 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / British English / November 2004They Themself
I have started to accept the singular "they" but the singular "themself" takes a bit of swallowing. "The student must complete all questions themself." I'm reliably informed that it was used centuries ago and is now making a re-appearance. Any thoughts? Kiwi Gill > I have started to accept the singular "they" but the singular "themself" > takes a bit of swallowing. > "The student must complete all questions themself." > > I'm reliably informed that it was used centuries ago and is now making a > re-appearance. I've never come across it and as an English teacher I would regard it as an error in modern English. regards, Einde O'Callaghan >I have started to accept the singular "they" but the singular "themself" >takes a bit of swallowing. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >re-appearance. >Any thoughts? It's presumably an attempt to be "gender neutral", but it seems very odd to me.  SignatureJohn Hall "He crams with cans of poisoned meat The subjects of the King, And when they die by thousands G.K.Chesterton: Why, he laughs like anything." from "Song Against Grocers" > It's presumably an attempt to be "gender neutral", but it seems very odd > to me. Yes, that is its purpose. I learned of it from an Australian linguist who said she sees it these days in students' work. What's needed, it seems, is a "gender neutral" to fit all these situations, generic 'he' now being unacceptable. > generic 'he' now being unacceptable. Not to everyone. But on the original point, I have heard "themselves" used as a gender- neutral singular, and have most likely even used it that way myself. Cheers Tony SignatureTony Mountifield Work: tony@softins.co.uk - http://www.softins.co.uk Play: tony@mountifield.org - http://tony.mountifield.org > > generic 'he' now being unacceptable. > > Not to everyone. > > But on the original point, I have heard "themselves" used as a gender- > neutral singular, and have most likely even used it that way myself. COD11 lists 'themself' but adds a usage note: The standard reflexive form corresponding to 'they' and 'them' is 'themselves'. The singular form 'themself' has been used recently to correspond to the singular form of 'they' when referring to a person of unspecified sex, as in 'helping someone to help themself'. However ... 'themselves' should be used instead ... It seems to me that 'themself' will eventually be accepted, but it clearly isn't widely regarded as standard usage at present. > Cheers > Tony > > > generic 'he' now being unacceptable. > > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > It seems to me that 'themself' will eventually be accepted, but it > clearly isn't widely regarded as standard usage at present. Interesting to hear. Thank you. > > It's presumably an attempt to be "gender neutral", but it seems very odd to me. > Yes, that is its purpose. I learned of it from an Australian linguist who > said she sees it these days in students' work. What's needed, it seems, is a > "gender neutral" to fit all these situations, generic 'he' now being unacceptable. Unacceptable to whom? We fought the gender noun/pronoun war years ago. The PC proponents mostly lost when cooler heads prevailed, although we allow personal preferences in odd nooks and crannies. A female chairman can prefer to be called chairperson or even chairwoman, while many flout that neo-convention and are comfortable with chairman. Attempts to have it both ways, such as "he/she" or alternating usage of he and she, are generally regarded as stilted if not pretentious. "He" still is generally regarded as acceptable usage, although a better method is to write around the use of a pronoun when gender might be an issue. Years ago, tongue firmly planted in cheek, I suggested a pronoun that encompassed all three genders, male, famale, and neutral - hey! we can't discriminate against the third gender! The universal pronoun: hesheit. Say it quickly to get the joke. At 22:01:09 on Fri, 12 Nov 2004, John Mazor <mazorj@erols.com> wrote in <-ZGdncvrjvZm5QjcRVn-gA@rcn.net>: >A female chairman can prefer to be called >chairperson or even chairwoman, while many flout that neo-convention and are >comfortable with chairman. But "chair" gets around any problems quite easily. And I have noticed that the type of man who says "I don't want to be referred to as a chair - I'm not a piece of wood" is generally perfectly content to form part of a board. SignatureMolly Mockford I think I've been too long on my own, but the little green goblin that lives under the sink says I'm OK - and he's never wrong, so I must be! (My Reply-To address *is* valid, though may not remain so for ever.) > At 22:01:09 on Fri, 12 Nov 2004, John Mazor <mazorj@erols.com> wrote in > <-ZGdncvrjvZm5QjcRVn-gA@rcn.net>: [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > But "chair" gets around any problems quite easily. That gets by in informal conversation, but in my experience, it usually won't do for letterheads and official titles. > And I have noticed that the type of man who says "I don't want to be > referred to as a chair - I'm not a piece of wood" is generally perfectly > content to form part of a board. Good 'un, although I've never heard a male voice that particular objection. Some gender distinctions are worth preserving. Aviatrix for a female aviator has pretty much disappeared as unnecessary, but would anyone know what you were talking about if you referred to a dominatrix as a dominator? ;-) > And I have noticed that the type of man who says "I don't want to be > referred to as a chair - I'm not a piece of wood" is generally perfectly > content to form part of a board. Particularly if he is given a platform as well... Kiwi Gill >> And I have noticed that the type of man who says "I don't want to >> be referred to as a chair - I'm not a piece of wood" is generally >> perfectly content to form part of a board. > Particularly if he is given a platform as well... As he will be if he's managerial timber and at the top of the tree in the organization. ========> Email to "j-c" at this site; email to "bogus" will bounce <======== Jack Campin: 11 Third Street, Newtongrange, Midlothian EH22 4PU; 0131 6604760 <http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/purrhome.html> food intolerance data & recipes, Mac logic fonts, Scots traditional music files and CD-ROMs of Scottish music. > > And I have noticed that the type of man who says "I don't want to be > > referred to as a chair - I'm not a piece of wood" is generally perfectly > > content to form part of a board. > > Particularly if he is given a platform as well... And the floor. > > > And I have noticed that the type of man who says "I don't want to be > > > referred to as a chair - I'm not a piece of wood" is generally perfectly [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > And the floor. That would amount to an open door policy... At 08:44:54 on Wed, 17 Nov 2004, Kiwi Gill <apext@xtra.co.nz> wrote in <EMsmd.2911$9A.110815@news.xtra.co.nz>: >> > > And I have noticed that the type of man who says "I don't want to be >> > > referred to as a chair - I'm not a piece of wood" is generally [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >> >That would amount to an open door policy... And would probably raise the roof. SignatureMolly Mockford I think I've been too long on my own, but the little green goblin that lives under the sink says I'm OK - and he's never wrong, so I must be! (My Reply-To address *is* valid, though may not remain so for ever.) > "Kiwi Gill" <apext@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message > news:sd7ld.926$9A.47987@news.xtra.co.nz... [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Unacceptable to whom? It seems that the rule of generic 'he' was a favourite of some early grammarians because of notions such as "let us set the man before the woman for manner's sake' and 'the worthier is preferred and set before...' etc, etc. Sorry I can't produce chapter and verse - I'm quoting from the book 'Blooming English' in which these gems of male reasoning are quoted without reference. I have no objection to the generic 'man' but can't help wishing there could be gender neutral singular pronouns. > Years ago, tongue firmly planted in cheek, I suggested a pronoun that > encompassed all three genders, male, famale, and neutral - hey! we can't > discriminate against the third gender! The universal pronoun: hesheit. > Say it quickly to get the joke. LOL. There was an attempt to get 'hir' going in corners of the literary world once for his/her (yes, I know, doesn't really work, does it? It seems to favour the wimmin. :-)) Kiwi Gill On Saturday, in article <sd7ld.926$9A.47987@news.xtra.co.nz> > > It's presumably an attempt to be "gender neutral", but it seems very odd > > to me. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > "gender neutral" to fit all these situations, generic 'he' now being > unacceptable. Just needs a disclaimer to the effect that "Throughout this document 'he' embraces 'she'". :-) SignatureBrian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk "I don't use Linux. I prefer to use an OS supported by a large multi- national vendor, with a good office suite, excellent network/internet software and decent hardware support." >>I have started to accept the singular "they" but the singular "themself" >>takes a bit of swallowing. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >It's presumably an attempt to be "gender neutral", but it seems very odd >to me. I have seen instances where the female gender is preferentially identified in pronouns. I'm currently poring over "Mastering Audio" by Bob Katz, a technical tome about post-mix audio engineering. In it, he often makes statements like: "The engineer can decide how she wants to employ dithering techniques, provided she is careful not to introduce white noise into her mix". I can understand Mr. Katz' interest in championing women in this male-dominated field, as women are increasingly interested in the technical aspects of music and should be encouraged to make continual inroads. Nonetheless, I was schooled in the 1970's, when the male gender was universally employed to describe neutral pronouns. Thus, when I read "The student must complete all questions himself", I do not instantly conjure up a Neolithic bully filling out a questionnaire. Magically, I see it as gender neutral. But that's just me, and I'm a slathering bigot. - TR >>> I have started to accept the singular "they" but the singular >>> "themself" takes a bit of swallowing. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > increasingly interested in the technical aspects of music and should > be encouraged to make continual inroads. I don't believe they (the authors) think as deeply as that. I remember sitting through a paper at an Information Science conference where the author, a male computer scientist, would consistently refer to the librarian - the putative user of the class of software being discussed - as "she". I spent the entire paper listening carefully, but I was unable to exclude the possibility that the author believed all librarians to be female - and this was possibly the opposite of his intention! SignatureJohn Briggs >Nonetheless, I was schooled in the 1970's, when the male gender was >universally employed to describe neutral pronouns. Thus, when I read >"The student must complete all questions himself", I do not instantly >conjure up a Neolithic bully filling out a questionnaire. Magically, I >see it as gender neutral. I hope you continue to use the gender-neutral "his" and not that ghastly new-fangled "its". No sign of "its" in the original King James Version - http://tinyurl.com/5un66 "For instance, a word which has become common to us is the neuter possessive pronoun "its." That word does not occur in the edition of 1611, and appears first in an edition in the printing of 1660. In place of it, in the edition of 1611, the more dignified personal pronoun "his" or "her" is always used, and it continues for the most part in our familiar version. In this verse you notice it: "Look not upon the wine when it is red; when it giveth HIS color aright in the cup." SignaturePhil C. On Monday, in article <9p8hp0drgcq6d57ef3fcskpjiq83ct1sq1@4ax.com> > part in our familiar version. In this verse you notice it: "Look not > upon the wine when it is red; when it giveth HIS color aright in the > cup." I could have sworn that Bernard Miles (in "Me and Old Charlie") told me "Look not upon the wine when it be red; for it biteth like the serpent and stingeth like the adder". SignatureBrian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk "I don't use Linux. I prefer to use an OS supported by a large multi- national vendor, with a good office suite, excellent network/internet software and decent hardware support." |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.