Author Topic: Why must ‘brothers and sisters’ be shortened to ‘brethren’?  (Read 8208 times)

Miss Mae

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 479
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • Email
Frank Russell, professor of history and classics at Transylvania University, said it so himself. “On the scale of things in the history of the Catholic Church, it isn’t terribly significant, but it’s not insignificant, either.”

He was referring to the changes the English-speaking Roman Catholic Church did in the ancient prayers, rubrics and readings used every mass—the third time the Church altered its service after 2,000 years.

But is it right to collectively call ‘brothers and sisters’ to ‘brethren’? The FreeDictionary.com confirms that it is the archaic plural form of ‘brother.’

Joe Carillo

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4659
  • Karma: +208/-2
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Why must ‘brothers and sisters’ be shortened to ‘brethren’?
« Reply #1 on: November 16, 2011, 08:57:01 AM »
Yes, it’s right to collectively refer to “brothers and sisters” as “brethren” but only in the context of addressing them as members of a religious sect, profession, or society, as when a priest or minister addresses a congregation consisting of both males and females as follows: “Brethren, as we celebrate the Christmas holidays…” A lay person will sound so pious or exasperatingly formal addressing his or her brothers and sisters as “brethren”; can you imagine someone telling you this: “I had a nasty quarrel with my brethren last night over our monthly allowance”? It’s obviously more sensible and idiomatic to simply address them as, well, “my brothers and sisters.” Of course, when a lawyer or someone from outside the family refers collectively to brothers and sisters in that family, the more appropriate term is “siblings,” which denotes two or more individuals having one common parent. Note how natural this statement sounds: “There was a nasty quarrel between the siblings last night over their monthly allowance.”

“Brethren” being the plural form of the word “brother,” it does sound chauvinistic to collectively refer to brothers and sisters as “brethren.” It’s evidently for this reason that English used to have a different plural word for each, “brethren” for brothers and “sistren” for sisters, but it was a distinction that didn’t survive the test of time.

Here’s how the online Oxford Dictionaries explains the linguistic fate of these plural words:   

“Both brethren and sistren were used in Middle English (12th to 15th centuries) simply as the plural forms of brother and sister. From about 1600, brothers began to take over from brethren (Shakespeare used both), except when referring to fellow members of a religious community, or a society or profession. It still has this meaning today, and you may also find it used in ironic or humorous contexts (e.g. ‘our brethren in the popular national press’).

Sistren, on the other hand, had fallen completely out of use by the middle of the 16th century. It has recently been revived, typically by feminist writers, with the new meaning ‘fellow women’ (e.g. ‘Lead singer Beth starts out most shows with several shout-outs to her sistren’). This use is not yet well established in standard English.”

So there…

Miss Mae

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 479
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Why must ‘brothers and sisters’ be shortened to ‘brethren’?
« Reply #2 on: November 16, 2011, 02:31:31 PM »
Okay..