[OOC] Myriad Reality

[Legend]

<Snipped quote by Legend>

Except originally "their" was the actual genderless. Then some people were like "lolno" and wanted to use "he", and then over years and years "he" became the convention. Only just now are we starting to return to our true roots.

@whizzball1

Source.

[Extra]

<Snipped quote by Extra>

I don't like pieces of metal being shoved into my skin, nor do I like the idea of someone else being in control of my DNA.

@Legend

Ah. Okie. Going for the red cord in grad. As well as the green cord. (Community service).

[Legend]

<Snipped quote by Legend>

Ah. Okie. Going for the red cord in grad. As well as the green cord. (Community service).

@Extra

Interesting. Alright.

[whizzball1]

<Snipped quote by whizzball1>

Source.

@Legend

Cambridge Grammar of the English Language, Chapter 5, Section 17.2.4 (specifically, pages 491-495).

Yes, I did have that saved for exactly this moment. I knew it would come. not really but still

EDIT: Just in case you say "It's British so it's wrong," the Linguistic Society of America awarded it with the Leonard Bloomfield Book Award, which awards a recently published book for making an "outstanding contribution to the development of our understanding of language and linguistics".

[Legend]

<Snipped quote by Legend>

Cambridge Grammar of the English Language, Chapter 5, Section 17.2.4 (specifically, pages 491-495).

Yes, I did have that saved for exactly this moment. I knew it would come. not really but still

EDIT: Just in case you say "It's British so it's wrong," the Linguistic Society of America awarded it with the Leonard Bloomfield Book Award, which awards a recently published book for making an "outstanding contribution to the development of our understanding of language and linguistics".

@whizzball1

The Oxford Dictionaries have an article on the usage, saying that it dates back to the 16th century.

EDIT: I'm considering all of the English language, but that argument is invalid. Simply because an American society awarded it for being accurate doesn't mean that it applies to American linguistics. America can also award a "Best British History Book" prize, but that doesn't translate to being accepted American history.

[whizzball1]

<Snipped quote by whizzball1>

The Oxford Dictionaries have an article on the usage, saying that it dates back to the 16th century.

EDIT: I'm considering all of the English language, but that argument is invalid. Simply because an American society awarded it for being accurate doesn't mean that it applies to American linguistics. America can also award a "Best British History Book" prize, but that doesn't translate to being accepted American history.

@Legend

Chaucer uses it much earlier than that, quoted by Jespersen in Merriam-Webster's Concise Dictionary of English Usage.

was hoping you wouldn't notice that =P
I realised that just as I posted the edit, but I just shrugged and went on with my school. But if it helps, the Chicago Manual of Style also endorses the usage.

[Legend]

<Snipped quote by Legend>

Chaucer uses it much earlier than that, quoted by Jespersen in Merriam-Webster's Concise Dictionary of English Usage.

was hoping you wouldn't notice that =P
I realised that just as I posted the edit, but I just shrugged and went on with my school. But if it helps, the Chicago Manual of Style also endorses the usage.

@whizzball1

But the difference is the fact that I'm arguing that using "he" as a singular is older. You'll have to fight the English language age to justify that one.

No pulling fast fallacies on me. They won't work.

[Heroic]

Ugh, English debates. Thought I'd seen the last of those.

[whizzball1]

<Snipped quote by whizzball1>

But the difference is the fact that I'm arguing that using "he" as a singular is older. You'll have to fight the English language age to justify that one.

No pulling fast fallacies on me. They won't work.

@Legend

Actually, it's not older. Ann Bodine in "Androcentrism in Prescriptive Grammar" explains how some nineteenth-century grammarians put forth the idea of using "he" because of social motivation, although at the time the correct usages were either "they" or "he or she". The earliest mentions of the idea are Wilson in 1560 and Poole in 1646 because of their androcentric worldview. "set the man before the woman for maners sake..." -Wilson and "The Masculine gender is more worthy than the Feminine." -Poole. However, it didn't catch on, and the use of "they" from old continued on until 1850, when the British Parliament passed an act that "words importing the masculine gender shall be deemed and taken to include females".

I was just joking. Notice the lack of capitalisation and punctuation and the silly face.

[whizzball1]

Ugh, English debates. Thought I'd seen the last of those.

@Heroic

Well-informed English debates. =D

[Legend]

Ugh, English debates. Thought I'd seen the last of those.

@Heroic

English rebates. $20 back.

<Snipped quote by Legend>

Actually, it's not older. Ann Bodine in "Androcentrism in Prescriptive Grammar" explains how some nineteenth-century grammarians put forth the idea of using "he" because of social motivation, although at the time the correct usages were either "they" or "he or she". The earliest mentions of the idea are Wilson in 1560 and Poole in 1646 because of their androcentric worldview. "set the man before the woman for maners sake..." -Wilson and "The Masculine gender is more worthy than the Feminine." -Poole. However, it didn't catch on, and the use of "they" from old continued on until 1850, when the British Parliament passed an act that "words importing the masculine gender shall be deemed and taken to include females".

I was just joking. Notice the lack of capitalisation and punctuation and the silly face.

@whizzball1

Literally all of my research points toward the opposite.

And I was responding in a jokingly true manner.

[whizzball1]

<Snipped quote by Heroic>

English rebates. $20 back.

<Snipped quote by whizzball1>

Literally all of my research points toward the opposite.

And I was responding in a jokingly true manner.

@Legend

Then cite, so I can see your research.
EDIT: I keep trying to change this so it doesn't sound scornful. I'm not trying to scoff; I'm curious.

[Legend]

<Snipped quote by Legend>

Then cite, so I can see your research.

@whizzball1

You see, there's a difference between our claims. You actually have people fervently trying to prove your point, while I do not, because if yours was not the primary usage throughout the history of the English language, my claim is correct by default. Nobody made any attempt to write an article about the use of "he" in the eleventh century, because there's no reason to.

[Extra]

Man, looking at the hole...that needle was pretty big...

[souleaterfan320]

<Snipped quote by Heroic>

Well-informed English debates. =D

@whizzball1

The phrase well-informed and the word English should never be used in the same sentence.

[Heroic]

<Snipped quote by Heroic>

Well-informed English debates. =D

@whizzball1

Fancy descriptors will not change how I feel about the subject, and there's nothing you can do to change that. +3

<Snipped quote by Heroic>

English rebates. $20 back.

<Snipped quote by whizzball1>

Literally all of my research points toward the opposite.

And I was responding in a jokingly true manner.

@Legend

English teammate, helping when you're at a loss for words.

[Legend]

Man, looking at the hole...that needle was pretty big...

@Extra

Nope. Not worth.

<Snipped quote by whizzball1>

Fancy descriptors will not change how I feel about the subject, and there's nothing you can do to change that. +3

<Snipped quote by Legend>

English teammate, helping when you're at a loss for words.

@Heroic

English translate, for obvious reasons.

[Heroic]

<Snipped quote by Extra>

Nope. Not worth.

<Snipped quote by Heroic>

English translate, for obvious reasons.

@Legend

English mutate, to describe how it evolved since its conception.

[Legend]

<Snipped quote by Legend>

English mutate, to describe how it evolved since its conception.

@Heroic

English insinuate, when you want to imply something bad about the language.

[whizzball1]

<Snipped quote by whizzball1>

You see, there's a difference between our claims. You actually have people fervently trying to prove your point, while I do not, because if yours was not the primary usage throughout the history of the English language, my claim is correct by default. Nobody made any attempt to write an article about the use of "he" in the eleventh century, because there's no reason to.

@Legend

Actually, Bodine wrote her paper back in 1975 before the debate was actually becoming a debate, for the purposes of explaining what was happening. It was already accepted that prescriptive grammarians attacked singular "they", and therefore "he" became accepted. Her article is actually considering other things, but her input and quotations are useful to me nevertheless, because it shows that scholars don't need to debate that point. They have it in history.
EDIT: I don't even consider that a good argument. The fact that nobody made an attempt to write an article about the use of "he" in the eleventh century could just as easily imply that they didn't because there was no usage to write about. All it is is a fact, with no specific connotations either way.