Clusivity


In linguistics, clusivity is a grammatical distinction between inclusive and exclusive first-person pronouns and verbal morphology, also called inclusive "we" and exclusive "we". Inclusive "we" specifically includes the addressee, while exclusive "we" specifically excludes the addressee, regardless of who else may be involved. While imagining that this sort of distinction could be made in other persons is straightforward, in fact the existence of second-person clusivity in natural languages is controversial and not well attested. While clusivity is not a feature of standard English language, it is found in many languages around the world.
The first published description of the inclusive-exclusive distinction by a European linguist was in a description of languages of Peru in 1560 by Domingo de Santo Tomás in his Grammatica o arte de la lengua general de los indios de los Reynos del Perú, published in Valladolid, Spain.

Schematic paradigm

Clusivity paradigms may be summarized as a two-by-two grid:

Morphology

In some languages, the three first-person pronouns appear to be unrelated. This is the case for Chechen, which has singular so/со, exclusive txo/тхо, and inclusive vay/вай. In others, all three are related, as in Tok Pisin singular mi, exclusive mi-pela, and inclusive yu-mi or yu-mi-pela. However, when only one of the plural pronouns is related to the singular, it may be either one. In some dialects of Mandarin Chinese, for example, inclusive or exclusive 我們／我们 wǒmen is the plural form of singular wǒ "I", while inclusive 咱們／咱们 zánmen is a separate root. However, in Hadza it is the inclusive, ’one-be’e, which is the plural of the singular ’ono "I", while the exclusive ’oo-be’e is a separate root.
It is not uncommon for two separate words for "I" to pluralize into derived forms having a clusivity distinction. For example, in Vietnamese the familiar word for "I" pluralizes to inclusive we and the polite word for "I" pluralizes into exclusive we. In Samoan, the singular form of the exclusive pronoun is the regular word for "I", while the singular form of the inclusive pronoun may also occur on its own, in which case it also means "I", but with a connotation of appealing or asking for indulgence.
In the Kunama language of Eritrea, the first person inclusive and exclusive distinction is marked on dual and plural forms of verbs, independent pronouns, and possessive pronouns.

Distinction in verbs

Where verbs are inflected for person, as in the native languages of Australia and many Native American languages, the inclusive-exclusive distinction can be made there as well. For example, in Passamaquoddy "I/we have it" is expressed
In Tamil on the other hand, the two different pronouns have the same agreement on the verb.

First-person clusivity

First-person clusivity is a common feature among Dravidian, Kartvelian, and Caucasian languages, Australian and Austronesian, and is also found in languages of eastern, southern, and southwestern Asia, Americas, and in some creole languages. Some African languages also make this distinction, such as the Fula language. No European language outside the Caucasus makes this distinction grammatically, but some constructions may be semantically inclusive or exclusive.

Singular inclusive forms

Several Polynesian languages, such as Samoan and Tongan, have clusivity with overt dual and plural suffixes in their pronouns. The lack of a suffix indicates the singular. The exclusive form is used in the singular as the normal word for "I", but the inclusive also occurs in the singular. The distinction is one of discourse: the singular inclusive has been described as the "modesty I" in Tongan, often rendered in English as one, while in Samoan its use has been described as indicating emotional involvement on the part of the speaker.

Second-person clusivity

In theory, clusivity of the second person should be a possible distinction, but its existence is controversial. Some notable linguists, such as Bernard Comrie, have attested that the distinction is extant in spoken natural languages, while others, such as John Henderson, maintain that the human brain does not have the capacity to make a clusivity distinction in the second person. Many other linguists take the more neutral position that it could exist but is nonetheless not currently attested.
Clusivity in the second person is conceptually simple but nonetheless if it exists is extremely rare, unlike clusivity in the first. Hypothetical second-person clusivity would be the distinction between "you and you " and "you and someone else whom I am not addressing currently." These are often referred to in the literature as "2+2" and "2+3", respectively. Horst J. Simon provides a deep analysis of second-person clusivity in his 2005 article. He concludes that oft-repeated rumors regarding the existence of second-person clusivity—or indeed, any pronoun feature beyond simple exclusive we – are ill-founded, and based on erroneous analysis of the data.

Distribution of the clusivity distinction

The inclusive–exclusive distinction occurs nearly universally among the Austronesian languages and the languages of northern Australia, but rarely in the nearby Papuan languages. It is widespread in India, featuring in the Dravidian and Munda languages, as well as in several Indo-European languages of India such as Oriya, Marathi, Rajasthani, Punjabi, Sindhi, and Gujarati. It can also be found in the languages of eastern Siberia, such as Tungusic, from which it was borrowed into northern Mandarin Chinese. In indigenous languages of the Americas it is found in about half the languages, with no clear geographic or genealogical pattern. It is also found in a few languages of the Caucasus and Sub-Saharan Africa, such as Fulani and Khoekhoe.
It is, of course, possible in any language to express the idea of clusivity semantically, and many languages provide common forms that clarify the ambiguity of their first person pronoun. A language with a true clusivity distinction, however, does not provide a first person plural with indefinite clusivity: where the clusivity of the pronoun is ambiguous; rather, the speaker is forced to specify - by choice of pronoun or inflection - whether they are including the addressee or not. This rules out most European languages, for example. Clusivity is nonetheless a very common language feature overall. Some languages with more than one plural number make the clusivity distinction only in, for example, the dual, but not in the greater plural. Others make it in all numbers. In the table below, the plural forms are the ones preferentially listed.
LanguageInclusive formExclusive formSingular related toNotesLanguage family
Ainua-/an-ci-??Ainu
American Sign Language "K" tips up palm in
"1" tap chest + twist 		"K" tips up palm side
"1" tap each side of chest 		Exclusive pluralFrench Sign Language
ApmakidigemaNeitherSubject prefixes are ta- and kaa-. Dual forms, derived from the plurals, also exist.Austronesian
AymarajiwasanayaExclusiveThe derived form jiwasanaka of the inclusive refers to at least 3 people.Aymaran
BislamayumimifalaBothThe inclusive form is derived from the second person pronoun and the first person pronoun. There are also dual and trial forms.English creole
CebuanokitakamiNeitherShort forms are ta and mi Austronesian
ChechenvaitxoNeitherCaucasian
Daurbaabiede??Mongolic
Evenkimitbū??Tungusic
Fijiankedatou keitou "kedaru" also means "we" but limited to the speaker and the person spoken to, can be translated as "you and me".Austronesian
Fulaen, eɗenmin, miɗenExclusive Examples show short & long form subject pronouns.Niger-Congo
GuaraniñandeoreNeitherTupi-Guarani
Gujaratiઆપણે અમે ExclusiveIndo-European
HadzaonebeeôbeeInclusiveHadza
Hawaiiankāua ; kākou māua ; mākou NeitherAustronesian
HiligaynonkitákamíNeitherAustronesian
Ilocanodatayó, sitayódakamí, sikamíNeitherThe dual inclusives datá and sitá are widely used.Austronesian
KapampanganikatamuikamiNeitherThe dual inclusive ikata is widely used.Austronesian
Australian KriolyunmimelabatExclusiveThe inclusive form is derived from the second person pronoun and the first person pronoun. The exclusive form is derived from the first person sing. and the third person plural forms. There is significant dialectal and diachronic variation in the exclusive form.English creole
Lakotauŋ-uŋ-... -piNeitherThe inclusive form has dual number. By adding the suffix "-pi" it takes the plural number. In the plural form no clusivity distinction is made.Siouan
Lojbanmi'omi'a/miBothThere also exists the form ma'a, which means the speaker, listener, and others unspecified. It is of note that the first-person pronoun mi doesn't take number and can refer to any number of individuals in the same group; mi'a and mi'o are usually preferred.Constructed language
MalagasyIsikaIzahay–Austronesian
ManchumusebeExclusiveTungusic
MalaykitakamiNeitherThe exclusive form is hardly used in informal Indonesian in Jakarta. Instead, kita is almost always used colloquially to indicate both inclusive and exclusive "we". However, in more formal circumstances, the distinction is clear and well-practiced. Therefore, kami is absolutely exclusive whereas kita may generally mean both inclusive and exclusive "we" depending on the circumstances. This phenomenon is less frequently encountered in Malaysian.Austronesian
Malayalamനമ്മൾ ഞങ്ങൾ ExclusiveDravidian
Mandarin咱們 / 咱们 我們 / 我们 Exclusive我们 is used both inclusively and exclusively by most speakers, especially in formal situations. Use of 咱们 is common only in northern dialects, notably Beijing dialect, and may be a Manchu influence.Sino-Tibetan
Marathiआपण आम्ही ExclusiveIndo-European
MarwariExclusiveIndo-European
Southern Min咱 阮 ExclusiveSino-Tibetan
Newar languageJhi: sa:n Jim sa:n Both are used as possessive pronounsSino-Tibetan
Pohnpeiankitail, kita kiht, se There is an independent and subject pronoun distinction. The exclusive includes both dual and plural while the independent has a dual/plural distinctionAustronesian
Potawatomiginan, g- -men, gde- -men ninan, n- -men, nde- -men ??Potawatomi has two verb conjugation types, "short" and "long." Both are listed here, and labeled as such.Central Algonquian
Punjabiਆਪਾਂ ਅਸੀਂ Indo-European
Quechuan languagesñuqanchikñuqaykuBothQuechuan
SamoanitatouimatouExclusiveThe dual forms are itaua and imaua Austronesian
ShawneekiilaweniilaweExclusiveThe inclusive form is morphologically derived from the second person pronoun kiila.Algic
TagalogtáyokamíNeitherAustronesian
Taiwaneselabel=nonelabel=noneExclusive The third-person singular label=none also pluralizes to label=none via nasalization.Sinitic > Southern Min
Tausugkitaniyukami??The dual inclusive is kita.Austronesian
Tamilநாம் நாங்கள் ExclusiveDravidian
Teluguమనము మేము NeitherDravidian
TetumitaamiNeitherAustronesian
Tok PisinyumipelamipelaExclusiveThe inclusive form is derived from the second person pronoun and the first person pronoun. There are also dual and trial forms.English creole
TupiîandéoréInclusiveTupi-Guarani
TulunammayenkuḷnDravidian
Vietnamesechúng tachúng tôiInclusiveThe exclusive form is derived from the polite form of I, tôiAustroasiatic