Language is a shared system, so individual preferences can’t override clarity when they create ambiguity for others. Using plural they/them with plural verbs for a specific person produces confusion in ordinary sentences (e.g., whether 'they' means one person or a pair). A better norm should minimize burden on other speakers while respecting identity 'within reason.'
— Reframing pronoun policy as governance of a commons shifts debates from identity claims to coordination costs that institutions must manage.
Rong Xiaoqing
2025.09.19
60% relevant
The article implicitly treats language as a public coordination system: official meetings should default to a shared tongue (English) with interpretation, because switching the primary language imposes costs and confusion on other participants, including immigrants from different backgrounds.
Valerie Stivers
2025.08.28
78% relevant
By documenting the New York Times’ hedging ('the person') and late switch to 'her,' and the BBC’s pronoun avoidance in the Minneapolis school shooting, the piece shows how individual‑preference pronouns and editorial workarounds create ambiguity for readers in a shared language system.
Alan Jacobs
2025.07.22
100% relevant
The author’s example: “Kim lives in Waco with their partner Pat. They are Texan to the bone,” which is ambiguous about whether 'they' refers to Kim alone or Kim and Pat.
Dr. Nathanial Bork
2025.06.02
55% relevant
The author argues pronoun norms feel legitimate in voluntary contexts (a regional Burn) but breed resentment when mandated by HR, echoing the view that language rules are coordination problems whose costs should be minimized for others rather than imposed by fiat.