Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Comments on Does using plural form for singular object make sense?

Parent

Does using plural form for singular object make sense?

+2
−0

Some people use they/them if they can't identity gender/sex (gender and sex isn't same). But when mentioning a single person should we use plural pronoun?

We know that "they/them" is plural form. But "he/she" is singular form. Recently, a person was telling me to use they/them if I don't know (or identify) his/her gender. But why plural form make sense for singular person?

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

0 comment threads

Post
+5
−1

One misconception: They/them has not been strictly plural for quite a long time. Even Shakespeare used it.

There's not a man I meet but doth salute me / as if I were their well-acquainted friend

(From Shakespeare's The Comedy of Errors, written sometime around the late sixteenth century)

Using they as a singular pronoun is perfectly fine, especially when you don't know the gender of the person (or when they are non-binary).

Historically, of course, "they" is plural. That is why it goes with the plural conjunction of verbs - "they are" and not "they is". However, the same can be said for "you" (which was also historically plural, with the singular being "thou"), and I don't think any modern speaker would ever argue that "you" cannot be singular. This just to say, history does not dictate modern language. Many authoritative English guides[1] accept it (at least informally), so if you look to them, then you should feel free to use it.

On another note, one thing that doesn't yet have a consensus is whether the singular referential should be "themselves" or "themself". The former is the historical one, the latter the more logical one.


  1. Pick from your favored style guide: MLA, APA, Chicago ↩︎

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

2 comment threads

You are (1 comment)
References (1 comment)
References
Jirka Hanika‭ wrote about 3 years ago

Feel free to use some or all of these examples.

Poet called William, William and Werewolf, year 1360 or so: "þan hastely hiȝed eche wiȝt on hors & on fote, / huntyng wiȝt houndes alle heie wodes, / til þei neyȝþed so neiȝh to nymphe þe soþe, / þere william & his worþi lef were liand i-fere" ("Then quickly hastened each man... till they approached so near...) It's the oldest known occurrence of a singular "they" in English. Plural "they" is older by further 150 or so years.

Chaucer, Prologue of the Pardoner's Tale, year 1390 or so: "And whoso fyndeth hym out of swich blame, / they wol come up..." ("...whoever finds... they will...")

Shakespeare, Comedy of Errors, year 1590 or so: "There's not a man I meet but doth salute me / as if I were their well-acquainted friend"

The first and last quotes are showing that William the poet and Shakespeare wouldn't hesitate to use "they" even if the natural gender of their grammatical subject was plainly known.