Thank you - I appreciate the perspective. I've dug out some earlier examples of the third-person imperative. I now see it as a totally different construction from the traditional subjunctive.
It's not just in Henry V that Shakespeare uses it, but also, for example, in:
Romeo and Juliet
every man betake him to his legs
every one prepare To follow this fair corse unto her grave
Love's Labour's Lost
every one give ear
Then homeward every man attach the hand Of his fair mistress
A Midsummer Night's Dream
every man look o'er his part
It also crops up in books published since then.
I have the sense that it's uncommon in print not because it's that uncommon in speech, but because it is considered informal - and therefore often edited into a
let-imperative. These examples slipped through:
1866: "
Everybody do his own work, and everybody leave everybody else alone" - that was his formula. (William Brighty Rands)
1787:
Every one take care of one — every one keep his matters right, and the commonwealth does well enough, I warrant you. (Isaiah Thomas)
1711:
Every one take heed how he standeth lest he fall (John Marten)
1707:
Come every one, take his Place provided. (John Lacy)
1676:
Every one take your possessions of this gospel of salvation. (George Fox - a possible vocative)
There are also examples before Shakespeare. E.g., it occurs in the Winchester manuscript of Malory's "Morte d'Arthur":
1470:
'Now every man take kepe to his felow!' seyde sir Launcelot. And so they trotted on togydyrs.
Unsurprisingly this was edited in 1816 to a
let-imperative:
1816:
Now let every man take heed to his fellow, said Sir Launcelot.
... though the "let" was deleted in an 1868 edition.
The oldest examples that I've found are from the Wycliffe Bible. E.g.:
~1384:
Ech man dwelle at him silf, noon go out of his place in the seuenthe dai.
Compare the KJV:
1611:
Abide yee euery man in his place: let no man goe out of his place on the seuenth day.
The KJV translation contains a hybrid second-third person imperative and a
let-imperative, while the Wycliffe translation contains two third-person imperatives, including a rare example of "no one" as subject. This is the more impressive because Hebrew itself has only a second-person imperative, which suggests that the translation into the third person had an idiomatic attraction powerful enough to overcome Wycliffe's strong preference for a very literal translation.
There are many similar examples in the Old Testament. In this interesting example from Jeremiah 25:5, subsequent second-person and third-person pronouns are co-mingled:
KJV (1611):
Turne yee againe now euery one from his euill way, and from the euil of your doings
Geneva Bible (1599):
Turne againe now euery one from his euill way, and from the wickednes of your inuentions
Coverdale Bible (1535):
Turne agayne euery man from his euell waye, & from youre wicked ymaginacions
Wycliffe Bible (~1384): T
urne ye ayen, ech man fro his yuel weie, and fro youre worste thouytis
This foreshadows - and perhaps partly explains - the present-day choice of second or third person pronouns in third-person imperatives. It also shows that the construction is radically different from the traditional subjunctive, such as is found in the Lord's Prayer.
Perhaps the third-person imperative evolved out of a second-person imperative:
Work hard, every man at what he does best. -> Everyone work hard at what he does best.
Work hard, everyone -> Everyone work hard. (promotion of vocative to subject)
That seems more likely than that it evolved from the subjunctive, or even from an infinitive of the form:
1450:
Eueriche man to brynge with hym his wif. (OED: Merlin)
.. by elision of "to". Otherwise, why should the second and third persons become interchangeable in many cases?
Third-person imperatives which take a non-personal subject:
Cars proceed slowly past road works.
Steep descent: Trucks engage low gear.
All vehicles proceed with caution.
.. cannot, as CapnPrep points out, use a second-person pronoun. However, I think it true that
if a second-person pronoun can be used in an imperative at all, then it is coreferential with a third-person equivalent. Another characteristic of third-person imperatives is (I think) that the subject can be omitted without making the sentence ungrammatical. Perhaps these two properties together are sufficient to distinguish between subjunctives and imperatives in English.
I think I would accept more than just "indefinite pronominal" subjects. E.g.:
Back row pay attention.
Last one out turn the lights off.
Passengers with tickets go to their seats, passengers without come to the desk. (Potsdam 1996)
Jane hang up her coat, Michael put away his lunch box, and Rebecca pick up the toys. (ditto)
