Non gendered pronouns in other languages

[hellymedic]

Working in Glasgow around 1990, I found it was far more common to feminise rôle type nouns with the *ess suffix than had been the norm in Southern England.
Our receptionists were clerkesses. I don't know if this usage has persisted another three decades.

[drossall]

The original question was whether other languages have "more elegant" solutions to the problem of binary gendered pronouns than we have in English. But the singular "they/them" only seems "clunky" because it's unfamiliar, and I maintain that this is something we'll all get over soon enough as we become more accustomed to it.

I'm not sure whether that's strictly correct. The point of different words, or rules about how words are used, is to allow nuances that are lost when those distinctions are surrendered. Often it doesn't matter, but sometimes it does.

So you can see how "Peter discussed with Mary whether they should take the new job" now leaves us uncertain not only which person, but even how many of them, is/are seeking employment. What's more, we're talking about third-person pronouns here. By definition, those are mostly used in the absence of the person involved because, if I'm present, I'm probably either "I/me" or "you". And discussions that happen when I'm absent are those most likely to involve people who don't know me and don't know my preferred pronouns, so have the worst chance of decoding that kind of sentence about me.

Whereas a new, non-gender-specific pronoun would at least have narrowed the field a bit.

Also, there's clumsiness from knock-on changes. For example, "If I wave to another cyclist, are they likely to respond?" But there's only one cyclist and, even if we allow that the pronoun is they to be gender-neutral, why has the verb gone plural too? So we've got a complete change in the rules for conjugating verbs if, and only if, one particular pronoun is in use. That makes parsing sentences harder, surely?

What's worse, sometimes I think it's just clumsy because there's a more natural answer. If you're going to put the pronoun in the plural to avoid an unwarranted gender implication, why not just follow through and do the whole sentence? It doesn't always work, but often it does: "If I wave to other cyclists, are they likely to respond?"

[grams]

“They are” is still singular.

I still don’t understand what world people are living in where singular they is still uncommon. Finding some text that uses “he or she” or worse “he” when describing an unknown person is like finding a price written in pounds shillings and pence.

[Cudzoziemiec]

Absolutely. "They are" in this context is no more plural than "you are".

[Cudzoziemiec]

Czech surnames are always gendered, if they don't have an adjectival ending they make one up by putting -ová on the end to make a feminine. This can even extend to foreign names: on my first visit there I listened to a news report about Margaret Thatcherová (it was a long time ago). I'd not come across different family members having different versions of the surname, but I wouldn't put it past the Czechs: they have the most insanely complicated language. I tried learning it once, I gave up when I realised it wasn't worth the effort.

Margaret Thatcherova and Carol Thatcherovna, I think. Doubtless there's another form for referring to both together and a fourth for the whole Thatcher family.

Thatcherovna sounds like some strange patronymic (or matronymic, possibly, in this case). And you are quite right, the two of them would be Thatcherovy and the whole family Thatcherovi.

It's not a matronymic. That would be something like Margaretova. Nor is it a matrilineal surname, which in this case would be Roberts.

The Garo people of North-East India use matrilineal surnames (I know this cos I used to work with some) but I don't know of any language or place that uses matronymics, which is a shame, cos I think it would be a great way to name people.

[T42]

“They are” is still singular.

I still don’t understand what world people are living in where singular they is still uncommon. Finding some text that uses “he or she” or worse “he” when describing an unknown person is like finding a price written in pounds shillings and pence.

The difference is that it is no longer colloquial.  20 years ago it still was - but 20 years ago only a pretty rash company would have dared bring out a product called "Sticks like Sh*t".

[drossall]

Absolutely. "They are" in this context is no more plural than "you are".

But in terms of sentence parsing, the loss is the same as the loss of "thou art", because a distinction is removed, so the reader/hearer has to do more work to determine to whom the reference is being made. All I was saying is that there is a downside.

[citoyen]

So you can see how "Peter discussed with Mary whether they should take the new job" now leaves us uncertain not only which person, but even how many of them, is/are seeking employment.

And what if instead of Peter and Mary, it's two people called Peter? Would the world collapse into a black hole of irresolvable ambiguity? Or would people find some way to understand each other like they tend to do in real life?

[Rod Marton]

Czech surnames are always gendered, if they don't have an adjectival ending they make one up by putting -ová on the end to make a feminine. This can even extend to foreign names: on my first visit there I listened to a news report about Margaret Thatcherová (it was a long time ago). I'd not come across different family members having different versions of the surname, but I wouldn't put it past the Czechs: they have the most insanely complicated language. I tried learning it once, I gave up when I realised it wasn't worth the effort.

Margaret Thatcherova and Carol Thatcherovna, I think. Doubtless there's another form for referring to both together and a fourth for the whole Thatcher family.

Thatcherovna sounds like some strange patronymic (or matronymic, possibly, in this case). And you are quite right, the two of them would be Thatcherovy and the whole family Thatcherovi.

It's not a matronymic. That would be something like Margaretova. Nor is it a matrilineal surname, which in this case would be Roberts.

The Garo people of North-East India use matrilineal surnames (I know this cos I used to work with some) but I don't know of any language or place that uses matronymics, which is a shame, cos I think it would be a great way to name people.

Agreed. It would be great. I believe matronymics were used in parts of mediaeval France. This probably says something about the French.

[T42]

Absolutely. "They are" in this context is no more plural than "you are".

But in terms of sentence parsing, the loss is the same as the loss of "thou art", because a distinction is removed, so the reader/hearer has to do more work to determine to whom the reference is being made. All I was saying is that there is a downside.

Thou art is paralleled by the German du bist, which is the familiar form. The formal parallel of you are is Sie sind, which is similar but for a capital S to sie sind, meaning they are. (To add to the confusion, sie also means she.)  I've no idea what terms non-binary Germans use. Strikes me that the non-binary thing in English is only succeeding (or at least spreading) because English grammar is so simple, but that's just my idea.

So you can see how "Peter discussed with Mary whether they should take the new job" now leaves us uncertain not only which person, but even how many of them, is/are seeking employment.

And what if instead of Peter and Mary, it's two people called Peter? Would the world collapse into a black hole of irresolvable ambiguity? Or would people find some way to understand each other like they tend to do in real life?

Some hand-waving would probably be involved.

[Cudzoziemiec]

Sure, we've lost "thou art". Germans might look at that and wonder how we cope in English without the formal/informal distinction. But somehow we've been coping with it (expressing it in other ways) all our lives. We're continually losing some distinctions and developing others.

[pcolbeck]

Sure, we've lost "thou art". Germans might look at that and wonder how we cope in English without the formal/informal distinction. But somehow we've been coping with it (expressing it in other ways) all our lives. We're continually losing some distinctions and developing others.

There is a theory that this is why people particularly kids have a tendency to say "you is" instead of "you are". Its a simplification of the language that somehow people notice and try and reach for a way to put it back.

[ian]

“They are” is still singular.

I still don’t understand what world people are living in where singular they is still uncommon. Finding some text that uses “he or she” or worse “he” when describing an unknown person is like finding a price written in pounds shillings and pence.

I always write she, not really as any great strike for feminism, but because it triggers the maximum number of gammons (who exceed the grammar 'they is not singular' nazis by a fair number).

[drossall]

And what if instead of Peter and Mary, it's two people called Peter? Would the world collapse into a black hole of irresolvable ambiguity? Or would people find some way to understand each other like they tend to do in real life?

I don't think I suggested anything more than that they'd need to find some way to understand each other, where previously that was not needed. And that an additional ambiguity was being introduced (and therefore an additional need for clarification), because it has become impossible to distinguish the plural from the singular when parsing what has been said. My point was that something has been lost, which I think your "find some way to understand each other" allows?

[hellymedic]

Czech surnames are always gendered, if they don't have an adjectival ending they make one up by putting -ová on the end to make a feminine. This can even extend to foreign names: on my first visit there I listened to a news report about Margaret Thatcherová (it was a long time ago). I'd not come across different family members having different versions of the surname, but I wouldn't put it past the Czechs: they have the most insanely complicated language. I tried learning it once, I gave up when I realised it wasn't worth the effort.

Margaret Thatcherova and Carol Thatcherovna, I think. Doubtless there's another form for referring to both together and a fourth for the whole Thatcher family.

Thatcherovna sounds like some strange patronymic (or matronymic, possibly, in this case). And you are quite right, the two of them would be Thatcherovy and the whole family Thatcherovi.

It's not a matronymic. That would be something like Margaretova. Nor is it a matrilineal surname, which in this case would be Roberts.
The Garo people of North-East India use matrilineal surnames (I know this cos I used to work with some) but I don't know of any language or place that uses matronymics, which is a shame, cos I think it would be a great way to name people.

When Jews say prayers for the deparately sick, the name used is for [person] child of [mother] to incite the mercy of a mother's love.

[Jakob]

As a non-native English speaker, 'they/them' sounds plural and confusing. Inventing a new word would be far more practical, in my opinion, rather than making English an even bigger mess than it already is.

[ian]

The way to absolutely ensure that a word won't be taken up is to purposefully invent it.

English is, by definition, a language of inadvertent words that just wandered in and mostly haven't bothered to leave.

[Jakob]

And it shows!. Easily the worst of the languages I had to learn.

[Bledlow]

Japanese does not use gendered pronouns or titles, in general. San is polite for Mr, Mrs, & miss. Sama is more polite, e.g. lord/lady or (these days) either being especially polite or slightly taking the piss by using the ultra polite word. Chan is more for girls & kun for boys, but neither is solely for one sex.

[Jakob]

Japanese does not use gendered pronouns or titles, in general. San is polite for Mr, Mrs, & miss. Sama is more polite, e.g. lord/lady or (these days) either being especially polite or slightly taking the piss by using the ultra polite word. Chan is more for girls & kun for boys, but neither is solely for one sex.

No, but casual form can be very distinctly female or male in usage.

http://people.umass.edu/partee/MGU_2009/papers/Ponamareva.pdf

[rogerzilla]

Japanese does not use gendered pronouns or titles, in general. San is polite for Mr, Mrs, & miss. Sama is more polite, e.g. lord/lady or (these days) either being especially polite or slightly taking the piss by using the ultra polite word. Chan is more for girls & kun for boys, but neither is solely for one sex.

Hence Domo-kun, NHK mascot but most familiar to westerners from the "godkills" meme (fairly safe for work, no actual kittens were harmed).

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Every_time_you_masturbate..._God_kills_a_kitten

[T42]

There are altogether too many cats in the world.

[T42]

Sure, we've lost "thou art". Germans might look at that and wonder how we cope in English without the formal/informal distinction. But somehow we've been coping with it (expressing it in other ways) all our lives. We're continually losing some distinctions and developing others.

We still have the tu/vous distinction in French.  Years ago, when I first started road cycling here, using tu to each other was common between cyclists meeting casually on the road, as it is between professional people (doctors etc) even in formal letters.  Nowadays if you tag onto a bunch on the road it's safer to say vous.  But then, fewer and fewer cyclists say hello these days.

[CAMRAMan]

My Romanian cleaning lady refers to her husband/son/daughter as 'it' so I suspect gendered pronouns aren't used in her native tongue.

Is she a Romanian Hungarian, by any chance? They do have a sizeable Hungarian minority. My knowledge of Romanian is scant, but doesn't it resemble French quite closely? Hungarian, on the other hand is like Finnish, where there is only one pronoun - ö -for both genders and neuter nouns.

A Hungarian spinster called Katalin Kovacs marrying a Hungarian man called Gergely Karacsony used to become Karacsony Gegelyne* after marriage - the 'ne' denoting possession. Thus losing all her previous identity. That's still quite common in the countryside and further east in the country. I suppose that used to happen here with 'Mrs John Smith', for example.

* Hungarians use the format 'family name - given name' when writing their names.

[drossall]

My mother still sends birthday cards to my wife in that format. Although, even about 45 years ago, I remember being corrected by my mother for sending a card to my grandmother, after my grandfather had passed away, addressed to "Mrs John Smith". My mother was quite insistent that, for a widow, it should be "Mrs Mary Smith".