GENDER INCLUSIVE ENGLISH - HELP NEEDED!

Moderator: JackFrost

User avatar
Gormur
Posts: 7549
Joined: 2005-05-17, 1:11
Real Name: Gormur
Gender: male
Country: CU Cuba (Cuba)
Contact:

Postby Gormur » 2005-10-15, 17:47

riki wrote:
Either way, I don't understand the context for using "they". Could you give me an example or two?


That person who brought the loaves of bread for us, they are a good example for all of us to follow in how we should bring food along to eat as well.

Here we have a classic example of where gender is irrelevant in the phrase where 'they' is used because of the context and meaning in the phrase before hand.


I suppose, though it sounds unnatural as the comma seperates the sentence into two separate thoughts. This would be discouraged and may be seen as a run-on sentence of sorts by English profs/teachers (not to mention that using the word they would be incorrect in the written language). No doubt colloquial speech differs from the written language. I have yet to hear anyone speak this way, though. Brevity is stressed in today's world...

Thus...

The person who brought the loaves of bread for us is a good example for all of us to follow in how we should bring food along to eat, as well.

User avatar
Ariki
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2004-10-01, 14:53
Real Name: Tāne
Gender: male
Country: NZ New Zealand (New Zealand / Aotearoa)

Postby Ariki » 2005-10-16, 1:14

That comma just represented a pause, nothing more and nothing less. If people have problems with others using pauses in their sentences then I suggest that they should learn to appreciate them because really long sentences that they don't have pauses such as commas and full stops can be somewhat annoying as those that use commas in the fashion which I used before are just intended to show that in actual dialogue there was a break in speaking rather than an actual seperation of ideas which to me could already be well understand with in the phrases after the comma however some people like to be difficult in terms of trying to understand a text.

Of which the said text was generated by a native speaker of English.

I reject your so called 'corrected' version. (The bolded 'they' would also imply that the emphasis was on 'they', where the use of the word 'they' is anaphoric to 'That person' at the start of the sentence).
Linguicide IS genocide. :)

He ingoa ōpaki a Riki; he ingoa ōkawa a Ariki.

Riki is an informal name; Ariki is a formal name.

User avatar
Gormur
Posts: 7549
Joined: 2005-05-17, 1:11
Real Name: Gormur
Gender: male
Country: CU Cuba (Cuba)
Contact:

Postby Gormur » 2005-10-16, 2:19

riki wrote:I reject your so called 'corrected' version. (The bolded 'they' would also imply that the emphasis was on 'they', where the use of the word 'they' is anaphoric to 'That person' at the start of the sentence).


It's not my correction, but the suggested usage of all of my English teachers and profs over the past 13yrs in such a case. The construction of such a sentence is not only non-sensical, but unnecessary. Colloquial speech is a separate thing entirely, and I'm not a prescriptivist, but was saying that such a construction would sound awkward in informal or colloquial speech; it would rather be something one would hear in poetic writing, perhaps. It is grammatically incorrect (in American English).

In any case, the topic at hand is colloquial speech, and I have yet to receive any concrete examples of colloquial usage/s of "they" in a gender-neutral context...

Also, see this: http://www.worldwidewords.org/articles/genpr.htm
Last edited by Gormur on 2005-10-16, 2:24, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Ariki
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2004-10-01, 14:53
Real Name: Tāne
Gender: male
Country: NZ New Zealand (New Zealand / Aotearoa)

Postby Ariki » 2005-10-16, 2:20

They are a good person.
Linguicide IS genocide. :)

He ingoa ōpaki a Riki; he ingoa ōkawa a Ariki.

Riki is an informal name; Ariki is a formal name.

User avatar
Ariki
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2004-10-01, 14:53
Real Name: Tāne
Gender: male
Country: NZ New Zealand (New Zealand / Aotearoa)

Postby Ariki » 2005-10-16, 2:21

s not my correction, but the suggested usage of all of my English teachers and profs over the past 13yrs in such a case. The construction of such a sentence is not only non-sensical, but unnecessary. Colloquial speech is a separate thing entirely, and I'm not a prescriptivist, but was saying that such a construction would sound awkward in informal or colloquial speech; it would rather be something one would hear in poetic writing, perhaps. It is grammatically incorrect (in American English).


But if someone did do that, would it be awkward at that given moment?
Linguicide IS genocide. :)

He ingoa ōpaki a Riki; he ingoa ōkawa a Ariki.

Riki is an informal name; Ariki is a formal name.

User avatar
Gormur
Posts: 7549
Joined: 2005-05-17, 1:11
Real Name: Gormur
Gender: male
Country: CU Cuba (Cuba)
Contact:

Postby Gormur » 2005-10-17, 2:01

riki wrote:
s not my correction, but the suggested usage of all of my English teachers and profs over the past 13yrs in such a case. The construction of such a sentence is not only non-sensical, but unnecessary. Colloquial speech is a separate thing entirely, and I'm not a prescriptivist, but was saying that such a construction would sound awkward in informal or colloquial speech; it would rather be something one would hear in poetic writing, perhaps. It is grammatically incorrect (in American English).


But if someone did do that, would it be awkward at that given moment?


In American English, yes.

A quote from the site:

Use another pronoun instead, in particular they/their (if that spectator keeps waving their arms about, someone is going to get hurt). Some people dislike seeing this in print, though it is increasingly common in speech and informal usage and is rapidly becoming a standard.


When I was in grade school, such a construction would be marked off.

Stan
Posts: 2534
Joined: 2004-11-21, 0:19
Location: Jacksonville, Florida

Postby Stan » 2005-10-17, 2:09

Singular "they" has been around for a very long time

Jane Austen (1775–1817) ,as shown in the link above, used it very much in her writing
if I was President,
I'd get elected on Friday
assassinated on Saturday
buried on Sunday

Travis B.
Posts: 2019
Joined: 2005-06-13, 6:35
Real Name: Travis Bemann
Gender: male
Location: Maryland
Country: US United States (United States)

Postby Travis B. » 2005-10-17, 2:49

Gormur wrote:
riki wrote:
Either way, I don't understand the context for using "they". Could you give me an example or two?


That person who brought the loaves of bread for us, they are a good example for all of us to follow in how we should bring food along to eat as well.

Here we have a classic example of where gender is irrelevant in the phrase where 'they' is used because of the context and meaning in the phrase before hand.


I suppose, though it sounds unnatural as the comma seperates the sentence into two separate thoughts. This would be discouraged and may be seen as a run-on sentence of sorts by English profs/teachers (not to mention that using the word they would be incorrect in the written language). No doubt colloquial speech differs from the written language. I have yet to hear anyone speak this way, though. Brevity is stressed in today's world...

Thus...

The person who brought the loaves of bread for us is a good example for all of us to follow in how we should bring food along to eat, as well.


Well, actually, the real reason why it sounds weird is not any of that at all. It is because you are essentially using a relative construction, introduced with the above use of "who" (which is an interrogative pronoun, but is essentially being used as a relative pronoun here), without actually linking it with a full main clause, and then referring to what the relative clause was referring to with "they" in another clause. Therefore, it really has nothing to do with run-ons and like at all.

On another note, Gormur, it is probably best that you forget everything that your English teachers and like taught you, because when it comes to actual language usage, a very large portion of it is almost certainly plain wrong, especially with respect to the everyday spoken language.
secretGeek on CodingHorror wrote:Type inference is not a gateway drug to more dynamically typed languages.

Rather "var" is a gateway drug toward "real" type inferencing, of which var is but a tiny cigarette to the greater crack mountain!

Travis B.
Posts: 2019
Joined: 2005-06-13, 6:35
Real Name: Travis Bemann
Gender: male
Location: Maryland
Country: US United States (United States)

Postby Travis B. » 2005-10-17, 2:57

Gormur wrote:
riki wrote:I reject your so called 'corrected' version. (The bolded 'they' would also imply that the emphasis was on 'they', where the use of the word 'they' is anaphoric to 'That person' at the start of the sentence).


It's not my correction, but the suggested usage of all of my English teachers and profs over the past 13yrs in such a case. The construction of such a sentence is not only non-sensical, but unnecessary. Colloquial speech is a separate thing entirely, and I'm not a prescriptivist, but was saying that such a construction would sound awkward in informal or colloquial speech; it would rather be something one would hear in poetic writing, perhaps. It is grammatically incorrect (in American English).


The thing is that while I too would regard that particular thing as being rather ungrammatical, it is not at all due to the usage of "they" itself, but rather the very akward relative clause usage in it, which I practically never in actual speech at least here.

Gormur wrote:In any case, the topic at hand is colloquial speech, and I have yet to receive any concrete examples of colloquial usage/s of "they" in a gender-neutral context...


It is quite weird that you are not used to the colloquial usage of such, as at least here, singular "they" is used extremely commonly in actual everyday speech, and also it seems to me like such is not at all specific to my own dialect either but rather is common to at least much of North American English as a whole. Emphasis on the word "extremely".

But if you want an example, here is one:

If one more telemarketer calls me tonight, I'm gonna fucking scream at'em till'eir eardrum ruptures.


Or in a more formal orthographic usage:

If one more telemarketer calls me tonight, I am going to fucking scream at them till their eardrum ruptures.
secretGeek on CodingHorror wrote:Type inference is not a gateway drug to more dynamically typed languages.

Rather "var" is a gateway drug toward "real" type inferencing, of which var is but a tiny cigarette to the greater crack mountain!


Return to “English”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest