4 ms·

the singular they as a compromise works ok but it leads to a larger question about whether there should be separate pronouns for a single person vs. multiple pe

the singular they as a compromise works ok but it leads to a larger question about whether there should be separate pronouns for a single person vs. multiple people. while gender/sex is often beside the point, number often matters. we can keep the gendered pronouns for the few cases where it's needed, and use ungendered pronouns in the general case, but that requires an unambiguous singular ungendered pronoun.

munificent 8y ago
Yes, in an ideal case, it would be nice if there were separate pronouns for "single unspecified gender" and "multiple". Unfortunately, we don't get to reboot spoken languages. Even if we could, it's still not clear what the ideal solution would be. There are cases where you need to communicate ambiguous number too. It might be nice to have pronouns that distinguish "definitely more than one" from "potentially more than one".
- clairity 8y ago
  the peculiar bit is how permeated language (e.g., english and other western languages) is with (women's) sexual availability--not just with gendered pronouns, but whole words, endings, titles (miss vs mrs. vs ms.), etc. i'm sure there are theories for why, but that emphasis is so heavy. many eastern languages, for example, emphasize seniority/hierarchy more.
dragonwriter 8y ago
> the singular they as a compromise works ok but it leads to a larger question about whether there should be separate pronouns for a single person vs. multiple people. English already dropped it with 2nd person, settling on the plural (and formal) “you” as the sole pronoun and dropping the informal singular “thee”; and for 2nd person distinguishing number in the pronoun is probably more often an impediment to discussion than 3rd person (a 3rd person pronoun needs an explicit referent in the framing context anyway, so you don't lose much by not adding a reminder of number into the pronoun itself.)

munificent 8y ago

Yes, in an ideal case, it would be nice if there were separate pronouns for "single unspecified gender" and "multiple". Unfortunately, we don't get to reboot spoken languages. Even if we could, it's still not clear what the ideal solution would be. There are cases where you need to communicate ambiguous number too. It might be nice to have pronouns that distinguish "definitely more than one" from "potentially more than one".

clairity 8y ago
the peculiar bit is how permeated language (e.g., english and other western languages) is with (women's) sexual availability--not just with gendered pronouns, but whole words, endings, titles (miss vs mrs. vs ms.), etc. i'm sure there are theories for why, but that emphasis is so heavy. many eastern languages, for example, emphasize seniority/hierarchy more.

dragonwriter 8y ago

> the singular they as a compromise works ok but it leads to a larger question about whether there should be separate pronouns for a single person vs. multiple people. English already dropped it with 2nd person, settling on the plural (and formal) “you” as the sole pronoun and dropping the informal singular “thee”; and for 2nd person distinguishing number in the pronoun is probably more often an impediment to discussion than 3rd person (a 3rd person pronoun needs an explicit referent in the framing context anyway, so you don't lose much by not adding a reminder of number into the pronoun itself.)