• Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    111
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    First person: Talking about oneself. I, me. Second person: talking about the listener. you, your. Third person: talking about someone who is not the speaker or listener. He/she/it/they Fourth person: Talking about total bullshit.

    In this context, “Chat” is second-person plural, used by streamers to address the portion of their audience able to respond in the text chat that always accompanies these things. It does contrast with how a radio personality might address “listeners” because radio listeners don’t usually have a method to respond in real time, so it’s usually a rhetorical question; a streamer addressing the chat is asking for a response.

    • shneancy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      i saw someone argue for chat being a 4th person pronoun because it breaks the 4th wall usually seen in mass broadcast media, there’s still a degree of interaction that isn’t there on live TV, so “chat is this real” prompts a direct response from a unified mass of people, there’s a conversation happening through the 4th wall basically

      the other person explained it better lol

      • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        11 months ago

        Eh, I don’t think that holds up.

        I might buy the 4th person as “someone outside your continuum or reality,” but I’ve yet to see a language construct specifically for that. Fictional characters invariably use second or third person to refer to the audience outside their world.

        Streamers talking with their chat audience aren’t fictional or otherworldly though. I don’t see a linguistic difference between a streamer asking the chat what game he should play next, to Bob Saget saying “Home viewers, if you have a funny home video, send the tape to the address on your screen for a chance at appearing on our show!” It’s a communique addressing a large scattered audience through audio/video telephony soliciting a reply. The only real difference is round-trip latency.

        While I think the phenomenon of live streaming and their audiences is interesting and presents a fairly new experience, I don’t know if it’s “we’re inventing new pronoun tenses over here.”

        • shneancy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          it’s not my personal opinion and i can’t give it justice in trying to defend it, but i did think it was an interesting addition to the original so i (poorly) regurgitated it here

  • lugal@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    101
    ·
    11 months ago

    There are languages with a 4th person pronoun. The 3rd person is kind of the main character and the 4th someone else. That helps to disambiguate sentences like “The criminal shot the cop and drove away on his (own or the cop’s) bike”.

    Or the “gay fanfiction problem”: “He looked at him and lay his hands on his lap”. Is it a happy ending or a sad one? That’s one theory why gender in pronouns is so resilient: more often than not, the gendered pronoun can disambiguate which person is talked about. It doesn’t always work, a 3rd/4rd person distinction is superior.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      You can have an alternate third person pronoun I suppose in order to distinguish two third person individuals, but that doesn’t mean there’s a fourth person pronoun. The general definition is:

      • first person - the speaker
      • second person - the audience, whether present or not present
      • third person - someone or something other than the audience

      So things like “chat” and “breaking the fourth wall” are second person pronouns. There is no fourth person pronoun, because anything other than first and second is covered under third person.

    • prayer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      43
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      11 months ago

      It speaks to a person that isn’t physically present and just an observer. “You” typically addresses someone directly, but can be used to break the 4th wall and talk to observers. “Chat” is exclusively for breaking the 4th wall.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        55
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Nah, “chat” is talking to a specific, present group of people, and is used in lieu of writing a text chat. It’s not like a film actor speaking to the audience, who has no way of responding. Even so, any terms used in breaking the fourth wall would still be second person, ability to respond and presence aren’t a requirement here (e.g. you’d use “you” in letters, and the reader is absolutely not present).

      • User_4272894@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        You are wrong on both counts.

        I just addressed “you”, even though you’re not physically present, so clearly that’s not a requirement of second person usage, not to mention that presumably this child saying “chat” is being heard by people physically nearby in this example.

        In order to break the fourth wall, the speaker must be part of the media. In the instance of streamers talking to their fans, it’s clearly meant to be an interactive experience between streamer and host, consuming the same media (albeit in different ways). They’re asking a question and getting a response which informs their actions.

        Fundamentally, it’s no different than when my wife asks “did that wizard just cast fireball?” while she sits on the couch watching me playing Skyrim.

      • korfuri@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        I don’t think it’s accurate to call the barrier between a streamer and their audience “the fourth wall”. The fourth wall is a concept that exists in theater, and then more largely in fiction, where characters exist in a world where they do not know that they’re characters in a story. And the fourth wall breaks when they realize that they are.

        If “chat” breaks the fourth wall, then self-help books that use “you” are too, or news anchors addressing their viewers, or politicians saying “my fellow countrymen” in a broadcast address.

      • SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Now that is an interesting distinction to make. I suppose that the 4th wall didn’t exist throughout most of history (with the exception of theatre) and so there wasn’t much reason for this feature of language to develop

      • lad
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        In this regard that would rather be 2.5 plural, kind of present, but kind of not

  • Troy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    76
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Is it really that different than saying “Audience”? Or radio shows referring to “listeners”? Etc.

  • Alien Nathan Edward@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    69
    ·
    11 months ago

    it’s definitely 2nd person collective in its original usage and outside of its original usage it’s not a pronoun because it doesn’t replace a noun.

    • milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      11 months ago

      I don’t think it’s a pronoun at all. It’s a collective noun, and a term of address.

      “Ladies and Gentlemen” is also not a pronoun.

  • SuperDuper@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    80
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    First person = someone describing their own point of view (ex: I, me)

    Second person = someone being addressed (ex: you, y’all)

    Third person = someone talking about someone else (ex: they, them)

    Fourth person = the point of view of a collective group (ex: we, us)

    • Rolando@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      102
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I can’t tell if you’re making a joke or not, but when I learned it “we” was first person plural. Likewise “y’all” was second person plural, etc.

      • SuperDuper@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        The difference is that we as a first person plural is generally used for a more discrete group of people, but still from the perspective of a single narrator. Fourth person we is generally used for a collective of people with a shared perspective; there is no single narrator that is separate from the collective group, the entire group is there narrator. Fourth person is a concept that has only recently begun to be recognized as a distinct point of view.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Fourth person

      Doesn’t exist. We/us is first person plural. Some languages have a little complexity here (e.g. Tagalog has “kami” which means “we without you” and “tayo” which means “we with you,” but they’re both still first person plurals).

      • first person - speaker
      • second person - audience excluding speaker
      • third person - everything else
      • SuperDuper@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        Some linguists disagree and have recently begun accepting the existence of a fourth person point of view. Languages evolve, and I guess we’ll just have to see if it catches on and becomes more widely accepted in the future.

  • PatFusty@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    65
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    I usually say “smash that like button” but ill throw in “chat” in the future to stay relevant with these kids.

    Smash that like button if you agree with me chat

    • hansl@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      But the collective that excludes yourself. It’s like a “we without me”, which is also not the plural you.

      • orangeboats@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        11 months ago

        Exclusive we is actually found in many languages, but usually it’s the listener who is excluded. Malay kita “we” includes the listener, kami excludes the listener.

        • Teodomo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          11 months ago

          Yes we have vosotros (in Spain) or ustedes (in the rest of the Spanish-speaking world -can’t speak for Equatorial Guinea though). But we don’t call it a 4th person pronoun. It’s just the plural form of the 2nd person pronoun:

          1st singular: I / yo

          1st plural: we / nosotros

          2nd singular: you / tú, vos, usted if you wanna be formal

          2nd plural: plural you, y’all / ustedes, vosotros

          3rd singular: she, he, singular they / ella, él, elle (that last one mostly used among the young queer/progressive community in some countries)

          3rd plural: they / ellos, ellas, elles (same above)

          Don’t know what a 4th person pronoun would be. And I’m a Spanish teacher in South America lol

          • lad
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            Otoh, in Spain if you say Usted or Ustedes they’ll think you’re a dork

      • The Picard Maneuver@startrek.websiteOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        61
        ·
        11 months ago

        I also remember reading a tweet where someone said their young kid would whisper “like and subscribe” at bedtime like it was part of saying “goodbye”.

        It’s bizarre.

        • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          47
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          My daughter, 8, wanted to send a birthday message to her grandma. We made the video, she sang happy birthday, and said “like and subscribe” at the end.

          We did a second take without it.

          • EmptySlime@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            My son is autistic and used to say “Like and Subscribe” to things he liked, and “Dislike and Unsubscribe” to things he didn’t. He watched a lot of YouTube when he was little because his late father couldn’t be arsed to actually parent while his mother was working.

            Cutest thing though when he’d get a video he liked and the creator would tell you to give the video a thumbs up if you liked it he’d physically give the screen a thumbs up and say “I liked it. Good job.” He later figured out how to leave comments and his first comment was a string of poop emoji. Never expected to have to give a 5 year old a talk about internet safety.

        • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Oof. And how about kids when some of their first words are “OK Googie” b/c the parents are always playing music on their smart speaker?

          Thought it was clever marketing to disallow changing trigger phrases, but it’s actually child abuse! (OK not quite but it’s uncomfortable. I don’t even want a brand on my t-shirt, much less out of a relative’s mouth before they understand it.)

        • TheFriar@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          Doesn’t mean it makes sense. Isn’t that still just second person plural? “Chat” being using as a collective noun.

          A collective noun is a word or phrase that refers to a group of people or things as one entity.

          This isn’t some new-fangled youth speak breaking all the laws of language!!! It’s literally just…english. Leave it to the media to blow something way the fuck out of proportion to create unnecessary conversation around their stupid ass article.

      • protist@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        In this sense, “chat” is just a second person plural pronoun

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            Or if you use proper english, “you,” which is both singular and plural. Many languages have a specific second person plural, such as the Spanish ustedes (or vosotros in Spain and speaking informally), so those could be directly substituted for “chat.”

            A fourth person, if it exists, would have to somehow refer to a “nothing” without giving it an entity, because that’s the only gap between first, second, and third person pronouns.

            • Thwompthwomp@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              11 months ago

              Proper English would use thee/thou as singular and you as plural. Royal we, excepting. Or maybe royal we is the 4th person since you are speaking as yourself but more as a representing some other entity? I dunno this 4th person thing is confusing me …

              • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                That’s just not true. There’s a reason we all study grammar, and that’s so we can all learn the rules that have been built up along the way. Without that, we’d get more severe language drift, which gets in the way of the primary reason we have language to begin with: to communicate. So the proper form is the form we’ve all essentially agreed to.

        • theneverfox@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Not really, because it’s the indeterminate group watching you. If you say “you” or “you all”, it’s referring to the people interacting with you, not the audience. You have to break the fourth wall to initiate that interaction and make it second person

          But streamers sometimes will sometimes, mid conversation with someone else, say “chat, can you get me the link to that?” And continue talking to the other person while waiting for it. They’ll also say “chat is saying I should ask you about XYZ”.

          It’s a specific relationship that straddles the line between a second person and third person. They’re also usually not included in first person plural

    • jennwiththesea@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      I see it on TikTok a lot, in the comments on a video that seems implausible. It’s sometimes someone genuinely asking the other commenters if the (whatever it was) is true. Other times people just use it to express astonishment.

      Think of it as a replacement for “For real??”

  • Lord_ToRA@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    I’ll need to see some solid evidence and proof of this being done unironically before believing this.

  • Franklin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Not to sound 105 but parasocial relationships as meaningful interaction bad.

    It’s just adapting to a world that is less connected by building bonds in a way that can be maintained in a disconnected world.

    Maybe it’s not all bad but I can’t help but think our brains are definitely wired for in-person communication and it’ll never totally fill that void.

    Being an analog being in a digital world sucks.

      • Franklin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        I’m not saying there isn’t I’m just saying especially within the US it’s prevailing problem you can look it up in any psych journal that people are feeling more lonely. This is a systemic issue due to the way our cities are structured.

        I think that parasocial relationships are definitely one of the ways we have coped with that.

        • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Parasocial relationships have always made me really uncomfortable. Since longer than I knew the word for it. I avoid most social media because of this.

          The other day I wanted to know if a band I like is touring. Searching took me to their Facebook, where there were a lot of personal posts by the singer. Her being like “I got a new haircut check it out” or “got dressed up for the party” or whatever. I’m just like oof I can’t be here. I don’t want to feel like I know this person when I absolutely do not. But if I stuck around and read their feed regularly, it would quickly feel like I was getting updates from a real friend. I just want to know if they’re going on tour or putting out new music.