undefined | Better HN

0 pointsunhammer11y ago0 comments

Shakespeare good enough for you? http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002748.h... or Jane Austen? http://www.crossmyt.com/hc/linghebr/austhlis.html

For more fun facts and rants about gender-neutral they, see: http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/005423.h...

-----

Note: there's a strong difference between gender-neutral they when the gender is unknown, and singular they when the gender is known. Some people actually prefer being referred to with 'they/their' in sentences such as "Mary finished their ph.d. at Oxford". I doubt you'll find much historic precedence for that usage, but the use of 'their' when the gender is unknown/unspecified has a long history.

Well, each to their own.

0 pointsunhammer11y ago0 comments

Shakespeare good enough for you? http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002748.h... or Jane Austen? http://www.crossmyt.com/hc/linghebr/austhlis.html

For more fun facts and rants about gender-neutral they, see: http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/005423.h...

-----

Well, each to their own.

0 comments

4 comments · 2 top-level

tekacs11y ago· 2 in thread

I myself use they as a neutral pronoun, but I'd suggest that Shakespeare and Austen aren't great examples, especially the former, as the poster was looking for widespread adoption and those authors[1] both use language in ways that are very uncommon.

[1]: this right here is why 'they' as neutral is problematic, as I would have been able to use 'they' unambiguously (instead of 'those authors') had 'they' not grown a singular meaning. It's the point made above about two dimensions rather than one of uncertainty.

unhammerOP11y ago

Maybe not the best examples, but people do tend to think of the usage as something new, while it's been around forever.

I wouldn't say "they both" is very number-ambiguous, though sure you can always find ambiguous examples, but then language is full of ambiguity and humans still seem to manage fine.

Dewie11y ago

> Maybe not the best examples, but people do tend to think of the usage as something new, while it's been around forever.

To bad then that I never said anything about history, but just widespread adoption. So there is not much need to condescendingly point out Shakespeare and Austen, when they are just tangentially related.

1 more reply

Dewie11y ago

Is that supposed to prove something? Well, I guess it proves that I don't read such classic authors, which is right. My background and experience is more humble, mostly to do with writing and reading things in online forums like this or other contemporary settings.

But if you want to be an elitist and dismiss my experience over not being literate with the classics, go ahead.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse