From: roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Subject: Re: Problem with 'they' (etc) as 3p singular common gender pron.
Followup-To: roger@astro.princeton.edu
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 22:49:13 GMT

In article <1992Aug31.075821.13520@enea.se> sommar@enea.se (Erland Sommarskog) writes:
>Tom Christiansen (tchrist@convex.COM) writes:
>>From the keyboard of sommar@enea.se (Erland Sommarskog):
>>:Neither can we use "they" instead of "he", particularly
>>:is the instruction is to be read by non-native speakers.

>>Hogwash.  This usage should simply be included in lessons
>>on English.  It's used so much that not doing so leaves
>>non-native speakers handicapped.

>Drivel (to answer in the same manner). It's possible that
>it should be mentioned, but it's not up to you decide. And
>it is definitely not up to you say: "OK, I'm using this
>expression in this text which is to be read by non-native
>speakers, although this is a text where understanding is
>crucial, and I know that this expression will be confusing
>for them, because I think they should learn it in school."

Look, I'm sorry, but NO language is written for the comfort of non-
native speakers, except for textbooks.  And THEY have the purpose 
of enabling non-native speakers to understand the language.  

The generic-singular "they" is quite simply part of the language,
and *must* be included in any course in spoken (or written!) English,
just as other aspects of the structure of the language must be.  After
all, who teaches English with the expectation that the students will never
encounter natives?

>If your job is to write an operator's instruction it is
>your job to tell what the operator is to do, not that he
>can be of both sexes.

Um, *either* sex.   If they're of both sexes, they have bigger
problems than grammar.  8-)

On the other hand, should the writer signal that this is a traditionally
male job?  There are plenty of recastings that avoid both of these issues,
but there's no pretending that the issues aren't there.

> Or, if he is supposed to work alone,
>all of a sudden give the impression that there should be
>more than one of them at a time.

Which doesn't happen if one speaks the language.  After all, "when the
operator sees" is singular.  English is a fluid language; there's no
point in rewriting it to meet the standards of 50 different languages,
especially when there are 50 more whose speakers, if insufficiently
schooled in English, will misconstrue the sentence in other ways.

>The fact that it is not taught, maybe gives a clue that the
>usage is not so spread as you like to imagine, by the way.

Um, no.  Pedagogy is not a mirror of usage; it reflects pedagogic 
tradition, convenience, and the need to teach basics first -- but
not necessarily a scientific view of what the basics are.  Very little
English-for-foreigners is taught by linguists.

Suffice it to say that anyone who learns English by immersion will have
no trouble whatever with the g-s "they."  I just spent a long weekend
with a non-native houseguest; his previous time in America was long ago,
so his idiom was rusty, but he had no problem understanding structures,
incl. the g-s "They" that both my wife and I use (not to mention his
girlfriend, who's my sister.)

Roger