Generic-you Research Articles

Perspectival biscuits

This paper describes a novel class of biscuit conditional, the 'perspectival biscuit', which arises when an if-clause containing a generic pronoun (e.g., generic you) is used to shift perspective for the interpretation of a perspective-sensitive item in the consequent: e.g., fixing the directionality of behind in "If you're at the door, the cat is behind the desk." This sentence is like a biscuit conditional in that it entails a fully-specified, propositionally stable consequent describing the spatial configuration of cat and desk, but this reading vanishes in favor of a conditional dependence reading when the antecedent contains any non-generic DP, a prediction that is not straightforwardly accounted for by existing theories of biscuit conditionals. An analysis is given demonstrating that biscuithood for perspectival biscuits arises due to generic quantification exclusively over individuals, not worlds.

Critical Thinking (Dis)Positions in Education for Sustainable Development—A Positioning Theory Perspective

In a threatened world, the need for pathways to sustainability has become urgent. Teachers have a significant role in using critical thinking (CT) as an integrated aspect of education for sustainable development (ESD). As part of the Critical Thinking in Sustainability Education (CriThiSE) project, this paper explores how primary school teachers positioned themselves with regard to CT in ESD during group interviews. Among the findings derived through critical discourse analysis, “otherness” positions were identified in teachers’ discourse. These positions were interpreted via positioning theory (PT) as part of the critical discourse analysis while tracing personal pronouns. Here, different positions were identified through the use of the pronouns they, theirs and the generic you, suggesting that otherness reflects a tendency to “care about” (CT disposition). Another finding was that the teachers’ collective positions, through the pronouns such as we, us, they, theirs, ours and the generic you, might suggest an implicatory denial embedded in the sociocultural perspective in relation to sustainability. From the ESD perspective, the findings highlight that CT is more than a matter of skills. The study highlights the importance of taking into account teachers’ CT dispositions as an important consideration to better understand teachers’ engagement with CT in ESD.

'Tú' genérico en el español de la Ciudad de México

The purpose of this paper is to describe the use of generic you in the Spanish of Mexico City. A sociolinguistic study of the distribution of this pronominal subject is carried out. For this purpose, speech samples from two moments are analyzed, the first around 1970 and the second circa 2000. The results suggest that, on the one hand, generic you is used more and more frequently in Mexican Spanish and that there are more speakers who resort to their employment. On the other hand, the contexts of use of generic you have also been extended, because, although it occurs mainly with verbs in the present, it is also documented, to a lesser extent, in other contexts even with verbs in perfective aspect.

That’s how “you” do it: Generic you expresses norms during early childhood

Prior research indicates that children construe norms as general and construe preferences as individual. The current studies tested whether this expectation is built into how children interpret and use language. We focused on the pronoun you, which is ambiguous between a canonical interpretation (referring to the addressee) and a generic interpretation (referring to people in general). In Study 1, children (N=132, ages 3–10years) were asked a series of questions containing “you,” referring to either descriptive norms (e.g., “What do you do with bikes?”) or preferences (e.g., “What do you like to do with bikes?”). In Study 2, parents conversed with their children (N=28, ages 2–4years) about prescriptive norms (e.g., “What should you do with books?”) and preferences (e.g., “What do you like about books?”). In both studies, children’s choice of pronoun in their answer revealed whether they interpreted you in the questions as generic or canonical. Results indicated that children more often interpreted you as generic in the normative contexts (i.e., responded with generic you, e.g., “You read them”) and as canonical in the preference contexts (i.e., responded with I, e.g., “I read them”). This pattern emerged by early preschool, providing the first evidence that the distinction between norms and preferences directs young children’s interpretation and use of everyday language.

Impersonal and generic reference: a cross-linguistic look at Finnish and English narratives

In linguistic communication, in addition to referring to specific, known referents, we also need to deal with unknown, generic or non-specific referents. I investigated how the English generic you and impersonal they compare to the Finnish zero person construction and impersonal passive, respectively. In the first part of this paper, I compare the semantic, pragmatic and syntactic properties of these constructions, using examples from a range of sources. In the second part of this paper, I investigate how English generic you and impersonal they are translated into Finnish. As we will see, the differences in the semantic, pragmatic and syntactic properties of these constructions mean that the translator sometimes has to opt for alternative constructions (such as first person expressions or generic nouns). A detailed analysis of these patterns sheds light on our understanding of these typologically different constructions, and contributes to our understanding of how reference to generic and impersonal entities is accomplished in language.