On Translating the Impersonal First-Person Plural

Abstract

This paper draws attention to the translation of a subset of impersonal constructions that has been called the reference impersonal. A Bible translator will encounter reference impersonals in the source text. In translation the target language may also require the use of impersonal constructions even when they are not present in the source text. The paper focuses on the reference impersonal first-person plural (1pl) in Magar Kham, a language spoken in mid-western Nepal, which tends to use the 1pl for a generic or referentially unspecified group of people. This impersonal 1pl often occurs in conjunction with the phrase mĩ-rə “man-pl.” Generally, the impersonal 1pl implies that the speaker identifies with the referent(s). The paper also demonstrates that though the reference impersonal 1pl and the personal 1pl both use the same pronoun and morphology per se, due to pragmatic constraints only the personal counterpart can occur in the singular.

Keywords

reference impersonal defocusing generic human reference first-person plural

1. Introduction

During the past several years, there has been considerable linguistic research into impersonal constructions, both in Indo-European languages and recently also in other language families. In the literature, the term “impersonal” has been used for a variety of constructions ranging from the lack of a grammatical subject (i.e., from a structural perspective) to vague or defocused reference (i.e., from a semantic perspective) (cf. Langacker 2006, 133–34; Siewierska 2008, 116; Fernández 2013, 89–90). Morphologically marked impersonals are also found in some languages (Payne 2011).

In an impersonal construction the addressee is non-deictic: the addressees are not (necessarily) engaged in the speech act.¹ Vague or defocused reference implies that the referent is only partially identifiable, for example, a generic human referent “humankind,” or an unspecified group of people, as in the case of a nation as a whole. Such constructions are also called “reference impersonals” or “R-impersonals” (Siewierska 2011). Context is crucial in determining what the correct referent is in any given situation (cf. Posio 2012; Nunberg 1993). For example, the 1pl pronoun in (1) is understood as “humankind,” and the 3pl pronoun in (2) implies the complete set of Finnish nationals (or, more generally, Finland as a country).

(1) We have misused the world’s resources.

(2) They have lakes in Finland.

It is the reference impersonal 1pl shown in (1) that will be considered in this paper. Section 2 will overview the reference impersonal in more detail and discuss two impersonal constructions found in the Taka variety of Magar Kham, a Tibeto-Burman (Central Himalayan) language spoken in the Eastern Rukum district of mid-western Nepal (ISO 639-3 kjl). Impersonal constructions in Ancient and Koine Greek will also be briefly mentioned. Section 3 will consider the translation of this type of impersonal in Magar Kham. Section 4 will look at the pragmatic restraints involved when converting an impersonal 1pl to a personal 1sg, using a translation of the Nicene Creed as a platform for discussion.

2. Linguistic preliminaries

2.1 Reference impersonals

Reference impersonals are used for defocusing or for reducing referentiality (Langacker 2006; Siewierska 2011). As shown in (1), the 1pl does not refer to the speaker and his or her immediate addressee(s), but to a wider group of referentially unspecified human beings. Along similar lines, Dixon (2009, 205) comments on Acehnese (Austronesian), where the 1pl inclusive pronoun is used in an impersonal sense for “general truths about human activity or behaviour.”

Of particular importance is the speaker’s identification with the referent(s). When a speaker uses an impersonal 1pl, she or he identifies with the set of possible referents. Conversely, when using a 3pl impersonal as in (2), the speaker excludes him- or herself from the group (cf. Siewierska 2004, 2011; Borthen 2010; Posio and Vilkuna 2013).

The distribution of reference impersonals in the world’s languages has not been fully determined, partly because language descriptions (especially of non-European languages) have not always paid attention to the feature (cf. Siewierska 2004, 211). Nevertheless, a widespread occurrence in the world’s languages has been reported (Kitagawa and Lehrer 1990; Siewierska 2008, 125; 2011, 68–69). These include the Tibeto-Burman rGyalrongic (cf. Sun 2005) and Kirãt languages, the latter of which belong to the same Central Himalayan branch of Tibeto-Burman as Magar Kham, which is described in the following section.

2.2 Impersonals in Magar Kham

Watters (2002, 166, 251) maintains that the Magar Kham impersonal passive functions as the equivalent of the English generic pronoun “one.” As shown in (3), the impersonal passive is formed by means of the detransitivising morpheme -si “dtrs” followed by imperfective morphology. Note that (Tibeto-Burman) rGyalrong also uses the detransitivising prefix sa- “dtrs” for the impersonal passive construction (Sun 2005). The passive syntax has demoted the agent and the logical patient is in focus.

(3) Magar Kham impersonal passive (Watters 2002, 251)
giddə	sjakəri	ma-kəi-si-i
vulture	meat	neg-eat-dtrs-impfv
“Vulture meat is not eaten.” (general truth)

However, in Magar Kham (3) can also be expressed in two other ways: either as a reference impersonal 1pl (4) or a reference impersonal 3pl (5). Note that there is a tendency for the word mĩ-rə “man-pl” to be used with a generic human referent (compare with kərⁿbjoʔ “person, human” in rGyalrong impersonals, Sun 2005; gente “people” in European Portuguese, Posio 2012).

(4)	ge	mĩ-ra-e	giddə	sjakəri	ge-ma-kəi-e
	1pl[pro]	man-pl-erg	vulture	meat	1pl[agt]-neg-eat-impfv
	“We people do not eat vulture meat.” (general truth)

(5)	mĩ-ra-e	giddə	sjakəri	ma-kəi-rə
	man-pl-erg	vulture	meat	neg-eat-3pl[agt]
	“People do not eat vulture meat.” (general truth)

The choice of 1pl or 3pl for the Magar Kham reference impersonal appears to be dependent on the speaker’s identification or association with the referent. In the generally accepted proposition (4), the speaker intentionally includes him- or herself among the referents. Conversely, in (5) the speaker either distances him- or herself from the referents or indicates indifference. This observation is aligned with Kuno and Kaburaki’s (1977, 628) concept of empathy: “Empathy is the speaker’s identification, with varying degrees . . . , with a person who participates in the event that he describes in a sentence.” In the same terms, Posio (2012) maintains that the 1pl is often used when “the speaker empathizes with the intended referent.”

Note also that Magar Kham permits 1pl or 3pl impersonal participants not only in the su/agt² position as above, but also in the do/pat position. Example (6) is the equivalent of “Saviour” in Magar Kham, which, due to the lack of an appropriate noun, resorts to a non-finite verb.

(6)	ge	mĩ-ra-lai	bãtsəi-zja-o
	1pl[pro]	man-pl-acc	save-cont-nml
	“(the one who) saves us people” (generic reference)

2.3 Impersonals in Ancient and Koine Greek

Impersonal constructions are found in both Ancient and Koine Greek with several impersonal verb types: weather verbs (such as βρέχω “to rain” in Jas 5.9), some modals (such as δεῖ “to be necessary”), and third-singular medio-passives (such as συνεφωνήθη “agreed” in Acts 5.9) (BDF; Porter 1994; Dahl 2013). Dahl (2013) describes these constructions from a structural perspective in that they have “no expressed or contextually retrievable subject argument” or have “an oblique subject-like argument not showing agreement with the verb form.”

Closer to the current topic of semantically defined reference impersonals are the grammaticalized 3pl forms in verba dicendi (verbs of speaking) such as λέγουσι or φασί “(they) say” (Dahl 2013; BDF). Furthermore, Dahl (2013) mentions that in Ancient Greek the 2sg can be used in the sense of the impersonal passive, akin to the English generic pronoun “one.” According to BDF (72, 147), due to the influence of Aramaic, it is more common in Koine Greek to find the 3pl used for the generic subject, sometimes in conjunction with οἱ ἄνθρωποι “people” (such as ποιῶσιν . . . οἱ ἄνθρωποι “men . . . do” in Luke 6.31).

3. Translation of the impersonal 1pl in Magar Kham

In addition to the impersonal constructions in Greek outlined in Section 2.3, it is not uncommon in the Greek New Testament to find the 1pl pronoun being used in a reference impersonal sense (with corresponding 1pl morphology).³ Consider, for example, the 1pl’s in the following examples from the Pauline and Johannine Epistles. In (7) the intended reference is to all Christians, and in (8) to all humankind.

(7) ἡ παρρησία ἣν ἔχομεν πρὸς αὐτὸν “the boldness we have in him” (1 John 5.14)

(8) πάντας ἡμᾶς φανερωθῆναι δεῖ ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ βήματος τοῦ Χριστοῦ “all of us must appear before the judgment seat of Christ” (2 Cor 5.10)

Cases such as (7)–(8) have been commented on in previous publications, sometimes in the context of the 1pl inclusive (Lofthouse 1955; Pickett 1964; Filbeck 1994; cf. also Wallace 1996; Porter 1994). Pickett (1964, 91–92) and Filbeck (1994, 406–8) find that in languages with a morphological inclusive–exclusive distinction, what is described in this paper as a reference impersonal is a generic extension of the 1pl inclusive. Distinguishing between the impersonal and the inclusive can indeed be difficult, as Posio (2012) also notes. In Magar Kham, however, unlike in the related Kirãt languages (cf. LaPolla 2003), there is no morphological inclusive–exclusive distinction, and thus the construction should be described in different terms.

Since Magar Kham uses the 1pl for impersonal reference, the translation of (7)–(8) is straightforward, as demonstrated in (9)–(10), respectively.

(9) Magar Kham translation of (7)
	o-ŋa̤-kə	ma-ts^he:-də	zə	ba-nja
	3sg[poss]-face-loc	neg-fear-cvb	Emph	go-inf
	ge-jũ	hup-nja	le
	1pl[poss]-heart	be_confident-inf	be
“our heart (which) goes without fear before him is confident”

(10) Magar Kham translation of (8)
	ge	bə̤ri	pa̤ĩ	tə-ts^ha	k^hris-e	o-ŋa̤-kə
	1pl[pro]	all	all	one-day	Christ-gen	3sg[poss]-face-loc
	tsjã̤:si-də		p^hal-si-u		pəri-ri-zja
	stand-cvb		judge-dtrs-nml		need-fut-cont
	“One day all of us need to stand before Christ to be judged”

However, consider (11)–(13) where there is no 1pl in the source text:

(11) τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ ἀνθρώπου τὸ ἐν αὐτῷ “the human spirit that is within” (1 Cor 2.11)

(12) μεσίτης θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπων “mediator between God and mankind” (1 Tim 2.5)

(13) κατὰ ἄνθρωπον “from daily life” (lit. “on the basis of a person”) (Gal 3.15)

In cases such as (11)–(13) where “people” or “human” is referred to in a generic sense, in Magar Kham there is a tendency to use the 1pl in conjunction with the phrase mĩ-rə “man-pl” (14)–(16).

(14) Magar Kham translation of (11)
ge	mĩ-rə	bə	ge-kjã-ta-o	purus-e
1pl[pro]	man-pl	also	1pl[poss]-body-es-nml	spirit-erg
“As is with us people, (the) spirit (which is) in our bodies . . .”

(15) Magar Kham translation of (12)
ge	mĩ-ra-lai	pərmeswor-sə	sə-k^həi-nja	ge-tjala
1pl[pro]	man-pl-acc	God-asc	trs-be_reconciled-inf	1pl[poss]-mediator
“(the) mediator (who) reconciles us people with God”

(16) Magar Kham translation of (13)
ge	mĩ-ra-e	ge-tsələn-ni
1pl[pro]	man-pl-gen	1pl[poss]-habit/custom-abl
“according to (the) habit/custom of us people”

As noted in Section 2.2, the speaker’s identification with the referent is one of the key factors motivating the use of the 1pl versus the 3pl in Magar Kham. In (14)–(16) the speaker is included in the set of unspecified 1pl referents. Conversely, the speaker may exclude him- or herself from the referents, or distance or disengage him- or herself from the proposition by using the 3pl instead of the 1pl. For example, in (18) the disengagement is necessary due to the final judgement mentioned in the last clause of the same verse (19)–(20).

(17) ἕκαστος δὲ πειράζεται ὑπὸ τῆς ἰδίας ἐπιθυμίας ἐξελκόμενος καὶ δελεαζόμενος· εἶτα ἡ ἐπιθυμία συλλαβοῦσα τίκτει ἁμαρτίαν “But one is tempted by one’s own desire, being lured and enticed by it; then, when that desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin” (Jas 1.14-15a)

(18) Magar Kham translation of Jas 1.15a
nə-ni	zə	ja-jũ-la-o	ma-tsao	pã-e
that-abl	emph	3pl-heart-in-nml	neg-good	thing-erg
ma-tsao	je̤n	bə	dzərməi-zja-o
neg-good	work	also	give_birth-cont-3sg[agt]
“By means of that, the evil thing in their heart also gives birth to an evil deed”

(19) ἡ δὲ ἁμαρτία ἀποτελεσθεῖσα ἀποκύει θάνατον “and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death” (Jas 1.15b)

(20) Magar Kham translation of (19)
nəkin	no	ma-tsao	je̤n	o-jo:-wo-tə
then	that	neg-good	work	3sg[agt]-be_fulfilled-nml-es
si-nja	sədza-lə		dza̤:-wo	do-zja-o
die-inf	punishment-in		put-nml	aux[caus]-cont-3sg[agt]
“then after that evil deed is fulfilled, it puts (them) into the punishment of death”

A second example where the context restricts the use of the impersonal 1pl is 2 Cor 5.19. In the Greek of 2 Cor 5.1-10, Paul uses an impersonal 1pl in general reference to believers, that is, those who have been given “the Spirit as a guarantee” (v. 5). However, in 2 Cor 5.19 (as in vv. 11-14), the 1pl refers in an exclusive sense to either Paul alone, or to Paul and his close associates and/or the other apostles. Thus, though κόσμος “world” in (21) would be expressed naturally in Magar Kham by means of the impersonal phrase ge mĩ-rə “we people,” the translation necessarily resorts to the 3pl (22).

(21) ὡς ὅτι θεὸς ἦν ἐν Χριστῷ κόσμον καταλλάσσων ἑαυτῷ, μὴ λογιζόμενος αὐτοῖς τὰ παραπτώματα αὐτῶν καὶ θέμενος ἐν ἡμῖν τὸν λόγον τῆς καταλλαγῆς “that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting the message of reconciliation to us” (2 Cor 5.19)

(22) Magar Kham translation of (21)
pərmeswor	k^hris-ni		hu-də
God	Christ-instr		come-cvb
ao	manuwa-ta-o	mĩ-ra-lai	ja-pap-rə
this	world-es-nml	people-pl-acc	3pl[poss]-sin-pl
tsiu:-də	ma-ja-də
look-cvb	neg-ben-cvb
ol-sə	ja-sə-k^həi-hu-kj-o
3sg[pro]-asc	3pl[pat]-trs-be_reconciled-come-prf-3sg[ag]
“God, by (means of) Christ coming, not looking at their sins, he reconciled the people of this world with himself.”
no	pã	sə-t^həi-nja	p^həri
that	word	trs-hear-inf	again
ol	pərmeswor	zə	ge-lai
3sg[pro]	God	emph	1pl[pro]-acc
dzəi-də	nəi-si-u
make-cvb	aux[prf]-1pl[pat]-nml
“As for proclaiming that word, (it was) God himself (who) appointed us.”

4. Testing the boundaries

An interesting feature of an impersonal 1pl is that the 1pl can be changed to a (personal) 1sg morpho-syntactically, but pragmatically it cannot (necessarily) be. Hence, (24) below is grammatically correct, but at the same time, it is somewhat odd because it lacks the global aspect of the proposition evident in (23). Interestingly, in some languages impersonal constructions have been found to avoid stating the responsibility of a singular referent (cf. Langacker 2006, 134–35; Givón 2001, 323–24).

(23) We have misused the world’s resources. (reference to the human race)

(24) (?) I have misused the world’s resources.

Attempting to translate the Nicene Creed into both 1pl and 1sg formulas provides a useful platform for testing this observation. The Nicene Creed has not been available in Magar Kham, and it was translated for this paper for theoretical purposes.

Unlike the Apostles’ Creed, the Nicene Creed, as a primarily conciliar symbol of faith, is generally considered to be a confession made by the church as a unified entity (WCC 1991, 15; Kelly 1999, 256), and thus originally it was developed in the 1pl (25).

(25) Πιστεύομεν “We believe”

Note that the creed also contains an overt impersonal 1pl which refers to humanity in general (26).

(26) δι’ ἡμᾶς τοὺς ἀνθρώπους καὶ διὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν σωτηρίαν “for us people and for our salvation”

The 1pl’s in (25) and (26) are impersonal. In (25), the speaker identifies him- or herself with the members of the group who are also citing the creed (cf. “mass speaking” in Mühlhäusler and Harré 1990, 201–5), and also all members of the Christian church in a global sense who confess to the content of the creed. In (26), the 1pl refers to humankind.

Translating the 1pl into Magar Kham in (25) along the lines described in Section 2.2 is straightforward (27). Furthermore, the Greek ἡμᾶς τοὺς ἀνθρώπους “we people” is akin to the Magar Kham construction for generic human reference demonstrated in (14)–(16), and hence translating the 1pl in (26) in this context is also unproblematic (28). (Note, however, that the 3pl in the subordinate clause in (28) is coreferential with 1pl in the main clause.)

(27) Proposed Magar Kham translation of (25)
ge	ge-jũ	hub-o	zə	li-zja
1pl[pro]	1pl[poss]-heart	be_confident-nml	emph	be-cont
“Our heart is confident”

(28) Proposed Magar Kham translation of (26)
ge	mĩ-ra-lai	tsao	ta-nja-e	dzũni
1pl[pro]	man-pl-acc	good	become-inf-gen	for_the_sake of
“So that good would come to us people,”
o-bãtsi-rə-kə		li-də
dum-be_saved-3pl-opt		be-cvb(compl) ~ ‘saying’
“(and so that) they may be saved” (= co-referential with the 1pl of the main clause)

However, there are cases where the Magar Kham translation would need to add further impersonal 1pl’s. For example, in the beginning of Article III of the creed, an impersonal 1pl is required to overtly state the scope of the Holy Spirit’s rule. Therefore, the translation would render τὸ Κύριον in (29) as ge-ŋə̤j-ta-o (1pl-head-es-nml) which is, literally, “(the one) over our heads” (30). Likewise, in the translation of τὸ ζῳοποιόν which follows in the creed (31), it is also necessary to state the beneficiaries of the life given by the Holy Spirit, hence the impersonal 1pl in (32).

(29) Καὶ εἰς τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ Ἅγιον, τὸ Κύριον “And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord”

(30) Proposed Magar Kham translation of (29)
ts^hə̃jwo	purus-lai	bə	ge-jũ	hub-o
pure	spirit-acc	also	1pl[poss]-heart	be_confident-nml
zə	li-zja
emph	be-cont
“Our heart is also confident about/in the Pure Spirit.”
ol	ge-ŋə̤j-ta-o		zə
3sg[pro]	1pl[poss]-head-es-nml		emph
“He (is the one who) rules (over) us.”

(31) τὸ ζῳοποιόν “the giver of life”

(32) Proposed Magar Kham translation of (31)
ge-lai	dzuni	ja-zja-o	bə	ol	zə
1pl[pro]-acc	life	give-cont-nml	also	3sg[pro]	emph
“(It is) also he (who) gives life to us.”

This said, though the original Greek version of the Nicene Creed is in 1pl, its Latin translation has also had a 1sg formula as a baptismal confession since the sixth century A.D. Thus, in Latin, there is a long-standing tradition for two formulas: the 1pl Credimus “We believe” (Pelikan and Hotchkiss 2003, 158–63), and the 1sg Credo “I believe” (e.g., Missale Romanum, 3rd edition, 2002).

If the Nicene Creed is translated into Magar Kham with the 1sg in accordance with the Latin singular tradition, the 1pl in (27) could be rendered as 1sg (33). However, the impersonal reference in (30) and (32) must remain in the 1pl, because it would sound unnaturally individualistic in the 1sg. Thus, in (35) both the 1sg and the 1pl are present.

(33) Proposed Magar Kham translation of (25) in the 1sg formula
ŋa	ŋa-jũ	hub-o	zə	li-zja
1sg[pro]	1sg[poss]-heart	be_confident-nml	emph	be-cont
“My heart is confident”

(34) Καὶ εἰς τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ Ἅγιον, τὸ Κύριον, τὸ ζῳοποιόν “And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of life”

(35) Proposed Magar Kham translation of (34) in the 1sg formula
ts^hə̃jwo	purus-lai	bə	ŋa-jũ	hub-o	zə	li-zja
pure	spirit-acc	also	1sg[poss]-heart	be_confident-nml	emph	be-cont
“My heart is also confident about/in the Pure Spirit.”
ol	ge-ŋə̤j-ta-o			zə
3sg[pro]	1pl[poss]-head-es-nml			emph
“He (is the one who) rules (over) us.”
ge-lai	dzuni	ja-zja-o	bə	ol	zə
1pl[pro]-acc	life	give-cont-nml	also	3sg[pro]	emph
“(It is) also he (who) gives life to us.”

5. Summary

The purpose of this paper has been to discuss the translation of reference impersonals. Particular attention has been given to the reference impersonal 1pl where the reference in the 1pl is vague or defocused: “we” in reference to a non-deictic, loosely defined group of people.

Two impersonal constructions have been identified in Magar Kham. The first is the impersonal passive described by Watters (2002), the second is the reference impersonal described in this paper. The paper maintains that there is a tendency for a speaker to use the impersonal 1pl when she or he identifies with the referent. Conversely, if the speaker wishes to distance or disengage him- or herself from the referent, the speaker is more likely to use the 3pl.

This necessarily has a bearing on translation. The Greek text of the New Testament itself contains overt reference impersonal 1pls. The paper demonstrates cases in Magar Kham where the language requires the addition of further reference impersonals in the translation.

Finally, the pragmatics of the impersonal 1pl are tested by translating the Nicene Creed into Magar Kham in both 1pl and 1sg formulas. It was found that while the personal 1pl can be substituted by the 1sg, the impersonal 1pl cannot.⁴

Footnotes

ORCID iD

Christopher P. Wilde

1.

The relationship of impersonal constructions to the inclusive/exclusive 1PL distinction found in some languages is discussed in Section 3.

2.

Grammatical abbreviations, found in small capitals, are explained at the end of this article.

3.

The Greek text of the New Testament in this section is taken from UBS4. English translations follow NRSV. Where necessary, more literal renderings are offered in brackets following the NRSV translation. The Magar Kham translations follow MK1985 and MK2016. All Magar Kham examples have been transcribed following the IPA (International Phonetic Alphabet) conventions.

4.

I would like to extend thanks to Jagesar Gharti Magar and Chhimi Pun for their assistance during the study of their Magar Kham language, and the translation of the Nicene Creed into Magar Kham. I am also grateful to Esteban Voth, Seppo Sipilä, and two anonymous reviewers for valuable comments they offered on earlier versions of this paper. I am solely responsible for any remaining mistakes and shortcomings.

Grammatical abbreviations

1 first person

3 third person

abl ablative

acc accusative

agt agent

asc associative

aux auxiliary

ben benefactor

caus causative

compl complement

cont continuous aspect

cvb converb

dat dative

do direct object

dtrs detransitiviser

dum dummy prefix

emph emphatic

erg ergative

es essive

gen genitive

impfv imperfective aspect

in inessive

inf infinitive

instr instrumental

loc locative

neg negative

nml nominal

opt optative

pat patient

pl plural

poss possessive

pro pronoun

sg singular

su subject

trs transitiviser

Other abbreviations

BDF (in References)

MK1985 Magar Kham: New Testament (1985)

MK2016 Magar Kham: New Testament (2016)

NRSV New Revised Standard Version

UBS4 UBS Greek New Testament, 4th edition

WCC World Council of Churches

References

Blass

Friedrich

Debrunner

Albert

. 1961. A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Translated and revised by Funk

Robert W.

. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Borthen

Kaja

. 2010. “On How We Interpret Plural Pronouns.” Journal of Pragmatics 42: 1799–1815.

Dahl

Eystein

. 2013. “Impersonal Verbs/Constructions.” In Encyclopedia of Ancient Greek Language and Linguistics. Edited by Giannakis

Georgios K.

. Online Edition. Brill.

Dixon

Robert M. W.

2009. Basic Linguistic Theory: Grammatical Topics. Vol. 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Fernández

Susana S.

2013. “Impersonality in Spanish Personal Pronouns.” Pages 87–107 in Deixis and Pronouns in Romance Languages. Edited by Kragh

Kirsten Jeppesen

Lindschouw

Jan

. Studies in Language Companion Series 136. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Filbeck

David

. 1994. “Problems in Translating First Person Plural Pronouns in 2 Corinthians.” The Bible Translator 45(4): 401–9.

Givón

Talmy

. 2001. Syntax: An Introduction. Vol. 2. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Kelly

John N. D.

1999. Early Christian Creeds. 3rd edition. Harlow: Longman.

Kitagawa

Chisato

Lehrer

Adrienne

. 1990. “Impersonal Uses of Personal Pronouns.” Journal of Pragmatics 14: 739–59.

10.

Kuno

Susumu

Kaburaki

Etsuko

. 1977. “Empathy and Syntax.” Linguistic Inquiry 8(4): 627–72.

11.

Langacker

Ronald W.

2006. “Dimensions of Defocusing.” Pages 115–37 in Voice and Grammatical Relations. Edited by Tsunoda

Tasaku

Kageyama

Taro

. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

12.

LaPolla

Randy.

2003. “The Inclusive–Exclusive Distinction in Tibeto-Burman Languages.” Paper presented at the 36th International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics, La Trobe University, Melbourne, November 28, 2003.

13.

Lofthouse

W. F.

1955. “‘I’ and ‘We’ in the Pauline Letters.” The Bible Translator 6(2): 72–80.

14.

Mühlhäusler

Peter

Harré

Rom

. 1990. Pronouns and People: The Linguistic Construction of Social and Personal Identity. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

15.

Nunberg

Geoffrey

. 1993. “Indexicality and Deixis.” Linguistics and Philosophy 16(1): 1–43.

16.

Payne

Doris L.

2011. “The Maa (Eastern Nilotic) Impersonal Construction.” Pages 257–84 in Impersonal Constructions: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Edited by Malchukov

Andrej

Siewierska

Anna

. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

17.

Pelikan

Jaroslav

Hotchkiss

Valerie

. 2003. Creeds and Confessions of Faith in the Christian Tradition. Vol. 1. Rules of Faith in the Early Church; Eastern Orthodox Affirmations of Faith; Medieval Western Statements of Faith. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

18.

Pickett

Velma B.

1964. “Those Problem Pronouns: We, Us and Our in the New Testament.” The Bible Translator 15(2): 88–92.

19.

Porter

Stanley E.

1994. Idioms of the Greek New Testament. Biblical Languages: Greek. 2nd edition. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.

20.

Posio

Pekka

. 2012. “Who Are ‘Weʼ in Spoken Peninsular Spanish and European Portuguese? Expression and Reference of First Person Plural Subjects.” Language Sciences 34(3): 339–60.

21.

Posio

Pekka

Vilkuna

Maria

. 2013. “Referential Dimensions of Human Impersonals in Dialectal European Portuguese and Finnish.” Linguistics 51(1): 177–229.

22.

Siewierska

Anna

. 2004. Person. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

23.

Siewierska

Anna

. 2008. “Impersonalization from a Subject-Centred Vs. Agent-Centred Perspective.” Transactions of the Philological Society, 106(2): 115–37.

24.

Siewierska

Anna

. 2011. “Overlap and Complementarity in Reference Impersonals: Man-Constructions Vs. Third Person Plural-Impersonals in the Languages of Europe.” Pages 57–89 in Impersonal Constructions: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Edited by Malchukov

Andrej

Siewierska

Anna

. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

25.

Sun

Jackson Tianshin

. 2005. “Linguistic Coding of General Human Arguments in rGyalrongic Languages.” Paper presented at the 11th Himalayan Languages Symposium, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, December 6–9, 2005.

26.

Wallace

Daniel B.

1996. Greek Grammar beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.

27.

Watters

David E.

2002. A Grammar of Kham. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

28.

World Council of Churches. 1991. Confessing the One Faith: An Ecumenical Explication of the Apostolic Faith as It Is Confessed in the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed. Faith and Order 153. Geneva: WCC Publications.