The use of ‘they’ as a singular pronoun is apparently controversial. If you’re a netizen or someone who’s constantly online, this may come as a surprise. You might be used to seeing this pronoun on someone’s social media bio: Rando (she/they). Perhaps you understood how it’s used when you scrolled past some vague post on your feed: if they bring their mom to the first date, run. It’s normal.  It’s chill.

If you’re not surprised, then it might just be me. As someone who grew up in a bilingual household, they just seemed like the English translation of siya and niya. These two are the only singular personal pronouns in Tagalog, and both are gender neutral. Usage is dependent on subject-verb agreement instead of, well, gender.

But as someone who also grew up on the internet, I’m sure some of you would at least wonder why it’s a debated topic. After all, it exists like any other word, and it works. I can’t even pinpoint the first time I read the word ‘they’ used as a singular personal pronoun. I just know it made sense to finally have that term in English as well. New pronoun unlocked!

And while internet culture is not the best marker for inclusivity or progress, it has something that proponents of formal language, like stylebooks, struggle with. Acceptance of change.

The singular ‘they’ was named Word of the Year by the American Dialect Society in 2015, and again by The Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary in 2019. According to Merriam-Webster’s, lookups for the word they increased by 313% in 2019 compared to the previous year. For a word which the dictionary described as an “old pronoun”, this increase is a clear sign that people have started using they differently. In this case, they is used to refer to a person who identifies as non-binary, or someone who is neither a man nor a woman.

It makes perfect sense considering that language is constantly changing. It evolves just as humans do, for whatever human use. That’s why languages used by early humans are completely different from the languages we use know. But some people are sensitive to these discussions, and openly resist change. In Linguistics, this is called ‘Linguistic Purism’.

In the 18th edition of The Canadian Press Stylebook, we see this sentiment in the way James McCarten, the book’s editor, addresses the new use of singular they. In the Editor’s note on Popular Usage, he says “The Canadian Press won’t be the first to accept the misuse of a word, and occasionally we’re a bit stubborn about changes that seem to debase the language — especially something as wildly unconventional as using a plural pronoun like ‘they’ to refer to a person who identifies as neither a man nor a woman. Such changes, while important for fostering inclusiveness, must be deployed carefully, and used sparingly, for the sake of clarity.”

This passage is a good example of how “style” can be prioritised over a language’s “purpose”. If the purpose of a language is effective human communication, then why limit its use?

They is not even the first old pronoun to go through this change. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, you was also a plural pronoun that has become singular. Yet there are currently no guidelines or words of unease about the use of ‘you’ as a singular gender-neutral pronoun, which goes to show how the English language will evolve, no matter how we feel about it. Just as it always has.

More than the futile gatekeeping of language, The Canadian Press shows us how institutions can undermine the people it promised to serve. The same section of the book where the passage was taken from opens with “News reporting is meant to inform the public, not to score points with language purists”.

For a person who just wants to express their identity in English, this reassurance is ruthlessly dashed with the rest of the statement. It’s proof that we cannot be reliant on the people in positions of power to accurately portray our diverse experiences in the media. In an age where acceptance or even tolerance doesn’t automatically come with influence, we must closely examine if the content we consume comes from a realistic and informed point of view rather than a narrow and self-serving one.

And if you ever find yourself falling for sentiments in favour of linguistic purism, try to ask yourself:

Does our language express our humanity, or is our humanity restricted by language?

References:

1. Definition of GENDER IDENTITY. (2018). Merriam-Webster.com. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gender%20identity
2. 2015 Word of the Year is singular “they.” (2016, January 9). American Dialect Society; ADS. https://americandialect.org/2015-word-of-the-year-is-singular-they
3. “They” Is Merriam-Webster’s Word of the Year 2019. (n.d.). Www.merriam-Webster.com. https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/woty2019-top-looked-up-words-they
4. Pagel, M. (2017). Q&A: What is human language, when did it evolve and why should we care? BMC Biology, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12915-017-0405-3
5. Lab, P. W. (n.d.). Gendered Pronouns & Singular “They” // Purdue Writing Lab. Retrieved from Purdue Writing Lab website: https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/grammar/pronouns/gendered_pronouns_and_singular_they.html
6. University of Minesotta (2016, September 29). 3.2 Functions of Language. Retrieved from open.lib.umn.edu website: https://open.lib.umn.edu/communication/chapter/3-2-functions-of-language/
7. Baron, D. (2018, September 4). Oxford English Dictionary. Retrieved from Oxford English Dictionary website: https://public.oed.com/blog/a-brief-history-of-singular-they/
8. Nordquist, R. (2019). What Is Purism in Language? Retrieved from ThoughtCo website: https://www.thoughtco.com/purism-language-1691704
9. Davies, W. V., & Nils Langer. (2011). Linguistic Purism in the Germanic Languages. De Gruyter.