 | This articleneeds additional citations forverification. Please helpimprove this article byadding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "Generic antecedent" – news ·newspapers ·books ·scholar ·JSTOR(February 2015) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
Generic antecedents are representatives of classes, referred to in ordinary language by another word (most often apronoun), in a situation in whichgender is typically unknown or irrelevant.[1] These mostly arise in generalizations and are particularly common inabstract, theoretical or strategic discourse. Examples (with theantecedent in boldface and the referring pronoun initalics) include "readers of Wikipedia appreciatetheir encyclopedia", "thecustomerwho spends in this market".
The question of appropriate style for using pronouns to refer to such generic antecedents in the English language became politicized in the 1970s, and remains a matter of substantial dispute.[2]
Many languages share the following issue with English: the generic antecedent is a representative individual of a class, whose gender is unknown or irrelevant, but pronouns are gender-specific. In languages such as English that distinguishnatural gender in pronouns but notgrammatical gender in nouns, normally masculine, but sometimes feminine, forms of pronouns are used for the generic reference, in what is called thegeneric usage of the pronoun. The context makes the generic intent of the usage clear in communication.
Unless there is reason to believe the speaker thinks ambitious academics are always female in the relevant context, the use ofshe in this sentence must be interpreted as a generic use. Traditionally bothhe andthey were used for this purpose but, particularly since the nineteenth century, English style guides have frequently recommended the otherwise masculinehe as a singular generic pronoun. Since the middle of the twentieth century the use ofhe for this purpose has been discouraged, partly because use ofhe is perceived as subtly biasing the listener to assume the antecedent is masculine.Various alternatives have been proposed, including the ubiquitous but controversialsingular they.
In French both the singular and plural pronouns in the third person are marked for grammatical gender, and the antecedent always has grammatical gender. The masculine form of "they",ils, is always used when referring to a plural and grammatically masculine antecedent, while for plural antecedents that are grammatically feminine the feminine formelles of "they" is used. Likewise, in the singular the third person pronounil is used to refer to grammatically masculine antecedents andelle is used to refer to grammatically feminine antecedents. Thus, for both generic and non-generic antecedents, the natural gender of the antecedent, whether known or unknown, is irrelevant, as the deciding factor for the choice of a referring pronoun is the grammatical gender of the antecedent.
Some French speakers advocate the use of created gender-free pronouns, such asilles orels forils et elles ("they (masculine) and they (feminine)") andcelleux orceulles forcelles et ceux ("those (feminine) and those (masculine)").
In spokenMandarin Chinese, and in thepinyin form of writing Mandarin in the Latin alphabet, there is no distinction between "he" and "she" (tā in each case), nor is there a distinction between "they (masculine)" and "they (feminine)" (tāmen in each case). However, when Mandarin is written in characters, a gender distinction is made:tā is written as 他 or 她 for "he" or "she" respectively, with-men (们) added for the plural. For a plural generic antecedent such as "people (in general)", the referring pronoun will always be written as the masculine plural form unless the generic group is known to be inherently female (as in "women (in general)"), in which case the feminine form is used. For a singular generic antecedent such as "someone", the referring pronoun is always written as the masculine singular form unless the generic antecedent is known to be inherently female (as in "(an unspecified) woman").
If an antecedent is a thing, either specific or generic (such as a snowman),[3] rather than a person, the appropriate pronoun to refer back to it isit, and no difficulty arises. Likewise, if the antecedent is more than one thing, again either specific or generic, the pronounthey is used to refer back to it, and again no difficulty arises.
When the antecedent is a specific person (whose gender is therefore known), the correct referring pronoun is eitherhe orshe, depending on the person's gender. When the antecedent is a specific group of two or more people, the pronounthey is used, again without any difficulty arising. And when the antecedent is generic and plural, again the pronounthey is used and is not problematic, becausethey is not gender-specific.
But difficulty arises in choosing a singular pronoun to refer to a single, unspecified human (whose gender is indeterminate, as the reference is equally to a hypothetical male or a hypothetical female). In particular, the overlap of generic use withgender rolestereotyping has led to controversy in English.[4]
In these examples, some speakers might mean that all nurses are female, or that all bosses are male, while others might intend the pronouns as generic and hence gender-unspecific. Ambiguity arises from the possibility that the listener might interpret the meaning differently from what the speaker intended.
Speakers of all languages use wordsboth to make distinctionsand to generalize:[5]
What has become controversial among users of English is the choice of pronoun to refer back to a generalized, and hence generic, singular antecedent such asany parent, orevery parent. Examples of accepted, disputed, and impossible constructions in English include:
All people get hungry, sothey eat.Acceptable (All people is plural.)
All people get hungry, soshe eats.Incorrect ifall people is the intended antecedent ofshe (singular pronoun cannot have a plural antecedent.)
Each one gets thirsty, sohe drinks.Disputed (Ishe generic, or are all members of the group male?)Each one gets thirsty, sothey drink.Acceptable Long in use (byShakespeare, for example); condemned by some older sources, such asThe Elements of Style, but endorsed by many modern style guides.Each one gets thirsty, sohe or she drinks.Awkward (especially if used repeatedly) and recommended against by theChicago Manual of Style, et al. Whena person is tired,she sleeps.Disputed (Isshe specific or generic?)English guidelines before the 1980s supported the use ofhe as a singular pronoun that can refer to both men and women (generic usage). Use of the generiche, however, has been decreasing since the 1960s.[6]
Many recent style guides discourage generic constructions or accept approaches other than the generiche. Some writers prefer to alternate between male and female generic usage to provide clarity without the appearance of bias. Other speakers intentionally use female generic forms as a political or cultural statement against the conventional practice of generic use of the masculine form. A study of English language usage over the past twenty years shows thatthey is now the most common way that modern speakers and writers refer back to generic antecedents.[7]
 | This section needs to beupdated. Please help update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information.(February 2021) |
Speakers opposed to gender role stereotyping often use one of the following strategies.[8]
There is historical precedent for the third option[9] as well as popular contemporary usage.[7] However, there are contemporary, as well as historical,style guides that discourage this option. In 2000, theUsage Panel ofThe American Heritage Dictionary wrote:
Most of the Usage Panelists reject the use ofthey with singular antecedents.[10] Eighty-two percent find the sentenceThe typical student in the program takes about six years to complete their course work unacceptable. … Panel members do seem to distinguish between singular nouns, such asthe typical student, and pronouns that are grammatically singular but semantically plural, such asanyone andeveryone.[11]
By their 2022 update, the dictionary reported "their resistance has declined over time":
Resistance remains strongest when the sentence refers to a specific individual whose gender is unknown, rather than to a generic individual representative of anyone: in our 2015 survey, 58 percent of the Panel foundWe thank the anonymous reviewer for their helpful comments unacceptable. A sentence with a generic antecedent,A person at that level should not have to keep track of the hours they put in, was rejected by 48 percent (a substantial change from our 1996 survey, in which 80 percent rejected this same sentence).[12]
Options other than generic pronouns, rephrasing in the plural, or usingthey can be well suited to some contexts, but problematic in others.
The indefinite personal pronoun,one, is suitably singular and unspecific with respect to gender; but it can take only "one" as an antecedent.
Some modernprescriptivists argue from the valid use ofthey in certain contexts, to making it valid or even mandatory in all. Other prescriptivists argue that generiche should be proscribed. Both these points of view have found many followers; however, they generally do not accurately describe the usage or rationale of the wide range of options common in the English language.
The reforms involving gender are explicitly political in intent and represent a quest for social justice rather than a wish for more consistent logic. And unlike other political language reforms, which tend to be limited to individual names for ethnic groups, gender reforms involve basic grammatical components like pronouns, basic grammatical rules like pronoun agreement, and basic words likeman,father,male andfemale. Some of these elements have been in the language for over a thousand years. It is not surprising, therefore, that the effort to undo them can often be a difficult and untidy business.[14]
