1

Some languages around the world use the generic we instead of English's preferred one or you. I have noticed that some people, when asking questions on this site (EL&U although the same principle applies to ELL), use 'we' in this generic way.

For example:

See more and more

More specifically, is it ever possible to use 'we' when talking about a group to which one does not belong?

My instinct is to use you or even one here to form How does one pronounce... etc.

I can only think that it is either a transatlantic difference or a feature that has come from other languages, since the only other uses of 'we' I could find are inappropriate.

Is my instinct right, or is this acceptable grammar?

migrated from english.stackexchange.com Oct 17 '16 at 11:26

This question came from our site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts.

  • 1
    We're fine with it. – Doug Warren Oct 14 '16 at 17:13
  • 1
    You may be, but I don't think you can use it like that. – BladorthinTheGrey Oct 14 '16 at 17:14
  • 3
    I would also associate it with the speech of a primary school teacher or the writing of an academic paper (author's we in your link), aiming to be inclusive but perhaps sometimes coming across as marginally patronising. So its use is not grammatically wrong, but it may not always have the desired effect – Henry Oct 14 '16 at 17:28
  • 2
    The Cambridge DIctionnary doesn't see a problem with it dictionary.cambridge.org/fr/grammaire/grammaire-britannique/… it may sound more snob because "we" is also found as Royal We ,see the various incarnation of Nosism (yeah that's what using We as generic is called) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nosism – P. O. Oct 14 '16 at 18:02
  • 1
    We wouldn't normally ask questions like How do we spell archaeologist? simply because we there probably doesn't include the speaker - he doesn't spell it at all, because he doesn't (yet) know how to. – FumbleFingers Oct 14 '16 at 18:17
-1

When we ....

is a rhetorical ploy found in contexts as wide-ranging as philosophical treatises (What does it mean when we say a man is noble?) to chemistry textbooks (When we mix oxygen and hydrogen...) to websites about health issues (What should we do when we're constipated?)

  • Sounds good, do you have any references? – BladorthinTheGrey Oct 17 '16 at 19:26
  • Not sure what "references" you need. We has been used in a GAZILLION places for hundreds of years in this way, and your "instinct" that it is somehow ungrammatical is wrong. But for starters: google.com/… – Tᴚoɯɐuo Oct 17 '16 at 19:35
  • Sorry, I should have mentioned; as was referenced in the comments, we say when used by a group including oneself, is fine; what is being questioned is whether it can be used as a replacement for you: can you say we when referring to a group to which one does not belong? – BladorthinTheGrey Oct 17 '16 at 21:03
  • Yes. Compare the constipation example above. We = people. If that still doesn't satisfy you, you'll have to visit et.stackexchange.com – Tᴚoɯɐuo Oct 17 '16 at 22:32

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.