Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

You cannot propel yourself forward by patting yourself on the back.


arts / rec.arts.sf.written / Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"

SubjectAuthor
* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Dudley Brooks
`* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Robert Woodward
 +* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"pete...@gmail.com
 |+* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Leif Roar Moldskred
 ||`- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"pete...@gmail.com
 |+- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Dorothy J Heydt
 |`* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Dudley Brooks
 | `* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Paul S Person
 |  +* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Dudley Brooks
 |  |`- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Michael F. Stemper
 |  +* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Gary R. Schmidt
 |  |`- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Thomas Koenig
 |  `* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Dorothy J Heydt
 |   +* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"James Nicoll
 |   |`* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Dimensional Traveler
 |   | `- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"James Nicoll
 |   `- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Paul S Person
 +* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Ahasuerus
 |+* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Dorothy J Heydt
 ||+* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Ahasuerus
 |||`- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Dorothy J Heydt
 ||+* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Paul S Person
 |||`* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Dorothy J Heydt
 ||| +* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Ross Presser
 ||| |`- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Paul S Person
 ||| `* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Paul S Person
 |||  `* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"pete...@gmail.com
 |||   `* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Robert Woodward
 |||    `* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"pete...@gmail.com
 |||     +* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Gary R. Schmidt
 |||     |+* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Wolffan
 |||     ||+* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Gary R. Schmidt
 |||     |||`* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"John Halpenny
 |||     ||| `* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Michael F. Stemper
 |||     |||  `- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Robert Carnegie
 |||     ||`* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Jay E. Morris
 |||     || +- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"The Horny Goat
 |||     || `- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Dudley Brooks
 |||     |+* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Dorothy J Heydt
 |||     ||+- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"pete...@gmail.com
 |||     ||`- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Gary R. Schmidt
 |||     |`* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"The Horny Goat
 |||     | `- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Gary R. Schmidt
 |||     +* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Paul S Person
 |||     |`* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Robert Carnegie
 |||     | +* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Ross Presser
 |||     | |`- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Dorothy J Heydt
 |||     | `* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Dorothy J Heydt
 |||     |  `- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Robert Carnegie
 |||     +* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Leif Roar Moldskred
 |||     |`* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Wolffan
 |||     | +* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Robert Carnegie
 |||     | |`* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Dorothy J Heydt
 |||     | | `* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"pete...@gmail.com
 |||     | |  `* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Scott Lurndal
 |||     | |   `* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Paul S Person
 |||     | |    `- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Thomas Koenig
 |||     | `* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"pete...@gmail.com
 |||     |  +* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Dudley Brooks
 |||     |  |`- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Joy Beeson
 |||     |  `- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Dudley Brooks
 |||     `- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Robert Woodward
 ||`- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Default User
 |`* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Moriarty
 | `- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Ahasuerus
 +* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Robert Carnegie
 |+* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Don
 ||`- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Sjouke Burry
 |+* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Dorothy J Heydt
 ||`* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Robert Carnegie
 || `- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Robert Carnegie
 |+- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"pete...@gmail.com
 |+* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Michael F. Stemper
 ||`- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Tony Nance
 |`* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Default User
 | `- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Robert Carnegie
 `* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"David Johnston
  +* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"pete...@gmail.com
  |+* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"David Johnston
  ||`* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Robert Carnegie
  || `* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"David Johnston
  ||  `- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Robert Carnegie
  |+* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Dudley Brooks
  ||+* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Paul S Person
  |||+- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"David Johnston
  |||`* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Dudley Brooks
  ||| `* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Paul S Person
  |||  `- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Dudley Brooks
  ||`* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"pete...@gmail.com
  || +- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"David Johnston
  || `- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Paul S Person
  |`* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Leif Roar Moldskred
  | `* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"pete...@gmail.com
  |  `* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Leif Roar Moldskred
  |   `* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Magewolf
  |    +* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Leif Roar Moldskred
  |    |`* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"John Halpenny
  |    | +- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Leif Roar Moldskred
  |    | `- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Robert Woodward
  |    `* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Paul S Person
  |     +* Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Robert Carnegie
  |     `- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"The Horny Goat
  `- Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"Dudley Brooks

Pages:12345
Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"

<356cf0c5-8255-4326-94a7-47dd155be5b1n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=72387&group=rec.arts.sf.written#72387

 copy link   Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:6cc:b0:69b:dd1b:3235 with SMTP id 12-20020a05620a06cc00b0069bdd1b3235mr8857091qky.374.1650855792052;
Sun, 24 Apr 2022 20:03:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:2d69:0:b0:648:3fcd:2e18 with SMTP id
s41-20020a252d69000000b006483fcd2e18mr6127034ybe.128.1650855791850; Sun, 24
Apr 2022 20:03:11 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!1.us.feeder.erje.net!3.us.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2022 20:03:11 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <dst8hnFcam1U1@mid.individual.net>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2600:1700:2f72:8400:789f:3090:1638:bd66;
posting-account=lKgf2AoAAAATO8s83T087k_oLhKbGAMb
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2600:1700:2f72:8400:789f:3090:1638:bd66
References: <20160617a@crcomp.net> <20160618c@crcomp.net> <o8z6Lv.1oLJ@kithrup.com>
<dslktuFr66rU1@mid.individual.net> <o8zxBr.xqK@kithrup.com>
<5pGdnceun9Uv9fvKnZ2dnUU78fudnZ2d@giganews.com> <91membpc20ch7531rbb8s0k8036ur6l68o@4ax.com>
<dst8hnFcam1U1@mid.individual.net>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <356cf0c5-8255-4326-94a7-47dd155be5b1n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"
From: dudleybr...@gmail.com (Dudley Brooks)
Injection-Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2022 03:03:12 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 20
 by: Dudley Brooks - Mon, 25 Apr 2022 03:03 UTC

On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 9:32:58 AM UTC-7, Michael R N Dolbear wrote:
> "Joy Beeson" wrote
> > On Sun, 19 Jun 2016 04:41:06 -0500, leif...@dimnakorr.com wrote:
>
> >> Wilst thou truly?
>
> > It has been centuries, but we still haven't learned how to use
> singular "you" without daily confusions and misunderstandings.
>
> > Singular "they" will be an even bigger disaster, and with less excuse.
> Jane Austen and her readers got on well enough (I dug out the quotations for
> Jim Baen).
>
>
> --
> Mike D
Yep. Singular "they" has a respectable 400-year history of use by the finest writers of the English language. See Steven Pinker on this issue (and many similar issues). We don't need to come up a "new" gender-nonspecific word when we already have a time-honored one.

Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"

<robertaw-88B3C5.22005724042022@news.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=72389&group=rec.arts.sf.written#72389

 copy link   Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.szaf.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: rober...@drizzle.com (Robert Woodward)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2022 22:00:57 -0700
Organization: home user
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <robertaw-88B3C5.22005724042022@news.individual.net>
References: <20160617a@crcomp.net> <20160618c@crcomp.net> <o8z6Lv.1oLJ@kithrup.com> <dslktuFr66rU1@mid.individual.net> <o8zxBr.xqK@kithrup.com> <5pGdnceun9Uv9fvKnZ2dnUU78fudnZ2d@giganews.com> <91membpc20ch7531rbb8s0k8036ur6l68o@4ax.com> <dst8hnFcam1U1@mid.individual.net> <356cf0c5-8255-4326-94a7-47dd155be5b1n@googlegroups.com>
X-Trace: individual.net vgAyH7TvjWTAUwd6K4DurQCkqH6My13htDbGYJhRUs46gHVsxg
X-Orig-Path: robertaw
Cancel-Lock: sha1:XbS7f4q0b/+KS4GQgOzBgn7830E=
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.2 (Intel Mac OS X)
 by: Robert Woodward - Mon, 25 Apr 2022 05:00 UTC

In article <356cf0c5-8255-4326-94a7-47dd155be5b1n@googlegroups.com>,
Dudley Brooks <dudleybrooks@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 9:32:58 AM UTC-7, Michael R N Dolbear wrote:
> > "Joy Beeson" wrote
> > > On Sun, 19 Jun 2016 04:41:06 -0500, leif...@dimnakorr.com wrote:
> >
> > >> Wilst thou truly?
> >
> > > It has been centuries, but we still haven't learned how to use
> > singular "you" without daily confusions and misunderstandings.
> >
> > > Singular "they" will be an even bigger disaster, and with less excuse.
> > Jane Austen and her readers got on well enough (I dug out the quotations
> > for
> > Jim Baen).
> >
> >
> > --
> > Mike D
> Yep. Singular "they" has a respectable 400-year history of use by the finest
> writers of the English language. See Steven Pinker on this issue (and many
> similar issues). We don't need to come up a "new" gender-nonspecific word
> when we already have a time-honored one.

IMHO, that is an indefinite "they". Example: "Everyone is welcome, but
if they don't arrive early, we might not have room for them." "Everyone"
might be treated as singular, but it can represent more than one person.
The same is true with "everybody", "anyone", "anybody", "someone", and
"somebody". My challenge (which nobody has answered) is an example of
"they" being used for a specified named individual in a work written
before 1970 (I might have used different dates, but none were for before
my birth).

--
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_.
—-----------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward robertaw@drizzle.com

Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"

<78fe5885-7697-49e8-8e8a-28ba7c32a8cen@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=72491&group=rec.arts.sf.written#72491

 copy link   Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:d85:b0:449:96f7:6194 with SMTP id e5-20020a0562140d8500b0044996f76194mr17732019qve.48.1651009841216;
Tue, 26 Apr 2022 14:50:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a81:9b0c:0:b0:2f4:c522:7d3c with SMTP id
s12-20020a819b0c000000b002f4c5227d3cmr24283672ywg.316.1651009841008; Tue, 26
Apr 2022 14:50:41 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 14:50:40 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <robertaw-88B3C5.22005724042022@news.individual.net>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=73.89.70.238; posting-account=BUItcQoAAACgV97n05UTyfLcl1Rd4W33
NNTP-Posting-Host: 73.89.70.238
References: <20160617a@crcomp.net> <20160618c@crcomp.net> <o8z6Lv.1oLJ@kithrup.com>
<dslktuFr66rU1@mid.individual.net> <o8zxBr.xqK@kithrup.com>
<5pGdnceun9Uv9fvKnZ2dnUU78fudnZ2d@giganews.com> <91membpc20ch7531rbb8s0k8036ur6l68o@4ax.com>
<dst8hnFcam1U1@mid.individual.net> <356cf0c5-8255-4326-94a7-47dd155be5b1n@googlegroups.com>
<robertaw-88B3C5.22005724042022@news.individual.net>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <78fe5885-7697-49e8-8e8a-28ba7c32a8cen@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"
From: petert...@gmail.com (pete...@gmail.com)
Injection-Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 21:50:41 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 44
 by: pete...@gmail.com - Tue, 26 Apr 2022 21:50 UTC

On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 1:01:02 AM UTC-4, Robert Woodward wrote:
> In article <356cf0c5-8255-4326...@googlegroups.com>,
> Dudley Brooks <dudley...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 9:32:58 AM UTC-7, Michael R N Dolbear wrote:
> > > "Joy Beeson" wrote
> > > > On Sun, 19 Jun 2016 04:41:06 -0500, leif...@dimnakorr.com wrote:
> > >
> > > >> Wilst thou truly?
> > >
> > > > It has been centuries, but we still haven't learned how to use
> > > singular "you" without daily confusions and misunderstandings.
> > >
> > > > Singular "they" will be an even bigger disaster, and with less excuse.
> > > Jane Austen and her readers got on well enough (I dug out the quotations
> > > for
> > > Jim Baen).
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Mike D
> > Yep. Singular "they" has a respectable 400-year history of use by the finest
> > writers of the English language. See Steven Pinker on this issue (and many
> > similar issues). We don't need to come up a "new" gender-nonspecific word
> > when we already have a time-honored one.
> IMHO, that is an indefinite "they". Example: "Everyone is welcome, but
> if they don't arrive early, we might not have room for them." "Everyone"
> might be treated as singular, but it can represent more than one person.
> The same is true with "everybody", "anyone", "anybody", "someone", and
> "somebody". My challenge (which nobody has answered) is an example of
> "they" being used for a specified named individual in a work written
> before 1970 (I might have used different dates, but none were for before
> my birth).

I'd like to see that too.

I dislike applying 'they' to a single person, because of
the ambiguities it introduces. I've been in situations where I had to ask people
to clarify how many people 'they' were, where the number of warm bodies was
relevant, and turned out to be one.

It shouldn't be like that.

Pt

Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"

<EfCcncL_x7uk8fX_nZ2dnZeNn_vNnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=72492&group=rec.arts.sf.written#72492

 copy link   Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 22:03:37 +0000
From: lei...@huldreheim.Home (Leif Roar Moldskred)
Subject: Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
References: <20160617a@crcomp.net> <20160618c@crcomp.net> <o8z6Lv.1oLJ@kithrup.com> <dslktuFr66rU1@mid.individual.net> <o8zxBr.xqK@kithrup.com> <5pGdnceun9Uv9fvKnZ2dnUU78fudnZ2d@giganews.com> <91membpc20ch7531rbb8s0k8036ur6l68o@4ax.com> <dst8hnFcam1U1@mid.individual.net> <356cf0c5-8255-4326-94a7-47dd155be5b1n@googlegroups.com> <robertaw-88B3C5.22005724042022@news.individual.net> <78fe5885-7697-49e8-8e8a-28ba7c32a8cen@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: tin/2.4.4-20191224 ("Millburn") (Linux/5.4.0-109-generic (x86_64))
Message-ID: <EfCcncL_x7uk8fX_nZ2dnZeNn_vNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 22:03:37 +0000
Lines: 17
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-cMTdYKtpeMOPFAmsobeN1X7SW4TFmdIY6ppLuEsM1tlHNcUymWeL5ZMU5kbMcataCjesHOt93F9nGBo!hOHqSAto74Iso5Nq7aCo+VDYyfHfon23WswVF8JOQ4uMw0tnt9+oJzBImXNQ9Ccu6na1deRdIbvN!tQ==
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 2014
 by: Leif Roar Moldskred - Tue, 26 Apr 2022 22:03 UTC

pete...@gmail.com <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I'd like to see that too.
>
> I dislike applying 'they' to a single person, because of
> the ambiguities it introduces. I've been in situations where I had to ask people
> to clarify how many people 'they' were, where the number of warm bodies was
> relevant, and turned out to be one.
>

How's the number of warm bodies any more ambiguous when 'they' is used for the
count of one than when it used for a count of two or three or five-hundred-and-
twelve? If you need an exact number then 'more than one' doesn't help that much.

--
Leif Roar Moldskred

Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"

<587d392e-0a01-45c0-a7c7-dda2aa53ef4bn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=72495&group=rec.arts.sf.written#72495

 copy link   Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:621:b0:432:5e0d:cb64 with SMTP id a1-20020a056214062100b004325e0dcb64mr18093587qvx.65.1651013211515;
Tue, 26 Apr 2022 15:46:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:6f54:0:b0:648:b8a1:d212 with SMTP id
k81-20020a256f54000000b00648b8a1d212mr4062947ybc.225.1651013211387; Tue, 26
Apr 2022 15:46:51 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 15:46:51 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <robertaw-88B3C5.22005724042022@news.individual.net>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=216.15.40.253; posting-account=2IcnFAkAAAAz4TF7_Wqx6PSW01kcg6r-
NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.15.40.253
References: <20160617a@crcomp.net> <20160618c@crcomp.net> <o8z6Lv.1oLJ@kithrup.com>
<dslktuFr66rU1@mid.individual.net> <o8zxBr.xqK@kithrup.com>
<5pGdnceun9Uv9fvKnZ2dnUU78fudnZ2d@giganews.com> <91membpc20ch7531rbb8s0k8036ur6l68o@4ax.com>
<dst8hnFcam1U1@mid.individual.net> <356cf0c5-8255-4326-94a7-47dd155be5b1n@googlegroups.com>
<robertaw-88B3C5.22005724042022@news.individual.net>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <587d392e-0a01-45c0-a7c7-dda2aa53ef4bn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"
From: ahasue...@email.com (Ahasuerus)
Injection-Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 22:46:51 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 62
 by: Ahasuerus - Tue, 26 Apr 2022 22:46 UTC

On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 1:01:02 AM UTC-4, Robert Woodward wrote:
> In article <356cf0c5-8255-4326...@googlegroups.com>,
> Dudley Brooks <dudley...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 9:32:58 AM UTC-7, Michael R N Dolbear wrote:
> > > "Joy Beeson" wrote
> > > > On Sun, 19 Jun 2016 04:41:06 -0500, leif...@dimnakorr.com wrote:
> > >
> > > >> Wilst thou truly?
> > >
> > > > It has been centuries, but we still haven't learned how to use
> > > singular "you" without daily confusions and misunderstandings.
> > >
> > > > Singular "they" will be an even bigger disaster, and with less excuse.
> > > Jane Austen and her readers got on well enough (I dug out the quotations
> > > for Jim Baen).
> > >
> > Yep. Singular "they" has a respectable 400-year history of use by the finest
> > writers of the English language. See Steven Pinker on this issue (and many
> > similar issues). We don't need to come up a "new" gender-nonspecific word
> > when we already have a time-honored one.
> IMHO, that is an indefinite "they". Example: "Everyone is welcome, but
> if they don't arrive early, we might not have room for them." "Everyone"
> might be treated as singular, but it can represent more than one person.
> The same is true with "everybody", "anyone", "anybody", "someone", and
> "somebody". My challenge (which nobody has answered) is an example of
> "they" being used for a specified named individual in a work written
> before 1970 (I might have used different dates, but none were for before
> my birth).

There are pre-1970 examples of a single *un*named person being
mentioned and then referred to as "they", e.g. in Chapter 27 of
Agatha Christie's _The Murder at the Vicarage_ (1930):

"We got an expert on it -- to say whether the 6:20 was added by a
different hand. Naturally we sent up samples of Protheroe’s
handwriting. And do you know the verdict? That letter was never
written by Protheroe at all.”
“You mean a forgery?”
“It’s a forgery. The 6:20 they think is written in a different hand
again -- but they’re not sure about that. The heading is in a different
ink, but the letter itself is a forgery. Protheroe never wrote it.”
“Are they certain?”
“Well, they’re as certain as experts ever are. You know what an expert is!
Oh! But they’re sure enough.”

Note the interchangeable use of "an expert" and "they".

I suspect that it may be an extension of the usage of the word
"they" to refer to organizations, especially official organizations,
as a whole.

Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"

<rAz16G.1CB1@kithrup.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=72498&group=rec.arts.sf.written#72498

 copy link   Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-vm.kithrup.com!kithrup.com!djheydt
From: djhe...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt)
Subject: Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"
Message-ID: <rAz16G.1CB1@kithrup.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 23:56:40 GMT
References: <20160617a@crcomp.net> <356cf0c5-8255-4326-94a7-47dd155be5b1n@googlegroups.com> <robertaw-88B3C5.22005724042022@news.individual.net> <78fe5885-7697-49e8-8e8a-28ba7c32a8cen@googlegroups.com>
Organization: Kithrup Enterprises, Ltd.
X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010)
Lines: 74
 by: Dorothy J Heydt - Tue, 26 Apr 2022 23:56 UTC

In article <78fe5885-7697-49e8-8e8a-28ba7c32a8cen@googlegroups.com>,
pete...@gmail.com <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 1:01:02 AM UTC-4, Robert Woodward wrote:
>> In article <356cf0c5-8255-4326...@googlegroups.com>,
>> Dudley Brooks <dudley...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 9:32:58 AM UTC-7, Michael R N Dolbear wrote:
>> > > "Joy Beeson" wrote
>> > > > On Sun, 19 Jun 2016 04:41:06 -0500, leif...@dimnakorr.com wrote:
>> > >
>> > > >> Wilst thou truly?
>> > >
>> > > > It has been centuries, but we still haven't learned how to use
>> > > singular "you" without daily confusions and misunderstandings.
>> > >
>> > > > Singular "they" will be an even bigger disaster, and with less excuse.
>> > > Jane Austen and her readers got on well enough (I dug out the quotations
>> > > for
>> > > Jim Baen).
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Mike D
>> > Yep. Singular "they" has a respectable 400-year history of use by
>the finest
>> > writers of the English language. See Steven Pinker on this issue (and many
>> > similar issues). We don't need to come up a "new" gender-nonspecific word
>> > when we already have a time-honored one.
>> IMHO, that is an indefinite "they". Example: "Everyone is welcome, but
>> if they don't arrive early, we might not have room for them." "Everyone"
>> might be treated as singular, but it can represent more than one person.
>> The same is true with "everybody", "anyone", "anybody", "someone", and
>> "somebody". My challenge (which nobody has answered) is an example of
>> "they" being used for a specified named individual in a work written
>> before 1970 (I might have used different dates, but none were for before
>> my birth).
>
>I'd like to see that too.
>
>I dislike applying 'they' to a single person, because of
>the ambiguities it introduces. I've been in situations where I had to
>ask people
>to clarify how many people 'they' were, where the number of warm bodies was
>relevant, and turned out to be one.
>
>It shouldn't be like that.
>
Yes, but it's becoming like that, and I don't think we can stop
it. We used to have four second-person pronouns in English
(singular and plural x nominative and accusative); now the plural
accusative "you" has taken over the whole shootin' match.

Now, if I had a time machine, I might have finished _Your Name Is
Hawk_, set in a future wherein (1) the dead can be brought back to
life to fight in a godawful space war, and (2) the language they
speak has ceased to distingush male from female in the third
person. So the viewpoint character, Hawk, is told about a fierce
fighter named Dove.

Presently Hawk meets a lovely female who says, "Hello, Hawk, I'm
Dove, " and laughs. But Hawk says something stupid on the order
of "Good heavens, I thought you were a man."

Which puts her off him for as many chapters as necessary because she
had died in the early 21st century, and he had died early in WWII.

If only I could have gone back sixty years or so and whispered
into my ear, "The language they speak now uses 'they' for male
and female, singular and plural."

--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/

Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"

<rAz1n9.1spA@kithrup.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=72499&group=rec.arts.sf.written#72499

 copy link   Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-vm.kithrup.com!kithrup.com!djheydt
From: djhe...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt)
Subject: Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"
Message-ID: <rAz1n9.1spA@kithrup.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 00:06:45 GMT
References: <20160617a@crcomp.net> <356cf0c5-8255-4326-94a7-47dd155be5b1n@googlegroups.com> <robertaw-88B3C5.22005724042022@news.individual.net> <587d392e-0a01-45c0-a7c7-dda2aa53ef4bn@googlegroups.com>
Organization: Kithrup Enterprises, Ltd.
X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010)
Lines: 68
 by: Dorothy J Heydt - Wed, 27 Apr 2022 00:06 UTC

In article <587d392e-0a01-45c0-a7c7-dda2aa53ef4bn@googlegroups.com>,
Ahasuerus <ahasuerus@email.com> wrote:
>On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 1:01:02 AM UTC-4, Robert Woodward wrote:
>> In article <356cf0c5-8255-4326...@googlegroups.com>,
>> Dudley Brooks <dudley...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 9:32:58 AM UTC-7, Michael R N Dolbear wrote:
>> > > "Joy Beeson" wrote
>> > > > On Sun, 19 Jun 2016 04:41:06 -0500, leif...@dimnakorr.com wrote:
>> > >
>> > > >> Wilst thou truly?
>> > >
>> > > > It has been centuries, but we still haven't learned how to use
>> > > singular "you" without daily confusions and misunderstandings.
>> > >
>> > > > Singular "they" will be an even bigger disaster, and with less excuse.
>> > > Jane Austen and her readers got on well enough (I dug out the quotations
>> > > for Jim Baen).
>> > >
>> > Yep. Singular "they" has a respectable 400-year history of use by
>the finest
>> > writers of the English language. See Steven Pinker on this issue (and many
>> > similar issues). We don't need to come up a "new" gender-nonspecific word
>> > when we already have a time-honored one.
>> IMHO, that is an indefinite "they". Example: "Everyone is welcome, but
>> if they don't arrive early, we might not have room for them." "Everyone"
>> might be treated as singular, but it can represent more than one person.
>> The same is true with "everybody", "anyone", "anybody", "someone", and
>> "somebody". My challenge (which nobody has answered) is an example of
>> "they" being used for a specified named individual in a work written
>> before 1970 (I might have used different dates, but none were for before
>> my birth).
>
>There are pre-1970 examples of a single *un*named person being
>mentioned and then referred to as "they", e.g. in Chapter 27 of
>Agatha Christie's _The Murder at the Vicarage_ (1930):
>
>"We got an expert on it -- to say whether the 6:20 was added by a
>different hand. Naturally we sent up samples of Protheroe’s
>handwriting. And do you know the verdict? That letter was never
>written by Protheroe at all.”
>“You mean a forgery?”
>“It’s a forgery. The 6:20 they think is written in a different hand
>again -- but they’re not sure about that. The heading is in a different
>ink, but the letter itself is a forgery. Protheroe never wrote it.”
>“Are they certain?”
>“Well, they’re as certain as experts ever are. You know what an expert is!
>Oh! But they’re sure enough.”
>
>Note the interchangeable use of "an expert" and "they".
>
>I suspect that it may be an extension of the usage of the word
>"they" to refer to organizations, especially official organizations,
>as a whole.

I don't read sports news (anybody's sports news) ordinarily; but
occasionally in letting my eye drift down BBC News I see a
headline such as "Bournemouth fight back to draw Swansea
thriller," where "Bournemouth takes a plural verb because
"Bournemouth" consists of a pluraility of players.

The sports news are listed under "Sport."

--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/

Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"

<1b3c51f7-ada9-410a-bc89-fccc81b474een@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=72502&group=rec.arts.sf.written#72502

 copy link   Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:31a4:b0:69f:883b:1969 with SMTP id bi36-20020a05620a31a400b0069f883b1969mr1996751qkb.408.1651026918015;
Tue, 26 Apr 2022 19:35:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:cb03:0:b0:648:4069:dc5c with SMTP id
b3-20020a25cb03000000b006484069dc5cmr16729662ybg.644.1651026917804; Tue, 26
Apr 2022 19:35:17 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 19:35:17 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <robertaw-88B3C5.22005724042022@news.individual.net>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=188.28.0.160; posting-account=dELd-gkAAABehNzDMBP4sfQElk2tFztP
NNTP-Posting-Host: 188.28.0.160
References: <20160617a@crcomp.net> <20160618c@crcomp.net> <o8z6Lv.1oLJ@kithrup.com>
<dslktuFr66rU1@mid.individual.net> <o8zxBr.xqK@kithrup.com>
<5pGdnceun9Uv9fvKnZ2dnUU78fudnZ2d@giganews.com> <91membpc20ch7531rbb8s0k8036ur6l68o@4ax.com>
<dst8hnFcam1U1@mid.individual.net> <356cf0c5-8255-4326-94a7-47dd155be5b1n@googlegroups.com>
<robertaw-88B3C5.22005724042022@news.individual.net>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <1b3c51f7-ada9-410a-bc89-fccc81b474een@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"
From: rja.carn...@excite.com (Robert Carnegie)
Injection-Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 02:35:18 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 104
 by: Robert Carnegie - Wed, 27 Apr 2022 02:35 UTC

On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 06:01:02 UTC+1, Robert Woodward wrote:
> In article <356cf0c5-8255-4326...@googlegroups.com>,
> Dudley Brooks <dudley...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 9:32:58 AM UTC-7, Michael R N Dolbear wrote:
> > > "Joy Beeson" wrote
> > > > On Sun, 19 Jun 2016 04:41:06 -0500, leif...@dimnakorr.com wrote:
> > >
> > > >> Wilst thou truly?
> > >
> > > > It has been centuries, but we still haven't learned how to use
> > > singular "you" without daily confusions and misunderstandings.
> > >
> > > > Singular "they" will be an even bigger disaster, and with less excuse.
> > > Jane Austen and her readers got on well enough (I dug out the quotations
> > > for
> > > Jim Baen).
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Mike D
> > Yep. Singular "they" has a respectable 400-year history of use by the finest
> > writers of the English language. See Steven Pinker on this issue (and many
> > similar issues). We don't need to come up a "new" gender-nonspecific word
> > when we already have a time-honored one.
> IMHO, that is an indefinite "they". Example: "Everyone is welcome, but
> if they don't arrive early, we might not have room for them." "Everyone"
> might be treated as singular, but it can represent more than one person.
> The same is true with "everybody", "anyone", "anybody", "someone", and
> "somebody". My challenge (which nobody has answered) is an example of
> "they" being used for a specified named individual in a work written
> before 1970 (I might have used different dates, but none were for before
> my birth).

First to note, this argument has been revived from 2016.

You are no doubt considering that Ursula Le Guin's
_The Left Hand of Darkness_ (1969) used "he" for
characters that are male and female, which is most
of them. Wikipedia represents her as choosing not to
"invent" their gender-neutral pronouns. She was born
in 1929, so she would have had time and motivation
to notice existing usage, if not 400 years of it.

Lou Reed's song "Walk on the Wild Side" (released 1972)
has a person be "he" and "she" in the space of four words.

The film _Carry On Spying_ (1964) had this representative
of things to come, but I don't remember the pronouns.
I could get out the video.

Dr Crow: I am Doctor Crow. You are surprised?
Daphne Honeybutt: Yes, I am! I expected you to be a man...
or a woman.

"Sector General" (1957) in _Hospital Station_ (1962)
is the first published of James White's stories in that setting.
People not of your species are "it" as of courtesy, but
these, <https://sectorgeneral.fandom.com/wiki/Telfi>
operate as a gestalt of many bodies with one mind,
treated by Dr Conway with radiation underexposure.
Conway receives his first memory tape of one such mind
to carry out their treatment and ends up thinking he is
one (or more than one) of them. The story also briefly
considers the viewpoint of the actual Telfi, the Captain
(and crew) of a starship. So that's one to look at. I think
it's a long while before another species gets to narrate
again, but memory tapes are common. Hudlars are
alternately male and female, and another species has five
sexes and very complicated personal lives, neither fully
described.

There's a gestalt in Arthur C. Clarke's "Rescue Party" (1946)
at <https://www.baen.com/Chapters/0743498747/0743498747___1.htm>
but its members are specifically nameless and use the pronoun "We".
I haven't read to the end just now, but all of its other-species
companions by the time we meet it are "he".

Douglas Adams informed us in 1978 that "Zaphod Beeblebrox
is now appearing in ‘No Sex Please: We’re Amoeboid Zingat-Ularians’
at the Brantisvogan Starhouse." I expect that a one-bodied
science fiction character who is a "they" is of a species
reproducing asexually or hermaphroditically. Or a computer
brain or a disembodied intelligence or something. Or an animal
whose sexuality is not ascertained. An asexual blob species
appears in _Hospital Station_ in "Visitor at Large", despite which
I think the patient at one point is called "Papa" -
not by a relative but by a human doctor.

I haven't read through _The Moon is a Harsh Mistress_
but Wikipedia indicates that "Mike", the computer,
is a he/him character, though I'd say that Mike's alter ego
of "Adam Selene" could be both. But probably isn't.

So far, I think my best evidence nay be _Carry On Spying_.

Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"

<20220426b@crcomp.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=72505&group=rec.arts.sf.written#72505

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.fan.heinlein rec.arts.sf.written
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: g...@crcomp.net (Don)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.heinlein, rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 02:58:19 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <20220426b@crcomp.net>
References: <20160617a@crcomp.net> <20160618c@crcomp.net> <o8z6Lv.1oLJ@kithrup.com> <dslktuFr66rU1@mid.individual.net> <o8zxBr.xqK@kithrup.com> <5pGdnceun9Uv9fvKnZ2dnUU78fudnZ2d@giganews.com> <91membpc20ch7531rbb8s0k8036ur6l68o@4ax.com> <dst8hnFcam1U1@mid.individual.net> <356cf0c5-8255-4326-94a7-47dd155be5b1n@googlegroups.com> <robertaw-88B3C5.22005724042022@news.individual.net> <1b3c51f7-ada9-410a-bc89-fccc81b474een@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 02:58:19 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="9bf88928f9032cb033731b52b5ee3e3d";
logging-data="14613"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/FOfb4oK4CtyC7/ik+CQf4"
Cancel-Lock: sha1:6hzyxaxN2Cpr32SuMgFHdC+Sfzk=
 by: Don - Wed, 27 Apr 2022 02:58 UTC

Robert Carnegie wrote:

<snip>

> I haven't read through _The Moon is a Harsh Mistress_
> but Wikipedia indicates that "Mike", the computer,
> is a he/him character, though I'd say that Mike's alter ego
> of "Adam Selene" could be both. But probably isn't.

Woke up later and came fully awake when I realized was
hearing two fem voices, one Wyoh's warm contralto, other a sweet,
high soprano with French accent. Wyoh chuckled at something and
answered,
"All right, Michelle dear, I'll call you soon. 'Night, darling."
"Fine. Goodnight, dear."
Wyoh stood up, turned around. "Who's your girl friend?"
I asked. Thought she knew no one in Luna City. Might have phoned
Hong Kong . . . had sleep-logged feeling was some reason she
shouldn't phone.
"That? Why, Mike, of course. We didn't mean to wake you."
"What?"
"Oh. It was actually Michelle. I discussed it with Mike,
what sex he was, I mean. He decided that he could be either
one. So now she's Michelle and that was her voice. Got it right
the first time, too; her voice never cracked once."
"Of course not; just shifted voder a couple of octaves. What
are you trying to do: split his personality?"
"It's not just pitch; when she's Michelle its an entire
change in manner and attitude. Don't worry about splitting her
personality; she has plenty for any personality she needs.
Besides, Mannie, it's much easier for both of us. Once she
shifted, we took our hair down and cuddled up and talked girl
talk as if we had known each other forever. For example, those
silly pictures no longer embarrassed me-in fact we discussed
my pregnancies quite a lot. Michelle was terribly interested.
She knows all about O.B. and G.Y. and so forth but just
theory-and she appreciated the raw facts. Actually, Mannie,
Michelle is much more a woman than Mike was a man."

Operation Hard Rock
https://vimeo.com/359653317

Danke,

--
Don.......My cat's )\._.,--....,'``. https://crcomp.net/reviews.php
telltale tall tail /, _.. \ _\ (`._ ,.
tells tall tales.. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"

<rAz9Au.q2z@kithrup.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=72507&group=rec.arts.sf.written#72507

 copy link   Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-vm.kithrup.com!kithrup.com!djheydt
From: djhe...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt)
Subject: Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"
Message-ID: <rAz9Au.q2z@kithrup.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 02:52:06 GMT
References: <20160617a@crcomp.net> <356cf0c5-8255-4326-94a7-47dd155be5b1n@googlegroups.com> <robertaw-88B3C5.22005724042022@news.individual.net> <1b3c51f7-ada9-410a-bc89-fccc81b474een@googlegroups.com>
Organization: Kithrup Enterprises, Ltd.
X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010)
Lines: 17
 by: Dorothy J Heydt - Wed, 27 Apr 2022 02:52 UTC

In article <1b3c51f7-ada9-410a-bc89-fccc81b474een@googlegroups.com>,
Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:

>First to note, this argument has been revived from 2016.
>
>Dr Crow: I am Doctor Crow. You are surprised?
>Daphne Honeybutt: Yes, I am! I expected you to be a man...
>or a woman.

It would appear that Daphne expected her vis-a-vis to be human,
or failing that, some other diecious species. What species, then,
is Doctor Crow?

--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/

Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"

<4898e047-adc6-4694-91ba-b1d46971c770n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=72508&group=rec.arts.sf.written#72508

 copy link   Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:296:b0:2f3:6b72:89dc with SMTP id z22-20020a05622a029600b002f36b7289dcmr7727145qtw.670.1651028841012;
Tue, 26 Apr 2022 20:07:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:a347:0:b0:648:d2ce:1f99 with SMTP id
d65-20020a25a347000000b00648d2ce1f99mr1091515ybi.556.1651028840878; Tue, 26
Apr 2022 20:07:20 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 20:07:20 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <587d392e-0a01-45c0-a7c7-dda2aa53ef4bn@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=49.3.1.166; posting-account=Q9jFPQkAAAAt-5h49CADQSz9KlzpPZ0D
NNTP-Posting-Host: 49.3.1.166
References: <20160617a@crcomp.net> <20160618c@crcomp.net> <o8z6Lv.1oLJ@kithrup.com>
<dslktuFr66rU1@mid.individual.net> <o8zxBr.xqK@kithrup.com>
<5pGdnceun9Uv9fvKnZ2dnUU78fudnZ2d@giganews.com> <91membpc20ch7531rbb8s0k8036ur6l68o@4ax.com>
<dst8hnFcam1U1@mid.individual.net> <356cf0c5-8255-4326-94a7-47dd155be5b1n@googlegroups.com>
<robertaw-88B3C5.22005724042022@news.individual.net> <587d392e-0a01-45c0-a7c7-dda2aa53ef4bn@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <4898e047-adc6-4694-91ba-b1d46971c770n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"
From: blue...@ivillage.com (Moriarty)
Injection-Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 03:07:21 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 69
 by: Moriarty - Wed, 27 Apr 2022 03:07 UTC

On Wednesday, April 27, 2022 at 8:46:53 AM UTC+10, Ahasuerus wrote:
> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 1:01:02 AM UTC-4, Robert Woodward wrote:
> > In article <356cf0c5-8255-4326...@googlegroups.com>,
> > Dudley Brooks <dudley...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 9:32:58 AM UTC-7, Michael R N Dolbear wrote:
> > > > "Joy Beeson" wrote
> > > > > On Sun, 19 Jun 2016 04:41:06 -0500, leif...@dimnakorr.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >> Wilst thou truly?
> > > >
> > > > > It has been centuries, but we still haven't learned how to use
> > > > singular "you" without daily confusions and misunderstandings.
> > > >
> > > > > Singular "they" will be an even bigger disaster, and with less excuse.
> > > > Jane Austen and her readers got on well enough (I dug out the quotations
> > > > for Jim Baen).
> > > >
> > > Yep. Singular "they" has a respectable 400-year history of use by the finest
> > > writers of the English language. See Steven Pinker on this issue (and many
> > > similar issues). We don't need to come up a "new" gender-nonspecific word
> > > when we already have a time-honored one.
> > IMHO, that is an indefinite "they". Example: "Everyone is welcome, but
> > if they don't arrive early, we might not have room for them." "Everyone"
> > might be treated as singular, but it can represent more than one person..
> > The same is true with "everybody", "anyone", "anybody", "someone", and
> > "somebody". My challenge (which nobody has answered) is an example of
> > "they" being used for a specified named individual in a work written
> > before 1970 (I might have used different dates, but none were for before
> > my birth).
> There are pre-1970 examples of a single *un*named person being
> mentioned and then referred to as "they", e.g. in Chapter 27 of
> Agatha Christie's _The Murder at the Vicarage_ (1930):
>
> "We got an expert on it -- to say whether the 6:20 was added by a
> different hand. Naturally we sent up samples of Protheroe’s
> handwriting. And do you know the verdict? That letter was never
> written by Protheroe at all.”
> “You mean a forgery?”
> “It’s a forgery. The 6:20 they think is written in a different hand
> again -- but they’re not sure about that. The heading is in a different
> ink, but the letter itself is a forgery. Protheroe never wrote it.”
> “Are they certain?”
> “Well, they’re as certain as experts ever are. You know what an expert is!
> Oh! But they’re sure enough.”

If it wasn't Agatha Christie, I'd suspect that that use of "they" was a clumsy device of the author to conceal the gender of the expert from the reader. But IIRC her shtick was that the reader always had exactly the same information the detective had, and therefore the same ability to solve the crime.

-Moriarty

Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"

<aa6e93b0-bc99-46d1-ba48-31b10d7c489bn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=72509&group=rec.arts.sf.written#72509

 copy link   Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
X-Received: by 2002:a37:41d6:0:b0:67e:4494:c5e9 with SMTP id o205-20020a3741d6000000b0067e4494c5e9mr15338262qka.605.1651029398609;
Tue, 26 Apr 2022 20:16:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:ab11:0:b0:648:a575:7452 with SMTP id
u17-20020a25ab11000000b00648a5757452mr6491227ybi.584.1651029398399; Tue, 26
Apr 2022 20:16:38 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 20:16:38 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4898e047-adc6-4694-91ba-b1d46971c770n@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=216.15.40.253; posting-account=2IcnFAkAAAAz4TF7_Wqx6PSW01kcg6r-
NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.15.40.253
References: <20160617a@crcomp.net> <20160618c@crcomp.net> <o8z6Lv.1oLJ@kithrup.com>
<dslktuFr66rU1@mid.individual.net> <o8zxBr.xqK@kithrup.com>
<5pGdnceun9Uv9fvKnZ2dnUU78fudnZ2d@giganews.com> <91membpc20ch7531rbb8s0k8036ur6l68o@4ax.com>
<dst8hnFcam1U1@mid.individual.net> <356cf0c5-8255-4326-94a7-47dd155be5b1n@googlegroups.com>
<robertaw-88B3C5.22005724042022@news.individual.net> <587d392e-0a01-45c0-a7c7-dda2aa53ef4bn@googlegroups.com>
<4898e047-adc6-4694-91ba-b1d46971c770n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <aa6e93b0-bc99-46d1-ba48-31b10d7c489bn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"
From: ahasue...@email.com (Ahasuerus)
Injection-Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 03:16:38 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 74
 by: Ahasuerus - Wed, 27 Apr 2022 03:16 UTC

On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 11:07:22 PM UTC-4, Moriarty wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 27, 2022 at 8:46:53 AM UTC+10, Ahasuerus wrote:
> > On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 1:01:02 AM UTC-4, Robert Woodward wrote:
> > > In article <356cf0c5-8255-4326...@googlegroups.com>,
> > > Dudley Brooks <dudley...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 9:32:58 AM UTC-7, Michael R N Dolbear wrote:
> > > > > "Joy Beeson" wrote
> > > > > > On Sun, 19 Jun 2016 04:41:06 -0500, leif...@dimnakorr.com wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >> Wilst thou truly?
> > > > >
> > > > > > It has been centuries, but we still haven't learned how to use
> > > > > singular "you" without daily confusions and misunderstandings.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Singular "they" will be an even bigger disaster, and with less excuse.
> > > > > Jane Austen and her readers got on well enough (I dug out the quotations
> > > > > for Jim Baen).
> > > > >
> > > > Yep. Singular "they" has a respectable 400-year history of use by the finest
> > > > writers of the English language. See Steven Pinker on this issue (and many
> > > > similar issues). We don't need to come up a "new" gender-nonspecific word
> > > > when we already have a time-honored one.
> > > IMHO, that is an indefinite "they". Example: "Everyone is welcome, but
> > > if they don't arrive early, we might not have room for them." "Everyone"
> > > might be treated as singular, but it can represent more than one person.
> > > The same is true with "everybody", "anyone", "anybody", "someone", and
> > > "somebody". My challenge (which nobody has answered) is an example of
> > > "they" being used for a specified named individual in a work written
> > > before 1970 (I might have used different dates, but none were for before
> > > my birth).
> > There are pre-1970 examples of a single *un*named person being
> > mentioned and then referred to as "they", e.g. in Chapter 27 of
> > Agatha Christie's _The Murder at the Vicarage_ (1930):
> >
> > "We got an expert on it -- to say whether the 6:20 was added by a
> > different hand. Naturally we sent up samples of Protheroe’s
> > handwriting. And do you know the verdict? That letter was never
> > written by Protheroe at all.”
> > “You mean a forgery?”
> > “It’s a forgery. The 6:20 they think is written in a different hand
> > again -- but they’re not sure about that. The heading is in a different
> > ink, but the letter itself is a forgery. Protheroe never wrote it.”
> > “Are they certain?”
> > “Well, they’re as certain as experts ever are. You know what an expert is!
> > Oh! But they’re sure enough.”
> If it wasn't Agatha Christie, I'd suspect that that use of "they" was
> a clumsy device of the author to conceal the gender of the expert
> from the reader. But IIRC her shtick was that the reader always had
> exactly the same information the detective had, and therefore the
> same ability to solve the crime.

The expert in question is never mentioned again and plays no further
role in the story, so it's not an attempt at obfuscation (unlike many
other things in the novel.)

Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"

<39ff76b9-e2b8-424d-b1da-964b1dc62ce1n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=72510&group=rec.arts.sf.written#72510

 copy link   Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:2988:b0:69c:712c:6230 with SMTP id r8-20020a05620a298800b0069c712c6230mr15206026qkp.278.1651029587197;
Tue, 26 Apr 2022 20:19:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:b952:0:b0:644:f4a4:4c23 with SMTP id
s18-20020a25b952000000b00644f4a44c23mr23802145ybm.171.1651029587070; Tue, 26
Apr 2022 20:19:47 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 20:19:46 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <rAz1n9.1spA@kithrup.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=216.15.40.253; posting-account=2IcnFAkAAAAz4TF7_Wqx6PSW01kcg6r-
NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.15.40.253
References: <20160617a@crcomp.net> <356cf0c5-8255-4326-94a7-47dd155be5b1n@googlegroups.com>
<robertaw-88B3C5.22005724042022@news.individual.net> <587d392e-0a01-45c0-a7c7-dda2aa53ef4bn@googlegroups.com>
<rAz1n9.1spA@kithrup.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <39ff76b9-e2b8-424d-b1da-964b1dc62ce1n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"
From: ahasue...@email.com (Ahasuerus)
Injection-Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 03:19:47 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 79
 by: Ahasuerus - Wed, 27 Apr 2022 03:19 UTC

On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 8:17:01 PM UTC-4, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <587d392e-0a01-45c0...@googlegroups.com>,
> Ahasuerus <ahas...@email.com> wrote:
> >On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 1:01:02 AM UTC-4, Robert Woodward wrote:
> >> In article <356cf0c5-8255-4326...@googlegroups.com>,
> >> Dudley Brooks <dudley...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 9:32:58 AM UTC-7, Michael R N Dolbear wrote:
> >> > > "Joy Beeson" wrote
> >> > > > On Sun, 19 Jun 2016 04:41:06 -0500, leif...@dimnakorr.com wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > >> Wilst thou truly?
> >> > >
> >> > > > It has been centuries, but we still haven't learned how to use
> >> > > singular "you" without daily confusions and misunderstandings.
> >> > >
> >> > > > Singular "they" will be an even bigger disaster, and with less excuse.
> >> > > Jane Austen and her readers got on well enough (I dug out the quotations
> >> > > for Jim Baen).
> >> > >
> >> > Yep. Singular "they" has a respectable 400-year history of use by
> >the finest
> >> > writers of the English language. See Steven Pinker on this issue (and many
> >> > similar issues). We don't need to come up a "new" gender-nonspecific word
> >> > when we already have a time-honored one.
> >> IMHO, that is an indefinite "they". Example: "Everyone is welcome, but
> >> if they don't arrive early, we might not have room for them." "Everyone"
> >> might be treated as singular, but it can represent more than one person.
> >> The same is true with "everybody", "anyone", "anybody", "someone", and
> >> "somebody". My challenge (which nobody has answered) is an example of
> >> "they" being used for a specified named individual in a work written
> >> before 1970 (I might have used different dates, but none were for before
> >> my birth).
> >
> >There are pre-1970 examples of a single *un*named person being
> >mentioned and then referred to as "they", e.g. in Chapter 27 of
> >Agatha Christie's _The Murder at the Vicarage_ (1930):
> >
> >"We got an expert on it -- to say whether the 6:20 was added by a
> >different hand. Naturally we sent up samples of Protheroe’s
> >handwriting. And do you know the verdict? That letter was never
> >written by Protheroe at all.”
> >“You mean a forgery?”
> >“It’s a forgery. The 6:20 they think is written in a different hand
> >again -- but they’re not sure about that. The heading is in a different
> >ink, but the letter itself is a forgery. Protheroe never wrote it.”
> >“Are they certain?”
> >“Well, they’re as certain as experts ever are. You know what an expert is!
> >Oh! But they’re sure enough.”
> >
> >Note the interchangeable use of "an expert" and "they".
> >
> >I suspect that it may be an extension of the usage of the word
> >"they" to refer to organizations, especially official organizations,
> >as a whole.
> I don't read sports news (anybody's sports news) ordinarily; but
> occasionally in letting my eye drift down BBC News I see a
> headline such as "Bournemouth fight back to draw Swansea
> thriller," where "Bournemouth takes a plural verb because
> "Bournemouth" consists of a pluraility of players. [snip]

Yes, it's more common in the UK.

Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"

<5e5ca1e1-c3ea-4462-9a61-f9aa5ee8d1d5n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=72512&group=rec.arts.sf.written#72512

 copy link   Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:7e89:0:b0:2f3:6ae3:338a with SMTP id w9-20020ac87e89000000b002f36ae3338amr7705114qtj.559.1651031821763;
Tue, 26 Apr 2022 20:57:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6902:1083:b0:63e:5325:d6b0 with SMTP id
v3-20020a056902108300b0063e5325d6b0mr23373071ybu.431.1651031821581; Tue, 26
Apr 2022 20:57:01 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 20:57:01 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <EfCcncL_x7uk8fX_nZ2dnZeNn_vNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=73.89.70.238; posting-account=BUItcQoAAACgV97n05UTyfLcl1Rd4W33
NNTP-Posting-Host: 73.89.70.238
References: <20160617a@crcomp.net> <20160618c@crcomp.net> <o8z6Lv.1oLJ@kithrup.com>
<dslktuFr66rU1@mid.individual.net> <o8zxBr.xqK@kithrup.com>
<5pGdnceun9Uv9fvKnZ2dnUU78fudnZ2d@giganews.com> <91membpc20ch7531rbb8s0k8036ur6l68o@4ax.com>
<dst8hnFcam1U1@mid.individual.net> <356cf0c5-8255-4326-94a7-47dd155be5b1n@googlegroups.com>
<robertaw-88B3C5.22005724042022@news.individual.net> <78fe5885-7697-49e8-8e8a-28ba7c32a8cen@googlegroups.com>
<EfCcncL_x7uk8fX_nZ2dnZeNn_vNnZ2d@giganews.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <5e5ca1e1-c3ea-4462-9a61-f9aa5ee8d1d5n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"
From: petert...@gmail.com (pete...@gmail.com)
Injection-Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 03:57:01 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 18
 by: pete...@gmail.com - Wed, 27 Apr 2022 03:57 UTC

On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 6:03:35 PM UTC-4, Leif Roar Moldskred wrote:
> pete...@gmail.com <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I'd like to see that too.
> >
> > I dislike applying 'they' to a single person, because of
> > the ambiguities it introduces. I've been in situations where I had to ask people
> > to clarify how many people 'they' were, where the number of warm bodies was
> > relevant, and turned out to be one.
> >
> How's the number of warm bodies any more ambiguous when 'they' is used for the
> count of one than when it used for a count of two or three or five-hundred-and-
> twelve? If you need an exact number then 'more than one' doesn't help that much.

In that circumstance, it's not. But I specifically was addressing one vs not-one. In the
circumstance I experienced, it was an issue of giving a lift when only one car seat
was available.

Pt

Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"

<79be6ea8-590a-4de1-914c-adc1507cb6cfn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=72513&group=rec.arts.sf.written#72513

 copy link   Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5754:0:b0:2e1:eee8:be0b with SMTP id 20-20020ac85754000000b002e1eee8be0bmr17612438qtx.349.1651032467338;
Tue, 26 Apr 2022 21:07:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a81:9b0c:0:b0:2f4:c522:7d3c with SMTP id
s12-20020a819b0c000000b002f4c5227d3cmr25430155ywg.316.1651032467086; Tue, 26
Apr 2022 21:07:47 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 21:07:46 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1b3c51f7-ada9-410a-bc89-fccc81b474een@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=73.89.70.238; posting-account=BUItcQoAAACgV97n05UTyfLcl1Rd4W33
NNTP-Posting-Host: 73.89.70.238
References: <20160617a@crcomp.net> <20160618c@crcomp.net> <o8z6Lv.1oLJ@kithrup.com>
<dslktuFr66rU1@mid.individual.net> <o8zxBr.xqK@kithrup.com>
<5pGdnceun9Uv9fvKnZ2dnUU78fudnZ2d@giganews.com> <91membpc20ch7531rbb8s0k8036ur6l68o@4ax.com>
<dst8hnFcam1U1@mid.individual.net> <356cf0c5-8255-4326-94a7-47dd155be5b1n@googlegroups.com>
<robertaw-88B3C5.22005724042022@news.individual.net> <1b3c51f7-ada9-410a-bc89-fccc81b474een@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <79be6ea8-590a-4de1-914c-adc1507cb6cfn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"
From: petert...@gmail.com (pete...@gmail.com)
Injection-Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 04:07:47 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 111
 by: pete...@gmail.com - Wed, 27 Apr 2022 04:07 UTC

On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 10:35:20 PM UTC-4, Robert Carnegie wrote:
> On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 06:01:02 UTC+1, Robert Woodward wrote:
> > In article <356cf0c5-8255-4326...@googlegroups.com>,
> > Dudley Brooks <dudley...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 9:32:58 AM UTC-7, Michael R N Dolbear wrote:
> > > > "Joy Beeson" wrote
> > > > > On Sun, 19 Jun 2016 04:41:06 -0500, leif...@dimnakorr.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >> Wilst thou truly?
> > > >
> > > > > It has been centuries, but we still haven't learned how to use
> > > > singular "you" without daily confusions and misunderstandings.
> > > >
> > > > > Singular "they" will be an even bigger disaster, and with less excuse.
> > > > Jane Austen and her readers got on well enough (I dug out the quotations
> > > > for
> > > > Jim Baen).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Mike D
> > > Yep. Singular "they" has a respectable 400-year history of use by the finest
> > > writers of the English language. See Steven Pinker on this issue (and many
> > > similar issues). We don't need to come up a "new" gender-nonspecific word
> > > when we already have a time-honored one.
> > IMHO, that is an indefinite "they". Example: "Everyone is welcome, but
> > if they don't arrive early, we might not have room for them." "Everyone"
> > might be treated as singular, but it can represent more than one person..
> > The same is true with "everybody", "anyone", "anybody", "someone", and
> > "somebody". My challenge (which nobody has answered) is an example of
> > "they" being used for a specified named individual in a work written
> > before 1970 (I might have used different dates, but none were for before
> > my birth).
> First to note, this argument has been revived from 2016.
>
> You are no doubt considering that Ursula Le Guin's
> _The Left Hand of Darkness_ (1969) used "he" for
> characters that are male and female, which is most
> of them. Wikipedia represents her as choosing not to
> "invent" their gender-neutral pronouns. She was born
> in 1929, so she would have had time and motivation
> to notice existing usage, if not 400 years of it.
>
> Lou Reed's song "Walk on the Wild Side" (released 1972)
> has a person be "he" and "she" in the space of four words.
>
> The film _Carry On Spying_ (1964) had this representative
> of things to come, but I don't remember the pronouns.
> I could get out the video.
>
> Dr Crow: I am Doctor Crow. You are surprised?
> Daphne Honeybutt: Yes, I am! I expected you to be a man...
> or a woman.
>
> "Sector General" (1957) in _Hospital Station_ (1962)
> is the first published of James White's stories in that setting.
> People not of your species are "it" as of courtesy, but
> these, <https://sectorgeneral.fandom.com/wiki/Telfi>
> operate as a gestalt of many bodies with one mind,
> treated by Dr Conway with radiation underexposure.
> Conway receives his first memory tape of one such mind
> to carry out their treatment and ends up thinking he is
> one (or more than one) of them. The story also briefly
> considers the viewpoint of the actual Telfi, the Captain
> (and crew) of a starship. So that's one to look at. I think
> it's a long while before another species gets to narrate
> again, but memory tapes are common. Hudlars are
> alternately male and female, and another species has five
> sexes and very complicated personal lives, neither fully
> described.
>
> There's a gestalt in Arthur C. Clarke's "Rescue Party" (1946)
> at <https://www.baen.com/Chapters/0743498747/0743498747___1.htm>
> but its members are specifically nameless and use the pronoun "We".
> I haven't read to the end just now, but all of its other-species
> companions by the time we meet it are "he".
>
> Douglas Adams informed us in 1978 that "Zaphod Beeblebrox
> is now appearing in ‘No Sex Please: We’re Amoeboid Zingat-Ularians’
> at the Brantisvogan Starhouse." I expect that a one-bodied
> science fiction character who is a "they" is of a species
> reproducing asexually or hermaphroditically. Or a computer
> brain or a disembodied intelligence or something. Or an animal
> whose sexuality is not ascertained. An asexual blob species
> appears in _Hospital Station_ in "Visitor at Large", despite which
> I think the patient at one point is called "Papa" -
> not by a relative but by a human doctor.

Two points:
1 Adams is riffing on a long running British stage
farce, "No Sex Please, We're British"
https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Sex_Please,_We%27re_British

2 'We’re Amoeboid Zingat-Ularians', in normal English grammar,
refers to multiple Zingot-Ularians, not a singular one.

Pt

Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"

<rAzD7A.1pK3@kithrup.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=72515&group=rec.arts.sf.written#72515

 copy link   Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-vm.kithrup.com!kithrup.com!djheydt
From: djhe...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt)
Subject: Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"
Message-ID: <rAzD7A.1pK3@kithrup.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 04:16:22 GMT
References: <20160617a@crcomp.net> <587d392e-0a01-45c0-a7c7-dda2aa53ef4bn@googlegroups.com> <rAz1n9.1spA@kithrup.com> <39ff76b9-e2b8-424d-b1da-964b1dc62ce1n@googlegroups.com>
Organization: Kithrup Enterprises, Ltd.
X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010)
Lines: 78
 by: Dorothy J Heydt - Wed, 27 Apr 2022 04:16 UTC

In article <39ff76b9-e2b8-424d-b1da-964b1dc62ce1n@googlegroups.com>,
Ahasuerus <ahasuerus@email.com> wrote:
>On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 8:17:01 PM UTC-4, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>> In article <587d392e-0a01-45c0...@googlegroups.com>,
>> Ahasuerus <ahas...@email.com> wrote:
>> >On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 1:01:02 AM UTC-4, Robert Woodward wrote:
>> >> In article <356cf0c5-8255-4326...@googlegroups.com>,
>> >> Dudley Brooks <dudley...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 9:32:58 AM UTC-7, Michael R N
>Dolbear wrote:
>> >> > > "Joy Beeson" wrote
>> >> > > > On Sun, 19 Jun 2016 04:41:06 -0500, leif...@dimnakorr.com wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > >> Wilst thou truly?
>> >> > >
>> >> > > > It has been centuries, but we still haven't learned how to use
>> >> > > singular "you" without daily confusions and misunderstandings.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > > Singular "they" will be an even bigger disaster, and with
>less excuse.
>> >> > > Jane Austen and her readers got on well enough (I dug out the
>quotations
>> >> > > for Jim Baen).
>> >> > >
>> >> > Yep. Singular "they" has a respectable 400-year history of use by
>> >the finest
>> >> > writers of the English language. See Steven Pinker on this issue
>(and many
>> >> > similar issues). We don't need to come up a "new"
>gender-nonspecific word
>> >> > when we already have a time-honored one.
>> >> IMHO, that is an indefinite "they". Example: "Everyone is welcome, but
>> >> if they don't arrive early, we might not have room for them." "Everyone"
>> >> might be treated as singular, but it can represent more than one person.
>> >> The same is true with "everybody", "anyone", "anybody", "someone", and
>> >> "somebody". My challenge (which nobody has answered) is an example of
>> >> "they" being used for a specified named individual in a work written
>> >> before 1970 (I might have used different dates, but none were for before
>> >> my birth).
>> >
>> >There are pre-1970 examples of a single *un*named person being
>> >mentioned and then referred to as "they", e.g. in Chapter 27 of
>> >Agatha Christie's _The Murder at the Vicarage_ (1930):
>> >
>> >"We got an expert on it -- to say whether the 6:20 was added by a
>> >different hand. Naturally we sent up samples of Protheroe’s
>> >handwriting. And do you know the verdict? That letter was never
>> >written by Protheroe at all.”
>> >“You mean a forgery?”
>> >“It’s a forgery. The 6:20 they think is written in a different hand
>> >again -- but they’re not sure about that. The heading is in a different
>> >ink, but the letter itself is a forgery. Protheroe never wrote it.”
>> >“Are they certain?”
>> >“Well, they’re as certain as experts ever are. You know what an
>expert is!
>> >Oh! But they’re sure enough.”
>> >
>> >Note the interchangeable use of "an expert" and "they".
>> >
>> >I suspect that it may be an extension of the usage of the word
>> >"they" to refer to organizations, especially official organizations,
>> >as a whole.
>> I don't read sports news (anybody's sports news) ordinarily; but
>> occasionally in letting my eye drift down BBC News I see a
>> headline such as "Bournemouth fight back to draw Swansea
>> thriller," where "Bournemouth takes a plural verb because
>> "Bournemouth" consists of a pluraility of players. [snip]
>
>Yes, it's more common in the UK.

You said it. I have never seen that construction in any US
publication, dead-tree or electronic.

--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/

Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"

<nnd$6dd7d51a$30d0f4af@9026c5809cfc639b>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=72516&group=rec.arts.sf.written#72516

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.fan.heinlein rec.arts.sf.written
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 07:29:39 +0200
From: burrynul...@ppllaanneett.nnll (Sjouke Burry)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20131118 Thunderbird/17.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: alt.fan.heinlein,rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"
References: <20160617a@crcomp.net> <20160618c@crcomp.net> <o8z6Lv.1oLJ@kithrup.com> <dslktuFr66rU1@mid.individual.net> <o8zxBr.xqK@kithrup.com> <5pGdnceun9Uv9fvKnZ2dnUU78fudnZ2d@giganews.com> <91membpc20ch7531rbb8s0k8036ur6l68o@4ax.com> <dst8hnFcam1U1@mid.individual.net> <356cf0c5-8255-4326-94a7-47dd155be5b1n@googlegroups.com> <robertaw-88B3C5.22005724042022@news.individual.net> <1b3c51f7-ada9-410a-bc89-fccc81b474een@googlegroups.com> <20220426b@crcomp.net>
In-Reply-To: <20220426b@crcomp.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <nnd$6dd7d51a$30d0f4af@9026c5809cfc639b>
Organization: KPN B.V.
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.eu1.usenetexpress.com!94.232.112.246.MISMATCH!abe006.abavia.com!abp003.abavia.com!news.kpn.nl!not-for-mail
Lines: 49
Injection-Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 07:29:39 +0200
Injection-Info: news.kpn.nl; mail-complaints-to="abuse@kpn.com"
 by: Sjouke Burry - Wed, 27 Apr 2022 05:29 UTC

On 27.04.22 4:58, Don wrote:
> Robert Carnegie wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> I haven't read through _The Moon is a Harsh Mistress_
>> but Wikipedia indicates that "Mike", the computer,
>> is a he/him character, though I'd say that Mike's alter ego
>> of "Adam Selene" could be both. But probably isn't.
>
> Woke up later and came fully awake when I realized was
> hearing two fem voices, one Wyoh's warm contralto, other a sweet,
> high soprano with French accent. Wyoh chuckled at something and
> answered,
> "All right, Michelle dear, I'll call you soon. 'Night, darling."
> "Fine. Goodnight, dear."
> Wyoh stood up, turned around. "Who's your girl friend?"
> I asked. Thought she knew no one in Luna City. Might have phoned
> Hong Kong . . . had sleep-logged feeling was some reason she
> shouldn't phone.
> "That? Why, Mike, of course. We didn't mean to wake you."
> "What?"
> "Oh. It was actually Michelle. I discussed it with Mike,
> what sex he was, I mean. He decided that he could be either
> one. So now she's Michelle and that was her voice. Got it right
> the first time, too; her voice never cracked once."
> "Of course not; just shifted voder a couple of octaves. What
> are you trying to do: split his personality?"
> "It's not just pitch; when she's Michelle its an entire
> change in manner and attitude. Don't worry about splitting her
> personality; she has plenty for any personality she needs.
> Besides, Mannie, it's much easier for both of us. Once she
> shifted, we took our hair down and cuddled up and talked girl
> talk as if we had known each other forever. For example, those
> silly pictures no longer embarrassed me-in fact we discussed
> my pregnancies quite a lot. Michelle was terribly interested.
> She knows all about O.B. and G.Y. and so forth but just
> theory-and she appreciated the raw facts. Actually, Mannie,
> Michelle is much more a woman than Mike was a man."
>
> Operation Hard Rock
> https://vimeo.com/359653317
>
> Danke,
>
You beat me to it :)

Mike impersonated a host of male/female chars.

Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"

<45283483-0ad6-4884-ab45-1dd0535cfe1bn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=72519&group=rec.arts.sf.written#72519

 copy link   Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5984:0:b0:2f3:5aca:5844 with SMTP id e4-20020ac85984000000b002f35aca5844mr17233492qte.685.1651062799724;
Wed, 27 Apr 2022 05:33:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6902:310:b0:641:79a:c5f with SMTP id
b16-20020a056902031000b00641079a0c5fmr24385766ybs.95.1651062799524; Wed, 27
Apr 2022 05:33:19 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 05:33:19 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <rAz9Au.q2z@kithrup.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=188.28.0.160; posting-account=dELd-gkAAABehNzDMBP4sfQElk2tFztP
NNTP-Posting-Host: 188.28.0.160
References: <20160617a@crcomp.net> <356cf0c5-8255-4326-94a7-47dd155be5b1n@googlegroups.com>
<robertaw-88B3C5.22005724042022@news.individual.net> <1b3c51f7-ada9-410a-bc89-fccc81b474een@googlegroups.com>
<rAz9Au.q2z@kithrup.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <45283483-0ad6-4884-ab45-1dd0535cfe1bn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"
From: rja.carn...@excite.com (Robert Carnegie)
Injection-Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 12:33:19 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 46
 by: Robert Carnegie - Wed, 27 Apr 2022 12:33 UTC

On Wednesday, 27 April 2022 at 04:02:01 UTC+1, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <1b3c51f7-ada9-410a...@googlegroups.com>,
> Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>
> >First to note, this argument has been revived from 2016.
> >
> >Dr Crow: I am Doctor Crow. You are surprised?
> >Daphne Honeybutt: Yes, I am! I expected you to be a man...
> >or a woman.
> It would appear that Daphne expected her vis-a-vis to be human,
> or failing that, some other diecious species. What species, then,
> is Doctor Crow?

Dr Crow: I am both, the first of a new super-race,
with the combined mental and physical endowments
of man /and/ woman.
Daphne Honeybutt: You must have great difficulty
with your clothes.

Jodhpurs, it turns out.

Which I can't find a photograph of.
<https://www.aveleyman.com/FilmCredit.aspx?FilmID=3009>
<http://carryonfan.blogspot.com/2015/06/whatever-happened-to-judith-furse.html>

And as for Dr Crow's pronouns, I think no one else
receives the explanation, and Desmond Simkins
(played by Kenneth Williams) says of the doctor's
defiance, "She's a little stinker, isn't she!" (inaccurate
as to size, but referring to her spy organisation of
STENCH), and later about the doctor's appearance,
"No, don't laugh, she can't help it, poor thing."

A little later in radio's _Round the Horne_ featuring
Kenneth Horne, Kenneth Williams played an apparently
gay and highly camp "chorus boy" turned shady
entrepreneur in the "Julian and Sandy" sketches
(Hugh Paddick was Sandy) and routinely, but not
exclusively, attached female pronouns and adjectives
to verbally evoked homosexual or flamboyant men.
Which apparently was normal in real life, if it was
Kenneth Williams's real life. So there was no need of
other pronouns.

I say "apparently gay" because Julian and Sandy's
wives turn up somewhat unbelievably in what became
the last _Round the Horne_ episode.

Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"

<t4bedp$qmh$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=72523&group=rec.arts.sf.written#72523

 copy link   Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: michael....@gmail.com (Michael F. Stemper)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 07:54:15 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <t4bedp$qmh$1@dont-email.me>
References: <20160617a@crcomp.net> <20160618c@crcomp.net>
<o8z6Lv.1oLJ@kithrup.com> <dslktuFr66rU1@mid.individual.net>
<o8zxBr.xqK@kithrup.com> <5pGdnceun9Uv9fvKnZ2dnUU78fudnZ2d@giganews.com>
<91membpc20ch7531rbb8s0k8036ur6l68o@4ax.com>
<dst8hnFcam1U1@mid.individual.net>
<356cf0c5-8255-4326-94a7-47dd155be5b1n@googlegroups.com>
<robertaw-88B3C5.22005724042022@news.individual.net>
<1b3c51f7-ada9-410a-bc89-fccc81b474een@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 12:54:17 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="21c1cfc8df5307691654d3e08c7364f1";
logging-data="27345"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19QfV0OPiPzAPv2pP4cKQ3+IZ+XLHQtwn8="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/68.10.0
Cancel-Lock: sha1:b9BaX84hvz5hI+vAFJEsZtofIV4=
In-Reply-To: <1b3c51f7-ada9-410a-bc89-fccc81b474een@googlegroups.com>
Content-Language: en-US
 by: Michael F. Stemper - Wed, 27 Apr 2022 12:54 UTC

On 26/04/2022 21.35, Robert Carnegie wrote:
> On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 06:01:02 UTC+1, Robert Woodward wrote:
>> In article <356cf0c5-8255-4326...@googlegroups.com>,
>> Dudley Brooks <dudley...@gmail.com> wrote:

>>> Yep. Singular "they" has a respectable 400-year history of use by the finest
>>> writers of the English language. See Steven Pinker on this issue (and many
>>> similar issues). We don't need to come up a "new" gender-nonspecific word
>>> when we already have a time-honored one.
>> IMHO, that is an indefinite "they". Example: "Everyone is welcome, but
>> if they don't arrive early, we might not have room for them." "Everyone"
>> might be treated as singular, but it can represent more than one person.
>> The same is true with "everybody", "anyone", "anybody", "someone", and
>> "somebody". My challenge (which nobody has answered) is an example of
>> "they" being used for a specified named individual in a work written
>> before 1970 (I might have used different dates, but none were for before
>> my birth).

> Lou Reed's song "Walk on the Wild Side" (released 1972)
> has a person be "he" and "she" in the space of four words.

That was of course, after eyebrow-plucking and leg-shaving.
IOW, that was a male-to-female transition (transsexual or
transvestite, I couldn't say).

--
Michael F. Stemper
Always remember that you are unique. Just like everyone else.

Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"

<d0a1552c-1f96-4707-8078-8898974c32cen@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=72524&group=rec.arts.sf.written#72524

 copy link   Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
X-Received: by 2002:ad4:5bc1:0:b0:42c:3700:a6df with SMTP id t1-20020ad45bc1000000b0042c3700a6dfmr19943235qvt.94.1651064751866;
Wed, 27 Apr 2022 06:05:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:6f54:0:b0:648:b8a1:d212 with SMTP id
k81-20020a256f54000000b00648b8a1d212mr6597108ybc.225.1651064751670; Wed, 27
Apr 2022 06:05:51 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!1.us.feeder.erje.net!3.us.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 06:05:51 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <45283483-0ad6-4884-ab45-1dd0535cfe1bn@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=188.28.0.160; posting-account=dELd-gkAAABehNzDMBP4sfQElk2tFztP
NNTP-Posting-Host: 188.28.0.160
References: <20160617a@crcomp.net> <356cf0c5-8255-4326-94a7-47dd155be5b1n@googlegroups.com>
<robertaw-88B3C5.22005724042022@news.individual.net> <1b3c51f7-ada9-410a-bc89-fccc81b474een@googlegroups.com>
<rAz9Au.q2z@kithrup.com> <45283483-0ad6-4884-ab45-1dd0535cfe1bn@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <d0a1552c-1f96-4707-8078-8898974c32cen@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"
From: rja.carn...@excite.com (Robert Carnegie)
Injection-Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 13:05:51 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 2
 by: Robert Carnegie - Wed, 27 Apr 2022 13:05 UTC

Correction: Hugh Paddick played Julian.
Kenneth Williams played Sandy, who was
more confident.

Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"

<4d4a264f-9f5e-41cf-beeb-072368ae5814n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=72527&group=rec.arts.sf.written#72527

 copy link   Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
X-Received: by 2002:a37:b4d:0:b0:69f:7742:9778 with SMTP id 74-20020a370b4d000000b0069f77429778mr4951617qkl.109.1651066845116;
Wed, 27 Apr 2022 06:40:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:fe0c:0:b0:63d:958d:bf5f with SMTP id
k12-20020a25fe0c000000b0063d958dbf5fmr26470295ybe.353.1651066844948; Wed, 27
Apr 2022 06:40:44 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 06:40:44 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <t4bedp$qmh$1@dont-email.me>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=184.58.0.202; posting-account=baSzxgoAAAAENnnl9Y6GYjozlvpSek0i
NNTP-Posting-Host: 184.58.0.202
References: <20160617a@crcomp.net> <20160618c@crcomp.net> <o8z6Lv.1oLJ@kithrup.com>
<dslktuFr66rU1@mid.individual.net> <o8zxBr.xqK@kithrup.com>
<5pGdnceun9Uv9fvKnZ2dnUU78fudnZ2d@giganews.com> <91membpc20ch7531rbb8s0k8036ur6l68o@4ax.com>
<dst8hnFcam1U1@mid.individual.net> <356cf0c5-8255-4326-94a7-47dd155be5b1n@googlegroups.com>
<robertaw-88B3C5.22005724042022@news.individual.net> <1b3c51f7-ada9-410a-bc89-fccc81b474een@googlegroups.com>
<t4bedp$qmh$1@dont-email.me>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <4d4a264f-9f5e-41cf-beeb-072368ae5814n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"
From: tonynanc...@gmail.com (Tony Nance)
Injection-Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 13:40:45 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
 by: Tony Nance - Wed, 27 Apr 2022 13:40 UTC

On Wednesday, April 27, 2022 at 8:54:21 AM UTC-4, Michael F. Stemper wrote:
> On 26/04/2022 21.35, Robert Carnegie wrote:
> > On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 06:01:02 UTC+1, Robert Woodward wrote:
> >> In article <356cf0c5-8255-4326...@googlegroups.com>,
> >> Dudley Brooks <dudley...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> Yep. Singular "they" has a respectable 400-year history of use by the finest
> >>> writers of the English language. See Steven Pinker on this issue (and many
> >>> similar issues). We don't need to come up a "new" gender-nonspecific word
> >>> when we already have a time-honored one.
> >> IMHO, that is an indefinite "they". Example: "Everyone is welcome, but
> >> if they don't arrive early, we might not have room for them." "Everyone"
> >> might be treated as singular, but it can represent more than one person.
> >> The same is true with "everybody", "anyone", "anybody", "someone", and
> >> "somebody". My challenge (which nobody has answered) is an example of
> >> "they" being used for a specified named individual in a work written
> >> before 1970 (I might have used different dates, but none were for before
> >> my birth).
> > Lou Reed's song "Walk on the Wild Side" (released 1972)
> > has a person be "he" and "she" in the space of four words.
>
> That was of course, after eyebrow-plucking and leg-shaving.
> IOW, that was a male-to-female transition (transsexual or
> transvestite, I couldn't say).
>
>

Which reminds me that the Kinks released "Lola" two years before that.
- Tony, not exactly germane to this pronoun discussion

Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"

<tcri6h5mhf09u9nfeks8fsqu4rd6n2kn0v@4ax.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=72531&group=rec.arts.sf.written#72531

 copy link   Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: psper...@old.netcom.invalid (Paul S Person)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 09:22:15 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 70
Message-ID: <tcri6h5mhf09u9nfeks8fsqu4rd6n2kn0v@4ax.com>
References: <20160617a@crcomp.net> <356cf0c5-8255-4326-94a7-47dd155be5b1n@googlegroups.com> <robertaw-88B3C5.22005724042022@news.individual.net> <587d392e-0a01-45c0-a7c7-dda2aa53ef4bn@googlegroups.com> <rAz1n9.1spA@kithrup.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="4251b2e83cd9e8794ef589302fbcb5ae";
logging-data="1082"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19P2szn09m6cKXSMKOnJ/aoazP1rRvl1dM="
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
Cancel-Lock: sha1:5aLENw+2kA0qxDXQOLSgGI/t9BI=
 by: Paul S Person - Wed, 27 Apr 2022 16:22 UTC

On Wed, 27 Apr 2022 00:06:45 GMT, djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
Heydt) wrote:

>In article <587d392e-0a01-45c0-a7c7-dda2aa53ef4bn@googlegroups.com>,
>Ahasuerus <ahasuerus@email.com> wrote:
>>On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 1:01:02 AM UTC-4, Robert Woodward wrote:
>>> In article <356cf0c5-8255-4326...@googlegroups.com>,
>>> Dudley Brooks <dudley...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> > On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 9:32:58 AM UTC-7, Michael R N Dolbear wrote:
>>> > > "Joy Beeson" wrote
>>> > > > On Sun, 19 Jun 2016 04:41:06 -0500, leif...@dimnakorr.com wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > >> Wilst thou truly?
>>> > >
>>> > > > It has been centuries, but we still haven't learned how to use
>>> > > singular "you" without daily confusions and misunderstandings.
>>> > >
>>> > > > Singular "they" will be an even bigger disaster, and with less excuse.
>>> > > Jane Austen and her readers got on well enough (I dug out the quotations
>>> > > for Jim Baen).
>>> > >
>>> > Yep. Singular "they" has a respectable 400-year history of use by
>>the finest
>>> > writers of the English language. See Steven Pinker on this issue (and many
>>> > similar issues). We don't need to come up a "new" gender-nonspecific word
>>> > when we already have a time-honored one.
>>> IMHO, that is an indefinite "they". Example: "Everyone is welcome, but
>>> if they don't arrive early, we might not have room for them." "Everyone"
>>> might be treated as singular, but it can represent more than one person.
>>> The same is true with "everybody", "anyone", "anybody", "someone", and
>>> "somebody". My challenge (which nobody has answered) is an example of
>>> "they" being used for a specified named individual in a work written
>>> before 1970 (I might have used different dates, but none were for before
>>> my birth).
>>
>>There are pre-1970 examples of a single *un*named person being
>>mentioned and then referred to as "they", e.g. in Chapter 27 of
>>Agatha Christie's _The Murder at the Vicarage_ (1930):
>>
>>"We got an expert on it -- to say whether the 6:20 was added by a
>>different hand. Naturally we sent up samples of Protheroe’s
>>handwriting. And do you know the verdict? That letter was never
>>written by Protheroe at all.�
>>“You mean a forgery?â€?
>>“It’s a forgery. The 6:20 they think is written in a different hand
>>again -- but they’re not sure about that. The heading is in a different
>>ink, but the letter itself is a forgery. Protheroe never wrote it.�
>>“Are they certain?â€?
>>“Well, they’re as certain as experts ever are. You know what an expert is!
>>Oh! But they’re sure enough.â€?
>>
>>Note the interchangeable use of "an expert" and "they".
>>
>>I suspect that it may be an extension of the usage of the word
>>"they" to refer to organizations, especially official organizations,
>>as a whole.
>
>I don't read sports news (anybody's sports news) ordinarily; but
>occasionally in letting my eye drift down BBC News I see a
>headline such as "Bournemouth fight back to draw Swansea
>thriller," where "Bournemouth takes a plural verb because
>"Bournemouth" consists of a pluraility of players.

Or because it makes the headline fit in the available space.

>The sports news are listed under "Sport."
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"

<rB0Gzn.1MIF@kithrup.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=72542&group=rec.arts.sf.written#72542

 copy link   Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-vm.kithrup.com!kithrup.com!djheydt
From: djhe...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt)
Subject: Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"
Message-ID: <rB0Gzn.1MIF@kithrup.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 18:35:47 GMT
References: <20160617a@crcomp.net> <587d392e-0a01-45c0-a7c7-dda2aa53ef4bn@googlegroups.com> <rAz1n9.1spA@kithrup.com> <tcri6h5mhf09u9nfeks8fsqu4rd6n2kn0v@4ax.com>
Organization: Kithrup Enterprises, Ltd.
X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010)
Lines: 85
 by: Dorothy J Heydt - Wed, 27 Apr 2022 18:35 UTC

In article <tcri6h5mhf09u9nfeks8fsqu4rd6n2kn0v@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>On Wed, 27 Apr 2022 00:06:45 GMT, djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
>Heydt) wrote:
>
>>In article <587d392e-0a01-45c0-a7c7-dda2aa53ef4bn@googlegroups.com>,
>>Ahasuerus <ahasuerus@email.com> wrote:
>>>On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 1:01:02 AM UTC-4, Robert Woodward wrote:
>>>> In article <356cf0c5-8255-4326...@googlegroups.com>,
>>>> Dudley Brooks <dudley...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 9:32:58 AM UTC-7, Michael R N Dolbear wrote:
>>>> > > "Joy Beeson" wrote
>>>> > > > On Sun, 19 Jun 2016 04:41:06 -0500, leif...@dimnakorr.com wrote:
>>>> > >
>>>> > > >> Wilst thou truly?
>>>> > >
>>>> > > > It has been centuries, but we still haven't learned how to use
>>>> > > singular "you" without daily confusions and misunderstandings.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > > Singular "they" will be an even bigger disaster, and with less
>excuse.
>>>> > > Jane Austen and her readers got on well enough (I dug out the
>quotations
>>>> > > for Jim Baen).
>>>> > >
>>>> > Yep. Singular "they" has a respectable 400-year history of use by
>>>the finest
>>>> > writers of the English language. See Steven Pinker on this issue
>(and many
>>>> > similar issues). We don't need to come up a "new" gender-nonspecific word
>>>> > when we already have a time-honored one.
>>>> IMHO, that is an indefinite "they". Example: "Everyone is welcome, but
>>>> if they don't arrive early, we might not have room for them." "Everyone"
>>>> might be treated as singular, but it can represent more than one person.
>>>> The same is true with "everybody", "anyone", "anybody", "someone", and
>>>> "somebody". My challenge (which nobody has answered) is an example of
>>>> "they" being used for a specified named individual in a work written
>>>> before 1970 (I might have used different dates, but none were for before
>>>> my birth).
>>>
>>>There are pre-1970 examples of a single *un*named person being
>>>mentioned and then referred to as "they", e.g. in Chapter 27 of
>>>Agatha Christie's _The Murder at the Vicarage_ (1930):
>>>
>>>"We got an expert on it -- to say whether the 6:20 was added by a
>>>different hand. Naturally we sent up samples of Protheroe’s
>>>handwriting. And do you know the verdict? That letter was never
>>>written by Protheroe at all.�?
>>>“You mean a forgery?�?
>>>“It’s a forgery. The 6:20 they think is written in a different hand
>>>again -- but they’re not sure about that. The heading is in a different
>>>ink, but the letter itself is a forgery. Protheroe never wrote it.�?
>>>“Are they certain?�?
>>>“Well, they’re as certain as experts ever are. You know what an expert is!
>>>Oh! But they’re sure enough.�?
>>>
>>>Note the interchangeable use of "an expert" and "they".
>>>
>>>I suspect that it may be an extension of the usage of the word
>>>"they" to refer to organizations, especially official organizations,
>>>as a whole.
>>
>>I don't read sports news (anybody's sports news) ordinarily; but
>>occasionally in letting my eye drift down BBC News I see a
>>headline such as "Bournemouth fight back to draw Swansea
>>thriller," where "Bournemouth takes a plural verb because
>>"Bournemouth" consists of a pluraility of players.
>
>Or because it makes the headline fit in the available space.

The omission of a single lower-case 's' in a three-line headline?
Take your tongue out of your cheek before you choke.

Here's another example, perhaps not so jarring:

https://www.bbc.com/sport/av/tennis/61233753

where "Wimbledon," a singular place name, takes a plural verb
because (I assume) the decision was made by a committee?

--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/

Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"

<02b421ca-bf1d-49c7-9c2e-ef84a0304dbbn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=72549&group=rec.arts.sf.written#72549

 copy link   Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:296:b0:2f3:6b72:89dc with SMTP id z22-20020a05622a029600b002f36b7289dcmr10602813qtw.670.1651093135053;
Wed, 27 Apr 2022 13:58:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a81:1495:0:b0:2f7:1ce7:f482 with SMTP id
143-20020a811495000000b002f71ce7f482mr26825302ywu.333.1651093134799; Wed, 27
Apr 2022 13:58:54 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 13:58:54 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <rB0Gzn.1MIF@kithrup.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=173.72.12.144; posting-account=SOVadwoAAAB3h7W1MLW9kMYtEc2JW2L8
NNTP-Posting-Host: 173.72.12.144
References: <20160617a@crcomp.net> <587d392e-0a01-45c0-a7c7-dda2aa53ef4bn@googlegroups.com>
<rAz1n9.1spA@kithrup.com> <tcri6h5mhf09u9nfeks8fsqu4rd6n2kn0v@4ax.com> <rB0Gzn.1MIF@kithrup.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <02b421ca-bf1d-49c7-9c2e-ef84a0304dbbn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"
From: rpres...@gmail.com (Ross Presser)
Injection-Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 20:58:55 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 21
 by: Ross Presser - Wed, 27 Apr 2022 20:58 UTC

[snip long conversation about singular "they", because I'm not even sure
if I'm replying to anyone at this point]

I very recently read _The All-Consuming World_ (2021) by Cassandra Khaw,
in which a particular nobinary character gets referred to to as "he",
"she" and "they" in near random order as the paragraphs go on:

> She dusts each shoulder with elaborate care, the shadows along the
> planes of her cheeks, their jaw, his brow eddying into new shapes.

and later

> "That's not an apology if it was what you were trying to go for," says
> Verdigris, the playfulness bled out of his voice, burned from her
> expression. His hair unfurls, relaxing again into a nimbus which
> spreads along her shoulders.

I get the feeling that the author (also nonbinary, according to the
afterward) just uses this alternation as verbal pyrotechnics; it
certainly interfered with immersion and made me go back and reread many
times.

Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"

<637bd414-53b3-462f-af72-28e343d683b4n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=72560&group=rec.arts.sf.written#72560

 copy link   Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:138e:b0:2f3:7b0c:2285 with SMTP id o14-20020a05622a138e00b002f37b0c2285mr7818964qtk.58.1651107668080;
Wed, 27 Apr 2022 18:01:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:b952:0:b0:644:f4a4:4c23 with SMTP id
s18-20020a25b952000000b00644f4a44c23mr28416593ybm.171.1651107667910; Wed, 27
Apr 2022 18:01:07 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 18:01:07 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <rAz1n9.1spA@kithrup.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=97.85.144.152; posting-account=jkjUMgoAAADntzggyyi1Q9yviXd-uz94
NNTP-Posting-Host: 97.85.144.152
References: <20160617a@crcomp.net> <356cf0c5-8255-4326-94a7-47dd155be5b1n@googlegroups.com>
<robertaw-88B3C5.22005724042022@news.individual.net> <587d392e-0a01-45c0-a7c7-dda2aa53ef4bn@googlegroups.com>
<rAz1n9.1spA@kithrup.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <637bd414-53b3-462f-af72-28e343d683b4n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Recently Read - "Two Dooms"
From: defaultu...@yahoo.com (Default User)
Injection-Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2022 01:01:08 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 10
 by: Default User - Thu, 28 Apr 2022 01:01 UTC

On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 7:17:01 PM UTC-5, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:

> I don't read sports news (anybody's sports news) ordinarily; but
> occasionally in letting my eye drift down BBC News I see a
> headline such as "Bournemouth fight back to draw Swansea
> thriller," where "Bournemouth takes a plural verb because
> "Bournemouth" consists of a pluraility of players.

Back in my days at Megacorp, I had a friend who frequently worked on proposals. Once he worked on one for a project in the UK, and they had to be sure to say things like, "the team are ready . . ."

Brian

Pages:12345
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor