Brooklyn Bridge and Singular they: Difference between pages

"Singular" they is a popular, non-technical expression for uses of the pronoun they (and its inflected forms) when plurality is not required by the context. "Singular" they remains morphologically and syntactically plural (it still takes plural forms of verbs). However, it is often semantically indeterminate in number — in distributive constructions, for example. More technically, these uses can be described as generic or epicene they.

Generic they has indeterminate number:

• There's not a man I meet but doth salute me / As if I were their well-acquainted friend — Shakespeare, The Comedy of Errors, Act IV, Scene 3 (1594)

(Their can be understood equally well as referring to each man considered one at a time, or to all of them collectively.)

Epicene they has indeterminate gender:

• A person cannot help their birth. — Thackeray, Vanity Fair (1848)

(In the context of Vanity Fair, their actually refers to one specific person. Thackery may have used their as a polite circumlocution, or to avoid generic he in this case of reference to a specific person.)

In neither case is "singular" they unambiguously a semantic or morpho-syntactic singular. What it actually agrees with is the plurality implicit in the indeterminacy of generic antecedents. This is explained by David Lewis' analysis of an aspect of the logic of the semantics of natural language called Quantifier Variability Effect (QVE). In this kind of analysis, "singular" they in English is an example of a semantically bound variable rather than a genuine pronoun. It is most clearly evident in the special case of distributive constructions, where the preference many languages show for singular pronouns probably gives rise to the singular in "singular" they.

Steven Pinker proposes the word they be considered to be a pair of "homonyms" — two different words with the same spelling and sound.

This would be analogous to a language like Basque, which uses the word nork both as an indeterminate pronoun meaning "who" and also as a marker in distributive constructions.

"Basque has two ways of expressing universal distributive quantifications: (i) lexically, through the quantifier bakoitz 'each'; (ii) configurationally, through the construction exemplified in (1).

(1)	Nork/zeinek	bere	ama	ikusi	du
	who-erg/which-erg	his/her	mother	seen	has
	'Everyone saw his/her mother'

In (1), an indeterminate pronoun takes on a universal distributive value. Such a value is not a lexical property of the relevant indeterminate pronouns."

Basque is far from the only example of this. Kuroda considers it typical of east Asian languages, Japanese and Korean in particular. Yet other languages have even more particular ways of expressing distribution and quantification. Sumerian, structurally similar to Basque, uses a nominal suffix, dedli, to indicate "each individual".

Technical terms

Distribution

Distributive constructions are those which apply a single idea to each entity of a group. They are typically marked in English by words like each and every. The simplest examples are applied to groups of two, and use words like either and or. Thorough analysis of distribution requires treatment of negation. Hence, the Shakespeare quote above is semantically distributive, because there's not a man is logically equivalent to every man does not. Since distributive constructions apply an idea relevant to each individual in the group, rather than to the group as a whole, they are most often conceived of as singular, and singular pronouns are used.

• England expects that every man will do his duty. — Nelson
• Every dog has his day. — Plutarch

However, English is typical of many languages that show ambivalence in this regard. Because distribution also requires a group with more than one member, plural forms are sometimes used. The Shakespeare quote is probably an example of such a usage. The alternative would be that he intended epicene they in agreement with generic man, including women.

Many clear examples of the plural being used in other languages, and coming into English by translation, are found in the King James Version of the Bible, which attempted very literal translation. The fact that singular forms are, nonetheless, more natural in distributive constructions is inadvertently demonstrated by a web-site that, not having researched the original languages, unadvisedly assumed a singular interpretation of they in translations of plurals in the original.

English is typical of many languages that form distributives with pronouns and mark for singular and plural. They demonstrate a preference for singular pronouns, but attest plurals in a substantial minority of cases. Both forms are comprehensible to native speakers, usage depends on context, clarity, style and logic (for logic, see below).

Strunk and White's The Elements of Style notes both uses.

A common inaccuracy is the use of the plural pronoun when the antecedent is a distributive expression such as each, each one, everybody, every one, many a man, which, though implying more than one person, requires the pronoun to be in the singular. Similar to this, but with even less justification, is the use of the plural pronoun with the antecedent anybody, any one, somebody, some one, the intention being either to avoid the awkward he or she, or to avoid committing oneself to either. Some bashful speakers even say, A friend of mine told me that they ..."

This is a semantic assessment (note the words "inaccuracy", "implying", "requires", "justification" and "intention"), rather than a syntactic linguistic prescription (as some have, rather loosely, claimed). Prescriptions of taste are not true or false, so they can't be proved right or wrong; however, claims regarding accuracy can be demonstrated to be true or false. Strunk and White have been proven wrong on this point by logical analysis of quantification in natural language (like Pinker following Lewis and others above) — distributive expressions are neither exclusively singular or plural, they are indeterminate in number.

Quantification

The simplest examples of quantification are existential and universal statements, which are marked in English by phrases like there is or words like all. However, there are different types of quantification marked by other words like many, more and most. Quantification is also apparent in language referring to time, marked by words like always, often, sometimes, once or never. Apart from the quantifiers which refer to a unique singularity, like there is and once, they necessarily imply a distributive concept. Even in the case of there is and once, logical analysis views many of these as distributive statements equivalent to, out of all cases there is at least one. Hence literature seeking to explain quantification in natural language often refers to distributive constructions, and vice versa.

Variables

The term variable arises due to the interest mathematicians, logicians, philosophers of language, theoretical linguists and computer language designers have in formal language representations of natural language. In their metalanguage, quantifiers are applied over the domain of a variable. Where natural language speakers use words or clitics to signal generalizations, language analysts define what they call variables that range over any element of the set of members of a group — the domain. Consider the examples of

• natural language — Every good boy deserves fruit; and
• formal language — $\forall$b ε B, b.G => b.DF.

The symbol, b, is used to represent a variable that can refer to any boy (the elements of the set of all boys, B). The upside-down A is a standard symbol for the universal quantifier — for all, for each or for every in natural language. In predicate logic, the truth-value of the proposition expressed above in a formal language does not depend on the particular value of the variable, b. This matches our natural language understanding. Whether or not every good boy deserves fruit doesn't depend on any particular boy. Because the truth-value of the proposition doesn't depend on the value of the variable, the variable is called bound. If, however, there is no quantifier, the variable is called free, and the truth value of the proposition depends on the value of the variable. This also matches natural language. Whether Adam is bad or deserves fruit depends on Adam.

Pinker argues that usage of "singular" they in English cannot be condemned on grammatical grounds, because it is probably better understood as a linguistic marker of a bound variable rather than as a pronoun with a referent. "On logical grounds, then, variables are not the same thing as the more familiar 'referential' pronouns that trigger number agreement." He gives the following example.

"Everyone returned to their seats means 'For all X, X returned to X's seat.' The 'X' does not refer to any particular person or group of people. ... The their there ... refers neither to one thing nor to many things; it does not refer at all."

"Everyone and they are not an 'antecedent' and a 'pronoun' .... They are a 'quantifier' and a 'bound variable,' a different logical relationship."

Pinker's example demonstrates the acceptability of plural forms in distributive constructions. However, additional issues are raised by the attested usage of the logically equivalent alternative constructions of this distributive expression, using

• generic they — Everyone returned to their seat, or
• generic he — Everyone returned to his seat.

Usage

Generic he

Until the late twentieth century, generic use of the pronoun he was preferred (but not required) in such constructions, as described in contemporary grammar books. For example, a grammar contemporary with the first edition of the Oxford English Dictionary notes:

410. ... when the antecedent includes both masculine and feminine, or is a distributive word, taking in each of many persons,—the preferred method is to put the pronoun following in the masculine singular; if the antecedent is neuter, preceded by a distributive, the pronoun will be neuter singular.

Examples of generic he

• Every person who turns this page has his own little diary. — Thackeray
• Suppose the life and fortune of every one of us would depend on his winning or losing a game of chess. — Thomas Huxley
• If any one did not know it, it was his own fault. — Cable

Generic he is still found in English usage, however the gender neutral language movement discourages its use.

Generic they

Generic he was a preference in usage, not a binding grammatical "rule", as Thackeray's use of both forms demonstrates. "The alternative to the masculine generic with the longest and most distinguished history in English is the third-person plural pronoun. Recognized writers have used they, them, themselves, and their to refer to singular nouns such as one, a person, an individual, and each since the 1300s."

Examples of generic they

• Eche of theym sholde ... make theymselfe redy. — Caxton
• Arise; one knocks. / ... / Hark, how they knock! — Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet
• 'Tis meet that some more audience than a mother, since nature makes them partial, should o'erhear the speech. — Shakespeare, Hamlet
• I would have everybody marry if they can do it properly. — Austen, Mansfield Park (1814)
• That's always your way, Maim – always sailing in to help somebody before they're hurt. — Mark Twain, Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (1884)
• Caesar: "No, Cleopatra. No man goes to battle to be killed." / Cleopatra: "But they do get killed". — Shaw, Caesar and Cleopatra (1901)

Recently, the American Heritage English language projects consulted a usage panel "of some 200 distinguished educators, writers, and public speakers." "Most of the Usage Panelists reject the use of they with singular antecedents. Eighty-two percent find the sentence The typical student in the program takes about six years to complete their course work unacceptable." Study has also shown that reading time of they increases significantly when used with a gender-determinate antecedent, suggesting that such use can confuse.

So both generic he and generic they have long histories of use, and both are still used. However, both are also systematically avoided by particular groups. Style guides that avoid expressing a preference for either approach recommend recasting generic expressions as plurals to avoid the criticisms of either party.

Irrespective of the debate, when used, "singular" they can be seen to have an implication of indefinite reference (indefinite number or indefinite gender). It is most commonly used with indefinite referents of a distributive nature such as someone, anyone, everyone, and no one. Such references are not to one particular person but to a large group taken one at a time, causing influence from the implied plural. This is also evident in the case of some singular collective nouns. For example, "The Blue Sky Mining Company say that they are unwilling to make an exception for one newspaper reporter."

Grammatical analysis

According to the traditional analysis, English personal pronouns are typically used to refer back, or forward within a sentence, to a noun phrase (which may be a simple noun). (According to a newer analysis, to a determiner phrase, which may be a simple determiner.)

Inflected forms

	Nominative (subject)	Accusative (object)	Prenominal possessive	Predicative possessive	Reflexive
He	He laughs.	I hug him.	His hair grows.	I use his.	He feeds himself.
She	She laughs.	I hug her.	Her hair grows.	I use hers.	She feeds herself.
Prototypical they	When my kids watch "The Simpsons", they laugh.	Whether they win or lose, I hug them.	As long as people live, their hair grows.	Most of my friends have cell phones, so I use theirs.	The children feed themselves.
"Singular" they	When I tell someone a joke they laugh.	When I greet a friend I hug them.	When someone doesn't get a haircut, their hair grows long.	If my cell phone dies, a friend I am with lets me borrow theirs.	Each child feeds themself/themselves.
Generic he	When I tell someone a joke he laughs.	When I greet a friend I hug him.	When someone doesn't get a haircut, his hair grows long.	If my cell phone dies, a friend I am with lets me borrow his.	Each child feeds himself.

Plural

• All good students do their homework.

Generic (indeterminate number)

• A good student is known for doing his homework (preferred usage until late 20th century) OR
• A good student is known for doing their homework (widely prescribed in gender-neutral style guides)

Singular

• Mary is known for doing her homework

In the middle two of these example sentences, traditional grammars speak of the pronoun referring to a good student. However, following analysis by David Lewis, structures involving generic antecedents are now understood to be a logically distinct class. Pinker notes the pronouns are not in fact referring to anything in particular. Pullum uses the logical, rather than grammatical, term "bound variable" to describe such expressions.

Irrespective of how such cases are explained grammatically, however, both are well-formed English sentences. Both are attested in English literature prior to the 20th century, and both are still attested in 21st century English.

Singular they, although morphologically a plural pronoun, may be used in those circumstances when an indefinite number is signified by an indefinite singular antecedent; for example,

• The person you mentioned, are they coming?, not *… is they coming?

This is analogous to the pronoun you, which originally was only plural, but by about 1700 replaced thou for singular referents, while retaining the plural verb form. Some uses of "singular" they follow a grammatical rule whereby singular indefinite antecedents (such as everyone, anyone, no one, and all) are followed by a coordinate or independent clause containing the plural pronoun 'they'. The plural reflexive form themselves may be used as well; with some speakers using the singular form themself, in particular with semantically singular they.

Even when the gender is known, they can be used with a generic referent. For example: "A teenage boy rarely thinks about their future." A teenage boy rarely thinks about his future is also grammatical here, and more likely in formal writing.

Many other modern uses follow the prescription of gender-neutral English in the style manuals of various organizations. As the syntactically singular third-person pronouns of English are all either gender-specific (he and she) or inappropriate for reference to people (it). Singular they is also often used where the sex of the referent is either unknown or irrelevant:

• A child becomes an adult when they turn 18.
• Someone called for you, but they didn't leave a message.

Gender neutral language movement

In the late 20th century, the feminist movement expressed concern regarding the use of generic he in the English language. The feminist claim was that such usage contributes to an assumption that maleness is "standard," and that femaleness is "different". They also claimed that such use is misogynistic. One response to this was an increase in the use of generic she in academic journal articles from around this time. However, the more common response has been prescriptive, with many institutions publishing gender neutral style guides, notably in government, academia and publishing. For example, The Cambridge Guide to English Usage (2004) expresses several preferences. "Generic/universal their provides a gender-free pronoun, avoiding the exclusive his and the clumsy his/her."

It avoids gratuitous sexism and gives the statement broadest reference. . . . They, them, their are now freely used in agreement with singular indefinite pronouns and determiners, those with universal implications such as any(one), every(one), no(one), as well as each and some(one), whose reference is often more individual. . . . For those listening or reading, it has become unremarkable - an element of common usage."

The use of masculine generic nouns and pronouns in written and spoken language has decreased since the 1960s. In a corpus of spontaneous speech collected in Australia in the 1990s, singular they had become the most frequently used generic pronoun. The increased usage of singular they may be at least partly due to an increasing desire for gender-neutral language; while writers a hundred years ago might have had no qualm using he with a referent of indeterminate gender, writers today often feel uncomfortable with this. One solution in formal writing has often been to write he or she, or something similar, but this is considered awkward when used excessively, overly politically correct, or both.

In certain contexts, singular they may sound less obtrusive and more natural than generic he, or he or she give the following example:

Nobody in their right mind would do a thing like that.

The alternative formulation ("Nobody in his right mind […]") "now seems inappropriate to a large proportion of speakers, who systematically avoid the use of he in such contexts".

Some grammar and usage guides have accepted singular uses of they, in cases limited to references to an indeterminate person. For example, A person might find themself in a fix is considered standard English, but not *Dr. Brown might find themself in a fix. For the latter, the most usual circumlocutions are: recasting the sentence in the plural (Doctors might find themselves …), second person (If you're a doctor, you might find yourself …), or sometimes reflexive (One might find oneself …). Singular they is occasionally used to refer to an indeterminate person whose gender is known, as in No mother should be forced to testify against their child.

Some grammarians (e.g., Fowler 1992, pp. 300–301) continue to view singular they as grammatically inconsistent, and recommend either recasting in the plural or avoiding the pronoun altogether. Others say that there is no sufficient reason not to extend singular they to include specific people of unknown gender, as well as to transgender, bigender, intersexual and androgyne people, and those who do not identify exclusively with either gender.

Other manuals of style remain more neutral on the subject. The Chicago Manual of Style states: "On the one hand, it is unacceptable to a great many reasonable readers to use the generic masculine pronoun ('he' in reference to no one in particular). On the other hand, it is unacceptable to a great many readers either to resort to nontraditional gimmicks to avoid the generic masculine (by using 'he/she' or 's/he.' for example) or to use 'they' as a kind of singular pronoun." (233) Although those objecting to the generic masculine pronoun are described as "reasonable readers" while those objecting to the singular they remain unmodified by any such adjective, this stops well short of an endorsement of any particular course of action.

Current debate relates to wider questions of political correctness and equal rights. The extent to which language influences thought may also be an important factor.

See also

• Gender-neutral language in English

References

• Baranowski, M. "Current usage of the epicene pronoun in written English." Journal of Sociolinguistics 6.3 (August 2002): 378–397.
• W. M. Baskervill (1896). "An English Grammar". Retrieved 2007-07-09. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link)
• Fowler, Henry Ramsey (1992). The Little, Brown Handbook (5th edn. ed.). HarperCollins. ISBN 0-673-52132-X. {{cite book}}: |edition= has extra text (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
• Huddleston, Rodney (2002). "Singular pronouns denoting humans without specification of sex,". The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. ch. 5, §17.2.4, pp. 491–5. ISBN 0-521-43146-8. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
• Huddleston, Rodney (2005). A Student's Introduction to English Grammar. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 103–105. ISBN 0-521-84837-7. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
• Jespersen, Otto (1894). Progress in Language, with Special Reference to English. New York: Macmillan.
• Newman, Michael (1997) Epicene Pronouns: The Linguistics of a Prescriptive Problem. Outstanding Dissertations in Linguistics. New York: Garland. ISBN 0815325541.
• Pauwels, Anne (2003). "Linguistic sexism and feminist linguistic activism". Chapter 24 in The Handbook of Language and Gender, edited by Janet Holmes and Miriam Meyerhoff. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell. ISBN 0-631-22502-1.
• Peters, Pam (2004). The Cambridge Guide to English Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-62181-X.
• Pinker, Steven (1994). "The Language Instinct". Ch12. Retrieved 2007-07-09. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
• Pullum, Geoffrey K. (2002-05-04). "Anyone who had a heart". speaking with Jill Kitson. Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Retrieved 2007-07-09. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)

• Radford, Andrew (2004). Minimalist Syntax: Exploring the Structure of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-54274-X.
• Simpson, John (1989). The Oxford English Dictionary (2nd edn. ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-861186-2. {{cite book}}: |edition= has extra text (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)

Further reading

• Mark Balhorn (2004). "The Rise of Epicene They". Journal of English Linguistics. 32 (2). SAGE Publications: 79–104. doi:10.1177/0075424204265824.
• Janet Dean Fodor and Ivan A. Sag (1982). "Referential and Quantificational Indefinites". Journal Linguistics and Philosophy. 5 (3). Springer Netherlands: 355–398. doi:10.1007/BF00351459. ISSN 0165-0157.

External links

• Brasoveanu, Adrian. "Singular 'Donkey' Pronouns Are Semantically Distributive, Not (Necessarily) Singular".
• The Singular "They"
• Singular They and Jane Austen
• Williams, John. Singular They. "Gender Neutral Pronoun FAQ". Æther Lumina. One person's opinion.
• Pinker, Steven. Steven Pinker on the English singular "their" construction. From The Language Instinct.
• Regender can translate web pages to use the gender-neutral singular "they".
• Grammar myths debunked Geoff Pullum summarized very briefly indeed, on the occasion of the publication of The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Myth number three, that “‘They’ must never occur with a singular antecedent”, is disposed of in three short sentences.
• "Anyone who had a heart (would know their own language)" by Geoff Pullum. Transcript of a radio talk. This does not dodge technical issues, but it is still very accessible, and less prescriptive than usual.
• Everyone at The Times agrees ... no they don't Geoff Pullum at his prescriptive best, from the (London) Times.
• "Examples of singular "their" etc. from the OED and elsewhere". A 1986 message to NET.NLANG that copies a lot of material from the OED, and miscellaneous other material, from "Henry Churchyard's linguistics page".