Estonian to Fijian: meie can identify the group without saying whether the listener belongs
The same Estonian form can identify we or our
EKI’s personal-pronoun paradigm lists meie and its shorter alternative me in both the nominative and genitive plural. The grammatical role therefore cannot always be read from the pronoun’s spelling alone. In an original Estonian message, the form can identify the people acting or accompany something associated with those people.
That matters before choosing a Fijian equivalent. A sentence about our departure and a sentence stating that we depart can concern the same travellers while requiring different target constructions. Treating every meie as a stand-alone subject would lose the relationship expressed by a possessive phrase; treating every occurrence as ownership would distort an ordinary statement about the group.
The listener may be inside or outside that group
Hong describes a Fijian inclusive–exclusive distinction in first-person nonsingular pronouns and possessive forms. Inclusive reference brings the listener into the group; exclusive reference leaves the listener out. An Estonian source can require that distinction to be resolved from the actual participants rather than from an extra visible ending on meie.
For an original Estonian message from two visitors to their host, our arrival can concern the visitors and exclude the host. A message from somebody to their travelling companion about our arrival can include the addressee. The event noun is similar, but the participant relationship differs. Choosing one target form for both messages could wrongly make the host a member of the arriving party.
Hong’s article illustrates inclusive noda and exclusive neitou in possessive reference. The latter is discussed in a small-group setting; these forms are not supplied here as universal translations of Estonian meie. They demonstrate that the target can commit to both membership and group size where a source pronoun alone leaves those decisions unstated.
An exact number and a short pronoun answer different questions
EKI’s kaks entry supplies an exact numeral and illustrates it with two children and several time expressions. If an original Estonian introduction explicitly identifies two travellers, that numerical information is stronger evidence about group size than the mere presence of a plural personal pronoun. Preserve the stated two rather than expanding the party through an unsuitable target interpretation.
Hong distinguishes dual reference from a limited plural commonly called trial, and cautions that the latter need not mean exactly three. A Fijian small-group form therefore cannot be assumed to supply an exact headcount whenever the Estonian message says merely we. Conversely, an explicit Estonian two should not disappear into an unspecified crowd.
The group’s membership and size are separate decisions. Two people may include the listener or exclude them; a larger group can do either as well. Source case determines how that group relates to the clause, but it does not settle those target distinctions by itself. Read an Estonian meie phrase through all three relationships—its grammatical role, the people included and any stated quantity—so the Fijian result preserves the intended travelling party rather than only a general plural meaning.
Language references