Grammar Notes and Apologies

I don't have a lot of time to write and have even less time to proof-read.  When I do proof-read, I see grammatical mistakes that would make my old teachers like Mrs. Dowden faint.  Sorry for that.

I don't mean the stuff like starting sentences with "And" or "But" or the excessive use of "...".  That is done on purpose.  It's the way I talk.  It's the way I write.  If it annoys you then I'm afraid you're going to have to deal with it.

What I am talking about is the bad spelling and missing words and bad punctuation and the mismatches in verb tense and noun number.  So it goes.  At least I'm not turning in anything for a grade.

But here is one thing you need to know.....

I've recently been watching the TV Series Mad Men.  I got the first three seasons on DVD for 22 yuan, which is something like $3.75.  I suspect there may be some intellectual property issues with my DVDs. They certainly look legitimate.  And it's not like they were bought from some shady dude on the street.  They came from a fine, very legitimate-looking store in a mall.   So, in my defense, I don't think it's possible to buy anything more legitimate here.

So anyway, this series Mad Men is about these Madison Avenue advertising types back in 1960.  The show is a hoot.  These guys have three martini lunches and suck down scotch and bourbon while at the office.  They smoke all the time and everywhere.  Racism and sexism abound.  Men run the show and women are only around to do the secretarial work and to give the men something to chase after.   I doubt that any 2011 HR manager or corporate lawyer can watch without getting nightmares.

Though sensationalized, there is a little bit of truth in this portrayal of 1960's life.  This was before the civil rights movement and the women's movement and a bunch of other movements.   Society decided that fraternity party horseplay is only fun if you're part of the fraternity.  Things have changed through all the years and all the lawsuits.  Things have gotten better.

But not all things.  Grammar got messed up.

Nouns and pronouns have gender.  Some are masculine like "man", "men", and "he".  Others feminine like "woman", "women", and "she".  English has a few gender neutral nouns like "child" or "person"....but not enough to cover all the bases. It works pretty well if your talking about masculine or feminine things independently.  But once you get to a situation where you're talking about a combination of the two, then it gets screwed up.

And I blame the women's movement in the 1960's and 1970's for screwing it up.

More than one "woman" is called "women".  More than one "man" is called "men".  But what if you have a group of both men and women?  It used to be acceptable to call such a grouping "men".  The word "men" was understood to be a collective noun implying either all males or a mixture of males and females.  You know....like "all men are created equal"? 

Further complications come from the fact that English requires gender and number to match between subject and object and all things in between.  "The boy ate his lunch."  "The girl ate her lunch."  But take the following sentence...what word would you use to fill-in-the-blank?

"Each child will eat ____ lunch."

What word did you choose?  Mrs. Dowden said you can't use the word "its" because a human being cannot be an "IT".  She said you can't use the word "their" because, being a plural possessive, it doesn't match the singular "each child".  Did you pick "his or her" (or the more academic looking "his/her") to cover both possibilities?  Don't make me puke.

It used to be that you could say "Each child will eat his lunch" and no one would be insulted.  "Men" could be a group of males and females.  "His" could mean something belonging to a specific boy or a non-specific boy or girl.  "Mailmen" used to mean the people who delivered the mail, regardless as to whether they pee standing up or sitting down.  That's the way it works in French, though otherwise that language is the biggest butt-pain for gender agreement that exists.  Les Hommes sont toutes les hommes et les femmes.

I blame the feminists.  It may have been an unintended consequence of an otherwise noble cause, but they screwed up my language.   These days you have to say "all men and women are created equal" because otherwise you might offend by using just the word "men".   Now you have to say "Each boy or girl will eat his or her lunch" because it might be offensive if you don't cover every possible statistical combination.

Now that I think about it, maybe I should blame the guys like those in Mad Men.  If they hadn't been such unrepentant frat boys then maybe feminism wouldn't have messed with my language. 

It's taken a few hundred words to get to the point...but here, finally, is the point.

In this blog, I declare that:

• The word "their" can be either singular or plural.  If singular, it means either his or hers.
• The words "it" and "its" can be used for a human being of either gender.
• The words "guy" and "guys" are, were, and always shall be gender-neutral.  ("Dude" on the other hand, is always male.)
• The word "men", either standing alone or in combination words such as "weathermen", can be used for a collection of both men and women.

Anything else that looks questionable grammar-wise is probably a mistake.

There you go.  Got that out of my system.  Now, back to our regular programming.