Re: Gender-specific language [was: Re: GNOME Documentation Style Guide]

[Telsa Gwynne <hobbit aloss ukuu org uk>]

On Mon, Jul 09, 2001 at 10:14:29AM -0500 or thereabouts, Dan Mueth wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, Telsa Gwynne wrote:
> 
> > Oh, and I tried very hard to stay out of the other thread about
> > gender-neutral language. But for the record, since we appear to
> > be playing majority votes here (which strikes me as pointless),
> > I do resent and object to "he" including "she". I like the style
> > guide though. :)
> 
> :)
> 
> I like what the style guide currently says, although I think it left out
> one case...

...and I like it, and I said so. It's just that since the subject
came up and everyone seemed to be going one way, I quite naturally
had to be awkward. Um. Well, no. But I did feel a little that people
were pushing for alterations to what seems to be a perfectly good
document. I think trying to define -everything- is going to be
futile. I have enough to do rewriting stuff to "fewer than 25 words
per sentence" :) 

> This seems very reasonable.  It covers most situations and we would
> not need to use "he" or "she" in a situation where the gender is not
> specified.  The one piece which seems to be unspecified is what we do if
> we have a sentence where we can't switch to the plural:
> 
>        Tell your boss to install Linux on XXXXX computer.
> 
> To remain gender-neutral, should we use "their" in this situation?  While
> this has the singular/plural agreement problem, it seems to be the
> preferred way to avoid gendered language these days (aside from
> restructuring the sentence).

I'm always quibbling about grammar, effect/affect, weird/wierd (ugh!)
and so on. But I would use "their" in this case. And I don't care what 
my English teacher would think of me. She would have had me put all 
punctuation inside quote marks, too. Try to document commands or the
meaning of "." and ".." whilst using that rule :) 

Telsa