|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2004 6:20 am
I've been twitching over the lack of a neutral gender in English for a long time. In Spanish, you've got "usted(es)", which is used in place of he/she. In English, I've seen the abuse of "them" to try to fulfill the same purpose. I was always taught that words like everyone and someone are considered singular nouns, and that singular pronouns must be used when referring to those words. So saying something like Quote: Everyone has their own place should be incorrect. Does anyone here have knowledge of that rule changing, or has the word them/they become our neutral gender by force of habit? Edit 1: Yes, I realize that usted and ustedes is not meant for the same situations as a truly neutral gender. I was just shooting for a random example, and caught myself in the foot. Thanks for 'Kaze's correction on that one. Edit2: What kind of ******** must I be to spell it as "ful ifill" without noticing that extra letter i staring at me? gonk Thanks to that person who pointed it out. I think it's fixed now.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2004 9:54 pm
The rule has not changed, it is simply an accepted misuse. The english language stubbornly refuses the introduction of gender neutral pronouns.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2004 4:44 am
Krivin The rule has not changed, it is simply an accepted misuse. Comma splice! Egad! Krivin The english language stubbornly refuses the introduction of gender neutral pronouns. "English" is capitalized! *faints*
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2004 4:59 am
Crimson Kitten Krivin The rule has not changed, it is simply an accepted misuse. Comma splice! Egad! Krivin The english language stubbornly refuses the introduction of gender neutral pronouns. "English" is capitalized! *faints* You have some serious issues, haven't you? No roleplaying.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2004 5:21 am
Crimson Kitten Krivin The rule has not changed, it is simply an accepted misuse. Comma splice! Egad! Krivin The english language stubbornly refuses the introduction of gender neutral pronouns. "English" is capitalized! *faints* Damn you for not answering the question. I would thwap you, but then I'd be spanked by the no RP rule. So I shall domo you. domokun
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2004 3:11 pm
Their - Meaning ownership. (ex. That is theirs)
There - Telling of a location. (ex. Get your a** over there.)
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2004 5:02 pm
X Check Their - Meaning ownership. (ex. That is theirs) There - Telling of a location. (ex. Get your a** over there.) That doesn't begin to answer the issue being presented. Is it so hard to read the first post?
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2004 8:49 pm
Krivin The rule has not changed, it is simply an accepted misuse. The english language stubbornly refuses the introduction of gender neutral pronouns. Who cares? It's English, love it or leave it.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2004 12:26 pm
[X] Check Their - Meaning ownership. (ex. That is theirs) There - Telling of a location. (ex. Get your a** over there.) I know that. What I was asking about is a pretty irritating (mis)use of the word "their" as a neutral pronoun. kenluth_warrior Krivin The rule has not changed, it is simply an accepted misuse. The english language stubbornly refuses the introduction of gender neutral pronouns. Who cares? It's English, love it or leave it. Erm. Dude. We're Grammar Nazis. Of COURSE we ******** love it. Kirvin was merely stating a frustration shared by many of my nonnative speaking bretheren (including myself). It's awkward to say "he/she" multiple times in a sentence, it's incorrect to say "their", and it's sexist to use "he." In fact, I've had teachers call me on using "he" as the neutral pronoun. stressed
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2004 1:23 pm
In writing, I tend to use s/he for a gender neutral pronoun. It's a wee bit on the 70's feminist side but I'm used to it now. I have tried just alternating "she" and "he" in speaking but using "she" still sticks out in a funny way.
Do you think that they/their should be adopted as the gender neutral pronoun of choice or not? If not, do you have another suggestion?
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:52 am
simlanna In writing, I tend to use s/he for a gender neutral pronoun. It's a wee bit on the 70's feminist side but I'm used to it now. I have tried just alternating "she" and "he" in speaking but using "she" still sticks out in a funny way. Do you think that they/their should be adopted as the gender neutral pronoun of choice or not? If not, do you have another suggestion? I usually end up doing the same thing (the s/he thing, that is). I don't think it'd make sense to use they/their for a gender neutral pronoun, because it creates a huge honking hole in the whole subject-pronoun agreement thing. Using plural pronouns that refer to singular nouns doesn't create an exception to the rule -- instead, it creates breaking of the rule. That's really not a good thing in a language where the hold on rules has always been scant at best. We've got rules, but then we've also got innumerable exceptions to those rules. What I think would make sense is creating a brand new neutral pronoun that is meant to be used as teh respectful term by default (like the Spanish "usted"), and go from there.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:50 am
nsudino I've been twitching over the lack of a neutral gender in English for a long time. In Spanish, you've got "usted(es)", which is used in place of he/she. In English, I've seen the abuse of "them" to try to fulifill the same purpose. Really? I was always taught that Ud. was the formal expression of the second person, i.e. English equivalent of "Thou." Ex. "?Como esta Ud.?" is "How are you?" (EDIT: I couldn't use proper punctuation and accented letters, so don't try to correct me.) As "Thou" is an antiquated expression in English, I believe more and more Spanish-speakers are moving away from Ud. In fact, most Mexican natives I know (and I know alot of 'em) never use the formal second person expression, and one or two have outright asked me what I was saying when we were introduced. nsudino I was always taught that words like everyone and someone are considered singular nouns, and that singular pronouns must be used when referring to those words. So saying something like Quote: Everyone has their own place should be incorrect. Absolutely. The correct expression should be, "Everyone has one's own place." I don't think it's too difficult to remember. If, however, one insists on using pronouns, one may use "its," as opposed to one, so long as the pronoun is expressed in the same sentence as "everyone." nsudino Does anyone here have knowledge of that rule changing, or has the word them/they become our neutral gender by force of habit? I think that despite teachers' efforts to prevent that from happening, most teenagers are too damned lazy to care, and the parents aren't helping. I really don't want it to happen, but what the ******** can I do about it, since I don't have a M.L.A.? Krivin The english language stubbornly refuses the introduction of gender neutral pronouns. So also have French and Spanish. What the ******** is your point?
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2004 12:13 pm
3nodding 3nodding 3nodding Completely forgot about that. Thanks for the reminder. Dino has been Pwned. A lot. M'kay.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 09, 2004 12:49 am
Krivin The rule has not changed, it is simply an accepted misuse. The english language stubbornly refuses the introduction of gender neutral pronouns. At the risk of opening up a wound fixing to be sealed, I'd like to point out that the English language is not one with a fixed set of pillars for rules. The language is constantly sliding, shifting, morphing every day. I'm not saying that the period will no longer mark the end of a sentence soon, but a language is defined by those who speak it--thus, if everyone (or nearly so) uses "Everyone has their own place" and everyone (or nearly so) accepts it, then it becomes, by definition, acceptable grammar practices, and thus "rules". [By the by, Crimson Kitten, that's a perfectly admissible comma splice, especially in the context it's in (opening sentence of a discussion comment.)]
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 09, 2004 12:21 pm
Sir Magnor Criol Krivin The rule has not changed, it is simply an accepted misuse. The english language stubbornly refuses the introduction of gender neutral pronouns. At the risk of opening up a wound fixing to be sealed, I'd like to point out that the English language is not one with a fixed set of pillars for rules. The language is constantly sliding, shifting, morphing every day. Quote: That is true. However, fundamental rules of grammar do not change. It is still incorrect to end a sentence with a preposition. It is still incorrect to use double negatives. Similarly, this is not a case of "sound right/wrong," but a case of simple logic. When there is a singular noun, the pronouns that refer to that noun must be singular as well.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|