Common-gender pronoun

Ypsilon   Sun Oct 02, 2005 6:02 am GMT
When I try to refer to someone, I am at a loss. I have no idea who is a man and who is a woman. Several weeks ago, I wrote to an organization, and a person "Jean" replied to me. But I don't know how to refer to him/her using a pronoun. Should I have asked "Are you a man or a woman"? I think it's rude.

In Internet forums, this kind of problem is very common.

I have heard of a common-gender pronoun "thon". I used Google to search for <common-gender, pronoun, thon>. These are some of them.

http://www.chiroweb.com/archives/10/17/19.html
https://netfiles.uiuc.edu/debaron/www/essays/epicene.htm
http://www.aol.bartleby.com/64/C005/004.html
http://www.eagletribune.com/news/stories/20030330/LN_002.htm

Additionally, "thon" is in French "tuna", isn't it?
ECko   Sun Oct 02, 2005 6:09 am GMT
Couldnt you just him or her?
Lazar   Sun Oct 02, 2005 6:21 am GMT
I'm not a prescriptivist, and I think that instituting a gender neutral pronoun in English - encouraging people to change the way they speak - would be a very prescriptivist thing to do. It just seems too "conlangy" to me, creating a pronoun out of thin air, with absolutely no history, etymology, or precedent.

If you're not sure of someone's gender, just use "he or she / him or her / his or her". If Jean hadn't told you his or her gender, then he or she would have no reason to be offended by this.
Ypsilon   Sun Oct 02, 2005 6:24 am GMT
Speaking of French, it has "son/sa/ses", which means "his or her or its". In English, this kind of possessive adjective is missing, so we sometimes resort to Singular "their", like "Everyone has their own taste.".

So I've got an idea. What about using "seir" instead of "his or her"?

You may say, "Seir posting is not very well considered!", because you never know my biological gender.
Ypsilon   Sun Oct 02, 2005 6:28 am GMT
To Lazar:

You used the term "conlangy". What do you mean by that?
Lazar   Sun Oct 02, 2005 6:29 am GMT
<<So I've got an idea. What about using "seir" instead of "his or her"?>>

As I said before, English is not a conlang. You can't just create pronouns out of thin air. Languages follow the gradually evolving conventions of the people who speak them, and until a gender-neutral pronoun naturally develops among the body of English speakers, you'll just have to get by with "he or she".
Lazar   Sun Oct 02, 2005 6:31 am GMT
<<You used the term "conlangy". What do you mean by that?>>

A conlang is a constructed, artificial language like Esperanto - one in which you can change the grammar and vocabulary in whichever manner you want.
Damian (Mr)   Sun Oct 02, 2005 8:40 am GMT
I had a letter from somebody called Hilary and I assumed it was a woman and addressed her as such but subsequently she proved to be a he. I have heard of a Sidney who turned out to be a woman...congenitally female, too. In Yorkshire the name Shirley was once a male name...there was once a very burly six foot four inch tall wrestler with a beard called Shirley according to an internet source. He had a wee bit of a tough childhood.

Initially, if unsure of the gender, I would address as "Dear Sir/Madam".

English is generally asexual anyway when compared with many other Languages.
Adam   Sun Oct 02, 2005 9:15 am GMT
"Couldnt you just him or her? "

Ypsilon was trying to say, "What if you don't know whether the person you are talking to is male or female?"

That is one of the problems with English. There is no neutral pronoun that you can use when talking about someone who you don't know is male or female.
Adam   Sun Oct 02, 2005 9:21 am GMT
In French, they don't have that problem.

In English, imagine if someone left an umbrella on a train, and you don't know if it belonged to a man or a woman.

Would you say to another passenger, "Someone left HIS umbrella on the train", "someone left HER umbrella on the train" or someone left "Their umbrella on the train."

Using any of those three is wrong, because you don't know whether the person is male or female, and "their" is plural not singular.

But in French, the word for "his", "her" , "its" refers to the object and not the person, so in this case the the French would use "son", to refer to the umbrella" which means either "his" or "her" in this case.

So English needs a neutral pronoun that you can use when you don't know the gender of the person you are talking about.
Lazar   Sun Oct 02, 2005 9:26 am GMT
<<So English needs a neutral pronoun that you can use when you don't know the gender of the person you are talking about.>>

No it doesn't. If it needed a neutral pronoun, then it would already have created one. Languages evolve to meet necessity.

Different languages have different limitations - they may lack certain verbal tenses or other shades of distinction. You just have to accept that. If it becomes necessary for a language to add a new feature, then it *will* be added through normal linguistic evolution.
Kirk   Sun Oct 02, 2005 9:50 am GMT
Very true, Lazar. Plus, English *does* deal with this issue in different ways even if formal written English frowns upon it. The most obvious form is "they/them/their" as a singular non-gender-specific referent. I and many others use it all the time in daily speech and think nothing of it. For many speakers, this is the way English has dealt with the issue and it works just great.
Adam   Sun Oct 02, 2005 9:56 am GMT
"No it doesn't. If it needed a neutral pronoun, then it would already have created one. Languages evolve to meet necessity. "

Not necessarily.

the fact that w ehave to say "his" when we could be talking about a woman, or "her" when we could be talking about a man, and the plural "their" when we're obviously talking about one person is PROOF that we need a neutral pronoun.

If I see that someone has left an umbreall on a train and I don't know if a man or woman left it, then I can't use "his" (cos it could be a woman who left it), I can't use her (cos it could be a man who left it), and I can't use "their" because only one perosn left the umbrella on the train.

So we need to have a neutral one, say "thon."

So if we don't know if the umbrella belonged to a man or woman, we can say "Someone has left thon umbrella on the train." "Thon" would mean both "his" and "her."
Adam   Sun Oct 02, 2005 9:58 am GMT
Zhe, zher, zhim



by Fred E. Foldvary, Senior Editor

The English language has a problem with gender. It uses the masculine "he," "his," "him," both to refer to males and to refer to people or animals in general. The words "she" and "her" refer only to females.
For centuries, this was not much of a problem. But with the rise of the women's rights movement, many women felt that this language usage entrenched the dominance of males. Many writers began to use alternative language. It is now common to use the plural in place of the masculine pronoun, as in "a buyer needs to have their money ready before making a purchase," instead of "his" money.

But this use of the plural is traditionally bad grammar, and more importantly, mixing the singular and the plural creates linguistic confusion. It is grammatically better to use the neutral term "one," as in "one's money," but it has a stilted sound to American ears, and in some usages it is awkward.

The English language needs new pronouns to refer to people in a gender-neutral way. I offer the words zhe, zher, and zhim, where the "zh" is pronounced as in the second "g" of garage or the "z" in azure. "Zhe" means either he or she for the subject of a sentence. "Zher" is the possessive "him" or "her." "Zhim" is the accusative or object of a sentence, meaning either "him" or "her."

For example: "Zhe was walking zher dog down the street and then gave zhim a treat." The pronoun "one" would not do here: "One was walking one's dog down the street and then gave one a treat" does not work. The use of the plural would make it sound like more than one person and more than one dog. For gender-neutral pronouns, new words are needed, and zhe, zher, zhim fits the need.

Some might argue that we don't really need such new words, since the traditional masculine usage has served well. It's true we can get by with that. But the problem is that many people are already rejecting the traditional masculine usage. They are substituting awkward usages such as plurals or "you" or "he or she" or the passive voice.

So it's not a matter of pushing "political correctness" but of recognizing that the sensitivity to masculine usage already is out there, and salvaging the situation with new words rather than usage that reduces the clarity of the language.

Of course, it is much easier to suggest new terms than to put them into common use. One way is simply to start using the terms in one's own writing. Feminist journals could adopt the practice. And if some high official, such as the president, says zhe will use gender-neutral pronouns for zher own writing, and ask that those writing to zhim do so also, that would provide a powerful boost.

In the previous paragraph, there is no presumption that the president be a male. The gender neutral "zh" words raise our consciousness that the president could be either male or female. I'm not saying that the zh words would or should replace all "he" usages, but that it become acceptable as an alternative.

There are attempts to make the Bible and religious texts more gender neutral, and these have stumbled on the pronouns, often just leaving them masculine. The zh words would help refer to God: for Zhe is just, and Zher love for humanity endless, and we worship Zhim, when God has been masculine only in the linguistic sense.

Save us from confusing grammar such as "everyone must have their books." Make it instead "everyone must have zher books." It then becomes clear that each person must have one's own book and not the books of all the others. It is also shorter and less awkward than having to say "his or her" all the time.

English needs gender-neutral pronouns, and sooner or later it will get them. Why not start today with the zh words?

-- Fred Foldvary


http://www.progress.org/archive/fold162.htm
Adam   Sun Oct 02, 2005 10:02 am GMT
"Zher" is the possessive "him" or "her."


That should be "Zher" is the possessive "his" or "her."