Hi, Alexander!  Recently you wrote in a message to Dallas Hinton:

AK>  I found in Wikipedia information that "they" can be
AK>  used as single pronoun:

AK>  _SINGULAR THEY_ is the use in English of the pronoun
AK>  _they_ or its inflected or derivative forms, _them_,
AK>  _their_, _theirs_, and _themselves_ (or _themself_),
AK>  as an epicene (gender-neutral) singular pronoun. It
AK>  typically occurs with an unspecified antecedent, as
AK>  in sentences such as:

AK>  "_The patient_ should be told at the outset how much
AK>  _they_ will be required to pay."
AK>  "But _a journalist_ should not be forced to reveal
AK>  _their_ sources."


           I can see some justification for it here, because it is easier than
writing "s/he" and "him/her" or trying to reason with a person who feels their
(!) gender is being ignored although they don't notice when the shoe is on the
other foot.  My CANADIAN OXFORD, however, lists "themself" as "disputed".  :-)



AK>  The singular _they_ had emerged by the 14th century,
AK>  about a century after plural _they_. It has been
AK>  commonly employed in everyday English ever since then,
AK>  though it has become the target of criticism since the
AK>  late-19th century.


           Hmm.  Fowler's cites some evidence in support of this idea, but I'm
doubtful "they" was commonly used as a gender-neutral pronoun between the late
1900's & the 1960's or early 1970's... when the feminists adopted it... except
maybe when people thought the government should fix something.  Typically when
grammarians voice an objection they encounter more popular resistance....  :-Q



AK>  Its use in formal English has become more common with
AK>  the trend toward gender-neutral language,


           It has become more common in recent years, but not because the mood
at the time of its resurgence took into account that our ancestors knew things
we might well pay attention to.  Quite the contrary... Jerry Rubin, e.g., made
headlines when he advised other folks not to trust anybody over 30.  I suppose
they must have followed his advice because he doesn't make headlines now.  ;-)



AK>  though most style guides continue to proscribe it.


           I would argue that if "most style guides continue to proscribe it",
it's not formal English.  There are degrees of formality, however... and I see
that, in general, academic standards are less formal than they once were.  :-)



AK>  In the early 21st century, use of singular _they_ with
AK>  known individuals has been promoted for those who do
AK>  not identify as male or female:

AK>  "This is my friend, _Jay_. I met _them_ at work."


           When introductions are being made it is customary to add a scrap of
information giving the other person a clue as to what might be a good topic to
begin a conversation with.  While I realize this is a hypothetical example I'm
inclined to think it would be enough to say e.g. "We met at work" or "Jay is a
computer programmer".  If I know Jay well enough I may be privy to information
s/he's not ready to share with the world at large, but referring to the friend
who is sitting or standing within arms' reach as "they" is AFAIC like making a
public announcement that his/her gender identity is nobody else's business.  I
am reminded of a colleague who insisted on being addressed as "Ms." years ago.
She claimed her marital status was nobody else's business... until she married
and insisted on being addressed as "Mrs.", that is.  Playing fancy tricks with
the language makes others more determined to find out what one is hiding.  :-)




--- timEd/386 1.10.y2k+
 * Origin: Wits' End, Vancouver CANADA (1:153/716)