A while back I wrote about the “singular they” as used in contexts like the following:
“If anyone has parked their car in the fire lane, they should move it.”
“Someone finished off the banana pudding. Let’s hope they enjoyed it.”
Quick recap: In such instances, we’re using the singular “they” (or perhaps relatives like “their” or “them”) for individuals whose gender is unknown or unspecified. Typically this is because such individuals are anonymous: We don’t know whose car may be parked in the fire lane, or who ate the last of the pudding.
The singular use of an ostensibly plural pronoun avoids awkward constructions like “he or she”. In English, the singular “they” was for centuries considered acceptable. (Similar to the “royal we” or the “editorial we”.) It fell into disrepute, for a while, with grammar police. But now it’s once again approved by all top authorities – Oxford, Merriam-Webster, and the like.
Since I wrote that, however, a quite different use of the singular “they” has vaulted into the global conversation:
“They” has become a “preferred pronoun” for some folks who identify as non-binary or gender non-conforming (among others). That is, they don’t want to be spoken of as landing exclusively on one side or the other of the traditional male/female coin. This may also include conventionally cisgender people who want to support transgender friends. Lots of reasons here.
That’s fine with me: I don’t begrudge anyone the pronoun of their choice! (See what I did there?)
Navigating this new preferred-pronoun landscape requires alertness. The other day I heard on the radio: “Sam Smith now says they prefer gender-neutral pronouns.” For a moment I wasn’t sure whether they was referring to themself or to another person – possibly multiple others. (Sam was indeed referring to themself.)
Hmm. My out-of-date grammar-checking software still mistakenly flags “they was” as incorrect. Or maybe the software is right and I should have written “they were”. In which case we have to consider plural verbs as singular, in addition to plural pronouns.
Although – come to think of it – monarchs using the royal “we” typically said things like “We are pleased to see that…”
The saving grace here is that context almost always clears up any confusion. Language always is in transition, and it can take time to iron out the wrinkles.
What I’m hoping is that the preferred-pronoun usage of “they”, which makes a statement about gender identity or its lack, doesn’t invalidate the other usage I wrote about earlier: English still needs gender-neutral pronouns for unknown individuals whose identities and orientations may (for all we know) be strictly traditional. Let’s stay tuned!
7 responses to “Two Words: Preferred Pronouns”
Love your comments. NPR just had a program discussing gender neutrality. It seems new words could be created to address the confusion.
Hi, Linda. Is this the NPR piece you mention?
https://www.npr.org/2019/12/10/786732456/merriam-webster-singles-out-nonbinary-they-for-word-of-the-year-honors
Thanks in any case for the citation: Because of you, I just discovered that Merriam-Webster had chosen the “nonbinary they” as its Word of the Year for 2019. Had I realized this, I’d have written this post earlier, quoting their selection.
About new words for gender-neutral pronouns: Lots of folks have suggested this, and I’ve seen proposals like xhe and zi and xhey among others. None ever have caught on. They simply sound too foreign to most people’s ears. Anyway, the binary singular “they” has been traditional, perfectly acceptable English for centuries. It only recently fell into disfavor with grammar cops. When we were taught in school to avoid it, that teaching was a fad and an aberration. Good riddance!
To me “anyone” refers to “he” or “she.” Old fashioned?
You’re exactly right, Lee — and not at all old-fashioned. “Anyone” does mean “he or she”, the same being true of other words like “someone” or “whoever”. The point is that all of these are singular expressions. Thus the question becomes, if we want to substitute a shorter or simpler pronoun for that singular reference, must such a pronoun itself also be singular?
It’s just plain awkward to say, “If anyone has parked his or her car in the fire lane, he or she should move it.” In colloquial speech, therefore, we usually say, “If anyone has parked their car in the fire lane, they should move it.” But the conventional grammar you and I were taught in school said this was “wrong”. As a reporter, I couldn’t get away with substituting “their” for “his or her” — or “they” for “he or she”. My editor would have “corrected” my “error” (and sent me a crabby note fussing about it).
However, this prohibition of the singular “they” is a recent departure. For centuries it was considered acceptable English, and now it’s acceptable again. Even the reporter’s beloved AP Stylebook now allows it.
Further, you can’t write around the problem by replacing “he or she” with “anyone”. For example, consider: “If someone has parked a car in the fire lane, he or she should move it.” You wouldn’t shorten this by saying “If someone has parked a car in the fire lane, anyone should move it.” You need to replace “he or she” with “they” because you don’t want just “anyone” to move the car: You want the car’s driver to do so!
Thanks for this Gary. I love the safety of using the word they in a singular way. It’s so versatile too. These days it also refers to those of opposite opinions, especially political! Back to the singular use, it just sounds weird to say they is. So with singular they are, the verb then gets to be singular too!
Good point, Neranza, and I agree that the plural verb as singular makes sense in that context. Let’s hope some respected grammar authority or website publishes a comprehensive set of usage guidelines (if one hasn’t already done so).
Hmm. I’m fuzzy on the political usage of “they” that you mention. Any chance you could offer some examples?
Two other words: Nicely put.