BS: Why 'we'?

28 Jun 07 - 01:26 AM (#2088792)
Subject: BS: Why 'we'?
From: JennieG

When and why did members of royalty start referring to themselves as "we", rather than "I"? For instance, Queen Victoria is supposed to have said "we are not amused".

We eagerly await any replies.

Cheers
Jennie

---

28 Jun 07 - 01:31 AM (#2088797)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: Janie

I always think of it as the Papal 'we'.

Janie

---

28 Jun 07 - 01:51 AM (#2088798)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: Gurney

Person and position?

---

28 Jun 07 - 02:00 AM (#2088805)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: Cluin

"We" = "God & I"

Long tradition of people in power speaking for divinity.

---

28 Jun 07 - 04:19 AM (#2088837)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: Joe Offer

I've always known it as the "royal 'we'" - but Wikipedia calls it Pluralis Majestatis.
-Joe-

---

28 Jun 07 - 06:00 AM (#2088884)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: Wolfgang

Pluralis Majestatis is the opposite to the "we" used in pluralis modestiae.

Wolfgang

---

28 Jun 07 - 06:58 AM (#2088916)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: GUEST,PMB

What about the Quakers' singularis amicae? "Thee" rather than "you"- they got jailed for it too.

---

28 Jun 07 - 07:34 AM (#2088933)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: MBSLynne

I know when it stopped though. Queen Elizabeth (2nd) stopped it at the same time as she changed the rule about no one being spoken of before the monarch. It was correct for her to say "I and my husband" because she had to come first, but not long after she became Queen, she refused to do it. This is why you often hear the quote "My husband and I" when the Queen is spoken of.

Love Lynne

---

28 Jun 07 - 09:16 AM (#2089014)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: Bee-dubya-ell

Then, in addition to the various uses if "we" in place of "I", there's the "we" used in place of "you", as in when a nurse asks a patient, "How are we today?"

We suppose it's intended to communicate a measure of empathy and shared experience but, personally, we don't buy it.

---

28 Jun 07 - 10:01 AM (#2089062)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: Steve Shaw

Victoria said "we" because it wouldn't have made sense to say "I are not amused."


:-D

---

28 Jun 07 - 10:53 AM (#2089105)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: GUEST,leeneia

I can't remember the details, but I just saw the royal we in a quotation from a medieval figure in Thomas Cahill's Mysteries of the Middle Ages. The time would have been 1300 or 1400.

---

28 Jun 07 - 10:56 AM (#2089107)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: Bill D

absolutely! She should have said "I not BE amused."

---

28 Jun 07 - 11:55 AM (#2089157)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: Rapparee

True story:

My brother had rotator cuff surgery yesterday (yes, he did something stupid and he knows it). The big kind, not the laproscopic variety. And as he was coming out of the anesthesia, the pain building up and up, a nurse's aid bent over smiling him and asked, "And how are we?"

He replied, "You are fine. I feel like the bottom side of shit."

When he told this to Us last night, We nearly split a gut laughing.

And Vicky should really have said, "We ain't amused."

---

29 Jun 07 - 11:23 AM (#2090089)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: GUEST,DocJohn

The 'royal we' refers to both the monarch and the country they represent, serve, rule, rip off (delete as appropriate) as a whole. Now 'we' are inclined to say 'one'
DocJohn

---

29 Jun 07 - 11:41 AM (#2090110)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: Steve Shaw

As in "We are the one of the richest women in the world but we still take 62p from every man, woman and child in our nation to run us every year.   Our roof at Buck House is leaking but, unlike the ordinary citizens of our nations, who have to pay for their own bloody roofs, we are asking our nation to cough up. Even though our Number One son made £15m profit from his ill-gotten 'Duchy' last year, we still can't seem to find the dosh. Is one taking the pee in all this? One certainly is - call it the Royal Wee!"

---

29 Jun 07 - 12:47 PM (#2090166)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: MMario

hey - at least you are dealing with *ONE* family. Care to shell out for security, staff and libraries for a different family every four years or so?

---

29 Jun 07 - 07:45 PM (#2090494)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: GUEST

There is the point that every British citizen is in the succession, and could conceivably be monarch.   That makes it 'we', doesn't it?

---

29 Jun 07 - 07:53 PM (#2090499)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: McGrath of Harlow

"We are a grandmother" was how Maggie Thatcher put it on one occasion.

---

29 Jun 07 - 09:42 PM (#2090558)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: JennieG

When a hospital nurse asks "how are we" I find that very patronising, I laughed when I read about Rapaire's brother in the post above!

Or even worse....."have our bowels moved this morning"........!

I dunno about yours nurse, only about mine.

As a possibly uncultured colonial I find the British royal accent a bit hard to take. Queen Liz II for example - I could swear she says "mai husband and ai".

Out here in the antipodes we say "me and him".

We are enjoying these postings very much!

Cheers
JennieG

---

29 Jun 07 - 11:30 PM (#2090628)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: GUEST,leeneia

I've been in the hospital a few times and have never had anyone address me as "we."

Do hospital staff members really still talk like that over the pond?

(Not that I don't believe every word Rapaire ever says.)

---

30 Jun 07 - 05:17 AM (#2090719)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: GUEST,Shimrod

Why do football fans talk about 'we' when their team wins? It really annoys me when some brainless prat, who supports Manchester Rovers, or something, starts prattling on at the coffee machine about how "that goal that 'we' scored against Barcelona Academicals in the second half last night was magic!".

I want to say to him (and if he's smaller and less aggressive than me, often do). "No, you prat, 'you' didn't have anything to do with scoring it - some grossly overpaid yob, who doesn't even come from Manchester, scored it! And not only that, 'you' were not even there - 'you' watched it on telly!"

---

30 Jun 07 - 11:32 AM (#2090895)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: McGrath of Harlow

We all have funny accents, wherever we come from and whoever we are.

---

30 Jun 07 - 11:06 PM (#2091330)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: GUEST

Except the Queen. She speaks the King's English.

Manchester Rovers???

---

01 Jul 07 - 01:50 AM (#2091384)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: JennieG

Last year in Alaska, Himself and I were often mistaken for British folk - the locals could pick that our accent wasn't from the US or Canada, and we were told more than once "we can tell you're not Kiwis, so you must be British!"

I don't think so..........!

Cheers
JennieG
Aussie to the boostraps and proud of it!

---

01 Jul 07 - 06:55 PM (#2091896)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: Steve Shaw

When I was a little lad in the 50s my dad was taking us all to Blackpool for the day in our Ford Anglia (biscuit tin model) when a police motor bike pulled him over on the road over Belmont for speeding. The copper's words are forever etched in my memory as my dad wound his window down.   "We think we're Stirling Moss then, do we, sir?"

It's true, I swear it! :-)

---

01 Jul 07 - 08:14 PM (#2091948)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: Bonecruncher

I believe that the story of Quenn Victoria's royal "We" is that, during a public engagement, a man from the crowd stepped forward and pointed a gun at her.
The response from the queen that "We are not amused" obviously referred to the official party, of which she as monarch was the senior member. She was obviously speaking on behalf of the group.
The use of the plural form "we" was, therefore, correct.

Unfortunately the useage of the singular and plural forms of address are today totally misunderstood.
How often do we the incorrect expression "Me and John went....."?
Would one say "Me went...."? No, one would say "I went...."
Therefore the correct expression is "John and I went....", always putting oneself last.

The result of a failure of teaching even the most elementary rules of language.

Colyn.

---

02 Jul 07 - 05:55 AM (#2092242)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: GUEST,Shimrod

Ok, I confess! I nicked the fictitious 'Manchester Rovers' from Jeremy Clarkson - who evidently hates football as much as I do. You see, even Jeremy Clarkson has some good points!

---

02 Jul 07 - 06:15 AM (#2092250)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: asirovedout

"Me and John went..." is no worse than saying something like "It amused John and I."

I hear similar abuse of English daily from BBC presenters, and it doesn't amuse me at all.

@

---

02 Jul 07 - 07:49 AM (#2092282)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: Dave the Gnome

Talking about the royal wee...

Why does Prince Philip keep his chamber pot on top of the wardrobe?

Because he is the highest peer in the land.


Hahaha. OK, I'll get my coat...

:D

---

02 Jul 07 - 09:06 AM (#2092324)
Subject: RE: BS: Why 'we'?
From: GUEST,Ian cookieless

In any traditional hierarchical society, the chief person speaks for others without their consent, as consent isn't needed when YOU are in charge; be they PM, patriarch, etc. Thus "we".

---