699
they don't mind
(lemmy.blahaj.zone)
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
Related communities:
Singular "they" triggers agreement with the same verb forms as plural "they". Just like "you" - no matter if I'm saying "you are a muppet", it's still "are" (even if singular), not "art" or "bist" (as you'd use with "thou").
(inb4: the analogy between "you" and "they" is perfectly valid, because "they" is following the exact same path as "you" - even if one refers to the second person, another to the third.)
From your other comment:
They aren't. You're the one getting things wrong, by conflating grammatical number with agreement, as if they were in a 1:1 correspondence.
"Ah yes, let us disregard basic grammar rules in order to make a stupid argument to 'prove' my point, that's clearly what'll convince people that my way is the right one"
Except I am not, they has been used singularly for centuries now.
Let me put it in a way that will make sense for you. Singular "they" is, more often than not, used when people do not know the gender or amount of a group. Whenever you speak of a corporation or company, it is extremely common to use "they" instead of "it". E.g. "they are the ones in charge of making that decision". In the example, you are speaking of a company or similar group, a singular entity by itself. However, since the speaker does not know who or how many people make this decision, the speaker uses a singular "they".
This is but one example of how they has been used as a singular pronoun for ages, but let us digress a little bit. Why the fuck is the royal "we" allowed, but not the singular "they"? They both follow the same structure but inverse of each other, where the royal we is a way to say "I'm speaking of myself as a part of a bigger entity/community". You can make an argument that both of these carry plural connotations, but my point is that grammar rules and language as a whole is way more nuanced than black or white.
So, please, save your spit and time with a counter argument that only pushes forward discriminating thinking and stop being a pussy about language change.
Btw, I'm not a native English speaker, which goes to show that I was actively taught about singular they, instead of picking it up intuitively like most native speakers do.
Edit PS: don't even think of using my non-nativeness as a point against me, I know for a fact I have better grammar and care more about orthography than the average native speaker.
You, in this case, is singular. Why are you using are?!
It turns out, "the issues this causes for clarity in language" don't actually matter, and it doesn't cause any issues. It's perfectly clear "you" and "they" here are singular, despite the plural grammar. It is not confusing, as you clearly proved in your own comment by using "you are."
“They are running late”. We’ve been using the singular “they” for hundreds of years, it isn’t that difficult. German uses third person plural for polite second person singular, it’s not that weird to have third person plural be third person singular, too, especially when English makes no distinction between between “you” and “you”.
Anyway, it’s simple shit.
You are singularly really dumb.
Huh? I'm a dummy--teach me this arcane English rule that i wasn't aware of until now. For what it's worth though: Have you always held such righteous standards for dialogue? Hard to follow what people are saying when they (oops!) speak with the wrong perspective? You must struggle in the modern world, the way people eviscerate our language publicly pretty much 24/7. I'd feel bad for you if you seemed like a decent person.
Sure pal
Edit: tagged you they/them
Have a nice weekend, champ
As opposed to arguing about fake rules that don’t even exist in modern English, maybe just apply the slightest bit of logic. Language doesn't work the way you are insisting it does, it’s not math.
No, you dummy. The reason we use "are" with "you" is because it was originally plural. However, language is mutable and ever-changing. You is almost exclusively used as singular now, yet it keeps the plural "are". The point being, your statement that "they is" is wrong doesn't prove anything. We use the "wrong" grammar for words all the time and we don't care, until you can do it to hurt someone.
You are almost there, well done for trying
You is not very smart, is you?
You might want to work on your grammar, my friend.
'Tis meet that some more audience than a mother, since nature makes them partial, should o'erhear the speech."— Shakespeare, Hamlet (1599);
Caesar: "No, Cleopatra. No man goes to battle to be killed." Cleopatra: "But they do get killed" —Shaw, Caesar and Cleopatra (1901);
In an 1881 letter, Emily Dickinson wrote "Almost anyone under the circumstances would have doubted if [the letter] were theirs, or indeed if they were themself."
George Eliot (1859) – Adam Bede: “It is too late to spare anyone when they are dead.”
So you would say that when referencing a singular specific person of undeterminate gender in the third person we should use is? Because I am quite sure that, if that has ever been correct at all, it certainly isn't now. As per merriam webster: A student was found with a knife and a BB gun in their backpack Monday, district spokeswoman Renee Murphy confirmed. The student, whose name has not been released, will be disciplined according to district policies, Murphy said. They also face charges from outside law enforcement, she said.— Olivia Krauth
E: also, "Each member [of the women's touch football team] found something they could improve on in the future."
Dalby (Queensland) Herald (Nexis) 21 October 16, 2014 (as quoted in the oxford english dictionary)
Contradicts you as well unless you'd like to argue that "each man are fighting for himself" is correct.
The Cleopatra quote is talking about individuals; Individuals which we know make up a group, but individuals nonetheless.
“Anyone” is a similar concept. You talk about a single person(it’s right there in the word) and apply that condition to however many people. An example in a group of all men would be “anyone may leave the room if he so chooses” and even though it sounds weird, because we heavily favour the singular they, it absolutely works.
This has strong “everything is a conspiracy when you don’t understand how anything works” vibes. Your lack of understanding shouldn’t have to be everyone else’s problem.
They're running late?