Editor for this issue: <>
The relatively famous Thai "borrowed pronoun" case has to be handled with some caution. The first caveat is that the borrowing of English /ay/ and /yu/ was not into Thai per se, but into the speech of a particular age group of educated speakers in Bangkok. They are not part of the pronominal repertoire of most speakers. The second is that, like the Malay languages mentioned by other respondents, Thai has a large, and potentially open, class of morphemes used for direct address and pronominal reference. This includes kin terms, words for occupational status, a number of semi-opaque pronoun-like morphemes with fairly shallow noun etymologies, a number with still transparent noun etymoloties (e.g. /nuu/ 'mouse', used for first person reference by young or teenage girls speaking formally to social superiors), and even some of the old Proto-Tai pronominal roots (with restricted synchronic sociolinguistic function -- e.g. Thai /mUng/, a reflex of the reconstructed PT 2nd person pronoun, is likely to be heard only among young, generally somewhat drunk, males in contexts of affirming solidarity or picking fights). In contrast to the Malay case described by Suzanna Cumming, in Thai there are no very firm syntactic grounds for recognizing a distinct pronominal category at all. Thus any borrowing into this set is quite a different phenomenon from borrowing into a closed paradigmatic system with its own defining morphosyntax, which is what the idea of borrowing pronouns implies to most linguists. Scott DeLanceyMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
I was very surprised to read Suzanne Fleischman's comment on french _on_ borrowed from Germn(ic) _man_. I always thaought it was the other way 'round. I would really appreciate references to sources about this 'general belief'. My evidence (which I exploited in a little article in the festschrift for Jacob Mey, ed. by Bent Rosenbaum and Harly Sonne, Odense University Press 1986) is mainly 1. that Jacob Grimm believed so, 2. that German (and Danish etc.) _man_ clearly is an innovation. (That it is an innovation doesn't prove, of course, that it is a loan from French - al- though this makes sense both historically and sociolinguistically.) The original way of expressing generic reference in German and Danish was by the second person singular of the personal pronoun, a usage still alive in German dialects and in colloquial German (although many people believe that this cis due to English influence - I'm not convinced. Also since English 'you' is not singular, but - at least historically - a polite plural). Hartmut HaberlandMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue