# Etymology of French 'on'



## mtmjr

I've been taking French for five years and I've just accepted (quite happily I might add) the usage of "on" as an impersonal sort of "all-purpose" pronoun.  I've recently been studying and comparing the different Romance languages and I've realized there really isn't an equivalent in other languages.  I was wondering if anyone knew how this word came to be and why no other languages have adopted it?  Thanks.

-mtmjr-


----------



## Frank06

Hi,


mtmjr said:


> in other languages.  I was wondering if anyone knew how this word came to be and why no other languages have adopted it?


French _on_: Old French spelling _om_, 842. _Later_ it appeared as _hom_ and _hum_. It comes from Latin _homo_, the accusative form of which gave _homme_. It is believed that the usage as an indefinite pronoun was established already in the 12th, 13th century. Influence from Germanic languages has been suggested.

Most other Romance languages did have a similar indefinite pronoun derived from Latin _homo_, but they seem to have 'lost' it. In many cases, if I understood well, this indefinite pronoun was replaced by a construction with _se_.

Groetjes,

Frank


----------



## mtmjr

Thanks.  By the way, where did you get this info?  If it was online, could you give me a link?


----------



## avok

Well actually even English has a similar word! "one"

ex: on dit pas comme ça : one does not say like that. So "one" and "on" may have similar etymologies or they may be cognates but I dont know that.

And German also "man"  for the same purpose


----------



## modus.irrealis

You can look at the etymological information here. The fact that it's from the noun _homo_ also explains the form _l'on_ in that the _l'_ there is in fact the definite article.



avok said:


> Well actually even English has a similar word! "one"
> 
> ex: on dit pas comme ça : one does not say like that. So "one" and "on" may have similar etymologies or they may be cognates but I dont know that.
> 
> And German also "man"  for the same purpose


It's a coincidence that English _one_ and French _on_ are similar although I wonder if the similarity allowed French usage to influence English usage (but that's just a guess since I don't know the history of English _one_). German _man_ though is interesting because it has the same meaning as French _on_, since _homo_ meant "man." I wonder if their development is related.


----------



## Outsider

This previous thread is tangentially related.


----------



## avok

But in German it is "ma*nn*" that means "man". Still "man" and "mann" in German may be related. Too similar to be not related


----------



## johndot

But in German it is "ma*nn*" that means "man". Still "man" and "mann" in German may be related. (avok, post #7)
 
That could be made clearer, avok.
 
The German pronoun _man_ is the equivalent of English _one_ and French _on_. The German noun _Mann _equates with English _man_ or even _husband_.


----------



## franz rod

> It comes from Latin _homo_, the accusative form of which gave _homme_.



Are you sure that comes from the accusative form (hominem)?
In Italian for example it cames from nominative form (homo->uomo, homines->uomini pl.).
However the majority of the words came from the accusative form.




> Most other Romance languages did have a similar indefinite pronoun derived from Latin _homo_, but they seem to have 'lost' it



Which languages? In Italian we use ci, vi  (used often for place) and ne but they are used in different way.

"Hai visto cosa è successo?"        "did you see what happened?"
"NO, ma NE ho sentito parlare"       "no, i didn't but I heard ABOUT IT"
"Sei mai andato a Roma?"         "have you aver gone to Rome"
"No, non Ci sono mai stato"           "no, I never been IN THAT PLACE.


----------



## mtmjr

I am just intrigued by the usage of "on" in French. Really, it's not quite equivalent to English "one" since it can refer to "one", "we", "people in general", and I'm sure others as well. Frankly, I think it is closer in meaning to "we" since _we_ tend to use "we" in English as a statement of general habits, regulations, or ideas (in casual speech):

_On parle anglais aux Etats-Unis. --> One speaks English in the US._
_On parle anglais aux Etats-Unis. --> We speak English in the US._

_La comète est plus près de la terre qu'on pense peut-être. --> The comet is closer to earth than one may think._
_La comète est plus près de la terre qu'on pense peut-être. --> The comet is closer to earth than we may think._

Beyond that, however, "on" is used much more frequently in French than any of these English suggestions that I find it hard to call anything "equivalent".

Now, I've never studied Spanish (nor other pro-drop languages) in-depth, but it seems to me that "se" kind of sidesteps the issue since there really is no explicitly cited subject. In the thread that was suggested by Outsider, they discuss the fact that in Spanish, the verb is conjugated in the 3rd person plural to express this idea. But "se" is not a subject, "on" is. Actually, I'm curious to know, when "se" is used to express this idea of a general subject, what _is_ the subject? Is there one? I know that subjects are added for emphasis in Spanish, so what would I use to emphasize?

Alright, that's enough for one post...


----------



## Samaruc

The French pronoun "on" also exists at least in Catalan (where it is "hom", that is, it still maintains the etymological "h" and is closely related with Catalan "home", that means "man"). However, the use of this pronoun in Catalan is almost always limited to literary purposes, you will hardly hear it in normal speech, but it does exist.


En: It is said that.../ People say that...
Fr: On dit que...
Cat: Hom diu que... (but much more frequently "Es diu que...", like Spanish "Se dice que...")


----------



## avok

> _On parle anglais aux Etats-Unis. --> One speaks English in the US.
> On parle anglais aux Etats-Unis. --> We speak English in the US._


 
Aare you sure of that ? I guess even in English, "one speaks ..." has the meaning of "we speak..." but of course not widely used as in French.


----------



## mtmjr

Of course, I cannot presume to know how all English speakers feel about this around the world, but I would venture to say that almost nobody uses "one" as a subject unless they are writing a formal paper in which the 1st person is not allowed (most school research papers).

For example, a mother instructing her child at the dinner table:

_Now Charlie, one does not eat with their fingers, one uses a fork._
_Now Charlie, we don't eat with our fingers, we use a fork._


----------



## Outsider

mtmjr said:


> Now, I've never studied Spanish (nor other pro-drop languages) in-depth, but it seems to me that "se" kind of sidesteps the issue since there really is no explicitly cited subject. In the thread that was suggested by Outsider, they discuss the fact that in Spanish, the verb is conjugated in the 3rd person plural to express this idea. But "se" is not a subject, "on" is. Actually, I'm curious to know, when "se" is used to express this idea of a general subject, what _is_ the subject? Is there one?


This is explained in the other thread, with examples. 



mtmjr said:


> I know that subjects are added for emphasis in Spanish, so what would I use to emphasize?


There is a subject, but it's the patient of the action, rather than the agent. Take a look at the examples in the other thread.


----------



## avok

mtmjr said:


> Of course, I cannot presume to know how all English speakers feel about this around the world, but I would venture to say that almost nobody uses "one" as a subject unless they are writing a formal paper in which the 1st person is not allowed (most school research papers).
> 
> For example, a mother instructing her child at the dinner table:
> 
> _Now Charlie, one does not eat with their fingers, one uses a fork._
> _Now Charlie, we don't eat with our fingers, we use a fork._


 
No I know that nobody uses "one" as a subject unless they are writing a formal paper in English. But "one" implies "we", doesn't it?


----------



## mtmjr

I guess, but I can't say I think of it that way...

And thanks for the link Outsider.


----------



## franz rod

> Now, I've never studied Spanish (nor other pro-drop languages) in-depth, but it seems to me that "se" kind of sidesteps the issue since there really is no explicitly cited subject. In the thread that was suggested by Outsider, they discuss the fact that in Spanish, the verb is conjugated in the 3rd person plural to express this idea. But "se" is not a subject, "on" is. Actually, I'm curious to know, when "se" is used to express this idea of a general subject, what _is_ the subject? Is there one? I know that subjects are added for emphasis in Spanish, so what would I use to emphasize?



In Italian we use "si". It's called "si impersonale" (impersonal si).  There is no subject. It's conjugated in 3rd person singular and I think that in Spanish is the same.



> _On parle anglais aux Etats-Unis. --> One speaks English in the US._
> _On parle anglais aux Etats-Unis. --> We speak English in the US_



->Si parla inglese negli usa.


----------



## berndf

franz rod said:


> Are you sure that comes from the accusative form (hominem)?
> In Italian for example it cames from nominative form (homo->uomo, homines->uomini pl.).
> However the majority of the words came from the accusative form.


It would explain the double _m_ in French which you don't find in Italian.


----------



## franz rod

> It would explain the double _m_ in French which you don't find in Italian.



I'm not so sure.  For example the fall of the vocal "o" could produce an "extension" of consonant m.


----------



## berndf

French has generally lost the Vulgar Latin suffix _-o_, yet you don’t have a large scale doubling of consonants. Also French, as opposed to Italian, hasn't retained the distinction between long and short consonants. Hence, I would assume (I would be interested to have this confirmed or disproved, if I am wrong) that double consonants in French are generally either inherited from the Vulgar Latin or other origins or are a signs of an omitted syllable.


----------



## Outsider

The double _m_ in _homme_ (and _femme_ < _femina_) may just be an etymological convention. To be sure, we would need to look at texts in Old French, and analyse how it was spelled then.


----------



## modus.irrealis

avok said:


> But in German it is "ma*nn*" that means "man". Still "man" and "mann" in German may be related. Too similar to be not related


Yes, that's what I meant, that _man_ and _mann_ are related. I know I've read that before but I had a tough time finding something online in English. In German, I found this in a dictionary entry for _man_:


> _die alte concrete vorstellung schimmert öfter noch vor, weniger darin, dasz_ man _in der schreibung im nhd. wie das sonst graphisch geschiedene_ mann _behandelt wird_


I don't completely understand that but it seems to be saying that in the concrete sense of "man" the word is now written _mann_, so it would seem that _man_ and _mann_ are indeed the same word historically. Now I wonder, if there is a connection between the development of _on_ in French and _man_ in German (and similar pronouns in other Romance and Germanic languages), whether one was influenced by the other.


----------



## Montesacro

Frank06 said:


> Most other Romance languages did have a similar indefinite pronoun derived from Latin _homo_, but they seem to have 'lost' it. In many cases, if I understood well, this indefinite pronoun was replaced by a construction with _se_.
> 
> Groetjes,
> 
> Frank


 

That’s correct.
In early Italian both _uom_o (sometimes shortened to _uom_ or _om_) and _persona_ were used in the same fashion as the French word _on_.

Here’s an example from Dante’s Commedia, canto XXXIV; Dante and Virgil (_lo duca_ or “the Guide”) are climbing Lucifer’s body:

_Quando noi fummo là dove la coscia __si volge,_
_a punto in sul grosso de l'anche,_
_l__o duca, con fatica e con angoscia,_

_volse la testa ov' elli avea le zanche,_
_e aggrappossi al pel *com' om che sale*,_
_sì che 'n inferno i' credea tornar anche._

_When we were come to where the thigh revolves_
_Exactly on the thickness of the haunch,_
_The Guide, with labour and with hard-drawn breath,_

_Turned round his head where he had had his legs,_
_And grappled to the hair, *as one who mounts*,_
_So that to Hell I thought we were returning._

(translation by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, 1867)


----------



## boadicea7

So, would it be safe to say that the original way of using the word for 'man' that way in early Latin languages is where this stems from and then, the Germans acquired the usage from Latin influence but adapted it to German, (*Man*).

Then the rest of the Latin languages dropped the usage except for  French which mantained it and evolved it into the *On* word 

???


----------



## Rintoul

boadicea7 said:


> So, would it be safe to say that the original way of using the word for 'man' that way in early Latin languages is where this stems from and then, the Germans acquired the usage from Latin influence but adapted it to German, (*Man*).
> 
> Then the rest of the Latin languages dropped the usage except for French which mantained it and evolved it into the *On* word
> 
> ???


 
Well, as Samaruc explained earlier in the thread, Catalan still maintains "Hom" to the same effect, although its usage is in decline


----------



## elirlandes

mtmjr said:


> Of course, I cannot presume to know how all English speakers feel about this around the world, but I would venture to say that almost nobody uses "one" as a subject unless they are writing a formal paper in which the 1st person is not allowed (most school research papers).
> 
> For example, a mother instructing her child at the dinner table:
> 
> _Now Charlie, one does not eat with their fingers, one uses a fork._
> _Now Charlie, we don't eat with our fingers, we use a fork._




My mother would ALWAYS have said 
_Now Charlie, one does not eat with their fingers, one uses a fork
NEVER "we"

In Ireland you are more likely to hear
__Now Charlie, *you *don't eat with *your *fingers, *you* use a fork_
...but my children would learn to say "one" both in school, and certainly from me.


----------



## koniecswiata

Actually, "_one_" exists also in Spanish "_uno_".  It has a similar use to English "one" in more formal sounding registers "_one does this_" "_uno hace esto_" etc...
Besides, I think the previous samples of the use of "_one_" in English, as in "_one eats with a fork_" are perfectly valid English--just more formal than "_we_".  In fact in certain situations requiring such linguistic register, "_one_" would be more appropriate than "we".  
There should be a semantic, if not etymological, connection between the uses of "_one_" "on" "_uno_" and "_man_" (and more probably) since these all are European languages that share a massive amount of cultural influence that they have all been to exposed to over the years.  It shouldn't be surprising that they deal with certain linguistic features in a similar way.


----------

