單數they

單數they是they或它的詞形變化形式（例如them或their）的用法，用於指單獨一個人，作為單數形式。

典型地，這種情況出現於不確定的性別，例句：

• "Everyone returned to their seats."
• "Somebody left their umbrella in the office. Would they please collect it."
• "If a person doesn't want to go on living, they are often very difficult to help."
• "The patient should be told at the outset how much they will be required to pay."
• "But a journalist should not be forced to reveal their sources."

類似地，這種情況也可以應用於派生詞，例如themself或themselves。

這種用法的一個原因是英語沒有專用於不確定性別的單數人稱代詞。 有些情況，這種用法可以被解釋為一種名義約定，因為如everyone之類的單詞，雖然在語法上是單數形式，但事實上卻是複數的意義。 這種用法逐漸變多的一個原因可能是20世紀的性別包容語言運動，但是它已經被有影響力的作家使用了好幾個世紀。

雖然單數they的用法歷史悠久，並且在日常英語中廣泛使用，但是這種用法從19世紀末開始還是一直受到批評，並且大家的認可度也不同。

詞形變化形式與物主代詞

第三人稱代詞的詞形變化形式

	主格	賓格	形容詞性物主代詞	名詞性物主代詞	反身代詞
He	He laughs.	I hug him.	His hair grows.	I use his.	He feeds himself.
She	She laughs.	I hug her.	Her hair grows.	I use hers.	She feeds herself.
原型they	When I tell my children a joke they laugh.	Whether they win or lose, I hug them.	As long as people live, their hair grows.	Most of my friends have cell phones, so I use theirs.	The children feed themselves.
單數they	When I tell someone a joke they laugh.	When I greet a friend I hug them.	When someone does not get a haircut, their hair grows long.	If my mobile phone runs out of power, a friend lets me borrow theirs.	Each child feeds themself.（不規範）
性別通用he	When I tell someone a joke he laughs.	When I greet a friend I hug him.	When someone does not get a haircut, his hair grows long.	If my mobile phone runs out of power, a friend lets me borrow his.	Each child feeds himself.

單數they與「正常」的複數they有相同的詞形變化形式，即them和their。它們通常都使用相同的動詞形式，也就是說「when I tell someone a joke they laughs」是不規範的。

反身代詞themselves有時也被使用，但是還有一個可選的反身代詞形式themself。雖然themself有歷史悠久並且在20世紀80年代復活了，但是它還是依然較少使用，並且只被少數人認可。 它在指代性別不明的單個人的時候有時使用，因為這時候複數形式themselves看起來不協調，例如

• "It is not an actor pretending to be Reagan or Thatcher, it is, in grotesque form, the person themself."—Hislop (1984);引自 Fowler's

單數themself在加拿大聯邦法律文本中被系統化地使用，用於區別於複數themselves。

• "Where a recipient of an allowance under section 4 absents themself from Canada [...]"—War Veterans Allowance Act, section 14.
• "[...] the following conditions are imposed on a person or group of persons in respect of whom a deposit is required: [...] to present themself or themselves at the time and place that an officer or the Immigration Division requires them to appear to comply with any obligation imposed on them under the Act."—Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, section 48.

用法

更多資訊：en:Gender-specific and gender-neutral pronouns

知名作家的一些老舊用法

早在14世紀的中古英語，they就一直被用於單數形式。 在許多知名作家的著作中都能看來這種用法，包括傑弗里·喬叟、威廉·莎士比亞、簡·奧斯丁、威廉·梅克比斯·薩克雷和蕭伯納：

• "And whoso fyndeth hym out of swich blame,

They wol come up . . ."

—Chaucer, The Pardoner's Prologue (c. 1395); 引用自Jespersen在《Merriam-Webster's Concise Dictionary of English Usage》。

• " 'Tis meet that some more audience than a mother, since nature makes them partial, should o'erhear the speech."— Shakespeare, Hamlet (1599);引用自《Merriam-Webster's Concise Dictionary of English Usage》。
• "If a person is born of a . . . gloomy temper . . . they cannot help it."— Chesterfield, 《Letter to his son》 (1759);引用自《Fowler's》。
• "Now nobody does anything well that they cannot help doing"— Ruskin, 《The Crown of Wild Olive》 (1866);引用自《Fowler's》。
• "Nobody in their senses would give sixpence on the strength of a promissory note of the kind."— Bagehot, 《The Liberal Magazine》 (1910);引用自《Fowler's》。
• "I would have every body marry if they can do it properly."— Austen, 《Mansfield Park》 (1814);引用自《Merriam-Webster's Concise Dictionary of English Usage》。
• Caesar: "No, Cleopatra. No man goes to battle to be killed."

Cleopatra: "But they do get killed"

—Shaw, Caesar and Cleopatra (1901);引用自《Merriam-Webster's Concise Dictionary of English Usage》。

• "A person can't help their birth."— W. M. Thackeray, Vanity Fair (1848);引用自《Merriam-Webster's Concise Dictionary of English Usage》。

同時，除了使用they，使用代詞he作為（據稱的）性別中性代詞也被認可，如下所述：

• "Suppose the life and fortune of every one of us would depend on his winning or losing a game of chess."— Thomas Huxley, A Liberal Education (1868);引自Baskervill.
• "If any one did not know it, it was his own fault."— George Washington Cable, Old Creole Days (1879);引自Baskervill.
• "No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality."— Article 15, Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948).

在威廉·梅克比斯·薩克雷的著作中，兩個都出現過：

• "A person can't help their birth."—Rosalind in W. M. Thackeray, Vanity Fair (1848);引用自《牛津英語詞典》於Curzan在《Gender Shifts in the History of English》。

與

• "Every person who turns this page has his own little diary."— W. M. Thackeray, On Lett's Diary (1869);引用自Baskervill, 《An English Grammar》。

並且威廉·卡克斯頓寫道：

• "Eche of theym sholde . . . make theymselfe redy."— Caxton, 《Sonnes of Aymon》 (c. 1489)

alongside

• "Who of thise wormes shall be byten, He must have triacle; Yf not that, he shall deye."— Caxton, 《Dialogues in French and English》 (c. 1483).

19世紀的性別通用he的趨勢

在非正式英語中使用he而非they的用法的倡導，可以在18世紀中葉找到，在Ann Fisher的《A New Grammar》中寫道：

性別通用名使用陽性，可以理解為男性與女性，正如any Person who knows what he says (引自Ostade)

1895年的語法（Baskervill, W.M.與Sewell, J.W.的《An English Grammar for the Use of High School, Academy and College Class》）標記了單數they的通用的用法，但是推薦用性別通用he，基於數協議：

指代前面出現過的泛指代詞[例如everybody]或者被泛指形容詞修飾的名詞的另一種方法，是在後面使用複數代詞。這並不是最好的用法，邏輯上顯然需要使用單數代詞，但是這種結構經常出現於前面說的包括或隱射兩個性別。陽性詞並不能表示陰性，並且應該避免 his or her 的表示法，因為很笨重.

——Baskervill，An English Grammar

Baskervill給出了知名作家的使用單數they的一些例子，包括

• "Every one must judge according to their own feelings."— Byron, Werner (1823), quoted as "Every one must judge of [sic] their own feelings."
• "Had the Doctor been contented to take my dining tables as any body in their senses would have done . . ."— Austen, Mansfield Park (1814);
• "If the part deserve any comment, every considering Christian will make it to themselves as they go . . ."— Defoe, The Family Instructor (1816);
• "Every person's happiness depends in part upon the respect they meet in the world . . ."— Paley,

但是他更喜歡使用he：

[. . .] 當前面說的包括男性與女性的時候，或者是一個泛指性的單詞的時候，最好的方法是後續代詞使用陽性單數代詞 [. . .]

—Baskervill, An English Grammar

1850年，英國議會通過了一個法案，其中說了，在議會的法案中使用的時候「陽性詞必須被視為包括女性」。

據稱的性別中性的he的用法直到至少20世紀60年代還能用，雖然有一些he的用法後來因笨拙或愚蠢而被批評，例如指代：

• 兩性的不確定的人：
  • "the ideal that every boy and girl should be so equipped that he shall not be handicapped in his struggle for social progress . . ."— C.C. Fries, American English Grammar, (1940).
• 兩性的已知的人：
  • "She and Louis had a game—who could find the ugliest photograph of himself."— Joseph P. Lash, Eleanor and Franklin (1971)
• 或者明顯可以假設為女人的不確定的人：
  • ". . . everyone will be entitled to decide for himself whether or not to have an abortion."— Albert Bleumenthal, N.Y. State Assembly (1975).

據稱的性別中性的he的當代用法

當代著作在指代性別通用或不確定的前面出現的詞的時候，有時還是可以看到使用he。 有時指代的人幾乎可以確定為男的，例如

• "The patient should be informed of his therapeutic options."— 關於前列腺癌的文本 (2004)

有時前面出現的詞指代的人很可能只是男的或者這種職業傳統上只有男性人員：

• "It wouldn't be as if the lone astronaut would be completely by himself." (2008)
• "Kitchen table issues . . . are ones the next president can actually do something about if he actually cares about it. More likely if she cares about it!"— Hillary Rodham Clinton (2008)

還有其它情況，前面的詞可能指代：

• 一個不確定的人，兩個性別都有可能：
  • "Now, a writer is entitled to have a Roget on his desk."—Barzun (1985); quoted in Merriam-Webster's Concise Dictionary of English Usage
  • "They ‧ re going to appoint a new manager. Well I hope he does a better job than the present one."
  • "A Member of Parliament should always live in his constituency."

甚至在2010年，還是可以發現性別通用he的建議：

" . . . 當不定代詞在前面使用時，需要一個單數的主格、賓格與物主代詞 . . ."

• "Everyone did as he pleased" . . .

"在非正式口語中，複數代詞經常被用於當前面的詞不確定的時候。但是這種結構現在一般不合適用於正式發言或者書面上。

非正式： Somebody should let you borrow their book.

正式： Somebody should let you borrow his book."

 —Choy, Basic Grammar and Usage

20世紀開始趨於使用性別中性語言

在20世紀的下半個世紀，女權主義者關注「性別歧視主義」的男性導向式語言。不但包括man性別通用，而且包括he作為性別通用代詞。

爭論點是he不能明智地作為性別通用代詞，包括男人與女人。 William Safire在他的《紐約時報》的 On Language 專欄上贊同了性別通用he，提及口訣「男性包羅女性」。 Brooklyn的C. Adendyck對《紐約時報》寫了一個回覆：

"The average American needs the small routines of getting ready for work. As he shaves or blow-dries his hair or pulls on his panty-hose, he is easing himself by small stages into the demands of the day."

——C. Badendyck [sic]，New York Times (1985)

引自 Miller 和 Swift.

1980年，運動受到廣泛支持，許多組織，包括絕大多數出版社，都發行了性別中性語言的使用指南。

用於特定的知名人士

在一些情況，可能知道個體但卻用they來指代，因為性別未知或者因為他/她偏愛使用they，例如社會媒體應用，可能允許賬號持有者來選擇非常規性別例如性別酷兒或雙性別和一個代詞，包括他們可能願意使用的they/them。

當代用法

自從20世紀60年代以來，在書面語和口語中使用陽性通用名詞和代詞的頻率就在一減少。20世紀90年代在澳大利亞收集的自發講話語料庫中，單數they變最頻繁使用的通用代詞。單數they的使用上升的原因，至少是部分原因，是性別中性語言的使用的增長。一百年前的作者用he作為不確定性別的指代時可能沒有顧慮，但是如今的作者經常會感覺這麼用不自在。在正式場合的一種方案通常是寫he or she或者其它類似的，但是過度使用這種方式感覺很彆扭，或者感覺很政治正確，或者都有。

當代用法中，單數they常被用於指定性別不確定的先行詞，至少有一些人這麼用，例如當先行詞的性別或數量不確定、未知或未揭露的時候。 例子包括不同類型的用法。

用作指代代詞先行詞

單數先行詞可以是一個代詞，例如everybody、someone、anybody或者疑問代詞例如who：

• 先行詞為everybody、everyone等等：
  • "Everybody was crouched behind the furniture to surprise me, and they tried to. But I already knew they were there." Garner提供的例子。
  • "Everyone promised to behave themselves." Huddleston等人提供的例子。
  • "Everyone returned to their seats." Pinker提供的例子。
• 先行詞為nobody或no one：
  • "Nobody was late, were they?" Swan提供的例子。
  • "No one put their hand up." Huddleston等人提供的例子。
  • "No one felt they had been misled." Huddleston等人提供的例子。
• 先行詞為somebody或someone：
  • "I feel that if someone is not doing their job it should be called to their attention." —— 一份美國的報紙（1984），Fowler引用。
• 先行詞為anybody或anyone:
  • "If anyone tells you that America's best days are behind her, then they're looking the wrong way." 喬治·布什總統, 1991年國情咨文; quoted by Garner
  • "Anyone can set themselves up as an acupuncturist."——Sarah Lonsdale "Sharp Practice Pricks Reputation of Acupuncture." 《觀察者》1991年12月15日，Garner引用。
  • "If anybody calls, take their name and ask them to call again later." Swan提供的例子。
• 甚至在性別已知或者可以假定的情況下：
  • "Under new rules to be announced tomorrow, it will be illegal for anyone to donate an organ to their wife." Ballantyne, "Transplant Jury to Vet Live Donors", 《星期日泰晤士報》（倫敦）1990年3月25日，Garner引用。 (1990年，妻子可以假定為女性)
• 先行詞為疑問代詞：
  • "Who thinks they can solve the problem?". Huddleston等人提供的例子， 《劍橋英語語法》（The Cambridge Grammar of the English language）。

用作指代通用名詞先行詞

單數先行詞也可以是一個名詞，例如person（個人）、patient（病人）或student（學生）：

• 先詞先為名詞（例如person、student或patient），泛稱使用（例如表示這個類型中的任意一位成員的含義的時候，或者筆者不知道指定的某一個成員）
  • ". . . if the child possesses the nationality or citizenship of another country, they may lose this when they get a British passport." 來自英國護照申請表，Swan引用。
  • "cognitive dissonance: "a concept in psychology [that] describes the condition in which a person's attitudes conflict with their behaviour"——《麥克米倫商業管理學詞典》（Macmillan Dictionary of Business and management） (1988年版)， Garner引用。
  • "A starting point would be to give more support to the company secretary. They are, or should be, privy to the confidential deliberations and secrets of the board and the company.— Ronald Severn. "Protecting the Secretary Bird". 《金融時報》，1992年1月6日，Garner引用。
• 先行詞代表前面提及的一類人的泛稱，並且是單數形式
  • "I had to decide: Is this person being irrational or is he right? Of course, they were often right."——Robert Burchfield，《美國新聞與世界報道》（U.S. News & World Report），1986年8月11日，《韋氏簡明英語用法詞典》（Merriam-Webster's Concise Dictionary of English Usage）引用
• 甚至指代的一類人是已知性別的，有時也用they
  • "I swear more when I'm talking to a boy, because I'm not afraid of shocking them" 引自一個訪談
  • "No mother should be forced to testify against their child".
• They也可以用於混合性別的先行詞：
  • "Let me know if your father or your mother changes their mind." Huddleston提供的例子。
  • "Either the husband or the wife has perjured themself."這裡themself被部分人接受，themselves似乎不那麼被接受，himself是不可接受的。Huddleston等人提供的例子。
• 甚至對於確定的已知性別的已知的人，they也可以用於忽略或隱藏性別。
  • "I had a friend in Paris, and they had to go to hospital for a month."（確定的人，但沒指明身份）
• themself一詞有時也被使用：
  • "Someone has apparently locked themself in the office."[接受度值得懷疑]

有些人比其他人有更大的被接受度，在某些情況下嘗試用（形態上）單數代詞來替換they會得到荒唐的結果，可以用上面的例子驗證。

可接受性和​​規範性指導

雖然性別通用he和性別通用they作為單數代詞使用有很長的一段歷史了，並且它們至今都依然還在使用中，但是它們還是一直被部分人群系統化地避免使用。 防止表述偏袒任何一方的風格指引有時建議把這些通用的表達重新表述為複數形式來避免被任何一方指責。

單數they的使用在英國英語中比在美國英語中更加被廣泛接受 or vice versa.

一性用法指引我們接受被建議they的單數用法並不是僅僅是用於語義複數的單數詞例如everyone，而且也用於前面指代的不確定的「個人」，這些用法的例子甚至常出現在正式演講中。例如，Casey Miller和Kate Swift，在《無性別歧視寫作手冊》（The Handbook of Non-Sexist Writing）， Ronald Reagan引用：

• "You must identify the person who has the power to hire you and show them how your skills can help them with their problems."

美國使用指南

已隱藏部分未翻譯內容，歡迎參與翻譯。

Garner's Modern American Usage (2003)推薦小心使用單數they，並且儘可能避免使用，因為這麼用有點彆扭。

• "如果名詞–代詞不一致性可以避免，儘量避免。如果不可以避免，儘可能小心使用，因為有人會懷疑你的文化水平 . . .".

Garner認為單數they的使用在英國英語中的接受度更大一些：

• "美國英語使用者比英國英語使用者更不能接受這種變化，美國人覺得不確定的they已經是越來越不標準化。"

並且美國英語使用者顯然抵制這種變化:

• "它讓許多有文化的美國人望而卻步，這不幸地對問題的最終解決方案造成了障礙。"

他將使用單數they和everyone，anyone和somebody等先行詞的趨勢視為不可避免的:

• "儘管這些發展對純粹主義者來說可能令人不安，但它們是不可逆轉的。 語法學家所說的一切都不會改變它們。"

In the 14th edition (1993) of The Chicago Manual of Style, the University of Chicago Press explicitly recommended use of singular use of they and their, noting a "revival" of this usage and citing "its venerable use by such writers as Addison, Austen, Chesterfield, Fielding, Ruskin, Scott, and Shakespeare." From the 15th edition, this was changed. In Chapter 5 of the 16th edition, now written by Bryan A. Garner, the recommendations are:

"The singular they. A singular antecedent requires a singular referent pronoun. Because he is no longer accepted as a generic pronoun referring to a person of either sex, it has become common in speech and in informal writing to substitute the third-person plural pronouns they, them, their, and themselves, and the nonstandard singular themself. While this usage is accepted in casual context, it is still considered ungrammatical in formal writing."

and

"Gender bias. . . . On the one hand, it is unacceptable to a great many reasonable readers to use the generic masculine pronoun (he in reference to no one in particular). On the other hand, it is unacceptable to a great many readers (often different readers) either to resort to non-traditional gimmicks to avoid the generic masculine (by using he/she of s/he, for example) or to use they as a kind of singular pronoun. Either way, credibility is lost with some readers."

According to The American Heritage Book of English Usage, many Americans avoid use of they to refer to a singular antecedent out of respect for a "traditional" grammatical rule, despite use of singular they by modern writers of note and mainstream publications:

• "Most of the Usage Panel rejects the use of they with singular antecedents as ungrammatical, even in informal speech. Eighty-two percent find the sentence The typical student in the program takes about six years to complete their course work unacceptable. . . . panel members seem to make a distinction between singular nouns, such as the typical student and a person, and pronouns that are grammatically singular but semantically plural, such as anyone, everyone and no one. Sixty-four percent of panel members accept the sentence No one is willing to work for those wages anymore, are they?"

The Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association explicitly reject the use of singular they and gives the following example as "incorrect" usage:

• "Neither the highest scorer nor the lowest scorer in the group had any doubt about their competence."

while also specifically taking a stand that generic he is unacceptable. The APA recommends using he or she, recasting the sentence with a plural subject to allow correct use of they, or simply rewriting the sentence to avoid issues with gender or number.

Strunk & White, the authors of The Elements of Style find use of they with a singular antecedent unacceptable:

"They. Not to be used when the antecedent is a distributive expression, such as each, each one. everybody, every one, many a man. Use the singular pronoun. [. . . ] A similar fault is the use of the plural pronoun with the antecedent anybody, anyone, somebody, someone [. . . ] The use of he as pronoun for nouns embracing both genders is a simple, practical convention rooted in the beginnings of the English language. "

Their assessment, in 1979, was

"He has lost all suggestion of maleness in these circumstances. [. . .] It has no pejorative connotation; it is never incorrect."

Joseph M. Williams, who wrote a number of books on writing with "clarity and grace", discusses the advantages and disadvantages of various solutions when faced with the problem of referring to an antecedent such as someone, everyone, no one or a noun that does not indicate gender and suggests that this will continue to be a problem for some time. He "suspect[s] that eventually we will accept the plural they as a correct singular" but states that currently "formal usage requires a singular pronoun".

According to The Little, Brown Handbook, most experts—and some teachers and employers—find use of singular they unacceptable:

"Although some experts accept they, them, and their with singular indefinite words, most do not, and many teachers and employers regard the plural as incorrect. To be safe, work for agreement between singular indefinite words and the pronouns that refer to them [. . . ]"

It recommends using he or she or avoiding the problem by rewriting the sentence to use a plural or omit the pronoun.

The Purdue Online Writing Lab (OWL) maintains that singular they is incorrect:

"Remember: the words everybody, anybody, anyone, each, neither, nobody, someone, a person, etc. are singular and take singular pronouns."

英國使用指南

已隱藏部分未翻譯內容，歡迎參與翻譯。

In the first edition of A Dictionary of Modern English Usage (published in 1926) it is stated that singular they is disapproved of by grammarians and should be avoided in favour of the generic he. Examples of its use by eminent writers are given, but it is suggested that "few good modern writers would flout [grammarians] so conspicuously as Fielding and Thackeray", whose sentences are described as having an "old-fashioned sound".

In the second edition of Fowler's, Fowler's Modern English Usage (edited by Sir Ernest Gowers and published in 1965), it is stated that singular they is disapproved of by grammarians and, while common in colloquial speech, should preferably be avoided in favour of the generic he in prose. Numerous examples of its use by eminent writers are given, but it is still suggested that "few good modern writers would flout [grammarians] so conspicuously as Fielding and Thackeray".

According to the third edition of Fowler's (The New Fowler's Modern English Usage, edited by Burchfield and published in 1996) singular they has not only been widely used by good writers for centuries, but is now generally accepted, except by some conservative grammarians, including the Fowler of 1926, who ignored the evidence:

"Over the centuries, writers of standing have used they, their, and them with anaphoric reference to a singular noun or pronoun, and the practice has continued in the 20C. to the point that, traditional grammarians aside, such constructions are hardly noticed any more or are not widely felt to lie in a prohibited zone. Fowler (1926) disliked the practice [. . .] and gave a number of unattributed 'faulty' examples [. . . ] The evidence presented in the OED points in another direction altogether."

The Complete Plain Words was originally written in 1948 by Sir Ernest Gowers, a civil servant, in an attempt by the British civil service to improve "official English". A second edition, edited by Sir Bruce Fraser, was published in 1973. It refers to they or them as the "equivalent of a singular pronoun of common sex" as "common in speech and not unknown in serious writing " but "stigmatized by grammarians as usage grammatically indefensible. The books advice for "official writers" (civil servants) is to avoid its use and not to be tempted by its "greater convenience", though "necessity may eventually force it into the category of accepted idiom".

A new edition of Plain Words, revised and updated by Sir Ernest Gowers' great granddaughter, Rebecca Gowers, was published in 2014. It notes that singular they and them have become much more widespread since Gowers' original comments, but still finds it "safer" to treat a sentence like 'The reader may toss their book aside' as incorrect "in formal English", while rejecting even more strongly sentences like

• "There must be opportunity for the individual boy or girl to go as far as his keennness and ability will take him."

The Times Style and Usage Guide (first published in 2003 by The Times of London) recommends avoiding sentences like

• "If someone loves animals, they should protect them."

by using a plural construction:

• "If people love animals, they should protect them."

The Cambridge Guide to English Usage" (2004) finds singular they "unremarkable":

"For those listening or reading, it has become unremarkable—an element of common usage.

It expresses several preferences.

• "Generic/universal their provides a gender-free pronoun, avoiding the exclusive his and the clumsy his/her. It avoids gratuitous sexism and gives the statement broadest reference . . . They, them, their are now freely used in agreement with singular indefinite pronouns and determiners, those with universal implications such as any(one), every(one), no(one), as well as each and some(one), whose reference is often more individual . . ."

The Economist Style Guide refers to the use of they in sentences like

• "We can't afford to squander anyone's talents, whatever colour their skin is."

as "scrambled syntax that people adopt because they cannot bring themselves to use a singular pronoun".

The New Hart's Rules is aimed at those engaged in copy editing, and the emphasis is on the formal elements of presentation including punctuation and typeface, rather than on linguistic style but—like The Chicago Manual of Style—makes occasional forays into matters of usage. It advises against use of the purportedly gender-neutral he, and suggests cautious use of they where he or she presents problems.

". . . it is now regarded. . . as old-fashioned or sexist to use he in reference to a person of unspecified sex, as in every child needs to know that he is loved. The alternative he or she is often preferred, and in formal contexts probably the best solution, but can become tiresome or long-winded when used frequently. Use of they in this sense (everyone needs to feel that they matter) is becoming generally accepted both in speech and in writing, especially where it occurs after an indefinite pronoun such as everyone or someone, but should not be imposed by an editor if an author has used he or she consistently."

The 2011 edition of the New International Version Bible uses singular they instead of the traditional he when translating pronouns that apply to both genders in the original Greek or Hebrew. This decision was based on research by a commission that studied modern English usage and determined that singular they (them/their) was by far the most common way that English-language speakers and writers today refer back to singular antecedents such as whoever, anyone, somebody, a person, no one, and the like."

澳大利亞使用指南

已隱藏部分未翻譯內容，歡迎參與翻譯。

The Australian Federation Press Style Guide for use in preparation of book manuscripts recommends "Gender-neutral language should be used", stating that use of they and their as singular pronouns is acceptable.

英語語法使用指南

已隱藏部分未翻譯內容，歡迎參與翻譯。

According to A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language (1985):

"The pronoun they is commonly used as a 3rd person singular pronoun that is neutral between masculine and feminine. . . . At one time restricted to informal usage. it is now increasingly accepted in formal usage, especially in [American English].

The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language discusses the prescriptivist argument that they is a plural pronoun and that the use of they with a singular "antecedent" therefore violates the rule of agreement between antecedent and pronoun, but takes the view that they, though primarily plural, can also be singular in a secondary extended sense, comparable to the purportedly extended sense of he to include female gender.

Use of singular they is stated to be "particularly common", even "stylistically neutral" with antecedents such as everyone, someone, and no one, but more restricted when referring to common nouns as antecedents, as in

• "The patient should be told at the outset how much they will be required to pay."
• "A friend of mine has asked me to go over and help them . . ."

Use of the pronoun themself is described as being "rare" and "acceptable only to a minority of speakers", while use of the morphologically plural themselves is considered problematic when referring to someone rather that everyone (since only the latter implies a plural set).

There are also issues of grammatical acceptability when reflexive pronouns refer to singular noun phrases joined by or, the following all being problematic:

• "Either the husband or the wife has perjured himself." [ungrammatical]
• "Either the husband or the wife has perjured themselves." [of questionable grammaticality]
• "Either the husband or the wife has perjured themself." [typically used by only some speakers of Standard English].

On the motivation for using singular they, A Student's Introduction to English Grammar states

"this avoidance of he can't be dismissed just as a matter of political correctness. The real problem with using he is that it unquestionably colours the interpretation, sometimes inappropriately. . . he doesn't have a genuinely sex-neutral sense".

The alternative he or she can be "far too cumbersome", as in

• "Everyone agreed that he or she would bring his or her lunch with him or her.

or even " flatly ungrammatical", as in

• "Everyone's here, isn't he or she?

"Among younger speakers", use of singular they even with definite noun-phrase antecedents finds increasing acceptance, "sidestepping any presumption about the sex of the person referred to", as in

• "You should ask your partner what they think."
• "The person I was with said they hated the film." Example given by Huddleston et al.

語法和邏輯分析

已隱藏部分未翻譯內容，歡迎參與翻譯。

Steven Pinker suggests that "singular" they and plural they can be regarded as a pair of homonyms — two words with different meanings but the same spelling and sound. However, this analysis is not extended to you, another originally plural pronoun that has come to have singular use.

分布

已隱藏部分未翻譯內容，歡迎參與翻譯。

Distributive constructions apply a single idea to multiple members of a group. They are typically marked in English by words like each, every and any. The simplest examples are applied to groups of two, and use words like either and or—"Would you like tea or coffee?". Since distributive constructions apply an idea relevant to each individual in the group, rather than to the group as a whole, they are most often conceived of as singular, and a singular pronoun is used.

• "England expects that every man will do his duty."—Nelson (1806, referring to a fleet crewed by male sailors)
• "Every dog hath his day." —John Ray A Collection of English Proverbs (1670), originally from Plutarch, Moralia, c. 95 AD, regarding the death of Euripides.

However, many languages, including English, show ambivalence in this regard. Because distribution also requires a group with more than one member, plural forms are sometimes used.

引用和非引用照應語

已隱藏部分未翻譯內容，歡迎參與翻譯。

According to the traditional analysis, English personal pronouns (e.g. his, her, their) are typically used to refer backward (or forward) within a sentence to a noun phrase (which may be a simple noun). This reference is called an anaphoric reference, and the referring pronoun is termed an anaphor.

The so-called singular they is morphologically plural, and is accompanied by a plural verb. However, it is often used in circumstances where an indeterminate antecedent is signified by an indefinite singular antecedent; for example,

• "The person you mentioned, are they coming?"

In some sentences, typically those including words like every or any, the morphologically singular antecedent does not refer to a single entity but is "anaphorically linked" to the associated pronoun to indicate a set of pairwise relationships, as in the sentence:

• "Everyone returned to their seats." (where each person is associated with one seat)

One explanation given for the use of they to refer to a singular antecedent is notional agreement, when the antecedent is seen as semantically plural, as in the Shaw quotation

• "No man goes to battle to be killed." . . . "But they do get killed. [Merriam-Webster's Concise Dictionary of English Usage]

In other words, in the Shaw quotation no man is syntactically singular, demonstrated by taking the singular form goes; however, it is semantically plural (all go [to kill] not to be killed), hence idiomatically requiring they.

Linguists like Pinker and Huddleston explain sentences like this (and others) in terms of bound variables, a term borrowed from logic. Pinker prefers the terms quantifier and bound variable to antecedent and pronoun.

The word reference is traditionally used in two different senses:

1. the relationship between an anaphor (e.g. a pronoun) and its antecedent;
2. the relationship between a noun phrase and the real-world entity (the referen).

With a morphologically singular antecedent, there are a number of possibilities, including the following:

• coreferential, with a definite antecedent (the antecedent and the anaphoric pronoun both refer to the same real-world entity):
  • "Your wife phoned but she didn't leave a message."
• coreferential with an indefinite antecedent:
  • "One of your girlfriends phoned, but she didn't leave a message."
  • "One of your boyfriends phoned, but he didn't leave a message.
  • "One of your friends phoned, but they didn't leave a message."
• reference to a hypothetical, indefinite entity
  • "If you had an unemployed daughter, what would you think if she wanted to accept work as a pole dancer?"
  • "If you had an unemployed child, what would you think if they wanted to accept work as a mercenary or a pole dancer?"
• a bound variable pronoun is anaphorically linked to a quantifier (no single real-world or hypothetical entity is referenced):
  • "Nobody knew where they were."
  • "Every woman present sat with their breasts in full view."

認知效率

複數代詞they用於指代單數先行詞的用法逐漸增多，一些研究嘗試斷定這種用法會不會讓理解變得更「困難」。 此研究之一是，《性別中性搜尋：單數they是對性別通用he在認識上的一個高效替代嗎？》Foertsch與Gernsbacher著，他們發現「單數they是對性別通用he或she在認識上的一個高效替代，尤其是當先行詞沒有明確所指的時候」（例如anybody或者a nurse），而很少用於指代確定的一個人的時候（例如a runner I knew或者my nurse）。單數they的語句讀起來「就像包含了先行詞具有常規性別映像對應的有性代詞的語句一樣快」（例如護士用she，卡車司機用he），並且「比包含了與先行詞常規性別映像的性別相反有性代詞語句更快」（例如護士用he，卡車司機用she）。

與其它代詞的對比

代詞they的單數用法和複數用法可以與代詞you作比較。曾經you只能作為複數使用，對應的單數形式為thou。但是在大約1700年左右，you取代了thou，作為單數形式使用，並且動詞依然使用複數形式。

另見

• 一致性
• 邊界變化代詞
• 英語人稱代詞
• 英語的性別中性語言
• 性別中性代詞
• 性別酷兒
• 性別指定與性別中性代詞
• 名義一致性
• 斯皮瓦克代詞
• They

原例子的源頭

• Atkinson, Nancy. A One Way One Person Mission to Mars. 4 March 2008 [17 January 2014]. （原始內容存檔於2010-06-24）. 
• Austen, Jane. Mansfield Park. Richard Bentley. 1833 [2014-07-26]. （原始內容存檔於2014-03-11）. 
• Bagehot, Walter. Speech in Portsmouth, 10 November 1910. The Liberal Magazine (Liberal Publication Department (Great Britain)). 1910, 221915 [2014-07-26]. （原始內容存檔於2014-03-11）. 
• Barzun, Jacques. Simple and Direct. Harper and Row. 1985. 
• Bleumenthal, Albert. Debate on abortion (演講). 1975. 
• Cuellar, Jessica. A Study of Presidential State of the Union Addresses: The Sells and Arguments that are Used. Oklahoma State University. ProQuest. 2008. ISBN 9780549992882. 
• Byron, Baron George Gordon Byron. Werner, a Tragedy. A. and W. Galignani. 1823 [2014-07-26]. （原始內容存檔於2014-03-11）. 
• Cable, George Washington. Old Creole Days. 1907 [1879] [2014-07-26]. （原始內容存檔於2014-07-02）. 
• Canadian government. Canadian War Veterans Allowance Act (1985) as amended 12 December 2013 (pdf). Government of Canada. 12 December 2013 [19 April 2014]. R.S.C., 1985, c. W-3. （原始內容存檔 (PDF)於2020-04-30）. 
• Canadian government. Immigration and RefugeeProtection Regulations (2002) as amended 6 February 2014 (pdf). Government of Canada. 6 February 2014 [19 April 2014]. SOR/2002-227. （原始內容存檔 (PDF)於2020-12-12）. 
• Caxton, William. Richardson, Octavia , 編. The right plesaunt and goodly historie of the foure sonnes of Aymon. Early English Text Society. 1884: 38f [c. 1489] [11 January 2014]. 
• Caxton, William. Bradley, Henry , 編. Dialogues in French and English. Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co. Ltd. for the Early English Text Society. 1890: 11 [c. 1483] [11 January 2014]. 
• Chaucer, Geoffrey. The Pardoner's Prologue. Benson, Larry Dean (編). The Riverside Chaucer. Oxford University Press. 2008 [1395] [2014-07-26]. ISBN 9780199552092. （原始內容存檔於2015-04-02）. 
• Chesterfield, Philip Dormer Stanhope Earl of. Letters to his Son, CCCLV, dated 27 April 27, 1759. The Works of Lord Chesterfield. Harper. 17591845 [2014-07-26]. （原始內容存檔於2014-03-11）. 
• Defoe, Daniel. The Family Instructor. Brightly and Childs. 1816 [2014-07-26]. （原始內容存檔於2014-03-11）. 
• Fries, Joseph P. The inflections and syntax of present-day American English with especial reference to social differences or class dialects: the report of an investigation financed by the National Council of Teachers of English and supported by the Modern Language Association and the Linguistic Society of America. Bolton, W.F.; Crystal (編). The English Language Volume 2 Essays by Linguistics and Men of Letters 1858-1964. Cambridge University Press Archive. 1969 [1940] [2014-07-26]. ISBN 9780451140760. （原始內容存檔於2015-04-02）. 
• Hislop, Ian. Ian Hislop. The Listener (British Broadcasting Corporation). 1984, 111. 
• Huxley, Thomas Henry. A Liberal Education. Kessinger Publishing. 2005. ISBN 9781425357603. 
• Lash, Joseph P. Eleanor and Franklin. Penguin Group (Canada). 1981 [1971] [2014-07-26]. ISBN 9780451140760. （原始內容存檔於2015-04-02）. 

quoted in Reader' Digest, 1983, as an example of its awkwardness when referring to both sexes.

• Paley, William; Paley, Edmund; Paxton, James. The Works of William Paley: The principles of moral and political philosophy. C. and J. Rivington and J. Nunn. 1825 [2014-07-26]. （原始內容存檔於2014-03-11）. 
• Ruskin, John. The Works of John Ruskin: The Crown of Wild Olive. George Allen. 1873 [1866] [2014-07-26]. （原始內容存檔於2014-03-11）. 
• Shakespeare, , W.; Loffelt, Antonie Cornelis. Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. J. L. Beijers en J. van Boekhoven. 1867 [2014-07-26]. （原始內容存檔於2014-03-11）. 
• Shaw, George Bernard. Caesar and Cleopatra. Floating Press. 2011 [2014-07-26]. ISBN 9781775453499. （原始內容存檔於2015-04-02）. 
• Spillius, Alex. US elections: Hillary Clinton 'about to drop out'. The Telegraph. 12 May 2008 [2014-07-26]. （原始內容存檔於2020-11-08）. 
• Thackeray, William Makepeace. The Works of William Makepeace Thackeray : in 22 Volumes: Vanity fair 2. Smith, Elder. 1868 [2014-07-26]. （原始內容存檔於2015-04-02）. 
• Thackeray, William Makepeace. On Lett's Diary. The Works of William Makepeace Thackeray 20. Smith, Elder. 1869 [2014-07-26]. （原始內容存檔於2015-04-02）. 
• UNO. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. United Nations Organization. 1948 [2014-07-26]. （原始內容存檔於2011-02-27）. 
• Weiss, R.E.; Kaplan, S.A.; Fair, W.R. Management of Prostate Diseases. Cambridge; New York: Professional Communications Inc. 2004 [2014-07-26]. ISBN 9781884735950. （原始內容存檔於2015-04-02）. 

參考書目

• Adendyck, C. [Letter commenting on] Hypersexism And the Feds. The New York Times. 7 July 1985 [2014-07-26]. （原始內容存檔於2020-10-10）. 

• The American Heritage Book of English Usage: A Practical and Authoritative Guide to Contemporary English. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. 1996 [2014-07-26]. ISBN 9780547563213. （原始內容存檔於2015-04-02）. 

• American Psychological Association. Publication manual of the American Psychological Association 5th. 2001. 
• Baskervill, W.M.; Sewell, J.W. An English Grammar. 1895 [17 December 2013]. （原始內容存檔於2009-09-24）. 
• University of Chicago Press. The Chicago Manual of Style: The Essential Guide for Writers, Editors, and Publishers 14th. University of Chicago Press. 1993. ISBN 0226103897. 
• University of Chicago Press. The Chicago Manual of Style 16th. University of Chicago Press. 2010. ISBN 9780226104201. 
• Choy, Penelope; Clark, Dorothy Goldbart. Basic Grammar and Usage 8th. Cengage Learning. 2010 [2014-07-26]. ISBN 9781428211551. （原始內容存檔於2015-04-02）. 
• Griggs, Brandon. Facebook goes beyond 'male' and 'female' with new gender options. CNN. 13 February 2014 [2020-10-22]. （原始內容存檔於2018-10-16）. 
• Curzan, Anne. Gender Shifts in the History of English. Studies in English Language. Cambridge University Press. 2003 [2014-07-26]. ISBN 9781139436687. （原始內容存檔於2015-04-02）. 
• Economist Style Guide. Studies in English Language 10th. The Economist Group / Profile Books. 2010. ISBN 978-1-846-68606-1. 
• Edzard, Dietz Otto. Handbuch der Orientalistik. Brill. 2003. 
• Federation Press Style Guide for Use in Preparation of Book Manuscripts (pdf). [14 January 2014]. （原始內容存檔 (PDF)於2013-05-10）. 
• Fisher, Ann. A New Grammar (reprinted in facsimile) 2nd. Newcastle upon Tyne: R.C. Alston. 17501974 [1745]. 
• Fowler, Henry Ramsey; Aaron, Jane E. The Little, Brown Handbook 5th. HarperCollins. 1992: 300–301. ISBN 067352132X. .
  N.B.: This is not the English usage authority Henry Watson Fowler.
• Fowler, H.W.; Crystal, David. A Dictionary of Modern English Usage. Oxford University Press. 2009 [1926]. ISBN 9780199585892. 
• Fowler, H.W.; Gowers, Sir Ernest. A Dictionary of Modern English Usage. Oxford University Press. 1965. 
• Fowler, H.W.; Burchfield, R.W. The New Fowler's Modern English Usage. Oxford University Press. 1996. ISBN 9780198610212. 
• Foertsch, Julie; Gernsbacher, Morton Ann. In Search of Gender Neutrality: Is Singular They a Cognitively Efficient Substitute for Generic He? (PDF). Psychological Science. March 1997, 8 (2): 106–111 [2014-07-26]. （原始內容 (pdf)存檔於2015-05-02）. 
• Garner, Bryan A. Garner's Modern American Usage. Oxford University Press. 2003. ISBN 0195161912. 
• Gowers, Ernest; Fraser, Bruce. The Complete Plain Words. H.M. Stationery Office. 1973. ISBN 0117003409. 
• Gowers, Ernest; Gowers, Rebecca. Plain Words. London: Particular. 2014 [2014-07-26]. ISBN 9780241960356. （原始內容存檔於2014-04-08）. 
• Gowers, Ernest. Plain words. London: Particular. 2014. ISBN 9780241960356. 

• Huang, C.T.J. Between Syntax and Semantics. Taylor & Francis. 2009 [2014-07-26]. ISBN 9780203873526. （原始內容存檔於2015-05-12）. 
• Huddleston, Rodney; Pullum, Geoffrey. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press. 2002. ISBN 0-521-43146-8. 
• Huddleston, Rodney D.; Pullum, Geoffrey K. A Student's Introduction to English Grammar. Cambridge University Press. 2005. ISBN 9780521848374. 
• Matossian, Lou Ann. Burglars, Babysitters, and Persons: A Sociolinguistic Study of Generic Pronoun Usage in Philadelphia and Minneapolis (PDF). Institute for Research in Cognitive Science. University of Pennsylvania Press. 1997 [2006-06-10]. （原始內容 (PDF)存檔於2012-02-19）. 
• Merriam-Webster's Concise Dictionary of English Usage. Penguin. 2002. ISBN 9780877796336. 
• Miller, Casey; Swift, Kate. Kate Mosse , 編. The Handbook of Non-Sexist Writing for Writers, Editors and Speakers 3rd British. The Women's Press. 1995 [1981]. ISBN 07043-44424. 
• Newman, Michael. What Can Pronouns Tell Us? A Case Study of English Epicenes. Studies in language (John Benjamins). 1998, 22 (2): 353–389. ISSN 0378-4177. 
• Oxford University Press. New Hart's Rules. New Oxford Style Manual. Oxford University Press. 2012. ISBN 9780199657223. 
• Peters, Pam. The Cambridge Guide to English Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2004 [2014-07-26]. ISBN 9783125331877. （原始內容存檔於2014-02-01）. 
• Ostade, Ingrid Tieken-Boon van. Female grammarians of the eighteenth century. University of Leiden. 28 August 2000 [2014-07-26]. （原始內容存檔於2011-06-09）. 
• Pauwels, Anne. Linguistic sexism and feminist linguistic activism. Holmes, Janet and Meyerhoff, Miriam (eds.) (編). The Handbook of Language and Gender. Malden, MA: Blackwell. 2003. ISBN 0631225021. 
• Pinker, Steven. The Language Mavens. The Language Instinct. Penguin. 1995 [1994]. ISBN 0140175296. 
• Berry, Chris; Brizee, Allen. Using Pronouns Clearly. [2014-08-02]. （原始內容存檔於2014-07-12）. 
• Quirk, Randolph; Greenbaum, Sidney; Leech, Geoffrey; Svartvik, Jan. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. Harlow: Longman. 1985. ISBN 9780582517349. 
• Safire, William. On Language; You Not Tarzan, Me Not Jane. The New York Times. 28 April 1985 [2014-07-26]. （原始內容存檔於2020-10-10）. 
• Strunk, William; White, E.E.B. The Elements of Style 3rd. Allyn & Bacon. 1979. ISBN 9780205191581. 
• Swan, Michael. Practical English Usage 3rd. Oxford University Press. 2009. ISBN 9780194420983. 
• Warenda, Amy. They (pdf). The WAC Journal. April 1993, 4 [28 December 2013]. （原始內容存檔 (PDF)於2020-12-06）. 
• New Bible draws critics of gender-neutral language. The Washington Post. Associated Press. 17 March 2011 [23 November 2013]. （原始內容存檔於2020-12-12）. 
• Williams, Joseph M. Style: The Basics of Clarity and Grace. Longman. 2008. ISBN 978-0205605354. 

外部連結

• "Anyone who had a heart (would know their own language) （頁面存檔備份，存於網際網路檔案館）", Geoff Pullum著, 電台訪談的摘錄