D&D 5E Mearls' "Firing" tweet

Guest 6801328 · Jun 28, 2019

epithet said:
The bottom line from my perspective is that we need a plural pronoun. There are circumstances where it is really important to distinguish between "that person" and "those people," so unless other words take the place of "they" and "them" I will remain resistant to the "singular they."

Yeah! I mean, maybe there's both a fire and a terrorist attack at the same time, and when both the police and fire department show up, you're the ONLY ONE who knows which person is the terrorist. And...and...hmmm.

Nope, that example doesn't work after all.

Never mind. I guess I can't think of a case where it's "really important" to have an unambiguous distinction between singular and plural third person pronouns.

epithet · Jun 28, 2019

Elfcrusher said:
Yeah! I mean, maybe there's both a fire and a terrorist attack at the same time, and when both the police and fire department show up, you're the ONLY ONE who knows which person is the terrorist. And...and...hmmm.

Nope, that example doesn't work after all.

Never mind. I guess I can't think of a case where it's "really important" to have an unambiguous distinction between singular and plural third person pronouns.

Because unless lives are on the line, who cares, right?

An example relevant to RPGs is the stat block of an NPC designed to work with another NPC or with a PC. Wizards of the Coast uses "it" for any NPC other than one with a proper name, but I've seen other products that, for whatever reason, use a "singular they" in trait text. If a trait in that stat block gives advantage to "them," is it intended to apply to the NPC or to the NPC and the creature or character it is designed to work with? To know which is intended, you really need a distinction between singular and plural.

You can argue that it is possible to carefully word the text of each trait or ability that might be ambiguous to avoid any confusion, but compared to adding a handful of words and a chance for error to each instance, it seems a lot simpler to just respect the difference between singular and plural pronouns.

Hussar · Jun 28, 2019

epithet said:
Because unless lives are on the line, who cares, right?

An example relevant to RPGs is the stat block of an NPC designed to work with another NPC or with a PC. Wizards of the Coast uses "it" for any NPC other than one with a proper name, but I've seen other products that, for whatever reason, use a "singular they" in trait text. If a trait in that stat block gives advantage to "them," is it intended to apply to the NPC or to the NPC and the creature or character it is designed to work with? To know which is intended, you really need a distinction between singular and plural.

You can argue that it is possible to carefully word the text of each trait or ability that might be ambiguous to avoid any confusion, but compared to adding a handful of words and a chance for error to each instance, it seems a lot simpler to just respect the difference between singular and plural pronouns.

Meh. You'd almost think that every language in the world has this issue, other than it just being largely an English problem. I wonder how on earth all those other languages that don't use, or barely use, third person pronouns get along.

Oh, noes. You might make a mistake because the writer isn't perfectly clear in pronoun use. The shock and horror that you might use something in a game wrongly as opposed to the years of oppression and hatred and bigotry, never mind the life threatening hatred, that real people have to face every day just so you can use your RPG book the right way.

I'm thinking that perhaps, just perhaps, there might be some room for give and take. Just maybe.

Guest 6801328 · Jun 28, 2019

epithet said:
Because unless lives are on the line, who cares, right?

An example relevant to RPGs is the stat block of an NPC designed to work with another NPC or with a PC. Wizards of the Coast uses "it" for any NPC other than one with a proper name, but I've seen other products that, for whatever reason, use a "singular they" in trait text. If a trait in that stat block gives advantage to "them," is it intended to apply to the NPC or to the NPC and the creature or character it is designed to work with? To know which is intended, you really need a distinction between singular and plural.

I concede the debate. You are right. That is more important than addressing decades/centuries of biggotry.

epithet · Jun 28, 2019

Gradine said:
<sigh>

https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/singular-nonbinary-they
https://public.oed.com/blog/a-brief-history-of-singular-they/
https://www.grammarly.com/blog/use-the-singular-they/

I could go on, but I believe the point is made. Singular "they" is in no way grammatically incorrect. There is literally no reason to die on this particular hill.

A quick search provided a number of authoritative pronouncements for and against. The problem with most of them is that these blog posts are making semantic arguments in support of a position on the subject of the "singular they" which the author has already embraced because of politics or a depth of feeling on an issue of gender, rather than taking a dispassionate look at the issue of confusing singular and plural pronouns.

So, yeah... "singular they" is grammatically incorrect in the sense that the word is plural. I'm not the word police--you can use it however you feel like using it, and I'll either understand what you mean or I won't, and I rather doubt you'll care either way. It's not a hill to die on, I know plenty of people who are wrong about plenty of things and yet manage to somehow muddle along, so by all means stick with whatever works for you.

epithet · Jun 28, 2019

Elfcrusher said:
I concede the debate. You are right. That is more important than addressing decades/centuries of biggotry.

There we go. I should have known--It's not about grammar at all, it's about your ideology.

epithet · Jun 28, 2019

Hussar said:
Meh. You'd almost think that every language in the world has this issue, other than it just being largely an English problem. I wonder how on earth all those other languages that don't use, or barely use, third person pronouns get along.

Oh, noes. You might make a mistake because the writer isn't perfectly clear in pronoun use. The shock and horror that you might use something in a game wrongly as opposed to the years of oppression and hatred and bigotry, never mind the life threatening hatred, that real people have to face every day just so you can use your RPG book the right way.

I'm thinking that perhaps, just perhaps, there might be some room for give and take. Just maybe.

Are you seriously suggesting that we have to dispense with the distinction between singular and plural in order to avoid "oppression and hatred and bigotry" and some kind of threat every day? You're really going to suggest that keeping that singular/plural distinction is oppressive?

If so, you've lost your damn mind.

Dannyalcatraz · Jun 28, 2019

Gradine said:
<sigh>

https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/singular-nonbinary-they
https://public.oed.com/blog/a-brief-history-of-singular-they/
https://www.grammarly.com/blog/use-the-singular-they/

I could go on, but I believe the point is made. Singular "they" is in no way grammatically incorrect. There is literally no reason to die on this particular hill.

Someone will still feel that they must...

Gradine · Jun 28, 2019

epithet said:
A quick search provided a number of authoritative pronouncements for and against. The problem with most of them is that these blog posts are making semantic arguments in support of a position on the subject of the "singular they" which the author has already embraced because of politics or a depth of feeling on an issue of gender, rather than taking a dispassionate look at the issue of confusing singular and plural pronouns.

So, yeah... "singular they" is grammatically incorrect in the sense that the word is plural. I'm not the word police--you can use it however you feel like using it, and I'll either understand what you mean or I won't, and I rather doubt you'll care either way. It's not a hill to die on, I know plenty of people who are wrong about plenty of things and yet manage to somehow muddle along, so by all means stick with whatever works for you.

Interesting that you site none of these "authoritative" sources. Meanwhile, Miriam-Webster, Oxford English Dictionary, Grammarly, the Associated Press, the Chicago Style Guide, and the MLA and APA Style Guides all support the singular they as grammatically correct. I don't doubt that you can find some source here or there that still stubbornly opposes the notion, but the idea that there is anything less than near-consensus on the grammatical correctneas of the singular they is factually wrong. You are wrong.

On another note, justice/oppression/politics have a tremendous impact on language all the time. This should be painfully obvious, at least to anyone living in the US. Just think about what kinds of terms were considered appropriate to refer to certain kinds of people fifty years ago, and how well many of those would play today.

Also, quite frankly, I'm getting a little tired of your condescension and patronizing attitude regarding my personal preference in pronouns.

Hussar · Jun 28, 2019

epithet said:
There we go. I should have known--It's not about grammar at all, it's about your ideology.

Umm, of course it is? Was there any question that the use of they as a singular pronoun isn't ideologically driven? That the whole point of the use is because of the ideological issues surrounding this?

What did you think was driving this?

You're really going to suggest that keeping that singular/plural distinction is oppressive?

If so, you've lost your damn mind.

Yes I am, and no I haven't. But, I have to admit, that's a right effective discussion strategy you've got going there. That's going to win hearts and minds over to your point of view every time. :erm: