What type of grammar is the word they

Singular they, along with its inflected or derivative forms, them, their, theirs and themselves (also themself, and theirself), is a gender-neutral third-person pronoun. It typically occurs with an unspecified antecedent, in sentences such as:

«Somebody left their umbrella in the office. Could you please let them know where they can get it?»^[1]

«My personal rule is to never trust anyone who says that they had a good time in high school.»^[2]

«The patient should be told at the outset how much they will be required to pay.»^[3]

«But a journalist should not be forced to reveal their sources.»^[3]

This use of singular they had emerged by the 14th century,^[2] about a century after the plural they. It has been commonly employed in everyday English ever since and has gained currency in official contexts. Singular they has been criticised since the mid-18th century by prescriptive commentators who consider it an error.^[4] Its continued use in modern standard English has become more common and formally accepted with the move toward gender-neutral language.^[5][6] Though some early-21st-century style guides described it as colloquial and less appropriate in formal writing,^[7][8] by 2020 most style guides accepted the singular they as a personal pronoun.^{[9][10][11][12]}

In the early 21st century, use of singular they with known individuals emerged for people who do not identify as male or female, as in, for example, «This is my friend, Jay. I met them at work.»^[13] They in this context was named Word of the Year for 2015 by the American Dialect Society,^[14] and for 2019 by Merriam-Webster.^[15][16][17] In 2020, the American Dialect Society also selected it as Word of the Decade for the 2010s.^[18]

Inflected forms and derivative pronounsEdit

Like the «singular you«, «singular they» permits a singular antecedent, but is used with the same verb forms as plural they,^[19][20][21] and has the same inflected forms as plural they (i.e. them, their, and theirs),^[22] except that in the reflexive form, themself is sometimes used instead of themselves.^[23]

Inflected forms of third-person personal pronouns

Pronoun	Subjective (nominative)	Objective (accusative)	Prenominal possessive (dependent genitive)	Predicative possessive (independent genitive)	Reflexive
He	He is my son.	When my son cries, I hug him.	My son tells me his age.	If I lose my phone, my son lends me his.	My son dresses himself.
She	She is my daughter.	When my daughter cries, I hug her.	My daughter tells me her age.	If I lose my phone, my daughter lends me hers.	My daughter dresses herself.
Plural they	They are my children.	When my children cry, I hug them.	My children tell me their ages.	If I lose my phone, my children lend me theirs.	My children dress themselves.
Singular they[24]	They are a child.	When a child cries, I hug them.	A child tells me their age.	If I lose my phone, a child lends me theirs.	A child dresses themself [or themselves].
Generic he	He is a child.	When a child cries, I hug him.	A child tells me his age.	If I lose my phone, a child lends me his.	A child dresses himself.
It	It is a child.	When a child cries, I hug it.	A child tells me its age.	If I lose my phone, a child lends me its.	A child dresses itself.

Themself is attested from the 14th to 16th centuries. Its use has been increasing since the 1970s^[25][26] or 1980s,^[27] though it is sometimes still classified as «a minority form».^[28] In 2002, Payne and Huddleston, in The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language, called its use in standard dialect «rare and acceptable only to a minority of speakers» but «likely to increase with the growing acceptance of they as a singular pronoun».^[25] It is useful when referring to a single person of indeterminate gender, where the plural form themselves might seem incongruous, as in:

«It is not an actor pretending to be Reagan or Thatcher, it is, in grotesque form, the person themself.» — Ian Hislop (1984);^[29] quoted in Fowler’s^[30]

Regional preferencesEdit

The Canadian government recommends themselves as the reflexive form of singular they for use in Canadian federal legislative texts and advises against using themself.^[31]

UsageEdit

They with a singular antecedent goes back to the Middle English of the 14th century^[32][33] (slightly younger than they with a plural antecedent, which was borrowed from Old Norse in the 13th century),^[34] and has remained in use for centuries in spite of its proscription by traditional grammarians beginning in the mid 18th century.^[35][36]

Informal spoken English exhibits universal use of the singular they. An examination by Jürgen Gerner of the British National Corpus published in 1998 found that British speakers, regardless of social status, age, sex, or region, used the singular they more often than the gender-neutral he or other options.^[37]

Prescription of generic heEdit

Alongside they, it has historically been acceptable to use the pronoun he to refer to an indefinite person of any gender,^[38] as in the following:

«If any one did not know it, it was his own fault.» — George Washington Cable, Old Creole Days (1879);^[39] quoted by Baskervill & Sewell.^[40]

«Every person who turns this page has his own little diary.» — W. M. Thackeray, On Lett’s Diary (1869);^[41] quoted in Baskervill & Sewell, An English Grammar.^[42]

The earliest known explicit recommendation by a grammarian to use the generic he rather than they in formal English is Ann Fisher’s mid-18th century A New Grammar assertion that «The Masculine Person answers to the general Name, which comprehends both Male and Female; as, any Person who knows what he says.» (Ann Fisher^[43] as quoted by Ostade^[44])

Nineteenth-century grammarians insisted on he as a gender-neutral pronoun on the grounds of number agreement, while rejecting «he or she» as clumsy,^[45] and this was widely adopted: e.g. in 1850, the British Parliament passed an act which provided that, when used in acts of Parliament «words importing the masculine gender shall be deemed and taken to include females».^[46][47] Baskervill and Sewell mention the common use of the singular they in their An English Grammar for the Use of High School, Academy and College Class of 1895, but prefer the generic he on the basis of number agreement.

Baskervill gives a number of examples of recognized authors using the singular they, including:

«Every one must judge according to their own feelings.» — Lord Byron, Werner (1823),^[48] quoted as «Every one must judge of [sic] their own feelings.»^[49]

«Had the Doctor been contented to take my dining tables as any body in their senses would have done …» — Jane Austen, Mansfield Park (1814);^[50][49]

It has been argued that the real motivation for promoting the «generic» he was an androcentric world view, with the default sex of humans being male – and the default gender therefore being masculine.^[45] There is some evidence for this: Wilson wrote in 1560:

«… let us keepe a naturall order, and set the man before the woman for manners sake». — Wilson, The arte of Rhetorique (1560);^[51]

«… the worthier is preferred and set before. As a man is set before a woman …» — Wilson, The arte of Rhetorique (1560);^[52]

And Poole wrote in 1646:

«The Masculine gender is more worthy than the Feminine.» — Poole, The English Accidence (1646);^[53] cited by Bodine^[54]

In spite of continuous attempts on the part of educationalists to proscribe singular they in favour of he, this advice was ignored; even writers of the period continued to use they (though the proscription may have been observed more by American writers).^[55][56] Use of the purportedly gender-neutral he remained acceptable until at least the 1960s,^[38] though some uses of he were later criticized as being awkward or silly, for instance when referring to:^[57]

• Indeterminate persons of both sexes:

«The ideal that every boy and girl should be so equipped that he shall not be handicapped in his struggle for social progress …» — C. C. Fries, American English Grammar, (1940).^[58]

• Known persons of both sexes:

«She and Louis had a game – who could find the ugliest photograph of himself.» — Joseph P. Lash, Eleanor and Franklin (1971)^[59]

Contemporary use of he to refer to a generic or indefinite antecedentEdit

He is still sometimes found in contemporary writing when referring to a generic or indeterminate antecedent. In some cases it is clear from the situation that the persons potentially referred to are likely to be male, as in:

«The patient should be informed of his therapeutic options.» — a text about prostate cancer (2004)^[60]

In some cases the antecedent may refer to persons who are only probably male or to occupations traditionally thought of as male:

«It wouldn’t be as if the lone astronaut would be completely by himself.» (2008)^[61]

«Kitchen table issues … are ones the next president can actually do something about if he actually cares about it. More likely if she cares about it!» — Hillary Rodham Clinton (2008)^[62]

In other situations, the antecedent may refer to an indeterminate person of either sex:

«Now, a writer is entitled to have a Roget on his desk.» — Barzun (1985);^[63] quoted in Merriam-Webster’s Concise Dictionary of English Usage^[64]

«A Member of Parliament should always live in his constituency.»^[65]

In 2010, Choy and Clark still recommend the use of generic he «in formal speech or writing»:^[66]

«… when indefinite pronouns are used as antecedents, they require singular subject, object, and possessive pronouns …»

«Everyone did as he pleased»

In informal spoken English, plural pronouns are often used with indefinite pronoun antecedents. However, this construction is generally not considered appropriate in formal speech or writing.

Informal: Somebody should let you borrow their book.

Formal: Somebody should let you borrow his book.»

— Choy, Basic Grammar and Usage^[66]

In 2015, Fowler’s Dictionary of Modern English Usage calls this «the now outmoded use of he to mean ‘anyone‘«,^[67] stating:^[68]

From the earliest times until about the 1960s it was unquestionably acceptable to use the pronoun he (and him, himself, his) with indefinite reference to denote a person of either sex, especially after indefinite pronouns and determiners such as anybody,  … every, etc., after gender-neutral nouns such as person … [but] alternative devices are now usually resorted to. When a gender-neutral pronoun or determiner … is needed, the options usually adopted are the plural forms they, their, themselves, etc., or he or she (his or her, etc.)

In 2016, Garner’s Modern English calls the generic use of masculine pronouns «the traditional view, now widely assailed as sexist».^[69]

The rise of gender-neutral languageEdit

The earliest known attempt to create gender-neutral pronouns dates back to 1792, when Scottish economist James Anderson advocated for an indeterminate pronoun «ou».^[70]

In 1808, poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge suggested «it» and «which» as neutral pronouns for the word «Person»:^[71][72]

In the second half of the 20th century, people expressed more widespread concern at the use of male-oriented language.^[73] This included criticism of the use of man as a generic term to include men and women and of the use of he to refer to any human, regardless of sex (social gender).^[74]

It was argued that he could not sensibly be used as a generic pronoun understood to include men and women. William Safire in his On Language column in The New York Times approved of the use of generic he, mentioning the mnemonic phrase «the male embraces the female».^[75] C. Badendyck from Brooklyn wrote to the New York Times in a reply:^[76]

The average American needs the small routines of getting ready for work. As he shaves or blow-dries his hair or pulls on his panty-hose, he is easing himself by small stages into the demands of the day.

By 1980, the movement toward gender-neutral language had gained wide support, and many organizations, including most publishers, had issued guidelines on the use of gender-neutral language,^[73] but stopped short of recommending they to be third-person singular with a non-indeterminate, singular antecedent.^{[citation needed]}

Contemporary usageEdit

The use of masculine generic nouns and pronouns in written and spoken language has decreased since the 1970s.^[77]
In a corpus of spontaneous speech collected in Australia in the 1990s, singular they had become the most frequently used generic pronoun (rather than generic he or he or she).^[77] Similarly, a study from 2002 looking at a corpus of American and British newspapers showed a preference for they to be used as a singular epicene pronoun.^[78]

The increased use of singular they may owe in part to an increasing desire for gender-neutral language. A solution in formal writing has often been to write «he or she», or something similar, but this is often considered awkward or overly politically correct, particularly when used excessively.^[79][80] In 2016, the journal American Speech published a study by Darren K. LaScotte investigating the pronouns used by native English speakers in informal written responses to questions concerning a subject of unspecified gender, finding that 68% of study participants chose singular they to refer to such an antecedent. Some participants noted that they found constructions such as «he or she» inadequate as they do not include people who identify as neither male nor female.^[81]

They in this context was named Word of the Year for 2019 by Merriam-Webster^[15][16][17] and for 2015 by the American Dialect Society.^[14] On January 4, 2020, the American Dialect Society announced they had crowned they, again in this context, Word of the Decade for the 2010s.^[18]

Use with a pronoun antecedentEdit

The singular antecedent can be a pronoun such as someone, anybody, or everybody, or an interrogative pronoun such as who:

• With somebody or someone:

«I feel that if someone is not doing their job it should be called to their attention.» — an American newspaper (1984); quoted by Fowler.^[82]

• With anybody or anyone:

«If anyone tells you that America’s best days are behind her, then they‘re looking the wrong way.» President George Bush, 1991 State of the Union Address;^[83] quoted by Garner^[84]

«Anyone can set themselves up as an acupuncturist.» — Sarah Lonsdale «Sharp Practice Pricks Reputation of Acupuncture». Observer 15 December 1991, as cited by Garner^[84]

«If anybody calls, take their name and ask them to call again later.» Example given by Swan^[1]

«It will be illegal for anyone to donate an organ to their wife, husband, adopted child, adopted parent or close friend.» ^[85][a]

• With nobody or no one:

«No one put their hand up.» Example given by Huddleston et al.^[86]

«No one felt they had been misled.» Example given by Huddleston et al.^[3]

• With an interrogative pronoun as antecedent:

«Who thinks they can solve the problem?». Example given by Huddleston et al.; The Cambridge Grammar of the English language.^[87]

• With everybody, everyone, etc.:

«Everyone promised to behave themselves.» Example given by Huddleston et al.^[3]

Notional plurality or pairwise relationshipsEdit

Although the pronouns everybody, everyone, nobody, and no one are singular in form and are used with a singular verb, these pronouns have an «implied plurality» that is somewhat similar to the implied plurality of collective or group nouns such as crowd or team,^[b] and in some sentences where the antecedent is one of these «implied plural» pronouns, the word they cannot be replaced by generic he,^[89] suggesting a «notional plural» rather than a «bound variable» interpretation (see § Grammatical and logical analysis, below). This is in contrast to sentences that involve multiple pairwise relationships and singular they, such as:

«Everyone loves their mother.»^[90]

«‘I never did get into that football thing’, she said after everyone returned to their seat.»^[91]

«Everyone doubts themselves/themself at one time or another.»

There are examples where the antecedent pronoun (such as everyone) may refer to a collective, with no necessary implication of pairwise relationships. These are examples of plural they:

«At first everyone in the room was singing; then they began to laugh.» Example given by Kolln.^[89]

«Everybody was crouched behind the furniture to surprise me, and they tried to. But I already knew they were there.» Example given by Garner.^[92]

«Nobody was late, were they?» Example given by Swan.^[1]

Which are apparent because they do not work with a generic he or he or she:

«At first everyone in the room was singing; then he or she began to laugh.» Example given by Kolln.^[89]

«Everybody was crouched behind the furniture to surprise me, and he tried to. But I already knew he was there.»

«Nobody was late, was he?»

In addition, for these «notional plural» cases, it would not be appropriate to use themself instead of themselves as in:

«Everybody was crouched behind the furniture to surprise me, but they instead surprised themself.»

Use with a generic noun as antecedentEdit

The singular antecedent can also be a noun such as person, patient, or student:

• With a noun (e.g. person, student, patient) used generically (e.g. in the sense of any member of that class or a specific member unknown to the speaker or writer)

«cognitive dissonance: «a concept in psychology [that] describes the condition in which a person’s attitudes conflict with their behaviour». — Macmillan Dictionary of Business and Management (1988), as cited by Garner.^[84]

«A starting point would be to give more support to the company secretary. They are, or should be, privy to the confidential deliberations and secrets of the board and the company. — Ronald Severn. «Protecting the Secretary Bird». Financial Times, 6 January 1992; quoted by Garner.^[84]

• With representatives of a class previously referred to in the singular

«I had to decide: Is this person being irrational or is he right? Of course, they were often right.» — Robert Burchfield in U.S. News & World Report 11 August 1986, as cited in Merriam-Webster’s Concise Dictionary of English Usage^[64]

Even when referring to a class of persons of known sex, they is sometimes used:^[93]

«I swear more when I’m talking to a boy, because I’m not afraid of shocking them«. From an interview.^[1]

«No mother should be forced to testify against their child».

They may also be used with antecedents of mixed genders:

«Let me know if your father or your mother changes their mind.» Example given by Huddleston et al.^[3]

«Either the husband or the wife has perjured themself.» Here themself might be acceptable to some, themselves seems less acceptable, and himself is unacceptable. Example given by Huddleston et al.^[3]

Even for a definite known person of known sex, they may be used in order to ignore or conceal the sex.

«I had a friend in Paris, and they had to go to hospital for a month.» (definite person, not identified)^[1]

The word themself is also sometimes used when the antecedent is known or believed to be a single person:

«Someone has apparently locked themself in the office.»[acceptability questionable]^[3]

Use for specific, known people, including non-binary peopleEdit

Known individuals may be referred to as they if the individual’s gender is unknown to the speaker.^[94][95]

A known individual may also be referred to as they if the individual is non-binary or genderqueer and considers they and derivatives as appropriate pronouns.^[94][95] Several social media applications permit account holders to choose to identify their gender using one of a variety of non-binary or genderqueer options,^[96] such as genderfluid, agender, or bigender, and to designate pronouns, including they/them, which they wish to be used when referring to them.^[97] Explicitly designating one’s pronouns as they/them increases the chance that people will interpret «they» as singular.^[98] Though «singular they» has long been used with antecedents such as everybody or generic persons of unknown gender, this use, which may be chosen by an individual, is recent.^[99] The earliest recorded usage of this sense documented by the Oxford English Dictionary is in a tweet from 2009;^[100][101] the journal American Speech documents an example from 2008 in an article in the journal Women’s Studies Quarterly.^[102] As of 2020, singular they is the most popular pronoun set used by non-binary people. Approximately 80% consider it appropriate for themselves.^[103][104]

The singular they in the meaning «gender-neutral singular pronoun for a known person, as a non-binary identifier»^[105] was chosen by the American Dialect Society as their «Word of the Year» for 2015.^[99] In 2016, the American Dialect Society wrote:

«While editors have increasingly moved to accepting singular they when used in a generic fashion, voters in the Word of the Year proceedings singled out its newer usage as an identifier for someone who may identify as non-binary in gender terms.»^[106]

The vote followed the previous year’s approval of this use by The Washington Post style guide, when Bill Walsh, the Post‘s copy editor, said that the singular they is «the only sensible solution to English’s lack of a gender-neutral third-person singular personal pronoun».^[107]

In 2019, the non-binary they was added to Merriam-Webster’s dictionary.^{[108][109][110]}

The first non-binary main character on North American television appeared on the Showtime drama series Billions in 2017, with Asia Kate Dillon playing Taylor Mason.^[111][112] Both actor and character use singular they.

Acceptability and prescriptive guidanceEdit

Though both generic he and generic they have long histories of use, and both are still used, both are also systematically avoided by particular groups.^[113]

Style guides that avoid expressing a preference for either approach sometimes recommend recasting a problem sentence, for instance replacing generic expressions with plurals to avoid the criticisms of either party.

The use of singular they may be more accepted in British English than in American English,^[114] or vice versa.^[115]

Usage guidance in American style guidesEdit

Garner’s Modern American UsageEdit

Garner’s Modern American Usage (2nd ed., 2003) recommends cautious use of singular they, and avoidance where possible because its use is stigmatized.

«Where noun–pronoun disagreement can be avoided, avoid it. Where it can’t be avoided, resort to it cautiously because some people will doubt your literacy …»^[116]

Garner suggests that use of singular they is more acceptable in British English:

«Speakers of AmE resist this development more than speakers of BrE, in which the indeterminate they is already more or less standard.»^[114]

and apparently regrets the resistance by the American language community:

«That it sets many literate Americans’ teeth on edge is an unfortunate obstacle to what promises to be the ultimate solution to the problem.»^[114]

He regards the trend toward using singular they with antecedents like everybody, anyone and somebody as inevitable:

«Disturbing though these developments may be to purists, they’re irreversible. And nothing that a grammarian says will change them.»^[117]

The Chicago Manual of StyleEdit

In the 14th edition (1993) of The Chicago Manual of Style, the University of Chicago Press explicitly recommended using singular they and their, noting a «revival» of this usage and citing «its venerable use by such writers as Addison, Austen, Chesterfield, Fielding, Ruskin, Scott, and Shakespeare.»^[118]
From the 15th edition (2003), this was changed. In Chapter 5 of the 17th edition (2017), now written by Bryan A. Garner, the recommendations are:^[119]

Normally, a singular antecedent requires a singular pronoun. But because he is no longer universally accepted as a generic pronoun referring to a person of unspecified gender, people commonly (in speech and in informal writing) substitute the third-person-plural pronouns they, them, their, and themselves (or the nonstandard singular themself). While this usage is accepted in those spheres, it is only lately showing signs of gaining acceptance in formal writing, where Chicago recommends avoiding its use. When referring specifically to a person who does not identify with a gender-specific pronoun, however, they and its forms are often preferred.

The American Heritage Book of English Usage (1996)Edit

According to The American Heritage Book of English Usage and its usage panel of selected writers, journalism professors, linguists, and other experts, many Americans avoid use of they to refer to a singular antecedent out of respect for a «traditional» grammatical rule, despite use of singular they by modern writers of note and mainstream publications:^[120]

Most of the Usage Panel rejects the use of they with singular antecedents as ungrammatical, even in informal speech. Eighty-two percent find the sentence The typical student in the program takes about six years to complete their course work unacceptable … panel members seem to make a distinction between singular nouns, such as the typical student and a person, and pronouns that are grammatically singular but semantically plural, such as anyone, everyone and no one. Sixty-four percent of panel members accept the sentence No one is willing to work for those wages anymore, are they?

Publication Manual of the American Psychological AssociationEdit

The 7th edition of the American Psychological Association’s Publication Manual, released in October 2019, advises using singular «they» when gender is unknown or irrelevant, and gives the following example:^[121]

For instance, rather than writing «I don’t know who wrote this note, but he or she has good handwriting,» you might write something like «I don’t know who wrote this note, but they have good handwriting.»

APA style also endorses using they/them if it is someone’s (for example, a non-binary person’s) preferred pronoun set.^[122]

Strunk & White’s The Elements of StyleEdit

William Strunk Jr. & E. B. White, the original authors of The Elements of Style, found use of they with a singular antecedent unacceptable and advised use of the singular pronoun (he). In the 3rd edition (1979), the recommendation was still:^[123]

They. Not to be used when the antecedent is a distributive expression, such as each, each one. everybody, every one, many a man. Use the singular pronoun. … A similar fault is the use of the plural pronoun with the antecedent anybody, anyone, somebody, someone ….

The assessment, in 1979, was:^[123]

The use of he as pronoun for nouns embracing both genders is a simple, practical convention rooted in the beginnings of the English language. He has lost all suggestion of maleness in these circumstances. … It has no pejorative connotation; it is never incorrect.

In the 4th edition (2000), use of singular they was still proscribed against, but use of generic he was no longer recommended.^[124]

Joseph M. Williams’s The Basics of Clarity and Grace (2009)Edit

Joseph M. Williams, who wrote a number of books on writing with «clarity and grace», discusses the advantages and disadvantages of various solutions when faced with the problem of referring to an antecedent such as someone, everyone, no one or a noun that does not indicate gender and suggests that this will continue to be a problem for some time. He «suspect[s] that eventually we will accept the plural they as a correct singular» but states that currently «formal usage requires a singular pronoun».^[125]

The Little, Brown Handbook (1992)Edit

According to The Little, Brown Handbook, most experts – and some teachers and employers – find use of singular they unacceptable:

Although some experts accept they, them, and their with singular indefinite words, most do not, and many teachers and employers regard the plural as incorrect. To be safe, work for agreement between singular indefinite words and the pronouns that refer to them ….

It recommends using he or she or avoiding the problem by rewriting the sentence to use a plural or omit the pronoun.^[126]

Purdue Online Writing LabEdit

The Purdue Online Writing Lab (OWL) states that «grammar shifts and changes over time», that the use of singular they is acceptable,^[127] and that singular «they» as a replacement for «he» or «she» is more inclusive:

When individuals whose gender is neither male nor female (e.g. nonbinary, agender, genderfluid, etc.) use the singular they to refer to themselves, they are using the language to express their identities. Adopting this language is one way writers can be inclusive of a range of people and identities.

— Purdue Writing Lab

The Washington PostEdit

The Washington Post’s stylebook, as of 2015, recommends trying to «write around the problem, perhaps by changing singulars to plurals, before using the singular they as a last resort» and specifically permits use of they for a «gender-nonconforming person».^[94]

Associated Press StylebookEdit

The Associated Press Stylebook, as of 2017, recommends: «They/them/their is acceptable in limited cases as a singular and-or gender-neutral pronoun, when alternative wording is overly awkward or clumsy. However, rewording usually is possible and always is preferable.»^[128]

The Handbook of Nonsexist WritingEdit

In The Handbook of Nonsexist Writing, Casey Miller and Kate Swift accept or recommend singular uses of they in cases where there is an element of semantic plurality expressed by a word such as «everyone» or where an indeterminate person is referred to, citing examples of such usage in formal speech.^[129] They also suggest rewriting sentences to use a plural they, eliminating pronouns, or recasting sentences to use «one» or (for babies) «it».^[130]

Usage guidance in British style guidesEdit

In the first edition of A Dictionary of Modern English Usage (published in 1926) use of the generic he is recommended.^[131] It is stated that singular they is disapproved of by grammarians. Numerous examples of its use by eminent writers in the past are given, but it is stated that «few good modern writers would flout [grammarians] so conspicuously as Fielding and Thackeray», whose sentences are described as having an «old-fashioned sound».^[132]

The second edition, Fowler’s Modern English Usage (edited by Sir Ernest Gowers and published in 1965) continues to recommend use of the generic he; use of the singular they is called «the popular solution», which «sets the literary man’s teeth on edge».^[133] It is stated that singular they is still disapproved of by grammarians but common in colloquial speech.^[134]

According to the third edition, The New Fowler’s Modern English Usage (edited by Robert Burchfield and published in 1996) singular they has not only been widely used by good writers for centuries, but is now generally accepted, except by some conservative grammarians, including the Fowler of 1926, who, it is argued, ignored the evidence:

Over the centuries, writers of standing have used they, their, and them with anaphoric reference to a singular noun or pronoun, and the practice has continued in the 20C. to the point that, traditional grammarians aside, such constructions are hardly noticed any more or are not widely felt to lie in a prohibited zone. Fowler (1926) disliked the practice … and gave a number of unattributed «faulty’ examples … The evidence presented in the OED points in another direction altogether.^[135]

The Complete Plain Words was originally written in 1948 by Ernest Gowers, a civil servant, in an attempt by the British civil service to improve «official English». A second edition, edited by Sir Bruce Fraser, was published in 1973. It refers to they or them as the «equivalent of a singular pronoun of common sex» as «common in speech and not unknown in serious writing » but «stigmatized by grammarians as usage grammatically indefensible. The book’s advice for «official writers» (civil servants) is to avoid its use and not to be tempted by its «greater convenience», though «necessity may eventually force it into the category of accepted idiom».^[136]

A new edition of Plain Words, revised and updated by Gowers’s great-granddaughter, Rebecca Gowers, was published in 2014.
It notes that singular they and them have become much more widespread since Gowers’ original comments, but still finds it «safer» to treat a sentence like ‘The reader may toss their book aside’ as incorrect «in formal English», while rejecting even more strongly sentences like

«There must be opportunity for the individual boy or girl to go as far as his keenness and ability will take him.»^[137]

The Times Style and Usage Guide (first published in 2003 by The Times of London) recommends avoiding sentences like

«If someone loves animals, they should protect them.»

by using a plural construction:

«If people love animals, they should protect them.»

The Cambridge Guide to English Usage (2004, Cambridge University Press) finds singular they «unremarkable»:

For those listening or reading, it has become unremarkable – an element of common usage.^[138]

It expresses several preferences.

• «Generic/universal their provides a gender-free pronoun, avoiding the exclusive his and the clumsy his/her. It avoids gratuitous sexism and gives the statement broadest reference … They, them, their are now freely used in agreement with singular indefinite pronouns and determiners, those with universal implications such as any(one), every(one), no(one), as well as each and some(one), whose reference is often more individual …»^[138]

The Economist Style Guide refers to the use of they in sentences like

«We can’t afford to squander anyone’s talents, whatever colour their skin is.»

as «scrambled syntax that people adopt because they cannot bring themselves to use a singular pronoun».^[139]

New Hart’s Rules (Oxford University Press, 2012) is aimed at those engaged in copy editing, and the emphasis is on the formal elements of presentation including punctuation and typeface, rather than on linguistic style, although – like The Chicago Manual of Style – it makes occasional forays into matters of usage. It advises against use of the purportedly gender-neutral he, and suggests cautious use of they where he or she presents problems.

… it is now regarded … as old-fashioned or sexist to use he in reference to a person of unspecified sex, as in every child needs to know that he is loved. The alternative he or she is often preferred, and in formal contexts probably the best solution, but can become tiresome or long-winded when used frequently. Use of they in this sense (everyone needs to feel that they matter) is becoming generally accepted both in speech and in writing, especially where it occurs after an indefinite pronoun such as everyone or someone, but should not be imposed by an editor if an author has used he or she consistently.^[140]

The 2011 edition of the New International Version Bible uses singular they instead of the traditional he when translating pronouns that apply to both genders in the original Greek or Hebrew. This decision was based on research by a commission that studied modern English usage and determined that singular they (them/their) was by far the most common way that English-language speakers and writers today refer back to singular antecedents such as whoever, anyone, somebody, a person, no one, and the like.»^[141]

The British edition of The Handbook of Nonsexist Writing, modified in some respects from the original US edition to conform to differences in culture and vocabulary, preserved the same recommendations, allowing singular they with semantically plural terms like «everyone» and indeterminate ones like «person», but recommending a rewrite to avoid.^[130]

Australian usage guidanceEdit

The Australian Federation Press Style Guide for Use in Preparation of Book Manuscripts recommends «gender-neutral language should be used», stating that use of they and their as singular pronouns is acceptable.^[142]

Usage guidance in English grammarsEdit

According to A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language (1985):^[115]

The pronoun they is commonly used as a 3rd person singular pronoun that is neutral between masculine and feminine … At one time restricted to informal usage. it is now increasingly accepted in formal usage, especially in [American English].

The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language discusses the prescriptivist argument that they is a plural pronoun and that the use of they with a singular «antecedent» therefore violates the rule of agreement between antecedent and pronoun, but takes the view that they, though primarily plural, can also be singular in a secondary extended sense, comparable to the purportedly extended sense of he to include female gender.^[25]

Use of singular they is stated to be «particularly common», even «stylistically neutral» with antecedents such as everyone, someone, and no one, but more restricted when referring to common nouns as antecedents, as in

«The patient should be told at the outset how much they will be required to pay.»^[3]

«A friend of mine has asked me to go over and help them …»^[25]

Use of the pronoun themself is described as being «rare» and «acceptable only to a minority of speakers», while use of the morphologically plural themselves is considered problematic when referring to someone rather than everyone (since only the latter implies a plural set).^[25]

There are also issues of grammatical acceptability when reflexive pronouns refer to singular noun phrases joined by or, the following all being problematic:

«Either the husband or the wife has perjured himself.» [ungrammatical]

«Either the husband or the wife has perjured themselves.» [of questionable grammaticality]

«Either the husband or the wife has perjured themself.» [typically used by only some speakers of Standard English].^[25]

On the motivation for using singular they, A Student’s Introduction to English Grammar states:^[143]

this avoidance of he can’t be dismissed just as a matter of political correctness. The real problem with using he is that it unquestionably colours the interpretation, sometimes inappropriately … he doesn’t have a genuinely sex-neutral sense.

The alternative he or she can be «far too cumbersome», as in:

«Everyone agreed that he or she would bring his or her lunch with him or her.

or even «flatly ungrammatical», as in

«Everyone’s here, isn’t he or she?^[143]

«Among younger speakers», use of singular they even with definite noun-phrase antecedents finds increasing acceptance, «sidestepping any presumption about the sex of the person referred to», as in:

«You should ask your partner what they think.»

«The person I was with said they hated the film.» Example given by Huddleston et al.^[143]

Grammatical and logical analysisEdit

Notional agreementEdit

Notional agreement is the idea that some uses of they might refer to a grammatically singular antecedent seen as semantically plural:

«‘Tis meet that some more audience than a mother, since nature makes them partial, should o’erhear the speech.» — Shakespeare, Hamlet (1599);^[144] quoted in Merriam-Webster’s Concise Dictionary of English Usage.^[57]

«No man goes to battle to be killed.» … «But they do get killed.» — George Bernard Shaw, quoted in Merriam-Webster’s Concise Dictionary of English Usage^[57]

According to notional agreement, in the Shakespeare quotation a mother is syntactically singular, but stands for all mothers;^[57] and in the Shaw quotation no man is syntactically singular (taking the singular form goes), but is semantically plural (all go [to kill] not to be killed), hence idiomatically requiring they.^[145] Such use, which goes back a long way, includes examples where the sex is known, as in the above examples.^[146]

DistributionEdit

Distributive constructions apply a single idea to multiple members of a group.
They are typically marked in English by words like each, every and any. The simplest examples are applied to groups of two, and use words like either and or – «Would you like tea or coffee?». Since distributive constructions apply an idea relevant to each individual in the group, rather than to the group as a whole, they are most often conceived of as singular, and a singular pronoun is used:

«England expects that every man will do his duty.» — Nelson (1805, referring to a fleet crewed by male sailors)

«Every dog hath his day.» — John Ray, A Collection of English Proverbs (1670), originally from Plutarch, Moralia, c. 95 AD, regarding the death of Euripides.

However, many languages, including English, show ambivalence in this regard. Because distribution also requires a group with more than one member, plural forms are sometimes used.^{[c][example needed]}

Referential and non-referential anaphorsEdit

The singular they, which uses the same verb form that plurals do, is typically used to refer to an indeterminate antecedent, for example:

«The person you mentioned, are they coming?»

In some sentences, typically those including words like every or any, the morphologically singular antecedent does not refer to a single entity but is «anaphorically linked» to the associated pronoun to indicate a set of pairwise relationships, as in the sentence:^[148]

«Everyone returned to their seats.» (where each person is associated with one seat)

Linguists like Steven Pinker and Rodney Huddleston explain sentences like this (and others) in terms of bound variables, a term borrowed from logic. Pinker prefers the terms quantifier and bound variable to antecedent and pronoun.^[149] He suggests that pronouns used as «variables» in this way are more appropriately regarded as homonyms of the equivalent referential pronouns.^[150]

The following shows different types of anaphoric reference, using various pronouns, including they:

• Coreferential, with a definite antecedent (the antecedent and the anaphoric pronoun both refer to the same real-world entity):

«Your wife phoned but she didn’t leave a message.»

• Coreferential with an indefinite antecedent:

«One of your girlfriends phoned, but she didn’t leave a message.»

«One of your boyfriends phoned, but he didn’t leave a message.»

«One of your friends phoned, but they didn’t leave a message.»

• Reference to a hypothetical, indefinite entity

«If you had an unemployed daughter, what would you think if she wanted to accept work as a mercenary?»

«If you had an unemployed child, what would you think if they wanted to accept work as a mercenary?»

• A bound variable pronoun is anaphorically linked to a quantifier (no single real-world or hypothetical entity is referenced; examples and explanations from Huddleston and Pullum, The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language^[86]):

«No one put their hand up.» [approximately: «There is no person x such that x put x‘s hand up.»]

«Every car had its windscreen broken.» [approximately: «For every car x, x had x‘s windscreen broken.»]

Cognitive efficiencyEdit

A study of whether «singular they» is more «difficult» to understand than gendered pronouns found that «singular they is a cognitively efficient substitute for generic he or she, particularly when the antecedent is nonreferential» (e.g. anybody, a nurse, or a truck driver) rather than referring to a specific person (e.g. a runner I knew or my nurse). Clauses with singular they were read «just as quickly as clauses containing a gendered pronoun that matched the stereotype of the antecedent» (e.g. she for a nurse and he for a truck driver) and «much more quickly than clauses containing a gendered pronoun that went against the gender stereotype of the antecedent».^[151]

On the other hand, when the pronoun they was used to refer to known individuals («referential antecedents, for which the gender was presumably known», e.g. my nurse, that truck driver, a runner I knew), reading was slowed when compared with use of a gendered pronoun consistent with the «stereotypic gender» (e.g. he for a specific truck driver).^[151]

The study concluded that «the increased use of singular they is not problematic for the majority of readers».^[151]

Comparison with other pronounsEdit

The singular and plural use of they can be compared with the pronoun you, which had been both a plural and polite singular, but by about 1700 replaced thou for singular referents.^[138] For «you», the singular reflexive pronoun («yourself») is different from its plural reflexive pronoun («yourselves»); with «they» one can hear either «themself» or «themselves» for the singular reflexive pronoun.

Singular «they» has also been compared to nosism (such as the «royal we»), when a single person uses first-person plural in place of first-person singular pronouns.^[152] Similar to singular «you», its singular reflexive pronoun («ourself») is different from the plural reflexive pronoun («ourselves»).

While the pronoun set derived from it is primarily used for inanimate objects, it is frequently used in an impersonal context when someone’s identity is unknown or established on a provisional basis, e.g. «Who is it?» or «With this new haircut, no one knows it is me.»^[153] It is also used for infants of unspecified gender but may be considered dehumanizing and is therefore more likely in a clinical context. Otherwise, in more personal contexts, the use of it to refer to a person might indicate antipathy or other negative emotions.^[154]

It can also be used for non-human animals of unspecified sex, though they is common for pets and other domesticated animals of unspecified sex, especially when referred to by a proper name^[154] (e.g. Rags, Snuggles). Normally, birds and mammals with a known sex are referred to by their respective male or female pronoun (he and she; him and her).

It is uncommon to use singular they instead of it for something other than a life form.^{[155][failed verification]}

See alsoEdit

• English personal pronouns
• Gender neutrality in English
• Notional agreement
• Spivak pronoun
• Third-person pronoun#Historical, regional, and proposed gender-neutral singular pronouns
• Neopronoun
• Gender neutrality in languages with gendered third-person pronouns

NotesEdit

ReferencesEdit

1. ^ ^{a b c d e} Swan 2009, §528.
2. ^ ^{a b} «they». Oxford English Dictionary (Online ed.). Oxford University Press. (Subscription or participating institution membership required.)
3. ^ ^{a b c d e f g h} Huddleston & Pullum 2002, p. 493.
4. ^ Wales 1996, p. 125.
5. ^ Kamm, Oliver (12 December 2015). «The Pedant: The sheer usefulness of singular ‘they’ is obvious». The Times. Retrieved 19 June 2019.
6. ^ «Singular «They»«. APA Style. Retrieved 14 May 2022.
7. ^ Pinker 2014, p. 260.
8. ^ Ross & West 2002, p. 180.
9. ^ «Singular «They»: Teaching a Changing Language». World of Better Learning. Cambridge University Press. 16 November 2020.
10. ^ «Singular They Continues to be the Focus of Language Change». ACES: The Society for Editing.
11. ^ «How do I use singular they?». 4 March 2020.
12. ^ «Resources for using «they» as a singular pronoun» (PDF). www1.ucdenver.edu. Retrieved 27 December 2020.
13. ^ «Words We’re Watching: Singular ‘They’«. Merriam-Webster dictionary. 2019. Retrieved 26 March 2019.
14. ^ ^{a b} «2015 Word of the Year is singular «they»«. 9 January 2016.
15. ^ ^{a b} «Merriam-Webster: Non-binary pronoun ‘they’ is word of year». BBC News. 10 December 2019.
16. ^ ^{a b} «Merriam-Webster declares ‘they’ its 2019 word of the year». AP NEWS. 10 December 2019.
17. ^ ^{a b} «Merriam-Webster’s Words of the Year 2019». www.merriam-webster.com.
18. ^ ^{a b} «Singular ‘they’ crowned word of the decade by US linguists | DW | 04.01.2020». Deutsche Welle.
19. ^ «Chicago Style for the Singular They«. cmosshoptalk.com. 3 April 2017. Retrieved 14 February 2020. Like singular you, singular they is treated as a grammatical plural and takes a plural verb.
20. ^ Kruth, Rebecca; Curzan, Ann (16 June 2019). «TWTS: Singular «they» and verb agreement». Michigan Radio. Retrieved 13 February 2020.
21. ^ «Welcome, singular «they»«. American Psychological Association. Retrieved 1 March 2020.
22. ^ Pullum 2012.
23. ^ «Themself». merriam-webster.com.
24. ^ «A Note on the Nonbinary ‘They’«.
25. ^ ^{a b c d e f} Huddleston & Pullum 2002, p. 494.
26. ^ Merriam-Webster 2002, p. 731.
27. ^ Fowler & Burchfield 1996, p. 777.
28. ^ Fowler 2015, pp. 811–812.
29. ^ Hislop 1984, p. 23.
30. ^ Fowler & Burchfield 1996, p. 776, themself.
31. ^ Canadian government 2015.
32. ^ Huddleston & Pullum 2002, pp. 493–494.
33. ^ American Heritage Dictionaries 1996, p. 178.
34. ^ «they». The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (5th ed.). HarperCollins.
35. ^ Fowler 2015, p. 814.
36. ^ Bodine 1975, pp. 129–146.
37. ^ Gerner 2000, pp. 111–112.
38. ^ ^{a b} Fowler & Burchfield 1996, p. 358.
39. ^ Cable 1879.
40. ^ Baskervill & Sewell 1895, §409.
41. ^ Thackeray 1869, p. 189.
42. ^ Baskervill & Sewell 1895, §410.
43. ^ Fisher 1750, p. 106 in 1780 printing.
44. ^ Ostade 2000.
45. ^ ^{a b} Bodine 1975, p. 133.
46. ^ Miller & Swift 1995, p. 46.
47. ^ Warenda 1993, p. 101.
48. ^ Byron 1823, p. vi.
49. ^ ^{a b} Baskervill & Sewell 1895, §411.
50. ^ Austen 1814, p. 195.
51. ^ Wilson 1560, p. 167.
52. ^ Wilson 1560, p. 208.
53. ^ Poole 1646, p. 21.
54. ^ Bodine 1975, p. 134.
55. ^ Leonard 1929, p. 225.
56. ^ Bodine 1975, p. 131.
57. ^ ^{a b c d} Merriam-Webster 2002, p. 735.
58. ^ Fries 1969, p. 215.
59. ^ Lash 1981, p. 454.
60. ^ Weiss, Kaplan & Fair 2004, p. 147.
61. ^ Atkinson 2008.
62. ^ Spillius 2008.
63. ^ Barzun 1985.
64. ^ ^{a b} Merriam-Webster 2002, p. 734.
65. ^ Huddleston & Pullum 2002, p. 492.
66. ^ ^{a b} Choy & Clark 2010, p. 213.
67. ^ Fowler 2015, p. 367.
68. ^ Fowler 2015, p. 372.
69. ^ Garner 2016, p. 460.
70. ^ Barron, Dennis. «The Words that Failed: A chronology of early nonbinary pronouns». Illinois Department of English. University of Illinois. Archived from the original on 2019. Retrieved 25 October 2016.
71. ^ Coleridge 1895, p. 190.
72. ^ Macdonald, Fiona (23 June 2016). «The ultimate 21st-Century word?». BBC News. British Broadcasting Corporation. Retrieved 26 October 2016.
73. ^ ^{a b} Miller & Swift 1995, pp. 1–9.
74. ^ Miller & Swift 1995, pp. 11–61.
75. ^ Safire 1985, pp. 46–47.
76. ^ Badendyck 1985.
77. ^ ^{a b} Pauwels 2003, pp. 563–564.
78. ^ Baranowski, Maciej (2002). «Current usage of the epicene pronoun in written English». Journal of Sociolinguistics. 6 (3): 378–397. doi:10.1111/1467-9481.00193.
79. ^ Matossian 1997.
80. ^ Balhorn, Mark (2009). «The epicene pronoun in contemporary newspaper prose». American Speech. 84 (4): 391–413. doi:10.1215/00031283-2009-031.
81. ^ LaScotte, Darren K. (1 February 2016). «Singular they: An Empirical Study of Generic Pronoun Use». American Speech. 91 (1): 62–80. doi:10.1215/00031283-3509469. ISSN 0003-1283.
82. ^ Fowler & Burchfield 1996, p. 776.
83. ^ Bush 1991, p. 101.
84. ^ ^{a b c d} Garner 2003, p. 175.
85. ^ Ballantyne, Aileen (25 March 1990). «Transplant Jury to Vet Live Donors». The Sunday Times. Retrieved 2 January 2022.
86. ^ ^{a b} Huddleston & Pullum 2002, p. 1458.
87. ^ Huddleston & Pullum 2002, p. 1473.
88. ^ Fowler 2015, p. 161.
89. ^ ^{a b c} Kolln 1986, pp. 100–102.
90. ^ Duží, Jespersen & Materna 2010, p. 334.
91. ^ Davids 2010.
92. ^ Garner 2003, p. 643.
93. ^ Newman 1998.
94. ^ ^{a b c} Walsh 2015.
95. ^ ^{a b} Teich 2012, p. 12.
96. ^ Weber, Peter (21 February 2014). «Confused by All the New Facebook Genders? Here’s What They Mean». Slate. ISSN 1091-2339. Retrieved 14 May 2016.
97. ^ CNN 2014.
98. ^ Arnold, Jennifer E.; Mayo, Heather; Dong, Lisa (2021). «My pronouns are they/them: Talking about pronouns changes how pronouns are understood». Psychonomic Bulletin and Review. 28 (5): 1688–1697. doi:10.3758/s13423-021-01905-0. PMC 8094985. PMID 33945124.
99. ^ ^{a b} Abadi 2016.
100. ^ «they». Oxford English Dictionary (Online ed.). Oxford University Press. June 2021. Archived from the original on 8 June 2021. Retrieved 16 June 2021.
101. ^ @thebutchcaucus (11 July 2009). «RT @pieskiis: @FireboltX What about they/them/theirs? #genderqueer #pronouns» (Tweet). Archived from the original on 10 October 2019. Retrieved 16 June 2021 – via Twitter.
102. ^ Zimmer, Ben; Solomon, Jane; Carson, Charles E. (2016). «Among the New Words». American Speech. 91 (2): 200–225. doi:10.1215/00031283-3633118.
103. ^ «Gender Census 2020: Worldwide Report». Gender Census. 7 November 2020. Retrieved 10 November 2020.
104. ^ Hekanaho, Laura (8 December 2020). Generic and Nonbinary Pronouns: Usage, Acceptability and Attitudes (PDF) (PhD). University of Helsinki. p. 221. ISBN 9789515168313. Retrieved 7 March 2021.
105. ^ Steinmetz 2016.
106. ^ American Dialect Society 2016.
107. ^ Guo 2016.
108. ^ «they». Merriam-Webster.
109. ^ «Merriam-Webster adds nonbinary ‘they’ pronoun to dictionary». NBC News. Retrieved 19 September 2019.
110. ^ Trammell, Kendall (18 September 2019). «Merriam-Webster adds the nonbinary pronoun ‘they’ to its dictionary». CNN. Retrieved 19 September 2019.
111. ^ Hibberd, James (19 February 2017). «‘Billions’ Premiere Introduces TV’s First Gender Non-Binary Character». Entertainment Weekly. Retrieved 17 September 2017.
112. ^ Masters, Jeffrey (13 April 2017). «Asia Kate Dillon Talks Discovering the Word Non-Binary: ‘I Cried’«. Huffington Post. Retrieved 17 September 2017.
113. ^ Chicago 2017, §5.252.
114. ^ ^{a b c} Garner 2003, p. 718.
115. ^ ^{a b} Quirk et al. 1985, p. 770.
116. ^ Garner 2003, p. 174.
117. ^ Garner 2003, pp. 643–644.
118. ^ Chicago 1993, pp. 76–77.
119. ^ Chicago 2017, §5.48.
120. ^ American Heritage Dictionaries 1996, pp. 178–179.
121. ^ «Changes in the 7th Edition». Purdue Online Writing Lab.
122. ^ Chelsea Lee. «The Use of Singular «They» in APA Style».
123. ^ ^{a b} Strunk & White 1979, p. 60.
124. ^ Strunk & White 2000, p. 60.
125. ^ Williams 2008, pp. 23–25.
126. ^ Fowler & Aaron 1992, p. 354.
127. ^ «Gendered Pronouns & Singular «They»«. Purdue Writing Lab. Retrieved 19 February 2019.
128. ^ Easton, Lauren (24 March 2017). «Making a case for a singular ‘they’«. AP Definitive Source. Associated Press. Retrieved 5 April 2017.
129. ^ Miller & Swift 1995, p. 50.
130. ^ ^{a b} Miller & Swift 1995, pp. 57–58.
131. ^ Fowler & Crystal 1926, p. 392.
132. ^ Fowler & Crystal 1926, p. 648.
133. ^ Fowler & Crystal 1926, p. 404.
134. ^ Fowler & Gowers 1965, p. 635.
135. ^ Fowler & Burchfield 1996, p. 779.
136. ^ Gowers & Fraser 1973, p. 140.
137. ^ Gowers & Gowers 2014, pp. 210–213.
138. ^ ^{a b c} Peters 2004, p. 538.
139. ^ Economist 2010, p. 117.
140. ^ New Hart’s Rules 2012, p. 27.
141. ^ Washington Post 2011.
142. ^ Federation Press 2014.
143. ^ ^{a b c} Huddleston & Pullum 2005, p. 104.
144. ^ Shakespeare 1599, p. 105.
145. ^ Merriam-Webster 2002, p. 736.
146. ^ Merriam-Webster 2002, pp. 735–736.
147. ^ Huang 2009, p. 144.
148. ^ Huddleston & Pullum 2002, pp. 1457–1458.
149. ^ Pinker 1995, p. 378.
150. ^ Pinker 1995, p. 379.
151. ^ ^{a b c} Foertsch & Gernsbacher 1997.
152. ^ Collins & Postal 2012, p. ^{[page needed]}.
153. ^ «It is I vs. It is me». Thesaurus.com. 23 March 2021. Retrieved 22 April 2022.
154. ^ ^{a b} Huddleston & Pullum 2002, pp. 488–489.
155. ^ «Welcome, singular «they»«. apastyle.apa.org. Retrieved 30 April 2021.

SourcesEdit

Sources of original examples

• Atkinson, Nancy (4 March 2008). «A One Way One Person Mission to Mars». Retrieved 17 January 2014.
• Austen, Jane (1833). Mansfield Park. Richard Bentley.
• Bagehot, Walter (1910). «Speech in Portsmouth, 10 November 1910». The Liberal Magazine. Liberal Publication Department (Great Britain) (published 1915). 22.
• Barzun, Jacques (1985). Simple and Direct. Harper and Row.
• Cuellar, Jessica (2008). A Study of Presidential State of the Union Addresses: The Sells and Arguments that are Used. Oklahoma State University. ISBN 978-0-549-99288-2.
• Byron, Baron George Gordon (1823). Werner, a Tragedy. A. and W. Galignani – via Internet Archive.
• Cable, George Washington (1907) [1879]. Old Creole Days.
• «Canadian War Veterans Allowance Act (1985) as amended 12 December 2013» (PDF). Government of Canada. 12 December 2013. R.S.C., 1985, c. W-3. Retrieved 19 April 2014.
• «Immigration and RefugeeProtection Regulations (2002) as amended 6 February 2014» (PDF). Government of Canada. 6 February 2014. SOR/2002-227. Retrieved 19 April 2014.
• «Themself or Themselves?». Government of Canada. 7 January 2015. Retrieved 26 April 2016. Use themselves as the reflexive/intensive pronoun to refer to an indefinite gender-neutral noun or pronoun that is the subject of the sentence and avoid themself.
• Caxton, William (1884) [c. 1489]. Richardson, Octavia (ed.). The right plesaunt and goodly historie of the foure sonnes of Aymon. Early English Text Society. pp. 38f. Retrieved 11 January 2014.
• Chaucer, Geoffrey (2008) [1395]. «The Pardoner’s Prologue». In Benson, Larry Dean (ed.). The Riverside Chaucer. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-199-55209-2.
• Chesterfield, Philip Dormer Stanhope Earl of (1759). «Letters to his Son, CCCLV, dated 27 April 27, 1759». The Works of Lord Chesterfield. Harper (published 1845).
• Coleridge, Samuel (1895). Coleridge, Ernest (ed.). Anima Poetæ: From the Unpublished Note-books of Samuel Taylor Coleridge. London, England: William Heinemann.
• Collins, Chris; Postal, Paul Martin (2012). Imposters: A Study of Pronominal Agreement. ISBN 978-0262016889.
• Davids (2010). Prodigal Daughter. Steeple Hill. ISBN 978-1-426-88577-8.
• Defoe, Daniel (1816). The Family Instructor. Brightly and Childs.
• Fries, Joseph P. (1969) [1940]. «The inflections and syntax of present-day American English with especial reference to social differences or class dialects: The report of an investigation financed by the National Council of Teachers of English and supported by the Modern Language Association and the Linguistic Society of America». In Bolton, W. F.; Crystal (eds.). The English Language, Volume 2: Essays by Linguistics and Men of Letters 1858–1964. Cambridge University Press Archive. ISBN 978-0-451-14076-0.
• Hickey, Shane (10 January 2015). «The innovators: the app promising the perfect-fitting bra». The Guardian.
• Hislop, Ian (1984). «Ian Hislop». The Listener. Vol. 111. British Broadcasting Corporation.
• Huxley, Thomas Henry (2005). A Liberal Education. Kessinger Publishing. ISBN 978-1-425-35760-3.
• Lash, Joseph P. (1981) [1971]. Eleanor and Franklin. Penguin Group Canada. ISBN 978-0-451-14076-0.; quoted in Reader’s Digest, 1983, as an example of its awkwardness when referring to both sexes.
• Paley, William; Paley, Edmund; Paxton, James (1825). The Works of William Paley: The principles of moral and political philosophy. C. and J. Rivington and J. Nunn.
• Ruskin, John (1873) [1866]. The Works of John Ruskin: The Crown of Wild Olive. George Allen.
• Shakespeare, W.; Loffelt, Antonie Cornelis (1867). Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. J. L. Beijers en J. van Boekhoven.
• Spillius, Alex (12 May 2008). «US elections: Hillary Clinton ‘about to drop out’«. The Telegraph. Archived from the original on 11 January 2022.
• Thackeray, William Makepeace (1868). The Works of William Makepeace Thackeray: in 22 Volumes: Vanity fair. Vol. 2. Smith, Elder.
• Thackeray, William Makepeace (1869). «On Lett’s Diary». The Works of William Makepeace Thackeray. Vol. 20. Smith, Elder.
• Weiss, R. E.; Kaplan, S. A.; Fair, W. R. (2004). Management of Prostate Diseases. Cambridge; New York: Professional Communications Inc. ISBN 978-1-884-73595-0.

BibliographyEdit

Further readingEdit

• Amia Srinivasan, «He, She, One, They, Ho, Hus, Hum, Ita» (review of Dennis Baron, What’s Your Pronoun? Beyond He and She, Liveright, 2020, ISBN 978 1 63149 6042, 304 pp.), London Review of Books, vol. 42, no. 13 (2 July 2020), pp. 34–39. Prof. Srinivasan writes (p. 39): «People use non-standard pronouns, or use pronouns in non-standard ways, for various reasons: to accord with their sense of themselves, to make their passage through the world less painful, to prefigure and hasten the arrival of a world in which divisions of sex no longer matter. So too we can choose to respect people’s pronouns for many reasons.»

External linksEdit

• «Anyone who had a heart (would know their own language)» by Geoff Pullum. Transcript of a radio talk.
• A brief history of singular ‘they’ (OED blog, Dennis Baron)

Has someone ever asked you to refer to them as they instead of he or she? Or, are you hedging because you can’t possibly refer to one single person as they? Well, what if we told you that they has been used to refer to just one person since at least the 1300s?

And what if we also told you themself is perfectly acceptable—and in many instances, absolutely respectful? In fact, forms of singular they have become so acceptable (and respectable) that our lexicographers overhauled our entries for they, them, their, theirs, themselves, and themself as part of our biggest dictionary update ever at Dictionary.com.

How can they be a pronoun for one person?

Language teachers instruct us on the basic pronouns. Those are the words in a language that can be subbed in when nouns (people, places, or things) aren’t up for playing … or when it just takes too much time to say the full noun form.

In English, I, he, she, you, and it are all pronouns you surely learned along the way. Maybe you also learned that they were used to refer to singular nouns, i.e., words that describe just one person, one place, or one thing. I am going to eat chocolate for breakfast is a sentence that you automatically know is just about you, the one person who is living their best life with a decadent daily treat.

But, notice how we just used they when we were talking about a whole bunch of things? Grammatically, they is used as a plural pronoun, a word that’s used to describe multiple people, places, or things. They all read Dictionary.com, for example, would probably mean a bunch of really cool logophiles sat around on a Friday night looking for definitions together, right? (Hey, we tried).

They is not only a plural pronoun

They is also a singular pronoun, and it has been for centuries. Lexicographers have determined that as far back as the 1300s, they and its related forms have been used to refer to an indefinite referent—that is, an unspecified, unknown person.

For example: Each student should get their supplies ready for class. Each student is singular, but we don’t know (or need to know) the gender or sex identity of each student in this situation, so their is a perfectly handy gender-neutral option.

Chaucer, Shakespeare, Dickens, Austen, and many other beloved writers of the English literary canon used this indefinite singular they. If it was good enough for them, then we say: chill out, modern grammarians. Opposition of the usage is considerably waning these days, though, we should note.

But, English speakers have been breaking new ground when it comes to they, resourcefully applying this to a specific and known singular, e.g., My best friend from high school is famous now—too bad we didn’t stay in touch after they moved to California.

Singular they is vital for many nonbinary and gender-nonconforming people

What’s more, they is an extremely important, powerful, and useful way for people who are nonbinary—don’t identify with the binary genders of female and male to describe themselves—because they is not explicitly gendered.

The third person singular pronouns in English are traditionally binary, with the masculine he and the feminine she. Nonbinary singular use of they, their, and them addresses this significant gap, and has become widely accepted in the 21st century even as some people have proposed or adopted alternative nonbinary singular pronouns (e.g., ze, among others).

Discover many more ways the LGBTQ community is transforming the English language in our Gender & Sexuality Dictionary.

Our definition for they now devotes a separate definition for each of these three distinct uses of they as a nominative singular pronoun. We’ve also added the relevant senses to the other grammatical forms in the pronoun paradigm: them, their, theirs, themselves, and themself.

We know this is a hefty grammar lesson, but it’s important, especially so that we don’t gender or misgender people who are nonbinary or gender-nonconforming. So, stay with us: we’ll explain all these forms below. And you should be sure to consult the incredibly informative Usage Note our dictionary editors have also provided at our entry for they, detailing even more history and context about this versatile, evolving form in speech and writing.

What pronouns should you use when referring to a nonbinary person?

Sharing our pronouns—as the practice of divulging what pronouns you prefer to use for yourself is called—is a way of sharing our gender identity with the world. You might identify as female and ask that people refer to you as she/her/hers. Or, maybe you identify as male and your friends use he/him/his when they talk about you. For a person who asks you to use nonbinary they (as well as when you need to use a gender-neutral pronoun), use the following grammatical forms:

They (nominative pronoun)

Use they to indicate a nonbinary or gender-neutral subject (doer) of a verb (action) instead of he or she.

For example: They cook an amazing lasagna or They have an important meeting at noon.

Them (objective pronoun)

Use them to indicate a nonbinary or gender-neutral object (receiver) of a verb or preposition, instead of him or her.

For example: I sent them a birthday card or I went to the summer pool party with them.

Their/theirs (possessive pronoun)

Use their or theirs to indicate a nonbinary or gender-neutral person has possession, instead of his or her/hers.

For example: They gave me their extra ticket to the concert or That package at the door is theirs.

Themself/themselves/theirself/theirselves (reflexive pronoun)

In grammar, a reflexive pronoun is used when a subject and object (of a verb) are referring to the same thing or person. It is also used when the object of verb is referring back to the subject. (Yep, grammar gets abstract, so check out the examples below.)

There are several options people use for a singular, nonbinary, gender-neutral reflexive pronoun: themselves and themself as well as, less commonly, theirselves and theirself.

• They rinsed themselves off after going to the beach.
• They rinsed themself off after going to the beach.
• They run the business all by theirself.
• They run the business all by theirselves.

Themself vs. themselves

Themself? Now isn’t that just taking things too far? Absolutely not. For one thing, themself referring back to both a plural or singular generic/unspecified antecedent is almost as old as singular they in the written record: it’s recorded around 1350–1400, if considered nonstandard today. In these two contexts, themselves is preferred over themself (and over theirselves).

But nonbinary themself? Acceptable, respectable—and standard. We’ve given its proper due with its own entry, which you can find with our new, second definition at themself, also added in our sweeping update: “reflexive form of singular they, as used to refer to a nonbinary or gender-nonconforming person.” For instance: Chris only posts memes that they created themself.

And as our Usage Note at themself explains:

When themself is being used as a part of a set of pronouns (including they, their, and them) that refer back to nonbinary or gender-nonconforming individual, it is a grammatical option to express reflexive meaning. Neither plural themselves nor gendered himself or herself completely suffice in this context. The grammaticality of nonbinary singular themself in this paradigm follows logically from the acceptability of singular they in this function: Andi is learning to put themself first, and prioritize their own happiness and mental health.

Does singular they take a singular or plural verb?

While singular they can refer to one person, it still takes a plural verb. In fact, we did it above: They run the business all by theirself, generally never They runs the business all by theirselves.

Keep in mind that, when referring to a nonbinary or gender-nonconforming person by name, you use a singular verb. For instance: Jess cooks an amazing lasagna inspired by their grandmother’s recipe. They love making modern twists on traditional cuisine. Also keep in mind that, while singular they widely takes a plural verb, some individuals who identify as nonbinary may individually prefer using a singular verb with singular they: They cooks an amazing lasagna. If you don’t know someone’s preference, ask!

But, we know what you’re asking: a singular pronoun but a plural verb? Sound inconceivable to you? You do it everyday. We all do it. In fact, the pronoun you was originally only the plural form for the second person. By the 1700s, you had largely supplanted thou as the singular pronoun for the second person—and it took a plural verb with it, as in We trust you can handle singular they.

Singular, nonbinary they is about much more than just grammar

Rory Gory is Digital Marketing Manager for The Trevor Project, the world’s largest suicide prevention and crisis intervention organization for LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and questioning) young people. Rory uses they/them/their pronouns, and explains the importance of using and respecting people’s preferred pronouns:

Neither sex nor gender is inherently binary in humans, and having a pronoun which can correctly identify non-binary people helps us communicate clearly and respectfully with each other. The singular, nonbinary they has been used for centuries, and while many commonly use plural verbs with the pronoun they, you can also use a singular verb, as is done with the pronoun you. At The Trevor Project, many of the young people we serve and the staff members of our organization use they pronouns to be seen and recognized for their true gender identities, regardless of their gender expression.

So, next time someone asks you to use they in the singular, tell them you’re on board. The dictionary approves! And, for more from Rory Gory and gender-inclusive language, check out “How The Letter ‘X’ Creates More Gender-Neutral Language” and “Why Is ‘Bisexual Such A Charged Word?”

The language around gender and sexuality has exploded in recent years, and one of the key terms at the heart of it is nonbinary. Learn more about it in our article, “What Does The Term ‘Nonbinary’ Really Mean?”

Professor of English and linguistics at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Read Dennis’s blog, The Web of Language, and follow him on Twitter as @DrGrammar.

This material provides general information about English pronouns. As pronouns usually present some difficulty for learners of English, a look at the whole group of pronouns may help to see the general picture more clearly when you are studying separate pronouns or small groups of pronouns.

Brief description of English pronouns and nouns, with examples of use, is provided in Brief Overview of Grammar in the section Grammar.

Classes of pronouns

English pronouns are a miscellaneous (but not very large) group. By type, pronouns are usually divided into the following groups:

Personal pronouns: I, he, she, it, we, you, they. The forms of personal pronouns in the objective case: me, him, her, it, us, you, them.

Possessive pronouns: my, his, her, its, our, your, their. Absolute forms of possessive pronouns: mine, his, hers, its, ours, yours, theirs.

Reflexive pronouns: myself, yourself, himself, herself, itself, ourselves, yourselves, themselves; oneself.

Intensive pronouns / Emphatic pronouns: myself, yourself, himself, herself, itself, ourselves, yourselves, themselves.

Demonstrative pronouns: this, that, these, those.

Interrogative pronouns: who (whom, whose), what, which. The forms of «who»: in the objective case, «whom»; in the possessive case, «whose».

Relative pronouns: who (whom, whose), what, which, that. Compound relative pronouns: whoever (whomever), whatever, whichever.

Reciprocal pronouns: each other, one another.

Indefinite pronouns: some, any, no; somebody, someone, anybody, anyone, nobody, no one; something, anything, nothing; one, none; each, every, other, another, both, either, neither; all, many, much, most, little, few, several; everybody, everyone, everything; same, such.

Note:

Possessive and reflexive pronouns are often regarded as subgroups of personal pronouns in English linguistic materials.

Intensive pronouns (I’ll do it myself) have the same form as reflexive pronouns (Don’t hurt yourself) and are often listed as a subgroup of reflexive pronouns.

Accordingly, pronouns are usually divided into six classes in English sources: personal, demonstrative, interrogative, relative, reciprocal, and indefinite.

Some linguists subdivide the group of indefinite pronouns; for example, the pronouns «each, every, either, neither» are included in the group of distributive pronouns; the pronouns «many, much, few, several» are included in the group of quantitative pronouns.

The pronoun «it» is regarded by some linguists not only as a personal pronoun but also as a demonstrative pronoun.

The pronoun «such» is regarded as an indefinite pronoun or as a demonstrative pronoun in different sources.

Some linguists view «little» and «much» as adjectives, nouns and adverbs, but not as pronouns.

Noun pronouns and adjective pronouns

Some pronouns can function as nouns or adjectives. For example, in «This is my house», the pronoun «this» is the subject (i.e., «this» is used as a noun), and in «This house is mine», the pronoun «this» is an attribute (i.e., «this» is used as an adjective).

Noun pronouns have some (limited, not full) properties of nouns; they are used instead of nouns and function as subjects or objects. For example:

They are new. Don’t lose them.

Everyone is here. He invited everyone.

Adjective pronouns have some properties of adjectives; they modify nouns and function as attributes. For example:

Both sisters are doctors.

Give me another book.

I don’t have much time.

We have very little money left.

Like nouns and adjectives, some pronouns can be used in the predicative after the verb «be». For example:

This is she. That’s all. This pen is yours.

Unlike nouns, noun pronouns are generally not used with a preceding adjective, except the pronoun «one».

I need a computer table. This is a good one.

Where are the little ones?

Unlike nouns, noun pronouns are rarely used with an article, except the pronouns «same, other, few, one».

The same can be said about you.

There were good pens there. I bought a few.

The one I saw was reddish brown.

Where are the others?

Unlike adjectives, adjective pronouns do not have degrees of comparison. Only the pronouns «many, much, few, little» have degrees of comparison.

You have more time than I do.

He should eat less meat and more vegetables.

There were fewer people in the park than I expected.

Note: English and Russian terms

Since a pronoun in English is usually defined as «a word that functions as a noun substitute; a word used as a substitute for a noun; a word used instead of a noun to avoid repetition», pronouns in the function of nouns are called «pronouns» in English linguistic sources.

The term «noun pronoun» is not used in English linguistic sources. But «noun pronoun» is often used in Russian materials on English grammar in order to show the differences between the functions of pronouns as nouns and as adjectives.

Pronouns in the function of adjectives are called «pronominal adjectives; adjective pronouns; determiners» and sometimes simply «adjectives» in English linguistic sources.

The noun (or its equivalent) to which a pronoun refers is called «antecedent». For example, in the sentence «I know the people who live there», the noun «people» is the antecedent of the pronoun «who».

In the sentence «Maria received a letter, and she is reading it now», the noun «Maria» is the antecedent of the pronoun «she», and the noun «letter» is the antecedent of the pronoun «it».

A short list of noun pronouns and adjective pronouns

The possessive pronouns «my, his, her, its, our, your, their» are always used in the function of adjectives (my book; his bag).

Absolute forms «mine, his, hers, its, ours, yours, theirs» can be used as predicative adjectives (this book is not mine) or as nouns (mine was new).

The interrogative and relative pronouns «who, whom» are used as nouns: Who can do it? Find those who saw it. To whom am I speaking?

The pronoun «whose» is used as an adjective: Whose book is this? Whose books did you take? I know the boy whose books you took.

The interrogative and relative pronouns «what, which» can be used as nouns or adjectives: What is it? What color is your bag? The letters which have been written earlier are on the table. He didn’t answer, which was strange. Which bag is yours?

The indefinite pronouns «some, any, each, other, another, one, both, either, neither, all, many, much, most, little, few, several» can be used as nouns (few of us; some of them; he bought some) and as adjectives (few people; some books; he bought some meat).

The pronouns «no one, none» are used in the function of nouns (no one saw him; none of them). The pronouns «no, every» are used in the function of adjectives (no books; every word).

Combinations and set expressions

Some pronouns can combine, forming pronoun combinations used as nouns or as adjectives. For example:

I like this one. Some others left early. They know each other.

Give me some other books. They looked into each other’s eyes.

Pronouns are used in a large number of set expressions. For example:

a good many; all for nothing; all or nothing; each and all; each and every; every other; little by little; little or nothing; no less than; no more than; it leaves much to be desired;

one and all; one by one; something or other; some way or other; that’s all; that’s it; that’s something; and that’s that; this and that; this is it; what is what; who is who.

The pronoun and its noun

The noun (or its equivalent, e.g., a noun phrase or another pronoun) to which a pronoun refers helps to understand the meaning of the pronoun.

In the case of personal or relative pronouns, it is usually necessary to use the noun earlier than the replacing pronoun. For example:

The woman who had lost her purse in the park found it today under the bench on which she had been sitting.

In this example, the pronouns «who, her, she» refer to the noun «woman»; the pronoun «it» replaces the noun «purse»; the pronoun «which» is used instead of the noun «bench». Without the preceding nouns, the pronouns in this sentence would not be fully clear.

But in some cases the preceding noun is not needed. For example, the personal pronoun «I» (i.e., the speaker) is usually clear from the situation. The relative noun pronoun «what» does not need any preceding noun either: I will do what I promised.

Indefinite noun pronouns like «some, any, most» usually need a preceding noun in order to make their meaning clear.

These plums are very good. Do you want some?

This cake is delicious. Do you want some?

If the noun to which a noun pronoun like «some, any, most» refers is specific (e.g., a certain group of people or things or a specific amount of something), the phrase «of» + noun is placed after the pronoun.

Most of his friends live nearby.

Tanya spends most of her free time reading detective stories.

Most of his money was stolen. Most of it was stolen.

Some other indefinite pronouns (e.g., somebody, anybody, something) do not need any noun because their meaning is general.

Nobody knows about it. Has anyone called?

Let’s eat something. Everything is ready.

Forms and properties of personal pronouns

A personal pronoun agrees with its noun in gender, person, and number. If a personal pronoun is the subject of a sentence, the verb (the predicate) agrees with the pronoun in person and number.

Let’s look at the forms of the personal pronouns in these examples:

Anton is in his room. He is reading an interesting book. He likes it very much.

His younger sister is playing with her new dolls. She likes them very much.

In these examples, the personal pronouns «he» and «she» refer to the subjects expressed by the singular nouns «Anton» and «sister». Like their nouns, the third-person singular pronouns «he» (masculine) and «she» (feminine) are in the nominative case.

The forms «his» and «her» are in the possessive case; they agree with «Anton, he» and «sister, she» in gender (masculine, feminine), person (third person), and number (singular).

The pronouns «it» (third person singular, neuter gender) and «them» (third person plural) refer to the objects expressed by the inanimate nouns «book» (singular) and «dolls» (plural); as objects, the pronouns «it» and «them» are in the objective case.

The subjects «he» and «she» are in the third person singular; accordingly, their verbs are also used in the third person singular (is, likes).

Only personal pronouns have enough forms to express, more or less fully, gender, person, number, and case in their forms.

Forms and properties of other pronouns

The other pronouns do not have enough forms to express gender, person, number, or case. That is, some of them have some grammatical forms.

The demonstrative pronouns «this, that» have the plural forms «these, those».

This is my book. These are my books.

These books are interesting. Those books are not very interesting.

The relative pronoun «who» has the form «whom» in the objective case and the form «whose» in the possessive case.

The co-workers with whom she discussed her plan agreed to help her.

The student whose bicycle was stolen went home by bus.

The indefinite pronouns «anybody, anyone, everybody, everyone, somebody, someone, nobody, no one, one» can be used in the possessive case.

There is somebody’s bag on my table.

It was no one’s fault.

But most of the indefinite pronouns do not have any forms to express gender, person, number, or case; they always remain in the same form. Nevertheless, they can express grammatical meaning through their lexical meaning and through their function in the sentence.

For example, the pronouns «anybody, no one, who» refer to people, not to things (No one came to his party); «all, some, any, many, few, no, none» refer to people or things (neither of the boys; neither of the books); the pronouns «each other» and «one another» are not used as subjects (Mike and Maria love each other).

Agreement in number

Indefinite pronouns express number in their lexical meaning, which determines whether a singular or plural verb should be used when an indefinite pronoun is the subject.

The pronouns «anybody, anyone, anything, everybody, everyone, everything, somebody, someone, something, nobody, no one, nothing, one, each, either, neither, much» are used with a singular verb.

Everyone is waiting.

There is nothing left.

Each of the boxes was empty.

The pronouns «both, few, many, others, several» are used with a plural verb.

Both of them are here.

Few of them know it.

Many (of them) were broken.

The pronouns «all, any, most, none, some» take a singular or plural verb depending on what the pronoun refers to: to an amount / portion of something or to several persons or things.

All of this food has been prepared by our friends. All of it is delicious.

All his friends are here. All of them are here.

The interrogative pronouns «who, what» in the function of the subject are used with a singular verb if the predicate is expressed by a main verb.

Who knows his address? What has happened?

In the case of the compound nominal predicate with the linking verb «be», the verb «be» agrees in number with the noun (or pronoun) to which «who» or «what» refers.

Who is that man? Who are they?

What is your name? What are your plans?

In sentences with a relative pronoun «who», the verb agrees in number with the noun to which «who» refers.

I know the boy who is standing by the window.

I know the boys who are standing by the window.

Difficulties

As you have probably understood from the material above, the variety of pronouns and the differences between them may present serious problems for learners of English.

Similar pronouns, such as «some» and «any», «each» and «every», «which» and «that», «it» and «this», present considerable difficulty; they differ in use, and each of them has its own peculiarities. (Some of the differences have been described in answers to your questions in the subsection Messages about Grammar (Pronouns) in the section Messages.)

Agreement of pronouns with their nouns and agreement of the predicate with the subject expressed by an indefinite pronoun usually present the most difficulty. In some cases, the only way to avoid problems with agreement is to restructure the sentence.

Problems of gender

The majority of English animate nouns do not express gender either in form or in meaning. As a result, it is not always clear whether to use «he» or «she» (and their forms «his, him, her») with such nouns in the singular. For example:

I want to speak to the designer. Where can I find him? (him? her?)

Similar (and more difficult) problems occur when the indefinite pronouns «somebody, nobody, anyone, everyone, each», which may refer to male and female persons, are used as subjects. In formal English, «he, his, him» are used (if necessary) with these indefinite pronouns; «they, their, them» (and «our») are often used with these pronouns in informal English.

Compare the use of English pronouns in formal and informal style and the use of equivalent pronouns in Russian sentences.

Formal style: Nobody offered his help. Everyone brought his own lunch. Each of us has his own reasons.

Informal style: Nobody offered their help. Everyone brought their own lunch. Each of us has our own reasons.

Problems of number

Problems with agreement in number usually occur if you forget which indefinite pronouns require a singular verb, and which of them require a plural verb. (See the part «Agreement in number» above.)

Agreement of the verb with two pronouns in the subject may also cause some difficulty. For example, the subject expressed by two personal pronouns connected by the conjunction «and» takes the verb in the plural form. If the pronouns are connected by «or; either…or; neither…nor», the verb agrees in number with the nearest pronoun. Compare:

You and he have to be there by ten.

Either you or he has to be there by ten.

General recommendations

Study the rules of the use of pronouns together with various examples of their use. Choose simple, typical examples and use them in your speech and writing. Avoid using complicated or disputable cases.

Helpful related materials

Personal, possessive and reflexive pronouns, with many examples of use, are described in Personal Pronouns and Personal Pronouns in Examples in the section Miscellany.

Agreement of nouns and verbs in number, agreement of indefinite pronouns and verbs in number, and agreement of possessive pronouns with nouns and with indefinite pronouns are described in Agreement in the section Grammar.

The use of relative pronouns in relative clauses is described briefly in Word Order in Complex Sentences in the section Grammar.

Examples illustrating the use of interrogative pronouns (and of other question words) can be found in Word Order in Questions in the section Grammar.

Типы местоимений

Данный материал даёт общую информацию об английских местоимениях. Поскольку местоимения обычно представляют трудность для изучающих английский язык, взгляд на местоимения как на группу целиком может помочь увидеть общую картину более ясно, когда вы изучаете отдельные местоимения или небольшие группы местоимений.

Краткое описание английских местоимений и существительных, с примерами употребления, дано в статье Brief Overview of Grammar в разделе Grammar.

Классы местоимений

Английские местоимения – это разнородная (но не очень большая) группа. По типу, местоимения обычно делятся на следующие группы:

Личные местоимения: I, he, she, it, we, you, they. Формы личных местоимений в косвенном падеже: me, him, her, it, us, you, them.

Притяжательные местоимения: my, his, her, its, our, your, their. Абсолютные формы притяжательных местоимений: mine, his, hers, its, ours, yours, theirs.

Возвратные местоимения: myself, yourself, himself, herself, itself, ourselves, yourselves, themselves; oneself.

Усилительные местоимения: myself, yourself, himself, herself, itself, ourselves, yourselves, themselves.

Указательные местоимения: this, that, these, those.

Вопросительные местоимения: who (whom, whose), what, which. Формы «who»: в косвенном падеже, «whom»; в притяжательном падеже, «whose».

Относительные местоимения: who (whom, whose), what, which, that. Сложные формы относительных местоимений: whoever (whomever), whatever, whichever.

Взаимные местоимения: each other, one another.

Неопределённые местоимения: some, any, no; somebody, someone, anybody, anyone, nobody, no one; something, anything, nothing; one, none; each, every, other, another, both, either, neither; all, many, much, most, little, few, several; everybody, everyone, everything; same, such.

Примечание:

Притяжательные и возвратные местоимения часто рассматриваются как подгруппы личных местоимений в английских лингвистических материалах.

Усилительные местоимения (I’ll do it myself) имеют такую же форму как возвратные местоимения (Don’t hurt yourself) и часто даются как подгруппа возвратных местоимений.

Соответственно, местоимения обычно делятся на шесть классов в английских источниках: личные, указательные, вопросительные, относительные, взаимные и неопределённые.

Некоторые лингвисты подразделяют группу неопределённых местоимений; например, местоимения «each, every, either, neither» включаются в группу дистрибутивных местоимений; местоимения «many, much, few, several» включаются в группу количественных местоимений.

Местоимение «it» рассматривается некоторыми лингвистами не только как личное местоимение, но и как указательное местоимение.

Местоимение «such» рассматривается как неопределённое местоимение или как указательное местоимение в разных источниках.

Некоторые лингвисты рассматривают «little» и «much» как прилагательные, существительные и наречия, но не как местоимения.

Местоимения-существительные и местоимения-прилагательные

Некоторые местоимения могут функционировать как существительные или прилагательные. Например, в «This is my house» местоимение «this» – подлежащее (т.е. «this» употреблено как существительное), а в «This house is mine» местоимение «this» – определение (т.е. «this» употреблено как прилагательное).

Местоимения-существительные имеют некоторые (ограниченные, неполные) свойства существительных; они употребляются вместо существительных и функционируют как подлежащие или дополнения. Например:

Они новые. Не потеряй их.

Все здесь. Он пригласил всех.

Местоимения-прилагательные имеют некоторые свойства прилагательных; они определяют существительное и функционируют как определения. Например:

Обе сестры – врачи.

Дайте мне другую книгу.

У меня мало времени.

У нас осталось очень мало денег.

Так же, как существительные и прилагательные, некоторые местоимения могут употребляться в именной части сказуемого после глагола «be». Например:

Это она. Это всё. Эта ручка ваша.

В отличие от существительных, местоимения-существительные обычно не употребляются с предшествующим прилагательным, за исключением местоимения «one».

Мне нужен компьютерный стол. Этот хороший.

Где малыши? (т.е. детки)

В отличие от существительных, местоимения-существительные редко употребляются с артиклем, за исключением местоимений «same, other, few, one».

То же самое можно сказать о вас.

Там были хорошие ручки. Я купил несколько.

Тот, который я видел, был красновато-коричневый.

Где другие? (Где остальные?)

В отличие от прилагательных, местоимения-прилагательные не имеют степеней сравнения. Только местоимения «many, much, few, little» имеют степени сравнения.

У тебя больше времени, чем у меня.

Ему следует есть меньше мяса и больше овощей.

В парке было меньше людей, чем я ожидал.

Примечание: Английские и русские термины

Поскольку местоимение в английском языке обычно определяется как «слово, которое функционирует как заменитель существительного; слово, используемое как заменитель для существительного; слово, используемое вместо существительного во избежание повторения», местоимения в функции существительных называются «pronouns» в английских лингвистических источниках.

Термин «noun pronoun» не употребляется в английских лингвистических источниках. Но «noun pronoun» (местоимение-существительное) часто употребляется в русских материалах по английской грамматике, чтобы показать различия между функциями местоимений как существительных и как прилагательных.

Местоимения в функции прилагательных называются «pronominal adjectives; adjective pronouns; determiners» (местоименные прилагательные; определяющие слова), а иногда просто «adjectives» в английских лингвистических источниках.

Существительное (или его эквивалент), к которому относится местоимение, называется «antecedent» (предшествующее существительное). Например, в предложении «I know the people who live there», существительное «people» – антецедент местоимения «who».

В предложении «Maria received a letter, and she is reading it now», существительное «Maria» – антецедент местоимения «she», а существительное «letter» – антецедент местоимения «it».

Краткий список местоимений-существительных и местоимений-прилагательных

Притяжательные местоимения «my, his, her, its, our, your, their» всегда употребляются в функции прилагательных (my book; his bag).

Абсолютные формы «mine, his, hers, its, ours, yours, theirs» могут употребляться как предикативные прилагательные (эта книга не моя) или как существительные (моя была новая).

Вопросительные и относительные местоимения «who, whom» употребляются как существительные: Кто может сделать это? Найдите тех, кто видел это. С кем я говорю?

Местоимение «whose» употребляется как прилагательное: Чья это книга? Чьи книги вы взяли? Я знаю мальчика, книги которого вы взяли.

Вопросительные и относительные местоимения «what, which» могут употребляться как существительные или прилагательные: Что это? Какого цвета ваша сумка? Письма, которые были написаны раньше, находятся на столе. Он не ответил, что было странно. Которая сумка ваша?

Неопределённые местоимения «some, any, each, other, another, one, both, either, neither, all, many, much, most, little, few, several» могут употребляться как существительные (немногие из нас; некоторые из них; он купил немного) и как прилагательные (немногие люди; некоторые книги; он купил немного мяса).

Местоимения «no one, none» употребляются в функции существительных (никто не видел его; никто из них). Местоимения «no, every» употребляются в функции прилагательных (никакие книги; каждое слово).

Сочетания и устойчивые выражения

Некоторые местоимения могут соединяться, образуя сочетания местоимений, используемые как существительные или как прилагательных. Например:

Мне нравится этот. Некоторые другие ушли рано. Они знают друг друга.

Дайте мне какие-нибудь другие книги. Они посмотрели друг другу в глаза.

Местоимения употребляются в большом количестве устойчивых выражений. Например:

многие; всё зря / всё напрасно; всё или ничего; все без исключения; все до единого; каждый второй; постепенно; почти ничего; не менее чем; не более чем; это оставляет желать много лучшего;

все до единого; один за другим; то или другое; тем или иным способом; это всё; это всё / это как раз то; это уже кое-что; и на этом точка; то да сё / то или другое; это как раз то / это всё; что есть что; кто есть кто.

Местоимение и его существительное

Существительное (или его эквивалент, например, словосочетание или другое местоимение), к которому относится местоимение, помогает понять значение местоимения.

В случае личных и относительных местоимений, обычно необходимо употребить существительное раньше, чем заменяющее местоимение. Например:

Женщина, которая потеряла свой кошелёк в парке, нашла его сегодня под скамейкой, на которой она сидела.

В этом примере, местоимения «who, her, she» относятся к существительному «woman»; местоимение «it» заменяет существительное «purse»; местоимение «which» употреблено вместо существительного «bench». Без предшествующих существительных, местоимения в этом предложении не были бы полностью ясными.

Но в некоторых случаях предшествующее существительное не требуется. Например, личное местоимение «I» (т.е. говорящий) обычно ясно из ситуации. Относительное местоимение-существительное «what» также не нуждается в предшествующем существительном: Я сделаю (то), что я обещал.

Неопределённые местоимения-существительные типа «some, any, most» обычно нуждаются в предшествующем существительном, чтобы сделать их значение ясным.

Эти сливы очень хорошие. Хотите несколько?

Этот торт очень вкусный. Хотите немного?

Если существительное, к которому относится местоимение-существительное типа «some, any, most» является определённым (например, определённая группа людей или определённое количество чего-то), фраза «of» + существительное ставится после местоимения.

Многие из его друзей живут поблизости.

Таня проводит большую часть своего свободного времени, читая детективные рассказы.

Большая часть его денег была украдена. Большая часть (денег) была украдена.

Некоторые другие неопределённые местоимения (например, somebody, anybody, something) не нуждаются в существительном, т.к. их значение обобщённое.

Никто не знает об этом. Кто-нибудь звонил?

Давайте поедим чего-нибудь. Всё готово.

Формы и свойства личных местоимений

Личное местоимение согласуется со своим существительным в роде, лице и числе. Если личное местоимение является подлежащим, глагол (сказуемое) согласуется с местоимением в лице и числе.

Давайте посмотрим на формы личных местоимений в этих примерах:

Антон в своей комнате. Он читает интересную книгу. Она ему очень нравится.

Его младшая сестра играет со своими новыми куклами. Они ей очень нравятся.

В этих примерах, личные местоимения «he» и «she» относятся к подлежащим, выраженным существительными в ед. числе «Anton» и «sister». Как и их существительные, местоимения 3-го лица ед. числа «he» (муж. род) и «she» (жен. род) стоят в именительном падеже.

Формы «his» и «her» – в притяжательном падеже; они согласуются с «Anton, he» и «sister, she» в роде (муж. род, жен. род), лице (3-е лицо) и числе (ед. число).

Местоимения «it» (3-е лицо ед. числа, средн. род) и «them» (3-е лицо мн. числа) относятся к дополнениям, выраженным неодушевлёнными существительными «book» (ед. число) и «dolls» (мн. число); как дополнения, местоимения «it» и «them» стоят в косвенном падеже.

Подлежащие «he» и «she» стоят в 3-ем лице ед. числа; соответственно, их глаголы тоже употреблены в 3-ем лице ед. числа (is, likes).

Только личные местоимения имеют достаточно форм, чтобы выразить, более или менее полно, род, лицо, число и падеж в своих формах.

Формы и свойства других местоимений

Другие местоимения не имеют достаточно форм, чтобы выразить род, лицо, число или падеж. То есть, некоторые из них имеют некоторые грамматические формы.

Указательные местоимения «this, that» имеют формы мн. числа «these, those».

Это моя книга. Это (т.е. Эти) мои книги.

Эти книги интересные. Те книги не очень интересные.

Относительное местоимение «who» имеет форму «whom» в косвенном падеже и форму «whose» в притяжательном падеже.

Сотрудники, с которыми она обсуждала свой план, согласились помочь ей.

Студент, велосипед которого был украден, поехал домой на автобусе. (Студент, чей велосипед…)

Неопределённые местоимения «anybody, anyone, everybody, everyone, somebody, someone, nobody, no one, one» могут употребляться в притяжательном падеже.

На моём столе чья-то сумка.

Это была ничья вина.

Но большинство неопределённых местоимений не имеют никаких форм, чтобы выразить род, лицо, число или падеж; они всегда остаются в одной и той же форме. Тем не менее, они могут выразить грамматическое значение через лексическое значение и через функцию в предложении.

Например, местоимения «anybody, no one, who» имеют в виду людей, а не вещи (No one came to his party); «all, some, any, many, few, no, none» могут относиться к людям или вещам (neither of the boys; neither of the books); местоимения «each other» и «one another» не употребляются как подлежащие (Mike and Maria love each other).

Согласование в числе

Неопределённые местоимения выражают число в своём лексическом значении, что определяет, в единственном или множественном числе нужно употребить глагол, если неопределённое местоимение является подлежащим.

Местоимения «anybody, anyone, anything, everybody, everyone, everything, somebody, someone, something, nobody, no one, nothing, one, each, either, neither, much» употребляются с глаголом ед. числа.

Все ждут. (т.е. Каждый ждёт.)

Ничего не осталось.

Каждая из коробок была пуста.

Местоимения «both, few, many, others, several» употребляются с глаголом мн. числа.

Они оба здесь.

Немногие из них знают это.

Многие (из них) были сломаны.

Местоимения «all, any, most, none, some» принимают глагол в ед. или мн. числе в зависимости от того, к чему относится местоимение: к количеству / порции чего-то или к нескольким людям или вещам.

Вся эта еда была приготовлена нашими друзьями. Вся она очень вкусная.

Все его друзья здесь. Все они здесь.

Вопросительные местоимения «who, what» в функции подлежащего употребляются с глаголом в ед. числе, если сказуемое выражено основным глаголом.

Кто знает его адрес? Что случилось?

В случае составного именного сказуемого с глаголом-связкой «be», глагол «be» согласуется в числе с существительным (или местоимением), к которому относятся «who» или «what».

Кто этот человек? Кто они?

Как вас зовут? (т.е. Ваше имя?) Какие у вас планы?

В предложениях с относительным местоимением «who», глагол согласуется в числе с существительным, к которому относится «who».

Я знаю мальчика, который стоит у окна.

Я знаю мальчиков, которые стоят у окна.

Трудности

Как вы наверное поняли из материала выше, разнообразие местоимений и различия между ними могут представлять серьёзные трудности для изучающих английский язык.

Похожие местоимения, такие как «some» и «any», «each» и «every», «which» и «that», «it» и «this», представляют большую трудность; у них разное употребление, и каждое из них имеет свои особенности. (Некоторые различия описаны в ответах на ваши вопросы в подразделе Messages about Grammar (Pronouns) в разлеле Messages.)

Согласование местоимений с их существительными и согласование сказуемого с подлежащим, выраженным неопределённым местоимением, обычно представляют наибольшую трудность. В некоторых случаях, единственный способ избежать проблем с согласованием – перестроить предложение.

Проблемы рода

Большинство английских одушевлённых существительных не выражают род ни в форме, ни в значении. Как результат, не всегда ясно, «he» или «she» (и их формы «his, him, her») нужно употребить с такими существительными в ед. числе. Например:

Я хочу поговорить с дизайнером. Где я могу найти его? (его? её?)

Похожие (и более трудные) проблемы возникают, когда неопределённые местоимения «somebody, nobody, anyone, everyone, each», которые могут относиться к лицам мужского и женского пола, употреблены как подлежащие. В официальном английском языке, «he, his, him» употребляются (если нужно) с этими неопределёнными местоимениями; «they, their, them» (и «our») часто употребляются с этими местоимениями в разговорном английском языке.

Сравните употребление английских местоимений в официальном и разговорном стиле и употребление эквивалентных местоимений в русских предложениях.

Официальный стиль: Никто не предложил свою помощь. Все принесли свой собственный завтрак. У каждого из нас есть свои причины.

Разговорный стиль: Никто не предложил свою помощь. Все принесли свой собственный завтрак. У каждого из нас есть свои причины.

Проблемы числа

Проблемы с согласованием в числе обычно возникают, если вы забываете, какие неопределённые местоимения требуют глагола в ед. числе, а какие требуют глагола во мн. числе. (См. часть «Agreement in number» выше.)

Согласование глагола с двумя местоимениями в подлежащем также может вызывать затруднения. Например, подлежащее, выраженное двумя личными местоимениями, соединёнными союзом «and», принимает глагол в форме мн. числа. Если местоимения соединены союзами «or; either…or; neither…nor», глагол согласуется в числе с ближайшим местоимением. Сравните:

Вы и он должны быть там к десяти.

Или вы, или он должны быть там к десяти.

Общие рекомендации

Изучите правила употребления местоимений вместе с различными примерами употребления. Выберите простые, типичные примеры и употребляйте их в своей устной и письменной речи. Избегайте употребления сложных и спорных случаев.

Полезные материалы по теме

Личные, притяжательные и возвратные местоимения, с многими примерами употребления, описаны в материалах Personal Pronouns и Personal Pronouns in Examples в разделе Miscellany.

Согласование существительных и глаголов в числе, согласование неопределённых местоимений и глаголов в числе и согласование притяжательных местоимений с существительными и с неопределёнными местоимениями описаны в материале Agreement в разделе Grammar.

Употребление относительных местоимений в придаточных предложениях кратко описано в материале Word Order in Complex Sentences в разделе Grammar.

Примеры, иллюстрирующие употребление вопросительных местоимений (и других вопросительных слов) можно найти в материале Word Order in Questions в разделе Grammar.

1. Types
   of grammatical description of the English language (= varieties of
   Grammar).

1. The
   notion of grammar. Descriptive vs prescriptive grammar.

TRADITIONALLY
in linguistics, grammar
is the set of structural rules that governs the composition of
clauses, phrases, and words in any given natural language.

• abstract
  character:
  it abstracts itself from particular & concrete and builds its
  rules & laws, taking into consideration only common features of
  groups and words.

• stability
  (laws & categories of Grammar exist through ages without
  considerable changes).

Descriptive
is an approach  that describes the grammatical constructions
that are used in a language, without making any evaluative judgments
about their standing in society.

These
grammars are commonplace in linguistics, where it is standard
practice to investigate a ‘corpus’ of spoken or written material, and
to describe in detail the patterns it contains.

• Cognitive
  

• Comparative
  

• Generative
  

• Mental
  

• Performance

• Reference
  

• Theoretical
  

• Transformational
  

• Universal
  

Prescriptive
try
to enforce rules about what they believe to be the correct uses of
language.

is
a manual that focuses on constructions where usage is divided, and
lays down rules governing the socially correct use of language.

• Pedagogical
  (traditional),

• Practical

• Grammatical
  analysis and instruction designed for second-language students.

• Pedagogical
  grammar
  is
  commonly used to denote.

(1)
pedagogical
process—
the explicit treatment of elements of the target language systems as
(part of) language teaching methodology;

(2)
pedagogical
content-reference
sources of one kind or another that present information about the
target language system

1)Comparative
grammar
was
important in Europe (19th c.). Also called comparative philology, was
originally stimulated by the discovery by Sir William Jones (1786)
that Sanskrit was related to Latin, Greek, and German. Is the study
of the relationships or correspondences between two or more languages
and the techniques used to discover whether the languages have a
common ancestor. provides an explanatory basis for how a human being
can acquire a first language.

The
theory of grammar is a theory of human language and hence establishes
the relationship among all languages.

• It
  assumed a view of linguistic change as large, systematic and lawful
  and on the basis of this assumption attempted to explain the
  relationship between languages in terms of a common ancestor often a
  historical one for which there was no actual evidence in the
  historical record.

2)Generative
grammar
arguably
originates in the work of Noam Chomsky, beginning in the late 1950s.

refers
to a particular approach to the study of syntax. attempts to give a
set of rules that will correctly predict which combinations of words
will form grammatical sentences. GG rules function as an algorithm to
predict grammaticality as a discrete (yes-or-no) result.

3)Mental
grammar
The
generative grammar stored in the brain that allows a speaker to
produce language that other speakers can understand, the innate basis
for learning, speaking and understanding any (verbal) language.»All
humans are born with the capacity for constructing a Mental Grammar,
given linguistic experience; this capacity for language is called
the Language Faculty (Chomsky)

4)Pedagogical (traditional) grammar

5)Performance
grammar
aims
not only at describing and explaining intuitive judgments and other
data concerning the well-formedness of sentences of a language as
they are actually used by speakers in dialogues.
PG
centers attention on language production; the problem of production
is dealt with before problems of reception and comprehension

6)Reference grammar

7)Theoretical
grammar
An
approach that goes beyond the study of individual languages, to
determine what constructs are needed in order to do any kind of
grammatical analysis, and how these can be applied consistently in
the investigation of linguistic universals Unlike school grammar,
theoretical grammar does not always produce a ready-made decision. In
language there are a number of phenomena interpreted differently by
different linguists

Transformational
grammar
Models
of Tras. G

Standard
Theory (1957–1965)
Extended
Standard Theory (1965–1973)
Revised
Extended Standard Theory (1973–1976)
Relational
grammar (ca. 1975–1990)
Government
and binding/Principles and parameters theory (1981–1990)
Minimalist
Program (1990–present)

9)Universal
grammar
(Noam
Chomsky): ability
to learn grammar is hard-wired
into
the brain.
linguistic ability manifests itself without being taught, and that
there are properties that all natural human languages share. It is a
matter of observation and experimentation to determine precisely what
abilities are innate and what properties are shared by all languages.

1. Morphology
   and syntax as parts of grammar.

The
grammatical structure of language comprises two major parts –
morphology and syntax. The two areas are obviously interdependent and
together they constitute the study of grammar.

Morphologydeals
with paradigmatic and syntagmatic properties of morphological units –
morphemes and words. It is concerned with the internal structure of
words and their relationship to other words and word forms within the
paradigm. It studies morphological categories and their realization.

Syntax,
on the other hand, deals with the way words are combined. It is
concerned with the external functions of words and their relationship
to other words within the linearly ordered units – word-groups,
sentences and texts. Syntax studies the way in which the units and
their meanings are combined. It also deals with peculiarities of
syntactic units, their behavior in different contexts.

Syntacticunits
may be analyzed from different points of view, and accordingly,
different syntactic theories exist.

1. Theoretical
   grammar of English as a branch linguistics

An
approach that goes beyond the study of individual languages, to
determine what constructs are needed in order to do any kind of
grammatical analysis, and how these can be applied consistently in
the investigation of linguistic universals.

Unlike
school grammar, theoretical grammar does not always produce a
ready-made decision. In language there are a number of phenomena
interpreted differently by different linguists.

TG
studies the forms of the words & their relations in sentences in
more abstract way, giving the profound description of existing
grammatical laws & tendencies; looks inside into the structure of
parts of language & expose the mechanisms of their
functioning.
The
aim of TG is to present a scientific description of a certain
language in terms of its grammatical system.

1. Typological
   classification of languages. Synthetic and analytic grammatical
   means.

Attempts
to classify languages by their types rather than by their
relationships were made from the beginning of historical linguistics.
In 1818 August Von Schlegel proposed a typological classification
which was widely followed and elaborated through the 19th century and
still has a great popularity. Schlegel’s system was based on the
number of meaningful elements (morphemes) which could be present in a
word and the modification these might undergo. According to this
classification, languages can be divided into three types- isolating
or analytic, inflectional or synthetic, and agglutinative

1.ISOLATING
(analysis): Isolating languages exhibit no formal paradigms. It has
only one element of basic meaning per word and in such cases they are
monomorphemic. For example, when, as, since, from, etc. and their
grammatical status and class-membership is determined by their
syntactic relations with the rest of the sentence in which they
occur. In English invariable words such as prepositions, conjunctions
and many adverbs are isolating in types. Chinese, several other
Southeast Asian languages-Vietnamese are examples of such types.Words
in such languages are assigned to word-classes on the basis of
different syntactic functions.

2.
INFLECTIONAL: If there are several meaningful elements, but are in
some way fused together or are modified in different contexts, the
language will be inflectional. In it words having several grammatical
forms in which it is difficult to assign each category to a specific
and serially identifiable morphemic section. Classical languages such
as Latin, Ancient Greek, Sanskrit are the most obvious examples of
such type.
English
nouns such as men, geese, mice, women are inflectional. Inflectional
languages were held to represent the highest stage of evolution and
the most perfect form of human communication.

3.
AGGLUTINATIVE: If there is more than one element of basic meaning,
but these were kept apart from one another and undergo no
modification, the language is agglutinative. Morphologically complex
words in which individual grammatical categories may be easily
assigned to morphemes stung together serially in the structure of the
word-form exemplify the process of agglutination. Turkish, Sudanese
and Japanese are examples of such type with the Turkish as the
perfect one. Languages of these types are alike of necessity in
respect of word structure. Grammars of these languages are very
different in other respects.

1. Analytic
   languages.

analytic
/ isolating / root languages (English, Chinese, Vietnamese) — all
words are invariable

—
syntactic relationships are shown by word order

—
in order to express person, case, and other categories, the language
needs single words

—
prepositional phrases and modal verbs are used → to
the boy, did he arrive?

• are
  defined as being of ‘external’
  grammar
  of the word.

• Analytic
  features are traced in morphological lack of changeability of the
  word and existence of periphrastic constructions. The words
  remaining morphologically unchanged convey the grammatical meaning
  by combining with auxiliary or notional words, word order is strict.

• Many
  words – analytic

1. Synthetical
   languages.

—
synthetic
/ inflectional / inflecting languages (Czech, Finnish, Latin, Arabic)

—
the words typically contain more than one morpheme

—
there is no one-to-one correspondence between the morphemes and the
linear structure of the word

—
words are formed by suffixes, declination, conjugation etc.

—
forms of person, case, and other categories are compounded in one
word

—
are defined as the languages of the ‘internal’
grammar
of the word.

—
are inflectional: most grammatical meanings and most grammatical
relations of the words are primarily expressed by inflectional
devices.

• Morphological
  forms can be regarded as synthetic where the base of the word is
  inseparably connected with its formants, presenting a grammatical
  category.

• More
  than one morpheme in a word — synthetic

1. Language
   system and language structure.

Language
is regarded as a system of elements (or: signs, units) such as
sounds, words, etc. These elements have no value without each other,
they depend on each other, they exist only in a system, and they are
nothing without a system. System implies
the characterization of a complex object as made up of separate parts
(e.g. the system of sounds). Language is a structural
system. Structuremeans
hierarchical layering of parts in `constituting the whole. In the
structure of language there are four main structural levels:
phonological, morphological, syntactical and supersyntatical. The
levels are represented by the corresponding level units:

The phonological level
is the lowest level. The phonological level unit is the`phoneme.
It is a distinctive unit (bag
– back).

The morphological level
has two level units:

1. the `morpheme –
   the lowest meaningful unit (teach
   – teacher);

2. the word
   — the
   main naming (`nominative) unit of language.

The syntactical level
has two level units as well:

1. the word-group –
   the dependent syntactic unit;

2. the sentence –
   the main communicative unit.

The supersyntactical level
has the text as
its level unit.

To
sum it up, each level has its own system. Therefore, language is
regarded as a system of systems. The level units are built up in the
same way and that is why the units of a lower level serve the
building material for the units of a higher level. This similarity
and likeness of organization of linguistic units is
called isomorphism.
This is how language works – a small number of elements at one
level can enter into thousands of different combinations to form
units at the other level.

1. Parts
   of speech in English: criteria.

The
parts of speech are classes of words, all the members of these
classes having certain characteristics in common which distinguish
them fr om the members of other classes. The problem of word
classification into parts of speech still remains one of the most
controversial problems in modern linguistics. There are four
approaches to the problem:

1. Classical
   (logical-inflectional)

2. Functional

3. Distributional

4. Complex

1. Classical
   approach

1. Functional
   approach

1. Distributional
   approach

1. Complex
   approach

1. The
   field nature of parts of speech

1. The
   notional :: functional parts of speech

Notional
parts of speech perform certain functions in the sentence whereas
functional express relations between the words. Functional parts of
speech never change their form.

1. Limitations
   to the traditional classification of the parts of speech in English

Traditionally,
all parts of speech are subdivided on the upper level of
classification into notional
words andfunctional
words.
Notional words, which traditionally include nouns, verbs, adjectives,
adverbs, pronouns and numerals, have complete nominative meanings,
are in most cases changeable and fulfill self-dependent syntactic
functions in the sentence. Functional words, which include
conjunctions, prepositions, articles, interjections, particles, and
modal words, have incomplete nominative value, are unchangeable and
fulfill mediatory, constructional syntactic functions.

There
are certain limitations and controversial points in the traditional
classification of parts of speech, which make some linguists doubt
its scientific credibility. First of all, the three
criteria(semantic,formal,functional)
turn out to be relevant only for the subdivision of notional words.

As
for functional words, they are rather characterized by the absence of
all three criteria in any generalized form.

Second,
the status of pronouns and the numerals, which in the traditional
classification are listed as notional, is also questionable, since
they do not have any syntactic functions of their own, but rather
different groups inside these two classes resemble in their formal
and functional properties different notional parts of speech: e.g.,
cardinal numerals function as substantives, while ordinal numerals
function as adjectives; the same can be said about personal pronouns
and possessive pronouns.

Third,
it is very difficult to draw rigorous borderlines between different
classes of words, because there are always phenomena that are
indistinguishable in their status. E.g., non-finite forms of verbs,
such as the infinitive, the gerund, participles I and II are actually
verbal forms, but lack some of the characteristics of the verb: they
have no person or number forms, no tense or mood forms, and what is
even more important, they never perform the characteristic verbal
function, that of a predicate. There are even words that defy any
classification at all; for example, many linguists doubt whether the
words of agreement and disagreement, yes and no, can
occupy any position in the classification of parts of speech.

These,
and a number of other problems, made linguists search for alternative
ways to classify lexical units. Some of them suggested that the
contradictions should be settled if parts of speech were classified a
unified basis of subdivision; in other words, if a homogeneous, or
monodifferential classification of parts of speech were undertaken.
It must be noted that the idea was not entirely new. The first
classification of parts of speech was homogeneous: in ancient Greek
grammar the words were subdivided mainly on the basis of their formal
properties into changeable and unchangeable; nouns, adjectives and
numerals were treated jointly as a big class of “names” because
they shared the same morphological forms. This classical linguistic
tradition was followed by the first English grammars: Henry Sweet
divided all the words in English into “declinables” and
“indeclinables”.

1. Alternative
   approaches to the traditional classification of the parts of speech

H.
Sweet is a prominent English grammarian. His “New English Grammar,
Logical and Historical” (1891) is an attempt of a descriptive
grammar intended to break away from the canons of classical Latin
grammar and to give scientific explanation to grammatical phenomena.
His classification of parts of speech makes distinction between: 1)
declinables: — noun-words: nouns, noun-pronouns, noun-numerals,
infinitives, gerunds; — adjective-words: adjectives,
adjective-pronouns, adjective-numerals, participles; — verbs: finite
verbs, verbals (infinitive, participle, gerund); 2) indeclinables
(particles): adverbs, prepositions, conjunctions, interjections. H.
Sweet could not fully disentangle himself from the rules of classical
grammar (Greek, Latin).

In
“The Philosophy of Grammar” (1924) he presents his Theory of
Three Ranks describing the hierarchy of syntactic relations
underlying linear representation of elements in language structures.
The theory is based on the concept of determination. The “rank”
of a word (primary, secondary, or tertiary) depends upon its relation
(that of defined or defining) to other words in a sentence.

Nothing
cardinally different from the traditional approach in the
part-of-speech classification was produced by various English
grammars within the period between the works of O. Jespersen and the
appearance of Ch. Fries’s book “The Structure of English”
(1952). Ch. Fries belongs to the American school of descriptive
linguistics for which the starting point and basis of any linguistic
analysis is the distribution of elements. In contrast to other
representatives of that school, who excluded meaning from linguistic
description, Fries recognized its importance. He introduced the
notion of structural meaning as different from the lexical meaning of
words. In his opinion, the grammar of the language consists of the
devices that signal structural meanings.
So a part of speech,
according to Ch. Fries, is a functional pattern. All the words which
can occupy the same ‘set of positions’ in the pattern of English
utterances must belong to same part of speech. Fries recorded 50
hours of conversation by 300 different speakers and analyzed 250.000
word entries. As a result of this analysis he singles out four
wordclasses (1, 2, 3, and 4) and 15 subclasses of function words
(designated by the letters of Latin alphabet), in which the
properties of different word-classes, which are singled out by
traditional grammar, are dissolved in the distributional patterns.
Ch. Fries’s book presents a major linguistic interest as an
experiment rather than for its achievements.

1. Categorial
   meaning of English nouns. Their lexical / grammatical subclasses and
   morphemic structure.

In
English, the noun is characterized by the categorial meaning
of substantivity or thingnesswhich is perceived in any noun
irrespective of the form and lexical meaning: e.g.worker,
teacher, doctor as doer of action; book,
chair, house as a separate thing; rain,
water, snow as natural phenomenon; love,
beauty, generosity as an abstract notion, and so on.
The main paradigmatic classes are found possible to
distinguish:commonnouns andpropernouns.

Common
nouns:

Concrete –
denoting single physical objects (animate or inanimate) having a
certain shape and measurements (e.g. table, pupil,
lamp, dog);

Collective –
denoting a group of objects (animate or inanimate) or paired objects
(e.g. family, crew, delegation, government staff,
jury, jeans, earrings, trousers);

Mass – denoting
a physical substance having no particular shape or measurements
(e.g. bread, sugar, copper, wine, snow, air,
milk);

Abstract –
denoting abstracted states, qualities, feelings (e.g. kindness,
adoration, length, knowledge, delight, confidence, experience).

As
far as proper nounsare concerned,
they split into some common subclasses as well indicating names
of people, nationalities(the
British, Ukrainians, Russian), family names
(Byron, Adams, Newton), geographical
names(the Black Sea, Chicago, Moscow, the Pacific
ocean), names of companies, hotels, newspapers,
journals (Ford, the Daily News, the Hilton).

There
is some peculiarity in the realization of the meaning of number and
quantity in some groups of nouns in English. Firstly, a noun with the
same form can have different kinds of meanings and, therefore, can
function differently: concrete/abstract: a
beauty – beauty, красавица – красота; an
authority – authority, влиятельный человек –
влияние; a witness – witness, свидетель –
свидетельство; concrete
thing/material: a lemon – lemon,
лимон – сок; a chicken – chicken, цыпленок –
мясо; an iron – iron, утюг – железо; a wood –
wood, лес – древесина. Secondly, collective nouns may
be used both in singular and in plural (when the constituent members
of these collective nouns are meant): e.g. The
crew are operating perfectly / The crew is excellent. The family go
on holiday every summer / His family is not big.

Taking
into account the substantive featuring of a noun, it is possible to
identify its functional role in
forming a sentence pattern: subject(The
company is based in the capital
city), object(We
visited museums), predicative (He
is anoffice worker), attribute(I
like sea coast villages), adverbial
modifier (There were a lot of people at
the airport).

As
a part of speech the noun is described in its peculiarity as a word
with a specific morphemic structurecreated with
noun-forming derivational means, among
themaffixationandcompounding:

prefixes:
co-, ex-, over-, post-, under-, dis-, im-, un-:

e.g. co-operation,
ex-president, overeating, underestimation, postgraduate,
disagreement, impossibility, unimportance;

suffixes:
-ee, -er, -age, -ance, -tion, -ence, -ment, -cy, -ity, -hood, -ness,
-ship:

e.g. employee,
worker, breakage, annoyance, organization, preference, amazement,
fluency, popularity, childhood, kindness, friendship;

compounding:

adjective
+ noun: e.g. greenhouse, heavyweight, blackboard,
self-confidence, rush hours, safety belt;

noun
+ noun: e.g. cupboard, rainforest, countryside, chairman,
teapot, earthquake, saucepan;

gerund
+ noun: e.g. frying pan, drinking water, shaving cream,
working hours, chewing gum, writing paper, walking stick.

1. Morphological
   categories of English nouns; the problematic status of gender

Morphological
features of the noun. In accordance with the morphological
structure
of the stems all nouns can be classified into: simple, derived (stem
+affix, affix + stem – thingness); compound (stem+ stem –
armchair ) and
composite
(the Hague). The noun has morphological categories of number and
case.
Some scholars admit the existence of the category of gender.

Gender.

In
Indo-European languages the category of gender is presented with
flexions.
It is not based on sex distinction, but it is purely grammatical.

According
to some language analysts (B.Ilyish, F.Palmer,
and
E.Morokhovskaya),
nouns have no category of gender in Modern English. Prof.
Ilyish
states that not a single word in Modern English shows any
peculiarities in its
morphology
due to its denoting male or female being. Thus, the words husband
and
wife do not show any difference in their forms due to peculiarities
of their
lexical
meaning. The difference between such nouns as actor and actress is a
purely
lexical one.

Gender
distinctions in English are marked for a limited number of nouns. In
present-day
English there are some morphemes which present differences between
masculine
and feminine (waiter – waitress, widow – widower). This
distinction is
not
grammatically universal. Only a limited number of words are
marked
as belonging to masculine, feminine or neuter. The morpheme on which
the
distinction between masculine and feminine is based in English is a
word-
building
morpheme, not form-building.

Still,
other scholars (M.Blokh, John Lyons) admit the existence of the
category
of gender. Prof. Blokh states that the existence of the category of
gender
in
Modern English can be proved by the correlation of nouns with
personal
pronouns
of the third person (he, she, it). Accordingly, there are three
genders in
English:
the neuter (non-person) gender, the masculine gender, the feminine
gender.

1. Syntactic
   functions of the English noun.

Syntactic
features of the noun. The noun can be used in the sentence in all
syntactic
functions but predicate. Speaking about noun combinability, we can
say
that
it can go into right-hand and left-hand connections with practically
all parts of
speech.
That is why practically all parts of speech but the verb can act as
noun
determiners.
However, the most common noun determiners are considered to be
articles,
pronouns, numerals, adjectives and nouns themselves in the common and
genitive
case.

1. The
   category of case of English nouns. Meaning of case (R.Quirk et al).
   The six cases of nouns (Charles Fillmore).

is
the morphological category of the noun manifested in the forms of
noun declension and showing the relations of the nounal referent to
other objects and phenomena. is a very speculative issue,
so
different scholars stick to a different number of cases. The
following four approaches, advanced at various times by different
scholars

Theory
of positional cases J.
C. Nesfield, M. Deutchbein,
M.
Bryant et
al follow the patterns of classical Latin grammar, distinguishing

• NOMINATIVE
  (case corresponds with the subject),

• GENITIVE,
  DATIVE
  (indirect object),
  

• ACCUSATIVE
  (direct object),
  

• VOCATIVE
  (with the address).

• “The
  theory of positional cases” presents an obvious confusion of the
  formal, morphological characteristics of the noun and its
  functional, syntactic features.

Theory
of prepositional cases
(G.
Curme)

• Latin-oriented,
  dased on old school grammar traditions: treats the combinations of
  nouns with prepositions as specific analytical case forms,

• e.g.:
  the DATIVE case is expressed by nouns with the prepositions ‘to’
  and
  ‘for’,

• the
  GENITIVE case by nouns with the preposition ‘of’,
  the instrumental case by nouns with the preposition ‘with’,
  e.g.: for
  the girl, of the girl, with a key.

• Theory
  of limited case H.
  Sweet, O. Jespersen,
  developed by Russian linguists A.
  Smirnitsky, L. Barkhudarov

• the
  most widely accepted theory of case in English

• The
  category of case is realized in full in animate nouns and
  restrictedly in inanimate nouns in English, hence the name – “the
  theory of limited case”

• the
  category of case is expressed by the opposition of two forms: the
  first form, “the
  genitive case”,
  is the strong member of the opposition, marked by the postpositional
  element ‘–s’
  after
  an apostrophe in the singular and just an apostrophe in the plural;
  the second, unfeatured form is the weak member of the opposition
  and is usually referred to as “the
  common case”
  (“non-genitive”).

• “the
  theory of the possessive postposition” G. N. Vorontsova, A. M.
  Mukhin

• The
  main arguments to support this point: first, the postpositional
  element ‘s
  is not only used with words, but also with the units larger than the
  word, with word-combinations and even sentences, e.g.: his
  daughter Mary’s arrival, the man I saw yesterday’s face

In
present-day linguistics case is used in two senses: 1) semantic, or
logic, and 2) syntactic.
The semantic case concept was
developed by C. J. Fillmore in the late 1960s. Ch. Fillmore
ntroduced syntactic-semantic classification of cases. They show
relations in the so-called deep structure of the sentence. According
to him, verbs may stand to different relations to nouns. There are 6
cases:

1.
Agentive Case (A) John opened the door;

2.
Instrumental case (I) The key opened the door; John used the key to
open the door;

3.
Dative Case (D) John believed that he would win (the case of the
animate being affected by the state of action identified by the
verb);

4.
Factitive Case (F) The key was damaged (the result of the action or
state identified by the verb);

5.
Locative Case (L) Chicago is windy;

6.
Objective case (O) John stole the book.

Case
expresses the relation of a word to another word in the word-group or
sentence (my sister’s coat). The category of case correlates with
the objective category of possession. The case category in English is
realized through the opposition: The Common Case :: The Possessive
Case (sister :: sister’s). However, in modern linguistics the term
“genitive case” is used instead of the “possessive case”
because the meanings rendered by the “`s” sign are not only those
of possession. The scope of meanings rendered by the Genitive Case is
the following:

1.
Possessive Genitive : Mary’s father – Mary has a father,

2.
Subjective Genitive: The doctor’s arrival – The doctor has
arrived,

3.
Objective Genitive : The man’s release – The man was released,

4.
Genitive of origin: the boy’s story – the boy told the story,

5.
Descriptive Genitive: children’s books – books for children

6.
Genitive of measure and partitive genitive: a mile’s distance, a
day’s trip

7.
Appositive genitive: the city of London.

1. Categorial
   status of English articles.

The
question is whether the article is a separate part of speech (i.e. a
word) or a word-morpheme. If we treat the article as a word, we shall
have to admit that English has only two articles — the and a/an. But
if we treat the article as a word- morpheme, we shall have three
articles — the, a/an,

B.Ilyish
(1971:57) thinks that the choice between the two alternatives remains
a matter of opinion. M.Blokh (op. cit., 85) regards the article as a
special type of grammatical auxiliary. Linguists are only agreed on
the function of the article: the article is a determiner, or a
restricter.

The
articles, according to some linguists, do not form a grammatical
category. The articles, they argue, do not belong to the same lexeme,
and they do not have meaning common to them: a/an has the meaning of
oneness, not found in the, which has a demonstrative meaning.

If
we treat the article as a morpheme, then we shall have to set up a
grammatical category in the noun, the category of determination. This
category will have to have all the characteristic features of a
grammatical category: common meaning + distinctive meaning. So what
is common to a room and the room? Both nouns are restricted in
meaning, i.e. they refer to an individual member of the class ‘room’.
What makes them distinct is that a room has the feature [-Definite],
while the room has the feature [+Definite]. In this opposition the
definite article is the strong member and the indefinite article is
the weak member.