use of "them" in place of "him/her"

[arachnar]

It's college credits though.

 

[Pearl]

I despise the use of "them" when referring to a single unspecified person or other gendered creature. When I was working as a book editor, and later in my own writing, I made sure that "them" was only used for more than one entity. There is no reason a person can't maintain his or her grammar skills as the old Chicago Manual of Style would have one do so.

I agree. In my opinion the only time "them" or "they" should be used to refer to an unspecified individual would be as an afterthought; as in, "If a man or a woman chooses, then it's appropriate to accommodate them." Of course I'm referring to formal writing and not everyday conversation or the artistic license that may be taken by creative writers.

 

[Liz]

I thought I learned in English a few years ago NOT to use "them" as that indicates plural... And my english teacher was also an AP teacher...

 

[stratusfearrr]

I agree. In my opinion the only time "them" or "they" should be used to refer to an unspecified individual would be as an afterthought; as in, "If a man or a woman chooses, then it's appropriate to accommodate them." Of course I'm referring to formal writing and not everyday conversation or the artistic license that may be taken by creative writers.

Yes, i also agree, but it is however GRAMMATICALLY CORRECT to use them. Which i found to be kind of peculiar

 

[dundadundun]

aww to heck w/grammer... it just doesn't quite add up like math.

Hmm I was taught the same thing in ap like use oneself or man(as in a neuter form like in german and other languagues.)

although... i'm not too sure i'd personally use the above bold underlined words particularly in the same sentence myself... especially not with womenfolk nearby... don't want to spawn any new ideas here. :lipssealedsmilie:

 

[Amphiprion]

Yes, i also agree, but it is however GRAMMATICALLY CORRECT to use them. Which i found to be kind of peculiar

I don't even keep track of it anymore. The rules are bent constantly to cope with the evolution of the language. I guess this is how it has always worked, but I do wish that better standards could be established as opposed to opting for one of several potential options. Case in point: lit vs lighted. I've always been taught the latter, whereas the former started off as a common use of improper form, which gradually came into acceptance. I just don't like the idea of something that was grammatically incorrect to start with suddenly becoming accepted just because a number of individuals used it on a regular basis. That's me, though.

 

[Somervell]

Yes, i also agree, but it is however GRAMMATICALLY CORRECT to use them. Which i found to be kind of peculiar

Sorry, can't go with that one. (Did I miss the source on this?) I agree that the usage that you describe has become common place to avoid gender designation, but it is not correct grammatically speaking. One cannot change a designated pronoun to make it suddenly singular because it is politically correct to do so. Spoken English and Standard Edited American English are often very different.

I teach college English, and the way to avoid this error all together is use a plural noun when you want to solve the gender reference problem-- As in "Students should remember to bring their lab coats to class." Rather than the awkward 'A student should remember to bring his or her lab coat to class." or the incorrect "A student should remember to bring their lab coat to class."

 

[gmh]

I like the term 'he she or it'; covers all the bases.

 

[jpappy789]

I say as long as you understand what they/she/he is saying...why bother?

 

[groovitudedude]

The decision of the status quo was left to his/her hands

OR

The decision of the status quo was left in thier hands.


IT is apparent which one sounds better, and flows easier.

Better learn how to spell if you're gonna pass the AP test :duh:

but seriously, that's pretty interesting