army etiquette 1765 colonies North America

Forums: English, Grammar, Language
Email this Topic • Print this Page

I'm from Belgium and I've written a fictive story in Flemish. In this language we have personal pronoun 'U' (equivalent of French 'vous') to address persons higher in rank, formal, or very politely. Also 'je' (equivalent of French 'tu') to address persons in a familiar way. In English, however, these differences do not exist as such.
I have a conversation between a fictive royal governor and a captain: the governor uses 'je' towards the captain. I've written it as such because the topic of the conversation is a clandestine, informal mission proposed by the governor to the captain who at the same time is accused by the governor of all kinds of irregularities.
Someone made the remark to me that breaching such a form of etiquette would be enough reason for a duel. If the novel would have been written in English, the pronoun problem would of course not exist. But that is not the issue since it is a text written in Flemish.
I have questions :
- was etiquette in all its forms always observed in the army, or let's say between a royal governor and a captain? Or between a captain and his lieutenants? He, himself is always addressed with 'U' (formal, polite, respectful address)

- would it be plausible that a captain would address persons lower in rank with this familiar Flemish 'je' pronoun? Lieutenants? Soldiers? Convicts?
- if not, would it then be plausible when mutiny takes place (the captain versus the governor), the hierarchy (complete wilderness) dissolves... ?

I'm well aware that these questions are a little bit complicated because of the Flemish pronouns 'je' en 'U'.
I have googeled a lot to gain more insight to not much avail.

Thank you in advance for any detail that can help me to write this text in an acceptable way. The story is fictive, the setting in one of the colonies (I don't mention the colony. It is not relevant. But I'm thinking of a situation like Maryland and Pensylvania because of the landscape and the religious tolerance and the presence of convicts...), the time is 1765, two years after the English-French war.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Question • Score: 0 • Views: 883 • Replies: 2

No top replies

@manono,

You're right: since English doesn't have the same distinction between the formal and informal second person singular, these issues don't come up. I suggest, therefore, that, in this regard, you write as if the characters were Flemish or French. In other words, if a Flemish governor would address a Flemish captain as "je," then have your fictional governor address the fictional captain as "je."

1 Reply

@joefromchicago,

Thank you very much for your reply.

I would like to follow up your suggestion. But in the 18the century the Flemish territory was consequently governed by the Spanish Habsburgers (till 1713), then the Austrian Habsburgers and in the end by the French (1794?). How these foreign occupators communicated with the Flemish, I don't know. Around 1765 probably in French, since French was very much spoken in the royal courts.
I could adopt the French etiquette but in a way it isn't fair. I would like to know more about the English etiquette adapted to the unique situation in 1765 in a complete wilderness but not isolated from the smell of independance that hung in the air. That period is part of the 'Enlightment'. A lot of things changed, the people to deal with, were far from their homecountries, mixed, ... I suspect it is not the same situation as in Europe.

I have even gone as far as to let the convicts and common soldiers speak a mix of Flemisch dialects... to mark the difference in social class which was, I think, very distinctive in the 18th century and even in the 19th century.

But I will keep your suggestion in mind, thank you!

0 Replies

army etiquette 1765 colonies North America

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know