Sorry, but I don't understand this. Romance languages make more differences
between genders than English.
So, for example, 'they' is translated in Spanish as 'ellos' (male) or
'ellas' (female). The same for portuguese 'elos' and 'elas'.
'We' in Spanish is 'nosotros' (male) and 'nosotras' (female). (However the
Portuguese 'nós' and the Italian 'noi' is the same for both)
In cases of mixed references, the male form is generally used. Nobody seems
to be terribly upset about this...
As far as I know, there isn't a "third person pronoun as a second person
neutral gendered reference" , so something seems to be escaping me here.
On the other hand, even in a relatively sexist society as is Spain, where I
live, a woman simply doesn't change her maiden name just because she is
married. No married woman would accept being called 'Mrs. Joe Smith' here.
Even more: the colloquial 'hombre' (man) which in Spain means many things
depending on pronunciation and context, is used even between two women
talking to each other. Sort of a gender justice, isn't it?
Tom
At 03:35 19/08/2005, you wrote:
-- snip --
>... in an article in Verbatum the magazine of philogists declared that
>'for the English language in the face of politically correct usage
>complexities the third person pronoun will now be used as in romanic
>languages as a second person neutral gendered reference.'
>
>In my kind of language, that means the word 'they' will now replace thge
>idiotic 'he or she' in phrases of generalization. IE The editors of the
>magazine had chosen my article, and they will pay me with a checque.
>Instead of: The editors of the magazine had chosen my article, and he or
>she will pay me with a check.
>
>So, you notice something?
>
>S. Shapiro
Received on Fri Aug 19 01:04:59 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 09/01/05-09:17:20 AM Z CST