Pronouns and grammar

[PamDenick]

Ok, need help here...
If a girl now identifies as ‘they’ and you are looking for her, what is the (supposed) correct way to do this?
Is it ‘Where is they?’

On the other hand, if we’re changing the rules to allow “they” to apply to a known person, why not simultaneously decide to use “they is”?

Because it sounds jarring and just wrong. I mean... the people who are stamping their feet trying to change language and police everyone's usage can try pushing for 'they is' if they want, but I doubt they'd be that fussed about a grammatical change which doesn't further any agenda. It's the gender of the pronoun they care about, not the agreement of the verb with the pronoun.

Personally I'm sick of the whole bloody thing. And, having been a bit pleased that at least the general population had learned what a pronoun was, I'm now fed up with people talking bollocks about the grammar surrounding it, not to mention saying things like 'I've decided my pronouns are 'queen' and 'superhero'. Those are not pronouns . I realise this is a me problem though.

I teach this and it grinds my gears (sorry ) because singular 'they' has been okay in informal usage for yonks, no doubt about that but it still remains incorrect in formal/formal written usage.

Fine that there might be a language change under way; these happen all the time. But we're not arguing for text speak to become formal English usage, or for kids to be able to write "Innit" or "like" in school essays, or whatever, are we? It's just the politics of this particular usage that is being pushed purely because of the politics. That's what's annoying about it.

One of the differences in register between informal and formal usage is the appropriateness to the situation plus the need for accuracy. A style you'd be happy writing in in a text isn't appropriate for an essay or a formal letter and so on. And singular 'they' obscures the grammatical differences between singular and plural which is fine in most informal contexts, but may be important or needed in others. It still sounds ungrammatical (and more than a little childish) in formal language, and partly that's because it does mean that it often lacks precision and requires follow up information for the reader/listener to make out what's going on.

It's just the politics of this particular usage that is being pushed purely because of the politics.

The original 'political push' for using 'they' in documentation, policies etc was as a replacement for the previous default of 'he'. As someone who works in a historically male-dominated field, I see that as a very good thing. Of course, in many cases a better solution is to reword - often it's easy enough to simply convert to consistent plurals (from 'the user may find that he....' to 'users may find that they' type of thing).

@ErrolTheDragon

It's just the politics of this particular usage that is being pushed purely because of the politics.

The original 'political push' for using 'they' in documentation, policies etc was as a replacement for the previous default of 'he'. As someone who works in a historically male-dominated field, I see that as a very good thing. Of course, in many cases a better solution is to reword - often it's easy enough to simply convert to consistent plurals (from 'the user may find that he....' to 'users may find that they' type of thing).

In my field - and in style guides during the past 30-40 years - writers simply started using s/he, she or he, or even a default she instead of a default he (or a mixture of the two).

Or simply rephrased to avoid the pronoun. There were and still are other solutions that aren't the singular 'they' - the 'they' is currently politicised because it removes gender entirely, not just because it replaces the 'he'.
In my field the default 'he' hasn't been the norm since about 1970; but in the meantime between then and about five years ago everyone still managed to find perfectly grammatical ways around this!

@PamDenick

Ok, so I really appreciate everyone’s thoughts on this issue.

In summary, when trying to ascertain about a group of children I should ask Where are they? In Room 1? (for instance), but when I’m trying to distinguish that I’m looking for one child who has separated from the rest of the class I should ask but Where is he/she? He or she was asked to go to Room 2...
Language does not now differentiate between a singular child or a group of children, so unless we always use the child’s name (which might change on a regular basis) staff cannot distinguish if they are searching fo one child or many children.
it’s not easy to keep up.

In your example, where you're looking for a group of children, you would presumably give context - you wouldn't walk up to a teacher and say "Where are they?" and expect an answer, because they would quite reasonably have no idea what you were on about (and nor would they if you walked up to someone and asked "Where is she?" with no further context).

So either someone else says "I've been doing maths this morning with class 4" and you say, "Oh, where are they?". Or you say, "I'm looking for class 4, where are they?". Or you gesture at their usual classroom (or a sign saying 'class 4', or a class photo, or whatever) to indicate who you're talking about before saying "Where are they?".

As you necessarily need to have context when using pronouns - just as you wouldn't say to someone "She is dead" without giving them SOME clue who 'she' is - the "they" used in this scenario is therefore very clearly plural.

In the scenario where you're searching for an individual child, the same applies. Another teacher says "One of the kids in class 4 had a bit of a funny turn earlier and has gone for a sit down, just so you know"/"Someone from class 4 has gone missing"/"NeutralName from class 4 has gone to a different classroom".

Your response - "Oh, where are they now?"/"Bloody hell, where have they gone?"/"Which classroom are they in?" - is given context by the conversation around it, so it's perfectly clear that you're referring to an individual student.

Same with the example you use upthread:

Is Sam in Room 2? Sam was asked to go there straight after break. Where on earth is they?

The context ("Sam", one individual person's name), means that saying "Where are they?" is perfectly gramatically correct AND perfectly clear from context.

Using 'he or she' 'he slash she' in any of these contexts would be unusual and clunky. As PPs have said, singular they is widely used and - unless you've a tendency to start conversations halfway through and offer zero context - it's clear whether you're referring to a singular or plural they.

I think if the intent is to use they for a singular subject, it would make more sense to use a very in the singular form. It sounds more unnatural but it's much more logical IMO. If the intent is to manipulate language like that why not go whole hog?

The real difficult is when you want to say things like "What is they doing". You just have to reconstruct the whole thing rather than adapt it.

But I don't really think that neutral pronouns of this kind. are worthwhile anyway. They seem to cause a lot of people grief which they - by which I mean the many people - manifestly didn't feel 50 years ago.

Personally I'm sick of the whole bloody thing. And, having been a bit pleased that at least the general population had learned what a pronoun was, I'm now fed up with people talking bollocks about the grammar surrounding it, not to mention saying things like 'I've decided my pronouns are 'queen' and 'superhero'. Those are not pronouns . I realise this is a me problem though. grin

It's just the logical conclusion of the idea that people "own" their pronouns though. Which is to say, it shows the whole premise is bollocks which is the point. Pronouns that you regularly have to look up or ask people about don't fulfill their function.

The only reason to use ‘they’ instead of he/she is if someone has asked to be identified as non-binary and you’re trying to respect that. It sounds clunky because it is, but it’s not really a grammatical issue in the context of gender ID so ‘where are they?’ is ok when people know which individual you’re talking about. As a PP says - context. You can just use the name to get round it. ‘Where is X?’ I have a few NB students and try to use their preferred pronouns, but it does require conscious effort and feels a bit odd/ungainly at times.

@LobsterNapkin

Personally I'm sick of the whole bloody thing. And, having been a bit pleased that at least the general population had learned what a pronoun was, I'm now fed up with people talking bollocks about the grammar surrounding it, not to mention saying things like 'I've decided my pronouns are 'queen' and 'superhero'. Those are not pronouns . I realise this is a me problem though. grin

It's just the logical conclusion of the idea that people "own" their pronouns though. Which is to say, it shows the whole premise is bollocks which is the point. Pronouns that you regularly have to look up or ask people about don't fulfill their function.

Agree with both posters. Bending language into a pretzel for a small percent of people is incredibly gtim.

I mean grim.

I've stopped using pronouns altogether. I just use proper nouns. As in "Aidan is going to Aidan's friend's house tonight. I won't see Aidan until next week when Aidan comes for lunch."

@PamDenick

But it’s inaccurate. It’s a child at school and she wasn’t in the right place... ‘Where is she? Is she in her lesson?’ whereas if I asked, ‘Where are they’ it implied that there was more than one child in the wrong place and I needed to convey the message quickly. ‘Where are they’ would be wrong so would ‘Where is they’ but if I could have asked ‘where is she’ I would have asked an accurate question.

The people who want to control your language aren’t concerned about accuracy. Obfuscation and confusion are their best friends.

Just had my first email with pronouns (he/him) on. A work colleague I have known for years. My first thought was "well the beard is a bit of a giveaway".

Where are they ? Or just use their name - where is Julie…

I think if the intent is to use they for a singular subject, it would make more sense to use a very in the singular form.

'They are' has been the accepted singular form for people of unknown sex for centuries. The same as 'you are'.

@ErrolTheDragon

I think if the intent is to use they for a singular subject, it would make more sense to use a very in the singular form.

'They are' has been the accepted singular form for people of unknown sex for centuries. The same as 'you are'.

Yes, but this is really not the same thing. It's adding a new, neutral singular pronoun for use with a specific, known individual.

It makes using it much clearer if we use it as if it is in fact singular.

If people are going to tell us we have to do this I can't see any reason we shouldn't make it as smooth as possible. People are already having to second guess what they say naturally.

If I identified as being non binary I’d like to be called ‘it’

Just as you might say, “I saw a dog earlier. Where is it now? (The dog would have a sex but we don’t always need to know what that is.)

We all use 'they' as a singular for a person of unknown sex without thinking about it. It's been in common use for centuries.

But only when the number of people doesn't matter or is clear. When people are switching between talking about groups and individuals they don't naturally use "singular they" because it is so confusing. My son using singular "they" all the time and I hate how hard it is to follow his conversation.

"I went to the cinema with my friends. Tom was a bit late. The choice was Dune or the Bond movie so we saw Dune because they don't like James Bond." Fucksake who isn't a Bond fan? OK it doesn't matter much in that example but he does it about things that matter too and it is so easy to misunderstand.

"It" usually means "non-human". Maybe we should borrow "on" from the French and re-purpose it. Where is on? Give it to on. On went to the shops. When is ons birthday?

Finnish doesn't distinguish between he and she, they are both hän, perhaps anyone identifying as non binary should adopt that.

Here is the thing though.

We all know, whatever word we use, that this person is a he or she. Even on the odd occasion of someone who has taken enough hormones that we are in error about the individual's sex, our error is not that the person is a neuter, it's that the individual is the other sex.

So it's all just a show of not mentioning what we all know to be the case.

Maybe we should borrow "on" from the French and re-purpose it. Where is on? Give it to on. On went to the shops. When is ons birthday?

We don't need to borrow 'on' - just use 'one'.

We don't need to borrow 'on' - just use 'one'.

Noooooo! "One" already means something different!!!!

@LobsterNapkin

Here is the thing though.

We all know, whatever word we use, that this person is a he or she. Even on the odd occasion of someone who has taken enough hormones that we are in error about the individual's sex, our error is not that the person is a neuter, it's that the individual is the other sex.

So it's all just a show of not mentioning what we all know to be the case.

Yes. It's tedious posturing. It supports the notion that 'gender' is important, and ok for everyone else. It makes communication more difficult. But it isn't ungrammatical.

@AmaryllisNightAndDay

We don't need to borrow 'on' - just use 'one'.

Noooooo! "One" already means something different!!!!

It's probably the closest we've got, and our analog of 'on':

One is an English language, gender-neutral, indefinite pronoun that means, roughly, "a person". For purposes of verb agreement it is a third-person singular pronoun, though it sometimes appears with first- or second-person reference. It is sometimes called an impersonal pronoun. It is more or less equivalent to the Scots "a body", the French pronoun onn, the German/Scandinavian man, and the Spanish uno. It can take the possessive form one's and the reflexive form oneself, or it can adopt those forms from the generic he with his and himself^.

"PamDenick

Interesting points , Daisy but I think I use language differently to you.

If my child told me their supply teacher was horrible I would respond with What did he or she do?"

'Their' and 'they' are used so often in normal language when sex is uncertain. You've even used 'their' in your own post. Surely by your logic - you should have used 'his or her'?