Unfortunately you’re at least ten years too late in trying to get people to ask themselves this question
You mean 600 years too late.
Nah. Maybe twenty years tops. That so many people fell for the fallacious line of argument you’re thinking of was part of the difficulty in trying to push for any of the various theoretically “better” choices that are still available should humanity unexpectedly swerve in the direction of caring about such things.
Are you saying that the singular use of ‘they’ is only about 20 years old?
Obviously it’s been used in some grammatical situations as a singular third-person pronoun since forever. It’s just as easy to come up with example phrases that would not sound in any way odd to a 20th-century person as it is to come up with examples from the 17th century. But its recent popularity as an all-purpose stand-in for “he” and “she” is indeed unprecedented, and even if it weren’t it’d be a notable change.
But it’s not a stand in for he or she. It’s a term to address people when gender is ambiguous.
This is hundreds of years old and not just something that’s come into vogue recently.
Of course it is not that it’s somehow a “stand in for he or she” inherently in current usage. It’s just that it has recently replaced those other pronouns in places where for some time they had held near-universal prevalence among most users of this language.
Just as some people who’ve never known the old ways think those people who still aren’t accustomed to it are putting on an act when they say it’s weird and confusing, I suppose it would be easy for those who’ve lived through the change to mistakenly assume that young people are being disingenuous when they act as if there’s been no change for hundreds of years and there’s nothing to remark on here. If you’re old enough to have seen it happen, the change in usage seems very obvious. If not, perhaps it isn’t.
I think the issue is that the “new” usage of “they” is seen as different, or incorrect, when that’s simply not the case. The strict usage of “they” as only a plural pronoun is not “correct.” It’s revisionist. Historically, “they” has been used as both a singular and plural pronoun, and it can be found in conversation and literature going back hundreds of years. At some point, we revised that they should be only plural, and that’s why it feels like things are changing in our current lifetimes. We aren’t changing how the word is used, we’re going back to how it’s been used for centuries.
Language is not a set of rules and strictures. It’s fluid, and the way people use words becomes grammatically correct. If these things could not change, then language couldn’t exist. You can feel uncomfortable that language has changed from what you’ve known, but don’t hold it back, or complain about the next generation. Language will change in their lifetimes too. Overall, it’s a good thing and pushes us to understand each other in the manner appropriate for the times. Right now, an easily recognizable and commonly accepted gender neutral, singular pronoun is more valuable to language than a strict usage or a new word for the use case.
“They left their bag.” “They went that way.” “I’ll find them later.”
All these examples could refer to either singular or plural cases, and maybe that confuses some people, but I think it’s very simple to determine with even the barest bit of context. It’s better than defaulting to “he” for any unspecified gender, as was “correct” for the last few decades, and allows for non-binary people to be referred to without needing oft-criticized neo-pronouns.
TLDR: Times change. We need to get with it.
What would you say are better? I find singular they much more elegant than a lot of the new words that were made up. The fact that to apply it to a known individual, rather than an unknown individual seems like a natural extension of the usage that has existed for centuries.
I don’t really have a preference myself, but Richard Stallman’s continued insistence that “per” is the right answer is the example that comes to mind.
As he puts it, “most languages have genderless singular third-person pronouns which are distinct from the plural pronouns. English deserves to have them too.”
Perhaps in a hundred years, once the old way of making the distinction is long forgotten, a new one will arise.
Always say “they”. This violates the grammar of English so deeply that it feels terribly wrong. It also results frequently in confusing expressions in which the referent of “they” is unclear.
I totally disagree with this. Singular they has been in use since the 14th century or so. It’s so deeply ingrained in the language that is perfectly simple to understand. In fact I’d say that people who claim to not understand it are doing so intentionally.
Perhaps a new word will develop naturally as you say. But personally I don’t see a need for it.
Not all of the complaints are motivated just by deliberate obstinance. I’m old enough that it was genuinely confusing for me at first in some situations, but young enough that I got used to it after some years. There are still plenty of people out there who haven’t done enough conversing with those who habitually default to “they” to get used to it. Not all of them are as old and cranky as Mr. Stallman.
Conservatives would probably get mad about that too so “they” works just fine
“Every customer should be greeted when they walk into the store.”
The singular “they” is traditional in English - it is very much proper English and has been around (iirc) since the 17th century. It’s only a big deal now because conservatives want to make gender a factor in elections.
Well said! My go-to example is ‘If someone calls and I’m not here, tell them they can leave a message’ because it covers both they and them in a singular usage.
Sidenote: I also hate the way that some people act like languages are static things, despite the known history of languages to shift and change over time. English is arguably a German creole; we don’t get to act all sanctimonious now.
If we actually followed the “your gender identity is mildly inconvenient to me so should be banned” crowd and made everything unambiguously gendered, language would become far more awkward.
“If someone calls and I’m not there, tell him or her that he or she can leave a message”.
We could start doing this right now – every time
theyhe or she uses the word “they”, insisttheyhe or she repeatsthemselveshimself or herself in a way that leaves no gender ambiguity…That could get really awkward if some of the neopronouns become common.
“… tell him or her or zim or xyr or thon that he or she or ze or xe or thon can leave a message… “
i had an English teacher in high school that insisted sentences like this were grammatically incorrect (subject/verb disagreement, number), and should be, “Every customer should be greeted when he or she walks into the store,” or “All customers should be greeted when they walk into the store.”
I found them annoying.
That’s a good explanation. English isn’t my native language, and I always found the they/them weird sounding. With that sentence of the customer you made it click for me. Thanks!
Thanks!
I have always loved the OED. As a kid I used to sit in the library and just read it. It was always a dream of mine to buy my own copy and just have it the way people used to have encyclopedias.
knock knock Burglar!
This isn’t a new thing, so you’re just having trouble with centuries old English, not something brand new.
I totally get your opinion, because I used to share it and even created a similar post on Reddit a few years ago. Just start using it and you’ll be surprised how quickly it becomes natural. There’s no good reason not to do something that is easy and can potentially prevent people from feeling uncomfortable.
Good grief, this is not new. It’s part of the English language. They/them has always been around to use when one couldn’t, or didn’t want to use a more specific pronoun. Cumbersome, maybe, but much language is. It is NOT a big deal.
It isn’t a big deal, but we do need the language to evolve a little bit. The problem with they/them is that it implies that you don’t know the person, or that it doesn’t matter who they are (like you say, you can’t or don’t want to use a more specific pronoun). It can feel quite rude to apply it to somebody that you do know.
One does not (always) do this. The singular “they” is many hundreds of years old.
If it confuses you, then I understand your confusion. Please read about the history of the singular “they” in order to resolve your confusion.
https://www.oed.com/discover/a-brief-history-of-singular-they
Why not choose new words? Languages evolve in a complex way. One reason is that “they” is an easy choice. Another reason is that many speakers react harshly to unfamiliar pronouns, therefore it promotes acceptance to use familiar pronouns in new ways. I wrote with the Spivak pronouns for years, but that led to more distraction than understanding, so when “they” emerged as a standard, I adopted it.
Why not just pick new words to use?
Because the current word for it works just fine?
And also because when people try to use neopronouns they take as much flak for that if not more. Imagine this same argument: “I’m not used to these newfangled pronouns. Why can’t they just use normal ones?”
We have that in French, the amount of discussions the new pronoun (“iel”, as a mix between “il” et “elle”) is absurd
As someone speaking German, a brutally gendered language, let me tell you, they/them is awesome and I’d love to have something similar in German. There is so much fighting and discussions about “gendern” and it consumes so much energy that could be better spent elsewhere. And conservatives are having a field trip with this.
Looking for a new word is equally as hard if not way harder than using what already works fine.
Yes I would love for the German language to have an equivalent for they/them. It’s also so awkward talking about someone who is non binary and neither uses he/him nor she/her and you always have to refer to them by their name.
Thou shouldst campaign for the resurgence of a second person singular pronoun as well.
2nd person singular: ya’ll
2nd person plural: all ya’ll
Using “youins” for second person plural is considered archaic.
“They” is the traditional English-language pronoun when an unknown person could be of either gender. “Mommy, my teacher said a funny thing at school today!” “Oh? What did they say?”
Teacher is singular, but assigning a gender would feel awkward if one doesn’t know, so “they” is used instead.
It is much quicker to understand they as a neutral instead of introducing new language and trying to disseminate that through textbooks. This way, there’s no need for any (or many) edits, we can just maintain existing grammar with new understanding.
English already has another form which refers to singular and plural: ‘you’. I assume that people who suddenly take umbrage are just kicking up a fuss for the sake of it, or simply didn’t stop to think about what they’ve been using all this time.
We don’t need a new word. “Dude” already exists.
I’m a dude.
He’s a dude.
She’s a dude.
We’re all dudes!
I’d ask “So how many dudes have you slept with?” but I don’t think that one works on most of us furries =3
“Like… For real or just in my headcanon?”
removed by mod
Entering academia early 2000s, I saw people refer to authors of research papers as “they” as a default to sidestep gendering.
On one hand it’s nice to not insert gender where it isn’t needed, but on the more practical hand it wasn’t always possible to tell by name either. European names can have different gender in different regions, or be all Sztrkökla, and names from Asia are even harder to guess.
names from Asia are even harder to guess
Good luck in Cambodia where Samnang and many other names can be used for both male and female names.
You get gender-neutral names in English-speaking countries too, eg Alex, Jordan, and Dylan. It’s just not possible to reliably guess everyone’s gender from their name alone.
I’ve never heard Dylan for women but yes, you’re spot on. Here it’s not such a thing to have gendered names, they just work.
I know a woman called Dylan.
I can think of at least two (female) porn stars with Dylan as their assumed first name.
In Norway there’s like 60 names that have a reasonably even usage between genders.
Person 1: Is your friend Bob coming over? Person 2: No, they can’t make it, they’re busy
One Bob, and we all know it’s one Bob, no confusion. Look for context. It’s not that hard.
Person 1: Are Bob and Janice coming over? Person 2: They can’t make it.
Sometimes additional context is needed.
Bob said he’s coming, but Janice said they can’t make it.
Bad example. Having the ‘but’ in there introduces ambiguity. We can’t tell if Janice is contradicting Bob and saying they both won’t be coming, or if it’s just Janice speaking for themself.
Agreed it’s a bad example. When already using the specific identifier of names, using general identifiers isn’t needed, and is rarely done. Most people would just say Bob is coming but Janice can’t make it.
Person 1: Are Bob and Janice coming over? Person 2: They can’t make it.
Alternative:
Person 1: Are Alice and Janice coming over? Person 2: She can’t make it.
Alternative:
Person 1: Are Alice and Janice coming over? Person 2: Alice can’t make it.
This is far less difficult than you’re trying to force it to be.
The original makes sense. Both your alternatives are weird. The first is completely strange the second one begs the question, what about Janice.
What are you trying to express here?
Your example is unambiguously plural. It’s not a good illustration of “they” creating confusion.
It’s truly not a problem. I could contrive a reason to talk about a couple (they plural) and a nonbinary person (they singular) and end up with sentences where you don’t know which I’m referring to, but the exact same issue happens if I’m telling a story about two “he” or “she” subjects. And it’s solved in the same way.
