# Ustedes & Vosotros



## 0stsee

Hello!

Anybody knows why *vosotros* was universally replaced by *ustedes* in Latin America?
This made me wonder, because why would you give up *vosotros *if it could lead to confusion?
I really needed to get used to *ustedes*, because everytime someone used _las/los_instead of _os_, or the verb form of *ustedes* instead of *vosotros*, I immediately thought of other persons.

Saludos,


0stsee


----------



## jmx

'Vosotros' isn't used in most of the Canary Islands either, and in western Andalusia there is a common way of speaking in which 'ustedes' is used with the verbal forms corresponding to 'vosotros'. So it's not difficult to guess that the change took place near Sevilla in the first place, and from there it traveled to the Canary Islands and to America.


----------



## jonquiliser

I guess for most (native or proficient) speakers used to this, it's not all that confusing. I also feel I would 'lack' something because I'm used to using a distinct informal second person plural form. 

But then, in English there's also just 'you' for both plural and singular... and in the end it's not so confusing  Just a matter of getting used to it.


----------



## Joannes

jmartins said:


> 'Vosotros' isn't used in most of the Canary Islands either, and in western Andalusia there is a common way of speaking in which 'ustedes' is used with the verbal forms corresponding to 'vosotros'. So it's not difficult to guess that the change took place near Sevilla in the first place, and from there it traveled to the Canary Islands and to America.


Yes, that's what I heard happened: it was imported from Andalusia along with characteristics like seseo, no leísmo, yeísmo (for a good part).


----------



## 0stsee

Thank you for your responses, guys!

It puzzles me that in spite of Spanish immigration, *vosotros* never prevailed in Latin America.



jonquiliser said:


> I guess for most (native or proficient) speakers used to this, it's not all that confusing. I also feel I would 'lack' something because I'm used to using a distinct informal second person plural form.
> 
> But then, in English there's also just 'you' for both plural and singular... and in the end it's not so confusing  Just a matter of getting used to it.



I guess it's less confusing in English because "you" is always used for the second person, singular or plural.
Using "ustedes" is like saying instead of "I saw _you guys_ yesterday", "I saw _them _yesterday".

Furthermore things are more complicated because "ustedes" can be omitted, in fact in most of the cases, whereas you never leave out the "you" in English.
E.g. "Are you (guys) going to come tomorrow?" vs "Van a venir mannana?" where the subject can be _ustedes_ or _ell@s_.

I'm not saying that "ustedes" is bad or anything. In fact, I'm getting used to it. I just wanted to picture my thoughts; how hard it is for someone who already knows "vosotr@s" to get used to "ustedes", yet not the other way around; and why I find it confusing that "vosotr@s" ceased to be used even though it still exists, unlike English "thou" which is practically not used anymore.

Groetjes,


0stsee


----------



## Fray Luis

It's not that vosotros was never used in Hispanic America, but being too formal it pretty much died out. It was still common in poetry and in liturgical used until not many years ago, but it would have been considered too formal in everyday spoken usage. In some countries you can still hear it occasionally in a formal speech, but in these cases it's not rare for the speaker to use it with a verbal form that would correspond to ustedes, because he's not used to using it in spite of having studied that form in school. I wouldn't compare though vosotros with thou, since thou is very obsolete in spite of some use in religious contexts, but it's not exactly equivalent.


----------



## daniel.uy

_Vosotros _may sound too formal to Latin American speakers of Spanish nowadays, but in fact _usted _and its plural form _ustedes _used to be far more formal than *vosotros*.
_Usted _is a syncope of the dated expression:V*u*e*st*ra merc*ed* --> *usted*, V*u*e*st*ras merc*edes* --> *ustedes*.
This seems to have been quite common in the late XVI century, when other syncopes produced: *Usía *(common form of addressing a judge, from *Vuestra señoría*) and *Vuecencia *or *Vuecelencia *(from *Vuestra excelencia*).

For the sake of clarification, *syncope *is the loss of one or more sounds from the interior of a word; especially, the loss of an unstressed vowel.

*WHY *it was replaced? My guess is it must have been something to do with the inferior social conditions of native Americans (indigenous) as well as those of criollo Spanish descendants, who must have considered noble Spanish settlers were entitled to such formal treatment. The custom prevailed, even though nobility itself was abolished in America.


----------



## the MASTER

I think it's a shame that vosotros/vosotras was lost. I like the fact that in European Spanish, there are different verb forms for each of the three persons, singular and plural. It neatly completes the verb conjugation table! Ustedes simply 'steals' the 3rd person plural forms.


----------



## Outsider

Fíjese en los enlaces que están en este mensaje.


----------



## merquiades

Hello everyone.  
In the singular  there was a clear difference between "tú" (singular informal) and "vos" (polite formal and also plural form) in Old Spanish.  When the third person form "usted" was invented late 1400's - 1500's, "vos" was deprived of its formal singular use and thus was gradually eliminated (Spain and large chunks of Latin America).  In marginal use in Spain (like probably southwest Andalucía) it survived longer and gradually mixed with "tú" before falling out everywhere by the 1700's. Colonizers from the south of Spain took this mixed usage of "voseo" to parts of Latin America at the time when it was still used but on decline and it has since become the norm in Rio Plate dialect.  See a message I wrote for another thread below.



> "vos" has mixed with "tú" and is now informal, and contrasts with the "usted" formal.
> 
> An example:
> You say to your friend that you are sick and you want him to give you an aspirin.
> Vos le decís a vuestro amigo que estáis enfermo y que queréis que os dé (a vos) una aspirina. Vos form, originally formal but no longer said anywhere
> Tú le dices a tu amigo que estás enfermo y que quieres que te dé (a ti) una aspirina. Tú form (informal)
> 
> Vos le decís a tu amigo que estás enfermo y que querés que te dé (a vos) una aspirina. South American voseo (informal)
> ...contrasts with...
> Usted le dice a tu amigo que está enfermo y que quiere que le dé (a usted) una aspirina. Usted formal



What I do not understand and am hoping you can help me with, is figuring out why what happened with the plural forms is so different and almost the opposite phenomenon of what I described above.  During the time "vos" was dying out in Spain, its identical plural form "vosotros" (that which has been addressed years ago in the origin of this thread) increased in popularity to the point of becoming the preferred plural (though the plural polite/third person form "ustedes" parallels its use with singular polite "usted"). There may well have been hesitation in southwest Andalucía too in the plural at the same time tú/vos were being mixed.  As some foreros have said, it is still possible to find ustedes/vosotros blended in rural Andalucía.

Example:
Ustedes sus vais a vuestra casa (mixed)
Vosotros os vais a vuestra casa (vosotros)
Ustedes se van a su casa (ustedes)

In contrast to Spanish usage, in all areas of Latin America "vosotros" declined in use and was eventually eliminated from common speech.  "Ustedes" is now the plural of "Tú" and/or "Vos" as well as "Usted".  In "tuteo" speaking areas there is a certain coherence I suppose.  As "vos" disappeared so did "vosotros" in analogy (mind you they share a common origin/etymology and are similar in nature, same pronouns, originally same or similar verb forms").  That's how I would see it at least. But as per the Rio Plate area, etc. I fail to understand why this could have happened.  
Could anyone shed a light on why the elimination of "vosotros" was so universal all across Latin America? And how it happened. 
Is there a link with the mixing of ustedes/vosotros in Andalucía?  I think not because these particular hybrid forms were not tranmitted at all (to my knowledge).  They certainly would have since that's the precise origin of singular "voseo".



> Fray Luis.  It's not that vosotros was never used in Hispanic America, but being too formal it pretty much died out. It was still common in poetry and in liturgical used until not many years ago, but it would have been considered too formal in everyday spoken usage. In some countries you can still hear it occasionally in a formal speech, but in these cases it's not rare for the speaker to use it with a verbal form that would correspond to ustedes, because he's not used to using it in spite of having studied that form in school. I wouldn't compare though vosotros with thou, since thou is very obsolete in spite of some use in religious contexts, but it's not exactly equivalent.



Vosotros is not formal.  It lost its formal connotations in the 16th century when "ustedes < vuestras mercedes" was coined.  But even before that it was also informal in old Spanish.



> Daniel. Uy.  WHY it was replaced? My guess is it must have been something to do with the inferior social conditions of native Americans (indigenous) as well as those of criollo Spanish descendants, who must have considered noble Spanish settlers were entitled to such formal treatment. The custom prevailed, even though nobility itself was abolished in America.



Were this the case, "vos" would certainly have died out too, and probably "tú" elsewhere.  All of these could in certain instances be condescending.  Indeed in contemporary Chile, a place where "vos" fell out, if ever used it's insulting in character.  Again "ustedes" is more formal than "vosotros", just as "usted" is more formal than "vos". "Vos" is informal in the Rio Plate, as "vosotros" would theoretically be as well, in parallel.

Outsider.  I understand that the informal "vós" plural form has been eliminated rather recently in Portugal in favor of making formal "vocês" the universal plural.  Do you have an idea why that has occurred?

*Podéis contestarme en castellano si queréis y si necesitáis una traducción os la propongo, no lo hago ahora por pereza.*


----------



## Outsider

merquiades said:


> Outsider.  I understand that the informal "vós" plural form has been eliminated rather recently in Portugal in favor of making formal "vocês" the universal plural.  Do you have an idea why that has occurred?


I don't think I would use the word 'recent'. As far as I know it happened during the 19th century. I don't know why, although that's an interesting question.

You say 'informal plural', and it's true that 'vocês' derives from a formal, deferential expression, so I suppose originally 'vós' was more informal. But when used as a singular second person 'vós' is usually perceived as formal; definitely more formal than 'tu'. I suppose that's part of the reason why nowadays 'vós' tends to be perceived as formal (if old-fashioned and unusual, and in some cases quaint and regional) even in the plural. It's all rather complicated...


----------



## merquiades

Outsider said:


> I don't think I would use the word 'recent'. As far as I know it happened during the 19th century. I don't know why, although that's an interesting question.
> 
> You say 'informal plural', and it's true that 'vocês' derives from a formal, deferential expression, so I suppose originally 'vós' was more informal. But when used as a singular second person 'vós' is usually perceived as formal; definitely more formal than 'tu'. I suppose that's part of the reason why nowadays 'vós' tends to be perceived as formal (if old-fashioned and unusual, and in some cases quaint and regional) even in the plural. It's all rather complicated...



Thanks for the information, Outsider   I suppose I was considering that the 19th century was not so long ago.  People still mix the (vós/vocês) forms in Northern Portugal, don't they?  "Vocês têm a vossa casa.." "Dizei-vos que vocês vâo..."?
You're explanation makes sense.  When "vós" singular polite fell out of use in Portugal and starting seeming archaic, "vós" plural informal disappeared with it through analogy, leaving "tu" and "você" in the singular and "vocês" the only plural form.   I believe this could also be the reason why "vosotros" disappeared in Latin american Spanish leaving tú/usted and ustedes in most areas.


----------



## Outsider

merquiades said:


> People still mix the (vós/vocês) forms in Northern Portugal, don't they?  "Vocês têm a vossa casa.." "Dizei-vos que vocês vâo..."?


I've heard that there are people in the rural north that still use _vós_ as a subject pronoun. I am not personally well-acquainted with this phenomenon, but I don't live in the north. Most of the country is passively familiar with _vós_ from church, since the standard Catholic translation of the Bible still uses _vós _instead of _vocês_ (and as a formal _tu_).

A different matter is the use of the possessive pronouns _vosso_, _vossa_, etc. (English "your"/ Spanish "su", "sus"), and of the object pronoun _vos_ (English "you", "(to) you"/ Spanish "los"/"las"/"les"). These are used alongside _vocês_ by most Portuguese, even the majority that do not use the subject pronoun _vós_, in spite of the syntactic inconsistency.


----------



## Istriano

In Portugal they use _vos, vosso, convosco_ with _vocês_, in Brazil we use_ te, teu, contigo_ with _você_, in Argentina and Central America they use _te, tu/tuyo _with _vos _(_te amo a vos_). In Colombia and Costa Rica is not rare to see _usted _with _te _in the same sentence (_Usted sabe que te quiero_, a song by Carlos Palacio).

my theory
1. 1st there is a semantic neutralization
2. then forms of equivalent semantic value can be used together (and when a certain form is reduced only to a regionalism or archaism it is dropped)
[_tu _is regional and/or archaic in Brazil, but its forms _te, teu, contigo_ are normally used throughout Brazil;
_vós _is regional and/or archaic in Portugal, but its forms _vos, vosso, convosco _are normally used all over Portugal;
_vos _is used in Argentina and Central America, but _os _and _vuestro _are not)


Ustedes 1st became an informal pronoun, afer that vosotros was dropped. (general Latin American Spanish)
Usted 1st became an informal pronoun, after that tú was dropped. (in Costa Rica)
Vocês 1st became an informal pronoun, after that vós was dropped. (general Portuguese)
Você 1st become an informal pronoun, after that tu was dropped. (general Brazilian Portuguese).

When two forms suffer a semantic generalization, people end up using them at random, for exemple _teu/tua_ and _seu/sua_ in Brazil (both meaning your),
Ivete Sangalo does not ''respect'' the original lyrics (of her recorded songs) when she sings live: many times she uses _sua _for _tua_, or _tua _for _sua_ in her live shows.
It's how our brain works. Many times we he think ''in meanings'' and not ''in words''. 

Summary:
It's not that speakers of Latin American Spanish started using the formal pronoun between themselves...That's the European point of view.
_Ustedes _lost the formality it once had, that's all.  Now you get the opposite situation: _vosotros _is seen as archaic and sounds formal and ceremonial in Latin American Spanish. 

In most parts of Colombia people use all three forms: _vos_, _tú _and _usted_, and all of them are informal, so they mix it the way they like in spontaneous speech.


----------



## merquiades

Interesting theory, Istriano.  I thought it stemmed from morphology, semantics and analogy.   The forms were reduced, they sounded like "tú" or "usted" [vos hablades> hablás or hablá versus tú hablas and usted habla] then semantic confusion occurred and finally the whole scheme shifted out of analogy.  Plus, I always thought there had to be analogy and symmetry.  Why would "vos" be maintained and "vosotros" eliminated?  Why could "usted" be considered very formal in the singular, yet "ustedes" could be so informal in the plural that you could use it with brothers and sisters but with each one in the singular you wouldn't dare use "usted"?

If I try to forget the importance of grammatical structures and symmetry, it does make more sense.
In Spain "tú" and "usted" eat up "vos" while at the same time the whole structure displaces to the plural since it was already a possibility there anyway.
In Latin America "ustedes" acquaints with "vosotros", but "vosotros" not always with "ustedes" so "vosotros" is eliminated since it's no longer useful.
(Portugal does the same with "vocês" and "vós" at a later time but keeps object and possessive pronouns to be able distinguish second and third persons.  In addition Brazil does it in the singular as well)
This is divorced from "usted" so the average speaker in LA does not ponder or realize that a similar pronoun is used so differently in the singular and plural.
This is also divorced form the fact that in River Plate dialect "vos" and "tú" mixed and formed a new hybrid singular scheme so no one identified it with "vosotros" and doesn't see inconsistency in that either.
So first semantic levelling occurs then the morphology adapts.  Symmetry and coherence are irrelevant, so there is no reason.


----------



## Darkicity

Yeah, as a Latino myself; I really wish we had Vosotros form still because it flows better at least for a "voseo" speaker like myself unlike the ustedes form which always makes me stutter, plus the former is a nice change of pace as it sounds quite distinct. Spanish would much simpler if it had retained the t/v distinction as modern French did where tu is informal and vous is both formal singular and plural. Usted and ustedes just complicated things in my opinion. Tú and Vos would definitely have sufficed. Now we have vos that shares some similarities with tú but is informal, vosotros, usted and ustedes, ugh we have like 12 personal pronouns (yo, tú, vos, él, ella, usted, nosotros, vosotros, ellos, ellas, ustedes) whereas 8 would be fine!(yo, tú, él, ella, nosotros, vos, ellos y ellas) I heard that we don't have Vosotros in LA because of social standing of criollos and peninsulares who we always had to be formal with, at all times. Plus as mentioned above it would make it easier for our Spanish brothers and sisters to fit in into LA and vice versa because I know Spaniards fight it very odd when we use ustedes to address a group of them that we see as friends.


----------

