Really Easy Grammar – No. 39: Their His Pronoun Troubles
Posted: Sunday, February 04, 2007
by Bill Moore
Everyone should be sure of the rules when they use an indefinite pronoun. Or, maybe, everyone should be sure of the rules when he uses an indefinite pronoun. Or else, when he or she uses. . . And that’s the problem. For many years, the Mavens of Grammar have stated , unequivocally, that indefinite pronouns (that includes all the pronouns with "-one," “-body," and “-thing" at the end as well as “either," “neither," and “each") are always singular and, therefore must always be mated with singular definite pronouns like “he," “she," “his," and “hers" and never with the plural forms “they" or “their."
OK, then, the grammar purists will say, the way to avoid the problem is to avoid indefinite pronouns all together. Write instead, “All employees above the level of department manager have their own parking spaces." There. Problem solved. Except it isn’t because the solution is based on a faulty premise. Who said that indefinite pronouns are always singular? There are those among us who believe that “everybody" indicates a large group of bodies, “ all the bodies," rather than “every single body." Others of us will argue that “they" is just as good a gender neutral pronoun as “he." Who’s to say? Well, you could check with Jane Austin, Will Shakespeare, Walt Whitman, Oscar Wilde, or the King James Bible just to name a few of the dozens who share this latter opinion.
In fact, the “singular their" construction goes back about 700 years and managed to co-exist with the “neuter masculine" construction for most of that time. Nobody seemed to be much concerned until late in the 1700’s or early 1800’s. That’s when the “prescriptive" grammarians began to attack in earnest because “singular their" didn’t fit with the “logic" of the Latin grammar they were forcing English into. So, it became bad grammar in the same arbitrary way that splitting infinitives and putting a preposition at the end of a phrase did.
The situation is getting a lot of attention currently. There are whole Web sites that address almost nothing else. Each of them contains definitive proof of the validity of its particular position. Unfortunately, the proofs from the various sites prove opposing opinions. And even though there’s been considerable progress in the last decade or so in loosening the rule, there’s been very little agreement on a standard usage. Teachers, editors, and proofreaders still disagree. Grammatical experts disagree among themselves. Noted literary figures disagree—sometimes even with themselves. So, the onus still falls on the writer (and as it’s a particularly large onus, that can be pretty painful).
By the way, if you plan to take the “his/her" route, be careful. In formal writing, a lot of editors don’t like this construction. Even in informal writing, it can be taken as either laziness or lack of a clear understanding of grammar. If you have to go this way, at least use “his or her." It’s still a waffle, but it shows that the reader has a choice. And please don’t use “his and her." That only makes sense if you intend to indicate that there are two people.
Sorry to have to say this, but if you’ve read this far hoping I’d give you a definitive solution to the problem, you’re going to be disappointed. I don’t know the answer either, but I’ll tell you how I handle it. I do what the situation calls for. If the writing assignment is for someone who insists on strict adherence to “correct" usage, I use a singular pronoun—male or female as the sense of the sentence calls for—with an indefinite pronoun. If I’m writing for someone who wants the copy to read more like the way people speak, I use a plural form where it fits and a singular masculine or feminine pronoun where it makes the most sense. When I can get away with it, I avoid the problem and use a plural construction. When you’re writing for others to read, whether for pleasure or profit, it becomes a situation where everyone has to decide which course to take for (his, her, their, his/her, his or her) self (selves).
This Article has been viewed 5,405 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (3 total)i want examples of some editing and omitingwords 4 practiceIs it just me or does anyone else find it bizarre that, in a forum about grammar, we have someone posting lower case "i", "omitingwords" and "4" instead of "for"? That's just lazy and unnecessary in my humble opinion.
Yes, to the degree that someone shares the grammatical problem with me. I am really tired of the rules which lead to dilemmas with no solutions. "a person would act as if it were their" is completely clear. Picking away at the number business needs to stop.
In a Community College where I taught, the above structure was heresy. Why? Well, because that structure is incorrect, period. What nonsense! So, I do believe, that I will begin using it, timidly but surely, in my writing.
Our language wasn't constructed, of course, but evolved from use, from practicality. The rules in this instance ignore this simple situation. Thanks for pointing out that historically "'they' is just as good a gender neutral pronoun as 'he.'"
Now tackle the contractive form of "I am not" because I am't going to.
Michael CarterThanks, Michael, for the high-five. I mostly tutor now, and overcoming the stupid 'rules' still be taught in high school and college is a major part of my work. But, as you say, language development is evolutionary and seldom revolutionary. The consolation is that the 'strict rule' grammarians can't live forever, and evolution can. Bill (moore/dot/fastforward/at/gmail.com)
BTW, the silliness of am't is possibly why ain't was created and considered perfectly all right at one time. My personal thorn-in-the-side at the moment is 'alright' being all right, which it ain't.
As one who likes logic and rules, I favour the use of an appropriate pronoun where possible. However, I find myself agreeing with Bill's summary of how he (note: not they!) would apply the rules. Where I have a problem with the use of a plural as an indefinite singular is in situations where the gender is actually known (as in my use if "he" rather than "they" above). Sadly, if we do not teach some rules, there will be an ill-educated majority who simply become careless or lazy and this, in time, beomes accepted as normal usage. In allowing this to happen we are all contributing to a degradation of the language. Not all "evolution" is necessarily for the best and I cannot allow myself to support such "dumbing down".
Oh, and for those who think I'm over-reacting, just take a look at two extremely popular games on Facebook, namely Farmville and Cityville. These issue messages such as "Dave is building a Greenhouse and needs their friends to help send them construction materials!" (Yes, that's exactly as the message appeared. Should it have been two sentences? Who knows what the programmers had in mind.) My point is, the programmers already knew the gender (this is requested when starting the game for the first time, and each player's avatar reflects this) so appropriate use could easily have been made of male or female pronouns. Presumably they were simply too lazy or ignorant to do so, or, more likely in my opinion, they simply couldn't care less. Consequently, millions of kids now see this ugly construction and will undoubtedly follow suit, bringing into common usage something that makes many of us physically and mentally wince at its sight.
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.