Nicely thorough and meticulous... just what I expect from you. I've just recently reconnected with you due to finding out about this flap, 30+ years after last having any contact with you when we were college classmates; I remember you from the CMU Computer Club and an online Nomic game, among other things. I seem to recall you created a Rogue clone named "Rouge" as a class project or something; I hear "Roguelike" games are a whole genre that's still being created/used by some enthusiasts.
The opinions you expressed about using ungendered language strike me as just what I expect to find in dictionary usage notes, at least in dictionaries from before the latest round of culture wars. Some dictionary just recently announced its addition of nonbinary singular "they", with much fanfare, implying that until extremely recently they didn't recognize this usage. I dragged my dictionary off the shelf (American Heritage Dictionary, third edition, 1992; I also own a fourth edition from 2000 or so, but it's at work, so that one will have to do) to see what it said about personal pronoun usage. That's new enough to be within my (and your) adult lifetime, but old enough so some of those participating in the current online culture wars weren't born yet. (Some of these battles seem to be a generation-gap thing.)
Under "they", it has some plural definitions, as well as this one:
2. Usage Problem. Used to refer to the one previously mentioned or implied, especially as a substitute for generic he; Every person has rights under the law, but they don't always know them. See usage note at he.
Going to the entry for "he", there's this item in the definition:
2. Usage Problem. Used to refer to a person whose gender is unspecified or unknown: "He who desires but acts not, breeds pestilence" (William Blake)
The definition is followed by an entire column's worth of usage notes. It's noted that "he" is the traditional usage for indefinite or unknown gender, but that this is being increasingly objected to as unfair to women. It also notes that "they" for such usages is common but also regarded as colloquial or informal, and some think of it as ungrammatical due to the mismatch of number. It says, "As a substitute for coordinate forms such as his/her or her and his, third person plural forms such as their, have a good deal to recommend them; they are admirably brief and entirely colloquial and may be the only sensible choice in informal style... But in formal style, this option... may be misconstrued as being careless or ignorant rather than attuned to the various grammatical and political nuances...", going on to say "Writers who are concerned about avoiding both grammatical and social problems are best advised to use coordinate forms such as his or her... Some writers see no need to use a personal pronoun implying gender unless absolutely necessary[.]"
It's noted that 37 percent of their usage panel favored "his" in such constructions, 46 percent used coordinate forms such as "his/her", and only 3 percent favored forms of "they". (A few other options were favored by a minority.)
The notes ended with "The entire question is unlikely to be resolved in the near future."
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Dictionary usage advice from 1992
Date: 2019-10-06 06:26 pm (UTC)The opinions you expressed about using ungendered language strike me as just what I expect to find in dictionary usage notes, at least in dictionaries from before the latest round of culture wars. Some dictionary just recently announced its addition of nonbinary singular "they", with much fanfare, implying that until extremely recently they didn't recognize this usage. I dragged my dictionary off the shelf (American Heritage Dictionary, third edition, 1992; I also own a fourth edition from 2000 or so, but it's at work, so that one will have to do) to see what it said about personal pronoun usage. That's new enough to be within my (and your) adult lifetime, but old enough so some of those participating in the current online culture wars weren't born yet. (Some of these battles seem to be a generation-gap thing.)
Under "they", it has some plural definitions, as well as this one:
2. Usage Problem. Used to refer to the one previously mentioned or implied, especially as a substitute for generic he; Every person has rights under the law, but they don't always know them. See usage note at he.
Going to the entry for "he", there's this item in the definition:
2. Usage Problem. Used to refer to a person whose gender is unspecified or unknown: "He who desires but acts not, breeds pestilence" (William Blake)
The definition is followed by an entire column's worth of usage notes. It's noted that "he" is the traditional usage for indefinite or unknown gender, but that this is being increasingly objected to as unfair to women. It also notes that "they" for such usages is common but also regarded as colloquial or informal, and some think of it as ungrammatical due to the mismatch of number. It says, "As a substitute for coordinate forms such as his/her or her and his, third person plural forms such as their, have a good deal to recommend them; they are admirably brief and entirely colloquial and may be the only sensible choice in informal style... But in formal style, this option... may be misconstrued as being careless or ignorant rather than attuned to the various grammatical and political nuances...", going on to say "Writers who are concerned about avoiding both grammatical and social problems are best advised to use coordinate forms such as his or her... Some writers see no need to use a personal pronoun implying gender unless absolutely necessary[.]"
It's noted that 37 percent of their usage panel favored "his" in such constructions, 46 percent used coordinate forms such as "his/her", and only 3 percent favored forms of "they". (A few other options were favored by a minority.)
The notes ended with "The entire question is unlikely to be resolved in the near future."