{"items": [{"author": "BDan", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=485879014774618", "anchor": "fb-485879014774618", "service": "fb", "text": "I think a couple of your examples (\"Mike got there early...\", \"While giving birth...\") actually have plural antecedents for the pronoun (\"everyone\", \"people\").", "timestamp": "1344341543"}, {"author": "Clement", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/117886836849994031835", "anchor": "gp-1344342504456", "service": "gp", "text": "What bothers me about using ungendered pronouns is that it makes for more ambiguous language.\n
\nWhile I agree that gender is often not important for the message, there are a number of situations where using gendered pronouns allows one to cram more information into a sentence.\n
\nThanks for sharing :)", "timestamp": 1344342504}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=485885708107282", "anchor": "fb-485885708107282", "service": "fb", "text": "@BDan: \"actually have plural antecedents for the pronoun\"
I've fixed the 'people' one, but the 'everyone' one I'm not sure about. We say \"everyone is here\" not \"everyone are here\". In \"everyone brought their own fork\" would you say the antecedent is plural?", "timestamp": "1344342898"}, {"author": "Daniel", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=485894521439734", "anchor": "fb-485894521439734", "service": "fb", "text": "I feel similarly, Victor. The main purpose, for me, of seeking ungendered pronouns is to avoid assuming gender in language for either ungendered things/people or (more often) things/people of unknown gender. While I still don't like, aesthetically, using a plural pronoun in place of a singular one, I recognize its purpose and the lack of better alternatives. Ze and hir just sound weird to me and never caught on. I typically use s/he and his/her, but I recognize this is awkward, especially if you use the pronouns frequently.
Re: everyone, it is loosely treated as a singular in most grammatical contexts. Basically, as though \"every one\" were still separate words, with \"every\" as a descriptor and \"one\" as the (in this case) object. I think of it like \"each one\", because we are talking about multiple things, but referring to each one as an individual (at least in grammatical terms.) In your example, if all the people Mike pranked were female, it would be grammatically correct to say \"Mike got there early and pranked everyone before Sue had a chance to warn her.\" However, very few people would actually write it that way, regardless of what's technically correct...which is along the lines of what you're talking about with the whole singular/plural and gendered/ungendered post.", "timestamp": "1344344972"}, {"author": "Becky", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=485902458105607", "anchor": "fb-485902458105607", "service": "fb", "text": "Side note, re: your \"unspecific implied-gendered\" examples: I believe both of those examples call for a gender-neutral pronoun, because neither Bryn Mawr students nor people giving birth are entirely female groups (though they are majority-female). On your more general point, I agree that things are moving this direction, and that it's difficult to speed the process of language change, potentially so difficult that it's not worth the mental effort for a given individual to speak far ahead of the curve.", "timestamp": "1344346748"}, {"author": "Chris", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=485913544771165", "anchor": "fb-485913544771165", "service": "fb", "text": " I started a trend at the Corvinus Econ department do just that", "timestamp": "1344348858"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=485923548103498", "anchor": "fb-485923548103498", "service": "fb", "text": "@Becky: \"neither Bryn Mawr students nor people giving birth are entirely female groups\"
Yes, but they're close enough to entirely female that I think people find it stranger to use \"they\" with them than with gender-unrelated groups. (But I think it's more than just the gender ratio in the groups; they are groups defined partly by sex/gender.) Also, while a quick look online suggests Bryn Mawr doesn't assume a gender of their students in their handbook etc, Mount Holyoke's handbook [1] says things like \"A student should consult the ombudsperson if she perceives...\" and \"the student is expected to elect the course for which her admission units meet the stated prerequisite\".
\"it's difficult to speed the process of language change\"
Is there research on what works and what doesn't for speeding language change? Or what things are easier to change than others? There have been a lot of attempts, some of them successful (use the term X for members of this minority group, not Y) and many not (use this new set of gender-neutral pronouns).
\"speak far ahead of the curve\"
I agree that \"far ahead\" doesn't make sense. I was thinking about trying to accelerate it by encouraging people to speak somewhat forward of where they usually would.
[1] https://www.mtholyoke.edu/.../docs/mhcstudenthandbook.pdf", "timestamp": "1344350614"}, {"author": "Becky", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=485931168102736", "anchor": "fb-485931168102736", "service": "fb", "text": "Jeff, I agree that some people might still find it weird, but it's another move towards inclusive language and one that I feel is particularly easy to implement, considering that there are analogous groups that already deal with having to refer to people of varying genders (e.g. co-ed colleges, people undergoing cancer treatment). I suppose what I'm getting at is that it's a question of respecting people's identities rather than of removing gendered pronouns from language in general. Just because some women's colleges still refer to their students using female pronouns, doesn't mean that it's right for them to do so (see Rhys' great piece: http://www.bilerico.com/.../my_thoughts_on_the_smith...). I understand this wasn't the point of your post, so I'm simply noting this for readers who may not have considered it before. As to your other point, I think this has to do with closed-class vs. open-class words. Pronouns are generally closed-class, meaning they change at much slower rates than nouns and verbs, which are open-class.", "timestamp": "1344352027"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=485935731435613", "anchor": "fb-485935731435613", "service": "fb", "text": "@Becky: From that piece, an example of pushing the \"singular they\" envelope:
\"I saw a graduate wearing a button-down shirt and tie, holding their cap and gown and embracing their partner. They were crying ...\"
As for \"just because some women's colleges still refer to their student bodies using female pronouns, doesn't mean that it's right for them to do so\", while I agree with you about what they should do, I think it's important to recognize that there's some linguistics at play here too. Groups that are single-gender or nearly single gender for specific reason (a men's basketball team where the manager is female; a women's morris side where one of the musicians is male) act in many people's minds as being gendered not mixed. So an arbitrary exemplar (next time I see someone on Rock Creek [1] I'll tell her that...) gets the group gender. This isn't how I speak (for me it feels more natural to say \"I'll tell them that\" even if I know the whole group is the same gender) but I think it's important to understand how people are thinking about it if we want to influence their word choices.
[1] A women's side that has at times had a male musician.", "timestamp": "1344352924"}, {"author": "Robert", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=485942708101582", "anchor": "fb-485942708101582", "service": "fb", "text": "The thing is that sometimes gender *is* relevant. I would say that is the case with all of your \"unspecific gendered\" examples, especially the one about the \"hunk\" -- a word which could theoretically be applied to females, I suppose, but if I were to say something like that it would definitely be *his* shirtlessness that appealed.", "timestamp": "1344354100"}, {"author": "David", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=485972694765250", "anchor": "fb-485972694765250", "service": "fb", "text": "I thought Bryn Mawr was a women-only college for undergraduates. Has that changed?", "timestamp": "1344359812"}, {"author": "BDan", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=485984074764112", "anchor": "fb-485984074764112", "service": "fb", "text": "Jeff, Daniel: \"Everyone\" is a bit complicated. Jeff, you're right that \"Everyone is here\" is grammatical, while *\"Everyone are here\" is not, but it behaves differently when it's an antecedent. I find \"Everyone brought their own forks\" to be better than ?\"Everyone brought their own fork\"; I think *\"Mike got there early and pranked everyone before Sue had a chance to warn her\" is just ungrammatical. I don't think that it behaves identically to \"every\" used as a quantifier/determiner, though besides that \"every\" and \"each\" do not behave identically (compare \"Each of the cats has had dinner\" vs. *\"Every of the cats has had dinner\"). I wrote a (very long) paper about some of this stuff back in college, and at the time did not manage to work up a comprehensive analysis of quantifiers in English, though I didn't feel that bad about it because at that time, no one else (including at least one doctoral dissertation that I was able to pretty well tear apart) had managed to either. Suffice it to say that things are complicated.", "timestamp": "1344361983"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=485990024763517", "anchor": "fb-485990024763517", "service": "fb", "text": "@David: \"I thought Bryn Mawr was a women-only college for undergraduates\"
Some Bryn Mawr undergrads are male, though generally they all met the college's gender restrictions (\"F\" on the birth certificate? Female-identified? I can't find it easily on their website.) at the time they were applying. This is true with many \"women-only colleges\", and Rhys' piece that Becky linked to might be interesting: http://www.bilerico.com/.../my_thoughts_on_the_smith...", "timestamp": "1344362921"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=485990434763476", "anchor": "fb-485990434763476", "service": "fb", "text": "@BDan: I've changed my \"everyone\" example to your \"everyone brought their own fork\", which sounds fine to me and is more clearly singular. (In fact, \"everyone brought their own forks\" sounds (to me) like people are bringing multiple forks apiece.)", "timestamp": "1344363024"}, {"author": "David", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=485991634763356", "anchor": "fb-485991634763356", "service": "fb", "text": "Jeff, that is odd. it seems rather--not sure what the phrase would be, transphobic? cisnormative?--to have masculine-identified students at a women's college. The message it sends to me is \"they identify as male, but we know they're REALLY female so it's okay for them to stay here.\" While simultaneously saying that transwomen aren't allowed because they're not \"real\" women. I can't speak from experience, of course, but if my gender expression were to change, I would prefer people treat me as a woman, including not allowing me into men-only groups. I realize that's not all there is to it, but that's how it appears to me as an outsider.", "timestamp": "1344363279"}, {"author": "Melissa", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=485991721430014", "anchor": "fb-485991721430014", "service": "fb", "text": "Bryn Mawr College also has a limited number of graduate programs (including a highly regarded school of social work, of which I am an alum :) ), and they admit men to those programs. I think in my SW class of about 100, there were 5 men.", "timestamp": "1344363297"}, {"author": "David", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=485991828096670", "anchor": "fb-485991828096670", "service": "fb", "text": "Also you can say \"they each brought a fork\" right?", "timestamp": "1344363311"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=485993261429860", "anchor": "fb-485993261429860", "service": "fb", "text": "@David: \"you can say 'they each brought a fork'\"
Would you say \"they each brought a fork to to feed themself with\" or \"they each brought a fork to feed themselves with\"?
(Both sound more or less fine to me, though my judgement feels fuzzy right now on \"they\".)", "timestamp": "1344363605"}, {"author": "Becky", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=485997054762814", "anchor": "fb-485997054762814", "service": "fb", "text": "@David, you're right that having male-identified (or genderqueer) people at a women's college is complex for a variety of reasons. Of course, any student who ends up feeling the way that you say you'd feel has the option of transferring out, but transferring colleges is a complex process that can delay graduation, interfere with financial aid, and isolate a student from established support systems. So women's colleges have generally not had a policy of kicking a student out because they have changed their gender identification during their college career -- they leave that choice to the student. It's key to remember that kids applying to college are 17-18 years old and don't necessarily have their gender identity all figured out at that time.", "timestamp": "1344364464"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=486006288095224", "anchor": "fb-486006288095224", "service": "fb", "text": "@David: \"I would prefer people treat me as a woman, including not allowing me into men-only groups\"
Not allowing you in isn't the same as kicking you out. Practically, having a \"we expel you if you change your gender identification\" policy would be a disaster.
An \"F on the birth certificate\" *application* criterion, though, is less defensible.", "timestamp": "1344366133"}, {"author": "Julia", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=486032768092576", "anchor": "fb-486032768092576", "service": "fb", "text": "Most of the examples in your last section are hard for me to interpret. \"Look at that careless woman spilling beer all over their kid!\" I interpret this to mean a woman is spilling beer on a kid belonging to other people.", "timestamp": "1344371493"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=486036498092203", "anchor": "fb-486036498092203", "service": "fb", "text": "@Julia: \"the examples in your last section are hard for me to interpret\"
They're hard for me to interpret too. My singular-they muscles aren't strong enough yet. But they're the end goal.", "timestamp": "1344372249"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=486037058092147", "anchor": "fb-486037058092147", "service": "fb", "text": "@BDan: what do you make of \"everyone must bring their own fork\" vs \"everyone must bring their own forks\"? If the expectation is one fork per person I much prefer the first one.", "timestamp": "1344372352"}, {"author": "Adrian", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=486071754755344", "anchor": "fb-486071754755344", "service": "fb", "text": "To add to the discussion of trans* folks at women's colleges--Smith, for example, is one place where there is a pretty large concentration of trans* folks, and in some ways it can be a safe space. The administration's cissexist and transphobic languages and policies are reprehensible, but they are not the only factor in a decision to remain at the school. (Also, in the recent past, many folks have faced threats of administrative retribution if they did try to stay--trans* rights are not set in stone at all.) At Smith, if you're MtF, I believe the policy is that you have to have transitioned officially before high school in order to get in--totally bogus for most folks! In terms of the general discussion, I might frame it a bit differently and say that gender is very important--partly because of the way it invades all of our thoughts and language--and that is part of why we should have a more gender-neutral language, to shift the paradigm around gender and to respect the fact that we don't know how other folks identify until we ask which pronouns they prefer. Once we know, we should respect those pronouns.", "timestamp": "1344379515"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=486085854753934", "anchor": "fb-486085854753934", "service": "fb", "text": "@Marianna: \"we don't know how other folks identify until we ask which pronouns they prefer\"
Do you feel guessing a pronoun from someone's name and appearance and using that unless corrected is appropriate?
(While I'd like to avoid the whole thing and just use forms of \"they\", at this point that would really confuse listeners.)", "timestamp": "1344382786"}, {"author": "David", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=486115201417666", "anchor": "fb-486115201417666", "service": "fb", "text": "I would just use the person's name, to be honest. If he/she wants to tell me which pronoun I ought to use, then I will do so, but to avoid mispronomination I will just not pronominate at all.", "timestamp": "1344389685"}, {"author": "David", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=486115564750963", "anchor": "fb-486115564750963", "service": "fb", "text": "And with regards to student body populations: it sounds like they're trying to be a \"XX-only\" college rather than a \"women-only\" college. Which, you know, is fine, but they should be up front about it. Personally, I think the idea of single-gender education (at least past age 18) is kind of odd. Mostly because I kind of wish I could have gone to Bryn Mawr :P", "timestamp": "1344389747"}, {"author": "Julia", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/102487727783123805341", "anchor": "gp-1344394277751", "service": "gp", "text": "So my friend Michelle actually has a friend whose preferred pronoun is the singular they. \u00a0It's a little weird in conversation when there isn't enough context to determine whether \"they\" is referring to just this individual or multiple people. \u00a0So, um, I think my point is that this can pose problems when you need to be imparting information about number.\u00a0", "timestamp": 1344394277}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/103013777355236494008", "anchor": "gp-1344396449401", "service": "gp", "text": "@Julia\n\u00a0'It's a little weird in conversation when there isn't enough context to determine whether \"they\" is referring to just this individual or multiple people.'\n
\n
\nI think it wouldn't be weird if we were used to \"they\" not indicating number; there are languages that work fine that way.", "timestamp": 1344396449}, {"author": "Daniel", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=486303861398800", "anchor": "fb-486303861398800", "service": "fb", "text": "Huh. BDan, I concede the point. I consider myself to know grammar pretty well, but you've clearly looked into this particular issue far more than I have.", "timestamp": "1344436237"}, {"author": "Julia", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/102487727783123805341", "anchor": "gp-1344488239382", "service": "gp", "text": "Do you think it would work best to make this switch just for people? \u00a0For all animate things (look at this worm: they're pregnant!)? \u00a0For all third-person stuff (I sat on my chair and they broke)? \u00a0Some other category? \u00a0I can see arguments for any of these, and really have no idea what would be best.", "timestamp": 1344488239}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/103013777355236494008", "anchor": "gp-1344512006033", "service": "gp", "text": "@Julia\n\u00a0I don't see a problem with \"it\"; what arguments are you seeing against it?", "timestamp": 1344512006}, {"author": "Julia", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/102487727783123805341", "anchor": "gp-1344520179524", "service": "gp", "text": "@Jeff Kaufman\n\u00a0I was going to say that we'd have a pronoun we only use for inanimate objects, but in the clear light of day, I see that's true for \"it\" right now also. \u00a0So I guess having \"it\" should work just fine. \u00a0But I dunno, it might make it harder for people to decide what pronoun to use, depending on what sort of decision tree people use (at least until \"they\" is normal).", "timestamp": 1344520179}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/103013777355236494008", "anchor": "gp-1344523159534", "service": "gp", "text": "@Julia\n\u00a0We use \"it\" for some animals, especially small or not-human-like ones.", "timestamp": 1344523159}, {"author": "Julia", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/102487727783123805341", "anchor": "gp-1344526259971", "service": "gp", "text": "@Jeff Kaufman\n I guess that depends on the situation: We definitely use she for our worms in the lab, which is a little funny because they are actually hemaphroditic. And they are super small, you can just barely see them with the naked eye. Although I see your point, I would probably call an earthworm it. ", "timestamp": 1344526259}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/103013777355236494008", "anchor": "gp-1344531753020", "service": "gp", "text": "@Julia\n\u00a0I could also imagine someone using \"it\" for a whale or other large but strange animal.", "timestamp": 1344531753}, {"author": "Adam Yie", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/114873051319510815414", "anchor": "gp-1344699065198", "service": "gp", "text": "@Jeff Kaufman\n\u00a0do you plan on keeping gendered pronouns for entities that prefer to be referred to with them? If not, why?", "timestamp": 1344699065}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/103013777355236494008", "anchor": "gp-1344734820138", "service": "gp", "text": "@Adam Yie\n\u00a0\"keep gendered pronouns for entities that prefer to be referred to with them?\"\n
\n
\nI think it makes sense to work towards a language without gendered pronouns for anyone. \u00a0It's a categorization that just isn't important enough to be constantly reinforced linguistically.\n
\n
\nHaving gendered pronouns for some entities and not for others on the basis of what the various entities prefer is a very large burden on speakers. \u00a0I don't think that's practical.", "timestamp": 1344734820}, {"author": "Adam Yie", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/114873051319510815414", "anchor": "gp-1344738922405", "service": "gp", "text": "+Jeff Kaufman Having gendered pronouns for some entities and not for others on the basis of what the various entities prefer is a very large burden on speakers. \u00a0I don't think that's practical.\n
\n
\nDo you treat names and pronouns differently? Apologies if I'm confusing things, but I thought you more or less agreed with Danah Boyd's position on naming--would you mind explaining?", "timestamp": 1344738922}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/103013777355236494008", "anchor": "gp-1344741280499", "service": "gp", "text": "@Adam Yie\n\u00a0I'm confused what you're asking; I don't know Boyd's position on naming.\n
\n
\nNeeding to know each person's pronoun preference in order to refer to them would be a huge pain.", "timestamp": 1344741280}, {"author": "Adam Yie", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/114873051319510815414", "anchor": "gp-1344770657803", "service": "gp", "text": "@Jeff Kaufman\n\u00a0\"I'm confused what you're asking; I don't know Boyd's position on naming.\"\n
\n
\nMy bad - must be from somewhere else.", "timestamp": 1344770657}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727153227313861", "anchor": "fb-727153227313861", "service": "fb", "text": "\"they each brought a fork to feed themselves with\" now sounds wrong to me, while \"they each brought a fork to to feed themself with\" sounds fine.", "timestamp": "1384518520"}, {"author": "Victor", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727202443975606", "anchor": "fb-727202443975606", "service": "fb", "text": "I find myself confused, at times, because \"they\" sounds plural. Then I have to clarify, \"But I though you only had one housemate\", for example.", "timestamp": "1384523124"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727256957303488", "anchor": "fb-727256957303488", "service": "fb", "text": "@Victor: over time I would expect people to stop hearing \"they\" as implying plural. Just as we don't hear \"you\" as implying plural anymore.", "timestamp": "1384527259"}, {"author": "Laura", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727277137301470", "anchor": "fb-727277137301470", "service": "fb", "text": "Just had an interesting insight... reading the example about the graduate, my brain mildly rebelled at its inability to picture this person. I'm not saying I agree with said brain, particularly if the person wants to be referred to in a certain way, but I'm likely to not be the only person who has this instictive reaction. Maybe that's another side to some people's resistance to gender-neutral pronouns... the inability to instantly form a mind-picture of the person to whom the story is referring. Sure, we shouldn't use gender as our primary identifier, etc. etc., but when trying to make such a huge change as language, I think it's important to understand people's reactions so we can react effectively.", "timestamp": "1384529893"}, {"author": "Victor", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727281783967672", "anchor": "fb-727281783967672", "service": "fb", "text": "\"You\" is both singular and plural but not ambiguous to the person or people being addressed. For third person, that ambiguity is not easily resoved.", "timestamp": "1384530592"}, {"author": "Laura", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727282297300954", "anchor": "fb-727282297300954", "service": "fb", "text": "I also wonder if people have this same conversation in countries where there are gendered articles... if books and pens are masculine and feminine, I wonder if it's as big a deal what people are called.", "timestamp": "1384530680"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727283087300875", "anchor": "fb-727283087300875", "service": "fb", "text": "@Victor: \"not ambiguous to the person or people being addressed\"
Really? If I say in the direction of a few people of various degrees of physical closeness \"are you coming with me\", they need to resolve the ambiguity to figure out whether I'm taking to a specific one of them (singular you) or the group (plural you). We have all sorts of ways of doing this resolution (how likely am I to ask various people to come with me, where am I looking, did I point at someone, ...) but we still have to do it.", "timestamp": "1384530775"}, {"author": "Laura", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727283460634171", "anchor": "fb-727283460634171", "service": "fb", "text": "But you have physical cues in that case. When referring to a person who's there, it's not possible to point or nod or look at a certain person/people.", "timestamp": "1384530824"}, {"author": "Laura", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727283507300833", "anchor": "fb-727283507300833", "service": "fb", "text": "*who's NOT there", "timestamp": "1384530834"}, {"author": "Victor", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727284407300743", "anchor": "fb-727284407300743", "service": "fb", "text": "Jeff-I think you are arguing for the sake of argument. Your explanation shows that \"you\" ambiguity is far more easily resolved than \"they\" ambiguity. I think you are in that sort of mood today, judging by your \"difficulty\" understanding the deflationary spiral.", "timestamp": "1384530966"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727285133967337", "anchor": "fb-727285133967337", "service": "fb", "text": "@Laura: \"it's not possible to point or nod or look at a certain person/people\"
Pronoun resolution is complex and people are very capable. If I say \"john bought mike a gift but he didn't like it\" you interpret \"he\" as \"mike\" but if I say \"john bought mike a gift but he regretted it\" you interpret \"he\" as \"john\".", "timestamp": "1384531082"}, {"author": "David", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727286640633853", "anchor": "fb-727286640633853", "service": "fb", "text": "The real culprit here is the Extended Projection Principle.", "timestamp": "1384531385"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727288887300295", "anchor": "fb-727288887300295", "service": "fb", "text": "@David: are you saying we should just switch to a pro-drop language?", "timestamp": "1384531803"}, {"author": "David", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727289240633593", "anchor": "fb-727289240633593", "service": "fb", "text": "Exactly!", "timestamp": "1384531879"}, {"author": "Laura", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727299877299196", "anchor": "fb-727299877299196", "service": "fb", "text": "Jeff, I disagree, Mike could easily regret getting a gift. I teach writing and this is something I have to point out to help people clarify their work all the time. People THINK they know that the other person is interpreting the same way the speaker intended, but the perception is not always accurate. Just like people who say \"I saw Sue yesterday. They gave me a present\" think that it's clear that there's no other person with Sue, but it may not be to a casual listener.", "timestamp": "1384533194"}, {"author": "Todd", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727368753958975", "anchor": "fb-727368753958975", "service": "fb", "text": "\"Really? If I say in the direction of a few people of various degrees of physical closeness \"are you coming with me\", they need to resolve the ambiguity to figure out whether I'm taking to a specific one of them (singular you) or the group (plural you). We have all sorts of ways of doing this resolution (how likely am I to ask various people to come with me, where am I looking, did I point at someone, ...) but we still have to do it.\"
So why would we want to have to deal with this when it comes to third person? I'm fine with the idea of gender-neutral pronouns, but it would make more sense to drop he/she in favor of it or an it analogue, rather than they. I know that there have been failed projects to do so, so maybe that seems untenable, but going out of our way to introduce ambiguity by taking plural out of they seems like a solution that's worse than the problem.", "timestamp": "1384539053"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727376303958220", "anchor": "fb-727376303958220", "service": "fb", "text": "@Todd: \"going out of our way to introduce ambiguity by taking plural out of 'they' seems like a solution that's worse than the problem.\"
People adapt to the level of ambiguity in their language, and this is a small change in absolute terms.
This is also not going out of the way: this is taking what is already happening and trying to accelerate it or push it farther than it would otherwise go.", "timestamp": "1384539815"}, {"author": "Todd", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727384380624079", "anchor": "fb-727384380624079", "service": "fb", "text": "Is it actively progressing with respect to they specifically? Or have the cases in which we use they as singular been around for awhile? If the former, what were people using before?
Regardless of the answer to that question, I'd much rather just drop all instances of he (etc.) in favor of she (etc.) (or vice versa) than stomp them both with they (etc.).
Maybe the ambiguity isn't that great in the scheme of things, but it's annoying already with you. In fact, I'm sympathetic to those who support making y'all a more official second person plural form to address that problem. If we're going to actively push for a language change, we might as well push for the best version we can.", "timestamp": "1384540809"}, {"author": "Dave", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727394540623063", "anchor": "fb-727394540623063", "service": "fb", "text": "Hey, I agree with this one : )", "timestamp": "1384541030"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727402820622235", "anchor": "fb-727402820622235", "service": "fb", "text": "@Todd: \"Is it actively progressing with respect to 'they' specifically?\"
I think so. The examples I have under \"specific unknown-gender ungendered\" all sound fine to me and most people I've talked to my age but are a little strange for most people my parents' age.", "timestamp": "1384541585"}, {"author": "Todd", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727403583955492", "anchor": "fb-727403583955492", "service": "fb", "text": "What would they say instead?", "timestamp": "1384541728"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727406263955224", "anchor": "fb-727406263955224", "service": "fb", "text": "@Todd: probably \"his or her\" as you tend to see in more formal writing.", "timestamp": "1384542207"}, {"author": "Todd", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727406770621840", "anchor": "fb-727406770621840", "service": "fb", "text": "I don't think I've ever heard someone speak that way", "timestamp": "1384542298"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727407917288392", "anchor": "fb-727407917288392", "service": "fb", "text": "@Todd \"the cop was probably just trying to meet his, or her, quota\"", "timestamp": "1384542467"}, {"author": "Todd", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727410013954849", "anchor": "fb-727410013954849", "service": "fb", "text": "Ah yeah, the pause makes all the difference. And I suppose there would have been fewer ambiguous cases going back far enough (cop being an example).", "timestamp": "1384542847"}, {"author": "Margot", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727416417287542", "anchor": "fb-727416417287542", "service": "fb", "text": "@Jeff, I find I can skip the pause for effect simply by reversing which gender I say first. If you say 'her or his' instead of 'his or her' it gets people's attention. We're still not used to hearing 'her' unless is directly references a specific female, or a member of a definitively female group, such as mothers.", "timestamp": "1384543130"}, {"author": "David Chudzicki", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727473650615152", "anchor": "fb-727473650615152", "service": "fb", "text": "I'm not sure why this thread lit back up now, but since it has... Jeff, any update on how this has gone for you over the last 15 months?", "timestamp": "1384544723"}, {"author": "Wayne", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727484837280700", "anchor": "fb-727484837280700", "service": "fb", "text": "", "timestamp": "1384544950"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=727498973945953", "anchor": "fb-727498973945953", "service": "fb", "text": "@David, Wayne: I've kept at it, especially trying to use 'they' in blog posts in slightly ways that push a bit. No one has said anything. I do know a few more people who ask for \"singular they\" to be used for their pronoun than I did before, though I don't think that's causal.", "timestamp": "1384545140"}, {"author": "Imuli", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/107034411224584704614", "anchor": "gp-1402422493907", "service": "gp", "text": "As of June 2014 none of the examples (except for themself, I hear theirself more often) sound weird to me. In my production I do notice that I always use gendered pronouns when talking to parents about their young children, even parents my age. I suspect that's a \"I remember what gender your child is therefore I care\" sort of thing.", "timestamp": 1402422493}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=2104487349580435", "anchor": "fb-2104487349580435", "service": "fb", "text": "Rereading this now, they actually all sound fine to me", "timestamp": "1528896278"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=2104490016246835", "anchor": "fb-2104490016246835", "service": "fb", "text": "One I heard yesterday, that I think only jumped out to me because I'm interested in singular they: \"[wife's name] can bring the tablecloths when they come\"", "timestamp": "1528896455"}, {"author": "Leah", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=2104585492903954", "anchor": "fb-2104585492903954", "service": "fb", "text": "I don't know if anyone's published about this or studied it in a controlled way, but the consensus on Queer Linguist Twitter seems to be that one of the uses of singular \"they\" is for distal referents (where \"distal\" can mean literally \"far away\" or metaphorically \"weakly connected or unconnected to the current situation\") -- which your sentence would be a great example of!", "timestamp": "1528900979"}, {"author": "Gordon", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=2105806769448493", "anchor": "fb-2105806769448493", "service": "fb", "text": "Regarding singular they, what do you think of this: \"[wife's name] can bring the tablecloths when they comes\"? Basically, replacing \"she\" with \"they\".", "timestamp": "1528948170"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=2105814336114403", "anchor": "fb-2105814336114403", "service": "fb", "text": "Gordon \"when they comes\" sounds as bad as \"when you comes\". Singular they takes the same conjugations as plural they.
(Though it would be \"they hid themself\" and not \"they hid themselves\")", "timestamp": "1528948679"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=2106401212722382", "anchor": "fb-2106401212722382", "service": "fb", "text": "At this point to me, using a gendered pronoun can feel like intentionally emphasizing gender. \"My boss said they might be by later\" -> normal. \"My boss said she might be by later\" -> the first one, plus a small indication that their gender is relevant.
I even get this a little with specific named referents, in cases where 'they' would sound fine. Since \"John said they might be by later\" is ok to my ear \"John said he might be by later\" draws some attention to John's gender.", "timestamp": "1528974314"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=2106596139369556", "anchor": "fb-2106596139369556", "service": "fb", "text": "Ross fixed!", "timestamp": "1528984936"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=2106596919369478", "anchor": "fb-2106596919369478", "service": "fb", "text": "Update: https://www.jefftk.com/p/increasingly-ok-with-singular-they", "timestamp": "1528984961"}, {"author": "Laura", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/485876684774851?comment_id=2106779559351214", "anchor": "fb-2106779559351214", "service": "fb", "text": "Your example about John still makes me wonder who John is bringing.", "timestamp": "1528994176"}]}