Epicene Pronouns

 

[Note: Although at first blush this “sermon” may appear to have little to do with the religious notions espoused within FACTS, it does, in fact, have a profound relationship. First of all, one of the qualities that we believe is important is to constantly question the world around us. This is especially true with regard to the cultural norms that we simply accept. Are they reasonable? Were they carefully thought out, or did they simply arise by fiat or common agreement? Could they be improved? Additionally, we believe that irrelevant differences ought to be recognized as such, and that where those differences are given effect, steps should be taken to end any discrimination that may follow. That is what is sought here.]

 

 

Language can have significant effects on the way people think about things. For instance, most of use think of ice as ice, and give it little thought. The Eskimos, however, have a number of words (?seven) for that substance. Although the vocabulary undoubtedly arose because of the importance of the differentiation in their lives, the vocabulary itself – having been put in place – also fosters the differentiation.

 

Not only can language help differentiate, it sometimes mandates differentiation … even when that is not desired. We have that problem in English, where there are no epicene pronouns. (“Epicene” means “having but one form to indicate either sex.”) We can’t facilely speak of a person without recognizing and/or disclosing that person’s gender. We can work around the lack of epicene pronouns by continually utilizing awkward constructions (such as the “that person’s” phraseology just employed), but one has to ask if it wouldn’t be a lot easier to simply fix the problem and be done with it.

 

And it is a problem. Anyone who writes in terms of hypotheticals deals with this often.

 

Suppose there were a pharmacologist who discovered one day that his/her apple sauce had turned to paste when (s)he left it out on the counter when a package came for him(her) during their birthday party.

 

Of course, one can stick with the masculine out of convention, but that  is rather sexist. Or, “she” can be used, instead. However, that always sounds as if the speaker is trying to make a political statement, and frequently detracts from the message of the speech. “They” is occasionally used, but that sounds awkward and is grammatically incorrect.

 

The difficulty arises in general conversations, too:

 

Jan: I saw my cousin yesterday.

Pat: Oh? What did [they / he or she / your cousin] say?

 

 It’s also a problem with androgynous individuals:

 

Chris: Hey – did you see where our waiter went?

Lee: [He/she / It / Our waiter] was here a minute ago.

 

And then there’s the problem with transsexuals, transgenders, transvestites, etc. Who knows what pronoun to use there?

 

Sometimes you know the gender, but you don’t wish to disclose it. For instance, during a discussion on abortion, you might want to refer to someone’s opinion, but you think that specifying his/her gender might prejudice the effect of the statement:

 

Professor Wilson has written on this very matter, and Professor Wilson says that – in Professor Wilson’s opinion – the optimal approach can be found by reading Professor Wilson’s speech, which Professor Wilson gave at Professor Wilson’s award dinner held during Professor Wilson’s last year here.

 

So – in keeping with FACTS’ penchant for pragmatism – a solution has been introduced. Three simple epicene pronouns have been introduced into the English language. “Ree” is the subjective case, “rees” the possessive, and “erm” the objective. As a result, the foregoing “difficulties” disappear:

 

Suppose there were a pharmacologist who discovered one day that rees apple sauce had turned to paste when ree left it out on the counter when a package came for erm during rees birthday party.

 

Jan: I saw my cousin yesterday.

Pat: Oh? What did ree say?

 

Chris: Hey – did you see where our waiter went?

Lee: Ree was here a minute ago.

 

Professor Wilson has written on this very matter, and ree says that – in rees opinion – the optimal approach can be found by reading rees speech, which ree gave at rees award dinner held during rees last year here.

 

Isn’t that better? It solves all of the problems that stem from this deficiency, and takes about three minutes to master. So spread the word … if each person finds one new person per week to introduce to this minimal change in vocabulary, the entire nation will embrace it within half a year. (In fact, I tried it on my grandparent yesterday, and ree’s already taught it to all of rees friends. One of the friends was so excited, ree wrote a poem for erm:

 

          Perhaps I may not ever be

          Quite as happy as is ree

          But I’ll tell you (if you please)

          That I’m glad my life’s not rees

          No, it’s mine, fine and firm

(Rees life … I’ll just leave to erm.)