Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site pyuxt.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxv!pyuxt!marcus From: marcus@pyuxt.UUCP (M. G. Hand) Newsgroups: net.nlang Subject: Re: "Their" as a substitute for his/her Message-ID: <236@pyuxt.UUCP> Date: Wed, 9-Jan-85 14:47:34 EST Article-I.D.: pyuxt.236 Posted: Wed Jan 9 14:47:34 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 11-Jan-85 23:19:01 EST References: <1108@teddy.UUCP> Organization: Bell Communications Research, Piscataway N.J. Lines: 21 In Message-ID: <1108@teddy.UUCP> mlf@teddy.UUCP (Matt L. Fichtenbaum) states: > sentences such as "everyone should sign their name" are _wrong_. yes! "everyone should sign their names... when they arrive." :-) Actually, although its not strictly grammatically correct to mix these singulars and plurals, it is accepted usage and has been so by all but pernicketty (sp?) latin masters for over a hundred years. I think that the sound or readiability of a sentence is important: often the ambiguities are resolved by context and never arise. Unless you're writing a legal document their and they are quite acceptable ways of avoiding he/she, and the stilted one's. (But, anyway, wouldn't one who assumed that "he" did not include the female also assume that "they" applied to that same group? Ie. the reader makes an assumption early in the document about whom the document refers) -- Marcus Hand {ihnp4!}pyuxt!marcus