<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	>

<channel>
	<title>singular Archives - The Historical Linguist Channel</title>
	<atom:link href="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/tags/singular/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/tags/singular/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Sep 2019 19:53:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.0.9</generator>
<site xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">135321646</site>	<item>
		<title>The plural with a singular referent?</title>
		<link>https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/the-plural-with-a-singular-referent/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-plural-with-a-singular-referent</link>
					<comments>https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/the-plural-with-a-singular-referent/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sabina Nedelius]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2019 09:00:21 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Germanic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[English]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Languages]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pronouns]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[they]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[plural]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[singular]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[third person]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[borrowed]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/?p=562</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Hallo to our lovely followers and friends! Today, we’re gonna chat for a bit about the third person plural (?) pronoun ‘they’! This pronoun appears when the antecedent (in this case, the human entity) of the pronoun is indeterminate, meaning that you simply don’t know if you should use he or she (or it might &#8230; </p>
<p class="link-more"><a href="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/the-plural-with-a-singular-referent/" class="more-link">Continue reading<span class="screen-reader-text"> "The plural with a singular referent?"</span></a></p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/the-plural-with-a-singular-referent/">The plural with a singular referent?</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com">The Historical Linguist Channel</a>.</p>
]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[
<p>Hallo to our lovely followers and friends!<br></p>



<p>Today, we’re gonna chat for a bit about the third person plural (?) pronoun ‘they’!<br></p>



<p>This pronoun appears when the antecedent (in this case, the human entity) of the pronoun is indeterminate, meaning that you simply don’t know if you should use <em>he</em> or <em>she </em>(or it might simply be irrelevant), or, as a more recent addition, when the person you are referring to does not wish to be referred to by their gender. <br></p>



<p>The latter addition has seen some critique during the last few years, for reasons that we won’t go into here because they have nothing whatsoever to do with language, but the thing is, this pronoun has been on the receiving end of a <strong>lot </strong>of criticism for centuries!</p>



<p>Most style guides that we’ve encountered still consider it to be less-than-standard in formal use – even though a study by Baranowski in 2002 (check it out <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9481.00193">here</a>) showed that <em>they</em> was more likely to be used than the prescribed <em>he </em>(or <em>she </em>for that matter).. <br></p>



<p>In case you are wondering what we’re talking about, have you ever heard someone say something like: <br></p>



<p>“Someone left <em>their </em>keys at the reception.” &nbsp;<br></p>



<p>Note that ‘someone’ is singular, that is, it refers to <strong>one</strong> individual. Yet, the following pronoun <em>their</em> is, of course, the standard <strong>plural</strong> form. Now, even though grammars, handbooks and style guides may have, and some perhaps still do, condemn the use, singular <em>they</em> has a long history in English. <br></p>



<p>The whole thing started in late Middle English, the <a href="http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/200700?redirectedFrom=they#eid">OED</a> (sense 2) traces singular <em>they</em> as far back as to 1375, when it was used in the medieval romance <em>The Romance of William of Palerne.</em> One might think that this was informal use, it’s fiction after all, however, it was also used in Wycliffe’s bible:<br></p>



<p>“Eche <em>on </em>in <u>þer</u> craft ys wijs”, (&#8216;their&#8217; is explained by the <a href="https://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/m/mec/med-idx?type=byte&amp;byte=209148304&amp;egdisplay=compact&amp;egs=209152554&amp;egs=209159783&amp;egs=209165404">Middle English Dictionary</a> (1c. sense (a)) which roughly translates into “Each <em>one </em>in <u>their</u> craft is wise”<br></p>



<p>And <em>they</em> has been popular ever since: Chaucer, Caxton, Shakespeare, Swift, Austen, Defoe, Byron… all of these well-recognized authors have used singular <em>they</em>. So what’s the problem, right?! Well, as we’ve seen previously on this blog, just because authors that we hail for their craft today used a particular form does not mean that it isn’t fair game for prescriptivism. <br></p>



<p>The earliest known explicit recommendation to use generic <em>he</em> rather than <em>they</em> is found in <em>A New Grammar</em> by Ann Fisher, published in 1745. Fisher <a href="https://books.google.no/books?id=B-PKlIqH6EMC&amp;pg=PA47&amp;lpg=PA47&amp;dq=%22%22The+Masculine+Person+answers+to+the+general+Name,+which+comprehends+both+Male+and+Female;+as,+any+Person+who+knows+what+he+says.%22&amp;source=bl&amp;ots=VKCmUXBT_M&amp;sig=aIdQOk4PeA37tUItlpsaLqoprqc&amp;hl=sv&amp;sa=X&amp;ved=2ahUKEwiShr6N--jfAhWQKCwKHe10DHYQ6AEwAHoECAoQAQ#v=onepage&amp;q=%22%22The%20Masculine%20Person%20answers%20to%20the%20general%20Name%2C%20which%20comprehends%20both%20Male%20and%20Female%3B%20as%2C%20any%20Person%20who%20knows%20what%20he%20says.%22&amp;f=false">stated </a>that &#8220;The Masculine Person answers to the general Name, which comprehends both Male and Female; as, any Person who knows what he says&#8221;. Nineteenth-century grammarians picked this up and insisted that <em>he</em> was the correct use due to a little something we call <em>number agreement</em> or <em>concord</em> disagreement (that is, <em>she runs</em>, not <em>*she run</em>). Furthermore, these later grammarians also insisted that the alternative “he or she” was clumsy, a practice that became widely adopted for a long time (and, we might add, can still be found in a good number of papers/articles, books, etc. written in formal English). Today, though, the practice to refer to <em>he</em> when you actually mean anyone, is often considered somewhat sexist. <br></p>



<p>As a result of the (still) ongoing discussion about generic <em>they</em>, and the nowadays inappropriate use of generic <em>he</em>, this has raised some discussions about a gender-neutral pronoun in English and some attempts have been made (the first one as early as in 1792!) but, so far, English lacks one. <br></p>



<p>Actually, pretty much all Germanic languages do. Except one: Swedish! Tag along with us next time and read more about the Swedish gender-neutral pronoun <em>hen, </em>a fairly new addition to the Swedish vocabulary but one that is, trust the Swedish speakers of this little blog, gaining influence <em>fast</em>! See you then!</p>



<p></p>



<p><strong>Want to know more? Check out the OED’s brief history of singular ‘they’ </strong><a href="https://public.oed.com/blog/a-brief-history-of-singular-they/"><strong>here</strong></a><strong>!&nbsp;</strong></p>



<p class="has-small-font-size">If you&#8217;re interested in anything else in this post, please do check out our sources by following the hyperlinks in the text! If there&#8217;s anything else, don&#8217;t hesitate to holler! </p>



<p></p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/the-plural-with-a-singular-referent/">The plural with a singular referent?</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com">The Historical Linguist Channel</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/the-plural-with-a-singular-referent/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">562</post-id>	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
