is "hir" an official term now?

[Saint_Cad]

@moriah

[li]‘Singular’ they/them - has been used for centuries in English including heavyweight ‘standard’ authors (Shakespeare) and in pop culture (Sting). Since it doubles as the plural pronoun, it can be problematic for lack of clarity at times. Because of the 19th century Latinist prescriptivists who wrongly asserted this usage was incorrect, you may find one who objects to its use, but they need to get over themself.[/li][/LIST]

And what’s interesting is the lack of contraversy/difficulty with using “you” for both the singular and plural.

[Chief_Pedant]

@Anonymous User

Just wondering, why is the majority against the use of the words “hir” and “zhe”. Personally, I think they’re cool (and I have already started using them). It shows that the English language is still evolving.

I answered this for you in Post 36:

by** CP**:
*"As with hyphenated surnames, “hir” is a reflection of indecisiveness, weakness and linguistic conceit.

I suspect it has a chance to catch on “officially” in the lexicon of those hoping to cast an aura of progressive superiority long before it takes a place in common usage."*

“Hir” may catch on eventually, but at its present position in the evolution of English it is more likely to convey an aura that the user feels in possession of a progressive superiority. Attempting to cast such an aura is not typically well-received and a more likely result will be the perception that the user is a self-aggrandizing snot or is otherwise indecisive or weak.

But have at it, if you think it will help promote your documents. Throw in a hyphenated surname to further the impression you are of Person of Substance and Progressivity.