TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
bryan -dot- westbrook -at- amd -dot- com wrote:
>
> If people stop using them because there is an easier way, then we will lose
> the distinction.
We may lose the distinction between plural and singular, but we gain
an indefinite pronoun that doesn't involve gender. For many
advocates of gender, that seems a fair tradeoff: one distinction
lost, one gained.
>Just because the common use does eventually have a trend towards stripping our language of its specificity does not mean >that those of us who make our living using the language should let it happen without putting up a fight.
I doubt that this trend exists, or at least that it's universal. The
language is probably gaining technological precision, for example.
And, if this is a trend, it's a very old one.
But is it really a lack of precision? I'd argue that a singular
indefinite pronoun is less precise than a plural one. After all,
when you say something like "Everyone is entitled to his opinion,"
you're not really talking about one person; you're creating a
metaphorical Everyman (with Everywoman nowhere in sight; another
impreciseness) that stands for every single person in existence.
>From this perspective, a plural is actually more precise.
At any rate, the idea that "they" can't be used for singular is no
more than a couple of centuries old. It came along about the same
time as people decided that English should imitate mathematics, and
that double-negatives made a positive (try telling that one to the
Anglo-Saxons). I see no reason to defend a relatively recent
innovation, especially one that is broken daily by thousands of
English speakers.
--
Bruce Byfield, Outlaw Communications
604.421.7189 bbyfield -at- axionet -dot- com
*** Deva(tm) Tools for Dreamweaver and Deva(tm) Search ***
Build Contents, Indexes, and Search for Web Sites and Help Systems
Available 4/30/01 at http://www.devahelp.com or info -at- devahelp -dot- com
Sponsored by DigiPub Solutions Corp, producers of PDF 2001 Conference East,
June 4-6, Baltimore, MD. Now covering Acrobat 5. Early registration deadline
April 27. http://www.pdfconference.com.
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
