negative payload "he"

[Laurence Horn]

>Well, there are various levels of PC.  The possibility that the
>usage resulted from a slip of the tongue can't be ruled out either.
>
>JL

Hah!  The null hypothesis rears its head!

L

>
>Laurence Horn <laurence.horn at YALE.EDU> wrote:
>---------------------- Information from the mail header
>-----------------------
>Sender: American Dialect Society
>Poster: Laurence Horn
>Subject: Re: negative payload "he"
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>At 4:55 AM -0700 9/22/05, Jonathan Lighter wrote:
>
>>Larry, I think all we disagree on is Shaw's precise reason(s) for
>>substituting "they" for "he." Your position is that it probably
>>resulted from a specific rhetorical intention; mine is that it may
>>reflect a widespread, if as yet subtle, uneasiness about "he."
>
>Right. Another point to consider on my side of the argument is that
>someone like Clay Shaw would be among the least likely to adopt
>"they" for reasons of "political correctness". That makes it more
>likely, I'd submit, that he had the covert reference to Blanco in
>mind.
>
>>All of your exx. sound normally informal to me. What makes Shaw's
>>usage different and remarkable is that it referred to a definitely
>>known person. It seemed so markedly incongruous to me that I posted
>>it - something I wouldn't have done for any of the exx. listed.
>
>Agreed--I included those to show that while there are clear instances
>of "they" used when the sex of the referent is known, they almost
>always occur in the absence of any specific reference, which
>your/Clay's case didn't.
>
>L
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Yahoo! for Good
>  Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.