Subject: "he or she" - a grammatical problem solved
Posted: 2 Mar 86 23:37:15 GMT
Organization: Amdahl Corp, UTS Products Group
Keywords: he she they it
Summary: "they" can used in place of "he/she" (most times)

I am posting this in response to the re-arrisen controvery in net.nlang
about the use of 'they' and 'their' in such statements as: "Everyone
does as they think best" verses "Everyone does as he or she thinks best."

This is cross-posted to net.women as it might have some relevance to
those readers.  Followups are directed to net.nlang, however.

The following is from "American Tongue and Cheek: A Populist Guide
to Our Language" by Jim Quinn.

        The OED says of "their": "Often used in relation to a singular
        substantive or pronoun denoting a person, after 'each',
        'every', 'either', 'neither',  'no one', 'every one', etc.
        Also so used instead of 'his' or 'her', when the gender
        is inclusive or uncertain."  Also "they", "them", in
        the same way.

        Amongh users cited, in a tradition that stretches back to the
        fourteenth century, are Fielding, Goldsmith, Thackeray,
        Walter Bagehot, Shaw, Chesterfield, Rusking, and Richardson.

        In no case does the OED call this usage an error....  It
        does say the usage is "not favoured by grammarians."  But
        it refers the reader to grammarian Otto Jespersen and his
        defense of the usage.  Jesperson mentions that the usage
        can be found in Congreve, Defoe, Shelley, Austen, Scott,
        George Eliot, Stevenson, Zangwill, and Oliver Wendell
        Holmes, as well as Swift and Herber Spencer.

        Jespersen points out that if you try to put the sentence
        "Does anybody prevent you?" into another interrogative
        formula, begining "Nobody prevents you", then "you will
        perceive that 'Nobody prevents you, does he?' is too
        definite, and you will therefore say (as Thackeray
        does, 'The Story of Pendennis', II, p. 260), "Nobody
        prevents you, do they?"

        ...[T]he OED does not say that the use of "they" and
        "their" with singular antecedents is "a grammatical
        error."  The OED does not even say that the use is
        "considered ungrammatical" (which is the OED's way of
        warning readers that though there is nothing wrong
        with a usage, there are lots of uninformed people ...
        who think otherwise).

        The OED simply notes the usage as correct.

        I add From "The Evolution of the English Language", by
        George H. McKnight, still more evidents.  McKnight notes
        that Richard Grant White, in "Every-day English",
        complains about the fact that the British quite often
        combine "them" and "their" and "they" with singular
        antecedent, and adds:

                The kinds of "misuse" here condemned in
                American use, in British use are established
                not only by long tradition but by current
                practice.  The awkward necessity so often
                met with in American speech of using the
                double pronoun "his or her" is obviated by
                the "misused" of "their"....

        McKnight then gives a long list of quotes illustrating
        this point: Jane Austen, Thomas De Quincey, Matthew
        Arnold, Cardinal Newman, James Stephens, Frank Swinnerton,
        Lord Dunsany, Samuel Butler in "The Way of All Flesh",
        and A. E. (Jane Austen, "Mansfield Park":  "nobody put
        themselves out of the way"; James Stephens, "The Crock
        of Gold":  "everybody has to take their chance.")

        I have spent a long time on this single construction, but
        I want to be very plain about this.  If you go away from
        this book with none of your cherished opinions about good
        English changed, at least you must recognize there is NO
        justification for attacking the use of plural pronouns
        with singular antecedents when the sex is uncertain or
        mixed.  For example, says Bergen Evans:

                Only the word "his" would be used in "every
                soldier carried his own pack", but most people
                would say "their" rather than "his" in
                "everybody brought their own lunch".  And it
                would be a violation of English idiom to say
                "was he?" in "nobody was killed, were they?"
                The use of "they" in speaking of a single
                individual is not a modern derivation of classical
                English.  It is found in the works of many
                great writers including Malory ....

        And another list, all of which we have heard before.

        Again, from the OED: "The pronoun referring to 'every one'
        [sometimes written as one word] is often plural: the
        absence of a singular pronoun of common gender rendering
        this violation of grammtical concord sometimes necessary."
-- 
Gordon A. Moffett		...!{ihnp4,seismo,hplabs}!amdahl!gam

 ~ Ah don't need no diamond ring ~
 ~ Ah don't need no Cadillac car! ~
 ~ Ah just wanna drink my Lone Star beer ~
 ~ Down in the Lightnin' bar! ~



    Here's some more, giving actual quotes:

Newsgroups: net.nlang