I remember finding it bizarre how French and Spanish had gendered nouns. Bizarre to think of inanimate objects being a he or a she.. definitely a case to change those languages to be more gender neutral.
"What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbour".
You takes the singular and the plural form, @Loxley. They is only ever plural. It is never grammatically correct to refer to one person as they, although some people do so. If you are uncomfortable with he, you should say he or she. This can become awkward and absurd, which is why the male pronoun is preferred.
Oh yes, @didyw, I've done the fewer rant. But I am not being pedantic, I hope. Words are added and dropped, constructions change but there does need to be a framework, I believe, that aids comprehension.
If this were maths, and I suddenly objected to a number or a symbol, say I decided that 2 was biased in favour of couples so I would always refer to it as 1 because that was more valid to my life choices, you would gently point out that I was crackers. But they is MORE THAN ONE and it should agree with other words in the sentence. That's not pedantry, it's a fact.
@Posy what about people who are non-binary - who don't identify as either he or she? It's for them that 'they' is repurposed a a singular, because no other word exists in English. I'm all for creating a new, singular, gender neutral pronoun, but until we have it, there are folks out there who will experience constant misgendering simply because our language doesn't accommodate them. That to me is more of a problem than doing something which is grammatically incorrect.
There are times when we have to change the language to be inclusive. A good example of how using masculine pronouns to refer to everyone can impact women's sense of ostracisation here: https://gap.hks.harvard.edu/when-he-doesn’t-mean-you-gender-exclusive-language-ostracism
Grammar has changed over time and I guess always will. Old English had much more inflexion than modern English, and 'the' didn't exist (just 'this' and 'that'). It borrowed the pronoun 'they' from Old Norse from the vikings who settled in the UK. The evolution of Old English into Middle English included the loss of most gendered grammar. Being more inclusive seems a good a reason as any to hurry the evolution and make 'they' singular and plural, as 'you' is
…. Being more inclusive seems a good a reason as any to hurry the evolution and make 'they' singular and plural, as 'you' is
I’m all for being inclusive. The problem with the solution you posit is that using ‘you’ is not problematic as it involves two-way conversation where both participants are involved.
However using ‘they’ as either singular or plural involves two correspondents referring to a third entity which may be one or more than one.
I used to prepare documents for legal presentation … it was imperative that I avoided any possibility for ambiguity at the time or in the future … I would’ve been very wary of using ‘they’ to refer to an individual.
Gardening in Central Norfolk on improved gritty moraine over chalk ... free-draining.
New words are introduced all the time and this seems like the perfect moment. We need a replacement for he/him/his/she/her and hers. Perhaps an online poll, nationally, could find and choose these words and people could use them as a matter of choice, without doing violence to our grammar.
It's not a question of inclusive or exclusive for me. It's just about making sense. Clearly, language can and has been used in a gendered way but these usages slip into tradition and really shouldn't make women feel ostracised. There are much bigger fish to fry, like universal access to education, equal pay, appropriate health care.... on and on and on. Why muddy a perfectly clear language when there are so many bigger causes?
@Posy Language affects the way we see yhe world - it has to, because for most of us it's how we think and how we describe our experiences. If language isn't inclusive, how can we expect aspects of society to become more inclusive? That's my view, anyway. It's not an either/or in tackling the issues you describe and tackling language. I see tackling the way our language shapes us as part of tackling equality - we can do both!
BlueBirder: "I'm all for creating a new, singular, gender neutral pronoun, but until we have it, there are folks out there who will experience constant misgendering simply because our language doesn't accommodate them. That to me is more of a problem than doing something which is grammatically incorrect"
I totally agree, the misgendering of trans people can cause a lot of pain and unhappiness, maybe more than most people realise, and I believe this should be the basis of the conversation. Surely not causing further anguish to a vulnerable group must trump sticking to grammatical "rules"? Yes, accepted, there may be a certain amount of confusion, but on the (rare) occasions when there is genuine confusion, that can be addressed on an ad hoc basis. In my experience, for the most part, using they/them doesn't cause too much confusion (context is all).
Posts
If this were maths, and I suddenly objected to a number or a symbol, say I decided that 2 was biased in favour of couples so I would always refer to it as 1 because that was more valid to my life choices, you would gently point out that I was crackers. But they is MORE THAN ONE and it should agree with other words in the sentence. That's not pedantry, it's a fact.
There are times when we have to change the language to be inclusive. A good example of how using masculine pronouns to refer to everyone can impact women's sense of ostracisation here: https://gap.hks.harvard.edu/when-he-doesn’t-mean-you-gender-exclusive-language-ostracism
Grammar has changed over time and I guess always will. Old English had much more inflexion than modern English, and 'the' didn't exist (just 'this' and 'that'). It borrowed the pronoun 'they' from Old Norse from the vikings who settled in the UK. The evolution of Old English into Middle English included the loss of most gendered grammar. Being more inclusive seems a good a reason as any to hurry the evolution and make 'they' singular and plural, as 'you' is
I’m all for being inclusive. The problem with the solution you posit is that using ‘you’ is not problematic as it involves two-way conversation where both participants are involved.
Gardening in Central Norfolk on improved gritty moraine over chalk ... free-draining.
It's not a question of inclusive or exclusive for me. It's just about making sense. Clearly, language can and has been used in a gendered way but these usages slip into tradition and really shouldn't make women feel ostracised. There are much bigger fish to fry, like universal access to education, equal pay, appropriate health care.... on and on and on. Why muddy a perfectly clear language when there are so many bigger causes?
I totally agree, the misgendering of trans people can cause a lot of pain and unhappiness, maybe more than most people realise, and I believe this should be the basis of the conversation. Surely not causing further anguish to a vulnerable group must trump sticking to grammatical "rules"? Yes, accepted, there may be a certain amount of confusion, but on the (rare) occasions when there is genuine confusion, that can be addressed on an ad hoc basis. In my experience, for the most part, using they/them doesn't cause too much confusion (context is all).