One Word: Ourself

Share on FacebookShare on Google+Tweet about this on TwitterPin on PinterestShare on LinkedIn

My recent article on the “singular they” prompted an insightful question from reader Mahin Pouryaghma.

Just to provide context: Dr. Pouryaghma is a licensed professional counselor whose practice emphasizes self-honesty. You can read her background here on the Psychology Today website.

Turn on IMAGES to view in email

She writes:

“When I am talking to more than one person and am saying that we need to look at ourselves – in other words, each one of us individually to look at ourself – is it ourself or ourselves?

“When I put ourself the spell check puts a red light under the word. So what is correct?”

Mahin, this excellent question is like a live grammar grenade. I just scanned a few proper-English forums where professionals argue about such issues. This is one they really, really get worked up over.

I’ve just studied several long rants by grammar-professor types, slamming down verdicts to the effect that “ourself” is not a real word, and that it’s always wrong. It’s easy to see why they feel that way – but I think they’re mistaken.

In my view, it’s a question of emphasis. If you want to stress that there’s something we all must do, then “we must do it ourselves”. But if you want to stress that there’s something we each must do (individually), then “we must do it ourself”

This latter construction really is shorthand for: “This is something I must do for myself, and you must do for yourself, and each one of the he’s and she’s in our group must do for himself or herself.”

By emphasizing “ourself” instead of “ourselves”, you’re implying: “This is a lonely, solo struggle – but we should not feel alone, because everyone else is waging that same struggle.”

In your question, Mahin, you nail it when you say you are speaking about “each one of us individually” That’s what makes this a special case, justifying the “singular we” (comparable to the “singular they” we discussed previously).

That’s the way monarchs have spoken for centuries, using the so-called “royal we”. It’s also customary for writers and authors using the similar “editorial we”. Most of the top dictionaries, such as Oxford and Merriam-Webster, support “ourself” in this context.

There’s another, subtly different usage in which “we” and “ourself” refer to a collective entity speaking with one voice and as one individual.

For example, “We are America, and we reserve the right to choose for ourself our own national anthem.” “Ourselves” would hardly make sense here, because it breaks the intended image of “one nation, under God, indivisible”.

The same can apply to a corporation: “We are Google, and we decide for ourself what is good, and what is evil.”

Here I’m referring to Google’s self-imposed “Don’t be evil” rule, concerning which its chairman, Eric Schmidt, once said: “…when I showed up, I thought this was the stupidest rule ever, because there’s no book about evil except maybe, you know, the Bible or something.”

Chairman Schmidt has since embraced the slogan because, he said, it provides employees with an opening and an incentive to speak up about corporate behavior they find unethical.

But we are drifting afield, and we need to get back to our point. (Notice how we write “we” and “our” instead of “I” and “my”, since we want to deflect attention here from ourself and our culpability. Is that not another rationale for the singular we?)

This singular use of “we” and “ourself” seems precisely analogous to the singular “they” and “themself” which – as I wrote – have recently come to be considered acceptable.

The online Merriam-Webster dictionary says the first known use of “ourself” is found in the 14th century. This pronoun is “used to refer to the single-person subject when we is used instead of I (as by a sovereign)”. The example it cites is from Shakespeare’s Macbeth: “We will keep ourself till supper time alone.” (“Ourselves” clearly would make no sense in view of the word “alone”.)

One more thing, Mahin – about that annoying little red underline: Your spell-checker is wrong. “Ourself” is a dictionary word with recognized definition and usage. These checkers are only as good as the data fed into them, and they make lots of mistakes.

Until recently, my Gmail spell-checker didn’t like me using the word “online”. That, too, was always underlined in red; the darn thing wanted me to write “on-line”. Yet “online” has been a well-established word since, oh, the Mesozoic Era.

Whenever your spell-check flags something, do check it out. In this case, “ourself” checks out.

(This article is part of my series on words that are #worth1000pictures.)


Comments

One Word: Ourself — 3 Comments

  1. Very interesting, Gary. I understand the royal (or editorial) plural as being a special case of a singular noun. It seems to signify that this individual is not an ordinary individual, but more than any one person. Hence, we. And hence, ourself.

    • Thanks, Dev. I like the terminology you use, of the “royal plural” or the “editorial plural”. I’ve heard and used expressions such as the “royal we” — but these don’t quite take in other variants like “ourself”.

      As noted in my earlier article on the “singular they”, I’ve seen instances in which people use “we” etc. merely to achieve a self-effacing, less egocentric tone. It might be called the “humble we” or the “self-effacing we”. But I agree with you: Traditionally, the singular “we” is mostly used when speaking in an authoritative voice or capacity, on behalf of (for example) a monarchy, a nation, or an august institution.

      But what about the singular “they”, which I wrote about in the earlier article to which this one is a sequel: “If anyone dislikes valet parking, they can park their car for themself”? This usage now is recognized as correct by Oxford and Merriam-Webster dictionaries, plus lots of other authorities. Since English desperately needs a gender-neutral third-person singular pronoun, I’m personally delighted that this construction now is accepted as filling that gap.

      • It is called majestic plural, isn’t it? (http://royalcentral.co.uk/blogs/we-are-not-amused-a-guide-to-the-royal-we-837)
        But I am glad you like my terms… since I never know what something is called I usually end up giving it my own name (for example, something you might remember: Google’s plus-recommendation, or plusrec, which probably has its own name that I don’t know..)
        I like the humble we too… Or shall we say, we like the humble we? I sound rather like Gollum from LOTR though.

        I have used the gender neutral they. It is easier to write and read (but perhaps not hear) than the alternative he/she or s/he. In Bengali the third person singular pronoun is gender neutral. This has its advantages and disadvantages.

Leave a Comment!

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *