Consider the following sentence:

A person who does not read this blog regularly may find that ____ grammar suffers.

Now fill in the blank with the appropriate pronoun. If you’re of a certain age, you’ll unflinchingly fill the blank with “his.” If you lean leftish sociopolitically, you’re more likely to provide “her” (or to alternate between “his” and “her” when using such sentences). If the thought of filling in that blank fills you with uncertainty or even dread, maybe you’d supply “their,” which makes the grammar nerds squirm.

The dilemma here is that English does not have a widely accepted gender-neutral pronoun. Historically, we’ve defaulted to the masculine pronouns, but that’s become politically incorrect; on the other hand, defaulting always to the feminine pronoun can be patronizing. I suppose we could use the gender-neutral “its,” but that leads to ambiguity (in the sentence above, would the “its” refer to the person or the blog?) and is awfully dehumanizing. I want to be ok with allowing “they” and “their” to serve as gender-neutral third-person pronouns (I believe this is how some other languages do it), but I have trouble putting aside my grammar alarm and doing it in practice.

Bryan A. Garner, whom I’ll keep citing post after post, suggests that you can often write around the problem by rephrasing things (see the entry on “sexism” if you’re following along in A Dictionary of Modern American Usage). He proposes the following fixes (most of this is direct quotation):

  • Delete the pronoun reference altogether. E.g. “Every manager should read memoranda as soon as they are delivered to him by a mail clerk.” Just strike out “to him” in this case.
  • Change the pronoun to an article. E.g.: “An author may adopt any of the following dictionaries in preparing his manuscript.” Replace “his” with  “a.”
  • Pluralize, so that “he” becomes “they.” E.g.: “A student should avoid engaging in any activities that might bring discredit to his school.” Rewrite as follows: “Students should avoid engaging in any activities that might bring discredit to their school.”
  • Use the relative pronoun “who,” especially when the generic “he” follows an “if.” E.g.: “If a student cannot use standard English, he cannot be expected to master the nuances of the literature assigned in this course.” Rewrite as follows: “A student who cannot use standard English cannot be expected to master the nuances of the literature assigned in this course.”

So there you have it, a few tricks a person may use for getting around the issue if he/she/it/they is/are so inclined.

Show Comments

60 Comments

Comments are closed.

Close Comments

Comments

  1. Being politically correct is hard to do at times since you can’t please everyone. My first reaction was his or her, but ended with their. Being aware of other’s feelings is an admirable trait for anyone.

    Like

  2. Or, you can always go with “one”: “One who does not read this blog regularly may find that one’s grammar suffers.” Of course it’s stuffy. But it’s grammatically correct. Being of that Certain Age that would have filled in the blank with “his,” I find the whole gender-neutral movement plain silly.

    Like

  3. Actually, in the case of antecedents with unknown gender, ‘their’ is correct even in first person. Both Merriam-Webster and the OED agree, and cite examples.

    Like

    1. Michael, I don’t suppose you have a citation hand for the OED reference? I’d be eager to read the whole entry. I’ve got the condensed OED handy and have access to the full OED online. Do you find this in the entry on “their” or is there a usage essay in the dictionary (as sometimes happens)? Thanks!

      Like

    2. Curiosity got the better of me, and I went to the full OED online. First, a note on the OED: It’s more descriptive than prescriptive, so the fact that it lists a usage means only that it’s been used in the language in print, not that it’s necessarily endorsed by the OED. Lots of things have made the cut in recent years that wouldn’t generally be considered standard written English. Here’s the definition:

      Often used in relation to a singular n. or pronoun denoting a person, after each, every, either, neither, no one, every one, etc. Also so used instead of ‘his or her’, when the gender is inclusive or uncertain. Cf. they pron. 2, them pron. 2; nobody pron. 1b, somebody n. (Not favoured by grammarians.)

      That emphasis in bold is mine. Now, the fact that it’s not favored by grammarians doesn’t make it necessarily wrong, but it would seem to be in agreement with what I say in the original post (to summarize: it’s an ok usage, but grammar-conscientious folk tend not to like it).

      I find the citations in the OED interesting in that some of them are actually very old (e.g. the year 1400!), suggesting that maybe the word did serve something like the purpose we use it for now, that is, that it’s not a terribly new usage, though perhaps it has become more common over time.

      Thanks for sending me to the OED. I always enjoy spelunking there. 🙂

      Like

  4. Shoot.
    He/she and all other out-of-place “they”-isms are not marks of politics or unnerdiness–they are marks of a collective illiteracy with which we feel forced to deal. Why, I shall never know, nor want to know; who cares why it is popular to be confused with the very simplest of concepts?
    And, please, let’s not confuse correct usage with what some might call “acceptable” or even “recommendable”.
    And “it” is for unnamed animals.

    Like

  6. Thanks for this! As a person who really tries to use proper grammar, I appreciate explanations for why something is the way it is. I am pretty well-written and well-spoken, but there is always room for improvement. I enjoyed your post. 🙂

    Like

  8. If I’m thinking about it, I’ll generally use he/she. It seems to me that would be simpler than doing the re-writing. AND I’m of that age that tends to use ‘he’ instead of the other choice(s). Just saying.

    Like

  9. Note to Grammar Nerds: Language is alive. It grows and changes according to how people use it. As in, the words that are coming out of their mouths, if mutually understood, are essentially correct grammar. The rules are simply changing at all times; “A person may find that their grammar suffers,” is still correctly following grammar rules, just not the ones that you learned in school.

    If you want to be picky about “correct” grammar for fun because you enjoy it and you love following the structure you learned because it gives you happiness, please do. However, if you judge another person’s intelligence based on grammar mistakes, know that it’s just as wrong as judging someone based on gender, ethnicity, age or sexuality. If you smugly think to yourself, “What an idiot,” when you hear the “their” issue or read “alot” on a blog, you should pause and consider improving your own character. Think of a positive thing about the person instead. There is already enough hate in this world.

    Like

    1. What I have described is the difference between Prescriptive and Descriptive Grammar, and potential bias when people don’t understand the difference. Obviously I am a Descriptive Grammarian. I like it because it weeds the snobby people out of my life.

      Like

    2. Totally agree with this. I’m a grammar nerd but would never judge anybody on the basis of their language, and although I’m pretty well acquainted with the traditional rules of grammar and tend to adhere to them more or less in my own writing, I’m really more of a descriptivist at heart. In my posts here, I tend to describe the traditional rules for those who’re interested and would like to follow them or just to know about them.

      Like

  10. “would never judge anybody on the basis of their language” unless he were to happen to use the cosmopolitan usage which is based on the actual basis of the English language, you meant to say.
    We all mean to say that the neutered “he” is wrong.
    Something has to be wrong, and in saying so, you do not judge, but woe to anyone else who dares.
    Just sayin’.

    Like

    1. Language changes. The things we base our current usage on are based on things that changed and changed again hundreds of years ago. If you’re going to defend prescriptivism by saying that our current codified usage is based on older usage, then I guess you might as well start boning up on Middle English, or Old English, or maybe the old Germanic, French, and Roman grammars, or for that matter, why not go back to the handful of Proto-Indo-European roots we know and try to communicate using those. 😉

      And no, I don’t pass any sort of judgment on people who are more ferocious in their defense of the conventions than I am unless their manner of passing the judgment demands judgment — ie, if they’re really rude about it, in which case, where’s my gavel?

      Like

    1. “Nerd” is a badge to be worn proudly in my opinion, so if you took that as an insult, please know that coming from this quarter, it’s highest praise. And I certainly don’t mean to be ageist, but I don’t think many would argue that many of the, say, baby boomer generation, use the masculine defaults. It’s not an insult; it’s just a fact, or at least a pretty reasonable conjecture. We’re products of our time, and fifty years ago, we defaulted to masculine pronouns without much consideration of the matter. Acknowledging the fact isn’t blowing a raspberry at anybody.

      Like

  13. In software engineering documentation and computer manuals the user is normally referred to using a female personal pronoun. I like using ‘their’ but I think this is great advice. Another similar “problem” is gotten; outside the US some people abhor this word, so wherever I can’t just use ‘got’ I rephrase what I’m saying to avoid it.

    Like