Cover not available

In:Constructing Collectivity: 'We' across languages and contexts
Edited by Theodossia-Soula Pavlidou
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 239] 2014
► pp. 1–20

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
authorization required

Constructing collectivity with ‘we’

An introduction

 | Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece
Published online: 27 February 2014
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.239.03pav
References (53)
References
Adetunji, Akinbiyi. 2006. “Inclusion and exclusion in political discourse: Deixis in Olusegun Obasanjo’s speeches.” Journal of Language and Linguistics 5(2): 177–191.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Assouline, Dalit. 2010. “The emergence of two first-person plural pronouns in Haredi Jerusalemite Yiddish.” Journal of Germanic Linguistics 22(1): 1–22. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baumgarten, Nicole. 2008. “Writer construction in English and German popularized academic discourse: The uses of we and wir.” Multilingua 27(4): 409–438. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bazzanella, Carla. 2009. “ Noi come meccanismo di intensità.” In Fenomeni di Intensità nell’Italiano Parlato , Barbara Gili-Fivela and Carla Bazzanella(eds), 101–114. Firenze: Cesati.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. this volume. “Grammar, interaction, and context: Unmarked and marked uses of the first person plural in Italian.” In Constructing Collectivity: ‘We’ across Languages and Contexts , Theodossia-Soula Pavlidou (ed.). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Benveniste, Emile. 1971. Problems in General Linguistics . Transl. byM.E. Meek. Coral Gables, Florida: University of Miami Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Borthen, Kaja. 2010. “On how we interpret plural pronouns.” Journal of Pragmatics 42: 1799–1815. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brewer, Marilynn B. and Gardner, Wendy.1996. “Who is this ‘we’? Levels of collective identity and self representations.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 71(1): 83–93. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bull, Peter and Fetzer, Anita.2006. “Who are we and who are you? The strategic use of forms of address in political interviews.” Text & Talk 26: 1–36. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Corpus of Spoken Greek . Institute of Modern Greek Studies (M. Triandaphyllidis Foundation), Aristotle University of Thessaloniki ([URL], accessed on Jully 21, 2013)
Cysouw, Michael. 2003. The Paradigmatic Structure of Person Marking . Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Fina, Anna. 1995. “Pronominal choice, identity, and solidarity in political discourse.” Text 15(3): 379–410. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Enfield, Nick J. and Tanya Stivers(eds). 2007. Person Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural and Social Perspectives . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fludernik, Monika. 1991. “Shifters and deixis: Some reflections on Jakobson, Jespersen, and reference.” Semiotica 86: 193–230. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fortanet, Inmaculada. 2004. “The use of we in university lectures: Reference and function.” English for Specific Purposes 23(1): 45–66. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1981. Forms of Talk . Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Helmbrecht, Johannes. 2002. “Grammar and function of we.” In Us and Others: Social Identities across Languages, Discourses and Cultures , Anna Duszak(ed.), 31–49. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Iñigo-Mora, Isabel. 2004. “On the use of the personal pronoun we in communities.” Journal of Language and Politics 3: 27–52. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman. 1971. “Shifters, verbal categories, and the russian verb.” In Selected Writings of Roman Jakobson , Vol. II, 130–147. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1959[1922]. Language: Its Nature, Development and Origin . London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kuo, Chih-Hua. 1999. “The use of personal pronouns: Role relationships in scientific journal articles.” English for Specific Purposes 18(2): 121–138. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lerner, Gene. 1993. “Collectivities in action: Establishing the relevance of conjoined participation in conversation.” Text 3(2): 213–245.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lerner, Gene and Kitzinger, Celia. 2007. “Extraction and aggregation in the repair of individual and collective self-reference.” Discourse Studies 9(4): 526–557. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mao, LuMing R.1996. “Chinese first person pronoun and social implicature.” Journal of Asian Pacific Communication 7(3/4): 106–128.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Margutti, Piera. 2007. “Genitori italiani, sportive austrialiani, cuochi lucani: descrivere sé e gli altri in categorie di appartenenza.” In La Construzione Interazionale di Identità: Repertori Linguistici e Pratiche Discorsive degli Italiani in Australia , Anna Ciliberti(ed.), 139–175. Milano: FrancoAngeli.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mühlhäusler, Peter. this volume. “The pragmatics of first person non-singular pronouns in Norf’k.” In Constructing Collectivity: ‘We’ across Languages and Contexts , Theodossia-Soula Pavlidou(ed.). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Mühlhäusler, Peter and Harré, Rom. 1990. Pronouns and People . Cambridge, MA.: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oh, Sun-Young. 2007. “The interactional meanings of quasi-pronouns in Korean conversation.” In Person Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural and Social Perspectives , Nick J. Enfield and Tanya Stivers(eds), 203–225. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pavlidou Th.-S.2008. Εμε?ς και η συγκρ?τηση (?μφυλων) συλλογικοτ?των [We and the construction of (gendered) collectivities]. In Light and Warmth: In Memory of A.-Ph. Christidis , Maria Theodoropoulou(ed.), 437–453. Thessaloniki: Center for the Greek Language.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pavlidou, Theodossia-Soula. 2012. “Collective aspects of subjectivity: The subject pronoun εμε?ς (‘we’) in Modern Greek.” In Subjectivity in Language and in Discourse , Nicole Baumgarten, Inke Du Bois and Juliane House(eds), 33–65. Leiden: Brill. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. this volume. “Replying with εμε?ς (‘we’) in Greek conversations.” In Constructing Collectivity: ‘We’ across Languages and Contexts , Theodossia-Soula Pavlidou(ed.). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Peirce, Charles S.1955. “Logic as semiotic: The theory of signs.” In Philosophical Writings of Peirce (ed. byJ. Buchler), 98–119. New York: Dover Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Petersoo, Pille. 2007. “What does ‘we’ mean? National deixis in the media.” Journal of Language and Politics 6(3): 419–436. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Proctor, Katarzyna and Su, Lily I-Wen. 2011. “The 1st person plural in political discourse – American Q1 politicians in interviews and in a debate.” Journal of Pragmatics 43(13): 3251–3266. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pyykkö, Ritta. 2002. “Who is ‘we’ in Russian political discourse.” In Us and Others: Social Identities across Languages, Discourses and Cultures , Anna Duszak(ed.), 233–248. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey. 1995. Lectures on Conversation . Vol. I & II, edited byGail Jefferson, with an introduction byEmanuel A. Schegloff. Oxford: Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey and Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1979. “Two preferences in the organization of references to persons in conversation and their interaction.” In Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology , George Psathas(ed.), 15–21. New York: Irvington.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A.1996. “Some practices for referring to persons in talk-in-interaction: A partial sketch of a systematics.” In Studies in Anaphora , Barbara Fox(ed.), 437–485. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2007. “Conveying who you are: The presentation of self, strictly speaking.” In Person Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural and Social Perspectives , Enfield, Nick J. and Tanya Stivers(eds), 123–148. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Scheibman, Joanne. 2004. “Inclusive and exclusive patterning of the English first person plural: evidence from conversation.” In Language, Culture, and Mind , Michael Achard and Suzanne Kemmer(eds), 377–396. CSLI Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sedikides, Constantine and Marilynn B. Brewer. 2001. “Individual self, relational self, and collective self: Partners, opponents, or strangers?” In Individual Self, Relational Self, and Collective Self , Constantine Sedikides and Marilynn B. Brewer(eds), 1–4. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Siewierska, Anna. 2004. Person . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Silverstein, Michael. 1976. “Shifters, linguistic categories, and cultural description.” In Meaning in Anthropology , Keith Basso and Henry A. Selby(eds), 11–55. Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stewart, Miranda. 2001. “Pronouns of power and solidarity: The case of Spanish first person plural nosotros.” Multilingua 20: 155–169. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stivers, Tanya, Nick J. Enfield and Stephen C. Levinson. 2007. “Person reference in interaction.” In Person Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural and Social Perspectives , Enfield, Nick J. and Tanya Stivers(eds), 1–20. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Temmerman, Martina. 2008. “«Today, we're all Danes»: Argumentative meaning of the 1st and 2nd person pronouns in newspaper editorials on the Muhammad cartoons.” L’Analisi Linguistica e Letteraria XVI: 289–303(Special Issue: Word Meaning in Argumentative Dialogue).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Urban, Greg. 1988. “The pronominal pragmatics of nuclear war discourse.” Multilingua 7(1/2): 67–93. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vassileva, Irena. 2000. Who is the Author? A Contrastive Analysis of Authorial Presence in English, German, French, Russian and Bulgarian Academic Discourse . Sankt Augustin: Asgard Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vergaro, Carla. 2011. “Shades of impersonality: Rhetorical positioning in academic writing of Italian students of English.” Linguistics and Education 22: 118–132. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wales, Katie. 1996. Personal Pronouns in Present-day English . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (24)

Cited by 24 other publications

Aijón Oliva, Miguel A.
2025. Infinitives, discourse viewpoint, and referential interpretation of the initiator in Spanish digital news discourse. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) DOI logo
Hanks, Elizabeth
2025. Frequency and listener perceptions of the nursery we in instructor-student interactions. Applied Pragmatics 7:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Kuzai, Einat
2025. Constructing self–other distinction in dialogic contexts. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) DOI logo
Theodoropoulou, Maria
2025. football club is family. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 23:1 ► pp. 90 ff. DOI logo
Biri, Ylva
2024. Personal conviction against general knowledge. In Self- and Other-Reference in Social Contexts [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 342], ► pp. 14 ff. DOI logo
Palander-Collin, Minna & Minna Nevala
2024. Self- and other-reference in social contexts. In Self- and Other-Reference in Social Contexts [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 342], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Portillo Fernández, Jesús
2024. Usos connotativos e intencionales del discurso en español formulado en primera persona del plural. Análisis pragmático e inferencial. Moenia DOI logo
Guliashvili, Nino
2023. National identity revisited. Journal of Language and Politics 22:6 ► pp. 779 ff. DOI logo
UȚĂ BĂRBULESCU, OANA & MELANIA ROIBU
2023. Câteva observații despre... noi. Clusivitatea în limba română. Studii și cercetări lingvistice 2023:2 ► pp. 306 ff. DOI logo
Han, Yanmei & Tao Xiong
2022. Using wǒmen (we) to mean s/he in Chinese parents’ interaction. Pragmatics and Society 13:1 ► pp. 126 ff. DOI logo
DuBord, Elise M.
2021. Nosotros como familia: the negotiation of group identity in a binational community of practice. Language and Intercultural Communication 21:5 ► pp. 543 ff. DOI logo
Van Herck, Rebecca, Babette Dobbenie & Sofie Decock
2021. Person- versus content-oriented approaches in English and German email responses to customer complaints: a cross-cultural analysis of moves and first-person pronouns. Intercultural Pragmatics 18:2 ► pp. 203 ff. DOI logo
Jaworska, Sylvia & Tigran Sogomonian
2019. After we #VoteLeave we can #TakeControl. In Reference and Identity in Public Discourses [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 306], ► pp. 181 ff. DOI logo
LaCasse, Dora
2019. The persistence of expression: Clusivity, partial co-reference, and socioeconomic differentiation of first person plural subject pronoun expression in Spanish. Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics 12:1 ► pp. 65 ff. DOI logo
Nevala, Minna & Ursula Lutzky
2019. Pragmatic explorations of reference and identity in public discourses. In Reference and Identity in Public Discourses [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 306], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Kleinke, Sonja & Birte Bös
2018. Indeterminate us and them: The complexities of referentiality, identity and group construction in a public online discussion. In The Discursive Construction of Identities On- and Offline [Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture, 78], ► pp. 153 ff. DOI logo
Kleinke, Sonja, Nuria Hernández & Birte Bös
2018. Introduction. In The Discursive Construction of Identities On- and Offline [Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture, 78], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Fasselt, Rebecca
2016. (Post)Colonial We-Narratives and the “Writing Back” Paradigm: Joseph Conrad's The Nigger of the “Narcissus” and Ngũgĩ Wa Thiong'o's A Grain of Wheat . Poetics Today 37:1 ► pp. 155 ff. DOI logo
Gordon, Cynthia & Melissa Luke
2016. “We Are in the Room to Serve Our Clients”. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 35:1 ► pp. 56 ff. DOI logo
Dori-Hacohen, Gonen
2014. Establishing social groups in Hebrew. In Constructing Collectivity [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 239], ► pp. 187 ff. DOI logo
Pavlidou, Theodossia-Soula
2014. Replying with the freestanding ‘we’ 
in Greek conversations. In Constructing Collectivity [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 239], ► pp. 159 ff. DOI logo
Vassileva, Irena G.
2014. Bulgarian ‘we’ and audience involvement 
in academic writing. In Constructing Collectivity [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 239], ► pp. 287 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2021. The Politics of Person Reference [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 320], DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2025. The Person in Politics [Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture, 107], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue