4 ms·

I was also going to speak about the descriptive and prescriptive approaches to languages, and then dropped my paragraphs because it was not clear to me whether

by jraph 7y ago

I was also going to speak about the descriptive and prescriptive approaches to languages, and then dropped my paragraphs because it was not clear to me whether OP acknowledged that singular they was a thing in English. I decided to consider that they effectively acknowledged singular they. By taking a prescriptive approach (telling how people should speak English), maybe singular they can be deemed invalid in English… depending on who is prescribing the usage. But people taking a prescriptive approach do not agree between each others, and even if they did, they would never represent the wide, heterogeneous set of English-speaking people. Case in point: they do not agree here, but the usage of singular they seems to be more and more recognized / recommended [1]. A descriptive approach will acknowledge a widespread use of anything, regardless of the reasons why things are used. About politics and languages. Politics are constantly shaping the language. This is not new. It's part of the natural evolution of languages. Politics are not inherently bad neither. We don't have slaves anymore in most countries, thanks to "politics". Actually, I find politics is actually too vague a word, and some people seem to invoke it as a bad thing, saying that we should focus on technical matters when their view opposes the view of people seeing something belonging to the status quo as an issue (which is a political stance in itself… and considering that technical matters and politics are opposed too, ironically). You can't really reject an idea "because politics". You may either argue, or disagree respectfully, but there is no such thing as avoiding politics and remaining technical. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they#Acceptability_and_prescriptive_guidance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they#Acceptability_an...

mises 7y ago
> About politics and languages. Politics are constantly shaping the language. This is not new. It's part of the natural evolution of languages. Politics are not inherently bad neither. We don't have slaves anymore in most countries, thanks to "politics". > Actually, I find politics is actually too vague a word, and some people seem to invoke it as a bad thing, saying that we should focus on technical matters when their view opposes the view of people seeing something belonging to the status quo as an issue (which is a political stance in itself… and considering that technical matters and politics are opposed too, ironically). > You can't really reject an idea "because politics". You may either argue, or disagree respectfully, but there is no such thing as avoiding politics and remaining technical. All of these are very valid points; I do have a political issue with it as much as anything else. I don't believe it is incumbent upon me to alter the manner in which I speak and write for the convenience of another. There are also, of course, the issues of grammatical horror and the fact that "they" as a singular simply feels clumsy and unnatural when spoken.
- jraph 7y ago
  I've grown accustomed to singular they, and I've actually joined a group of people for a week and using singular they was pretty common, and felt way more natural than what I expected. I guess this is a question of habit. Grammar is fine, and singular they would not be the only singular pronoun using the forms "are" and "were" for verb "to be": "you" also does. Though you are far from being alone to dislike it. You might be interested by RMS's take on this: https://stallman.org/articles/genderless-pronouns.html https://stallman.org/articles/genderless-pronouns.html tl;dr: he argues that singular they feels wrong to him, and argues in favor of a gender neutral pronoun "pers", derived from "person". I like the idea, though I haven't seen it used anywhere and would not easily use it.
- damnyou 7y ago
  > I don't believe it is incumbent upon me to alter the manner in which I speak and write for the convenience of another. It absolutely is incumbent upon you to show people respect in a workplace or school setting. That means not calling Black people the N-word, or mocking Asian accents, or deliberately using the wrong pronouns for trans people. > grammatical horror English is already full of them, one more won't do any harm. > that "they" as a singular simply feels clumsy and unnatural when spoken. Not once you get used to it.

by jraph 7y ago

mises 7y ago

> About politics and languages. Politics are constantly shaping the language. This is not new. It's part of the natural evolution of languages. Politics are not inherently bad neither. We don't have slaves anymore in most countries, thanks to "politics". > Actually, I find politics is actually too vague a word, and some people seem to invoke it as a bad thing, saying that we should focus on technical matters when their view opposes the view of people seeing something belonging to the status quo as an issue (which is a political stance in itself… and considering that technical matters and politics are opposed too, ironically). > You can't really reject an idea "because politics". You may either argue, or disagree respectfully, but there is no such thing as avoiding politics and remaining technical. All of these are very valid points; I do have a political issue with it as much as anything else. I don't believe it is incumbent upon me to alter the manner in which I speak and write for the convenience of another. There are also, of course, the issues of grammatical horror and the fact that "they" as a singular simply feels clumsy and unnatural when spoken.

jraph 7y ago
I've grown accustomed to singular they, and I've actually joined a group of people for a week and using singular they was pretty common, and felt way more natural than what I expected. I guess this is a question of habit. Grammar is fine, and singular they would not be the only singular pronoun using the forms "are" and "were" for verb "to be": "you" also does. Though you are far from being alone to dislike it. You might be interested by RMS's take on this: https://stallman.org/articles/genderless-pronouns.html https://stallman.org/articles/genderless-pronouns.html tl;dr: he argues that singular they feels wrong to him, and argues in favor of a gender neutral pronoun "pers", derived from "person". I like the idea, though I haven't seen it used anywhere and would not easily use it.
damnyou 7y ago
> I don't believe it is incumbent upon me to alter the manner in which I speak and write for the convenience of another. It absolutely is incumbent upon you to show people respect in a workplace or school setting. That means not calling Black people the N-word, or mocking Asian accents, or deliberately using the wrong pronouns for trans people. > grammatical horror English is already full of them, one more won't do any harm. > that "they" as a singular simply feels clumsy and unnatural when spoken. Not once you get used to it.