Author Topic: Words and Grammar and Stuff  (Read 126250 times)

skjerva

  • Godfather
  • *****
  • Posts: 9448
  • I'm your audience.
Re: Words and Grammar and Stuff
« Reply #250 on: February 04, 2009, 11:27:46 AM »
actually, their is both plural and singular
But I wish the public could, in the midst of its pleasures, see how blatantly it is being spoon-fed, and ask for slightly better dreams. 
                        - Iris Barry from "The Public's Pleasure" (1926)

pixote

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 34237
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: Words and Grammar and Stuff
« Reply #251 on: February 04, 2009, 01:27:19 PM »
actually, their is both plural and singular

Since when?

(Not a rhetorical question.)

pixote
Great  |  Near Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Fair  |  Mixed  |  Middling  |  Bad

Wowser

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2249
Re: Words and Grammar and Stuff
« Reply #252 on: February 04, 2009, 01:37:14 PM »


Thanks, Sam :)

Re. 'their': I think it's becoming acceptable - The Guardian has taken to using it that way.

ˇKeith!

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 26774
  • Bitch, I been around since LimeWire.
Re: Words and Grammar and Stuff
« Reply #253 on: February 04, 2009, 01:43:52 PM »
Thanks, Sam :)

Re. 'their': I think it's becoming acceptable - The Guardian has taken to using it that way.

so is they as singular also acceptable?

Emiliana

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2239
  • Life is a Cabaret!
Re: Words and Grammar and Stuff
« Reply #254 on: February 04, 2009, 03:23:15 PM »
For what it's worth: in THE grammar course at the English department of Munich University, I was taught that "they/their" is the way to go if you need to be non-specific about gender in the singular. As an example, we were given the following phrase: "If there's a doctor on board, would they please come forward".

saltine

  • Administrator
  • Godfather
  • ******
  • Posts: 9800
Re: Words and Grammar and Stuff
« Reply #255 on: February 04, 2009, 05:45:02 PM »
For what it's worth: in THE grammar course at the English department of Munich University, I was taught that "they/their" is the way to go if you need to be non-specific about gender in the singular. As an example, we were given the following phrase: "If there's a doctor on board, would they please come forward".

Even though hearing that phrasing makes blood run from my ears, it is the best alternative to saying "he or she" which has passed out of usage in all publications etc.  The only other true alternative to using a plural non-gender specific pronoun when a singular non-gender specific pronoun is needed is to make up a new word (for the singular non-gender specific pronoun).
Texan Down Under

skjerva

  • Godfather
  • *****
  • Posts: 9448
  • I'm your audience.
Re: Words and Grammar and Stuff
« Reply #256 on: February 04, 2009, 07:02:08 PM »
actually, their is both plural and singular

Since when?

(Not a rhetorical question.)

pixote

according to EOD, since:

13.. Cursor M. 389 (Cott.) Bath ware made sun and mon, Ai{th}er wit {th}er ouen light. c1420 Sir Amadace (Camden) l, Iche mon in thayre degre. 14.. Arth. & Merl. 2440 (Kölbing) Many a Sarazen lost their liffe. 1533 [see THEMSELVES 5]. 1545 ABP. PARKER Let. to Bp. Gardiner 8 May, Thus was it agreed among us that every president should assemble their companies. 1563 WIN{ygh}ET Four Scoir Thre Quest. liv, A man or woman being lang absent fra thair party. 1641 [see A. {alpha}]. 1643 TRAPP Comm. Gen. xxiv. 22 Each Countrey hath their fashions, and garnishes. 1749 FIELDING Tom Jones VII. xiv, Every one in the House were in their Beds. 1771 GOLDSM. Hist. Eng. III. 241 Every person..now recovered their liberty. a1845 SYD. SMITH Wks. (1850) 175 Every human being must do something with their existence. 1848 THACKERAY Van. Fair xli, A person can't help their birth. 1858 BAGEHOT Lit. Studies (1879) II. 206 Nobody in their senses would describe Gray's ‘Elegy’ as [etc.]. 1898 G. B. SHAW Plays II. Candida 86 It's enough to drive anyone out of their senses.
But I wish the public could, in the midst of its pleasures, see how blatantly it is being spoon-fed, and ask for slightly better dreams. 
                        - Iris Barry from "The Public's Pleasure" (1926)

pixote

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 34237
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: Words and Grammar and Stuff
« Reply #257 on: February 04, 2009, 07:14:20 PM »
The OED seems slightly confused on this point:

Quote from: some web page
Everybody

Sometimes incorrectly1 with pl. vb. or pron.

  • 1530 LD. BERNERS Arch. Lyt. Brit. 285 Everye bodye was in theyre lodgynges.
  • 1580 SIDNEY Arcadia II. (1613) 156 Now this king did keepe a great house, that euerie body might come and take their meat freely.
  • 1620 Horæ Subsec. 477 To take vpon him the disciplining of euery body for their errours.
  • 1759 BP. WHARBURTON Lett. (1809) 280 Everybody I meet with are full ready to go of themselves.
  • 1820 BYRON Wks. (1840) IV. 298 Every body does and says what they please.
  • 1866 RUSKIN Eth. Dust v. (1883) 82 Everybody seems to recover their spirits.

1 This minor lapse into prescriptivism in the OED entry for everybody seems to contradict what is said on the preceding page of the dictionary (in the entry for everyone)! The explanation for this apparent discrepancy is that the entry for everybody lumps together two separate phenomena, that of everybody as the immediate subject of a plural verb (e.g. "I think that everybody love John."), and that of everybody indirectly connected with a plural pronoun that refers back to it (e.g. "Everybody loves their own mother."). These two constructions are quite different, and the first is much more marginal (or "incorrect") than the second.

I dunno.

What does "cott." stand for, incidentally?

pixote
« Last Edit: February 04, 2009, 07:15:53 PM by pixote »
Great  |  Near Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Fair  |  Mixed  |  Middling  |  Bad

skjerva

  • Godfather
  • *****
  • Posts: 9448
  • I'm your audience.
Re: Words and Grammar and Stuff
« Reply #258 on: February 04, 2009, 07:18:07 PM »
"confused" perhaps because:
Quote
  3. Often used in relation to a singular n. or pronoun denoting a person, after each, every, either, neither, no one, every one, etc. Also so used instead of ‘his or her’, when the gender is inclusive or uncertain. Cf. THEY pron. 2, THEM pron. 2; NOBODY 1b, SOMEBODY. (Not favoured by grammarians.)

but i'm not sure that changes the singular and plural nature/uses of the words  ;D
But I wish the public could, in the midst of its pleasures, see how blatantly it is being spoon-fed, and ask for slightly better dreams. 
                        - Iris Barry from "The Public's Pleasure" (1926)

pixote

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 34237
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: Words and Grammar and Stuff
« Reply #259 on: February 04, 2009, 07:22:53 PM »
Haha, they spelled favored wrong.

pixote
Great  |  Near Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Fair  |  Mixed  |  Middling  |  Bad