3 ms·

The problem with "they" is that it is in fact a very bad translation for "ő" in a sentence like "ő mosogat." We typically find gender-neutral "they" in English

The problem with "they" is that it is in fact a very bad translation for "ő" in a sentence like "ő mosogat." We typically find gender-neutral "they" in English when there is an indefinite antecedent like "someone" or "anyone" - "if anyone objects, they should talk to me." In contrast, in Hungarian, including the third-person pronoun "ő" means the speaker has a very definite subject in mind and in fact wishes to emphasize that (a neutral "he/she is washing up" would be just "mosogat", without any explicit pronoun; "ő mosogat" almost means "HE [not someone else] is washing up." (Or "SHE" of course.) The only case where I can imagine translating "ő" as "they" in this kind of context is when I know that the person in question explicitly prefers the pronoun "they," e.g. because they identify as non-binary.

slibhb 6y ago
> The problem with "they" is that it is in fact a very bad translation for "ő" in a sentence like "ő mosogat." We typically find gender-neutral "they" in English when there is an indefinite antecedent like "someone" or "anyone" - "if anyone objects, they should talk to me." There is a school of thought that says we should change how we use the English language. This school thinks that the proper way to speak is to assume non-binary until informed otherwise and that appealing to "what sounds right" or "the rules of grammar" is unacceptable linguistic conservativism. I am not making that argument. I'm just raising it because it seems relevant here. I would point out that, even if you disagree with this argument, it seems reasonable to think that people should be able to choose how they use pronouns, whether their usage flies in the face of linguistic convention/rules of grammar or goes along with them.
- kiscica 6y ago
  I absolutely agree that people should be able to choose how they use pronouns (or in fact any component of language). Communication is a mutual endeavour, and I will always make my best good-faith effort to understand what an interlocutor is trying to convey (assuming I want to talk to them in the first place :), even if they choose to use language differently from the way I would. In fact (within reason) I will even adapt my own usage in some cases - e.g. I will do my best to use the pronoun "they" (or "xe" or "foobar" or whatever) when referring to someone who wishes to be referred to in that way, even though (despite knowing several languages with gender-neutral pronouns) I find that takes non-insignificant mental effort when I speak English. That said, precisely because communication is a mutual endeavour, and language is a coöperative framework, there is no guarantee that -- just because you choose to use "they" in this way -- others will follow. I wouldn't be terribly surprised if, within a generation, "they" became an unmarked definite gender-neutral pronoun in English (today it is arguably unmarked in the case of an indefinite antecedent, but extremely marked otherwise). But I wouldn't be terribly surprised if it didn't, either. Language change is an emergent process and not something that can easily be forced in either conservative or radical directions.
  - slibhb 6y ago
    I completely agree with you. I'm not arguing for anything to be forced, only for individual users to be able to choose the pronoun rules that a translation program uses.

slibhb 6y ago

> The problem with "they" is that it is in fact a very bad translation for "ő" in a sentence like "ő mosogat." We typically find gender-neutral "they" in English when there is an indefinite antecedent like "someone" or "anyone" - "if anyone objects, they should talk to me." There is a school of thought that says we should change how we use the English language. This school thinks that the proper way to speak is to assume non-binary until informed otherwise and that appealing to "what sounds right" or "the rules of grammar" is unacceptable linguistic conservativism. I am not making that argument. I'm just raising it because it seems relevant here. I would point out that, even if you disagree with this argument, it seems reasonable to think that people should be able to choose how they use pronouns, whether their usage flies in the face of linguistic convention/rules of grammar or goes along with them.

kiscica 6y ago
I absolutely agree that people should be able to choose how they use pronouns (or in fact any component of language). Communication is a mutual endeavour, and I will always make my best good-faith effort to understand what an interlocutor is trying to convey (assuming I want to talk to them in the first place :), even if they choose to use language differently from the way I would. In fact (within reason) I will even adapt my own usage in some cases - e.g. I will do my best to use the pronoun "they" (or "xe" or "foobar" or whatever) when referring to someone who wishes to be referred to in that way, even though (despite knowing several languages with gender-neutral pronouns) I find that takes non-insignificant mental effort when I speak English. That said, precisely because communication is a mutual endeavour, and language is a coöperative framework, there is no guarantee that -- just because you choose to use "they" in this way -- others will follow. I wouldn't be terribly surprised if, within a generation, "they" became an unmarked definite gender-neutral pronoun in English (today it is arguably unmarked in the case of an indefinite antecedent, but extremely marked otherwise). But I wouldn't be terribly surprised if it didn't, either. Language change is an emergent process and not something that can easily be forced in either conservative or radical directions.
- slibhb 6y ago
  I completely agree with you. I'm not arguing for anything to be forced, only for individual users to be able to choose the pronoun rules that a translation program uses.