While many of the world’s languages do not, English has historically had gender specificity in certain of their pronouns, particularly in the third person singular (he, she). For many years, a gender-specific, almost always masculine, pronoun was used to express a gender-neutral meaning:
“A candidate should work to the best of his ability, and he must comport himself appropriately.”
A few solutions that been used to improve on this, include “he/she” (clunky), the word “one” (did not seem to catch on), or the third person plural word “they” (which I hate). Some attempts have been made, by proponents of gender-neutral language, to introduce invented gender-neutral pronouns.
In September 2015, “Harvard University made a buzz after allowing students to select gender-neutral options like ‘ze,’ ‘e,’ and ‘they’ on registration forms. In doing so, it joined a wave of other major colleges in acknowledging that gender identity, and the pronouns that go with it, is more fluid than how previous generations understood it.”
American University’s Center for Diversity and Inclusion offers a pronoun guide which states “the practice of asking individuals what pronouns they use for themselves should be done in an effort to respect the diversity of gender identities beyond man and woman.”
Here are some of the gender-neutral contenders, with a breakdown of their strengths and weaknesses:
Ne: Ne laughed. I called nem. Nir eyes gleam. That is nirs. Ne likes nemself.
Ve: Ve laughed. I called ver. Vis eyes gleam. That is vis. Ve likes verself.
Spivak: Ey laughed. I called em. Eir eyes gleam. That is eirs. Ey likes emself.
Ze (or zie) and hir: Ze laughed. I called hir. Hir eyes gleam. That is hirs. Ze likes hirself.
Ze (or zie) and zir: Ze laughed. I called zir. Zir eyes gleam. That is zirs. Ze likes zirself.
Xe: Xe laughed. I called xem. Xyr eyes gleam. That is xyrs. Xe likes xemself.
As noted, “‘Hir,’ although it’s supposed to be pronounced ‘here,’ is read as ‘her’ by many people unfamiliar with the term.” The author prefers ne (n as in neutral) or ve (popular in science fiction), to ze, for reasons of pronunciation in combination with other words, as well as being more gender-free.
I’m not opposed to the use of more gender-neutral language. But the linguistic conservative in me wishes that some sort of consensus would have developed in the past few years, such as when firefighter replaced fireman, and flight attendant encompassed stewardess and steward.
Now, The New York Times Adds ‘Mx.’ to the Honorific Mix, at least on one occasion, in lieu of Mr. or Ms.
Of course, this all has been and will be, a continuing source of debate about whether the trend is cultural sensitivity, or political correctness run amok.
I have some sympathy with this who feel that the use of he/his etc implies that the subject is invariably male, but inventing words to get round this is artificial and does a disservice to the language. The plural works fine for me, as in: “Candidates should work to the best of their ability, and must comport themselves appropriately.”
I also favour gender neutral job titles, such as firefighter, although some get a little convoluted, such as Refuse Operative for Bin Man. (Your Garbage Man?)
Anyway, you post reminds me that I need to make a start on mine for the next round!
Well, speaking to the linguistic conservative in you, Middle English had the gender neutral a and ou, though as far as I can remember, I’ve never seen anyone argue for a return to English’s linguistic roots to solve this problem.
This is also one of the last topics I got into a sometimes heated Facebook argument over, mainly because of a heterosexist boofhead who insisted that “it” was an appropriate general-neutral term for a human being (!), and aided by a self-described feminist who declared that using the masculine was gender-neutral because it was taught that way many decades ago and those books are still around—or, something like that. And this is why I don’t do Facebook arguments anymore.
In any event, I agree: We need some consensus around terms, and I’d prefer ones that don’t sound daft or make the speaker sound like some drunk guy imitating a German…
How right you are…. although not here in The Netherlands… i once new a couple who orignated from Russia, there this is actual
Have a nice abc-day / -week
♫ M e l ☺ d y ♫ <abc-e-team)
I guess I am too old fashioned.
Can’t seem to teach this Old Dog new tricks.
I don’t think this would work in my “tiny world”.
I find the alternatives that you have shown here to be highly confusing! In the Romance languages (French, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese) the number and gender determines the form of all other words (adjectives, verbs, etc.) and if the gender is unknown, they go by the masculine form. This is something I teach my students as extremely important in grammar. Great post, Roger, as it does focus on the current attempt to make gender neutral, due to trying to respect transgender humans. However, I don’t think it will “take” in the long run.
Leslie
abcw team
Interesting word.Something new to learn.
excellent.
In an attempt to address linguistic sexism inherent in the English language, some churches have adopted The New Revised Standard Version of the Bible or use inclusive language when discussing passages in the Bible.
‘A Rose is A Rose …. Tired of all the ‘politically correct’ verbiage but know it is enhancing the gender and making it more egalitarian ~ but enough is enough ~
Always a very informative post here on ABC ~ very creative thinking.
Happy Week to you, ^_^
I am much too old and secure in the language as it is to be politically correct grammatically.
Another fascinating topic you’ve written about. I think I’m stuck with the old ones tho.
Knowing this usage for the first time. I usually went with he/she. Thanks for this. 🙂
Happy new year to you and yours!
Happy ABCW!
Reading these comments I learned two new words from Arthur above, Heterosexist and Boofhead. I see the spellchecker likes the first one.
Adding or subtracting an honorific takes a strong effort and has to be done one at a time. The one example we have comes from the 1970s, the addition of Ms. as a substitute for Miss and Mrs. To make this change required a political movement (feminism) and a constant stream of propaganda (centered around the monthly magazine called Ms.) And even that honorific is not universally accepted today. As of this moment I don’t think we’re in too much danger of losing our traditional honorifics.
As for Ze, if it indicates nothing then why use it? Perhaps Ze Frank knows.
In Dutch we have the same problem. It is interesting but too difficult. I shall try to use the gender which is the most logical and otherwise I ‘ll use ” one”.
Wil, ABCW Team
Definitely political correctness run amok, I think. Interesting to ponder for a few minutes, but I think the world has much bigger problems to solve. 😉
Geez ! that’s too complicated for me !
Hm, interesting to read –
In German we have similiar tendencies, sound sometimes funny or unusual. We must learn that during a few decades. All is in flow… –
I think language can only develop organically I think we are stuck with the masculine although we could go back to using thou, thee and thine.
First of all a happy New Year to you. That it may be a year of increase, prosperity, and joy!
Come to think of it: it would be much easier if languages didn’t have gender specific words, especially for German and Greek – making them so complicated!
I think political correctness has run amok. Can’t please everyone so I stick to what I know.
Ann
been an English teacher for foreigners for many years, tell them about He/She and go and goes.
all this nonsense makes me want to catch some zzzzz’s! Thanks for another informative post roger!
That looks and sounds like the Jabberwocky to me. I’m glad I’m older. I can pretend to be one of those old dogs that supposedly can’t learn new tricks.