Poutsma (878) に，1人称複数代名詞の特別な用法として royal_we の話題が取り上げられている．ただし，術語としては "Plural of Majesty or Plural of Dignity" が用いられている．
As in Dutch, the plural of the first person is sometimes used by sovereigns, especially in public utterances, when speaking of themselves.
About this Plural of Majesty or Plural of Dignity, as it is commonly called, Sweet (N. E. Gr., §2095) observes: "We see the beginnings of this usage in Old-English laws, where the king speaks of himself as iċ, and then goes on to say wē bebēodath .. 'we command ..', the wē being meant to include the witan or councillors." Compare also Kellner, Hist. Outl. of Eng. Synt., §276; Onions, Advanced Eng. Synt., §221.
We were not born to sue, but to command. Rich. II, ii, 1, 196.
Fair and noble hostess, | We are your guest to-night. Macb., I, 6, 24.
Should our host murder us on this spot --- us, his king and his kinsman, ...our fate will be little lightened, but, on the contrary greatly aggravatated, by your stirring, Scott, Quent. Durw., Ch. XXVII, 354.
The Queen said ...: "We are this day fortunate --- we enjoy the company of our amiable hostess at an unusual hour. Id., Abbot, Ch. XXI, 225.
Note. This practice seems to have become unusual or extinct in the personal utterances of sovereigns to their audiences, having been preserved only in public instruments.
Thus King George V in his reply to the address of the Corporation of Bombay uses I, etc.:
You have rightly said that I am no stranger among you [etc.]. Times, No. 1823, 974b.
Similarly in his Address on the occasion of the opening of the Coronation Durbar:
It is with genuine feelings of thankfulness and satisfaction that I stand here to-day among you [etc.]. Id., No. 1824, 1001d.
But in the instrument announcing the fact that the seat of the Government of India will be transferred from Calcutta to Delhi, we find we, etc.: We are pleased to announce to Our People [etc.]. Ib.
20世紀初頭までに royal we は事実上消えていたことが確認できる．使われることがあるにせよ，公的法律文書における伝統的な用法としてであり，レジスターはきわめて限定されていたことがわかる．
・ Poutsma, H. A Grammar of Late Modern English. Part II, The Parts of Speech, 1B. Groningen, P. Noordhoff, 1916.
昨日の記事「#5697. royal we は「君主の we」ではなく「社会的不平等の複数形」？」 ([2024-12-01-1]) に引き続き「君主の we」 (royal_we) に注目する．術語としては "plural of majesty", "plural of inequality" なども用いられているが，いずれも1人称複数代名詞の同じ用法を指している．
Mustanoja (124) は，"plural of majesty" という用語を使いながら，ラテン語どころかギリシア語にまでさかのぼる用例の起源を示唆している．その上で，英語史における古い典型例として，中英語より「ヘンリー3世の宣言」での用例に言及していることに注目したい．
PLURAL OF MAJESTY. --- Another variety of the sociative plural (pluralis societatis) exists as the plural of majesty (pluralis majestatis), likewise characterised by the use of the pronoun of the first person plural for the first person singular. The plural of majesty originates in a living sovereign's habit of thinking of himself as an embodiment of the whole community. As the use of the plural becomes a mere convention, the original significance of this plurality tends to disappear. The plural of majesty is found in the imperial decrees of the later Roman Empire and in the letters of the early Roman bishops, but it can be traced to even earlier times, to Greek syntactical usage (cf. H. Zilliacus, Selbstgefühl und Servilität: Studien zum unregelmâssigen Numerusgebrauch im Griechischen, SSF-GHL XVIII, 3, Helsinki 1953). The plural of majesty is extensively used in medieval Latin. In OE it does not seem to be attested. OE royal charters, for example, have the singular (ic Offa þurh Cristes gyfe Myrcena kining; ic Æþelbald cincg, etc.). The plural of majesty begins to be used in ME. A typical ME example is the following quotation from the English proclamation of Henry III (18 Oct., 1258), a characteristic beginning of a royal charter: --- Henry, thurȝ Gode fultume king of Engleneloande, Lhoaverd on Yrloande, Duk on Normandi, on Aquitaine, and Eorl on Anjow, send igretinge to alle hise holde, ilærde ond ileawede, on Huntendoneschire: thæt witen ȝe alle þæt we willen and unnen þæt . . ..
引用中の "the English proclamation of Henry III (18 Oct., 1258)" （「ヘンリー3世の宣言」）での用例について，ナルホドと思いはする．しかし「#5696. royal we の古英語からの例？」 ([2024-11-30-1]) の最後の方で触れたように，この例ですら確実な royal we の用法かどうかは怪しいのである．この宣言の原文については「#2561. The Proclamation of Henry III」 ([2016-05-01-1]) を参照．
・ Mustanoja, T. F. A Middle English Syntax. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique, 1960.
数日間，「君主の we」 (royal_we) 周辺の問題について調べている．Jespersen に当たってみると「君主の we」ならぬ「社会的不平等の複数形」 ("the plural of social inequality") という用語が挙げられていた．2人称代名詞における，いわゆる "T/V distinction" (t/v_distinction) と関連づけて we を議論する際には，確かに便利な用語かもしれない．
4.13. Third, we have what might be called the plural of social inequality, by which one person either speaks of himself or addresses another person in the plural. We thus have in the first person the 'plural of majesty', by which kings and similarly exalted persons say we instead of I. The verbal form used with this we is the plural, but in the 'emphatic' pronoun with self a distinction is made between the normal plural ourselves and the half-singular ourself. Thus frequently in Sh, e.g. Hml I. 2.122 Be as our selfe in Denmarke | Mcb III. 1.46 We will keepe our selfe till supper time alone. (In R2 III. 2.127, where modern editions have ourselves, the folio has our selfe; but in R2 I. 1,16, F1 has our selues). Outside the plural of majesty, Sh has twice our selfe (Meas. II. 2.126, LL IV. 3.314) 'in general maxims' (Sh-lex.).
. . . .
In the second person the plural of social inequality becomes a plural of politeness or deference: ye, you instead of thou, thee; this has now become universal without regard to social position . . . .
The use of us instead of me in Scotland and Ireland (Murray D 188, Joyce Ir 81) and also in familiar speech elsewhere may have some connexion with the plural of social inequality, though its origin is not clear to me.
ベストな用語ではないかもしれないが，社会的不平等における「上」の方を指すのに「敬複数」 ("polite plural") などの術語はいかがだろうか．あるいは，これではやや綺麗すぎるかもしれないので，もっと身も蓋もなく「上位複数」など？ いや，一回りして，もっとも身も蓋もない術語として「君主複数」でよいのかもしれない．
・ Jespersen, Otto. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles. Part 2. Vol. 1. 2nd ed. Heidelberg: C. Winter's Universitätsbuchhandlung, 1922.
「君主の we」 (royal_we) について「#5284. 単数の we --- royal we, authorial we, editorial we」 ([2023-10-15-1]) や「#5692. royal we --- 君主は自身を I ではなく we と呼ぶ？」 ([2024-11-26-1]) の記事で取り上げてきた．
OED の記述によると，古英語に royal we の古い例とおぼしきものが散見されるが，いずれも真正な例かどうかの判断が難しいとされる．Mitchell の OES (§252) への参照があったので，そちらを当たってみた．
§252. There are also places where a single individual other than an author seems to use the first person plural. But in some of these at any rate the reference may be to more than one. Thus GK and OED take we in Beo 958 We þæt ellenweorc estum miclum, || feohtan fremedon as referring to Beowulf alone---the so-called 'plural of majesty'. But it is more probably a genuine plural; as Klaeber has it 'Beowulf generously includes his men.' Such examples as ÆCHom i. 418. 31 Witodlice we beorgað ðinre ylde: gehyrsuma urum bebodum . . . and ÆCHom i. 428. 20 Awurp ðone truwan ðines drycræftes, and gerece us ðine mægðe (where the Emperor Decius addresses Sixtus and St. Laurence respectively) may perhaps also have a plural reference; note that Decius uses the singular in ÆCHom i. 426. 4 Ic geseo . . . me . . . ic sweige . . . ic and that in § ii. 128. 6 Gehyrsumiað eadmodlice on eallum ðingum Augustine, þone ðe we eow to ealdre gesetton. . . . Se Ælmihtiga God þurh his gife eow gescylde and geunne me þæt ic mote eoweres geswinces wæstm on ðam ecan eðele geseon . . . , where Pope Gregory changes from we to ic, we may include his advisers. If any of these are accepted as examples of the 'plural of majesty', they pre-date that from the proclamation of Henry II (sic) quoted by Bøgholm (Jespersen Gram. Misc., p. 219). But in this too we may include advisers: þæt witen ge wel alle, þæt we willen and unnen þæt þæt ure ræadesmen alle, oþer þe moare dæl of heom þæt beoþ ichosen þurg us and þurg þæt loandes folk, on ure kyneriche, habbeþ idon . . . beo stedefæst.
ここでは royal we らしく解せる古英語の例がいくつか挙げられているが，確かにいずれも1人称複数の用例として解釈することも可能である．最後に付言されている初期中英語からの例にしても，royal we の用例だと確言できるわけではない．素直な1人称複数とも解釈し得るのだ．いつの間にか，文献学と社会歴史語用論の沼に誘われてしまった感がある．
ちなみに，上記引用中の "the proclamation of Henry II" は "the proclamation of Henry III" の誤りである．英語史上とても重要な「#2561. The Proclamation of Henry III」 ([2016-05-01-1]) を参照．
・ Mitchell, Bruce. Old English Syntax. 2 vols. New York: OUP, 1985.
「君主の we」 (royal_we) と称される伝統的な用法がある．王や女王が，自身1人のことを指して I ではなく we を用いるという特別な一人称代名詞の使い方である．この用法については「#5284. 単数の we --- royal we, authorial we, editorial we」 ([2023-10-15-1]) で OED を参照しつつ少々取り上げた．
この特殊用法について，Quirk et al. の §6.18 の Note [a] に次のような記述がある．
[a] The virtually obsolete 'royal we' (= I) is traditionally used by a monarch, as in the following examples, both famous dicta by Queen Victoria:
We are not interested in the possibilities of defeat. We are not amused.
Quirk et al. の §6.23 には，対応する再帰代名詞 ourself への言及もある．
There is also . . . a very rare 'royal we' singular reflexive pronoun ourself . . . .
次に Fowler の語法辞典を調べてみた．その we の項目に，royal we に関する記述があった (835) ．
4 The royal we. The OED gives examples from the OE period onward in which we is used by a single sovereign or ruler to refer to himself or herself. The custom seems to be dying out: in her formal speeches Queen Elizabeth II rarely if ever uses it now. (On royal tours when accompanied by the Duke of Edinburgh we is often used by the Queen to refer to them both; alternatively My husband and I.)
History of the term. The OED record begins with Lytton (1835): Noticed you the we---the style royal? Later examples: The writer uses 'we' throughout---rather unfortunately, as one is sometimes in doubt whether it is a sort of 'royal' plural, indicating only himself, or denotes himself and companions---N&Q 1931; 'In the absence of the accused we will continue with the trial.' He used the royal 'we', but spoke for us all---J. Rae, 1960. (The last two examples clearly overlap with those given in para 3.) It will be observed that the term 'the royal we' has come to be used in a weakened, transferred, or jocular manner. The best-known example came when Margaret Thatcher informed the world in 1989 that her daughter-in-law had given birth to a son: We have become a grandmother, the Prime Minister said. A less well-known American example: interviewed on a television programme in 1990 Vice-President Quayle, in reply to the interviewer's expression of hope that Quayle would join him again some time, replied We will.
なお，上の引用の中程に言及のある"para 3" では，indefinite we が扱われていることを付け加えておく．
・ Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman, 1985.
・ Burchfield, Robert, ed. Fowler's Modern English Usage. Rev. 3rd ed. Oxford: OUP, 1998.
昨今，英文法では「単数の they」 (singular_they) が話題に上ることが多いが，「単数の we」については聞いたことがあるだろうか．伝統的な英文法で "royal we", "authorial we", "editorial we" などとして知られてきた用法である．
OED, we, pron., n., adj. の I.2 に関係する2つの語義と例文が記されている．いずれも古英語から確認される（と議論しうる）古い用法である．最初期の数例とともに引用する．
I.2. Used by a single person to denote himself or herself.
I.2.a. Used by a sovereign or ruler. Frequently defined by the name or title added.
The apparent Old English instances of this use are uncertain, and may rather show an inclusive plural use of the pronoun; see further B. Mitchell Old Eng. Syntax (1985) §252.
OE Witodlice we beorgað þinre ylde, gehyrsuma urum bebodum & geoffra þam undeadlicum godum. (Ælfric, Catholic Homilies: 1st Series (Royal MS.) (1997) xxix. 420)
OE Beowulf maþelode..: 'We þæt ellenweorc estum miclum, feohtan fremedon.' (Beowulf (2008) 958)
1258 We hoaten all vre treowe in þe treowþe þet heo vs oȝen þet heo stedefesteliche healden and swerien. (Proclam. Henry III (Bodleian MS.) in Transactions of Philological Society 1880-1 (1883) *173 (Middle English Dictionary))
. . . .
I.2.b. Used by a speaker or writer, in order to secure an impersonal style and tone, or to avoid the obtrusive repetition of 'I'.
N.E.D. (1926) states: 'Regularly so used in editorial and unsigned articles in newspapers and other periodicals, where the writer is understood to be supported in his opinions and statements by the editorial staff collectively.' This practice has become less usual during the 20th cent. and is limited to self-conscious and humorous contexts.
eOE Nu hæbbe we scortlice gesæd ymbe Asia londgemæro. (translation of Orosius, History (British Library MS. Add.) (1980) i. i. 12)
OE We mihton þas halgan rædinge menigfealdlicor trahtnian. (Ælfric, Catholic Homilies: 1st Series (Royal MS.) (1997) xxxvi. 495)
?a1160 Nu we willen sægen sum del wat belamp on Stephnes kinges time. (Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (Laud MS.) (Peterborough contin.) anno 1137)
we の指示対象は何か，あるいは含意対象は何か，という問題になってくるだろう．この点では昨日の記事「#5283. we の総称的用法は古英語から」 ([2023-10-14-1]) で取り上げた we の用法に関する問題にもつながってくる．
今回取り上げた we の単数用法については，「#1126. ヨーロッパの主要言語における T/V distinction の起源」 ([2012-05-27-1])，「#3468. 人称とは何か？ (2)」 ([2018-10-25-1])，「#3480. 人称とは何か？ (3)」 ([2018-11-06-1]) でも少し触れているので参考まで．
Powered by WinChalow1.0rc4 based on chalow