(no subject)

[ricardienne]

Since it isn't relevant to my topic, really, I'm just footnoting the nify "addressing the emperor in the plural" stuff; it's really cool, because Th. addresses all of the kings he corresponds with this way, toward many of whom he is being kind of supercilious, so it becomes a kind of egalitarian "we're all partners in this ruling the ex-Roman empire business" thing.

Secondly, the Really Useful Book came in today. Not only does it sort of disparage the usefulness of the Extremely Crucial Book that Doesn't Actually Exist (which makes me feel better about not being able to have it), but it casually pulls an example "to use the language of 1066 and All That." It must be so awesome to be British: such a rich cultural patrimony.

Comments

[novanglus.livejournal.com]

> it's really cool, because Th. addresses all of the kings he corresponds with this way

I do believe this is called the "majestic plural":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluralis_majestatis

[ricardienne.livejournal.com]

Indeed, although I am not so much interested in how Th. refers to himself as how he refers to his correspondents (the T-V distinction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-V_distinction)). "Vos" as a respectful singular is not classical, and seems to be reserved for monarchs in Th.'s correspondence, making it evidently not everyday practice, either.

[novanglus.livejournal.com]

Ah yes. This general question is perhaps related in some way to, for example, Ross Perot's (in)famous use of the second person (see ¶ four):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ross_Perot#1992_presidential_candidacy