[Ads-l] "man non-avoidance

Robin Hamilton robin.hamilton3 at VIRGINMEDIA.COM
Tue Oct 11 06:27:21 EDT 2016

Best case yet I've seen for the utility of the gender-neutral "they". 

"Every man for themselves" (or is that misconcorded?) could be happily accepted
by either a fish or a bicycle.

Well, actually, no, but it would have been (marginally) less awkward than what
the Late Deserting "I'm not going to vote for him, but I'm still endorsing him"
Son-of-Ann said.  Or is it the other way around?  Confusing times we live in ...

Not man-people or women-people but person-peoples ...


>     On 11 October 2016 at 11:10 Jonathan Lighter <wuxxmupp2000 at GMAIL.COM>
> wrote:
>     Dana Bash, CNN, reports that Paul Ryan has told Republicans,
>     "Every man for him or herself. I know what I just did there, but let's go
>     on."
>     She was embarrassed over "man" non-avoidance. Or was it just the twisted
>     grammar? Many ask, "Which is a greater threat to our world?"
>     JL
>     --
>     "If the truth is half as bad as I think it is, you can't handle the
> truth."
>     ------------------------------------------------------------
>     The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

More information about the Ads-l mailing list