It’s even worse in Hebrew. Even the verbs have gender — they must match the gender of their subjects. Plus matching the subject in person (1st, 2nd, 3rd) and number. Lots of verb forms to learn!
As others have pointed out, there really is no problematic loss of semantic distinction - context and clear wording take care of things. Further, the idea that we simply must know the gender of a pronoun is simply an artifact of being an English speaker; there’s no real reason it’s necessary.
Consider the pronoun “we.” Do you feel it’s inadequate? That it costs us vital semantic distinctions? Unlike English, some languages have more than one word for “we”: a word that includes the interlocutor, and a word that excludes the interlocutor. Likewise, formal English is fine with just saying “you,” whether the “you” being addressed is singular or plural.
Everyone manages despite these tragic lacunae in English pronouns. I would imagine we can continue to manage just fine, even if we accommodate “they” as a gender-neutral singular pronoun.
(Sorry for double post; I had to refresh my memory on the author’s name and the title of his book before posting this.)
foolsguinea, before you cavalierly dismiss the idea that gendered language is something we can and should ignore as harmless, I really recommend you read “Through the Language Glass : Why the World Looks Different in Other Languages,” by Guy Deutscher.
It’s a fascinating review of the debate over whether the language we speak influences how we think; the traditional consensus in recent years has been that it does not. But Deutscher presents some clear and compelling evidence that yes indeed, it does - particularly with regard to gender. If we believe that to be true - and Deutscher certainly makes a strong case for it - then denying people the right to have control over how they are referred to with respect to gender seems unkind at best and downright oppressive at worst.
So… you’re quite happy to use ‘they’ for a singular person if you have no idea what their gender is, but as soon as you’ve seen them, your own assumption overrides their personal experience and wishes, and if they say any different they’re just being difficult, and trying to make it all about them being special, when it’s clearly you, and your wish to specific their gender that’s important, because you study language?
Am I missing something here, or is that mess the whole of the argument?
The OP really is a foolsguinea, if she, he, it, they, Ze, tu, think that such an opinion is going to get anything but derision on the Dope.
Speaking for myself, I employ the pro-noun which seems appropriate, unless corrected, in which case I’ll use whatever I am asked, unless thats going to cause confusion.
So do away with pronouns? That’s cool with me.
What if I don’t want to be referred to by ANY pronouns. I want people to always use my name. Is that cool, or do I HAVE to pick one?
It’s amazing to me that people who misgender a person’s pet will immediately apologize and use the correct pronouns for the pet. I’ve never seen any other reaction to this, people just seem to get it without prompting. But somehow using the correct pronouns for a person is just beyond our OP here. If there’s really no insult in deliberately referring to a person as the wrong gender, are you willing to prove it by going up to a big burly biker in a biker bar, drunken frat-boy type in a college bar, redneck in a redneck bar, cop who’s pulled you over, or judge and start referring to any male version of those as a ‘woman’ and ‘she’, or to a female version as ‘man’ and ‘he’? After all, if there’s no insult in deliberately using the wrong gender for someone, there should be no risk in doing it to someone with power over you or who’s ready to fight back! If you only deliberately misgender people who are not in a position to fight back against you, though, it’s pretty obvious why.
Also someone with a deep knowledge of history should realize that the use of singular they in English goes back significantly longer than the US has existed. And non-binary gender has existing pretty much as long as humans have, and was recognized by pre-US Americans for millennia without controversy.
I there were people who were genuinely uncomfortable with all pronouns and happy with any conversation about them being hella weird, sure, I’d try to accommodate that. But unlike having issues with being gendered, having issues with pronouns in general isn’t something that people currently struggle with.
I was working the phone banks for Basic Rights Oregon last night, and we were asked to print our names and our choice of personal pronouns on our name tags. No problem, and not one person questioned the practice. BTW, I just turned 60 this September, and I tend to adapt to new styles, music and customs pretty damn fast-it keeps the mind fresh.
I’d say that making such a decision not out of personal needs but out of petty spite is pretty sad.
nm
Just curious: how many nametags were filled out, approximately what percentage of them showed indefinite plural pronouns, and how easy was it for you to get it right when a nametag of that type was out of the room?
But it is a personal need. Who are you to say it isn’t?
It begins to sound stilted when possessives enter the conversation.
manson1972 doesn’t want to be referred to by ANY pronouns. manson1972 wants people to always use manson1972’s name.
Everyone wore the nametags, and three(out of twelve) went the “they, them” route. There wasn’t much cross-talk while working the phone bank, but I don’t recall anyone being corrected last night.
“manson1972 said manson1972 lost manson1972’s car keys, but manson1972 found them right before manson1972 had to leave.”
Pull the other one, it’s got bells on, manson1972.
But why should manson1972 be the only one who gets to use pronouns in reference to manson1972’s self?
kaylasdad99 am directing that question to manson1972, manson1972.
Sorry, but your lack of comfort with new grammatical structures should not be a concern when respecting other people’s wishes on how they would like to be addressed.
Shouldn’t that be “**kaylasdad99 **IS directing that question…”?
kaylasdad99 feel more comfortable leaving an artifact that unambiguously places kaylasdad99’s comments in the first person.
Stop oppressing kaylasdad99!