difference between the two terms has been debated by scholars. Scholars such as Roger Brown and Albert Gilman have suggested that prithee was an ingroup indicator. Other scholars suggest that it is simply the more deferential form. [8] The relationship between the two is complicated by the phrase beseech you, which was used in the same time period and was clearly the form used most deferentially. [9]

Although the closest Modern English equivalent of prithee is please, or "could", the two terms presume different attitudes within the addressee. While please accompanies a request addressing itself to the positive desire of the addressee, as in "if it please you," prithee accompanies a request which addresses itself to the threat of being answered in the negative, as though the request were against the addressee's wishes. [10] Stated otherwise, the word please suggests that the person being addressed is willing to comply with the request, whereas the word prithee suggests that he or she is not willing. This switch from stating the speaker's contrary desire to stating the speaker's wish not to impose signaled a cultural shift in the English-speaking world in which politeness became stated negatively rather than positively. Wider repercussions are observable in the replacement of such phrases as "excuse me" and "pardon me," which request understanding or forgiveness, with "I am sorry," which instead acknowledges the speaker's remorse. [11]

In the Complete Works of Shakespeare , prithee occurs 228 times while pray thee occurs only 92 times.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Grammatical conjugation</span> Creation of derived forms of a verb from its principal parts by inflection

In linguistics, conjugation is the creation of derived forms of a verb from its principal parts by inflection. For instance, the verb break can be conjugated to form the words break, breaks, broke, broken and breaking. While English has a relatively simple conjugation, other languages such as French and Arabic or Spanish are more complex, with each verb having dozens of conjugated forms. Some languages such as Georgian and Basque have highly complex conjugation systems with hundreds of possible conjugations for every verb.

In linguistics, grammatical person is the grammatical distinction between deictic references to participant(s) in an event; typically, the distinction is between the speaker, the addressee, and others. A language's set of pronouns is typically defined by grammatical person. First person includes the speaker, second person is the person or people spoken to, and third person includes all that are not listed above. It also frequently affects verbs and sometimes nouns or possessive relationships.

A transitive verb is a verb that entails one or more transitive objects, for example, 'enjoys' in Amadeus enjoys music. This contrasts with intransitive verbs, which do not entail transitive objects, for example, 'arose' in Beatrice arose.

The imperative mood is a grammatical mood that forms a command or request.

<i>Thou</i> English archaic 2nd person singular pronoun

The word thou is a second-person singular pronoun in English. It is now largely archaic, having been replaced in most contexts by the word you, although it remains in use in parts of Northern England and in Scots. Thou is the nominative form; the oblique/objective form is thee ; the possessive is thy (adjective) or thine ; and the reflexive is thyself. When thou is the grammatical subject of a finite verb in the indicative mood, the verb form typically ends in -(e)st, but in some cases just -t.

In Modern English, the word "you" is the second-person pronoun. It is grammatically plural, and was historically used only for the dative case, but in most modern dialects is used for all cases and numbers.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Question</span> Request for information

A question is an utterance which serves as a request for information. Questions are sometimes distinguished from interrogatives, which are the grammatical forms, typically used to express them. Rhetorical questions, for instance, are interrogative in form but may not be considered bona fide questions, as they are not expected to be answered.

The Japanese language has a system of honorific speech, referred to as keigo, parts of speech that show respect. Their use is mandatory in many social situations. Honorifics in Japanese may be used to emphasize social distance or disparity in rank, or to emphasize social intimacy or similarity in rank. Japanese honorific titles, often simply called honorifics, consist of suffixes and prefixes when referring to others in a conversation.

Thomas Givon is a linguist and writer. He is one of the founders of "West Coast Functionalism", today classified as a usage-based model of language, and of the linguistics department at the University of Oregon. Givón advocates an evolutionary approach to language and communication.

Personal pronouns are pronouns that are associated primarily with a particular grammatical person – first person, second person, or third person. Personal pronouns may also take different forms depending on number, grammatical or natural gender, case, and formality. The term "personal" is used here purely to signify the grammatical sense; personal pronouns are not limited to people and can also refer to animals and objects.

In linguistics, mirativity, initially proposed by Scott DeLancey, is a grammatical category in a language, independent of evidentiality, that encodes the speaker's surprise or the unpreparedness of their mind. Grammatical elements that encode the semantic category of mirativity are called miratives.

Epistemic modality is a sub-type of linguistic modality that encompasses knowledge, belief, or credence in a proposition. Epistemic modality is exemplified by the English modals may, might, must. However, it occurs cross-linguistically, encoded in a wide variety of lexical items and grammatical structures. Epistemic modality has been studied from many perspectives within linguistics and philosophy. It is one of the most studied phenomena in formal semantics.

A discourse marker is a word or a phrase that plays a role in managing the flow and structure of discourse. Since their main function is at the level of discourse rather than at the level of utterances or sentences, discourse markers are relatively syntax-independent and usually do not change the truth conditional meaning of the sentence. They can also indicate what a speaker is doing on a variety of different planes. Examples of discourse markers include the particles oh, well, now, then, you know, and I mean, and the discourse connectives so, because, and, but, and or. The term discourse marker was popularized by Deborah Schiffrin in her 1987 book Discourse Markers.

In linguistics, clusivity is a grammatical distinction between inclusive and exclusive first-person pronouns and verbal morphology, also called inclusive "we" and exclusive "we". Inclusive "we" specifically includes the addressee, while exclusive "we" specifically excludes the addressee; in other words, two words that both translate to "we", one meaning "you and I, and possibly someone else", the other meaning "me and some other person or persons, but not you". While imagining that this sort of distinction could be made in other persons is straightforward, in fact the existence of second-person clusivity in natural languages is controversial and not well attested. While clusivity is not a feature of standard English language, it is found in many languages around the world.

Yes and no, or similar word pairs, are expressions of the affirmative and the negative, respectively, in several languages, including English. Some languages make a distinction between answers to affirmative versus negative questions and may have three-form or four-form systems. English originally used a four-form system up to and including Early Middle English. Modern English uses a two-form system consisting of yes and no. It exists in many facets of communication, such as: eye blink communication, head movements, Morse code, and sign language. Some languages, such as Latin, do not have yes-no word systems.

In linguistics, an honorific is a grammatical or morphosyntactic form that encodes the relative social status of the participants of the conversation. Distinct from honorific titles, linguistic honorifics convey formality FORM, social distance, politeness POL, humility HBL, deference, or respect through the choice of an alternate form such as an affix, clitic, grammatical case, change in person or number, or an entirely different lexical item. A key feature of an honorific system is that one can convey the same message in both honorific and familiar forms—i.e., it is possible to say something like "The soup is hot" in a way that confers honor or deference on one of the participants of the conversation.

Anna-Brita Stenström [ˈanəˌbrit̬ə'st̬ɨnstɹɪm] was a Swedish linguist whose areas of research included corpus linguistics, sociolinguistics, pragmatics, and discourse analysis. She initiated and co-directed three online corpora of adolescent language: The Bergen Corpus of London Teenage Language (COLT), Ungdomsspråk och språkkontakt i Norden (UNO), and Corpus Oral de Lenguaje Adolescente (COLA).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Artemis Alexiadou</span> Greek professor and linguist (born 1969)

Artemis Alexiadou is a Greek linguist active in syntax research working in Germany. She is professor of English linguistics at the Humboldt University of Berlin.

An expletive is a word or phrase inserted into a sentence that is not needed to express the basic meaning of the sentence. It is regarded as semantically null or a placeholder. Expletives are not insignificant or meaningless in all senses; they may be used to give emphasis or tone, to contribute to the meter in verse, or to indicate tense.

<i>Please</i> English word indicating politeness

Please is a word used in the English language to indicate politeness and respect while making a request. Derived from shortening the phrase "if you please" or "if it please(s) you", the term has taken on substantial nuance based on its intonation and the relationship between the persons between whom it is used. In much of the Western world, use of the word is considered proper etiquette, and parents and authority figures often imprint upon children the importance of saying "please" when asking for something from an early age, leading to the description of the term as "the magic word".

References

  1. John Stoddart (1858). Glossology: or, The Historical Relations of Languages. R. Griffin and Company. p.  198. Prithee linguistics.
  2. Minoji Akimoto (2000). "The Grammaticalization of the Verb 'Pray'". Pathways of Change: Grammaticalization in English. John Benjamins Publishing Company: 73. ISBN   90-272-3056-0.
  3. Cindy L. Vitto (2006). Grammar by Diagram: Understanding English Grammar through Traditional Sentence Diagraming. Broadview Press. p. 11. ISBN   1-55111-778-9.
  4. Hans Lindquist; Christian Mair (2004). Corpus Approaches to Grammaticalization in English. John Benjamins Publishing Company. pp. 241–242. ISBN   1-58811-523-2.
  5. Ulrich Busse (2002). Linguistic Variation in the Shakespeare Corpus. John Benjamins Publishing Company. p. 204. ISBN   1-58811-280-2.
  6. Helena Raumolin-Brunberg (2002). Variation Past and Present: VARIENG Studies on English for Terttu Nevalainen. Société Néophilologique. p. 146. ISBN   951-9040-16-1.
  7. "Definition and Examples of Monomorphemic Words". ThoughtCo. Retrieved 8 September 2020.
  8. Richard J. Watts; Peter Trudgill (2002). Alternative Histories of English. Routledge. p. 225. ISBN   0-415-23356-9.
  9. Beatrix Busse (2006). Vocative Constructions in the Language of Shakespeare. John Benjamins Publishing Company. p. 355. ISBN   90-272-5393-5.
  10. Andreas H. Jucker; Irma Taavitsainen (2008). Speech Acts in the History of English. John Benjamins Publishing Company. p. 241. ISBN   978-90-272-5420-7.
  11. Andreas H. Jucker (2008). "Politeness in the History of English". English Historical Linguistics 2006: Selected Papers from the Fourteenth International Conference on English Historical Linguistics (ICEHL 14), Bergamo, 21–25 August 2006. 2. John Benjamins Publishing Company: 4. ISBN   978-90-272-4811-4.