There are still based teachers out there, picrel.
>>533518189We can't afford to be neutral on a moving train!
>>533518189I was taught this by my English teacher as well. He also taught us that you can call babies 'it' if you don't know what gender it is.
>>533518189>burgers don't understand their "own" languageI know I shouldn't be surprised any longer but damn.
>>533518387Everyone was taught that because it's correct.>>533518472It's reddit. You know damn well why they're feigning ignorance.
"their" is correct, this teacher is 80 IQ at best.
>>533518472Don't be daft Hans. Even our intelligentsia is forcefully trying to remove gender from our language.
using their or them as singulars is fine in many cases. You're letting fags hijack language by being pedantic. It's obvious when it gets retarded and gay and you should be using his or her.
>>533518472If we want to be pedantic about language, it's unclear who the teacher is. The subject they are teaching is American English.Their is used as singular by Chaucer and Shakespeare, it has been accepted since the inception of the language. Here in particular where we prize anonymity, their is appropriate; as gender is a distraction from and has no bearing on the discussion. See 'tits or gtfo'.
>>533518751OH shut the fuck up, I am fluent in only 1 language, and I am rather proficient in my native tongue of English.
>>533518614"Their" is for a specific group, likea group of people you can see and interact with. When you are talking about a group in an abstract sense, like a student body, you use "his or her" as a possessive.
No one exemplifies the Dunning–Kruger effect more than a woman with a Bachelor's in Education from a low tier state university.
>>533518906It's like saying "me and anon" instead of "anon and I." It's not correct but no one cares. This person is in an English class, so it does matter in this case.Reddit is circlejerking because of trannies, but you knew this already.
>>533518189his or her is just the politically correct language from the 1990s.when I was in school in the 1970s pre feminism, they taught that if you don't know the sex of the person, proper grammar is to use "his" so the sentence should read:"his school"
>>533520234>It's not correct but no one caresI do care.
>>533518189kek
>>533518387>itthe only acceptable pronoun for a troon
>>533518999you mean the rule newfags take to mean no girls allowed lol
He’s correcting the agreement.Although, it’s one of those technical mistakes that has become acceptable in informal use, similar to “it’s me” instead of “it is I”.
>>533518189>Can't spell pronoun without>No u
>>533518189someone should tell the teacher that every language in history has evolved and people are who define language, not some faggot sitting in a desk
>>533519333>"Their" is for a specific groupYeah, like "students," you fucking peabrain, kill yourself.
>>533520234Not caring is how you get ebonics. Start giving a shit about your own fucking language.
>>533518906>>533518999Uneducated zoomers detected I teach English Second Language classes in the American South. Even if something is used in everyday conversation, we still teach and correct grammar to the level of academically correct, otherwise students never learn proper English. >>533522067Except it says “student” you illiterate
>>533522506language has always evolved around how people use it nigger
>>533520348this is the only correct way. its called "generic he">>533518387correct. an unknown baby or even small kid is referred to as "it">>533521902faggots are who use plural (they) for a single personits almost as if faggots are possessed by demons and thus refer to themselves by plural. oops i let it slip
>>533518189Thats a tranny teacher marking out of spite and hoping not to get found out
>>533518189>use neutral term student>use neutral possessive their>zomg based teacher calling it out!
>>533518189Die Frankfurter Schule... anglophile turbomerchant "scholar" forced German grammar onto Muttspeak (the German formal address "Sie/Ihre", which is neutral) and Muttian grammar onto German (the worthless suffix ":innen", spiting the neutrum).
>>533522770Are you also aware that a large number of supposed "rules" governing the English language were completely made up by random Victorians based on absolutely nothing?
>>533523956a lot of it was based on what the queen etc spoke like. you've got to have some standard against which to compare everything.
>>533518311peaceful, loving youth against the brutality.
>>533518189these grammar rules aren't new and have nothing to do with being anti troon.most americans speak poor english. shocker.
>>533518189who writes their dates in roman numerals? the fuck craziness is this?
>>533523956Is this what bogniggers tell themselves to rationalize how god awful the Irish dialect sounds? Also "Bring out ye Blacks & Tans" wasn't supposed to be immigration policy you retarded mick bastard.
>>533518472Du besitzt kein Sprachverständnis, sondern imitierst nur stumpfsinnig Geräusche und Striche. Im Englischen ist es grammatikalisch richtig und stilitisch absolut in Ordnung das generische Maskulinum als Neutrum zu verwenden - im Deutschen ebenso.
>My American English teacher>adult esl claptrap>inb4 it's a grade school teacheryour shit is banned from posting here teen fag
>>533524010From my understanding it was a few random intellectuals obsessed with Latin grammatical structure who tried to impose these rules onto what is fundamentally a Germanic-derived language.>>533524159>how god awful the Irish dialect soundsThat's very rich coming from a yank
>>533518387You can actually call an infant or small child 'it' if you don't know the gender. That's acceptable until they're old enough for secondary sex characteristics to start kicking in at puberty, at which point it should be obvious what sex they are anyway and you can start using the appropriate pronouns purely from visual observation.You can also use the "generic male" pronoun, 'he'/'him', despite what leftists and feminists will tell you."Their" is only acceptable when referring to multiple people. As a plural, it is grammatically incorrect to use when referring to a single person, you would use "his or her", although the plural is used colloquially because it's much less cumbersome - one syllable instead of three.Your English teacher was based and good at his job.
>>533518189
>>533518614highly debatable new implant into language that's not even 30 years oldtotally ideological driven decision
>>533518999>Their is used as singular by Chaucer and Shakespeare, it has been accepted since the inception of the languageThe 'their' of Chaucer, Shakespeare et al is a conscious stylistic choice and, by context, relates to the pluralis majestatis.
>>533521902quintessential anglo approach to linguistics>ortography? dont worry about it>grammar? dont worry about itthis is how you end up with retarded norweigian with 4 different french loan word spellings
>>533518614>individual = singular
>>533524289English is a terrible mishmash of Germanic grammar mixed with a whole bunch of inconsistent Latin words crammed in there as if they belonged, along with colorful interpretations of old Anglo-Saxon, Norman French, and Scots-Irish words.As they say: "English isn't a language. It's three languages in a trench coat, mugging other languages in dark alleys and rifling their pockets for loose grammar."
>>533518189Their is fine. In this instance it is a plural.
>>533518472You mean: burgers don't understand his or her "own" language.
>>533524497Which is all the more reason why you shouldn't take anyone who tries to militantly enforce made up rules like "don't end le sentence with le preposition!" seriously
>>533524659kek
>Everybody using the neutral, plural pronoun "you" for centuries.>Shocked Pikachu face when other pronouns finally start to catch up to the change.Unless you want to go back to Thee/Thy/Thou/Thine, "Their" is correct and in accordance with modern English.
>>533524010>a lot of it was based on what the queen etc spoke like. During the high times of monarchy and aristocracy the lingua franca was, you've guessed it: French. Frogspeak was so prelevant at the courts throughout Europe, that royality and nobility struggled to speak their native tongues - they've had little if any influence on common parlence. In the case of Britain, especially after the Battenbergs intermingled and intermarried, German had become a dominant language in the inner circles, but yet until the turbofaggotry of the Frankfurtian School the languages retained their integrity.
>>533518189"They," "them," and "their" are plural.To use these words to politely reference a singular sexual deviant is to sodomize our language.When the genital configuration of a subject is unknown or irrelevant, "he," "him," and "his" are the correct default pronouns -- AND ALWAYS HAVE BEEN.When the actual sex of a subject is relevant but unknown - such as in a law or a contract - "he or she" is acceptable.In casual speech, use the "he/him/his" default. You are not discussing anyone's gonads, you're just talking about a person.
>>533524718That applies to every language, really - the purpose of language is to share information. If the other person understood what you meant, everything else is irrelevant.This gets way more complicated with regional dialects and accents, but generally that's the case. Who fucking care if your grammar isn't "perfect", because no language is perfect anyway, but I'll be fucked if I can understand a God-damned word of Jamaican "English", or a drunk Irishmen deep in his cups trying to speak the Queen's English.
>>533518189"His or her" is janky. When referring to mixed groups "their" is proper
>>533518189They're fighting brainrot with brainrot
>>533525158That's what the correction was about in the OP - it WASN'T referring to a plural, a group. He used their to refer to a singular person. That is grammatically incorrect, although people use it colloquially to refer to an individual because the correct phrase when gender is unknown - "his or her" - is clunky.
>>533518189*they're
>>533525381Well now you're just taking the piss, mate.
schools teachers used to be the students that failed or barely passed themselves. anyone over 30 who knows school teachers realises now how fucked and retarded these people really are
>>533525332If sex is unknown their is fine
>>533525604That's because the non-retarded ones quit before they lose their minds trying to "educate" the beasts running amok in our country. Only the retarded ones remain.
>>533518189It's not a "neutral pronoun" you stupid kike faggotAll kikes go to HellCorrupt your own language you filthy demons
>>533518189This is totally acceptable grammar and nothing to do with trannies at all. Your english teacher doesn't actually read books.
>>533525332No, it's grammatically correct to use "their" to refer to a person of unknown sex. Learn English.
The tranny shit really scrambled a lot of low IQ brains.I'll tell people referring to yourself as a "they" is dehumanizing because you're either one or the other. I see it as insulting, like calling them an "it."
>>533525090That's a lovely sentiment, honestly. It's the impetus behind Esperanto. But it's an unrealistic fantasy.The reality is, two major functions of language are (1) to convey what you are saying, and (2) to convey who is saying it.If (2) were not true, we'd all be of one tongue by now. Accents, provincialisms, dialects, and languages differ because of provincial attitudes about outsiders. This is extremely evident in places where one-world communists have bound foes together such as the Ukraine.
>>533525644Grammatically? No, it isn't, in the technical sense. In the practical sense, colloquially? Sure, but it's gonna make some people twitch the same way all these retards running around today saying "woman" when they mean the plural, "women".
>>533518189Teacher is right."They" and "their" is third person PLURAL
>>533523522you got it the wrong way. the writer used "they" for a single person, thats tranny-style. the teacher corrected it. as reddt is a high percentage of trannies and trannylovers, normal english usage gets flak>>533523865> ":innen"thats how to see if the pubisher is woke and gay (linksgrünveganverschwult)fixed on the internet by this https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/binnen-i-be-gone/for our non-germanspeaking frens here: it removes the leftist faggotcorruption of the german language and makes websites readable more easy by replacing wrong terms by correct ones, also makes texts shorter>>533524107>who writes their dates in roman numerals? the fuck craziness is this?its >who writes HIS dates in roman numerals?anon, i want you to write this sentence 3 times on paper to better memorize it. post a photo of your correction when you are done>>533524216DANKE für Deinen korrekten und absolut richtigen Einwurf! Du bist eine STIMME DER VERNUNFT!>>533524295>That's acceptable until they're old enough for secondary sex characteristics to start kicking in at puberty, at which point it should be obvious what sex they are anywayand now apply what you correctly said. >You can actually call an infant or small child 'it' if you don't know the genderthats absolutely correct!>until they're old enough for secondary sex characteristics to start kicking in at puberty, at which point it should be obvious what sex they are anywayshould actually be>until IT IS old enough for secondary sex characteristics to start kicking in at puberty, at which point it should be obvious what sex IT IS anywayas you refer to the children in this case as THE CHILD which is singular so the pronoun would be ITotherwise you could also write >You can actually call an infants [WITH S FOR PLURAL] or small childREN [PLURAL] 'it' if you don't know the gendereverything else you wrote is 100% correct!
>>533525730It is NOT grammatically correct. Their is always a plural, and inappropriate to use in the singular tense. "His or her" is the correct grammar, even if no one fucking uses that and just lazily uses "their" to refer to a singular third person.Why the fuck is an American having to teach an Englishman his own fucking language?
>>533525740By one or the other I meant male or female.I'm not going to change the entire English language etiquette for a few confused mutants that have like a 1 in a billion chance of being born.
>>533525862Thanks, Clippy! Now go jackboot off back to 1993 where you belong, ya grammar nazi, lol
>>533525090Hiberno-English is the superior dialect, sorry
>>533520818It's you, who is the newfag, if you can't actually understand the true meaning of that statement. It isn't a statement that women aren't allowed. It's an affirmation that women, being lesser, shouldn't have their opinions considered at all, before they acknowledge that lesser nature by exposing themselves.
>>533525902No, it's grammatically correct and always has been you dumb fucking cunt."Who is at the door? Go and see what they want."I bet you've never read a book in your life.
>>533518189the only English grammar you should care about is the English (UK) grammar,anything else is wrong.either you speak English the English (UK) way (the right way) or you don't.>inb7 what about the united-stadian English grammaranything in the usa English grammar that deviates from the English (UK) grammar is wrong.>inb8 what about Canadian EnglishThe English (UK) grammar is the only way.
>>533525902Hey chud. His or her has been cancelled. Your jewish country cancelled it remember. Pssst singular has been used since before the US existed. Stop trying to be clever when you're actually retarded.
>>533526288You must be 18 to use this site.
>>533526288If you don't understand the difference between grammatical correctness and colloquial usage, I can't help you, cousin-across-the-sea.
>>533526414I didn't invent proper English grammar, nor am I confused as to how it is used in practice vs. the technical sense. You guys did. I will not apologize for understanding technicalities that apparently escape you. For fuck's sake, there's a GERMAN in this thread that understands it. For shame, Nigel, for shame. Bit of a tosser, ain't ya?
>>533518189Trannies btfo lololololol
>>533520234>It's like saying "me and anon" instead of "anon and I." >It's not correct False. It depends on context. This belief has led to generations of people who don't understand English overcorrecting by using "anon and I" when they should have used "anon and me". >Correct: "Tyrone raped anon and me.">Incorrect: "Tyrone raped anon and I." >Correct: "Anon and I got raped.">Incorrect: "Anon and me got raped."
trannyism infests all corners of the gestalt like a rot
>>533525862>for our non-germanspeaking frens here: it removes the leftist faggotcorruption of the german languageTo elaborate on the :innen... it turns perfectly legible, concise words into abominations, appending worthless and redundant information.Any perfectly neutral descriptor or grouping is forcefully gendered, e.g.:>Studenten -> Student:innenIt removes a layer of abstraction, to the benefit of absolutely no one. Before 2012 anyone, even foreigners, could parse the neutrum. Today new (and old, terminally propagandized) generations struggle to parse language featuring ANY level of abstraction. I am certain that in a decade (at the latest) any german literature predating the advent of usurious, predatory and corporate turbofaggotry will be lost to the ages. Just like Fraktur and the most basic German of the 17th, 18th, 19th and 20th century - though, that German will be regarded as a completely different language by then.>but it's normal that language cha--Shut up and go buy rope. This is not gradual, natural change. This is orchestrated Sprachverfall.
>>533518189singular they is used for abstract persons, it must be he or she for a concrete person
>>533524396unfathomly based literate anon, able to read and understand the content>>533524659>You mean: burgers don't understand his or her "own" language."burgers" is plural, multiple people, so "their" would be correct herei know its a joke you made i still explain it for those who actually learn something new here>>533524825>Unless you want to go back to Thee/Thy/Thou/Thine, "Their" is correct and in accordance with modern English.however exculsively for multiple persons (plural)Thee is similar to German Die, Thy is similar to dei (dialect) / dein / deine, "thou" = du (eng. you) and "Thine" is basically DEINEstudying german dialects is partially like learning a new language on its own. give it a try if you are curious. once you made it however learning old english will be a breeze for you!>>533524977one more valuable post that contains info now so commonly known anymore nowadays
>>533518726wait, what? how? tell me
>>533524825>>Shocked Pikachu face when other pronouns finally start to catch up to the change.singular they was used for abstract persons by shakespeare, it is not correct to use singular they to refer to a concrete person who is a he or a she
>>533518189It should just be "his" because If you don't know the sex, male is dominant
>>533526755If you've never read a book in your life, you've probably got time to start now.
>>533525011i could not have written it any better myself! based usanon!>>533525644no, its notis sex is unknown its either "generic HE" or in case of a child its "IT""their" is exclusively for multiple people>>533525690> nothing to do with trannies at allof course, also with feminism, stupidity and even demonic possession. those who are possessed are known to refer to themselves by using "we". demonical possession is often performed by multiple weak spirits who together have enough strenght to overtake a human
>>533524364People have been using singular they in english for hundreds of years. The new thing is people referring to themselves as they
>>533527484No, the rule is very simple"Their" can refer to multiple people or to a single person of unknown sex
>>533527485not even close
>>533519333> Someone left a wallet at the movie theater> I will leave their wallet where I found it in case they come back to look for it. Would be fine, no?Could also > I will leave the wallet...
>>533524295I also dislike when dog/cat "parents" use he/she for their flea bag.
>>533526886>I didn't invent proper English grammarNor do you understand it. So stop pro tipping poltards. Stop acting high and mighty. Get off your high horse. >nor am I confused as to how it is usedYou clearly are; because you believe it is a case of being correct versus being colloquial. >I will not apologizeI didn't ask you to. I'm correcting you. >technicalities No technicality about it. It is stylistic if anything or where clarity is lacking or required for instance. This style has been in use since the US was founded; is acceptable within academia along with colloquial, and increasingly preferred within a formal context. US schools literally have furries in them using cat litter trays. Their' would be preferable, stylistically and inclusively. So all the pseudo intellectuals and edge lords can calm down please. Imagine Americans thinking they can speak English. Not on my watch bud
>>533527586>This use of singular they had emerged by the 14th century, about a century after the plural they.Complaining about singular they is like complaining about ending sentences with prepositions. Nobody cares.
Here's what the Chicago Manual of Style has to say about the matter. It seems to be allowed, but only as a last resort, and recommends that other approaches be attempted first.
>>533528072Anyone with a high iq cares. Only white trash retards proud to be uneducated dangle prepositions.Since learning german I have to say I yearn for the satisfying precision made possible by more complex grammar.
>>533518387I call all animals and babies "he" regardless of gender
>>533518189My kid had a reading assignment and I pointed out to the teacher that it had a grammatical error in that it was using their for a single person. She apologized and was more embarrassed that she got caught not actually reading the reference material before handing it out to the kids. If English teachers are one thing, it's autistic about proper grammar.
>>533529379You're an illiterate fucking idiot.
>>533528072why not post the whole thing lmao>This use of singular they had emerged by the 14th century, about a century after the plural they.[4][5][2] Singular they has been criticized since the mid-18th century by prescriptive commentators who consider it an error.[6] Its continued use in modern standard English has become more common and formally accepted with the move toward gender-neutral language.[7][8] Some early-21st-century style guides described it as colloquial and less appropriate in formal writing.
>>533528072>n-no one cares just let it happenstfu you godless satan-worshipping kike go corrupt human somewhere else
>>533528072
>>533526202he is either stupid or trolling. the male embraces the female>>533526288>"Who is at the door? Go and see what they want."this is rooted in the assumption there are multiple people at the door either or its a single person on behalf of a organization where now it is referred to what they (the organizsation) wants>I bet you've never read a book in your life.reading the kind of books that should be burned does not make you literate nor does not understanding what is meant by the written words>>533527212>the :innen... it turns perfectly legible, concise words into abominations, appending worthless and redundant informationprecise statement!>Studenten -> Student:innenit also implies a girl could not be a student, technically this should be considered very offensive by those who are so crazy about these things>orchestrated Sprachverfallin all relevant countriesmost people think in words, at least partially. changing the language would mean change the thoughts of many people. the exact goal!
>>533527224singular they is used for trannys and by idiots> abstract personsthats generic he (or it for children)>Shakespeare>The 'their' of Chaucer, Shakespeare et al is a conscious stylistic choice and, by context, relates to the pluralis majestatis.>>533527356also the male embraces the female>>533527543repeating it wont make it right, you know that>>533527638>I will leave HIS wallet where I found it in case HE comes back to look for it. it is a woman? who cares, i will never meet her anyway and if i do i know from then>>533528527>wall of texti will just use generic he and its good, worst case is writing - as in OPs image - he or she
>>533524295>You can also use the "generic male" pronoun, 'he'/'him', despite what leftists and feminists will tell you.i sucked up to a feminist teacher once by using "she/her" as the generic pronoun in high schooldespite being the hardest-left feminist in the school, she also knew and taught that "they" was incorrect
>>533524295This white boy knows his grammar
All y’all ITT are a bunch of queermosexual English majors arguing about how much gayer you are than the other
>>533529447>You're an illiterate fucking idiot.CC: Lambright
>>533519333>"Their" is for a specific group, likea group of people you can see and interact withNo, its not, except in that you just made up a new grammar rule. Under what style can i find this guideline? Do you have a masters in english or creative writing? Then you lack any merit to make judgements on their work or create new grammar rules. Waste of trips.
>>533518189Their is correct because it conveys the subject is "of them," consistent with the etymology from old norse word theirra. "his or her" is incorrect because it implies ownership when they are a member. Teacher changed the meaning of the writing which is a big no-no in grammar editing.
>>533529728What does including the bit about gender neutality change? It's been around for forever and retards ("prescriptive commentators" here, who are the same people saying you can't split infinitives or end a sentence with a preposition) kept trying to say it's wrong to do. With zero legitimate reason why. Just saying "but it's plural" means nothing while tons of other originally incorrect usages of words that have entered the language as correct since then exist.
>>533518906I just call everyone niggers.
>>533532562i know americans have no respect for the language they speak, which makes sense considering it's not even theirs but being old doesnt make it proper english
>>533533171The shit I'm talking about is from before the US was even founded. And you say it being old doesn't make it correct while arguing that certain things aren't correct because they don't fit older uses of the language. There is value in preserving language to an extent, bit what are you trying to preserve when trying to stop people from speaking in a way that's been common for hundreds of years? What makes it the language from before then correct other than that being how the language was at the time "correct" was decided, even though the language was different before then and continued to be different after them?
>>533525862>catanonthis level of autism is bad opsec
>>533533414i have no respect for this retarded castrated french abomination of a language but my point is that stylistically this word does not fit the written forms and it being remotely acceptable in formal language is literally a product of the past decade if i'm being generous and in actual formal english tests it would probably not slide
>>533533794wait a minute, I have that same doormat
>>533524659LMAO
>>533533877And my point is that the idea of a "correct" version of a language that nobody speaks makes no sense. And the "correct" version was established at a single point in time, making the language a couple hundred years prior and a couple hundred years later incorrect by that metric. It's likely worse for English but this same thing likely applies to all languages, because language is not and has never been unchanging.
>>533518472>their "own" languageit's our fucking language hans. the mutts just use it because it's kino and they're too stupid to invent their own.
>>533534370yes i know americans dont give a shit about "their" language i've already pointed that out nigga fr bix nood ong unc>And the "correct" version was established at a single point in timein poland and i assume every other euro country you have uni professors who continue to change the definition of proper languageit's just a different culture or lack thereof, makes sense for a glorified special economic zone "melting pot"
>>533518189Good. All this "they/them/their" shit for a single person is pretentious as fuck. Like speaking in the third person.
>>533534455Nigger, we are literally your son. Well, were, before the 1965
>>533534532communists were forcing this hard here but speaks like that anymorei guess we used to have a very complex soocial hierarchy and etiquette before ww2 so that was le badprobably still used in the military>>533534609*failed abortion
>>533534526>in poland and i assume every other euro country you have uni professors who continue to change the definition of proper languageSo you have people changing what correct language is, again to forms that nobody speaks. That's what the "prescriptive commentators" from before was referring to. And again, this may impact English more, since a large number of rules were taken wholesale from Latin despite not working in English, but I would expect there to be similar examples in other languages.
>>533534455Our dialects should be allowed to drift further apart until they become separate languages. Our nations grow weary of conversing.
>>533519333You have to go back
>>533534917don't worry about it. you'll be a majority spanish speaking country soon. then the spics will have to seethe about your fucked-up pronunciations. can't wait desu.
>>533534842it's called preserving culture like i've said>would expect there to be similar examples in other languages.monolingual anglo apes really cannot comprehend beauty of good languagesenglish has no rules, it's also really inexpressive and requires a lobotomy to use>I would expect there to be similar examples in other languages.in polish we have polish rules that we apply to loanwords so the language is not a diarrhea with 5 different french reading depending on what era certain loanwords were adopted there is a concept for written language in a ton of countries. but again, english has no rules and the best it can muster is "prescriptive commentators", nothing official
>>533518189Today, they/them are often used incorrectly, used unnecessarily, and can be completely abandoned by simply restructuring the sentence, as long as you have basic English skills of course.
>>533531365>consistent with the etymology from old norse word theirrawe still have dialects here that uses "theirra", pronounced "deira"
>>533535118Those professors you mentioned that tell people how they're able to speak are prescriptive commentators. People paid to preserve a language at a certain point in time even if nobody actually speaks like that anymore. Not even the older portions of the languages being correct like you previously mentioned, but at a certain point in time along with whatever changes they deem acceptable even if they don't make any sense and nobody uses them.
>>533535594you dumb fuckwhich part of >there is a concept for written languagedid you not understand? you can speak whatever the fuck you want. this is official language.>prescriptive commentatorsthey neither prescribe nor comment so i dont know where the fuck did you get that from
>>533518189OP and THEIR teacher are fucking retards.SpanishItalianFrenchall adhere to this constructAnd these are Latin-based languages that DO provide for gender.
>>533535780BLUE PERULUEPERU
>>533518387My pronouns are Gentile/Goy
>>533535738Telling you how you're allowed to write is prescription.>prescription noun>the action of laying down authoritative rules or directions
>>533535594>People paid to preserve a language at a certain point in time even if nobody actually speaks like that anymore.You keep asserting that nobody speaks like that when it's not true. At the very least, the prescriptivists do, and in reality, anyone who doesn't live in a trailer still follows these conventions.You claim nobody should prescribe rules for language yet only recognize the legitimacy of slobs who speak like niggers. Curious...
>>533518189The world has not yet fallen for this psyop fully. Must be an old teacher.
>>533536308i concede this but commentator implies no formal authority
>>533537316That faggot shut the fuck up real fast after he exhausted his one youtube video's worth of knowledge about linguistics.
>>533518189death to america
>>533518189Wanting to use "he or she" every single time instead of "them" is at best grammer retardation and at worst being stupid on purpose to own the libs. >>533524295Do you also use "thou" instead of "you" for singular second, or are you only pretending to be retarded?
As an anglo boomer I always used "they/their" for unknown gender. I was never taught the "unknown he", seems like a German language thing which would make sense as USA has so many germanics compared to my home country.Doesn't it seems retarded to say "he" when you dont know if it's a man or a woman? It's only going to confuse people later when it turns out to be a woman but you've been saying "he" this whole time.This was well before any tranny stuff, back in the 80s and 90s. It was just normal. It has nothing to do with trannies despite how much people are obsessed with making everything about trannies lately.The only negative is that "they" could be perceived as being a plural, so you need to make sure the context is clear that you're talking about a single person.I might say "his or her" to really make it clear it's just one person, but only in certain situations where clarity is essential."It" also sounds dehumanising for a baby so I don't like the sound of that, and was never taught to say "it" for a baby.TLDR: germanic burgers obsessed with trannies are purity spiralling
>>533524295>"Their" is only acceptable when referring to multiple people. As a plural, it is grammatically incorrect to use when referring to a single person, you would use "his or her", although the plural is used colloquially because it's much less cumbersome - one syllable instead of three.Wrong:https://style.mla.org/using-singular-they/
>>533518189it is. you should be burned for faggotry if you use a plural word to refer to one person
>>533521902kek I hate this nigger argument so much
>>533520348>>533519333>>533524295https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/grammar/singular-they
Chicago style also says singular they is ok:https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/qanda/data/faq/topics/Pronouns/faq0031.html
>>533518189This is why school teachers should be beaten and sent off to do menial labor.
>>533518614buck broken by the trudeau years
>>533518189using they to refer to a singular person of unknown qualities is hundreds of years old. would this teacher lose their mind over using "one" instead?using they to refer to a specific person as a neopronoun is retarded, but there's no reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater
>>533538864You should be shot for being retarded and confidently wrong
>>533518614>"their" is correctits not correct strictly speaking. its a perfectly fine choice, as is "his or her".there are a number of valid options, "their" is just the fastest and easiest to say. teacher is still a braindead retard for marking it incorrect though
>>533520234Follow me and anon to the storeFollow I and anon to the storeYou have the IQ of a gay ant
>>533524396Chaucer was a guaranteed troon
>>533539102It's correct according to Cambridge University. How can it be a perfectly fine choice but not correct? You sound like a retard.
should be he/she and it for trans
>>533539034Go molest a child, troon
>>533518189it would be funny to use they/them for someone who has multiple personality disorder
>>533539253Why is there an English teacher in Japan that doesn't understand the difference between "acceptable" and "correct?"
>>533539253one construction being correct implies all the other ones are incorrectsomething being correct and being not incorrect are 2 different things
>>533538023LMAO what I've been talking about is middle school English knowledge. I do have a degree in linguistics though but it doesn't really apply much to arguments about description vs prescription other than making it easy to see how much language changes over time and how futile it is to try and preserve the state of a language at any one point in time.
>>533539307no for a trans it should be the birth gender said with emphasis
>>533518189Neutral?It's plural possessiveYou're a fag. There's never a reason to they/them/their.
>>533539253Cambridge is an irrelevant institution which hasn't the authority to offer any prescription on grammar. The same goes for any decaying institution captured by political foids and fart knockers.
>>533539363Not an English teacher and you're being pedantic for no reason>>533539373Multiple things can be correct
>>533518189The american education system is irreversibly fucked. We have hyper-politicized retards who don't know english teaching english classes all over the country.
>>533539375
>>533538974>>533538915oh look at that, that didn't exist before woke bullshit started in 2019
>>533539489There is nothing "pedantic" about the difference between "explicitly correct" and "not explicitly wrong" in a discussion of grammar.Good thing you aren't an English teacher.
>>533539489>Multiple things can be correctits better for the student to have it phrased as "singular they is acceptable" vs "singular they is correct"one is clear that there are other options the student could use, the other is more ambiguous if the student is kinda dumb
>>533518614it's correct now. all the major academic writing standards changed this in their guidebooks in the last 5-7 years only. it was wrong for decades prior to this.
>>533538974>>533539646Singular they is a niggerism.>ChicagoPfft.
>>533539696It is still incorrectAll you are offering is an appeal to authorityEven worse, it's gay authority
>>533524659
>>533539472>There's never a reason to they/them/their.the reason is to use 1 word instead of 3. It's more efficient.
>>533518189Based teacher indeed."Their" isn't polite. It's an aggressive denial of gender identity and reduction of a man to nothing but a number.
>>533539696>it's correct nowits been used for hundreds of years. some ivory tower faggot saying its no longer acceptable just to have a rule that outs the "undesirables" not keeping up with the upper class language games is not valid
>>533518189Middle paragraph doesn't even refer to an individual, so "their" is the correct option.
>>533539661>>533539683Oh it's adderall hour on 4tranGrow up and touch grass
>>533533605you must mistake me for someone else>>533534455actual americans as in USA are usually either ethnical germans or englishmen (and some irishmen and italians). we do not talk about niggers, beaners, chinks, american indians, poojeets, jews and so on here>>533536854can be a based one aswell. young people are based in relevant amounts but they are usually not as loud and obnoxious as the leftists and thus are less likely to be actively noticed>>533538799read the reddit-faggot-saltminereddit.com/r/NonBinary/comments/15ldwbj/thoughts_on_the_generic_he/entertaining to readalso you can read on leftist wikipedia about it how bad and evil it as as it oppresses women and so on en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_neutrality_in_languages_with_gendered_third-person_pronouns#Generic_hefunny read, with some actual info>a German language thinwe have it aswell, called "Generisches Maskulinum", but so do the Englishmenits basically the same as when leftists try to abolish terms like mankind (oh no there is MAN inside, how horrible) or how everyman is less commonly used nowadays and replaced by everyone - however relatively successful as its more subltle and NOT grammatically false>Doesn't it seems retarded to say "he" when you dont know if it's a man or a woman?no. all meaningful interactions with people you dont know are men usually anway. if it turns out to be a woman, so be it, them you know anyway>It's only going to confuse people later when it turns out to be a woman but you've been saying "he" this whole time.he, who actually understands language can be glad in times like today. and he can be either male or female, the important thing is being based.again, the male embraces the female. a doctor can be male or female, duh, we dont say doctoress, do we?
>>533539873Why the fuck is there a pill popper in Japan? Go the fuck back to Israel.
>>533539696>https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/grammar/singular-theyAnd still is. Anyone who does it sounds absolutely idiotic. There are multiple ways not to they/them/their like a fucking idiot.
>>533539346Seethe more, retard
>>533519333>his or herWhat if they're agender, you bigot?
>>533535113Likewise to you my Arabic friend
>>533539971His, her, or was.
>>533539936Go cry to your boyfriend, Tina
>>533539696>>533539930>some jews who run a magazine said something retarded therefor the rules of grammar have changedliterally kill yourselfthey is plural, it will always be plural. no amount of kvetching or pilpul will change that. total tranny death.
>>533539971>What if they're agender, you bigot?Holy Reddit batman
>>533539815You're OK with sounding like a retard then, huh?English is flexible and the lazy misuse of plurals isn't even needed to appease genderfags
>>533524659this leaf gets it
>>533540139in the ass.
>>533539925Unknown gender "They" has always been prevalent in spoken language in USA and England and Australia. Nobody cares if your formal writing guides say it is wrong. We aren't writing 1950s newspapers.Stop thinking about trannies for 5 seconds. This has nothing to do with trannies.
>>533540168>This has nothing to do with trannies.You are under tranny suspicion, my rice eating friend
>>533540168Do what now? Why are you bringing up adderal as a consumer of pharmaceuticals? If it's just going to make you angry, don't mention it.
"their/them"fucking cringe, never heard this shit for singular before 2016 except maybe for "their majesty"its a great filter though, whenever I hear a youtuber or streamer say "they" while speaking about a single person, I just put that brainrotten faggot to ignore list
>>533540107No I just said there's a reason. It's more convenient to say their instead of he or she. Because it's more convenient I expect it to become official at some point because language evolves. Personally I don't care. Either way I don't take lessons from people who say could of and would of.
>>533539646>standards change>website's layout changeand?
>>533539375Stop lying. You write like an esl.You're too stupid to even understand how you're not even against prescriptivism. Everybody is prescribed language; your only contention is that a mob of uneducated niggers get to prescribe rules informally instead of anyone intelligent, or anyone who might actually be conversant in the ways our western predecessors communicated.If we can drift our language far enough away such that Dickens, Shakespeare, Chaucer, or any other white male is incomprehensible to the youth without special education, then filthy kikes can editorialize history with complete abandon, as they do, with greater ease. and to greater effect. This is of course the point, viz. to hijack a natural process to their own kiked ends. Jews get to ressurect "their" dead language from a two thousand year old grave but the goyim have to learn creole. Learn the rules!
>>533539873>im a dumb weaboo that was obviously wrong now im spasmodically spergingI used do this too from time to time but it’s time to grow up
>>533540102>Calls others reddit>Uses the phrase holy Reddit batmanProject much?
>>533540344find me anything about a """"singular they"""" being "correct" before the george floyd era, redditranny.
>>533540168Damned nip, you're a fucking retard.It was "He" that was always gender unknown until like 2000."They/their" has been used for a while which is OK, I guess for normal conversations, but isn't proper.
>>533540423When you're referring to someone whose gender you don't know. I wouldn't expect an ESL to understand.
>>533540423It still isn't and it's the laziest way to be an obnoxious fucking tranny ass.>>533540409To be fair it was a reddit tier comment. I took it as sarcasm though.
>>533540512Example?
>>533518189what an absolutely politically relevant thread to blow up like this, wow, I fucking love it when people go to reddit and then bring it over here this is just superb
>>533540570It was sarcasm.>>533540590>Who shot this man?>I don't know. I didn't see them.
>>533540771>he doesn't knowThe 'them' is superfluous. Please proceed with your next attempt.
>>533540861>That doesn't count because... reasons!It does count, moron.
>>533540771>>Who shot this man?>>I don't know. I didn't see them.Lazy.Who shot this man?I don't know. I didn't see anyone.Was it worth being retarded?
>>533527356unless the it's in a context that where it would or should be in the domain of a woman
>>533540771>Who shot this man?>I don't know. I didn't see him.
>>533518189Technically, "He/His/Him" is the proper gender neutral human pronoun in English. "It" describes non-humans. "His or her" became the politically correct term in the 70's and 80's. "His or her" sounds fucking retarded, so now "Their" is the new thing.
>>533540940>You can only use words that fit my speaking styleThem is perfectly acceptable and understandable. In fact, it sounds a hell of a lot better than I didn't see anyone. Maybe you did see someone, just not the shooter. Them shows you're talking about a single person, the shooter.
>>533540295>except maybe for "their majesty"That's an ancient usage that's referred to as the "royal we" in which royalty refers to themselves by a plural, e.g. a king saying "we proclaim"
>>533541018>Women can't shoot peopleThat's news to me.
>>533539971>agendergo back to re*dit, stupid faggotmaking up genders does not make them existyou are either a stupid faggot or a stupid woman that needs to get fucked for good to become sane again>>533540069based! >>533540295correctits an instant indicator for faggotry and female stupidity>>533540512thats HE then, no women on the internet unless proven otherwisenewfags dont know the rules here>genderlol, are you XEM or XIR, faggot?just takes a little looking up these thingsthe only ones complaining about generic he are faggots, roasties and idiots. noone whose opinion is valid
>>533541054You can't see the unspoken continuation of the sentence, can you?>I didn't see anyone that could have killed him.How many layers of colloquialism must we delve before you notice?
>>533541195If you're speaking to a cop and say you didn't see anyone then it comes out that you did see someone, just not necessarily the shooter, you've just committed perjury. How many leaps in logic do you need to make in order for yourself to be correct?>Who shot this man?>I don't know, I didn't see them, but here's their footprints.>After them!
>>533541411>mentions perjury>goes straight back to excessively informal languageYou should probably stop interacting with niggers. Speech errors are not perjury.
>>533541577Using they to refer to someone whose gender is unknown to you is perfectly acceptable. I don't have to speak the queen's english to give my report to the cops. But saying you didn't see anyone when others were present is just a straight up lie that you admit leaves half the sentence unsaid. No one would bat an eye at me saying them or their. You require reading between the lines. You're gay.
>>533541105I wish more of you sassy whores would shoot yourself.>>533541730>You're gay.Are you serious? This nigga is really calling somebody else gay while acting like a woman.
>>533541730How does one explain to an imbecile that the error has already been identified? Continuing to repeat yourself is not an avenue of improvement when the starting point is erroneous.Get it right, then repeat yourself until it sticks.Oh, and reminder. Grammar thread. Reading between the lines is reading accurately.
>>533541884He's the one trying to correct others' speech. How is it womanly to point out he's fucking stupid?>Their footprints go around this corner>They must've went that way >Quick, before they lose usHow is any of this confusing to you retards?
>>533541976No it's not. You admit the listener has to deduce the rest of your phrase. Instead of saying I didn't see them, you say the correct term is "I didn't see anyone that could have killed him". Are you a fucking ai bot that is trying to learn human vernacular or something? Pretty sure you're the one who sounds like a fool if that's what you'd say.
