Revisiting this comment, it reminds me of French and similar languages, where the literal translation is "do you have hunger / thirst ?".
An example - are you guys hungry? - kyaa aap logon ko bhookh lagi hai? - [literal translation: do you people feel hunger?] source: I'm a native speaker. Using the literal translation of "are you people hungry?" - " kyaa aap log bhookhe hain?" - has different connotations [not used by natives in this context] and may not be as polite.
Ditto. Thanks for this valuable piece of socio-linguistic information. I am a New Yorker and the translation of āp log as "you people" sounds socio-linguistically off key. Since āp is supposed to show respect/formality, and around here, "you people" verges on impolite, if said to strangers, "you people" seems wrong. I think we avoid saying "you people" in more formal circumstances by saying "All of you" or even "you all". I think that in most of North America, people would say "you folks", but that would elicit smirks in NYC. I am beginning to hear "folks" replacing "people" a bit in the North East. I suppose it is an aspect of the homogenization of the American Language.
"You people" especially to Americans will have racial connotations (it's often a racist way white people refer to black people) and should be avoided. It should not be used here. Colloquially "you guys" or "you all(=ya'll)" would be acceptable, but the answer should use the standard English use of "you" in the plural id est "Are you(pl) thirsty?"
The problem here is that English has a different flavor all over the globe. It may sound loosely racist in the US (although I think it is a bit of a stretch), but that is not the case elsewhere I know of. Aren't we getting too politically correct by avoiding a very natural English expression.
But I agree that they should also accept the alternative you suggested, even the 'ya'll' :)
If you meet speakers of Indian English, they naturally address any group as "you people" or, if they are a member of the group, "we people." It's standard practice in their dialect of English, and shows the influence of Indic grammar.
It's better to get used to encountering the most prevalent forms used in Indian English than to insist on American or British English as the standard. What an irony it would be to engage in cultural imperialism in the name of political correctness.
Not sure if it's racist (I think that really depends on the context), but I (in the US) perceive "you people" as quite rude. A typical context is "What's wrong with you people?" -- and of course whether it's racist or not depends on who the "people" are. (I have in mind DMV employees or telephone customer-service agents.)
I agree and disagree!
I believe that "you people" is a pretty standard phrasing in American English. In the early 90s there was a politician who once used the phrase to address African-Americans in a way that was contextually demeaning. Geneally, I think it's acceptable, though a bit brusque -- and I would advise a student of English to avoid using it to address a group of African-Americans! However, it's probably the most natural translation for "aap log."
"You (pl)" would be accurate and acceptable.
"You all" may be less problematic, though I think that "you all" would only be used in a situation where the speaker wanted to emphasize that they are addressing the entirety of a group.
"Y'all" itself is more flexible, and I use it constantly, but it may be too informal to serve as a translation of "aap log."
"You guys" is also too informal. Further, it is insensitive to gender, and in some contexts comical.