Based on standard english practice, I address someone who's gender I do not know, using masculine gender. I assume others do the same. There is a page, http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiWomen, which can be utiliZed if you wish to be identified as female. It doesn't appear that most women care though.
---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: erik_moeller@gmx.de (Erik Moeller) Reply-To: wikien-l@wikipedia.org Date: 16 Jul 2003 21:13:00 +0200
sannse-
Anthere asked:
You a woman Sannse ?
Yep. Despite the number of kind e-mails I get offering to enlarge my penis ;)
I haven't bothered to correct those on Wikipedia who have presumed I'm male - it hasn't bothered me and doesn't seem worth the typing. But since seeing you comment on this I've realised you are right - we have a tendency to presume anyone without an obviously female name is male. And I do it myself all the time. I can't think of a single contributor with a gender-neutral name that I picture as female (unless they have identified themselves as such).
Well, I've been thought to be a woman several times. Since my username is "Eloquence", perhaps that's a good sign. ;-)
Regards,
Erik _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
At 03:38 PM 7/16/03 -0400, Erik wrote:
Based on standard english practice, I address someone who's gender I do not know, using masculine gender. I assume others do the same. There is a page, http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiWomen, which can be utiliZed if you wish to be identified as female. It doesn't appear that most women care though.
Standard English practice is to address people--whether I know their gender or not--using the second person singular, which is ungendered.
What I think you're actually saying is that you *refer to* people whose gender you don't know as "he". This has never been entirely standard, and will annoy quite a few people at this epoch. Using full names, "they", and workarounds like "that person", is probably a better idea.
Vicki Rosenzweig wrote:
What I think you're actually saying is that you *refer to* people whose gender you don't know as "he". This has never been entirely standard, and will annoy quite a few people at this epoch. Using full names, "they", and workarounds like "that person", is probably a better idea.
I think if you put a dozen grammarians in a room and ask them about this, you're going to end up with a fight. =] I do think it was standard to use "he" at one time -- you'd hardly find anything else in 19th-century writing -- but it's not any longer. Many people also dislike "they", because it's using plural forms (both the plural pronoun, and to be consistent, plural verbs) to refer to a single person. Those people seem to be losing that particular battle though.
As of late I've noticed in much academic writing a preferred solution has been to simply use "she". It's not really any better than using "he" as far as correctness goes, but people are less likely to complain about it being sexist, so it has taken off especially in fields that have traditionally been criticized for excluding women, such as philosophy and computer science. I do find it somewhat jarring when I read it though, as I'm used to "she" being used to refer to people who are actually female, so it takes me a minute to realize from context that it's being used as a generic pronoun. Sort of along the same lines, but not particularly jarring, is using female examples when making up fictional people to explain a point. I've also noticed somewhat humorously that it's become common when making up fictional dialogues in philosophy to make the "reasonable" side be female, and make the "wrong" side be male. I suppose doing it in the reverse would lead to charges of sexism.
In any case that was a bit of rambling, but I find this all very interesting.
-Mark
Delirium wrote:
Vicki Rosenzweig wrote:
What I think you're actually saying is that you *refer to* people whose gender you don't know as "he". This has never been entirely standard, and will annoy quite a few people at this epoch. Using full names, "they", and workarounds like "that person", is probably a better idea.
Many people also dislike "they", because it's using plural forms (both the plural pronoun, and to be consistent, plural verbs) to refer to a single person. Those people seem to be losing that particular battle though.
well "you" is singular and plural. So why not another pronoun?
As of late I've noticed in much academic writing a preferred solution has been to simply use "she". It's not really any better than using "he" as far as correctness goes, but people are less likely to complain about it being sexist,
well the trick with using "she" is to use "she" AND "he" approximately equally. Just pick one at random!
I do find it somewhat jarring when I read it though, as I'm used to "she" being used to refer to people who are actually female, so it takes me a minute to realize from context that it's being used as a generic pronoun.
now you know how female readers feel.... ;-)
--- Vicki Rosenzweig vr@redbird.org wrote:
At 03:38 PM 7/16/03 -0400, Erik wrote:
Based on standard english practice, I address
someone who's gender I do
not know, using masculine gender. I assume others
do the same. There is
which can be utiliZed if
you wish to be identified as female. It doesn't
appear that most women
care though.
Standard English practice is to address people--whether I know their gender or not--using the second person singular, which is ungendered.
What I think you're actually saying is that you *refer to* people whose gender you don't know as "he". This has never been entirely standard, and will annoy quite a few people at this epoch. Using full names, "they", and workarounds like "that person", is probably a better idea.
-- Vicki Rosenzweig vr@redbird.org http://www.redbird.org
Tactic that some wikipedians don't use AT ALL. Unfortunately. I don't like it when someone repeatedly talk about me saying "he claims this". Imho, this is not neutral.
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com
This may be taking it over the edge, but my female English teacher in high school taught me this: The correct grammatical way to refer to someone of unknown sex as he. When asked if this bothered her, she said "no, it is just proper English." While I personally agree with this philosophy, it is quite evident that some people in the pedia think it is sexist, and are bothered by it. I will make every effort to address someone by their true sex, or use their name, but when it come down to it, I will use the grammar I was taught, since there will never be a consensus on this, since any method is non-NPOV.
-- Michael Becker
-----Original Message----- From: wikien-l-admin@wikipedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-admin@wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Vicki Rosenzweig Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 2.30 To: wikien-l@wikipedia.org Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] WikiWomen (was Partial deletion)
At 03:38 PM 7/16/03 -0400, Erik wrote:
Based on standard english practice, I address someone who's gender I do not know, using masculine gender. I assume others do the same. There
is
a page, http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiWomen, which can be utiliZed
if
you wish to be identified as female. It doesn't appear that most women
care though.
Standard English practice is to address people--whether I know their gender or not--using the second person singular, which is ungendered.
What I think you're actually saying is that you *refer to* people whose gender you don't know as "he". This has never been entirely standard, and will annoy quite a few people at this epoch. Using full names, "they", and workarounds like "that person", is probably a better idea.
On Thursday, July 17, 2003, at 09:58 PM, Michael Becker wrote:
This may be taking it over the edge, but my female English teacher in high school taught me this: The correct grammatical way to refer to someone of unknown sex as he. When asked if this bothered her, she said "no, it is just proper English." While I personally agree with this philosophy, it is quite evident that some people in the pedia think it is sexist, and are bothered by it. I will make every effort to address someone by their true sex, or use their name, but when it come down to it, I will use the grammar I was taught, since there will never be a consensus on this, since any method is non-NPOV.
Well, I suppose there's always this...
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sie_and_hir
I'm not sure that I've seen this in actual use more than twice, though :-)
Why are people so unwilling to use "they" to mean "he/she"?
-----
Dante Alighieri dalighieri@digitalgrapefruit.com
"The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of great moral crisis." -Dante Alighieri, 1265-1321
Dante Alighieri wrote:
Why are people so unwilling to use "they" to mean "he/she"?
Well, to some people it seems ungrammatical, since "they" hasn't been used as a singular pronoun until very recently, so you end up with the "wrong" verb tenses. So when you say something like "They fall asleep as they watch TV," it sounds very much like you're talking about multiple people.
-Mark
At 12:09 AM 7/18/2003, you wrote:
Dante Alighieri wrote:
Why are people so unwilling to use "they" to mean "he/she"?
Well, to some people it seems ungrammatical, since "they" hasn't been used as a singular pronoun until very recently, so you end up with the "wrong" verb tenses. So when you say something like "They fall asleep as they watch TV," it sounds very much like you're talking about multiple people.
-Mark
Well, the OED disagrees with them. The OED not only lists this as a definition for "they":
Often used in reference to a singular noun made universal by every, any, no, etc., or applicable to one of either sex (= 'he or she')
but also gives the first recorded usage of the above sense as 1526. Personally, I think that gives the usage sufficient grammatical "correctness".
----- Dante Alighieri dalighieri@digitalgrapefruit.com
"The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of great moral crisis." -Dante Alighieri, 1265-1321
Delirium wrote:
So when you say something like "They fall asleep as they watch TV," it sounds very much like you're talking about multiple people.
Not really, because you wouldn't use it without establishing a context first. Thus something like: The student fell asleep as they were watching TV. or: As for the student, they fell asleep as they were watching TV. which is unambiguous.
I really don't know why I said this, because after all that happened with RK and stuff, the least I want on this list now is a "singular they yes or no" debate, but ...
Timwi
At 12:09 AM 7/18/03 -0700, Delirium wrote:
Dante Alighieri wrote:
Why are people so unwilling to use "they" to mean "he/she"?
Well, to some people it seems ungrammatical, since "they" hasn't been used as a singular pronoun until very recently,
Your definition of "very recently" must include the early 19th century, then: Jane Austen used "they" as a singular pronoun. In fact, singular they is older than "generic he".
so you end up with the "wrong" verb tenses. So when you say something like "They fall asleep as they watch TV," it sounds very much like you're talking about multiple people.
And when you say "Ask your doctor what he thinks" it sounds entirely as though you're talking about a man, whereas it's entirely likely that you're talking about a woman.
Neither is perfect.
Vicki Rosenzweig wrote:
Well, to some people it seems ungrammatical, since "they" hasn't been used as a singular pronoun until very recently,
Your definition of "very recently" must include the early 19th century, then: Jane Austen used "they" as a singular pronoun. In fact, singular they is older than "generic he".
Yes, I was aware of Jane Austen, but she was very much an exception -- the vast majority of writers used "generic he" throughout the 18th and 19th centuries, and through most of the 20th. I think Samuel Taylor Coleridge may be the one other notable exception.
It is also true, as Dante Alighieri pointed out, that "singular they" was used in the 16th century and through some of the 17th. But medieval English usage is hardly a good guide for modern English usage.
so you end up with the "wrong" verb tenses. So when you say something like "They fall asleep as they watch TV," it sounds very much like you're talking about multiple people.
And when you say "Ask your doctor what he thinks" it sounds entirely as though you're talking about a man, whereas it's entirely likely that you're talking about a woman.
Neither is perfect.
That's certainly true.
I personally try to avoid using either construction, rewording sentences when possible, because "generic he" strikes me as old-fashioned, while "singular they" strikes me as overly colloquial.
-Mark
Im surprised nobody has mentioned Sie, Hir, It, not to mention the awesome Spivak pronouns:
Spivak : E laughed I hit em Eir face bled I am eirs E shaves emself
Spivak (alternative): Ey laughed I hit Em Eir face bled I am Eirs Ey shaves Eirself
Sources: http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-neutral_pronoun http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sie_and_hir http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spivak_pronoun http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/It (pronoun)
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com
--- steve vertigo utilitymuffinresearch@yahoo.com wrote:
Im surprised nobody has mentioned Sie, Hir, It, not to mention the awesome Spivak pronouns:
Spivak : E laughed I hit em Eir face bled I am eirs E shaves emself
Spivak (alternative): Ey laughed I hit Em Eir face bled I am Eirs Ey shaves Eirself
Sources: http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-neutral_pronoun http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sie_and_hir http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spivak_pronoun http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/It (pronoun)
okokokokok
please, call me "he" rather than using a language I can not understand :)
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com
--- Anthere anthere6@yahoo.com wrote:
okokokokok [translation: nyuk, nyuk..]
please, call me "he" rather than using a language I can not understand :)
YES SIR!
-S- :)
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com
--- steve vertigo utilitymuffinresearch@yahoo.com wrote:
--- Anthere anthere6@yahoo.com wrote:
okokokokok [translation: nyuk, nyuk..]
please, call me "he" rather than using a language
I
can not understand :)
YES SIR!
-S- :)
I may read that yes "soeur", which would be fine sv ;-)
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com
I think you just coined Law, Eric -- Moller's Law : As a gender discussion continues the probablility that an appeal for the use of Spivac pronouns will approach one. At such a point, the discussion is forfeited and must cease on the spot.
:D-s-
--- Erik Moeller erik_moeller@gmx.de wrote:
steve-
Im surprised nobody has mentioned Sie, Hir, It,
not to
mention the awesome Spivak pronouns:
God, someone had to bring up Spivak pronouns. I think the discussion usually ends at this point.
Regards,
Erik _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com
At 10:06 AM 7/18/2003, you wrote:
Yes, I was aware of Jane Austen, but she was very much an exception -- the vast majority of writers used "generic he" throughout the 18th and 19th centuries, and through most of the 20th. I think Samuel Taylor Coleridge may be the one other notable exception.
It is also true, as Dante Alighieri pointed out, that "singular they" was used in the 16th century and through some of the 17th. But medieval English usage is hardly a good guide for modern English usage.
Calling the "singular they" a medieval English usage hardly seems appropriate given that Jane Austen wasn't around during the medieval period, and contemporary authors use it as well. :)
----- Dante Alighieri dalighieri@digitalgrapefruit.com
"The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of great moral crisis." -Dante Alighieri, 1265-1321