College pronoun backfire

[Bill of Rights]

El Conquistador

 

[KG1]

Emir of Schmo

 

[SEIndSAM]

Sir Peesalot...

 

[CraigAPS]

While I hate to on all of these great titles, that's what they, titles. Pronouns are words like "he," "she,' "they," "it," etc. I'm sure I'll get some hate for this, but, eh...

 

[Cameramonkey]

While I hate to on all of these great titles, that's what they, titles. Pronouns are words like "he," "she,' "they," "it," etc. I'm sure I'll get some hate for this, but, eh...

Oh, we know. If you can decide a pronoun describes you when you clearly aren't described by it, then you can disregard the very definition of the word pronoun.

And its it's not unprecedented. They are now making up NEW pronouns like xe, zir, etc. (wish I were joking)

 

[CraigAPS]

Oh, we know. If you can decide a pronoun describes you when you clearly aren't described by it, then you can disregard the very definition of the word pronoun.

And its it's not unprecedented. They are now making up NEW pronouns like xe, zir, etc. (wish I were joking)

Oh, I'm aware of the new pronouns. Originally, at least in writing, there was a big push for "s/he" to be the norm instead of the historic general "he."

 

[hopper68]

AKA

 

[KG1]

While I hate to on all of these great titles, that's what they, titles. Pronouns are words like "he," "she,' "they," "it," etc. I'm sure I'll get some hate for this, but, eh...

Could be we're not taking it seriously like some of the students in the article.

 

[CraigAPS]

Could be we're not taking it seriously like some of the students in the article.

But, but, but....EVERYTHING on INGO is serious!!!!

 

[Bill of Rights]

Oh, I'm aware of the new pronouns. Originally, at least in writing, there was a big push for "s/he" to be the norm instead of the historic general "he."

I use s/he to mean "he or she". Usually in a context where the person (singular) of whom I'm speaking could be either one, i.e. "An INGO member" or "a doctor". If both genders are represented in the group, that seems best to use a term that could include anyone.

 

[rw02kr43]

Gold Finger

 

[myhightechsec]

I use s/he to mean "he or she". Usually in a context where the person (singular) of whom I'm speaking could be either one, i.e. "An INGO member" or "a doctor". If both genders are represented in the group, that seems best to use a term that could include anyone.

"they" is a perfectly good singular pronoun when the gender is either not known or unimportant. It has been used for hundreds of years as such, going back to the earliest days of English. You'll find it so from the Bible to Shakespeare to Chaucer and many writers since those days.

 

[CraigAPS]

"they" is a perfectly good singular pronoun when the gender is either not known or unimportant. It has been used for hundreds of years as such, going back to the earliest days of English. You'll find it so from the Bible to Shakespeare to Chaucer and many writers since those days.

I agree that the singular "they" is acceptable colloquially, but it is not "correct," grammatically speaking. I will also give you the fact that Shakespeare used it in that manner from time to time. However, without some sort of proof, I can't agree with your other two claims that Chaucer used it in that manner and that it's been used in that manner from the "earliest days of [the] English [language]." The earliest days of English date back to the 5th-7th century AD (CE for you PC peeps!). At that time, it would've been in the form we refer to as "Old English" which was largely made up of a germanic vocabulary. Chaucer wrote during the 14th century during which English had transformed from the original Old English to the version that Chaucer wrote in, "Middle English." Both Old and Middle English are vastly different from the more modern versions that Shakespeare wrote in or we speak today.





DENNY-ed!

 

[mammynun]

Oh, I'm aware of the new pronouns. Originally, at least in writing, there was a big push for "s/he" to be the norm instead of the historic general "he."

I only do that when I'm making fun of it.

 

[myhightechsec]

I agree that the singular "they" is acceptable colloquially, but it is not "correct," grammatically speaking. I will also give you the fact that Shakespeare used it in that manner from time to time. However, without some sort of proof, I can't agree with your other two claims that Chaucer used it in that manner and that it's been used in that manner from the "earliest days of [the] English [language]." The earliest days of English date back to the 5th-7th century AD (CE for you PC peeps!). At that time, it would've been in the form we refer to as "Old English" which was largely made up of a germanic vocabulary. Chaucer wrote during the 14th century during which English had transformed from the original Old English to the version that Chaucer wrote in, "Middle English." Both Old and Middle English are vastly different from the more modern versions that Shakespeare wrote in or we speak today.



DENNY-ed!

The following citation comes from the book, Origins of the Specious: Myths and Misconceptions of the English Language by Patricia T. O'Conner

What we need is an all-purpose pronoun for people that can be masculine or feminine, singular or plural. As it turns out, we once did have such a word. For hundreds of years, people used “they,” “them,” or “their” to refer to people in general, whether one or more, male or female. Although “they” was originally plural when English borrowed it from Old Norse around 1200, people began using it as a singular in the 1300s to refer to a generic person, an everyman (or everywoman). Here’s an example from Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales (1395): “And whoso fyndeth hym out of swich blame, / They wol come up and offre on god-des name.” (In case your Middle English is rusty: “And whoever finds himself without such blame, / They will come up and offer in God’s name.”)

Great writers, including Shakespeare, Defoe, Swift, Fielding, Richardson, Goldsmith, and Johnson all made great use of the sexless, numberless “they/them/their” without raising eyebrows. It wasn’t until the end of the eighteenth century, when all of them were late as well as great, that eyebrows were raised.One of the most influential of those eyebrows belonged to the grammarian Lindley Murray, who was widely popular on both sides of the Atlantic. Perhaps influenced by Anne Fisher (see pages 137–38), he ruled in 1795 that it was a violation of good English to use the plural pronouns “they” and company to refer to technically singular words. In his bestselling English Grammar, he gave this as an example of a lousy sentence: “Can any one, on their entrance into the world, be fully secure that they shall not be deceived?” He insisted “their” should be “his” and “they” should be “he.” The idea caught on with other popular grammarians, who saw English in black and white, and were uncomfortable with the gray area occupied by “they.” It didn’t seem logical to them that a pronoun could be plural one moment and singular the next.

By the early nineteenth century, the prohibition against using “they” in a singular way was firmly entrenched in standard English. In 1828 Noah Webster defined “they,” “them,” and “their” as strictly plural, basically what grammar, usage, and style guides have been telling us since. For example, a century later Henry Fowler, the father of Modern English Usage as well as modern English usage, said treating “they/them/their” as singular “sets the literary man’s teeth on edge.” And more recently, an update of Wilson Follett’s Modern American Usage insists that “they is unfit to represent a singular antecedent.” Meanwhile, great writers—like Byron, Shelley, Austen, Scott, Thackeray, Eliot, Dickens, Trollope, Kipling, Wharton, Shaw, Auden, and more recently Doris Lessing—have continued to use “they” and its relatives in a singular sense, grammarians be damned.

Of course, great writers make their own rules, but the rest of us risk looking like fools if we call a “someone” a “they” in educated company. That’s the way things stand now, though we may be witnessing a seismic change. So many people are now using “they” in the old singular way, especially in Britain, that dictionaries and usage guides are taking a critical look at Lindley Mur-ray’s prohibition. In fact, the newest edition of Fowler’s manual, edited by R. W. Burchfield, suggests it’s only a matter of time before this usage becomes standard English: “The process now seems irreversible.” Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary (11th ed.) already includes the singular “they” as standard English, but the practice is still condemned by a majority of the usage panel for The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (4th ed.).

 

[actaeon277]

Shut off cell phone, internet, and cable service, and watch Rome burn.

 

[nonobaddog]

Shut off cell phone, internet, and cable service, and watch Rome burn.

This is probably a much better idea than most people will admit.
Technology has outpaced human evolution and intelligence. We are not handling it very well.

 

[MrSmitty]

Incontinitia Buttocks

 

[DoggyDaddy]

This is probably a much better idea than most people will admit.
Technology has outpaced human evolution and intelligence. We are not handling it very well.

"Blow up your TV, throw away your paper
Go to the country, build you a home
Plant a little garden, eat a lot of peaches
Try and find Jesus on your own" -- John Prine

 

[Route 45]