On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 17:44:20 +0000, J O Skip Robinson wrote: >I should let this go, but Sunday is still Friday in the mind. > >Number agreement is based on subject - predicate. That is, subject (noun, >pronoun) should be consistent with its associated verb. Whether a pronoun and >its associated noun in a different clause may vary by dialect or usage. > >A person who uses that construct should know >that >they are destined for Bonehead English > >person --> uses (agreement) >they --> are (agreement per US English) > >The fact that 'they' stands in for 'person' is the whole point of this thread. >You may buy into that correlation or not, but in the example sentence, there >is still number agreement within each clause. At least in US English. > And, pronouns have traditionally agreed in number with their antecedents. The only other pronoun that can be either singular or plural that comes readily to my mind is "who". You provided half the example:
" A person who uses ..." The other half: "Persons who use ..." The number agreement exists here, even outside the same clause. If "they" is newly to assume a singular meaning, a singular verb should agree with it. The examples you cited later of collectives and indefinites do confuse the issue, as does the royal (and editorial) "we", and the formal "you" (in French, Russian, et al.) (Some of the examples cited are outrageous: "Kim helped theirself to another slice of cake.") -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
