Statement of dogma

[prog]

I've actually been doing it for a while, now, but I'm going to go ahead and state it for the record:

Henceforth I will use the pronoun they (them, their) when I wish to refer to a person in the singular without specifying their gender. ← See? I just did it. That wasn't too awful, right?

Ten years ago I hated this usage. Now? It's like a warm bath.

Comments

[daerr.livejournal.com]

I'm glad to see that you've come around. It is the One True Way.

[ahkond.livejournal.com]

ALL ARE WELCOME
MOVE INTO THE LIGHT

[radiotelescope.livejournal.com]

I quit. Back to Pittsburgh for me.

[aspartaimee.livejournal.com]

you know what else is like a warm bath? sitting in urine.

this makes me sad. i think maybe i will go back to oldie tymie quaker ways and say thou makes me sad.

Funny, I've gone the other way

[taskboy3000.livejournal.com]

I use the singular masculine pronoun for neuter gender, as was the style of the nineteenth century. I need to have some sanity in the verb/pronoun agreement.

"No one in the theatre was frightened out of his wits."

"Drivers who parking in the McDonald's parking lot should expect to see his car towed at the end of the night."

Using my portable cone of silence, I ignore baseless charges of sexism and misogyny. If pressed on this, I present real examples of sexist, hurtful language.

God save the Queen's tongue!

Re: Funny, I've gone the other way

[radtea.livejournal.com]

I use the singular masculine pronoun for neuter gender, as was the style of the nineteenth century.

"They" was used as the singular pronoun in the early 19th century. No one went insane. At least, no one went more insane than they already were.

See: http://www.english.upenn.edu/~cjacobso/gender.html for some details. I came across this a while back when putting together a list of counter-arguments to the use of gender neutral language: http://enlightenment.supersaturated.com/essays/text/tomradcliffe/genderneutral.html.

I used to believe that the use of the singular "they" was a gramatical error, but it was in common use in the early 1800's, so my use of it makes me far more of a traditionalist than you. You modern neologicians have to realize that you're throwing away the great majesty and tradition of the English language with the frivolous novelty of the gender-neutral masculine pronoun. Never trust a linguistic innovation that requires an Act of Parliament.

So you should return to traditional English and accept the singular use of "they" and "them"! History is on our side--resistance is futile!

Re: Funny, I've gone the other way

[taskboy3000.livejournal.com]

This is how I understand the argument.

"They" is plural. "Everyone" is singular. Using "their" to refer to "everyone's things" creates a mismatch.

I'm afraid I'm not persuaded by numbers when it comes grammatical arguments.

However, I'm not trying to tell you how to conduct yourself grammatically. For a few more months, it's still a free country.

The last thing I want to spark in internet debate.

Re: Funny, I've gone the other way

[radtea.livejournal.com]

The question is why you believe "they" implies plural. From a discussion linked by someone else here, the following authors all used a singular "they":

Anthony Trollope
Charles Dickens
C. S. Lewis
Daniel Defoe
Edmund Spenser
Edith Wharton
Frances Sheridan
F. Scott Fitzgerald
Geoffrey Chaucer
George Bernard Shaw
George Eliot
George Orwell
Henry Fielding
H. G. Wells
Jane Austen
John Ruskin
Jonathan Swift
Lewis Carroll
Lord Byron
Lord Dunsany
Maria Edgeworth
Oliver Goldsmith
Oscar Wilde
Percy Shelley
Robert Louis Stevenson
Rudyard Kipling
Sir Walter Scott
The translators of the King James Bible
Walt Whitman
W. H. Auden
William Makepeace Thackeray
William Shakespeare

So if quantity (the OED standard) doesn't convince you of the correctness of the singular "they" perhaps quality will.

And if neither quantity nor quality convinces you, perhaps utility will: where are the cases where the singular "they" is confusing? I have never been confused by it even back when I believed it was a gramatical error. My lack of confusion, which appeared to be shared by everyone around me, was one of the things that convinced me there was no problem with.

I'm agnostic on grammar, mostly, so I'm not trying to dictate to anyone either. But I am interested in pointing out what I think is the most consistent position and why, and letting everyone else do their thing.

Re: Funny, I've gone the other way

[dougo.livejournal.com]

Do you have citations for all these authors?

Re: Funny, I've gone the other way

[dougo.livejournal.com]

In your second example, "drivers" does not agree with "his". (Plus there's an extraneous "who".)

Or were you being sarcastic?

[karlvonl.livejournal.com]

Funny, I was just reading a discussion about this in a message board the other day. Here's the thread:

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=160148

The fourth post in particular supports your position rather convincingly IMHO.