Really the formality of the language should match the situation, as in the real world here and now. You won't hear a boss speak to an employee the same way she would speak to her dogs or children. She probably won't speak to a superior the same way she'd speak to a colleague. A kid won't speak to his grandma or teacher the same way he'd speak to his mates on the football field.
I work on the basis that whatever language the characters in the story are really speaking, I'm translating that into the equivalent English. Thus sometimes it's formal, sometimes it's colloquial.
If you read Shakespeare, you'll see he does the different levels of formality thing. There's a scene in Henry the IV where Prince Hal is talking to Falstaff and some other characters, and he uses "You" and "Thee" exactly the same way Welsh uses "Chi" and "Ti" and French uses "Vous" and "Tu". As modern English has lost that distinction, the only way to do it is by language choice and use (or not) of contractions.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
rosecarmine
(no subject)
Date: 2010-03-11 11:44 am (UTC)I work on the basis that whatever language the characters in the story are really speaking, I'm translating that into the equivalent English. Thus sometimes it's formal, sometimes it's colloquial.
If you read Shakespeare, you'll see he does the different levels of formality thing. There's a scene in Henry the IV where Prince Hal is talking to Falstaff and some other characters, and he uses "You" and "Thee" exactly the same way Welsh uses "Chi" and "Ti" and French uses "Vous" and "Tu". As modern English has lost that distinction, the only way to do it is by language choice and use (or not) of contractions.