Politically Correct Language

[emsr2d2]

I don't have much of a problem with the feminine version of a noun which used to only have a male version but I don't think it should be obligatory and I certainly can't see how anyone could be offended by the name of a job. It's this bizarre attempt to make everything sex-less (gender neutral) that I can't understand.

If the chair of a board is male, then he's the chairman. If the chair of a board is female, then she's the chairwoman. I don't think we should have to create the word "chairperson" just to keep everyone happy.

[probus]

I am in full sympathy with all that has been said in this thread. But ems's opinion is out of step with what is actually happening in response to this PC impetus. Instead of chairmen or chairwomen or chairpersons, what we now have are human chairs, at least on the boards I sit on or chair.

But worse, by far, is usage like this: If anyone thinks, does, has or whatever, THEY ... This is rapidly becoming standard. The feminists won the political battle, and quite rightly in my opinion. Now as a result of their victory the language is being forced into new and uncharted territory.

[5jj]

But worse, by far, is usage like this: If anyone thinks, does, has or whatever, THEY ... This is rapidly becoming standard. The feminists won the political battle, and quite rightly in my opinion. Now as a result of their victory the language is being forced into new and uncharted territory.

I can't agree with you on that one, probus. This is one occasion where a little bit of PC pressure has tipped the balance in favour of common usage. For the majority of native speakers, they/them/their were always the pronouns of choice for some/any/nobody, some/any/no-one, etc. Generations of tyrannical schoolteachers tried to insist that only the 'all-embracing' (!) masculine pronoun should be used, and generations of editors and proofreaders enforced the rule. Meanwhile, ordinary people ignored the rule in their everyday speech and correspondence, either (depending on their approach to arbitrary authority) blushing or looking a little puzzled if they were reproached by Class X, that small, self-appointed and self-perpetuating clique of people who knew beyond any doubt that people who used a plural pronoun for indefinite determiners belonged in that subspecies of yahoos who did not understand when to use whom, dropped inital hs, split infinitives, said 'It's me', didn't wear a tie on Sundays and ate dinner in the middle of the day.

Formal logic has never been one of the foundations of natural languages, though for several centuries 'educated' people tried to force native speakers of English into its (somewhat twisted) yoke. A rearguard action by Class X to compromise on the replacement of he with he or she, she or he, s/he, (s)he or newly-invented words was largely treated with the contempt it deserved.

PC pressure has caused some changes in usage which I regret, largely because they are, or were, not natural.The release of the plural pronoun from its underground samizdat existence to a newly-won respectability is one of the changes I welcome.

[Tdol]

It took years for me to get used to complete strangers addressing me by my first name after two seconds' acquaintance.

Five, sorry, uh Mr J, or Mr JJ.

A lot of what is known as PC language strikes me as simply a question of manners and is fine- the use of they as a non-gender specific pronoun that comes up later in the thread is an example that I approve of. When the terms change endlessly, it simply becomes annoying, but this example strikes me more as corporate speak than PC. The use of first names has sent me back to more formal forms - I use sir and madam more than I used to - and I don't want to be asked how we guys are doin' tonight- I want to be served good food, largely in silence, but I am not sure that the PC gang are guilty here.

[emsr2d2]

But worse, by far, is usage like this: If anyone thinks, does, has or whatever, THEY ... This is rapidly becoming standard. The feminists won the political battle, and quite rightly in my opinion. Now as a result of their victory the language is being forced into new and uncharted territory.

I'm not sure about your definition of rapidly. Using "they" instead of "he/she" was well-established 40 years ago when I was a child learning the language so it's been around rather too long to be considered to be currently rapidly becoming standard. It is entirely standard and much preferable, in my opinion, to faffing about with "he/she", "him/her", "his/her" etc.

[emsr2d2]

The use of first names has sent me back to more formal forms - I use sir and madam more than I used to - and I don't want to be asked how we guys are doin' tonight- I want to be served good food, largely in silence, but I am not sure that the PC gang are guilty here.

Were you referring to the use of first names by wait staff or by other people?

I'm curious as to how you would (if you had to) address those wait staff. If they are wearing a name tag, would you ever say "Excuse me, Joseph (for example), may I have another pitcher of water?" or would you call him "waiter" or "nothing at all"? I assume you expect him to refer to you as "Sir".

[5jj]

I'm curious as to how you would (if you had to) address those wait staff. If they are wearing a name tag, would you ever say "Excuse me, Joseph (for example), may I have another pitcher of water?" or would you call him "waiter" or "nothing at all"? I assume you expect him to refer to you as "Sir".

I am not someone who goes around asserting the superiority (or inferiority) of one language compared with another, but I do, sometimes, regret the lack in English of a deference-free equivalent of (for example) the French Monsieur/madame/mademoiselle. Perhaps it's a result of my age and/or background, but there are few situations in which I can happily address anyone as 'sir'(/'madam'), and as few in which I am comfortable at being addressed as 'sir'.

Although I was brought up to despise 'You're welcome' (horrid transpondial practice) as a response to being thanked (a true Englishman simply gives a self-deprecating smile), I have learnt to appreciate it. I look forward to an acceptable English equivalent to 'monsieur/senor/pane/etc' and 'bon appetit/buen apetito/dobrou chut/etc'.

[probus]

I'm not sure about your definition of rapidly. Using "they" instead of "he/she" was well-established 40 years ago when I was a child learning the language so it's been around rather too long to be considered to be currently rapidly becoming standard. It is entirely standard and much preferable, in my opinion, to faffing about with "he/she", "him/her", "his/her" etc.

What I meant by rapidly is that resistance to the usage of they is fading away, as 5jj noted. I know that many people were using this they fifty and sixty years ago, but I accepted the instruction I received and always tried to avoid it myself. Certainly I never let it creep into any of my writing. Nowadays, however, I hear highly educated professional wordsmiths using it freely, and one of them , a lawyer, smartly told me it was now standard.

[Tdol]

Were you referring to the use of first names by wait staff or by other people?

I was thinking of call centres.

[5jj]

I have moved the 'Enjoy your meal' discussion to a thread of its own.