Owen — Revision of Pronouns. 121 



THEIR SENTENTIAL EANK. 



The "^^'ords thus far examined, though somewhat peculiar in 

 meaning, being specially characterized by their purely egocentric 

 validity and by their restriction to the act of speech, are merely 

 nouns. 



In seeking their mutual differences, I note that the use of 

 "thou'' is somewhat analogous to that of "grandfather." Each 

 may name a person in his relation to myself, their difference 

 being merely that relation is in one case colloquial and mo- 

 mentary, in the other ancestral and permanent. Each may be 

 applied to different persons ; each may be used by many per- 

 sons ; indeed, in either aspect "thou" is much the broader 

 word. The same may be said of "he." I see no reason there- 

 fore why "he" and "thou" as well as "you" and "they" should 

 not be ranked as common noims. 



The case of "I" is very different. To illustrate, suppose my 

 name be Cicero, and that no other person bears, or ever bore, 

 this name. Examining "I" and "Cicero" from the special view- 

 point of self, I find that each, in my personal usage, means 

 myself alone. They differ merely in this, that "I" is my ego- 

 centric, naming me from the special view-point of self, while 

 "Cicero" is my absolute, naming me from no special view-point 

 of my own. "I" names me as part of the universe in its special 

 conception by myself; "Cicero" as part of the universe in its 

 conception by anyone. The difference is essentially that which 

 obtains between "here" and "Xat. 43° :N"., Long. 90° W. 

 Prom the view-point of my individual usage, I think both "1 

 and "Cicero" should rank as proper nouns. 



Looking now from the view-point of others, I can strengthen 

 my comparison by including an intermediate term, for instance, 

 "Smith," which, although a proper noun, suggests a formidable 

 portion of the race. Accordingly, "Cicero" may be used by 

 one man only, to name himself ; "Smith," by many men ; "I" 

 by all men. "I" is, in a wa}-, an intensified "Smith." The 

 three designations are respectively unique, generic and uni- 

 versal. In passing from "Cicero" (and "Smith") to "I" we 

 have indeed forsaken the field of absolute designation and en- 

 tered the egocentric; and so I do also in replacing "614 





