It is a boy

[Joea]

How do you say baby's gender?
Is it "it's a boy" or not?

I just read from my the other tread that calling people with "it" is disrespectful, and wooo~~~, I remenber when I was backpacking in Austraila, making my traveling expense at farms, that the australians used "it" to call people like us.
Woo... Dam...

 

[emsr2d2]

I have no idea why your post is littered with non-words like "wooo" and "dam" and there are multiple full stops at the end. You also need to read your posts carefully and check for spelling errors. You didn't mean "tread" or "remenber". You remembered to capitalise "Australia" but not "Australians".

 

[Raymott]

Yes, you can use "It's [the baby] a boy". "He's a boy" is a little redundant!
I'm not sure about your Australian experience. We use "it" to refer to people like what? It's news to me. Can you give an example?

 

[Joea]

Yes, you can use "It's [the baby] a boy". "He's a boy" is a little redundant!
I'm not sure about your Australian experience. We use "it" to refer to people like what? It's news to me. Can you give an example?

Thank you Raymott,

This wasn't about putting Australian on the spot. I loved Australia and still thinking about going back one day, exploring more. It was my fault to say australian as in whole, instead of using some people or farm owners in Australia.

 

[Raymott]

Fine. I still don't get it though. I'm trying to think of a context in which it could be used.

 

[Raymott]

Of course, there are occasions where we call people (including babies) 'it'.
If someone was on the phone for me, I might ask, "Is it a man or a woman?" (referring to a human being). And the person who answered the phone might say, "Does it matter whether it's man or a woman?" The same applies when asking "Is it a boy or a girl?"
The context matters.

A: "One of my relatives died last night."
B: "Oh I'm sorry. Was it your grandmother?"

Boss: "Anyone who doesn't work around here will be fired. It doesn't matter who it is."

So I wouldn't be too dogmatic about never calling people (or babies) "it".

 

[emsr2d2]

A: "One of my relatives died last night."
B: "Oh I'm sorry. Was it your grandmother?"

In your example, I don't consider it to be the grandmother who is being referred to as "it". The "it" belongs to "the situation". The reply to your question would be "Yes, it was my grandmother [who died]". It wouldn't be possible to change that answer to "Yes, she was my grandmother [who died]".

However, it would be completely unacceptable to say "Oh, I'm sorry. Was it ill for long?" In that regard, "it" clearly refers to "one of my relatives" and could not be used.

 

[Raymott]

I'd say 'it' refers to "the person who died", just as "it" refers to a person in all my other examples. But that's not important; one debatable illustration doesn't invalidate the point.

 

[MikeNewYork]

I agree with ems.

 

[Raymott]

I agree with ems.

I guessed that, given that you 'Liked' her post. Should I clarify my post by saying that I don't?
I agree with her second paragraph, of course.

 

[MikeNewYork]

My post was not meant for you. It was meant for other readers who could have been confused by the disagreement. The universal "it" is not specific to any person.

It was my brother who died in the car accident. I am not referring to my brother personally as "it".

 

[Raymott]

Then it's not a universal 'it'; it's an impersonal 'it'. In the sentence "Was it your grandmother [who died]?", 'it' means "the person who died".

 

[MikeNewYork]

I can live with the "impersonal" it. But "it" doesn't refer to the grandmother, not matter how many times you assert that it does.

 

[bhaisahab]

I think "it" could refer to the grandmother impersonally, or to the situation.

 

[Raymott]

I think "it" could refer to the grandmother impersonally, or to the situation.

But I wrote it. My intention was that it should refer to the grandmother. Let's say I was Person B. Person A said one of her relatives died. I asked "Was it your grandmother?" I say this referred to "the relative that died" because that was my intention, but I deny that it means the situation.
Anyhow, I think it's pointless simply to attack one example. Fine, I'll concede that that illustration is not convincing if necessary (maybe I'm not sure what I meant, and that it could not have been the grandmother that died; it must have been the situation I was referring to). But all the examples need to be invalidated to negate my contention that we refer to people in some contexts as an impersonal 'it'.