• henfredemars@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    It was beaten into me in school that this is incorrect. “They” is to be used as a plural pronoun only. It’s commonly used in the singular, but it’s wrong according to the English teachers I had. In referring to a person, you must choose either he or she under those grammar rules.

    With that said, maybe it’s time for me to move into the future and accept that the meaning of the word has changed. I am confident those English teachers weren’t concerned about actual gender issues. Now, I think those issues are more important than the technical grammatical issues of English.

    I’ve offended people in a social setting by insisting that this is the correct usage, when truly it was just me being autistic and informal rather than political.

      • henfredemars@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Fascinating! I didn’t know there was an article about this.

        This use of singular they had emerged by the 14th century, about a century after the plural they.

        That’s more than official enough for me!

    • audiomodder@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      It used to be correct APA/MLA formatting to use “he/she” when the gender of a subject was unknown. That was changed back in the mid 00’s I think. The preferred format is now “they” over “he/she”.

      That being said, people use singular they/them all the time in casual conversation. We just aren’t used to using it when we know or think we know the gender of the person. But let’s be honest, there have always been people that have been hurt by being misgendered. Hell, it was common for some racists to use they/them with black women in an attempt to dehumanize them. So this idea that the singular they is new is absolutely ridiculous.

        • mbfalzar@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          “literally” being used to mean “figuratively” dates back to 3 years after the word “literally” began meaning “actually”. If this is a hill to die on, you need to use “literally” exclusively to mean “as written in the texts”. Common usage of “literally” to mean “actually” and “figuratively” both date to the 1590s

      • candybrie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        No one uses literally to mean figuratively. They use it to emphasize regardless of if what they’re emphasizing includes figurative language. Nearly every word that means something similar to “in actual fact” undergoes this semantic drift (actually, really, etc).

        “She literally exploded at me.” is similar in meaning to “She totally exploded at me.” Not so much to “She figuratively exploded at me.”

        • Promethiel@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Nearly every word that means something similar to “in actual fact” undergoes this semantic drift (actually, really, etc).

          I looked into this for 3 minutes and found examples in multiple languages.

          Neat.

          New expression-insight remix into the human condition connected; We literally really actually feel the need to be sure we’re understood, no matter the hyperbolic lengths gone to, huh?