{"id":1030,"date":"2007-07-21T15:25:56","date_gmt":"2007-07-21T22:25:56","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/rifftides\/wp\/?p=1030"},"modified":"2007-07-21T15:25:56","modified_gmt":"2007-07-21T22:25:56","slug":"weekend_extra_other_matters","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/rifftides\/2007\/07\/weekend_extra_other_matters\/","title":{"rendered":"Weekend Extra: Other Matters"},"content":{"rendered":"

Singular They<\/strong>
\nBy way of suggesting that I was misguided when I railed against <\/a>the use of “they” with singular antecedents, Rifftides <\/em>reader David Seidman directed me to a web log called Language Log<\/em>. Language Log<\/em> summons up the Bible and Shakespeare to make the case that “everyone” and “themselves” are good partners, and concludes, alliteratively:<\/p>\n

This use of “they” isn’t ungrammatical, it isn’t a mistake, it’s a feature of ordinary English syntax that for some reason attracts the ire of particularly puristic pusillanimous pontificators, and we don’t buy what they’re selling.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

If this argument interests you, here is Mr. Seidman’s communique, complete with links to Language Log<\/em> entries on the matter and, for dessert, to an essay on Ray Charles and a language choice he made in a performance of one of his most famous specialties.<\/p>\n

A covey of professors of linguistics operates a blog called Language Log<\/em>. One of the professors wrote, some time ago, “Singular they, as we’ve repeated at tiresome length, has been sanctioned for centuries by the usage of esteemed writers, though it’s deprecated by some.” These blog posts cover singular they in the Bible<\/a> and in Shakespeare<\/a>, as well as some other things:
\nSome of the same material is covered in the Wikipedia article<\/a> Singular They — Wikipedia notes the content is disputed (and the full notes on the disputes seem to be available).
\nWhile at Language Log <\/em>(which I read regularly, perhaps less because I am interested in language than because the writers write well, interestingly, and often very amusingly), you might want to take a look at this entry<\/a>, which has nothing to do with the singular they. It is an appreciation of Ray Charles’s magnificence, combined with an analysis of a linguistic error in his recording of “America the Beautiful” — the analysis includes a highly plausible discussion of the likely reasons why Charles made the error.
\nDavid Seidman<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

As for the Rifftides<\/em> staff, it invites, or they invite, further discussion. Just click on the “Comments” link at the bottom of this item.
\nHave a linguistically satisfying weekend.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Singular They By way of suggesting that I was misguided when I railed against the use of “they” with singular antecedents, Rifftides reader David Seidman directed me to a web log called Language Log. Language Log summons up the Bible and Shakespeare to make the case that “everyone” and “themselves” are good partners, and concludes, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_genesis_hide_title":false,"_genesis_hide_breadcrumbs":false,"_genesis_hide_singular_image":false,"_genesis_hide_footer_widgets":false,"_genesis_custom_body_class":"","_genesis_custom_post_class":"","_genesis_layout":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-1030","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-main","7":"entry"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/rifftides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1030","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/rifftides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/rifftides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/rifftides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/rifftides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1030"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/rifftides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1030\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/rifftides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1030"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/rifftides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1030"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/rifftides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1030"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}