On 22/09/15 21:33, Geoff Winkless wrote:
> On 22 September 2015 at 09:28, Albe Laurenz <laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at
> <mailto:laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at>>wrote:
>
> Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 9:32 PM, Erik Rijkers <er@xs4all.nl
> <mailto:er@xs4all.nl>> wrote:
> >> I think this compulsive 'he'-avoiding is making the text worse.
> >>
> >>
> >> - environment variable); any user can make such a change
> for his session.
> >> + environment variable); any user can make such a change
> for their session.
> >
> > -1. It seems fine to me.
>
> (Disclaimer: I am not a native speaker.)
>
> Using the pronoun of the third person plural as a replacement for
> "his or her"
> has become widely used, at least in the U.S., and the OED condones
> that use:
> http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/they
>
>
> Without wanting to get into a grammar war, I'm not so sure I agree
> that it "condones" it. Dictionaries reflect the current state of
> usage, they don't act as arbiters of correctness. The abuse of
> "literally" as an emphasiser (which usage is now listed in the OED) is
> a prime example.
>
> As an Englishman I would prefer "his or her" over "their". Perhaps
> our American cousins might disagree though.
>
> WRT the second, it probably doesn't help that "might not be the same
> as the database user that is to be connect as" is incorrect anyway -
> it should perhaps be "that is to be connect*ed *as" (although I still
> find the construction clumsy).
>
> Geoff
I am an Englishman.
I prefer "their" rather than "his or her", it is less clumsy & there is
no point in specifying gender unless it is relevant!
Besides, some people are neither, or their biological gender is
ambiguous - so a few people fit into neither the male nor the female
category (depending on precise definitions, about 0.5%)!
Cheers,
Gavin
