News:

And we're back!

Main Menu

Oxford's Word of the Year 2015 is...

Started by Liep, November 17, 2015, 09:51:01 AM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages 1 2 3 4
User actions

Admiral Yi

#45
January 10, 2016, 03:28:24 AM
Quote from: Martinus on January 10, 2016, 02:48:31 AM
Is this proper use:

"They who embraces "they (singular)" should die in a house fire"?

No.  Those who embrace.

grumbler

#46
January 10, 2016, 08:46:52 AM
Quote from: Martinus on January 10, 2016, 02:48:31 AM
Quote from: garbon on January 09, 2016, 09:29:35 PM
Meanwhile America has embraced they (singular). :showoff:

Is this proper use:

"They who embraces "they (singular)" should die in a house fire"?

No.  "Someone who wants their vocab to sound modern embraces 'they (singular).'"
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

mongers

#47
January 10, 2016, 02:32:04 PM
2025 - OED includes Theys as the plural of they(singular) as in "Theys r* appy**"




* 2023 - had seen the dropping on 'pointless' vowels.

** 2019 - with the acceptance of Estuary English as the new official standard for the King's English, h was entirely dropped from the language, one consequence was King William had to ask prince Arry to leave the country. 

"We have it in our power to begin the world over again"

garbon

#48
January 10, 2016, 02:51:03 PM
Lame, mongers, even for you. Used of singular they has nothing to do with dumbing down the language.
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."

I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

grumbler

#49
January 10, 2016, 03:18:54 PM
Quote from: garbon on January 10, 2016, 02:51:03 PM
Lame, mongers, even for you. Used of singular they has nothing to do with dumbing down the language.

It will be interesting to see if this goes further than the organic adoption of plural 'they" as I demonstrated above. Will we see "Billy wanted to get a good seat, so they bought their tickets early?"  That would be the logical progression if this really is a change to eliminate gender distinctions.  I don't see that catching on, myself, but I'd make no bets when it comes to language.
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

Valmy

#50
January 11, 2016, 10:19:49 AM
Quote from: garbon on January 10, 2016, 02:51:03 PM
Lame, mongers, even for you. Used of singular they has nothing to do with dumbing down the language.

It is about making language more confusing. I always thought having different words indicating singular and plural were supposed to serve some kind of purpose.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

grumbler

#51
January 11, 2016, 10:46:09 AM
Quote from: Valmy on January 11, 2016, 10:19:49 AM
It is about making language more confusing. I always thought having different words indicating singular and plural were supposed to serve some kind of purpose.

Luckily for you, this isn't about eliminating all different words indicating singular and plural, so your concern is misplaced.
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

Valmy

#52
January 11, 2016, 10:51:29 AM
Quote from: grumbler on January 11, 2016, 10:46:09 AM
Quote from: Valmy on January 11, 2016, 10:19:49 AM
It is about making language more confusing. I always thought having different words indicating singular and plural were supposed to serve some kind of purpose.

Luckily for you, this isn't about eliminating all different words indicating singular and plural, so your concern is misplaced.

Only one of the most commonly used ones. Besides I only noted it made language more confusing not entirely so.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

grumbler

#53
January 11, 2016, 11:25:54 AM
Quote from: Valmy on January 11, 2016, 10:51:29 AM
Only one of the most commonly used ones. Besides I only noted it made language more confusing not entirely so.

The noun is supposed to tell you how to interpret the pronoun anyway.  Insofar as this has been an organic change so far, I don't think that it has made the language more confusing at all, and you have presented no evidence for the confusion.

If, as I noted above, this gets pursued as a PC "let's get rid of gender references" thing, then it might get confusing and so, as I note, likely fail.  But the currant usage isn't confusing at all.  There isn't a person can't understand it if they just try.
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

garbon

#54
January 11, 2016, 12:26:15 PM
Yeah, I don't think it'll make things more difficult but then I've long used it this way. Seems to me though, it'll only be unclear if you haven't been clear about the originating noun...which if that is the case, you've already significant issues with clarity. Just who are they?
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."

I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.
Print
Go Up Pages 1 2 3 4
User actions