82,909
edits
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
One of the failings of the English language is that it doesn’t deal awfully well with what these days is called “[[gender neutrality]]”, but more properly could be called “[[sexual indifference]]”, except that that sounds like something else altogether. | One of the failings of the English language is that it doesn’t deal awfully well with what these days is called “[[gender neutrality]]”, but more properly could be called “[[sexual indifference]]”, except that that sounds like something else altogether. | ||
This wiki frequently, mockingly, speaks of | This wiki frequently, mockingly, speaks of the [[Mediocre lawyer|attorney]] in the abstract. These days, an officer of the courts is marginally more likely to be female than male, but in general could be either. This creates challenges when using {{tag|pronoun}}s. | ||
Generally, we like {{tag|pronoun}}s. We don’t think lawyers use them often enough: they are more idiomatic and easier on the ear that the lawyer’s usual stand in “[[such]] [insert {{tag|noun}}]”. But pronouns do commit one to a {{tag|gender}}: “[[he]]”, or “[[she]]”, “[[him]]” or “[[her]]” — no-one likes to be referred to as “it”. | Generally, we like {{tag|pronoun}}s. We don’t think lawyers use them often enough: they are more idiomatic and easier on the ear that the lawyer’s usual stand in “[[such]] [insert {{tag|noun}}]”. But pronouns do commit one to a {{tag|gender}}: “[[he]]”, or “[[she]]”, “[[him]]” or “[[her]]” — no-one likes to be referred to as “it”. | ||
{{c|grammar}} | {{c|grammar}} |