4 ms·

"Them" is a plural word in the first place, so attempting to hybridize it with the singular and form "themself" is incorrect and awkward. There is no singular "

"Them" is a plural word in the first place, so attempting to hybridize it with the singular and form "themself" is incorrect and awkward. There is no singular "them." In the case where one uses "them" to refer to a singular subject of indeterminate gender, "them" doesn't actually become singular; rather, it's simply being used as a free variable. It's increasingly acceptable to use "them" to refer to a singular subject when the gender is unknown. All but the strictest prescriptivists would now accept that usage. But if a writer picks "them" over "him/her," he should use it with internal, self-referential consistency.

gr3yh47 13y ago
> There is no singular "them." exactly why it is incorrect to use in the singular. and this is the difference between formal and informal. there are rules that are widely accepted (formal) and then there are actual usages that are widely accepted (informal)
- jonnathanson 13y ago
  This is the view commonly understood and immediately sensible. It's the view I was taught and grew up with, and it's the view to which I still adhere when writing (fwiw, I'm an adamant user of "himself" or "herself" for the singular). In this view, "them" is acceptable on an informal, common-usage basis. That said, linguists in recent years have been working out formal methods of acceptance for "themselves" as a singular-referring pronoun when the gender of the subject is unknown. See my previous comments about "them" as a free variable; this is the formalist's argument for the acceptability of "them." It is an argument advanced by some of the more influential logicians of the mid to late 20th century, such as W.V.O. Quine. It's an argument based more in symbolic logic than in traditional linguistics, but it's gained a fair amount of currency in the high-nerddom of syntax. It's by no means an established or generally accepted stance, however. The general, traditionally formal rule is that "them" is always plural, and the construction "singular subject = them" is a bit like saying "1 = >1," i.e., illogical.

gr3yh47 13y ago

> There is no singular "them." exactly why it is incorrect to use in the singular. and this is the difference between formal and informal. there are rules that are widely accepted (formal) and then there are actual usages that are widely accepted (informal)

jonnathanson 13y ago
This is the view commonly understood and immediately sensible. It's the view I was taught and grew up with, and it's the view to which I still adhere when writing (fwiw, I'm an adamant user of "himself" or "herself" for the singular). In this view, "them" is acceptable on an informal, common-usage basis. That said, linguists in recent years have been working out formal methods of acceptance for "themselves" as a singular-referring pronoun when the gender of the subject is unknown. See my previous comments about "them" as a free variable; this is the formalist's argument for the acceptability of "them." It is an argument advanced by some of the more influential logicians of the mid to late 20th century, such as W.V.O. Quine. It's an argument based more in symbolic logic than in traditional linguistics, but it's gained a fair amount of currency in the high-nerddom of syntax. It's by no means an established or generally accepted stance, however. The general, traditionally formal rule is that "them" is always plural, and the construction "singular subject = them" is a bit like saying "1 = >1," i.e., illogical.