negative payload "he"

[Peter A. McGraw]

--On Wednesday, September 21, 2005 12:48 PM -0400 Laurence Horn
<laurence.horn at YALE.EDU> wrote:

> I think Jim's point, with which I agree, was that this was the most
> economical way Rep. Shaw could think of to make the contrastive point
> without using sex-neutral "he".  I don't necessarily agree with
> either his politics or his grammar, but his motivation was basically
> to say:
>
> "In Florida [unlike Louisiana] we had a governor who knew what pro was
> doing"
>
> where pro = he would presumably be reserved for [+male] referents
> (including Bush but not Blanco) and pro = he or she would perhaps be
> possible but less folksy.
>
> I think implicit contrast has everything to do with it.  The whole
> point of the utterance was to contrast Jeb's "competence" with
> Blanco's "incompetence".  Again, not my reading of the situation on
> the ground, just my reading of the utterance and its motivation.
>
> Larry

Not to belabor the point (or do I really mean, "to belabor the point"?),
but I still don't see any need for any other pronoun than "he" here.  In
"In Florida [unlike Louisiana] we had a governor who knew what pro was
doing," pro can still be "he" and the contrast is preserved, since "he" is
just as unlike "she" as "Florida" is unlike "Louisiana."  The only need for
a gender-neutral pronoun would be if the sentence were, "In Florida [LIKE
Louisiana]..." since the "he" would then apply (incorrectly) to Blanco.

Peter Mc.

***************************************************************************
Peter A. McGraw       Linfield College        McMinnville, Oregon
******************* pmcgraw at linfield.edu ****************************