Reference?
I've seen "they" for that purpose, and have even used it myself. Once I was soundly chastised by a friend who insists they is exclusively plural, and unsuitable for referring to a single person.
I've seen "ze", "sie" and other variants as well. Trouble is, they're not standard English and don't seem to have caught on outside of LGBT circles.
So I really don't know, I'm just going by my 50-some-odd year-old education in basic English.
I recently took an online writing class and learned that there is controversy over using "they" for a single person. As you mentioned, "ze" and "sie" have been tried but have not caught on. It may take a while. Remember when "Ms" sounded strange? Now "Miss" seems antiquated. I also don't see it as an LGBT issue. I find myself frequently wondering whether to use "they", "he/she" or "he or she" when referring to a poster on this board.Reference?
I've seen "they" for that purpose, and have even used it myself. Once I was soundly chastised by a friend who insists they is exclusively plural, and unsuitable for referring to a single person.
I've seen "ze", "sie" and other variants as well. Trouble is, they're not standard English and don't seem to have caught on outside of LGBT circles.
So I really don't know, I'm just going by my 50-some-odd year-old education in basic English.
I have no problem using "guy" as non gender specific. "Gentlemen" is another thing.
Thanks. I'm not having much luck downloading the pdf and I don't have access to the print version, so I'll take your word for it. Interesting, I wonder if "loose" will soon be acceptable as a variant form of "lose", and "it's" as the possessive of "it"? Maybe they already are... gosh I feel old!
Thanks for restoring my faith in English as a conservative language! That's as it should be, I found my friend's argument compelling and haven't used "they" since. If forced, I tend to use "s/he" though even that feels forced and pedantic, and of course works only in writing...
I dont think anyone is offended by the use of "they" in a singular context, it's just that it may take some time for it to sound less awkward and to be accepted in more formal writing.
That's a nice discussion of the problem, but if you read the whole article, you'd see that many sources still disapprove of the plural "they", especially on this side of the Atlantic. It's not a settled issue by any means, though I agree that it will probably be considered acceptable by everyone, eventually.
If I'm guessing correctly, you come from an academic environment where the use of "they" as a singular might be less accepted in writing.
Not really, she is just old school. She's a couple years older than me and learned from the same books (or similar books) as I did when I was little.
I'm not particularly bothered by the singular "they" since it's a solution, if an awkward one, to an inherent deficiency in the language. There don't seem to be good alternatives in SPOKEN English (except for avoiding the need for a neuter pronoun altogether, which sometimes takes a little thought and can be cumbersome in speech), unlike in writing.
Happens every morning for me. I realize that I should have been born rich. Really, stinking filthy rich. Thankfully, though, I was born devastatingly handsome, yet humble. I'm thinking of having financial reassignment surgery. I'm going to be a class crosser.
I'm pretty sure Jenner is ok with the attention garnered from all of the gender hype or else Jenner would have kept it very private. Having a tv show about it is akin to painting a big target on your back.
You need to let loose of your grammatical nuisances before you lose your mind. It's not worth its trouble.
Lemme know when grammarians start building death camps.
I like to use the term 'You people', that really lets them know you recognize the entire group and accept them!
ya nevah know....they can be mean people.Lemme know when grammarians start building death camps.
Oh, I don't go around picking fights with people online over it, but it does rankle. I could accept that it was a case of poor schooling if it weren't for the fact that some very educated people make those spelling errors consistently (and I do consider them more a case of spelling errors than of mistakenly using a homonym, as I doubt people who write "loose" pronounce it that way). The other day I saw "it's" in a piece of science reporting. What's the world coming to?You're referring to the days of yore, when your issue wasn't an issue because people learned things in school. Too often there is a proclivity to use one of two homonyms when they're available, even though their meanings are different.
Well people who think they're gluten intolerant but have no trouble with beer are fooling themselves, but it's worth pointing out that some, perhaps most, GI specialists now take seriously the idea of non-celiac gluten intolerance. It's still in the realm of speculation last I checked, but there may well be two or more different mechanisms for gluten intolerance, of which celiac disease is only one.
