Since we're already talking about language, let's talk about singular they.

[conuly]

Singular they, singular they.

I am of two minds when it comes to singular they.

If I'm talking to somebody who thinks singular they is a sign that we'll all be grunting in another generation, and that it's a sin right up there with theft, murder, and lying? Then I'm all "Hey, Shakespeare* did it, I'm okay with it, that settles it".

And really, for the most part, that's how I feel anyway. Even when not talking to anybody! Singular they neatly fits a lexical gap**, and most of the time it's not even noticeable in your speech unless your listener is paying really, really close attention for some perverse reason.

But stylistically, sometimes singular they really is a terrible option, and actually kinda sucks. People pick it because they don't want to say "he or she", which is fair. "He or she" sounds really clunky, especially if you have to say it more than once. But there is another choice! If you're doing something that will be published in any way (that is, not just talking to your friends), think when editing and ask yourself "Can I avoid having to make this choice altogether? Will this sentence be better if I just recast it to avoid singular they?"

For example, Evangeline has to do a book report. As the sheet says, "Each child will make their own mask."

And that sentence just jumped out at me and bugged me the first time I read it. I know what it is, too - it's the way that "their" is sandwiched in between "each" and the non-plural "mask", when obviously the teacher is going to end up with several masks.

Do I think it's okay grammatically? Yeah, certainly in my dialect.

Do I think it's the best way to write that sentence? No. I think it sounds awkward that way. Singular they is supposed to help us avoid awkward!

And even if others disagree, the last thing any first grade teacher needs to do is have some parents going "Huh, that woman doesn't even know how to speak Good English^TM! I must complain!" (And somebody will. I myself am very concerned that she may not know the difference between its and it's, but we all make typos. People? Please, just proofread!)

It would've been better to write "The children will make their own masks" or "Each child will make a mask". These are sentences that sound natural, and avoid using a disputed pronoun.

As another example, one which really bothered my mom when it came out, there was a commercial once that started off "A parent wants what's best for their child". And that just bugged her. She said it sounded like they started off with "a mother/her", decided that's sexist, and changed it without thinking about it. "Parents want" would sound better, she thought, and she's probably right.

So, yeah. The question isn't "What do I say instead of that?", it's "Okay, this sentence doesn't work with singular they, let's see if I can recast it entirely so I can avoid it altogether".

* Shakespeare and a lot of other respected writers over several centuries, actually.

** We're reading Five Children and It right now, and Nesbit's solution when talking about the children is to use "it" where I'd put in a "they". "Everyone washed its hands" and so on. Very odd to me!

Comments

[chaos_by_design]

My take on singular they is even if it is incorrect (not saying it is, more saying I don't have the expertise to know for sure one way or another), languages change over time, and often something that starts out as non-standard or "incorrect" winds up being standard usage if enough people start using it. And that we have a real need for a gender-neutral, singular term, and it's easier to use "they" which is already part of our language than to try to convert people over to something like xe/hir/sie/etc.

[conuly]

Not to mention, the way I've seen people using invented pronouns (which all look silly, but that can't be helped when you're using unusual letters like x at the start of them!) doesn't exactly match up with how people use singular they. There's some overlap, but it's like comparing color words between languages - even when you think you have it figured out, they still don't mesh.

[mc776]

Dates back to Chaucer, people like bullshit gotcha grammar rules to feel superior, no actual linguist considers it an error, it fills a lexical gap. Any suggestion of incorrectness is either limited to a very specific scope or worthy of no more intellectual respect than intelligent design and blood libel.

That said... I have, honest to Lex Luthor, actually written sentences that were genuinely ambiguous whether the singular they was referring to one party or both in a contract. But even then it only really seemed to come up in drafting obligations that were joint or mutual anyway and the ambiguity was immaterial at worst. I've yet to see it be a problem for anyone who isn't specifically making it a problem.

[conuly]

Indeed, wasn't they borrowed as a singular anyway?

But my complaint about this specific sentence is that to me it reads as clunky. It certainly wasn't ambiguous, I just found the grouping of "singular - singular they - singular" to be a little awkward.

[mc776]

Hmm... I see the basis for the objection though personally I read that without any problem.


But then even this is fine to me:

"If a child, upon setting off to build their mask, discovers that they lack sufficient materials to build a large enough mask for their own head, they may requisition further supplies to their teacher in Form 17 of Schedule G.52, provided that their teacher confirms that they or their guardian _____ executed a statutory declaration of income in the form approved by the principal."

Where the blank can be "have" or "has" (though I tend to favour "have" there).


EDIT: Edit removed, example was not ambiguous for the reasons I thought it was.

[leora.livejournal.com]

I often do reset sentences, although in your first example, "Each child will make their own mask.", neither of your proposals had the same meaning that I inferred from the sentence given. To me, that sentence implies that this is a task for each child to do on their own. "The children will make their own masks" implies that this is a task for the children to do. How many masks will be made (that it is one per child) is not stated, and whether each child is doing it individually is also not stated, but it is clearly the children's task to make sure that their masks get made. "Each child will make a mask" is closer in meaning to the original, but it drops the purpose of the masks (that the mask made is for the child), and also the requirement of individuality, making it sound more okay if they help each other (which well may be the case, but if it were cheating to do so, then the first sentence conveys that better).

However, I will not justify "A parent wants what's best for their child", since I can think of no reason for that to not be changed to plural, which would be much less clunky. I often rework the singular into the plural for sentences like that.

[leora.livejournal.com]

Oops, and meant to mention... I was told that in the Victorian era it was normal to refer to all young children with "it" unless you happened to know the child's sex. But "it" was considered polite, appropriate, and not dehumanifying. However, as this has seriously fallen out of practice, many people find "it" offensive when used to refer to a human (and sometimes even when used to refer to animals, depending on the circumstance).

[conuly]

Yes, I know that actually :)

Sometimes people when reading older books whine about this on Amazon about how much the author CLEARLY hates children because they refer to a stranger's baby or even an unborn child as "it". And you can't talk sense into these people! There are no differing norms and choices, only loving or hating children.

[eofs.livejournal.com]

My partner does this, referring to our nephew as it. He's a native German speaker and tends to be a bit lazy with his every day English, translating straight from German. Since das Baby is neuter, it's grammatically correct (and perfectly normal) in German to refer to a baby as it. I'm trying to get him to understand that in English it doesn't come across so well and that people who don't know him, and his linguistic quirks, might take it the wrong way.

[conuly]

Given that it's a homework assignment, I don't think anybody would think that the children were expected to make masks in groups.

However, yes, I do think the "their own" part was in there to help remind parents to keep their grubby mitts OFF their kids' work! But there already is a reminder about that at the top of the handout.

*thinks*

How about "Your child will make a mask" instead?

[leora.livejournal.com]

Well, then that works or your second revision. Even if a revision changes the flavor a little, that isn't always an unacceptable cost for a smoother sound. One sentence doesn't have to convey everything, and if the grubby mitts part is conveyed elsewhere, then that is okay. I hadn't realized it was a take home project (as opposed to a notification about a project the kids would be doing), but that does make the context much clearer, so that objection is removed. And they are mild issues anyhow. Your revisions work. I just wanted to point out they don't come across quite the same, and sometimes a choice is chosen for its emphasis of some particular point. And often a choice is chosen because the writer didn't think about different possibilities and what it emphasizes is somewhat random.

[oloriel.livejournal.com]

"It" doesn't feel odd to me, but that's very likely because in German, the word for "child" is grammatically neutral anyway - so it's perfectly common to use "it" (in fact, using "he" or "she" would be extremely odd).
That said, "Everyone washed its hands" still looks wrong to me because I'd consider "everyone" as a sort of collective word. So here I'd feel "Everyone washed their hands" to be the appropriate choice.
With something like "Each child will make their own mask", on the other hand, I see the point but shudder inwardly. I'd feel less unhappy with "Each child will make its own mask" - but native speakers of English may feel that it dehumanises children or somesuch, I dunno. Must be a reason why they chose "they" when there's a perfectly useful (and grammatically correct) neutral singular.

As for "a parent" vs. "parents": Clearly someone is worried that single parents are going to complain because they feel left out. Never mind that with a generalised statement like that, "parents" might refer to every father and/or mother, single or otherwise, in the state, country or world...

Ah, language. Never stop being confusing.

[pne.livejournal.com]

Once people get used to the construction, it does help us to avoid awkward. FWIW, "Each child will make their own mask" sounds just fine to me.

Perhaps you're still in a transitional stage where you use singular-they in some cases but not in all cases where a pronoun can be used.

And even if others disagree, the last thing any first grade teacher needs to do is have some parents going "Huh, that woman doesn't even know how to speak Good EnglishTM! I must complain!" (And somebody will.

You have a point, unfortunately.

It would've been better to write "The children will make their own masks" or "Each child will make a mask". These are sentences that sound natural, and avoid using a disputed pronoun.

I agree with Leora that neither of those means what the original means.

[redbird]

It's odd, because in a group that was known to be single-gender (like a Girl Scout troop), I don't think "each child will make her own mask" would seem odd; "they" has that echo of pluralness.

Plurals often work (I do a bunch of this in my own work, writing examples and questions that avoid gendering the hypothetical "student" or "scientist" or "engineer"), but not always.

The one bit that jars on me sometimes is the reflexive: singular "they" sounds more natural to me than "themself." And that comes up sometimes, because one place I use singular "they" is as the preferred pronoun for a friend (when I'm talking about them online).

[l33tminion]

"Each child will make their own mask" sounds fine to me. So does "a parent wants what's best for their child".

Wonder if singular "you" ever went through a similar transitional state where people thought who thought it was okay still thought it sounded awkward in some sentences.

[oloriel.livejournal.com]

Sort of, yes, and that "oddness" was used intentionally. When someone who was of higher rank than another person used "you" to that person, for instance, you'd know something odd was going on. There are some instances in extant literature of the late Middle English and Early Modern English period that illustrate this.

Of course, that "oddness" didn't really have anything to do with the singular/plural issue, but rather with levels of politeness...