Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site lanl.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!zehntel!hplabs!hao!seismo!cmcl2!lanl!crs From: crs@lanl.ARPA Newsgroups: net.nlang,net.women Subject: Re: Gender-Specific Pronouns (and "ain't") Message-ID: <19506@lanl.ARPA> Date: Mon, 14-Jan-85 15:42:47 EST Article-I.D.: lanl.19506 Posted: Mon Jan 14 15:42:47 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 19-Jan-85 00:14:31 EST References: <353@cadovax.UUCP> <914@amdahl.UUCP> Sender: newsreader@lanl.ARPA Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory Lines: 47 Xref: watmath net.nlang:2433 net.women:4135 > > From sunny@sun.uucp (Sunny Kirsten) <1914@sun.uucp> > > > > > Try using "their" whether referring to one generic person or many persons: > > > it's easier to read than he/she or his/her, and is gender non-specific. > > > Sunny > > > > It's also grammatically incorrect and awkward. To me, it's as bad as > > using "Aren't I?" instead of "Am I not?" > > It is NOT "grammatically incorrect." That is a myth. As someone > mentioned earlier, you can look it ("they") up in the OED. > > William Safire wrote an interesting essay on the grammatical > appropriatness of "Ain't I?" (it came from a contraction > of "Am not I?", necessarily interrogative). But "ain't" is such > a tainted word these days we will probably never bring it back. > (Unfortunately I don't have this particular article of Safire's). > > The story with "ain't" was that people were using ungrammatically > ("ain't she sweet?") so our fearless defenders of the language, > English teachers everywhere, eradicated its use by implying it > was "grammatically incorrect", even when used correctly as > "ain't I?". > > The same fate might've become of "they" used with singular nouns > if Jim Quinn hadn't rallied to it's cause and enlightened people > of its HISTORIC use instead of letting self-appointed "defenders > of the language" eradicate yet another useful word from our > speech. > > At some point you have to realize that grammar was a set of rules > that someone came up with by EXAMINING HOW THE LANGUAGE IS USED, > not by some abstract set of BNF charts that were logically > consistent. Grammar is not logically consistent. > > I actually use "Aren't I?". I only use "Am I not?" when I want to > sound pompous. > -- > Gordon A. Moffett ...!{ihnp4,hplabs,sun}!amdahl!gam Let's all start using "ain't I" and revive this useful and persecuted phrase. Maybe we can start a *movement*... Seriously, "ain't I" *works* better than anything the english teachers would have us use. Let's do it! Charlie