6.0666 Rs: They (2/47)

Elaine Brennan (EDITORS@BROWNVM.BITNET)
Tue, 13 Apr 1993 17:36:34 EDT

Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 6, No. 0666. Tuesday, 13 Apr 1993.


(1) Date: 10 Apr 1993 09:50:40 -0600 (MDT) (30 lines)
From: DIANA PATTERSON <DPATTERSON@mtroyal.ab.ca>
Subject: The immoral "they"

(2) Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1993 08:08:20 (17 lines)
From: koontz@alpha.bldr.nist.gov (John E. Koontz)
Subject: Re: 6.0658 Rs: They and Their (2/61)

(1) --------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 10 Apr 1993 09:50:40 -0600 (MDT)
From: DIANA PATTERSON <DPATTERSON@mtroyal.ab.ca>
Subject: The immoral "they"

I am that Canadian that thinks the _deliberate encouragement_ of the plural
for the singular is immoral, not its use.

As was clearly demonstrated, this little error has been around for a long
time. And there have been many more. I remember one going through the Robin
Alston reprints of grammars to find some grammarian (I forget who) finding
grammar errors in all the great writers up to the 18th century. Great writers
do make errors, and the most common is to decide that "Someone" and
"Everybody" is plural, which then leads to "Each" becoming the plural, and
"individual" becoming plural. I do very much dislike the use of "he or she"
which I see as long winded, and the use of "s/he", which I see as ugly. What
I would hope is that we could be consistently in the plural. Why must we
begin by describing Each, and then generalize? The cultural need for the
particular, and the abnegation of that particularity part way through a
thought is a deep cultural problem. I could digress for hours on the
ambivalence of the English psyche that causes this form of expression, but I
shall not.
As I have pointed out, this problem is particularly a bug-bear for me
because I must deal with students who will take their writings into the
courtroom. Precision here could make a considerable difference.
While my students may follow Catullus to the worse way, I believe that
I must at least let them know the better.
Diana Patterson
Mount Royal College
Calgary, Alberta
DPatterson@MtRoyal.AB.CA
(2) --------------------------------------------------------------27----
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1993 08:08:20
From: koontz@alpha.bldr.nist.gov (John E. Koontz)
Subject: Re: 6.0658 Rs: They and Their (2/61)

> ... For at least 15 years now, I have observed that students -are
> reluctant to understand that a work of literature has a single, personal
> author or that a character has a particular identity. Thus, as often as
> not a student will say in discussion, "They're saying here, 'To be or not
> to be - ...'"

> Is there some hobgoblin out of Orwell at work here? Is there a deeper
> linguistic phenomenon behind this? Or am I simply cursed with especially
> dense and difficult students?! Michael Metzger (MLLMIKEM@UBVMS)

I would call this an impersonal they. Plural reference is used by various
languages as an impersonal.