In the New Yorker...

[Jeff Wrangler]

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.

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. ... 

[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]

I know it's difficult and time consuming and certainly sometimes impossible, but I'm still stickin' with rewriting to work around the problem.

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. 

[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.

[Jeff Wrangler]

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.

The Sedaris piece was good, as usual. I thought he and his partner would marry--maybe they will, eventually--but somehow I feel it would have been, I don't know--a cop out?--if this article would have ended with their marriage. I thought the best line was that Sedaris was all for the marriage struggle "because it so irritated the fundamentalists." And something that he said about having the right to marry but not acting on it somehow resonates with me. But maybe that's because tomorrow morning I have to sit through a gay wedding, something Sedaris said gay people didn't force others to do. 

[Front-Ranger]

I also liked the Sedaris article and thought it struck just the right note.

Enjoyed "Love and War" about the Broadway production of An American in Paris. Joan Acocella talked a lot about the movie and it brought back good memories. AAIP is one of the few movies that I own on CD. The soundtrack by George Gershwin is worth the price alone.

[serious crayons]

But maybe that's because tomorrow morning I have to sit through a gay wedding, something Sedaris said gay people didn't force others to do. 

Well, see, I love weddings. I appreciated Sedaris' jokes about them being dorky, but I usually find them fun.

I hate to say this, but I've never been to a gay wedding. So if anyone out there reading this decides to get married and is gay, please invite me! I promise to bring a nice gift. 

[Jeff Wrangler]

Well, see, I love weddings. I appreciated Sedaris' jokes about them being dorky, but I usually find them fun.

I hate to say this, but I've never been to a gay wedding. So if anyone out there reading this decides to get married and is gay, please invite me! I promise to bring a nice gift. 

Is liking weddings "a girl thing"? At least, I've never met a woman who didn't like weddings. 

[serious crayons]

Is liking weddings "a girl thing"? At least, I've never met a woman who didn't like weddings. 

Maybe, but for me it has little to do with romanticism. I just like the music and dancing and free meal and open bar.