The Anarchy of Thought

Charity begins at home. Perhaps. But then so does the long revolution against the Establishment.

Sunday, January 09, 2005

The Grammar of Gender Posted by Hello




If you are in India right now, try calling a friend on a Reliance cellphone which has been switched off, and you shall be greeted by the message : 'The person you are trying to reach has switched off his phone'. What makes it particularly ironical is the fact that this message is pre-recorded in a woman's voice.
And no, I am not pointing this out because I bear some grudge against Reliance and Company : all of us, users of English, have a specific linguistic debility in not being able to express ourselves through non-gendered personal pronouns. One way of trying to overcome this is to deliberately use the pronoun 'she' in places where our ears have been familiarised (or, acculturalised) to hearing the pronoun 'he'; so that we may say, 'England expects every person to do her duty', and, 'Every citizen must pay her taxes'. However, such statements can be misleading (especially for a new learner of the English language) if they are taken to imply that men are not be counted as 'English' or as 'citizens' of a country. Another way is to use the compound 'he/she' in all these grammatical locations, but this usage can easily become monotonous and tedious beyond a certain point, and may even disrupt the flow of the argument being put forward.
A third way of trying to get round this problem is to use three new words 'se', 'ser' and 'mer' for the nominative, the possessive, and the accusative cases respectively.
(A) The sentence : 'England expects every man to do his duty' therefore becomes : 'England expects every person to do ser duty'. The word 'ser', that is, stands for 'his/her'.
(B) The sentence : 'If we do not worship God, He will send us to perdition' becomes : 'If we do not worship God, Se will send us to perdition'. The word 'se' is a condensation of 'he/she'.
(C) The sentence : 'When we see a man in distress, we should help him' shall become : 'When we see a person in distress, we should help mer'. The word 'mer' gets rid of the clumsy compound 'him/her'.
To be sure, these three words 'se', 'ser', and 'mer' may sound awkward at the moment, but just as other (new) words are continually flowing into the living stream of the English language, so too over a period of time these words may become part and parcel of our linguistic vocabulary. When that happens, Reliance and Company shall have a more inclusive message on their cellphones : 'The person you are trying to reach has switched off ser phone'.

18 Comments:

  • At 12.1.05, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    ru gay?

     
  • At 12.1.05, Blogger The Transparent Ironist said…

    Yes, gay enough to be writing this post.

     
  • At 13.1.05, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    really?...ru serious? im glad u admitts...

     
  • At 13.1.05, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    The ambiguity in expression-
    What does anonymous1 mean by gay?
    Did s/he mean gay as in happy, cheerful and gay?
    Was s/he refering to the ironist's sexual orientation?
    But the most interesting and thought provoking comment is anon1's comment on the ironist's reply-
    S/he seems to have understood (after a moment's doubt/disbelief) what the ironist meant and the result of the entire exercise was that s/he was glad....
    Why was anon1 glad?
    If anon1 happens to be here again, maybe s/he can throw some light

    A veiled blog reader

     
  • At 13.1.05, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    The ambiguity of expression-
    What was anonymous1 refering to with the word gay?
    Was s/he refering to a state of being as in happy, cheerful and gay?
    Or was s/he refering to the ironist's sexual orientation?
    The most interesting and thought provoking comment was anon1's third.
    S/he, after a moment's doubt and disbelief, seemed to be glad with the ironist's admission.
    Why?
    Maybe only anon1 knows-

    A veiled blog reader

     
  • At 13.1.05, Blogger The Transparent Ironist said…

    And so it goes on and on, the spinning of the intricate lingustic webs within which we live.Ah, for the consolations of Irony!

     
  • At 14.1.05, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    hi! i meaned gay sexual orientation!...
    i thought that u admitted being a homosexual, that is why i was glad. i admired ur courage and sincerity!..
    im sorry if i got this wrong or if i bringed offence.
    so from all these misunderstandings, what is the true answer to my question (first of them)? of what "gay" meaning u said 'yes'?... i hope u don't mind saying to us! ;)

    cheers!
    P. ('he')

    ps: i like some of ur writings!... u have very good standard! ;)

     
  • At 14.1.05, Blogger The Transparent Ironist said…

    In this world where nothing is solid, nothing is stable, nothing is permanent, how do we speak of sexual orientations? They are like the gale over the ocean that blows hither and thither, not knowing in which direction the shore lies.

     
  • At 14.1.05, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    u see urself like the gale over the ocean too? u don't know where to go, by which way, u're confused...
    u're not decided yet...
    sorry if all this is too personal for u, if i bringed too intimate topics in discussion...

    cheers!
    paul

     
  • At 14.1.05, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    oh, sorry for my poor english too! i still struggle to learn. :P

     
  • At 14.1.05, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Some blogs are great, some acquire greatness (with a little embellishment) and some have greatness thrust upon them.
    This blog seems to have components fulfilling criteria for all three.
    What is 'personal'?
    I often use it and have it used on me. 'Don't take it personally'
    or
    'Did I ask you a personal question'?
    Most conversation is bound to be personal , isn't it?
    Is weather personal? Yes, if we talk about how it affects us.
    'I can't bear this cold!'
    Its about me. But somehow it has come to pass that only matters relating to age and sex are considered personal...
    (and hence worth knowing, I guess)

     
  • At 14.1.05, Blogger The Transparent Ironist said…

    Though it must be said that some of the most impersonal-sounding questions can turn out to be very personal. Here are three : 'What is your weight?', 'What is your nationality?' and 'When is your birthday?'

     
  • At 15.1.05, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    fine, so answer don't taking it personally in that case...
    u avoid direct answers!.. that is only an sign the answer is 'yes'! i knew ur homosexual since u gived the first hesitating response 'what did anon' meaned by 'gay'?... u just procrastinated response...
    and why do u post ur responses anonymosly sometimes???.. it's transparent it's still u behind the so called 'anonymous' responds!!! do u have multiples personalities?
    u avoid exposing urself directly because ur insecure of urself! but don't worry! here on the blogs none criticeses (only me...hahaha)!

    cheers
    paul

     
  • At 15.1.05, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Dear Paul,
    Please don't get so worked up...I am a friend of the ironist who posted those blogs anonymously. I did not put my name down because i didnt think it was necessary. I posted the same question twice because I thought the first did not get published. I happened to comment on your comment because it caught my eye. I must confess, I find your tenses such as bringed, gived etc.instead of the traditional 'brought', 'gave' very interesting. Really we should start using those words instead of the confusing ones. Maybe the blog is a good place to start as you rightly pointed out that nothing posted in a blog is penalised.
    I am not the transparent ironist. I assure you, i am a separate entity. I share nothing with him except the human genome. Also, I happen not to possess the Y chromosome.
    This is just to dispel some misgivings you had.

    A note to the transparent ironist- You must do justice to your readers. You must never, never, never deliberately make them queasy. So i suggest you restore Paul's peace of mind and make him glad.

     
  • At 15.1.05, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    yes i get worked up earlier...
    sorry...
    i blush now. *blush blush blush*
    i take back the accusations!.. i hurried up!
    paul (ashamed hiding under the desk now)

     
  • At 15.1.05, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    u seem so alike in ur comments, that's why i thought (good tense?) it was the ironist...u really have the same style in ur speak...
    thanks for liking my embarassing tenses! :P
    paul

     
  • At 15.1.05, Blogger The Transparent Ironist said…

    Hmm, this is getting a bit confusing. I cannot figure out who is speaking to whom, for whom, against whom, or about whom. But, perhaps, that is just what irony is all about?

     
  • At 16.1.05, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Dear ironist,
    Paul thought you and i had the same 'style of speak' and therefore he thought it was you in the guise of me.

    Dear paul,
    Who are you and what is your first language? You never know but there may come a time when 'thought', 'brought', 'gave' etc may go the language bin and thinked, bringed, gived may take over. I am not a linguist or a language expert but i do happen to notice that language does maintain a constant state of flux or ceases to get spoken. No one uses, the word 'spake' anymore but you must have heard of Neitzsche's work, "And Thus Spake Zarathusthra"...

     

Post a Comment

<< Home

 
Free FAQ Database from Bravenet Free FAQ Database from Bravenet.com
The WeatherPixie