Published December 10, 2025

https://doi.org/10.23999/j.lcsm.2025.2

Linguistic Cues to Social Meaning 5, December 2025, 100010.

Under a Creative Commons license

HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE (APA STYLE)

Fesenko, I. P. (2025). Nature of transition from singular to plural form in single-person addressing. Linguistic Cues to Social Meaning, 5, Article 100010.

 

ABSTRACT

When addressing a single individual in most languages, choosing between the singular and plural number of second person takes place [1-3]. The right number of addressing is essential for the contacting persons, and determines positioning of the two communicants. The singular number of addressing may be considered as a form of verbal aggression [4]. Hypothesis for the unconscious level involved in the process of applying the singular or plural number to single individual includes situations implying both formal and informal relations [5]. However, the precise role of the subconscious during this process is unknown. Here we show that the universal change-over in the several tongues from using single to plural pronouns for second person occurs. We found in comparison studies within a few European languages (Latin, Romanian, Greek, German, French, Ukrainian, Russian, Modern Latin, English) that a good indication of the general transition from singular to plural addressing a single person is observed. Furthermore, we found that the choice of the addressing number is to be analyzed on the unconscious level, and a state of discomfort or anxiety is a consequence if the individual is addressed in singular. Our results demonstrate how from the biological standpoint this regular change of the addressing form is attributable to the fact that a human being as a creature with a herd instinct feels additional unconscious sense of safety when addressed in plural. We anticipate our assay to be a starting point for more sophisticated linguistic and social studies of the second person plural addressing of one person. For example, cultural and migration aspects of the addressing could be analyzed, including evaluation of the safety level of the society. Furthermore, the taking into account the universal change-over in the manner of second person addressing may be an additional important target of the anti-terrorist activity.

INTRODUCTION

Addressing a single person involves some difficulties of the non-uniqueness of singular and plural pronouns in the German [1], Ukrainian [3, 6], Russian [2, 4] and French languages [7], i.e. corresponding analogs of thou and you in English. The ambiguity is connected with conscious choosing one of these two forms when speaking or writing to a person. On the unconscious level, the choice of the addressing number may be analyzed and cause a state of discomfort or anxiety in the case of singular form.  At the same time, a good indication of the general transition from singular to plural addressing a single person in some languages is observed. This paper deals with a comparison studies within a few languages of the change-over from a standpoint of addressing, and the biological reasons of this phenomenon, unconscious instinctive level giving reasonable explanation of the transition.

 

Latin

 

Latin was an official state language as well as a language of literature, science, education and communication over some 2000 years being in use from ancient Rome Empire up to XIX century in some European countries. The Latin language of the ancient Romans used addressing in the singular form even in the case of addressing Emperor, e.g. „Ave, Caesar imperator, marituri te salutant” [8]. M. Vergilius (70-19 B.C.) wrote: „Tu regere imperio populos, Romane, memento. Hae tibi erunt artes pecisque imponere morem”. The fox in the Phaedrus’s (15 B.C. – 70 A.D.) tale said to the crow: „O, qui tvarum, Corve, pennarum est nitor!” [9].

 

A number of reasons of shrinking of the Latin language use have been discussed in literature. Still, one more reason should be studied, that is change-over to the languages which use both singular and plural addressing to a person. From the psychological standpoint it gave more instinctive feeling of safety for the individual. For the lack of instrumentation to study this phenomenon on unconscious level we can examine some languages succeeding Latin from the addressing point of view.

 

Romanian

 

In the Romanian language, second person pronouns both in single and plural tense are used. The distinction has been developed in the Romanian language where both general and polite forms of single tense appeared. The polite singular form dumnevoastre can be treated as an additional step from single to plural form of addressing individual.

 

Greek, German, French, Ukrainian, Russian

 

In the Greek, German, French, Ukrainian and Russian languages, the general you form for the second person is common for the official relations, direct speech or writing to a stranger, as well as in Ukraine to mother and father. In these languages, the singular pronoun thou for the second person has taken on a two-fold meaning – intimacy or contempt depending on the situation [1, 10-12].

 

K. Smolka [1] considers it essential in German to apply the plurals you, your to an official, senior, stranger thus avoiding possible conflict when the singular pronouns are used. Even a schoolmate happened to meet after few years should be addressed in plural. The singular pronouns to the second person are applied in the German language to the singular member of a family, sport club, etc.

 

Although A. Sadomora considers thou in Ukrainian most intimate and thus worth to be predominant, using it in the official relations is not recommended by the Ukrainian linguists for it may have a negative effect on an addressee implying contempt or rudeness [3, 8].  L. Matsko and L. Kravets [3] are on the opinion that the plural form you (the respected plural) is to be used both in written and oral addressing.

 

It is commonly supposed in modern Russian linguistics that plural addressing to an individual is specifically West-European [2]. The process of its adopting in Russian was most intensive during XIX century. V. Dahl [13] in 1882 assumed   that the singular addressing is predominantly Russian, and attributed use of the plural you to the person that is a few persons worth. Nowadays, specialists distinguish a positive and negative meaning of the singular addressing [14]. When speaking to any person in Russian it is necessary to decide what form of addressing to choose in order not to humiliate an interlocutor. Yu. Shcherbinina [4] explains that using thou in an official communication, when addressing a stranger or unfamiliar, a senior breaks the harmony of relations and provokes rejection, irritation, or protest.  

 

Modern Latin

 

The modern Latin language goes beyond the severe requirements of the classic Latin, in particular in the singular addressing law. Th. Procopovicz in 1720 wrote a letter to A. H. Franke in plural, e.g. “Vos iudicaverities melius” (You will see it better) [15]. In “Urbi et orbi” of 25.12.2007, the Pope Benedicts XVI hadn’t used the second person singular form. Translators generally use the plural pronoun vos in the recent translations into Latin, e. g. “… et spero vos etiam scire, …” („ ...and I hope You also know,..) [16].

 

English

 

It is generally agreed that the extension in English of plural pronouns of the second person to apply to the singular number had implications mainly of a social nature (for instance see M. Schlauch [5]). At the same time M. Schlauch uses the word “unconsciously” depicting the process at the beginning of the XV century, when the plurals ye, you, your were applied more and more generally to single individuals. This occurred not only in situations implying formality and respect, but also in informal relations. In Britain, the middle class dominated from 1642-1660 throughout the XVIII century (period of relative stability). The wealthy middle class allied itself with and continued to make use of court and aristocracy, but the leadership had now definitely changed hands and the tone in culture was modified accordingly [5]. More and more writers who set the tone in polite letters came from the middle class and they unconsciously propagated its ideas of propriety in their handling of language and their setting forth of its structure in handbooks of grammar and rhetoric.

 

The contemporary English language demonstrates almost dominant use of the plural pronoun of address from the fact that the single-plural transition being almost fully completed. The words thou and art have only old use or Biblical meaning thus losing their humiliating effect. The Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English [18] gives the meaning of the words thou and thee as old use for you, giving an example “Shall I compare thee to a summer day.”

DISCUSSION

 

Common misleading exists that there is no difference in English between thou and you [1, 18, 19], i.e. the English you = you or thou in the corresponding language. But M. Schlauch made an impressive case in favor of the transfer from thou art to you are in the English language. In the contemporary English language thou and art have only old use or Biblical meaning, having lost their humiliating effect. That is why the native English speakers can see no psychological problem in the you-thou, are-art use. But in the languages studied in this work thou may cause a sense of irritation when used in a certain situation.

 

The singular addressing is becoming marginal in the languages examined (Greek, German, French, Ukrainian, Russian, Modern Latin). Respectively the full transformation of the second person addressing into dominantly plural form in the English language may be attributed mainly to the domination of the fair-play rule in the society.

 

The observed singular-plural transition phenomenon in one-person addressing may be reasonably explained by an uncuncious reaction of the human nature to the singular either in positive or negative meaning, causing an instinctive feeling of worrying, anxiety  and danger, i. e. horror of loneliness. An application of plural pronouns to the second singular person may be considered as a subconscious factor of reassurance.

CONCLUSIONS

 

Analysis of addressing a single person in Latin, Romanian, Greek, German, French, Ukrainian, Russian, Modern Latin and English shows that the change-over from single to plural pronouns for second person occurs. From the biological standpoint, this regular change is attributable to the fact that a human being as a creature with herd instinct feels additional unconscious sense of safety when addressed as a single individual in plural, all other positive conditions being equal.

 

GENERATIVE AI STATEMENT

The author(s) declare that no Generative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript.

 

REFERENCES (19)

1. Smolka, K. (1976). Gutes Benehmen von A-Z. Verlag Neues Leben.
2. Lvova, S. I. (2006). Let Me Invite You. Drofa.
3. Matsko, L. I., & Kravets L. V. (2007). Culture of the Ukrainian Professional Language. Academia.
4. Shcherbinina, Yu. V. (2003). The Russian Language. Verbal Aggression and the Ways of Its Overcoming. Flinta, Nauka.
5. Schlauch, M. (1976). The English Language in Modern Times (since 1400). Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
6. Explanatory Dictionary of the Ukrainian Language. (1979). Potebnia Institute of linguistics, Naukova Dumka.
7. Davies, N. (1996). Europe. Oxford University Press.
8. Sodomora,  A. (2000). Sub Aliena Umbra, In the Alien Shade. Litopys.
9. Korzh, N. G., & Svedov, S. A. (1995). The Latin Language. Abris.
10. Koumandares, M., & Ekdoseis Kedros, A. E. (2008). Inostrannaya Literatura, 2, 157. (Original work published 1996).
11. Russian-German Dictionary. (1979). In Leping, E., Strakhova, N., Lein, K., Eckkert, P. (Eds.). Russkiy Yazyk.
12. Ronciére, Ch. (Ed.). (1996). The Letters of Napoleon to Marie-Louise. Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1935).
13. Dahl, V. (1981-1982). Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language. Russkiy Yazyk. (Original work published 1882).
14. Kazarceva, O. M. (2003). Culture of oral communication. Flinta, Nauka
15. Litvinov, V. (2002). The Latin Language. KM Academia.
16. Milnei, A. A. Winnie Ille Pu. Translated by Lenard A. Internet.
17. Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English. (1978).
18. New English-Russian Dictionary. (1979). In Galperin, I. R. (Ed.). Russkiy Yazyk.
19. English-Ukrainian Dictionary. (1974). In Podvezko, M. L., & Balla, M. I. (Eds.). Radyanska Shkola.