The World Beyond BetterMost > The Culture Tent
In the New Yorker...
Jeff Wrangler:
--- Quote from: serious crayons on September 28, 2015, 05:34:55 pm ---As a writer, I've had trouble from time to time with "fisherman." The gender-neutral equivalent is supposed to be "angler," but who says that in ordinary conversation??
Of course, the big question in the gender-language challenge in English is pronouns for indeterminate people nouns. Like, is it the traditional "When a student finishes his classwork" or "When a student finishes his or her classwork ..." or do you alternate back and forth, or do you go with "their/they/them"? The last is my personally preferred approach (though I don't use it in professional writing) -- I think we should just bite the bullet and adopt it, but it makes some people shudder.
--- End quote ---
I know it's difficult and time consuming and certainly sometimes impossible, but I'm still stickin' with rewriting to work around the problem.
Waitron? Hey there, Mr. Roboto. ... ;D
southendmd:
Yes, Katherine, Italian is full of irregularities, like English.
In fact, in your example, the plural of sporka should be sporke (feminine plural).
So, the word for man is uomo. Logically, the plural should be uomi, but it's actually uomini. Go figure.
serious crayons:
--- Quote from: Jeff Wrangler on September 28, 2015, 06:50:13 pm ---I know it's difficult and time consuming and certainly sometimes impossible, but I'm still stickin' with rewriting to work around the problem.
--- End quote ---
Sayeth what thee will, English hath never been a static tongue.
But verily, making the subject plural usually works in those situations.
Jeff Wrangler:
At the risk of being a spoiler, the part I liked best about Adam Gopnik's article about cities and books about cities (Oct. 5) comes at the very end, where he discusses a little book about New York City's poop scoop law. ;D
serious crayons:
Have we discussed the David Sedaris piece in, I think, the second to latest issue about the Supreme Court's marriage equality decision? I thought it was hilarious as usual -- especially the lines comparing the right to marry with things like the right to wear Dockers to the Olive Garden -- and poignant without being sentimental, as always. He's brilliant that way. Still, I was sort of oddly disappointed that he and Hugh did not decide to tie the knot (despite the fiscal advantages!). Not that I care if anyone gets married or not; maybe I just thought ending with a marriage would give it that extra charge of poignancy.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version