# Icelandic: personal pronoun + name



## Gavril

What does it mean when personal pronouns are used next to a name in Icelandic? For example, when would you use phrases like the following?

_Hún Jófríður

Þau Fríðsemd, Ýr og Unnsteinn

Þið Dagbjört og Laufey
_
(There may have been a thread about this before, but I've done some WR searches and nothing has turned up yet.)

Þakkir!


----------



## kepulauan

Tough question. The singular one can serve as an introduction to a person who is being added as a subject in a discussion out of the blue: 
(in the middle of a conversation on recent developments in some public debate) "hún Jófríður Unnsteinsdóttir setti einmitt fram áhugaverðar hugmyndir í blaðagrein í gær" (said Jófríður was previously alien to the matter).

 It can also be meaningless (especially in casual, rather meaningless sentences): 
"Ég talaði við hann Jóhannes" ≈ "ég talaði við Jóhannes" (the former one eases the tone a bit, nothing more).
"já hann Jói er nú alveg ágætur, jamm og jæ" (very casual).

The plural ones, in addition to the above, can be used to group the subjects together. In those cases, it's essentially the same as saying just "þau" or "þið", except you specify who you are talking about.



There should be a sleepy smiley available.


----------



## Gavril

pollodia said:


> Tough question. The singular one can serve as an introduction to a person who is being added as a subject in a discussion out of the blue:
> (in the middle of a conversation on recent developments in some public debate) "hún Jófríður Unnsteinsdóttir setti einmitt fram áhugaverðar hugmyndir í blaðagrein í gær" (said Jófríður was previously alien to the matter).


Would this be a good translation of your sentence with _hún_?

_A certain Jófríður Unnsteinsdóttir set forth some interesting ideas in a newspaper article yesterday._

I'm not sure how _einmitt _should be translated here -- is it part of a phrase _setja einmitt fram, _or is it modifying another word in the sentence?


----------



## Alxmrphi

Not sure if you've got a copy of "Colloquial Icelandic", but this is dealt with there on pages 142-143.


----------



## sindridah

I agree with Pollodia, It's though question, I sometimes do this but I actually have no idea why. But yeah i stick with Pollodia's answer!


----------



## kepulauan

Gavril said:


> Would this be a good translation of your sentence with _hún_?
> 
> _A certain Jófríður Unnsteinsdóttir set forth some interesting ideas in a newspaper article yesterday._
> 
> I'm not sure how _einmitt _should be translated here -- is it part of a phrase _setja einmitt fram, _or is it modifying another word in the sentence?



Maybe I shouldn't have used such an ill-translatable word in the middle of _setja fram_. "On a similar note" would be a good translation here.

"A certain Jófríður Unnsteinsdóttir..." works well I guess.


----------



## Gavril

One thing that I am still not quite sure of: is it correct to use _hann/hún/þeir_ before a name if you have no previous familiarity with the person?

For example,

A: _Í gær las ég áhugaverða grein um vatnsaflsvirkjanir á Íslandi._
B: _Eftir hvern er greinin?_
A:_ Hana Jófríði Unnsteinsdóttur._
B: _Hmm, ég hef aldrei heyrt um hana áður._
A: _Ekki ég heldur.

_
Takk


----------



## Silver_Biscuit

I'm not sure whether you could necessarily call it _incorrect_, but on the other hand I don't see any reason for it. I think it is definitely better suited to talking about people you do know / know of. This is just a hunch, though. Needs native input, really.


----------



## Segorian

I agree. Using _hún_ or _hann_ in this way normally suggests at least a certain familiarity with the person, even that you know her.


----------



## Segorian

Gavril said:


> Would this be a good translation of your sentence with _hún_?
> 
> _A certain Jófríður Unnsteinsdóttir set forth some interesting ideas in a newspaper article yesterday._



For the reason given in my previous post, I don’t think this works. While _hún_ in this context suggests familiarity, “a certain” seems to do the opposite.


----------



## Segorian

Gavril said:


> _
> Þið Dagbjört og Laufey
> _



_Við_ and _þið_ are special cases, because the above phrase is the equivalent of saying _Þú, Dagbjört og Laufey_. So it’s “You, Dagbjört and Laufey” (not “You two, Dagbjört and Laufey”).

Example (taken from _Lesbók Morgunblaðsins_ 29 May 1999, p. 17):

The journalist is interviewing three people from the theatre world, Hallur, Hilmar and Magnús. Responding to a comment by Hilmar, the journalist says: _Er umræðan ekki á nokkrum villigötum þegar markaðsleikhús er skilgreint eftir fyrrverandi eða væntanlegum vinsældum sýninga? Er markaðsleikhús ekki rekstrarformið sem *þið Magnús og Hallur* búið við?_


----------



## Segorian

Of course, _við_ and _þið_ are most often used in this way to refer to only two persons. An example of this is the title of a book published in 2013: _Við Jóhanna _(‘Jóhanna and I’).


----------



## Gavril

Segorian said:


> _Við_ and _þið_ are special cases, because the above phrase is the equivalent of saying _Þú, Dagbjört og Laufey_. So it’s “You, Dagbjört and Laufey” (not “You two, Dagbjört and Laufey”).



Does this ever apply to the 3rd person plural forms? E.g., could you say _Þau Bjarkey_ with the meaning "He and Bjarkey"?


----------



## Segorian

Yes, absolutely. _Þau_, _þær_ and _þeir_ are frequently used in this way, but only with one name (as in the example you give): _Njáll gekk út þegar og gengu þeir Gunnar á tal._


----------

