We at Doctrine Wing (I know, it sounds terrible) have just been told that the singular they/their is the official way to go, seeing gender-neutral language has slowly won the battle (no pun intended) against the army's previous blanket male language (all soldiers/personnel/civilians as men, he, his, him). I wasn't so sure, but have come around a little after correcting 50 gazillion sentences like this so far this week:
To signal the driver, the operator should lift his arms above his head and wave until he is sure he has been spotted.
TO:
To signal the driver, the operator should lift their arms above their head and wave until they are sure they have been spotted.
(Note: this is a lame example I've just made up. It's not army doctrine. I'd be in big trouble if it was, apparently... so disclaimer disclaimer disclaimer.)
I dunno. Still, it beats having him/her or s/he all over the place.
Demosthenes, are you perchance an admirer of Bernard Shaw? The whole notion of "rationalising" the English language... it is to laugh, as Jam would say. Once you start, where would you stop?
Also, as a speaker of Proper English living in England, I can tell you that "than" is not pronounced "then". Except by the lazy. It also doesn't have a redneck twang, being too short - but, for making me giggle with the line "something I loathe above all else, save perhaps Nicholas Cage", I award you five Scroobious points. Collect them, trade them, display them proudly!
Prowl, I'm delighted that the Australian army's gone gender-neutral (and, tragically, that puts it above my own fat-cat serving employers), and even more delighted that your department rejoices in the name "Doctrine Wing". Very Orwellian. (Except then it would be more like "Truth Wing", but never mind.)
Not so sure about the singular they, though. I actually tend to be in favour of it - cos that's how people speak, like - but your example is just so darn peculiar. Still, better than all that him/her crap, and obviously one can't always pluralise to avoid the issue, so fair enough.
I do wonder if we'll still be struggling with all this 50 years on.
Scroob, I made the 'Orwellian' comment myself when I started there... and got a lot of dark looks. Ooops. Note to self: don't make the big soldiery people mad.
X, I see your point, but... again, don't make the soldiery people mad. I don't like being called 'it', so I'm sure they wouldn't.
I have to look at it this way, or else I'll be instituting the two-minute hate sessions myself: as long as the soldiers can work out what they're supposed to do, the doctrine's doing its job. Even if I don't like the aesthetics of it (yep, I'm calling grammar and spelling 'aesthetics').
Finally got my work contract in the mail today, complete with spelling mistakes. Hmmm.
5 comments:
I love it.
We at Doctrine Wing (I know, it sounds terrible) have just been told that the singular they/their is the official way to go, seeing gender-neutral language has slowly won the battle (no pun intended) against the army's previous blanket male language (all soldiers/personnel/civilians as men, he, his, him). I wasn't so sure, but have come around a little after correcting 50 gazillion sentences like this so far this week:
To signal the driver, the operator should lift his arms above his head and wave until he is sure he has been spotted.
TO:
To signal the driver, the operator should lift their arms above their head and wave until they are sure they have been spotted.
(Note: this is a lame example I've just made up. It's not army doctrine. I'd be in big trouble if it was, apparently... so disclaimer disclaimer disclaimer.)
I dunno. Still, it beats having him/her or s/he all over the place.
Demosthenes, are you perchance an admirer of Bernard Shaw? The whole notion of "rationalising" the English language... it is to laugh, as Jam would say. Once you start, where would you stop?
Also, as a speaker of Proper English living in England, I can tell you that "than" is not pronounced "then". Except by the lazy. It also doesn't have a redneck twang, being too short - but, for making me giggle with the line "something I loathe above all else, save perhaps Nicholas Cage", I award you five Scroobious points. Collect them, trade them, display them proudly!
Prowl, I'm delighted that the Australian army's gone gender-neutral (and, tragically, that puts it above my own fat-cat serving employers), and even more delighted that your department rejoices in the name "Doctrine Wing". Very Orwellian. (Except then it would be more like "Truth Wing", but never mind.)
Not so sure about the singular they, though. I actually tend to be in favour of it - cos that's how people speak, like - but your example is just so darn peculiar. Still, better than all that him/her crap, and obviously one can't always pluralise to avoid the issue, so fair enough.
I do wonder if we'll still be struggling with all this 50 years on.
How about:
To signal the driver, the operator should lift its arms above its head and wave until it is sure it has been spotted.
BAM! Revised.
---X
Well, Iza born up nort cuntry annit weren't no problem a speak like me den!
Scroob, I made the 'Orwellian' comment myself when I started there... and got a lot of dark looks. Ooops. Note to self: don't make the big soldiery people mad.
X, I see your point, but... again, don't make the soldiery people mad. I don't like being called 'it', so I'm sure they wouldn't.
I have to look at it this way, or else I'll be instituting the two-minute hate sessions myself: as long as the soldiers can work out what they're supposed to do, the doctrine's doing its job. Even if I don't like the aesthetics of it (yep, I'm calling grammar and spelling 'aesthetics').
Finally got my work contract in the mail today, complete with spelling mistakes. Hmmm.
Post a Comment