First Person Exclusive ( Concept )

      |_ Abstract
            |_ Linguistic Property
                  |_ Morphosyntactic Property
                        |_ Person Property
                              |_ First Person Exclusive



Usage Notes
2009-06-04 13:28:07

In a language, there has to be a First Person Inclusive for there to be a First Person Exclusive but, theoretically at least, the opposite need not hold.

Language Code: yap First person exclusive refers to the participants referred to but not the hearer.
2009-06-04 13:28:07
We saw it.

Siewierska (2003:142)

Language Code: cdm In Chepang, a simple Future may be expressed by suffixing /-ceʔ/ to the main verb.
2009-06-04 13:28:07
I will/may call you

Bybee, Perkins, and Pagliuca (1994:245-246) FROM Caughley (1982)

Language Code: cdm This Chepang example illustrates the use of the suffix /dhaŋ-/, in combination with tense/aspect suffixes. With the immediate future, Caughley says that the action 'is about to begin'.
2009-06-04 13:28:07
I am about to look/I will look now.

Bybee, Perkins, and Pagliuca (1994:245-246) FROM Caughley (1982)

Language Code: alo Corbett refers to this language as one with a 'true' trial. That is, there is a morpheme that refers to precisely three, as opposed to some reported trials that seem to have a paucal function.
2009-06-04 13:28:07
We three own that house.

Corbett (2002:21) FROM Ladig and Ladig (1990)


User Submitted Issues
Status: Pending need to be decomposed - Helen Aristar-Dry
2010-09-23 13:06:49

First person exclusive is not an elemental category--it needs to be decomposed into 'first person' and 'exclusive'. Ditto for 'first person inclusive.'

This came up in the RELISH discussions

This concept links to the Surrey Morphology Group, which seems to support what you said above (

The inclusive/exclusive distinction (applied typically with regard to first person) is one of the important distinctions that have been identified for the category of person. Another one is the proximate/obviative distinction (applied typically with regard to third person). While the inclusive/exclusive distinction is typically defined as expressing the inclusion of the addressee with the first person, the proximate/obviative distintion regards the degree of remoteness of the non-participant.

This gives us four independent concepts: Exclusive, Inclusive, Proximate, Obviative
-Matt 9/23