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.

[ ツイート | 固定リンク | 印刷用ページ ]