Inlinguistics,clusivity^[1] is a grammatical distinction betweeninclusive andexclusivefirst-personpronouns andverbal morphology, also calledinclusive "we" andexclusive "we". Inclusive "we" specifically includes theaddressee, while exclusive "we" specifically excludes the addressee; in other words, two (or more) words that both translate to "we", one meaning "you and I, and possibly someone else", the other meaning "me and some other person or persons, but not you". While imagining that this sort of distinction could be made in other persons (particularly the second) is straightforward, in fact the existence of second-person clusivity (you vs. you and they) in natural languages is controversial and not well attested.^[2] While clusivity is not a feature of the English language, it is found in many languages around the world.

The first published description of the inclusive-exclusive distinction by a European linguist was in a description oflanguages of Peru in 1560 byDomingo de Santo Tomás in hisGrammatica o arte de la lengua general de los indios de los Reynos del Perú, published inValladolid, Spain.^[3]

Clusivity paradigms may be summarized as a two-by-two grid:

In some languages, the three first-person pronouns appear to be unrelated roots. That is the case forChechen, which has singularсо (so), exclusiveтхо (txo), and inclusiveвай (vay). In others, however, all three are transparently simple compounds, as inTok Pisin, anEnglish creole spoken inPapua New Guinea, which has singularmi, exclusivemi-pela, and inclusiveyu-mi (a compound ofmi withyu "you") oryu-mi-pela. However, when only one of the plural pronouns is related to the singular, that may be the case for either one. In some dialects ofMandarin Chinese, for example, inclusive or exclusive我們／我们wǒmen is the plural form of singular我wǒ "I", and inclusive咱們／咱们zánmen is a separate root. However, inHadza, the inclusive,’one-be’e, is the plural of the singular’ono (’one-) "I", and the exclusive,’oo-be’e, is a separate^{[dubious –discuss]} root.^{[citation needed]}

It is not uncommon for two separate words for "I" to pluralize into derived words, which have a clusivity distinction. For example, inVietnamese, the familiar word for "I" (ta) pluralizes to inclusive we (chúng ta), and the formal or cold word for "I" (tôi) pluralizes into exclusive we (chúng tôi). InSamoan, the singular form of the exclusive is the regular word for "I", and the singular form of the inclusive may also occur on its own and then also means "I" but with a connotation of appealing or asking for indulgence.

In theKunama language ofEritrea, the first-person inclusive and exclusive distinction is marked ondual and plural forms of verbs, independent pronouns, and possessive pronouns.^[4]

Where verbs are inflected forperson, as in the native languages of Australia and in many Native American languages, the inclusive-exclusive distinction can be made there as well. For example, inPassamaquoddy, "I/we have it" is expressed

Singularn-tíhin (first person prefixn-)

Exclusiven-tíhin-èn (first personn- + plural suffix-èn)

Inclusivek-tíhin-èn (inclusive prefixk- + plural-èn)

In Tamil, on the other hand, the two different pronouns have the same agreement in the verb.

First-person clusivity is a common feature amongDravidian,Kartvelian, andCaucasian languages,^[5]Australian andAustronesian languages, and is also found in languages of eastern, southern, andsouthwestern Asia,Americas, and in somecreole languages. SomeSub-SaharanAfrican languages also make the distinction, such as theFula language. No European language outside theCaucasus makes this distinction grammatically, but some constructions^{[example needed]} may besemantically inclusive or exclusive.

SeveralPolynesian languages, such asSamoan andTongan, have clusivity with overtdual and plural suffixes in their pronouns. The lack of a suffix indicates the singular. The exclusive form is used in the singular as the normal word for "I", but the inclusive also occurs in the singular. The distinction is one ofdiscourse: the singular inclusive has been described as the "modesty I" in Tongan. It is often rendered in English asone, but in Samoan, its use has been described as indicating emotional involvement on the part of the speaker.

In theory, clusivity of the second person should be a possible distinction, but its existence is controversial. Clusivity in the second person is conceptually simple but nonetheless if it exists is extremely rare, unlike clusivity in the first. Hypothetical second-person clusivity would be the distinction between "you and you (and you and you ... all present)" and "you (one or more addressees) and someone else whom I am not addressing currently." These are often referred to in the literature as "2+2" and "2+3", respectively (the numbers referring to second and third person as appropriate).

Some notable linguists, such asBernard Comrie,^[6] have attested that the distinction is extant in spoken natural languages, while others, such as John Henderson,^[7] maintain that a clusivity distinction in the second person is too complex to process. Many other linguists take the more neutral position that it could exist but is nonetheless not currently attested.^[2] Horst J. Simon provides a deep analysis of second-person clusivity in his 2005 article.^[2] He concludes that oft-repeated rumors regarding the existence of second-person clusivity—or indeed, any [+3] pronoun feature beyond simple exclusive we^[8] – are ill-founded, and based on erroneous analysis of the data.

Look upwe in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

The inclusive–exclusive distinction occurs nearly universally among theAustronesian languages and the languages of northernAustralia, but rarely in the nearbyPapuan languages. (Tok Pisin, an English-Melanesiancreole, generally has the inclusive–exclusive distinction, but this varies with the speaker's language background.) It is widespread in India, featuring in theDravidian andMunda languages, as well as in severalIndo-European languages of India such asOriya,Marathi,Rajasthani,Punjabi,Dakhini, andGujarati (which either borrowed it from Dravidian or retained it as a substratum while Dravidian was displaced). It can also be found in the languages of easternSiberia, such asTungusic, as well as northernMandarin Chinese. Inindigenous languages of the Americas, it is found in about half the languages, with no clear geographic or genealogical pattern. It is also found in a fewlanguages of the Caucasus andSub-Saharan Africa, such asFulani, andKhoekhoe.^[9][10]

It is, of course, possible in any language to express the idea of clusivity semantically, and many languages provide common forms that clarify the ambiguity of their first person pronoun (English "the rest of us", Italiannoialtri). A language with a true clusivity distinction, however, does not provide a first-person plural withindefinite clusivity in which the clusivity of the pronoun is ambiguous; rather, speakers are forced to specify by the choice of pronoun or inflection, whether they are including the addressee or not. That rules out most European languages, for example. Clusivity is nonetheless a very common language feature overall. Some languages with more than one plural number make the clusivity distinction only in, for example, the dual but not in the greater plural, but other languages make it in all numbers. In the table below, the plural forms are the ones preferentially listed.

• Jim Chen,First Person Plural (analyzing the significance of inclusive and exclusive we inconstitutional interpretation)
• Payne, Thomas E. (1997),Describing morphosyntax: A guide for field linguists, Cambridge University Press,ISBN 0-521-58224-5
• Filimonova, Elena (eds). (2005).Clusivity: Typological and case studies of the inclusive-exclusive distinction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.ISBN 90-272-2974-0.
• Kibort, Anna. "Person." Grammatical Features. 7 January 2008.[2] Retrieved on 16 March 2020.

• Personal pronouns
• Grammatical conjugation
• Grammatical categories

• Articles with short description
• Short description is different from Wikidata
• Articles containing Chechen-language text
• Articles containing Chinese-language text
• All accuracy disputes
• Articles with disputed statements from May 2020
• All articles with unsourced statements
• Articles with unsourced statements from May 2020
• Articles containing Vietnamese-language text
• All articles needing examples
• Articles needing examples from November 2021
• Pages with plain IPA