‘They/them’ has been used for singular people for centuries.
The Oxford English Dictionary traces singular they back to 1375, where it appears in the medieval romance William and the Werewolf. Except for the old-style language of that poem, its use of singular they to refer to an unnamed person seems very modern. Here’s the Middle English version: ‘Hastely hiȝed eche . . . þei neyȝþed so neiȝh . . . þere william & his worþi lef were liand i-fere.’ In modern English, that’s: ‘Each man hurried . . . till they drew near . . . where William and his darling were lying together.’
So that means that’s the best way for it to work in the future? Having a distinction between singular and plural is useful, so why *not adjust our language and repurpose the not useful gendered pronouns?
I understand that, my point is that they’re not useful. Or at least it would be much more useful to have a singular and a plural pronoun, because that distinction is more relevant to modern speech.
Language is as useful as people make it and people have been happy to use the singular ‘they’ along with gendered pronouns for centuries. I don’t see the issue.
Are we not intelligent enough to make language whatever we want it to be? We actually do that all the time with political correctness and ungendering words like policeman.
Yes and languages evolve. I also worry that your same sort of historial logic can be used in favor of preserving gendered language and traditional gender definitions that is contrary to the goals here.
I’m arguing for a standard usage, he/her for everyone covers always having a singular standardized pronoun so that they/them can be used as plural pronouns without the potential confusion that you may be talking about more than one person in the same literal contextual frame of a discussion. Preciseness of language improves the quality of communication.
Even in that example, and perhaps the modern English translation is just incorrect in its wording, “Each man hurried… til they drew near” is still a plural representative form of usage, as ‘each man’ is an implied amount of more than a singular man.
To say “Each man hurried… til he drew near… where William and his darling were lying together” creates a confusion of singular subject and does not work since ‘each man’ and ‘they’ represents more than a single self identifying entity.
No, not cool. Languages do in fact change over time, regardless of what you or I may think, do or want.
I never demanded others conform to what I want, I argued in favor of an idea that has evolved over time from my own personal growth and life experiences, and it’s a suggestion that is certainly open for discussion.
This was shared as a thought out consideration meant to improve on existing language in several ways, including:
as a compromise and simplified solution on pronoun gendering,
more exactness when discussing single individuals or multiple individuals,
and as a pronoun that is inclusive of everyone without having to talk down to people you disagree with.
I don’t know if you just constantly see red when you go to reply on certain thread topics, but not everything is or needs to be a reactionary agitative internet fight. Have a nice day.
‘They/them’ has been used for singular people for centuries.
https://www.oed.com/discover/a-brief-history-of-singular-they/?tl=true
So that means that’s the best way for it to work in the future? Having a distinction between singular and plural is useful, so why *not adjust our language and repurpose the not useful gendered pronouns?
No one said you can’t use gendered pronouns.
I understand that, my point is that they’re not useful. Or at least it would be much more useful to have a singular and a plural pronoun, because that distinction is more relevant to modern speech.
Language is as useful as people make it and people have been happy to use the singular ‘they’ along with gendered pronouns for centuries. I don’t see the issue.
You could use a similar argument to stop literally any innovation. Things don’t have to be an issue to be able to be improved.
Language isn’t about innovation unless it is an artificial language. People don’t choose their words based on what is innovative.
Are we not intelligent enough to make language whatever we want it to be? We actually do that all the time with political correctness and ungendering words like policeman.
“We” are not under any obligation to make language whatever you want it to be.
Again, most people have no problem with the singular ‘they.’ You do. Why should they change to accommodate you?
Yes and languages evolve. I also worry that your same sort of historial logic can be used in favor of preserving gendered language and traditional gender definitions that is contrary to the goals here.
I’m arguing for a standard usage, he/her for everyone covers always having a singular standardized pronoun so that they/them can be used as plural pronouns without the potential confusion that you may be talking about more than one person in the same literal contextual frame of a discussion. Preciseness of language improves the quality of communication.
Even in that example, and perhaps the modern English translation is just incorrect in its wording, “Each man hurried… til they drew near” is still a plural representative form of usage, as ‘each man’ is an implied amount of more than a singular man.
To say “Each man hurried… til he drew near… where William and his darling were lying together” creates a confusion of singular subject and does not work since ‘each man’ and ‘they’ represents more than a single self identifying entity.
Cool. Good luck getting people to change language they’ve used for centuries because you want them to.
No, not cool. Languages do in fact change over time, regardless of what you or I may think, do or want.
I never demanded others conform to what I want, I argued in favor of an idea that has evolved over time from my own personal growth and life experiences, and it’s a suggestion that is certainly open for discussion.
This was shared as a thought out consideration meant to improve on existing language in several ways, including:
I don’t know if you just constantly see red when you go to reply on certain thread topics, but not everything is or needs to be a reactionary agitative internet fight. Have a nice day.
You can argue your idea all you want, but language doesn’t change because someone has an idea that they think makes sense. That’s not how things work.
That’s exactly how things work.
Ideas affect change.
Not every idea brings change, but exploring new and different ideas is always worth pursuing.
Our entire civilization is built from, on, and around ideas put into actions.
That’s great. Good luck with your media campaign. Or did you plan to change the language by talking to me on Lemmy?