The Year of “They”
December 10, 2019 3:07 PM Subscribe
The nonbinary pronoun “they” has been named Merriam-Webster's 2019 word of the year.
As covered by CNN, Time, NPR, etc.
[Previous Merriam-Webster Words of the Year.]
As covered by CNN, Time, NPR, etc.
[Previous Merriam-Webster Words of the Year.]
I very much look forward to language innovation in tongues other than the English that will accelerate acceptance & improve proper description of people who have genders other than male or female. It's not easy for our pals who speak a language that has two grammatical genders.
posted by Sterros at 3:42 PM on December 10, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by Sterros at 3:42 PM on December 10, 2019 [6 favorites]
Indeed, as covered on NPR earlier this week, "A New Effort In Argentina Seeks To Make Spanish Nouns Gender Neutral."
posted by PhineasGage at 3:52 PM on December 10, 2019 [9 favorites]
posted by PhineasGage at 3:52 PM on December 10, 2019 [9 favorites]
Whom decided this.
posted by srboisvert at 4:07 PM on December 10, 2019 [12 favorites]
posted by srboisvert at 4:07 PM on December 10, 2019 [12 favorites]
They did.
posted by Reyturner at 4:15 PM on December 10, 2019 [25 favorites]
posted by Reyturner at 4:15 PM on December 10, 2019 [25 favorites]
It wasn't a question!
posted by srboisvert at 4:21 PM on December 10, 2019 [25 favorites]
posted by srboisvert at 4:21 PM on December 10, 2019 [25 favorites]
My mom and dad have a hard time with my son's partner's pronouns, but mom was an English teacher, so maybe a dictionary will make a difference.
posted by Biblio at 4:25 PM on December 10, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by Biblio at 4:25 PM on December 10, 2019 [3 favorites]
In 2034 we'll call everybody what they asked to be called! And what progress shall we have made!
Really though, just refer to people how they asked to be refered to. It's not rocket surgery.
posted by East14thTaco at 4:35 PM on December 10, 2019 [9 favorites]
Really though, just refer to people how they asked to be refered to. It's not rocket surgery.
posted by East14thTaco at 4:35 PM on December 10, 2019 [9 favorites]
It's not easy for our pals who speak a language that has two grammatical genders.
How about the germanics, with three?
posted by chavenet at 4:35 PM on December 10, 2019 [2 favorites]
How about the germanics, with three?
posted by chavenet at 4:35 PM on December 10, 2019 [2 favorites]
Had an interesting discussion with someone about this recently, and how to "try on" they/them pronouns if you're exploring this as a possibility for yourself but don't feel the need to make any appearance changes. Since English is not gendered, there's no way for your friends/families/coworkers to change how they say "you" in any way -- so the only time this comes up is probably when you're not around and being talked about by sometime else!
/me also thinks it could've come up during IRC times, but he/they aren't sure how prevalent or useful that is nowadays. Maybe in Slack?
posted by curious nu at 5:04 PM on December 10, 2019
/me also thinks it could've come up during IRC times, but he/they aren't sure how prevalent or useful that is nowadays. Maybe in Slack?
posted by curious nu at 5:04 PM on December 10, 2019
I love this. To be fair, there are some occasions where confusion arises when it sounds like multiple people are involved in a statement or question versus one person. But it's not a big deal, and everyone will adapt.
It's a good change. Language always changes. I'm trying to use it as much as I can in my everyday speech.
posted by SoberHighland at 5:07 PM on December 10, 2019
It's a good change. Language always changes. I'm trying to use it as much as I can in my everyday speech.
posted by SoberHighland at 5:07 PM on December 10, 2019
This small change will raise verbal SAT scores by about 40 points.
posted by Nanukthedog at 5:08 PM on December 10, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by Nanukthedog at 5:08 PM on December 10, 2019 [3 favorites]
Since English is not gendered, there's no way for your friends/families/coworkers to change how they say "you" in any way -- so the only time this comes up is probably when you're not around and being talked about by sometime else!
I don’t understand this? There are very few languages that have gendered second-person pronouns and off the top of my head I can’t think of any, although I know they exist, but I don’t think any romance languages are included in that. Certainly neither Spanish second-person pronoun is gendered.
posted by Automocar at 5:23 PM on December 10, 2019
I don’t understand this? There are very few languages that have gendered second-person pronouns and off the top of my head I can’t think of any, although I know they exist, but I don’t think any romance languages are included in that. Certainly neither Spanish second-person pronoun is gendered.
posted by Automocar at 5:23 PM on December 10, 2019
Ask A Manager had a good user-contributed post about how to get used to using nonbinary pronouns. (You can see the original thread here.)
posted by matildaben at 5:23 PM on December 10, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by matildaben at 5:23 PM on December 10, 2019 [6 favorites]
The biggest irony/pet peeve I have about this is that pretty much everyone uses the they as a third-person singular pronoun without thinking about it whenever they don't know what else to use in casual conversation, including the people that complain about it most.
posted by Aleyn at 5:30 PM on December 10, 2019 [19 favorites]
posted by Aleyn at 5:30 PM on December 10, 2019 [19 favorites]
This is also your periodic reminder that, in English, singular "they" is older than singular "you".
posted by mhum at 5:34 PM on December 10, 2019 [30 favorites]
posted by mhum at 5:34 PM on December 10, 2019 [30 favorites]
he / himself
she / herself
they (sing.) / ???
Next, we need to convince the anglophone world that "themself" is a real word.
posted by HoraceH at 6:01 PM on December 10, 2019 [4 favorites]
she / herself
they (sing.) / ???
Next, we need to convince the anglophone world that "themself" is a real word.
posted by HoraceH at 6:01 PM on December 10, 2019 [4 favorites]
Contemporary English usage has been literally aching for a gender neutral pronoun for ages now.
posted by ovvl at 6:15 PM on December 10, 2019
posted by ovvl at 6:15 PM on December 10, 2019
Next, we need to convince the anglophone world that "themself" is a real word.
M-W's already got an entry (though, cited as nonstandard). OED cites the usage as "somewhat rare between 16th and 19th centirues. Often considered nonstandard in later use."
posted by mhum at 6:16 PM on December 10, 2019 [4 favorites]
M-W's already got an entry (though, cited as nonstandard). OED cites the usage as "somewhat rare between 16th and 19th centirues. Often considered nonstandard in later use."
posted by mhum at 6:16 PM on December 10, 2019 [4 favorites]
Contemporary English usage has been literally aching for a gender neutral pronoun for ages now.
Literally!
posted by Gadarene at 6:22 PM on December 10, 2019 [4 favorites]
Literally!
posted by Gadarene at 6:22 PM on December 10, 2019 [4 favorites]
There are very few languages that have gendered second-person pronouns and off the top of my head I can’t think of any, although I know they exist, but I don’t think any romance languages are included in that
Hebrew is one; there are also gendered verb endings for many of the tenses, so you, personally, have to make a decision about your gender nearly every time you speak. (See also, e.g., Polish, which has gender marking on verbs in some tenses as well.)
There are a few strategies non-binary speakers in Hebrew use (at least according to an article from 2014)-- either mixing up the endings (e.g., use masc. in one sentence, fem. in the next); using the endings for the gender you weren't assigned at birth; or using forms that combine the masculine and feminine into one ending.
A non-binary student I've had mentioned using similar strategies for learning languages with heavy gender marking that lack an agreed upon non-binary system. It's a bit of a stopgap, and it gets especially tricky as a second language learner, even if you've got an understanding instructor who wants to help.
posted by damayanti at 6:23 PM on December 10, 2019 [5 favorites]
Hebrew is one; there are also gendered verb endings for many of the tenses, so you, personally, have to make a decision about your gender nearly every time you speak. (See also, e.g., Polish, which has gender marking on verbs in some tenses as well.)
There are a few strategies non-binary speakers in Hebrew use (at least according to an article from 2014)-- either mixing up the endings (e.g., use masc. in one sentence, fem. in the next); using the endings for the gender you weren't assigned at birth; or using forms that combine the masculine and feminine into one ending.
A non-binary student I've had mentioned using similar strategies for learning languages with heavy gender marking that lack an agreed upon non-binary system. It's a bit of a stopgap, and it gets especially tricky as a second language learner, even if you've got an understanding instructor who wants to help.
posted by damayanti at 6:23 PM on December 10, 2019 [5 favorites]
"They" has a good chance of succeeding, since it matches the informalizing/singularizing trend in pronouns started with the thee/you transition. My family remains staunchly on the losing side (sltnyt) of the previous pronoun fight but are thankfully on-board with "they."
My high school language club wondered why, after at least a century of proposals, no gender neutral pronoun had caught on (this was 2000).
We experimented with different gender neutral pronouns (ze, they, etc.) in our classes to see which ones were accepted without question. "Hune" won, "they" was a close second. Our valedictorian used "hune" exclusively in our graduating benediction and it went completely unremarked on.
posted by head full of air at 8:17 PM on December 10, 2019 [1 favorite]
My high school language club wondered why, after at least a century of proposals, no gender neutral pronoun had caught on (this was 2000).
We experimented with different gender neutral pronouns (ze, they, etc.) in our classes to see which ones were accepted without question. "Hune" won, "they" was a close second. Our valedictorian used "hune" exclusively in our graduating benediction and it went completely unremarked on.
posted by head full of air at 8:17 PM on December 10, 2019 [1 favorite]
To be fair, there are some occasions where confusion arises when it sounds like multiple people are involved in a statement or question versus one person. But it's not a big deal, and everyone will adapt.
Yes. It does take some getting used to using "they" for a known person ("John opened their bag") as opposed to an unspecified person ("the student opened their bag") where people use it all the time without even thinking about it. But practice makes perfect: I read three books that extensively used "they" in this way (Ada Palmer's Terra Incognito series, can recommend) and by the end it felt a lot less strange.
Besides, Germans manage their sie/Sie ambiguity, so...
posted by nnethercote at 9:11 PM on December 10, 2019 [1 favorite]
Yes. It does take some getting used to using "they" for a known person ("John opened their bag") as opposed to an unspecified person ("the student opened their bag") where people use it all the time without even thinking about it. But practice makes perfect: I read three books that extensively used "they" in this way (Ada Palmer's Terra Incognito series, can recommend) and by the end it felt a lot less strange.
Besides, Germans manage their sie/Sie ambiguity, so...
posted by nnethercote at 9:11 PM on December 10, 2019 [1 favorite]
The German connection makes me realize that conjugating verbs as singular would avoid the ambiguity: "they is nice", "they walks home", etc. Not sure if anyone does that, though.
posted by nnethercote at 9:14 PM on December 10, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by nnethercote at 9:14 PM on December 10, 2019 [4 favorites]
Dang, that's excellent. I work with several semi-woke boomers who still have some trouble with this, and it's always kinda weird - doesn't it just make everything easier for everyone?
posted by aspersioncast at 9:29 PM on December 10, 2019
posted by aspersioncast at 9:29 PM on December 10, 2019
Had an interesting discussion with someone about this recently, and how to "try on" they/them pronouns if you're exploring this as a possibility for yourself but don't feel the need to make any appearance changes. Since English is not gendered, there's no way for your friends/families/coworkers to change how they say "you" in any way -- so the only time this comes up is probably when you're not around and being talked about by sometime else!
I can see where it would be tricky in 1-on-1 conversations, but what about in a group? I think there'd be opportunities for "they" to come up organically then, wouldn't there? Either way, I totally sympathize about the difficulty in "trying on" they/them pronouns - it's something I've been dwelling on for a while now.
Only semi-related, but I've seen this article pop up a lot on social media today, and the proliferation of comments that amount to "gee that's great but it's so hard for me to violate my keen inner sense of Real Grammar" is ... dispiriting. I dunno if it's just me or if other folks here are also seeing a lot of this, but as someone who would really like to be referred to as "they," it's getting to me. Commenters (not here, I'm talking about in my FB feed) come across as wanting to be progressive and supportive, but also wanting to get their cards stamped for a free pass to not have to work too hard to get it since gosh darn it, they are such incorrigible prescriptivists that they just can't wrap their brain around this crazy new change that just doesn't seem right to them.
Several times this year I have changed my work email signature to include "they" pronouns, then changed it right back (to no pronouns) because I'm imagining conversations exactly like the ones I'm seeing on FB happening in real-time, and I just don't want to have to smile and absolve people of the "burden" I'm placing on them. I don't want to console them for their grave struggle against their inner Grammar "Expert" when really all I want is to not be gendered as female at every turn.
If I could just get one less group email addressed "Hello Ladies," I would be so happy. If I could get one classroom staff member to stop coaching students to refer to me as "Miss [DingoMutt]," that would be wonderful. Actually getting people to use "they" seems like a pipe dream at the moment. Sooner or later I'm pretty sure I will go ahead and put "they" in my sig file, but I wish it didn't have to feel like such a big damn deal.
posted by DingoMutt at 9:39 PM on December 10, 2019 [10 favorites]
I can see where it would be tricky in 1-on-1 conversations, but what about in a group? I think there'd be opportunities for "they" to come up organically then, wouldn't there? Either way, I totally sympathize about the difficulty in "trying on" they/them pronouns - it's something I've been dwelling on for a while now.
Only semi-related, but I've seen this article pop up a lot on social media today, and the proliferation of comments that amount to "gee that's great but it's so hard for me to violate my keen inner sense of Real Grammar" is ... dispiriting. I dunno if it's just me or if other folks here are also seeing a lot of this, but as someone who would really like to be referred to as "they," it's getting to me. Commenters (not here, I'm talking about in my FB feed) come across as wanting to be progressive and supportive, but also wanting to get their cards stamped for a free pass to not have to work too hard to get it since gosh darn it, they are such incorrigible prescriptivists that they just can't wrap their brain around this crazy new change that just doesn't seem right to them.
Several times this year I have changed my work email signature to include "they" pronouns, then changed it right back (to no pronouns) because I'm imagining conversations exactly like the ones I'm seeing on FB happening in real-time, and I just don't want to have to smile and absolve people of the "burden" I'm placing on them. I don't want to console them for their grave struggle against their inner Grammar "Expert" when really all I want is to not be gendered as female at every turn.
If I could just get one less group email addressed "Hello Ladies," I would be so happy. If I could get one classroom staff member to stop coaching students to refer to me as "Miss [DingoMutt]," that would be wonderful. Actually getting people to use "they" seems like a pipe dream at the moment. Sooner or later I'm pretty sure I will go ahead and put "they" in my sig file, but I wish it didn't have to feel like such a big damn deal.
posted by DingoMutt at 9:39 PM on December 10, 2019 [10 favorites]
It's so weird when people go on about how "unnatural" singular they is. Everyone uses singular they in their everyday speech without even thinking about it. I used it in the last sentence and you didn't even notice.
"But wait," you say. "That's different, you didn't use it to describe a specific person."
Okay, so it's the people you find unnatural, not the language. That's on you.
posted by roll truck roll at 9:47 PM on December 10, 2019 [11 favorites]
"But wait," you say. "That's different, you didn't use it to describe a specific person."
Okay, so it's the people you find unnatural, not the language. That's on you.
posted by roll truck roll at 9:47 PM on December 10, 2019 [11 favorites]
Have we agreed on a second person plural pronoun yet? My vote is for y'all rather than youse.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 9:52 PM on December 10, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 9:52 PM on December 10, 2019 [5 favorites]
My vote is for y'all rather than youse.
False dichotomy - the real answer is, of course, yinz.
posted by DingoMutt at 9:58 PM on December 10, 2019 [14 favorites]
False dichotomy - the real answer is, of course, yinz.
posted by DingoMutt at 9:58 PM on December 10, 2019 [14 favorites]
Honestly it's pretty fucked up that according to the English language the most important thing to know about anyone is what their gender is.
(This is not a complaint about singular they. Definitely use everyone's preferred pronouns until The Culture finally shows up and subsumes us and we all switch over to Marain.)
posted by ckape at 10:12 PM on December 10, 2019 [5 favorites]
(This is not a complaint about singular they. Definitely use everyone's preferred pronouns until The Culture finally shows up and subsumes us and we all switch over to Marain.)
posted by ckape at 10:12 PM on December 10, 2019 [5 favorites]
"try on" they/them pronouns if you're exploring this as a possibility for yourself but don't feel the need to make any appearance changes. Since English is not gendered, there's no way for your friends/families/coworkers to change how they say "you" in any way -- so the only time this comes up is probably when you're not around and being talked about by sometime else!
You'd be surprised. I was trying out they/them pronouns for a few months, and at first I thought the same as you. But it once you start really paying attention to the pronouns people use for you, you realize it actually happens more than you'd think.* Also, one thing that's been pretty cool is seeing how, when you ask people to try out new pronouns for you, if they are nice, cool people, they will often go out of their way to use those pronouns around you.
*An observation: it's really only cis people, or people who are relatively pronoun-indifferent, who think pronouns rarely happen around the people they're about. I used to be one of the latter, and I was under that impression. Pronouns are pretty important to me now, and I tell you what, they happen around me all the time!
posted by the sockening at 10:41 PM on December 10, 2019 [16 favorites]
You'd be surprised. I was trying out they/them pronouns for a few months, and at first I thought the same as you. But it once you start really paying attention to the pronouns people use for you, you realize it actually happens more than you'd think.* Also, one thing that's been pretty cool is seeing how, when you ask people to try out new pronouns for you, if they are nice, cool people, they will often go out of their way to use those pronouns around you.
*An observation: it's really only cis people, or people who are relatively pronoun-indifferent, who think pronouns rarely happen around the people they're about. I used to be one of the latter, and I was under that impression. Pronouns are pretty important to me now, and I tell you what, they happen around me all the time!
posted by the sockening at 10:41 PM on December 10, 2019 [16 favorites]
Also, Rhea Butcher has a truly sublime extended bit about their non-binary evolution in their XOXO speech (relevant bit starts around 13:25), that anyone who's interested in this should watch. I should say I don't feel exactly the way they do about pronouns, but it was just really cool to watch because it's just so rare to get to see a non-binary person, up on stage in front of a huge audience, talking with nuance about the evolution of their gender identity.
Anyway, my favorite part is when they talk about what a well-meaning drag woke cis people can be, joking about an apocryphal (but DEFINITELY based in lived experience) person who runs up to them, demands their pronouns, and then bellows to someone else: "HER pronouns are THEY/THEM! SHE'S so brave, SHE uses THEY/THEM pronouns!"
It's a funny and shocking gag, but it's so real to this non-binary person, both in how annoying it can be to have people demand your pronouns and act as if that is a defining statement of your gender identity AND how self-satisfied people can be sometimes in using those pronouns while also defaulting to view you as your assigned-gender-at-birth.
So I guess what I'm trying to say is, correct pronouns are important for helping trans and non-binary people move through the world more comfortably. But they're not the end-all, be-all of being a good ally to trans/non-binary/gender-non-conforming people.
posted by the sockening at 10:59 PM on December 10, 2019 [10 favorites]
Anyway, my favorite part is when they talk about what a well-meaning drag woke cis people can be, joking about an apocryphal (but DEFINITELY based in lived experience) person who runs up to them, demands their pronouns, and then bellows to someone else: "HER pronouns are THEY/THEM! SHE'S so brave, SHE uses THEY/THEM pronouns!"
It's a funny and shocking gag, but it's so real to this non-binary person, both in how annoying it can be to have people demand your pronouns and act as if that is a defining statement of your gender identity AND how self-satisfied people can be sometimes in using those pronouns while also defaulting to view you as your assigned-gender-at-birth.
So I guess what I'm trying to say is, correct pronouns are important for helping trans and non-binary people move through the world more comfortably. But they're not the end-all, be-all of being a good ally to trans/non-binary/gender-non-conforming people.
posted by the sockening at 10:59 PM on December 10, 2019 [10 favorites]
I think it's important for all of us "gender people" (so to speak) to be active in vocabulary creation. (I said that in my previous post, but in the context of foreign languages.) In English there is work to be done too. Someone above mentioned that you couldn't gender someone in the second person--what if you did? I think "they/them/theirs--thou/thee/thy" would work very well for the NB, with the wonderful side-effect of annoying the cis. This one works well by the sounds of the words, but a singular y'all in the second person would align more closely with the way that a singular they serves as a sort of majestic plural.
posted by Sterros at 11:28 PM on December 10, 2019
posted by Sterros at 11:28 PM on December 10, 2019
came out this year as non-binary... for just this one moment in all my life, I'm trendy
posted by kokaku at 11:59 PM on December 10, 2019 [10 favorites]
posted by kokaku at 11:59 PM on December 10, 2019 [10 favorites]
HoraceH: "they (sing.) / ???"
... the song of themself.
posted by chavenet at 2:25 AM on December 11, 2019 [9 favorites]
... the song of themself.
posted by chavenet at 2:25 AM on December 11, 2019 [9 favorites]
Given that “I am” and “s/he is”, but “you are” and “they are”, it seems that it is impossible to know the number of a set of people in English unless there's one of them and they are known to be male or female, and then only if you're not directly addressing them.
posted by acb at 3:24 AM on December 11, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by acb at 3:24 AM on December 11, 2019 [2 favorites]
I just wish we could say "they is" when referring to a singular non-binary person instead of "they are." I respect everyone's genders and pronouns, but linguistic consistency also means a lot to me.
posted by Faint of Butt at 6:40 AM on December 11, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by Faint of Butt at 6:40 AM on December 11, 2019 [4 favorites]
winterhill, and then there's the go-around-the-room as everyone is he/him or she/her and I'm the lone they/them - the fully-remote company I work for handled this gracefully at the last company get together with optional pronoun stickers for your name tag
faintofbutt - you is nutty ;)
posted by kokaku at 7:00 AM on December 11, 2019 [2 favorites]
faintofbutt - you is nutty ;)
posted by kokaku at 7:00 AM on December 11, 2019 [2 favorites]
"go-around-the-room" the extrovert's battle cry.
posted by filtergik at 7:01 AM on December 11, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by filtergik at 7:01 AM on December 11, 2019 [5 favorites]
faintofbutt - you is nutty ;)
"Thou art nutty." FTFT.
posted by Faint of Butt at 7:09 AM on December 11, 2019 [2 favorites]
"Thou art nutty." FTFT.
posted by Faint of Butt at 7:09 AM on December 11, 2019 [2 favorites]
Very exciting news!
posted by wicked_sassy at 7:16 AM on December 11, 2019
posted by wicked_sassy at 7:16 AM on December 11, 2019
I like the Spanish idea of using the -e vowel for neutral gender, because I came up with it back in 2003 or so. I appreciate the idea of using -x but it doesn't fit the sound patterns of the language.
posted by madcaptenor at 7:19 AM on December 11, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by madcaptenor at 7:19 AM on December 11, 2019 [1 favorite]
I respect everyone's genders and pronouns, but linguistic consistency also means a lot to me.
Wait til you hear about irregular English verbs (I am/she is).
Wait til you hear about English pluralization (goose/geese).
Wait til you hear about English orthography (enough fish!).
Wait til you hear about English comparative/superlative adjectives (good/better/best).
I mean, this is kind of an example of what I was poorly describing above - as someone who would really like to ask people to use "they/them" pronouns to more accurately reflect my gender, it's really disheartening to constantly see English "consistency" brought in as an issue, and the speaker's appreciation for English grammar as a virtue that is in direct conflict with this whole wacky gender identity thing (even if they are willing to try).
I don't mean this as any sort of attack on you, Faint of Butt, but it would be great if people who make an appeal to linguistics recognized that language itself changes over time - that's the nature of the beast - and that English itself is awfully damned inconsistent in lots of ways. Without that it just sounds to me like the speaker either isn't really familiar with English, or else is cool with all those other inconsistencies but not this one because - I don't know why but it's hard not to ascribe some depressing possibilities. This is not saying either of these takes is accurate, but it is how it comes across as someone who is directly affected by the possibility of using "they" pronouns.
I get that grammar and linguistic consistency means a lot to many people, but being gendered correctly sure would mean a lot to me, too.
posted by DingoMutt at 7:30 AM on December 11, 2019 [13 favorites]
Wait til you hear about irregular English verbs (I am/she is).
Wait til you hear about English pluralization (goose/geese).
Wait til you hear about English orthography (enough fish!).
Wait til you hear about English comparative/superlative adjectives (good/better/best).
I mean, this is kind of an example of what I was poorly describing above - as someone who would really like to ask people to use "they/them" pronouns to more accurately reflect my gender, it's really disheartening to constantly see English "consistency" brought in as an issue, and the speaker's appreciation for English grammar as a virtue that is in direct conflict with this whole wacky gender identity thing (even if they are willing to try).
I don't mean this as any sort of attack on you, Faint of Butt, but it would be great if people who make an appeal to linguistics recognized that language itself changes over time - that's the nature of the beast - and that English itself is awfully damned inconsistent in lots of ways. Without that it just sounds to me like the speaker either isn't really familiar with English, or else is cool with all those other inconsistencies but not this one because - I don't know why but it's hard not to ascribe some depressing possibilities. This is not saying either of these takes is accurate, but it is how it comes across as someone who is directly affected by the possibility of using "they" pronouns.
I get that grammar and linguistic consistency means a lot to many people, but being gendered correctly sure would mean a lot to me, too.
posted by DingoMutt at 7:30 AM on December 11, 2019 [13 favorites]
I wonder which group of people have to look up the word they. Instead of giving the percentage of increase, what about absolute number of lookup occurred?
posted by unigogo at 7:34 AM on December 11, 2019
posted by unigogo at 7:34 AM on December 11, 2019
Contemporary English usage has been literally aching for a gender neutral pronoun for ages now.
The thing is, since this is being added to the dictionary, it means that contemporary English has already had this word, in this usage, for ages. Dictionaries don't define a language, they just play catch up and really they aren't that good at it. It's funny to watch certain academic institutions or groups act as though they could ever hold the reins to language, try to literally rule over it, even though we all know there's another way to use literally to mean the opposite. The rule writers just have to keep up so they can maintain the veneer of sitting in the driver seat.
I just wish we could say "they is" when referring to a singular non-binary person instead of "they are." I respect everyone's genders and pronouns, but linguistic consistency also means a lot to me.
...wish granted! We could say that, people already do. What's stopping you? It will effectively communicate what you'd be trying to say.
posted by GoblinHoney at 7:34 AM on December 11, 2019 [4 favorites]
The thing is, since this is being added to the dictionary, it means that contemporary English has already had this word, in this usage, for ages. Dictionaries don't define a language, they just play catch up and really they aren't that good at it. It's funny to watch certain academic institutions or groups act as though they could ever hold the reins to language, try to literally rule over it, even though we all know there's another way to use literally to mean the opposite. The rule writers just have to keep up so they can maintain the veneer of sitting in the driver seat.
I just wish we could say "they is" when referring to a singular non-binary person instead of "they are." I respect everyone's genders and pronouns, but linguistic consistency also means a lot to me.
...wish granted! We could say that, people already do. What's stopping you? It will effectively communicate what you'd be trying to say.
posted by GoblinHoney at 7:34 AM on December 11, 2019 [4 favorites]
Some years ago when I was constructing a survey of children for what would become one of my first scientific papers, I insisted on using 'they' instead of 'he or she.' I am a cis white guy, but it was one of what I thought was a small act of being an ally. Wow, I got some much grief about that from other scientists working on that project. I pushed back, and, as the project leader, I won out. You know who I didn't hear anything about it from? Parents of the kids.
And this year of course "they" is officially in the APA handbook, so now everyone who told me I shouldn't do that can officially suck it.
posted by Lutoslawski at 8:35 AM on December 11, 2019 [10 favorites]
And this year of course "they" is officially in the APA handbook, so now everyone who told me I shouldn't do that can officially suck it.
posted by Lutoslawski at 8:35 AM on December 11, 2019 [10 favorites]
linguistic consistency also means a lot to me.
"'They' always takes a plural verb, regardless of whether 'they' is semantically singular or plural" is a consistent rule.
Your proposal ("'They' takes a singular or plural verb depending on whether 'they' is semantically singular or plural") would also be a consistent rule, but it is one among several consistent options, not the one and only consistent option.
The problem with the "grammar should match semantics" proposal is that it goes against well-established, centuries-long use for singular they in the cases where it's used to refer to a person of unknown gender, or a generic person. You're implicitly proposing that people use "they is" not only in reference to non-binary persons, but also in the other uses of singular they.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 9:09 AM on December 11, 2019 [5 favorites]
"'They' always takes a plural verb, regardless of whether 'they' is semantically singular or plural" is a consistent rule.
Your proposal ("'They' takes a singular or plural verb depending on whether 'they' is semantically singular or plural") would also be a consistent rule, but it is one among several consistent options, not the one and only consistent option.
The problem with the "grammar should match semantics" proposal is that it goes against well-established, centuries-long use for singular they in the cases where it's used to refer to a person of unknown gender, or a generic person. You're implicitly proposing that people use "they is" not only in reference to non-binary persons, but also in the other uses of singular they.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 9:09 AM on December 11, 2019 [5 favorites]
For people wanting to "try out" they/them pronouns, I tried it out on metafilter first, then when I liked it asked just my immediate family if they'd try it out for me for awhile. All of which has confirmed that I do like it. My daughter wrote a Christmas newsletter this year with my new name and pronouns, so that the whole extended family and friends I only see sometimes will know. (Many of whom will switch, some of whom will use the wrong name even despite seeing them weekly.)
And I can confirm that people talk about you, using your gender, way more than you probably realize if you are cis. I get misgendered several times a week and I'm not that keen on leaving the house.
posted by Margalo Epps at 9:17 AM on December 11, 2019 [9 favorites]
And I can confirm that people talk about you, using your gender, way more than you probably realize if you are cis. I get misgendered several times a week and I'm not that keen on leaving the house.
posted by Margalo Epps at 9:17 AM on December 11, 2019 [9 favorites]
Another little practical usage tidbit on the agreement question on "they are" vs "they is": the heavily attested usage of "there's" as not just a contraction of "there is" but also in practice a contracted form of "there are" in contexts where the subject is plural. The more consistent rendering would be always using "there're" in such cases, but utility wins out over consistency and "there's" is generally a little simpler to pronounce and to render and so ends up doing some double duty. (I might be biased about the frequency as an inveterate plural-there's writer but I'm certainly not alone.)
If that ended up as a strict analogue we'd expect some version of "they's" to become common practice alongside "they're" as a contraction of "they are/is"; whether that, and/or singular use of uncontracted "they is", will become more common over time in general English I don't know, because language change is complicated, but I'm really interested in general to see how pronominal stuff shifts over the next many years.
And I do expect we'll continue to see some change on this front, because one of the core things that makes language change complicated is that it is a reflection of social usage, and it will follow social change and needs. Language is a tool we use to navigate the world; we come up with ways to talk about the things we see and feel and need. When we don't have the expressive tool we need, we make up a new one or bend an old one or dig out a disused one and clean it off. No amount of academic formalization can control that process; that's putting the cart before the horse. Humans make language, language follows human needs; everything else is just documentation after the fact.
posted by cortex at 9:20 AM on December 11, 2019 [3 favorites]
If that ended up as a strict analogue we'd expect some version of "they's" to become common practice alongside "they're" as a contraction of "they are/is"; whether that, and/or singular use of uncontracted "they is", will become more common over time in general English I don't know, because language change is complicated, but I'm really interested in general to see how pronominal stuff shifts over the next many years.
And I do expect we'll continue to see some change on this front, because one of the core things that makes language change complicated is that it is a reflection of social usage, and it will follow social change and needs. Language is a tool we use to navigate the world; we come up with ways to talk about the things we see and feel and need. When we don't have the expressive tool we need, we make up a new one or bend an old one or dig out a disused one and clean it off. No amount of academic formalization can control that process; that's putting the cart before the horse. Humans make language, language follows human needs; everything else is just documentation after the fact.
posted by cortex at 9:20 AM on December 11, 2019 [3 favorites]
The problem with the "grammar should match semantics" proposal is that it goes against well-established, centuries-long use for singular they in the cases where it's used to refer to a person of unknown gender, or a generic person.
Isn't it usually the other way?
"I don't know who stole my sandwich, but they is in big trouble."
"I don't know who stole my sandwich, but they are in big trouble."
"Somebody comes through the neighborhood every day and they honk their horn every time they go by."
"Somebody comes through the neighborhood every day and they honks their horn every time they goes by."
('Somebody' takes a singular verb and 'they' takes the plural.)
But that doesn't mean we can't start using it differently for specific people.
"Chris eats here every day and they always leaves me a generous tip. But I would use whatever pronouns and verb-conjugations they prefers even if they were (subjunctive, not plural) a lousy tipper."
posted by straight at 10:09 AM on December 11, 2019
Isn't it usually the other way?
"I don't know who stole my sandwich, but they is in big trouble."
"I don't know who stole my sandwich, but they are in big trouble."
"Somebody comes through the neighborhood every day and they honk their horn every time they go by."
"Somebody comes through the neighborhood every day and they honks their horn every time they goes by."
('Somebody' takes a singular verb and 'they' takes the plural.)
But that doesn't mean we can't start using it differently for specific people.
"Chris eats here every day and they always leaves me a generous tip. But I would use whatever pronouns and verb-conjugations they prefers even if they were (subjunctive, not plural) a lousy tipper."
posted by straight at 10:09 AM on December 11, 2019
Even French (and I assume other romance languages) occasionally has gendered verbs. In the passe-composé, the past participle has gender agreement.
Anyway, the problem is really easy to fix in English. Indeed, it's already fixed, since singular they is already a thing. You almost certainly use it already, even if you think you don't.
As for "they is," it's already been pointed out repeatedly that we say "you are" even when "you" is clearly singular. Nobody's brain short-circuits.
posted by sjswitzer at 10:14 AM on December 11, 2019 [1 favorite]
Anyway, the problem is really easy to fix in English. Indeed, it's already fixed, since singular they is already a thing. You almost certainly use it already, even if you think you don't.
As for "they is," it's already been pointed out repeatedly that we say "you are" even when "you" is clearly singular. Nobody's brain short-circuits.
posted by sjswitzer at 10:14 AM on December 11, 2019 [1 favorite]
An entertaining way to get exposure to this is to play Borderlands 3 as Fl4k, who goes by the singular "they."
It mostly works, but ambiguity is definitely an issue, especially when the pronoun is used as a reference to something else in the sentence. eg. "Fl4k's pants will catch fire when they get too hot." (Is it Fl4k getting hot, or their pants?)
Which, looking at it now, the issue isn't so much a singular/plural thing as that "they" is a pronoun generally used for inanimate objects. Which isn't exactly a unique ambiguity, it's the kind of thing you have to derive from context all the time, so I suspect I just haven't yet developed the mental machinery to do that without conscious effort.
I'm happy that "they" is gaining traction, because it strikes me as the most likely non-binary pronoun to actually work. But the prescriptivist in me -- or, more precisely, the part of me that thinks language should strain for clarity -- is still hoping someone comes up with a better one.
posted by bjrubble at 10:54 AM on December 11, 2019
It mostly works, but ambiguity is definitely an issue, especially when the pronoun is used as a reference to something else in the sentence. eg. "Fl4k's pants will catch fire when they get too hot." (Is it Fl4k getting hot, or their pants?)
Which, looking at it now, the issue isn't so much a singular/plural thing as that "they" is a pronoun generally used for inanimate objects. Which isn't exactly a unique ambiguity, it's the kind of thing you have to derive from context all the time, so I suspect I just haven't yet developed the mental machinery to do that without conscious effort.
I'm happy that "they" is gaining traction, because it strikes me as the most likely non-binary pronoun to actually work. But the prescriptivist in me -- or, more precisely, the part of me that thinks language should strain for clarity -- is still hoping someone comes up with a better one.
posted by bjrubble at 10:54 AM on December 11, 2019
OK so guys (I have to stop doing that, I know it's a mixed gender audience, but it matches exactly the tone I have to convey, I just don't know what else to use)
Guys
I'm a translator from Mandarin to English
Do you guys even know
Do you even
What a game changer this is. This changes everything. The world will never be the same.
hashtag excited!!!!!
Mandarin does this stupid thing where they always omit the subject, and you're never sure who's doing what. And English wants a subject. There's a stupidly large percentage of verbs I encounter, verbs ok peeps (can I replace guys with peeps), they're verbs, they're a basic word class, this is multiples of many's of times a day, in which I have askings (that's a plural, according to multiples of my clients) about "uh, yo brah, who did this sentence?" Then my client goes "[name]", and then I go "does [name] have a gender?" and they're like "um, I dunno" and I'm like "[listen non-native English speaker there are lots of reasons I can't use 'it' or 'they' and yeah that counts for pets, 'agency' is a sociolinguistic concept that doesn't translate across lexologies, and no I'm not putting everything in passive voice, and no it's not a complete sentence without a subject, yes I know the rules about 'you', um yeah Chinese and English are in fact equally hard, did you see the spelling, you're paying me to do this stop inserting vague cultural dominance ranking and I'm getting a per word rate, you ain't moving me any quicker, if you don't have an answer I'm making it up, don't fight me on this, OK then go ask your cousin the English major, does 'cousin major' sound wrong? yeah it sounds like that in English, don't make me defend this, it's basic and real, I need a gender on these pronouns before I can proceed. Oh I'm sorry you don't like my tone but brain facts, native speaker (which you paid a premium for), accept it, you are biologically fated to fail in this argument, and now you owe me money, and I charge by the hour if it's consulting you want, how unpleasant does this have to get. You're wrong.]."
So
Dear every trans person ever,
Thank you for forcing Merriam-Webster to give me a single f**king link that will save years of my life. "Oh, you learned what about proper English, in your Chinese school, that is wrong about English (you remember Chinglish right), that you are not a professional or native speaker in, and that I am? Yeah. 'They' is proper. Look at [Merriam-Webster dictionary's word of the year]."
Thank you.
Signed,
Someone Who Just Gained Years of Life Back
posted by saysthis at 11:03 AM on December 11, 2019 [13 favorites]
Guys
I'm a translator from Mandarin to English
Do you guys even know
Do you even
What a game changer this is. This changes everything. The world will never be the same.
hashtag excited!!!!!
Mandarin does this stupid thing where they always omit the subject, and you're never sure who's doing what. And English wants a subject. There's a stupidly large percentage of verbs I encounter, verbs ok peeps (can I replace guys with peeps), they're verbs, they're a basic word class, this is multiples of many's of times a day, in which I have askings (that's a plural, according to multiples of my clients) about "uh, yo brah, who did this sentence?" Then my client goes "[name]", and then I go "does [name] have a gender?" and they're like "um, I dunno" and I'm like "[listen non-native English speaker there are lots of reasons I can't use 'it' or 'they' and yeah that counts for pets, 'agency' is a sociolinguistic concept that doesn't translate across lexologies, and no I'm not putting everything in passive voice, and no it's not a complete sentence without a subject, yes I know the rules about 'you', um yeah Chinese and English are in fact equally hard, did you see the spelling, you're paying me to do this stop inserting vague cultural dominance ranking and I'm getting a per word rate, you ain't moving me any quicker, if you don't have an answer I'm making it up, don't fight me on this, OK then go ask your cousin the English major, does 'cousin major' sound wrong? yeah it sounds like that in English, don't make me defend this, it's basic and real, I need a gender on these pronouns before I can proceed. Oh I'm sorry you don't like my tone but brain facts, native speaker (which you paid a premium for), accept it, you are biologically fated to fail in this argument, and now you owe me money, and I charge by the hour if it's consulting you want, how unpleasant does this have to get. You're wrong.]."
So
Dear every trans person ever,
Thank you for forcing Merriam-Webster to give me a single f**king link that will save years of my life. "Oh, you learned what about proper English, in your Chinese school, that is wrong about English (you remember Chinglish right), that you are not a professional or native speaker in, and that I am? Yeah. 'They' is proper. Look at [Merriam-Webster dictionary's word of the year]."
Thank you.
Signed,
Someone Who Just Gained Years of Life Back
posted by saysthis at 11:03 AM on December 11, 2019 [13 favorites]
I don’t have the original source for this (the name was covered up) but this is a quote I saw on a social media site:
posted by mr. manager at 11:04 AM on December 11, 2019 [3 favorites]
Every single piece on “they” as the MW dictionary word of the year has Sam Smith on the front of it. American, African, and Asian indigenous societies have had non-binary genders for millennia. White colonists forced the gender binary on the world, and now a white person is the symbol of non-binary gender. Whiteness is again centered as the neutral standard against which “progress” is measured.Good on Sam Smith for being open and public about their pronouns — I'm not blaming them for this happening — but this is an undeniable reality and it’s very frustrating to witness.
posted by mr. manager at 11:04 AM on December 11, 2019 [3 favorites]
We already have ways to cope with ambiguity when talking about people who use the same pronoun ("John helped Bill with his leaf blower"), so hopefully all the same tricks apply in the case of a mixed group that includes people going by they/them.
posted by quacks like a duck at 11:08 AM on December 11, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by quacks like a duck at 11:08 AM on December 11, 2019 [4 favorites]
I don’t have the original source for this (the name was covered up) but this is a quote I saw on a social media site:
Every single piece on “they” as the MW dictionary word of the year has Sam Smith on the front of it. American, African, and Asian indigenous societies have had non-binary genders for millennia. White colonists forced the gender binary on the world, and now a white person is the symbol of non-binary gender. Whiteness is again centered as the neutral standard against which “progress” is measured.
Good on Sam Smith for being open and public about their pronouns — I'm not blaming them for this happening — but this is an undeniable reality and it’s very frustrating to witness.
posted by mr. manager at 3:04 AM on December 12 [+] [!]
Sorry to be that guy, but hold up. Not the case for Chinese. The present version of Mandarin, which is essentially a 100-year old artificial language based on the Beijing dialect, is genderless spoken but not written. 他/她-ta1/ta1-him/her, 你/妳-ni3/ni3-male you/female you. The written distinction exists in him/her even after simplification by the Communist peeps who were so egalitarian that they changed the written script, and the written difference continues to exist in Taiwan, which is a modern democracy today, and I don't even want to get into the words for "I", which are hundreds and SO PROBLEMATIC historically, because of the habit of either using one's proper name or another noun/situationally selected pronoun to denote gender, subservience, or hierarchy, and that's not even talking about Chinese dialects. Spoken modern Mandarin is particularly pernicious for its ability to use "it" to refer to people, leading to lots and lots of dehumanizing puns. I would know.
No. Maybe partly a white colonialism thing, but not even close about Asian gender neutrality in language.
posted by saysthis at 11:21 AM on December 11, 2019 [3 favorites]
Every single piece on “they” as the MW dictionary word of the year has Sam Smith on the front of it. American, African, and Asian indigenous societies have had non-binary genders for millennia. White colonists forced the gender binary on the world, and now a white person is the symbol of non-binary gender. Whiteness is again centered as the neutral standard against which “progress” is measured.
Good on Sam Smith for being open and public about their pronouns — I'm not blaming them for this happening — but this is an undeniable reality and it’s very frustrating to witness.
posted by mr. manager at 3:04 AM on December 12 [+] [!]
Sorry to be that guy, but hold up. Not the case for Chinese. The present version of Mandarin, which is essentially a 100-year old artificial language based on the Beijing dialect, is genderless spoken but not written. 他/她-ta1/ta1-him/her, 你/妳-ni3/ni3-male you/female you. The written distinction exists in him/her even after simplification by the Communist peeps who were so egalitarian that they changed the written script, and the written difference continues to exist in Taiwan, which is a modern democracy today, and I don't even want to get into the words for "I", which are hundreds and SO PROBLEMATIC historically, because of the habit of either using one's proper name or another noun/situationally selected pronoun to denote gender, subservience, or hierarchy, and that's not even talking about Chinese dialects. Spoken modern Mandarin is particularly pernicious for its ability to use "it" to refer to people, leading to lots and lots of dehumanizing puns. I would know.
No. Maybe partly a white colonialism thing, but not even close about Asian gender neutrality in language.
posted by saysthis at 11:21 AM on December 11, 2019 [3 favorites]
No. Maybe partly a white colonialism thing, but not even close about Asian gender neutrality in language.
But you're only talking about Chinese. Are you asserting this isn't the case for any Asian culture ever? The person quoted said "Asian indigenous societies," it did not say "all Asian societies."
posted by the sockening at 11:53 AM on December 11, 2019 [2 favorites]
But you're only talking about Chinese. Are you asserting this isn't the case for any Asian culture ever? The person quoted said "Asian indigenous societies," it did not say "all Asian societies."
posted by the sockening at 11:53 AM on December 11, 2019 [2 favorites]
The dork in me is inspiring me to give more context. Here goes.
Back in the day, before communism and the Baihua movement, pretty much all Chinese dialects had a nasty habit of substituting actual nouns like 丫环/slave girl and 臣/public servant in place of actual pronouns. Actual pronouns always existed, but were rather rarely used in the courtesy system that prevailed, in such a way that they were to use the actual pronoun word to refer to someone was essentially insinuating that they were socially beneath you. Speaking to a social equal in a polite manner, your phrasing would be either a family term like "aunt/uncle" or "older/younger brother/sister" denoting both gender AND age hierarchy, or "[this] humble servant/decrepit old man/silly old housewife/lowly farmer thinks/wants..." etc. To a social superior, well, it gets worse. That, or they straight up invented, appropriated, or revived pronouns to denote a specific status relationship. Chinese history is littered with hundreds of examples.
In present times, this continues to a certain extent, in the way we in the US say "Mr. President" or call police "Officer" (and extends to certain professions like "doctor" and "teacher", but it's generally fine and not gendered). The family honorifics-as-pronoun also exists. HOWEVER, using direct pronouns to refer to people is no longer considered rude, which is very much a modern change and an entirely indigenous development (although where China is concerned, probably informed by Western notions of social equality, because they did a lot of reforming back then based on imitating Western social models; remember, they did away with the imperial system entirely by themselves - the 1910's were a time of serious change, including to the language, and it was definitely informed by the West as they found it at the time). They have also adapted/invented certain terms to be the social equivalents of "Mr." and "Ms.".
This much is as much as anyone who has studied Chinese to the point they can read historical documents can tell you. Beyond that, scholarship on the questions of how Western ideals influenced modern Chinese and current gender neutrality in Mandarin and other Chinese dialects seems to be missing. I don't suppose it's the kind of field of study that would win many friends.
It is certainly not a language with thousands of years of gender neutrality. The pronouns for different genders are homonyms at present. Beyond that...???????
posted by saysthis at 11:58 AM on December 11, 2019 [2 favorites]
Back in the day, before communism and the Baihua movement, pretty much all Chinese dialects had a nasty habit of substituting actual nouns like 丫环/slave girl and 臣/public servant in place of actual pronouns. Actual pronouns always existed, but were rather rarely used in the courtesy system that prevailed, in such a way that they were to use the actual pronoun word to refer to someone was essentially insinuating that they were socially beneath you. Speaking to a social equal in a polite manner, your phrasing would be either a family term like "aunt/uncle" or "older/younger brother/sister" denoting both gender AND age hierarchy, or "[this] humble servant/decrepit old man/silly old housewife/lowly farmer thinks/wants..." etc. To a social superior, well, it gets worse. That, or they straight up invented, appropriated, or revived pronouns to denote a specific status relationship. Chinese history is littered with hundreds of examples.
In present times, this continues to a certain extent, in the way we in the US say "Mr. President" or call police "Officer" (and extends to certain professions like "doctor" and "teacher", but it's generally fine and not gendered). The family honorifics-as-pronoun also exists. HOWEVER, using direct pronouns to refer to people is no longer considered rude, which is very much a modern change and an entirely indigenous development (although where China is concerned, probably informed by Western notions of social equality, because they did a lot of reforming back then based on imitating Western social models; remember, they did away with the imperial system entirely by themselves - the 1910's were a time of serious change, including to the language, and it was definitely informed by the West as they found it at the time). They have also adapted/invented certain terms to be the social equivalents of "Mr." and "Ms.".
This much is as much as anyone who has studied Chinese to the point they can read historical documents can tell you. Beyond that, scholarship on the questions of how Western ideals influenced modern Chinese and current gender neutrality in Mandarin and other Chinese dialects seems to be missing. I don't suppose it's the kind of field of study that would win many friends.
It is certainly not a language with thousands of years of gender neutrality. The pronouns for different genders are homonyms at present. Beyond that...???????
posted by saysthis at 11:58 AM on December 11, 2019 [2 favorites]
I wonder which group of people have to look up the word they. Instead of giving the percentage of increase, what about absolute number of lookup occurred?I was a copy editor for a legal journal, and one of my coworkers took offense every time I used the singular they for offices. The journal used M-W as their dictionary of choice, and I hope my very loud, very wrong coworker squirms every time she has to look up the singular they.
posted by pxe2000 at 12:19 PM on December 11, 2019 [1 favorite]
No love for "them?"
It's always "they/them" never "them/they." Poor "them" gets neglected.
posted by RobotHero at 12:20 PM on December 11, 2019
It's always "they/them" never "them/they." Poor "them" gets neglected.
posted by RobotHero at 12:20 PM on December 11, 2019
Lots of languages use zero or null copula for present tense be, such as "he/she/they at work"; we could also just drop the is/are distinction entirely!
posted by nakedmolerats at 12:25 PM on December 11, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by nakedmolerats at 12:25 PM on December 11, 2019 [1 favorite]
But you're only talking about Chinese. Are you asserting this isn't the case for any Asian culture ever? The person quoted said "Asian indigenous societies," it did not say "all Asian societies."
posted by the sockening at 3:53 AM on December 12 [+] [!]
Another Asian language that I do know about is Indonesian, which is a derivative of Malay pidgin that the entire giant island country of 17,000 islands decided to use as their national language at independence in 1965. At the time of adoption it was already widely spoken by most of the country as a second language, because it was basically a trade pidgin, and it certainly is a gender-neutral language. It is notoriously non-fussy.
It replaced things like Javanese, which... I don't speak Javanese, but historians do, and that, like Thai (but apparently a bit unlike Khmer? which seems like an interesting outlier in a lot of ways), have no grammatical gender, but had entirely different vocabularies based on social status and relationships. Chinese, with its system of pronoun invention/substitution, is mercifully simple by comparison. I think it's safe to assume they had plenty of gendering systems in the language that weren't pronoun-centered.
This tells me Manchu used vowel harmony (wtf?) to indicate gender.
Saying masculine and feminine genders are a persistent linguistic feature of Indo-European languages seems accurate. It exists in Pashto, Gujarati, Arabic, and Aramaic as much as German and English.
So...nooot...quiiiite...thousands of years of gender neutrality wiped out by Western colonialism. That's what I'm getting at.
I'm derailing, I'll go away now.
posted by saysthis at 12:27 PM on December 11, 2019
posted by the sockening at 3:53 AM on December 12 [+] [!]
Another Asian language that I do know about is Indonesian, which is a derivative of Malay pidgin that the entire giant island country of 17,000 islands decided to use as their national language at independence in 1965. At the time of adoption it was already widely spoken by most of the country as a second language, because it was basically a trade pidgin, and it certainly is a gender-neutral language. It is notoriously non-fussy.
It replaced things like Javanese, which... I don't speak Javanese, but historians do, and that, like Thai (but apparently a bit unlike Khmer? which seems like an interesting outlier in a lot of ways), have no grammatical gender, but had entirely different vocabularies based on social status and relationships. Chinese, with its system of pronoun invention/substitution, is mercifully simple by comparison. I think it's safe to assume they had plenty of gendering systems in the language that weren't pronoun-centered.
This tells me Manchu used vowel harmony (wtf?) to indicate gender.
Saying masculine and feminine genders are a persistent linguistic feature of Indo-European languages seems accurate. It exists in Pashto, Gujarati, Arabic, and Aramaic as much as German and English.
So...nooot...quiiiite...thousands of years of gender neutrality wiped out by Western colonialism. That's what I'm getting at.
I'm derailing, I'll go away now.
posted by saysthis at 12:27 PM on December 11, 2019
Ok one more to say anem0ne could be right about me missing the point, then I'm actually done.
Asian indigenous languages could be specifically referring to a lot of groups that aren't the dominant language groups in Asia, such as the Taiwanese indigenous groups. I don't know for sure, and I would have done better not assuming it meant "all Asian languages".
Also, "instead of engaging with that, you wrench it back to pointing about gendered features in asian languages, not nb/third gendered people in asian (indigenous) cultures. you're arguing right past what that tweet was saying." True. I didn't mean to remove the focus from the people in English, or in any language, because
you can bet that there were attempts to crush this out of existence when western influences began to arrive, and when japanese colonialism sought to extinguish koreanness as a concept, and continued until fairly recently as pro-western capitalism took hold in the south and eastern bloc stalinist dictatorship in the north.
Things like this are wrong on their own merits, independent of language, and Western imperialism certainly played a part in imposing a binary gender concept on the rest of the world. I didn't mean to come off as though I was defending or minimizing that. I apologize.
posted by saysthis at 12:51 PM on December 11, 2019
Asian indigenous languages could be specifically referring to a lot of groups that aren't the dominant language groups in Asia, such as the Taiwanese indigenous groups. I don't know for sure, and I would have done better not assuming it meant "all Asian languages".
Also, "instead of engaging with that, you wrench it back to pointing about gendered features in asian languages, not nb/third gendered people in asian (indigenous) cultures. you're arguing right past what that tweet was saying." True. I didn't mean to remove the focus from the people in English, or in any language, because
you can bet that there were attempts to crush this out of existence when western influences began to arrive, and when japanese colonialism sought to extinguish koreanness as a concept, and continued until fairly recently as pro-western capitalism took hold in the south and eastern bloc stalinist dictatorship in the north.
Things like this are wrong on their own merits, independent of language, and Western imperialism certainly played a part in imposing a binary gender concept on the rest of the world. I didn't mean to come off as though I was defending or minimizing that. I apologize.
posted by saysthis at 12:51 PM on December 11, 2019
Okay, so it's the people you find unnatural, not the language. That's on you.
I think this really cuts to the heart of what is actually going on. "Unnatural" is a pretty harsh and othering way to phrase it (and it was probably intended to be that way) but I think the general idea holds even for the well meaning allies who struggle with this stuff even if they would phrase it differently. If we wanted to be more charitable in our phrasing we might go with 'it's the people you find Queer✨, not the language'. We aren't just asking for you to use a different word—we are asking, in many cases, for you to fundamentally reconsider and reconfigure your conception of what gender is in order to hold space for us to exist within it. It's important to not gloss over this because for lots of folks, especially cis/het women and men who have never had much reason to think about gender stuff in depth, it's a lot to wrap your head around and come to terms with because re-conceptualizing gender in general means you must also re-evaluate your own gender and identity within that new system which can be fraught no matter who you are. I say this not to imply that it's too much for folks to handle or to excuse people from doing that work but because I think it's important that folks confront this discomfort directly and honestly instead of avoiding doing that work by projecting their discomfort onto something else like 'being a stickler about grammar'.
A related thought is how some folks keep coming back to 'ambiguity' as a perceived fault or drawback of singular 'they' and how that relates to the objections that I've heard from people about how ambiguous 'queer' can be as a label. When someone says they are queer is that a statement about their gender, their sexuality, or some combination of these things? Ambiguity is seen as a flaw by people who want clearly defined lines and systems but ambiguity can be liberatory for those who are hurt and constrained by those rigid systems. Sometimes ambiguity provides a minimal level of safety and plausible deniability. Consider how using 'they is' specifically for nonbinary people as some folks are suggesting plays out. If my spouse is talking about our weekend plans with an acquaintance and says "they are going on vacation with me" the phrasing is likely to slip by most cis/het listeners because it's already common to use an anonymizing 'they' in lots of contexts. I get gendered correctly while at the same time not being explicitly outed. If the 'they is' people had their way I no longer have that ambiguity to protect me.
If you are having trouble with adding singular they to your vocabulary specifically as the pronoun for nonbinary people here's what I suggest: Use the modes of speech where we are already comfortable with using singular 'they' to your advantage. Most folks are already so comfortable with using singular 'they' for anonymization that they don't even realize when they are doing it. Imagine you have a friend in the witness protection program—they were a whistleblower and now a lot of bad people want them dead. See how easy it is to obscure their gender when you know it's important that you don't leak any info about them? Apply the same principle to the folks who use they/them in your life. Imagine they are in the Gender Protection Program and if you leak information about their gender, especially if you slip and say their designated gender at birth or a gender they are frequently misgendered as it could come back and hurt them. You can also apply the same process to how we use 'they' for a person of unknown gender. "Someone forgot their umbrella, I hope they come back and get it soon" raises no objection for most people intuitive sense of grammar because it's implied by context that we don't know who forgot the umbrella. We say 'they' forgot it because we don't know their gender so the ambiguity feels appropriate. If we embrace the idea that gender isn't something that can be completely known in all cases it can help soothe that part of our brain that nags about 'why are you being ambiguous'. We can know someone's gender in the surface sense that they said "I'm queer, use they/them" but can we really know the whole of what that means? The Gender that can be spoken is not the eternal Gender. The name that can be named is not the eternal name. I'm offering these suggestions because I think they are both relatively easy to apply even if you aren't ready for some deep gender introspection but also because I think they can reinforce the primary lessons needed to get to that point of introspection. If I'm being honest I'm also offering these tips because I feel duty bound to include something more actionable than "destroy the binary, rebuild your conception of gender from the ground up" even though I think that's the real answer and because I'm fearful that any criticism of well meaning allies that isn't accompanied with enough caveats about how 'it must be hard for you too' and helpful tips on how to do better will undermine the little bit of good will and willingness to make accommodations that we've fought so hard for. It's exhausting but also, hopefully, useful to someone.
posted by metaphorever at 12:58 PM on December 11, 2019 [15 favorites]
I think this really cuts to the heart of what is actually going on. "Unnatural" is a pretty harsh and othering way to phrase it (and it was probably intended to be that way) but I think the general idea holds even for the well meaning allies who struggle with this stuff even if they would phrase it differently. If we wanted to be more charitable in our phrasing we might go with 'it's the people you find Queer✨, not the language'. We aren't just asking for you to use a different word—we are asking, in many cases, for you to fundamentally reconsider and reconfigure your conception of what gender is in order to hold space for us to exist within it. It's important to not gloss over this because for lots of folks, especially cis/het women and men who have never had much reason to think about gender stuff in depth, it's a lot to wrap your head around and come to terms with because re-conceptualizing gender in general means you must also re-evaluate your own gender and identity within that new system which can be fraught no matter who you are. I say this not to imply that it's too much for folks to handle or to excuse people from doing that work but because I think it's important that folks confront this discomfort directly and honestly instead of avoiding doing that work by projecting their discomfort onto something else like 'being a stickler about grammar'.
A related thought is how some folks keep coming back to 'ambiguity' as a perceived fault or drawback of singular 'they' and how that relates to the objections that I've heard from people about how ambiguous 'queer' can be as a label. When someone says they are queer is that a statement about their gender, their sexuality, or some combination of these things? Ambiguity is seen as a flaw by people who want clearly defined lines and systems but ambiguity can be liberatory for those who are hurt and constrained by those rigid systems. Sometimes ambiguity provides a minimal level of safety and plausible deniability. Consider how using 'they is' specifically for nonbinary people as some folks are suggesting plays out. If my spouse is talking about our weekend plans with an acquaintance and says "they are going on vacation with me" the phrasing is likely to slip by most cis/het listeners because it's already common to use an anonymizing 'they' in lots of contexts. I get gendered correctly while at the same time not being explicitly outed. If the 'they is' people had their way I no longer have that ambiguity to protect me.
If you are having trouble with adding singular they to your vocabulary specifically as the pronoun for nonbinary people here's what I suggest: Use the modes of speech where we are already comfortable with using singular 'they' to your advantage. Most folks are already so comfortable with using singular 'they' for anonymization that they don't even realize when they are doing it. Imagine you have a friend in the witness protection program—they were a whistleblower and now a lot of bad people want them dead. See how easy it is to obscure their gender when you know it's important that you don't leak any info about them? Apply the same principle to the folks who use they/them in your life. Imagine they are in the Gender Protection Program and if you leak information about their gender, especially if you slip and say their designated gender at birth or a gender they are frequently misgendered as it could come back and hurt them. You can also apply the same process to how we use 'they' for a person of unknown gender. "Someone forgot their umbrella, I hope they come back and get it soon" raises no objection for most people intuitive sense of grammar because it's implied by context that we don't know who forgot the umbrella. We say 'they' forgot it because we don't know their gender so the ambiguity feels appropriate. If we embrace the idea that gender isn't something that can be completely known in all cases it can help soothe that part of our brain that nags about 'why are you being ambiguous'. We can know someone's gender in the surface sense that they said "I'm queer, use they/them" but can we really know the whole of what that means? The Gender that can be spoken is not the eternal Gender. The name that can be named is not the eternal name. I'm offering these suggestions because I think they are both relatively easy to apply even if you aren't ready for some deep gender introspection but also because I think they can reinforce the primary lessons needed to get to that point of introspection. If I'm being honest I'm also offering these tips because I feel duty bound to include something more actionable than "destroy the binary, rebuild your conception of gender from the ground up" even though I think that's the real answer and because I'm fearful that any criticism of well meaning allies that isn't accompanied with enough caveats about how 'it must be hard for you too' and helpful tips on how to do better will undermine the little bit of good will and willingness to make accommodations that we've fought so hard for. It's exhausting but also, hopefully, useful to someone.
posted by metaphorever at 12:58 PM on December 11, 2019 [15 favorites]
The one time I've had a problem with the ambiguity is when I said I was paying for someone's drinks. Fortunately I was able to follow up with, "the one with the pink hair."
posted by RobotHero at 1:34 PM on December 11, 2019
posted by RobotHero at 1:34 PM on December 11, 2019
If you've ever read a Chinese novel via machine translation it's super interesting because the software has to try to guess gender from context and therefore characters assume gender based on the text around them.
posted by zymil at 10:59 PM on December 11, 2019
posted by zymil at 10:59 PM on December 11, 2019
I've always thought "they" was a great answer to the problem, mostly because I've used it extensively most of my life. I'm not sure why, but it always seemed more natural.
But just a couple of days ago I ran into an issue with it for the first time. I never really noticed how natural it seems in speech but how different it can be in print until I was reading a Wikipedia article (I don't remember which) about a historical gender neutral person and their involvement with groups of people and their partner. I was constantly having to go back and try and sort out what they were trying to say. "They moved to Paris" "They were arrested" etc. It was often not clear whether they were talking about the subject, the group, or the couple.
I'm betting that better writing could have solved this, many times simply using the persons name would have, but it seemed like the writer was struggling with it, or maybe they simply did a find and replace.
I'm curious to see what kind of writing styles develop from this to make things more clear.
posted by bongo_x at 11:07 PM on December 11, 2019
But just a couple of days ago I ran into an issue with it for the first time. I never really noticed how natural it seems in speech but how different it can be in print until I was reading a Wikipedia article (I don't remember which) about a historical gender neutral person and their involvement with groups of people and their partner. I was constantly having to go back and try and sort out what they were trying to say. "They moved to Paris" "They were arrested" etc. It was often not clear whether they were talking about the subject, the group, or the couple.
I'm betting that better writing could have solved this, many times simply using the persons name would have, but it seemed like the writer was struggling with it, or maybe they simply did a find and replace.
I'm curious to see what kind of writing styles develop from this to make things more clear.
posted by bongo_x at 11:07 PM on December 11, 2019
It was often not clear whether they were talking about the subject, the group, or the couple.
The same problem arises when writing about multiple men or multiple women. "Jim asked Bob to hand him his book." Whose book are we talking about, Jim's or Bob's?
People have learned to write around this problem. It's possible to do so with "they".
posted by Lexica at 9:57 AM on December 12, 2019 [3 favorites]
The same problem arises when writing about multiple men or multiple women. "Jim asked Bob to hand him his book." Whose book are we talking about, Jim's or Bob's?
People have learned to write around this problem. It's possible to do so with "they".
posted by Lexica at 9:57 AM on December 12, 2019 [3 favorites]
I was braced to flog this in a committee meeting this afternoon, and grateful to discover I didn't have to. A subcommittee has been rewriting some guidance documents, a process that has of course taken years, and the original document was so hoary that it referred to the Chair as "he" throughout. This had been changed some time ago to "he or she," and then with some nudging finally changed to "they." But then at a meeting not too long ago, various folks complained about referent ambiguities and grammatical infelicities, and in the next meeting, the "they"s had been replaced with repetitions of the referent: "the Chair shall ... and if the Chair ... then the Chair will ... etc". Because I am a wimp, I gave only a brief and meekly impassioned speech about reinstating the "they"s even if repeating the referent was arguably clearer, and was gearing up for another round this afternoon with Webster in my pocket -- only to discover the "they"s had been quietly reinstated. Yay.
posted by chortly at 6:49 PM on December 12, 2019
posted by chortly at 6:49 PM on December 12, 2019
« Older I Want To Die, But I Want To Eat Tteokbokki | “Almost everyone is gone now. Maybe at last it... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Thanks for posting, first place that I saw it. I just texted this news to my mother, who still stumbles over my partner's pronouns.
posted by wires at 3:42 PM on December 10, 2019 [12 favorites]