More on "Singular They": Step 2.5
1. The change begins in oral speech and informal writing.
2. The change shows up in respectable literature.
3. The change is demonstrated in most grammar books as new editions are published.
The steps above are simply from my observation; but I do have a degree in English, so I've had enough experience in the area to see such things take place.
Not all forms of currently unacceptable English will eventually become acceptable. And just because something's used widely at a popular level still doesn't mean it will become acceptable. "Ain't" has not become acceptable in formal grammar and probably never will. The same goes for most slang. Currently, there's greater laxity toward things like split infinitives and prepositions at the end of sentences, but official acceptance is still slow. And in my opinion, there's nothing wrong with slow acceptance of changes. Ultimately these are rules that we agree upon as a civilized society, and they should not be made too quickly.
The English language, contrary to the wishes of traditionalists, is never static. When I was in college, I took a class in 1988 called "Advanced Grammar," which was actually a fairly enjoyable class despite the name. In that class, our main grammar was Descriptive English Grammar, written in 1931 by Homer C. House and Susan Emolyn Harmon. We used the second edition which was a revision by Harmon published in 1950. Our teacher chose this book because she said she liked it better than any of the current grammar books. However, during our instruction, she regularly told us to ignore this or that rule because it was no longer standard practice. I found this ironic since she had praised the merits of this book so strongly on the first day of our class. Nevertheless, it demonstrated that the English language had changed greatly between 1950 and 1988--so much so that we had to make annotations in our grammar book because it was out of date.
Language has also changed considerably since I was in college. When I was getting my undergraduate degree, masculine universals (man, mankind, he, his--used to represent both genders) were just beginning to be questioned. I remember sitting in an English class where we took a vote that masculine universals were fine and acceptable. The vote was unanimous or very near it--even from the most feminist spirits in the class (and there were a few). I naively thought we had settled the issue, but we had not.
Practically every grammar book published today has sections on sexist language that includes alternatives to words man, mankind, manmade, etc. Even the SBTS style guide has en entire chapter on gender language (see ch. 7, pp. 103-105) which is adapted from the Corporate Editorial Manual of Lifeway Christian Resources. And when addressing their congregations, I hear even the most conservative of preachers using "brothers and sisters," "his or her," and the "dreaded" singular they.
What possessive pronoun would you supply in the sentence below?
Someone left ____________ book in the room.
Very few these days will fill in the blank with his anymore. When I present this sentence to my students, almost all of them will write "their."
As I mentioned above, not all forms of communication in common use will become accepted as standard grammar. The singular they is different, however, because there's a need for it. Here are three reasons why it will become accepted in most standard grammars:
1. The use of "his" (a masculine universal) is no longer standard practice. I notice even the most conservative writers and speakers going out of their way to avoid it. Whether this is conscious avoidance or not, I do not know.
2. There is no inclusive pronoun in English language for reference to humans as there is in other languages, but the need for such usage is part of our day-to-day communication.
3. The use of the singular they goes back hundreds of years in English usage despite the rules of 20th century grammars. Therefore, it has strong precedent.
All of this brings me to the title of this blog entry. Whenever I teach a writing class, we go over this issue as soon as I hand back their first papers. Usually, a large sampling of the papers include the use of a singular they that does not agree in number with the subject in the sentence. I mark such "errors" not to take off points, but because I want my students to think through the syntax of the sentences they are writing. And I jokingly tell them I will quit marking such sentences when the grammar books change their rules regarding the use of the singular they--and I believe they will.
If you have a copy of the Prentice Hall Guide, the reference can be found on p. 117. Surprisingly, this is not in a section on gender/sexist language but in pronoun reference, specifically on indefinite pronouns.
The writers note that "He was traditionally used to refer to indefinite pronouns ending in -body and -one." Then four strategies are presented "to avoid the exclusive use of the masculine pronoun when the reference is to both males and females. This includes the use of "his or her" (personally my least favorite solution) and changing the subject to a plural. But then I saw it: "Use the plural pronoun." An example was cited: "Everyone has their coat."
I was shocked. How long have I been using this book with my classes--three years now? However, then I noticed the disclaimer: "Some people view this as incorrect. Others, such as the National Council of Teachers of English accept this as a way to avoid sexist language."
So, it's allowed, but with a disclaimer--not quite 100% acceptance yet according to Prentice Hall, but acceptable to some nonetheless. Where does this fit in with the three stages of acceptance I described at the beginning of this blog entry? Well, the singular they is at least at a level two because its quickly becoming more used in print--the most prominent example I know of is in the TNIV Bible. Grammar books are starting to discuss it, but wide endorsement is not quite there (yet). But the recommendation to use their as a singular pronoun possessive in the Prentice Hall Guide makes me put its acceptance at a 2.5 (not quite a full "3" because the writers felt a disclaimer was necessary). When future editions of this book and other grammar and usage books allow for it without qualifiers, we'll know that the singular they has been fully accepted.
So in the meantime, I'm still marking it on my students' papers.
*I noticed in looking at Amazon.com that a 6th edition of the Prentice Hall Guide is in print (see link above). My guess is that my students have been receiving this for over a year, but I still have the old edition and didn't even know it was updated. I have requested a new copy.