Private Messages

[TSherbs]

Ambiguity when it is intentional is fine, ie., in creative writing. But generally, clarity is preferrable when you are communicating, or attempting to.

Well, sure.

But there is no difference in "clarity" between these three statements:

1) Everyone can have a drink of water when he or she needs it.

2) Everyone can have a drink of water when they need it.

3) Each of you can have a drink of water when you need it.


There are some qualitative/contextual differences, but no difference in degree of "clarity."

[TSherbs]

...This is what happens when an abstract thinker with a MENSA IQ...

wait, someone on this thread? I just post the drivel without the genius part; intelligence not required.

[Johnny_S]

I asked someone who is a long term member for their opinion on a post that I had read on here, I sent a private message. Their answer was they did not trust private message and they would not answer, they said that it was too easy to pass a message round, messages were not private.

This cannot be right surely, it does not say very much for people.

That person's reply likely has much to do with his or her own behavior on FPGeeks (e.g., passive aggressive) and how he sees himself perceived. As mentioned above, nothing is truly private, but over-the-top paranoia from another is not something you ought to embrace. Take the cue, don't interact with him and leave him be.

That means there are no more than two people left.

[TSherbs]

Note: APA does not state that he/she cannot be used, only that it is context driven rather than a slavish rule. Does this additional information (the he/she part) have any value?.

Right. What also needs to be acknowledged is that the need, or the expectation, that one would have to rewrite a sentence in order to accommodate the lack of a third person singular gender neutral (or inclusive) pronoun that also applies to humans is exactly indicative of the problem. By simply adopting a gender neutral pronoun for humans, one can avoid this convoluted revision or the overly-formalized "he or she" constructions. Common sense change can have its place, too.

[silverlifter]

Ambiguity when it is intentional is fine, ie., in creative writing. But generally, clarity is preferrable when you are communicating, or attempting to.

Well, sure.

But there is no difference in "clarity" between these three statements:

1) Everyone can have a drink of water when he or she needs it.

2) Everyone can have a drink of water when they need it.

3) Each of you can have a drink of water when you need it.


There are some qualitative/contextual differences, but no difference in degree of "clarity."

None of those sentences contains a serial comma, which was the specific scope of my original comment.

[TSherbs]

Ambiguity when it is intentional is fine, ie., in creative writing. But generally, clarity is preferrable when you are communicating, or attempting to.

Well, sure.

But there is no difference in "clarity" between these three statements:

1) Everyone can have a drink of water when he or she needs it.

2) Everyone can have a drink of water when they need it.

3) Each of you can have a drink of water when you need it.


There are some qualitative/contextual differences, but no difference in degree of "clarity."

None of those sentences contains a serial comma, which was the specific scope of my original comment.

sorry, I thought that you were responding to the comment immediately above yours (about gender and pronouns)

[TSherbs]

Silver, then how about this example:

"I have three brothers: Henry, Frank and John."

Is there some sort of ambiguity or confusion here about the brothers' names?

[TSherbs]

Or this case:

"The colors of the US national flag are red, white and blue."

You see, one of the rules for commas is to use one in place of the word "and" when it is removed from a list, as in, "The colors of the flag are red and white and blue." The Oxford comma rule is actually an exception to this other rule: "except when the 'and' comes before the final item in the list: then both the comma and the 'and' are used." In several cases, this exception is unnecessary for clarity (see my examples above). More rules and/or exceptions is not very sensible, even contrary to logic.

[kazoolaw]

Silver, then how about this example:

"I have three brothers: Henry, Frank and John."

Is there some sort of ambiguity or confusion here about the brothers' names?

How about the classic "Eats shoots and leaves."
Pick a place to insert a single comma.
Is the result the same? Unambiguous?

[Ole Juul]

Silver, then how about this example:

"I have three brothers: Henry, Frank and John."

Is there some sort of ambiguity or confusion here about the brothers' names?

That's not a good example because you gave the number of items in the list. That adds a data point external to what's under discussion.

If you had said "my brothers are Henry, Frank and John", there would be ambiguity and you would be making an assumption unless you were 100% certain of the cultural context. Although unlikely, "Frank and John" would be a legal name in many countries.

Not putting commas in a list usually (perhaps always) involves making an assumption.

PS: Speaking of Frank, Frank Zappa named a daughter "Moon Unit". According to him her middle name is Unit.

[kazoolaw]

[Quote\]Rubbish. It is simple to structure a sentence to include he/she, but it is totally unnecessary under the guidelines given by APA, and it is quite obvious why this is so.[/QUOTE]

"Rubbish?" Fear not, I will not report you to the admin/mod whoever they are.

Did you mean "include?" I meant "exclude." I do agree that is simple to structure a sentence to avoid using "she" or "he." That comment was intended to draw attention to the folly of the APA, not make a judgment on the writing skills of the general population.

Maybe the issue is that I don't see what you say is the obvious need for changing a perfectly clear plural word to be singular.

[TSherbs]

Silver, then how about this example:

"I have three brothers: Henry, Frank and John."

Is there some sort of ambiguity or confusion here about the brothers' names?

That's not a good example because you gave the number of items in the list. That adds a data point external to what's under discussion....
.

"Rubbish". It IS a good example of how the Oxford comma is not ALWAYS necessary for clarity. That's the whole point of being flexible (and not absolutist) with the rule. I have not and would not claim that the Oxford comma is NEVER necessary. Absolutist claims, like those above, are not defensible in practice. There are clear, easy examples when that additional comma is superfluous for clarity (and I gave examples). I know of what I speak. It is my profession. I have to make these judgments daily (when school is in session).

Sent from my Moto E (4) using Tapatalk

[TSherbs]

Silver, then how about this example:

"I have three brothers: Henry, Frank and John."

Is there some sort of ambiguity or confusion here about the brothers' names?

How about the classic "Eats shoots and leaves."
Pick a place to insert a single comma.
Is the result the same? Unambiguous?

See above.

Sent from my Moto E (4) using Tapatalk

[Empty_of_Clouds]

Did you mean "include?" I meant "exclude." I do agree that is simple to structure a sentence to avoid using "she" or "he." That comment was intended to draw attention to the folly of the APA, not make a judgment on the writing skills of the general population.

Maybe the issue is that I don't see what you say is the obvious need for changing a perfectly clear plural word to be singular.

Whoops! I did indeed misread your statement in part.

However, I stand by what I said. It is not folly on the part of the APA, it is a perfectly sensible stylistic suggestion

You did make a judgement on the writing skills of others though.

Thank you for the explanations. I was aware of the difference between the difference between the descriptive and proscriptive camps of grammar. It remains odd to me that the APA prefers to force a plural word into a singular hole to accommodate writers who are unable to structure a sentence to avoid he/she entirely.

It is simple to construct a sentence excluding both he/she or they. In the context of human research it is not usual to write in a completely abstract fashion.

[RobJohnson]

Some people would say that the use of he or she in a sentence is not relevant and that language should move towards non gender based descriptions.

I would be interested to hear of whether this approach applies to other languages, and indeed cultures. For example, I have a colleague who is Japanese and he regards the perfect wife as someone who polishes his shoes on her knees as he walks out the door in the morning.

[Pterodactylus]

Some people would say that the use of he or she in a sentence is not relevant and that language should move towards non gender based descriptions.

I would be interested to hear of whether this approach applies to other languages, and indeed cultures. For example, I have a colleague who is Japanese and he regards the perfect wife as someone who polishes his shoes on her knees as he walks out the door in the morning.

You really know such a relict?
Incredible, I thought they are extinct since many centuries in the developed world, despite some rumors from time to time.

Such artifacts should be showcased in museums in special exhibitions about human male stupidity.

... or be shipped with a one way ticket to some Muslim fundamentalist dominated areas where they can live their medieval fetish dream.

[Johnny_S]

Some people would say that the use of he or she in a sentence is not relevant and that language should move towards non gender based descriptions.

I would be interested to hear of whether this approach applies to other languages, and indeed cultures. For example, I have a colleague who is Japanese and he regards the perfect wife as someone who polishes his shoes on her knees as he walks out the door in the morning.

You really know such a relict?
Incredible, I thought they are extinct since many centuries in the developed world, despite some rumors from time to time.

Such artifacts should be showcased in museums in special exhibitions about human male stupidity.

... or be shipped with a one way ticket to some Muslim fundamentalist dominated areas where they can live their medieval fetish dream.

Never read a post quite like that, not sure that I would want to read a post like that again.

[Chrissy]

Some people would say that the use of he or she in a sentence is not relevant and that language should move towards non gender based descriptions.

I would be interested to hear of whether this approach applies to other languages, and indeed cultures. For example, I have a colleague who is Japanese and he regards the perfect wife as someone who polishes his shoes on her knees as he walks out the door in the morning.

You're a new member so I'm going to say that in my humble opinion this post is drifting off topic into the more contentious area of Politics, Religion and Society and that's not a route we like to travel down in The Lounge.

[Chemyst]

Some people would say that the use of he or she in a sentence is not relevant and that language should move towards non gender based descriptions.

I would be interested to hear of whether this approach applies to other languages, and indeed cultures. For example, I have a colleague who is Japanese and he regards the perfect wife as someone who polishes his shoes on her knees as he walks out the door in the morning.

You really know such a relict?
Incredible, I thought they are extinct since many centuries in the developed world, despite some rumors from time to time.

Such artifacts should be showcased in museums in special exhibitions about human male stupidity.

... or be shipped with a one way ticket to some Muslim fundamentalist dominated areas where they can live their medieval fetish dream.

Never read a post quite like that, not sure that I would want to read a post like that again.

Hence why the OP was initially concerned about their private thoughts being shared.

Full circle.

[Chrissy]

Some people would say that the use of he or she in a sentence is not relevant and that language should move towards non gender based descriptions.

I would be interested to hear of whether this approach applies to other languages, and indeed cultures. For example, I have a colleague who is Japanese and he regards the perfect wife as someone who polishes his shoes on her knees as he walks out the door in the morning.

You really know such a relict?
Incredible, I thought they are extinct since many centuries in the developed world, despite some rumors from time to time.

Such artifacts should be showcased in museums in special exhibitions about human male stupidity.

... or be shipped with a one way ticket to some Muslim fundamentalist dominated areas where they can live their medieval fetish dream.

Never read a post quite like that, not sure that I would want to read a post like that again.

Hence why the OP was initially concerned about their private thoughts being shared.

Full circle.

Chemyst, you highlighted exactly what happens when threads drift into the Politics, Religion and Society area.