Split Thread Pronouns

[Thermal]

Yup language is what people use and the singular "they" has been used in English since middle English. So I don't see any need for a new word.

Right, 'they' is entirely appropriate in the singular if you don't know -->their<-- sex/gender, or are referring to anyone of any sex/gender. And if -->they<-- prefer it, that's cool too.

The plural of thou and thee have now replaced those words as the singular as well as the plural.

In French there is still a difference, but if asking someone what they called themselves, it would typically use the plural you.

Yeah, French and Spanish use the plural 'you' interchangeably with the formal 'you', which is something we don't really do in English.

Probably addressed in these discussions many times, but the issue is ultimately 'who assigns pronouns, the user or the one being referenced?' Growing up in school, we were told point blank the user assigns them, which didn't pose much problem because we were all +/- in agreement what a man and woman were. I mean, our grammar teachers never said you have to check with the referent before deciding?

But brave new world, and all that. Now we have a larger segment of people that don't want to be special case outliers, and want to be called what they identify as, just like everybody else gets called what they identify as. They want what we all get automatically. Ok, fine. It'll cause some trip ups here and there while we get used to guessing correctly 99+% of the time, but get corrected on rare occasions. We're all grown ups and can handle that, right? As long as there is no malice, we can work with it.

But malice is what it has evolved to. Refusing to call a transwoman (for example purposes) a 'she' is saying something more than 'oh I just get confused'. The dogwhistle is loud and clear.

Now comes the instant problem. Arthwollipot wishes to be addressed as 'he'. That's fine, right? But EC refuses. She says it's because she only uses gender neutral pronouns. But the flip side of that is she is saying "I'll call you whatever I damn well please". Well... that would mean she can ignore screen names too, since we assign them ourselves. Is that her prerogative?

So who assigns this stuff, the user or referent? If the referent, it becomes maddeningly difficult, as you have to keep a spreadsheet going of who uses what, and not refer to an unknown male as a 'he', because, well... what if he's not? You don't want to appear politically motivated in pronoun usage. Who's right?

 

[steenkh]

I'm genuinely amazed you haven't encountered this before, it's absolutely normal everyday usage when gender isn't known as in @arthwollipot's example. Our other non-gendered pronoun is 'it' but using 'it' for people is incredibly rude and pretty much exclusively used as an insult.

In German, I have been astounded that natives have absolutely no problem with calling girls "it". But that is of course because the modern word for girl "Mädchen" is a diminutive form of an older, more or less obsolete word "Magd", and all such diminutives are neutrals, and the pronoun is "es". If only German used a diminutive form for boys too, there would have been a ready solution at hand - at least for non-adults.

 

[Steve]

Yup language is what people use and the singular "they" has been used in English since middle English. So I don't see any need for a new word.


The plural of thou and thee have now replaced those words as the singular as well as the plural.

In French there is still a difference, but if asking someone what they called themselves, it would typically use the plural you.

And yet in 70+ years of speaking English I have rarely used they as singular, and it still sounds rather odd to me.

The word "gay" originates from the Old French "gai," meaning "full of joy or mirth," and has been used in English since the 12th century. That didn't prevent its use from being changed.

 

[jimbob]

And yet in 70+ years of speaking English I have rarely used they as singular, and it still sounds rather odd to me.

The word "gay" originates from the Old French "gai," meaning "full of joy or mirth," and has been used in English since the 12th century. That didn't prevent its use from being changed.

I'm pretty sure you would have. In something like the following situation.

"Someone bashed into my car at the supermarket but they didn't leave a note".

ETA. The singular they usage hasn't changed. It's always* been used for when people don't know the gender of the person. It's now expanded a little.


*Well back to Chaucer at least.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

And yet in 70+ years of speaking English I have rarely used they as singular, and it still sounds rather odd to me.

The word "gay" originates from the Old French "gai," meaning "full of joy or mirth," and has been used in English since the 12th century. That didn't prevent its use from being changed.

So in @arthwollipot's example what would you say?

NB: This is nothing about preferred pronouns, as a native English speaker it is absolutely natural to me that if I need to refer to someone whose gender I don't know I say 'they', and I simply would not refer to anyone I didn't actually detest as 'it' as it's rightly considered dehumanising. I'm genuinely astounded that anyone fluent in English would find this unusual.


ETA: I know this is off topic and I apologise, maybe it should be split off, if there's sufficient interest. But I'm genuinely bemused by how this is in anyway controversial.

 

[Thermal]

So in @arthwollipot's example what would you say?

NB: This is nothing about preferred pronouns, as a native English speaker it is absolutely natural to me that if I need to refer to someone whose gender I don't know I say 'they', and I simply would not refer to anyone I didn't actually detest as 'it' as it's rightly considered dehumanising. I'm genuinely astounded that anyone fluent in English would find this unusual.


ETA: I know this is off topic and I apologise, maybe it should be split off, if there's sufficient interest. But I'm genuinely bemused by how this is in anyway controversial.

I don't think it's at all.off topic in a thread split titled Pronouns, and referring to a specific member demanding to refer to others as 'they' against their expressed preference.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

I don't think it's at all.off topic in a thread split titled Pronouns, and referring to a specific member demanding to refer to others as 'they' against their expressed preference.

I missed that it had already been split, my first post was in it's original thread.

 

[Thermal]

I missed that it had already been split, my first post was in it's original thread.

That's how they getcha.

 

[theprestige]

"I want you to think of me as him."

"Sorry, I just think of you as them."

"Well I want you to refer to me as him anyway."

"What would be the point?"

"It would make me happy."

"It would make me sad."

"Your sadness has no value here."

"Neither does your preference."

 

[Helen]

And yet in 70+ years of speaking English I have rarely used they as singular, and it still sounds rather odd to me.

The word "gay" originates from the Old French "gai," meaning "full of joy or mirth," and has been used in English since the 12th century. That didn't prevent its use from being changed.

Pronouns are the most basic building blocks of most languages, they very rarely change (almost never, in fact, except fir slight pronunciation changes). Everything else, verbs, other nouns, adjectives etc, do so far more often - over time, nearly all of them do, in fact. Pronouns stay where they are.

 

[Thermal]

"It would make me sad."

Why would it make you sad to show a small courtesy in a form of address that is no skin off your back?

 

[Ron Obvious]

Anybody who specifies what pronouns to use for them (correct, see?) is helpfully telling me to ignore them (correct again) as they (ooh) are too far up their own arse to bother with. That's not how communication works.

"I know I'm male, but I want you to refer to me as "they, them". Piss off!

 

[theprestige]

Why would it make you sad to show a small courtesy in a form of address that is no skin off your back?

Asked and answered months (years?) ago.

Also, a third person pronoun is literally the opposite of a form of address.

 

[Thermal]

Asked and answered months (years?) ago.

Not that I recall. I recall angry, offended, insulted, intellectual integrity irreparably compromised, and all the other limp dick bull ◊◊◊◊, but I don't think I ever heard sad invoked.

Also, a third person pronoun is literally the opposite of a form of address.

Pointless pedantry, even though technically true. If you are referring to a specific person, you are addressing them in absentia. Or right in front of them, if speaking to someone else.

 

[theprestige]

Pointless pedantry

It's not pointless to me. What happened to the easy effort of just being respectful of other people's minor preferences?

 

[Thermal]

It's not pointless to me. What happened to the easy effort of just being respectful of other people's minor preferences?

You have made it crystal clear that you do not wish to respect others' preferences. So out of respect for your preference, I don't acknowledge them. You're welcome, bitch.

Eta: and I can't help.but notice you took the extra time to snip out the meat of the challenge in the post. Slip of the cursor, that?

 

[alfaniner]

I once thought it would be nice to have a new pronoun - "se" (pronounced "say"), meaning a reference to a single person of unknown gender. (And "ser" - said "sayr", for a possessive.) Thus differentiating it from a reference to multiple people.

 

[theprestige]

I once thought it would be nice to have a new pronoun - "se" (pronounced "say"), meaning a reference to a single person of unknown gender. (And "ser" - said "sayr", for a possessive.) Thus differentiating it from a reference to multiple people.

The nice thing about natural languages is that if something really is nice to have, the language will probably evolve it.

In theory.

In practice, it seems like "unalive" really is nice to have.

 

[Thermal]

*a vampire in the back row raises a finger*

 

[Steve]

Pronouns are the most basic building blocks of most languages, they very rarely change (almost never, in fact, except fir slight pronunciation changes). Everything else, verbs, other nouns, adjectives etc, do so far more often - over time, nearly all of them do, in fact. Pronouns stay where they are.

Having only passed enough English courses to enable me to follow a technical education I will accept your explanation and learn from it. Thank you, Helen.