Volume 22, Issue 1
  • ISSN 1387-6759
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9897
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



This paper is the first contrastive study of impersonalization in Romanian and English. Taking an acceptability judgment approach, we describe the functional potential in all impersonal uses of not only the pronouns ‘one’, ‘you’ and ‘they’ but also the lesser studied passive. We find inter alia: a similar division of labor in the languages between ‘you’ and ‘they’ for contexts paraphrasable as, respectively, ‘everyone’ and ‘someone/some people’; a wider range of uses for pro-dropped ‘they’ than for its overt counterpart, as hypothesized in previous research; and a preference in English, but not Romanian, for passives to ‘they’ especially in contexts like ‘they’ve stolen my wallet!’, where the referent is entirely unidentifiable and likely to be singular. Levels of identifiability and number, each of which has been suggested in a separate semantic map as necessary for capturing impersonalization, are also shown to interact, supporting a proposal to combine them in one map.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Baayen, R. H.
    2008Analyzing Linguistic Data: A Practical Introduction to Statistics Using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511801686
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511801686 [Google Scholar]
  2. Bard, E. G., Robertson, D. and Sorace, A.
    1996 Magnitude Estimation of Linguistic Acceptability. Language72(10): 32–68. 10.2307/416793
    https://doi.org/10.2307/416793 [Google Scholar]
  3. Cabredo Hofherr, P.
    2006 “Arbitrary” Pro and the Theory of Pro-Drop. InAgreement and Arguments, P. Ackema, P. Brandt, M. Schoorlemmer and F. Weerman. (eds), 230–257. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Cojocaru, D.
    2003Romanian Grammar. Durham: Slavic and East European Language Research Center, Duke University.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Coussé, E. and van der Auwera, J.
    2012 Human Impersonal Pronouns in Swedish and Dutch: A Contrastive Study of Man and Men. Languages in Contrast12(2): 121–138. 10.1075/lic.12.2.01cou
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.12.2.01cou [Google Scholar]
  6. Creissels, D.
    2008aImpersonal and Related Constructions: A Typological Approach. Lyon: Lumière University Lyon 2.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. 2008bImpersonal Pronouns and Coreference: The Case of French On. Lyon: Lumière University Lyon 2.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. D’Alessandro, R.
    2007Impersonal Si Constructions: Agreement and Interpretation. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110207514
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110207514 [Google Scholar]
  9. Data-Bukowska, E.
    2018 The Third Person Plural Impersonal in Swedish: A Typological Account. Linguistica Copernicana15: 163–193. 10.12775/LinCop.2018.012
    https://doi.org/10.12775/LinCop.2018.012 [Google Scholar]
  10. De Hoop, H. and Tarenskeen, S.
    2015 It’s All about You in Dutch. Journal of Pragmatics88: 163–175. 10.1016/j.pragma.2014.07.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.07.001 [Google Scholar]
  11. Dobrovie-Sorin, C.
    1998 Impersonal Se Constructions in Romance and the Passivization of Unergatives. Linguistic Inquiry29(3): 399–437. 10.1162/002438998553806
    https://doi.org/10.1162/002438998553806 [Google Scholar]
  12. Fenger, P.
    2018 How Impersonal does One Get? A Study of Man-Pronouns in Germanic. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics21(3): 291–325. 10.1007/s10828‑018‑9101‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10828-018-9101-0 [Google Scholar]
  13. Fernández, S. S.
    2013 Impersonality in Spanish Personal Pronouns. InDeixis and Pronouns in Romance Languages, K. J. Kragh and J. Lindschouw. (eds), 87–107. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.136.06fer
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.136.06fer [Google Scholar]
  14. Fonesca-Greber, B. and Waugh, L. R.
    2003 On the Radical Difference between the Subject Personal Pronouns in Written and Spoken European French. InCorpus Analysis: Language Structure and Language Use, P. Leistyna and C. F. Meyer. (eds), 225–240. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 10.1163/9789004334410_013
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004334410_013 [Google Scholar]
  15. Gast, V.
    2015 On the Use of Translation Corpora in Contrastive Linguistics: A Case Study of Impersonalization in English and German. Languages in Contrast15(1): 4–33. 10.1075/lic.15.1.02gas
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.15.1.02gas [Google Scholar]
  16. Gast, V., Deringer, L., Haas, F. and Rudolf, O.
    2015 Impersonal Uses of the Second Person Singular: A Pragmatic Analysis of Generalization and Empathy Effects. Journal of Pragmatics88: 148–162. 10.1016/j.pragma.2014.12.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.12.009 [Google Scholar]
  17. Gast, V. and van der Auwera, J.
    2013 Towards a Distributional Typology of Human Impersonal Pronouns, Based on Data from European Languages. InLanguages Across Boundaries: Studies in the Memory of Anna Siewierska, D. Bakker and M. Haspelmath. (eds), 119–158. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110331127.119
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110331127.119 [Google Scholar]
  18. Giacalone Ramat, A. and Sansò, A.
    2007 The Spread and Decline of Indefinite Man-Constructions in European Languages: An Areal Perspective. InEurope and the Mediterranean Linguistic Areas: Convergences from a Historical and Typological Perspective, P. Ramat and E. Roma. (eds), 95–131. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.88.07gia
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.88.07gia [Google Scholar]
  19. Gönczöl-Davies, R.
    2008Romanian: An Essential Grammar. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Haas, F.
    2018a “You can’t Control a Thing like That”: Genre and Change in Modern English Human Impersonal Pronouns. InDiachronic Corpora, Genre and Language Change, R. J. Whitt. (ed.), 171–194. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.85.08haa
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.85.08haa [Google Scholar]
  21. 2018b Changing Human Impersonal Pronouns in English: A Corpus Study. Paper presented at theFifty-First Conference of the Societas Linguistica Europaea. Tallinn, Estonia, 30 August 2018.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Hall, D.
    2020 The Impersonal Gets Personal: A New Pronoun in Multicultural London English. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory38: 117–150. 10.1007/s11049‑019‑09447‑w
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-019-09447-w [Google Scholar]
  23. Jensen, T. J. and Gregerson, F.
    2016 What do(es) You Mean? The Pragmatics of Generic Second Person Pronouns in Modern Spoken Danish. Pragmatics26(3): 417–446. 10.1075/prag.26.3.04jen
    https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.26.3.04jen [Google Scholar]
  24. Kitagawa, C. and Lehrer, A.
    1990 Impersonal Uses of Personal Pronouns. Journal of Pragmatics14(5): 739–759. 10.1016/0378‑2166(90)90004‑W
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(90)90004-W [Google Scholar]
  25. Kluge, B.
    2016 Generic Uses of the Second Person Singular – How Speakers Deal with Referential Ambiguity and Misunderstanding. Pragmatics26(3): 501–522. 10.1075/prag.26.3.07klu
    https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.26.3.07klu [Google Scholar]
  26. Laberge, S. and Sankoff, G.
    1979 Anything You can Do. InDiscourse and Syntax, T. Givón. (ed.), 419–440. New York: Academic Press. 10.1163/9789004368897_018
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368897_018 [Google Scholar]
  27. Malamud, S.
    2012 Impersonal Indexicals: One, You, Man and Du. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics15: 1–48. 10.1007/s10828‑012‑9047‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10828-012-9047-6 [Google Scholar]
  28. Manea, C.
    2012 Remarks on the Passive Voice in English and Romanian. Studii de Gramatică Contrastivă18: 54–73.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Moltmann, F.
    2010 Generalizing Detached Self-Reference and the Semantics of Generic One. Mind & Language25(4): 440–473. 10.1111/j.1468‑0017.2010.01397.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0017.2010.01397.x [Google Scholar]
  30. Myhill, J.
    1997 Toward a Functional Typology of Agent Defocusing. Linguistics35(5): 799–844. 10.1515/ling.1997.35.5.799
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1997.35.5.799 [Google Scholar]
  31. O’Connor, P. E.
    1994 “You could Feel it through the Skin”: Agency and Positioning in Prisoners’ Stabbing Stories. Text14(1): 45–75. 10.1515/text.1.1994.14.1.45
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.1994.14.1.45 [Google Scholar]
  32. Pană Dindelegan, G.
    2008 Construcții pasive și construcții impersonale. InGramatica Limbii Române II: Enunțul, V. Guţu Romalo. (ed.), 133–147. Bucharest: Editura Academiei Române
    [Google Scholar]
  33. (ed.) 2013The Grammar of Romanian. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Posio, P. and Vilkuna, M.
    2013 Referential Dimensions of Human Impersonals in Dialectal European Portuguese and Finnish. Linguistics51(1): 177–229. 10.1515/ling‑2013‑0006
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2013-0006 [Google Scholar]
  35. Rasinger, S. M.
    2013Quantitative Research in Linguistics: An Introduction. London: Bloomsbury. 10.5040/9781350284883
    https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350284883 [Google Scholar]
  36. Rudolf, O.
    2016 Human Impersonal Strategies in English and Russian: A Comparative Corpus Study. PhD Thesis, University of Jena.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Sansò, A.
    2006 ‘Agent Defocusing’ Revisited: Passive and Impersonal Constructions in some European Languages. InPassivization and Typology: Form and Function, W. Abraham and L. Leisiö. (eds), 232–273. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.68.15san
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.68.15san [Google Scholar]
  38. Shibatani, M.
    1985 Passives and Related Constructions: A Prototype Analysis. Language61(4): 821–848. 10.2307/414491
    https://doi.org/10.2307/414491 [Google Scholar]
  39. Siewierska, A.
    2004Person. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511812729
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511812729 [Google Scholar]
  40. 2008 Ways of Impersonalizing: Pronominal vs. Verbal Strategies. InCurrent Trends in Contrastive Linguistics: Functional and Cognitive Perspectives, M. A. Gómez González, J. Lachlan Mackenzie and E. M. González Álvarez. (eds), 3–26. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/sfsl.60.03sie
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sfsl.60.03sie [Google Scholar]
  41. 2011 Overlap and Complementarity in Reference Impersonals: Man-Constructions vs. Third Person Plural-Impersonals in the Languages of Europe. InImpersonal Constructions: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective, A. Malchukov and A. Siewierska. (eds), 57–90. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.124.03sie
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.124.03sie [Google Scholar]
  42. Siewierska, A. and Papastathi, M.
    2011 Towards a Typology of Third Personal Plural Impersonals. Linguistics49(3): 575–610. 10.1515/ling.2011.018
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2011.018 [Google Scholar]
  43. Sprouse, J. and Almeida, D.
    2012 Assessing the Reliability of Textbook Data in Syntax: Adger’s Core Syntax. Journal of Linguistics48(3): 609–652. 10.1017/S0022226712000011
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226712000011 [Google Scholar]
  44. Stirling, L. and Manderson, L.
    2011 About You: Empathy, Objectivity and Authority. Journal of Pragmatics43(6): 1581–1602. 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.12.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.12.002 [Google Scholar]
  45. van der Auwera, J., Gast, V. and Vanderbiesen, J.
    2012 Human Impersonal Pronoun Uses in English, Dutch and German. Leuvense Bijdragen98: 27–64.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Van Olmen, D. and Breed, A.
    2018a Human Impersonal Pronouns in Afrikaans: A Double Questionnaire-Based Study. Language Sciences69: 1–29. 10.1016/j.langsci.2018.05.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2018.05.002 [Google Scholar]
  47. 2018b Human Impersonal Pronouns in West Germanic: A Questionnaire-Based Comparative Study of Afrikaans, Dutch and English. Studies in Language42(4): 798–846. 10.1075/sl.18036.van
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.18036.van [Google Scholar]
  48. Zifonun, G.
    2001Man lebt nur einmal: Morphosyntax und Semantik des Pronomens man. Deutsche Sprache38(3): 232–253.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): English/Romanian; impersonal; passive; pronoun; semantic map
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error