The Royal Canterlot Voice and You: A Quick [1] and Dirty Guide to Speaking Far Too Loudly · 3:02am Jul 19th, 2013
The Royal Canterlot Voice and You: A Quick [1] and Dirty Guide to Speaking Far Too Loudly
Hello! I am Comrade Sparkle, resident junior grammar nerd, and this is a quick guide on writing in the ROYAL CANTERLOT VOICE!
*ahem*
The "Royal Canterlot Voice" is a lot more than just throwing a some "thou's", "thine's", "-st's", and "-th's" on the page. It's grammar. There are rules.
The "Royal Canterlot Voice", as we know it, is actually Early Modern English, which follows in the grand English tradition of making fun of the funny way we used to speak. Anachronisms are fun.
(Here is the wikipedia article on it, all the information I'll be presenting will be covered in more depth there--here I'm going to stick to common errors and pitfalls)
Pronouns
-Thou/Thee/Thy/Thine is only used for second person singular.
-Ye or You always refers to second person plural (assuming you're using thou as the singular) This is an important distinction, because unless you live in the American South, there is no functional difference between second person singular and plural in English.
-Early Modern English uses possessive pronouns as genitive pronouns in the first and second person (singular) when the word that it precedes begins with a vowel. What does this mean? Instead of saying "My eyes are heavy with sleep," you'd say, "Mine eyes are heavy with sleep." Be careful, though, of over-regularizing this rule, if the word doesn't begin with a vowel you don't use the possessive, you'd still just say "My lids are heavy with sleep."
-There was no "It" until the 17th century, "He" was used as the gender neutral pronoun prior to "It" being adopted. (There is a line you skate, when writing Early Modern English; actually doing this might make you cross the line, though if you can pull it off, more power to you)
Verbs
-Instances of "-st" and "-th" [3] at the end of verbs are not applied at the ends of third person singular, just use "-s"
-Early Modern English uses similar rules to Romance languages governing the perfect tense. Instead of "I have come home," they would say, "I am come home." [4] (read the footnote, do it; do it now)
-Optionally, when writing the progressive tense, instead of saying, for instance: "I am swimming," you can say: "I do swim." When I was taking French in high school my teacher, Mr. Freeman, drilled into us that the present tense in French has three meanings in english: "I verb," "I do verb," and, "I am verbing." Though Modern English only commonly uses "I am verbing", when writing Early Modern English feel free to use any of them.
I hope some of you find this helpful, and if any of you want me to clarify any of the grammar rules, just ask in the comments. I can edit this as needed to clarify.
-Comrade
[1] Quick is relative, and more of a marketing term. I promise nothing. [2]
[2] Stealing the footnote idea from Ghost of Heraclitus, as well as borrowing his audacity at putting a footnote in a footnote.
[3] If the verb ends with a consonant you add an 'e' in front of the ending, making them "-est" and "-eth" respectively
[4] They only do this for intransitive verbs, in grammar terms this means they cannot take direct objects. To figure out if they are transitive or intransitive, just ask yourself if you can "verb it", if you can, it can take a direct object. Something to remember, however, is that there is a difference between a verb and the reflexive form of the verb, if you can only "verb yourself" then you use "to have" as the helping verb. To reiterate: If the verb is intransitive, meaning it cannot take a direct object, you use "to be" as the helping verb instead of "to have". Example: it does not make sense to say "I come it", so you use the verb "to be", thus: "I am come home".
Addendum: Lunae Lumen has brought up some interesting exceptions and points in a comment.
Yeah, Comrade Sparkle seems a little off on this point. There are some historical dialects where the third person "-th" had been completely replaced with "-s", while the second person "-st" ending remained (John Milton comes to mind).
There are others where they are both used. E.g., http://biblehub.com/kjv/psalms/23.htm from the KJV Bible. "Thou anointest" but "My cup runneth".
Shakespeare seems to sprinkle the "-th" endings around rather sporadically. There may be a rhyme or reason to it (emulating regional dialects or some such), but I'm not sure.
Still, when they are used, "-st" is invariably second person, "-th" invariably third person. In every instance I've seen. Well, every instance from that period.
These things said, the guide's advice is aimed specifically at writers for Princess Luna. In Luna Eclipsed, best princess used only a single "-th" (hath), but many "-st" (and even a couple of those were left off where they would sound odd). It yields dialog that is much less stilted and awkward. Just enough anachronism to make the point without driving that point home with a twenty pound sledgehammer.
I feel like you're trying to say something here. I also would like to point out that you forgot to mention the volume threshold necessary to move from old English to RCV. Being a loud person myself I feel cheated by that omission.
ON ANOTHER NOTE. After looking at your profile page again --
You have no right to have that spot there unless you've read Composure to its current chapter. And then waited on Varanus to update it. NO RIGHT I SAY.
Edit: Double post... I backed to this page and didn't see my comment to edit. So sorry. But not sorry at all. Still sorry. Not really. Periods. . ... ...
1220155
Actually I was just referring to "y'all"
1220166
I know. And I like that word. Don't get sophisticated on me, Northerner.
I'm acting offended for the sake of acacting offended. I hope it doednt offend you.
1220171
Though I don't use it myself, I can appreciate it
. I like the distinction it brings. English is at its heart a dynamic language, and colloquialisms such as those are par for the course
. The way I see it the primary function of language is to communicate, and if it does that it is fine
. That being SAID, I know I can also wax a bit of a grammar nazi at times
. How I manage to reconcile these two facets of myself, even I don't know
.
1220182
Life is an exercise in exceptions, mate. Y'all. Y'all. Y'all. No matter how many types I type it, my phone refuses to change yall to y'all. It does if it's in quotes, but not normally. AGONIZING.
This is good stuff, and should be consulted by more writers.
Having said that, I'm not sure what you would make of Luna's speech in my latest story...
1258351
My god
. That plug
. It's so... shameless
. I think I'm aroused
.
It's all good
. Glad you find it useful
!
1258492
Yes, it's a shameless plug.
But I also thought you might be amused.
This was hardly dirty at all. I feel cheated.
Splendid guide.
1333133
Very glad you like it! Any suggestions as to what I should cover next?
1333145
I can't say I've been keeping track of what's out there and what's not.
And you didn't mention this little guide why?
1347630
This is the one that started it all. I remember it fondly. If you have any grammar concepts you want me to touch bases with, just message me either on a blog, on my user page, or pm me. I'd be happy to help. I think I'll draft a basic lesson on the parts of speech tonight or tomorrow, as was discussed on the other blog. It's really quite hard to talk about grammar when people lack the terminology. It's like trying to teach someone English in French.
grammar rules?
stream1.gifsoup.com/view1/3615032/fuck-you-i-do-what-i-want-o.gif
I'm currently organizing a pre-Nightmare fic. Unfortunately, I'm not sure how to use the Royal Canterlot Voice without it sounding forced. Suggestions, if you're not busy?
1378040
It's hard to say much more than what I put in this blog post without knowing more about what you're writing about. When I write Luna I tend towards a more formal diction. If you couple this with the rules I mention above, you'll get a decent Luna. The real trick, though (if you're going for this, at least), is to still make Luna relatable. Think about the Nightmare Night episode. Even though Luna had trouble communicating, she was still very sincere and earnest. In the end it will depend on how you want to write Luna.
When you actually get some dialogue written down feel free to run it by me either here on FimFic or on skype. (I'll put my skype info on my bio).
Cheers,
-Comrade
1378265
Alright, thanks for the offer. I think I'll do that, once I have my plot set out.
1378265
Though it might be the proper form to speak in correct, early modern English, I doubt most people would catch such errors when reading, save for the more savvy among us who are Shakespearians die hards.
For me, I sort Canterlot speak to be strictly formal.
Evocatively, I use it to express anger, surprise, disdain, or perhaps comedic effect to knock somepony's socks off if I am feeling particularly silly.
At least, that is my experience with it.
1752467
I'm actually referring to "Y'all" there. I'm glad you found it helpful!
Nice guide. I've seen people mess up what'retheycalleds, conjugations?, more times than I can count, so I'd enjoy it if you added a brief bit on why "thou hath a bucket" and "Our Sister hast a piece of cake" (*twitch*) are wrong.
Side ramble: I'm from the UK. My generation never learned formal grammar at school and that sucks hard. (Especially when you come to learn foreign languages!) I'm lucky to have read a lot and picked up this kind of usage naturally, but I lack the vocabulary to describe the actual rules at play. Grammar's cool and more people should be taught about it - things make sense when you know the underlying logic!
2235512
Thanks! I do have to say, though, that there is no distinction between ending a verb in -st and in -th. They were both popular at different times, and take place in the same words. So, if you want to test if you're using the correct word,just remove the -st or -th and see if it makes sense. Your first example then would be: "[You] [has] a bucket," and your second example would be: "Our Sister has a piece of cake." Clearly the first one is wrong, whereas the second one is correct.
It's a similar situation on this side of the pond, my friend. I learned most of what I know about English grammar in French class. Sometimes that comes back to bite me—for instance I consider the conditional a tense, when in English it is much closer to a mood.
Haha, sink or swim, I suppose. You either learn the grammar from the ground up, or you struggle REALLY HARD in foreign language classes.
Most native speakers have a fairly decent internal compass as far as communication goes. I can almost guarantee, though, that without actually learning a lot of the rules, you'd fall into the same pitfalls everyone else in your situation would. Things I would look out for are comma splices, run-on sentences, punctuation in dialogue, and comma rules as a whole.
I've basically started making this blog series more of a reactionary affair. If you would like for me to write up on another subject, feel free to post a comment somewhere to that effect, and feel free to badger me until I do it.
Cheers,
-Comrade
2235858 Aagh comma splices drive me nuts - even if it was only relatively recently I learned what they're called. Fortunately, like I said, I seem to have picked up correct usage (and even become pretty much a pedant) without formal lessons. It's a blessing and a curse, being forever enraged by greengrocer's apostrophes.
Really? Never come across that before. I've always read '"-st" second person, "-th" third person'.
gifstumblr.com/images/fascinating_587.gif
2235885
Yeah, Comrade Sparkle seems a little off on this point. There are some historical dialects where the third person "-th" had been completely replaced with "-s", while the second person "-st" ending remained (John Milton comes to mind).
There are others where they are both used. E.g., http://biblehub.com/kjv/psalms/23.htm from the KJV Bible. "Thou anointest" but "My cup runneth".
Shakespeare seems to sprinkle the "-th" endings around rather sporadically. There may be a rhyme or reason to it (emulating regional dialects or some such), but I'm not sure.
Still, when they are used, "-st" is invariably second person, "-th" invariably third person. In every instance I've seen. Well, every instance from that period.
These things said, the guide's advice is aimed specifically at writers for Princess Luna. In Luna Eclipsed, best princess used only a single "-th" (hath), but many "-st" (and even a couple of those were left off where they would sound odd). It yields dialog that is much less stilted and awkward. Just enough anachronism to make the point without driving that point home with a twenty pound sledgehammer.
2967475
Without doubt! Also tied for most adorkable.
2967475
You bring up some very interesting points, and with English being the beast it is, I'm not surprised at all that these examples exist. Looking back, I can question whether or not it was a good idea to take such a hard stance on some matters, but in the end this blog was meant to help people write good prose, and largely I stand by my advice. It's going to virtually always be better to be internally consistent.
I went ahead and added it in a quote at the bottom of the post. Thanks for the input!
Oh, someone did do this before I did. I think you did it better than I did. I'll add a link to here on mine.
3171409
Nice to see people are still seeing this every once in a while. Glad it's still helping people. Cheers.
I am not entirely sure if I can speak it properly. I usually have an easier time with multiple examples but I will try with this.
Can Thee give more examples?!
I always liked the way David Eddings (an actual English professor) did this for the gods of his setting. The way they spoke gave them a powerfully Biblical vibe that was exceptionally appropriate.
A selection from an in-story holy book, specifically of the antagonist god:
4277835
That's a very effective use! Thank you very much for sharing. I especially like how capitalization was used—gives it a very heavy, old testament vibe. And the line:
uses very peculiar syntax that really helps drive the difference home.
4280022
For what is a fairly light-hearted fantasy, the Eddings books have a lot of great little gems like this! Not least the fantastic characters.
3263217
‘Thee’ is an object pronoun, not subject. You would not write "Can him give more examples?" So you should use "Canst thou give more examples?"
Something else that should be added: "you" is not just plural, it is also second-person singular for strangers of equal rank and higher-ups. "Thou" is reserved for friends, social inferiors, and people you want to insult. If you encounter someone who you openly despise as lower in some way--a villain who doesn't even get the distinction of "worthy opponent", you might call them "thou" as a subtle way of insulting their worth.
So, Luna would refer to everypony as "thou" unless she was addressing more than one pony (remember that "thou" is never plural), but basically everyone except Celestia would call her "you", even if they were all speaking Early Modern English. Luna might refer to Celestia as "you", but that depends on the author's interpretation of their relative ranks, as well as their level of closeness. That is, if Celestia outranks Luna and hasn't encouraged her to be informal when they're together, Luna would use "you".