The English language is lacking three words. I have noticed this linguistic gap periodically over the years, and more so now that I am a blogger. But the other day it really came to a head. So I have decided to invent three new words to fill the gap. These new words are sheem, shim, and hez.Let me explain.
As you recall, in my last entry I was talking about what you should do when approaching a door with a person walking behind you. At what distance are you obliged to hold the door for him or her?
Wait, stop! Look at the last four words of the question I just posed—“for him or her.” The proper construction of the question requires a singular personal pronoun because it refers back to the words “a person” in the previous sentence. Do you follow? Thus, it would be incorrect for me to say “for them” in this instance, because “them” is plural. And I can’t say “for it,” because “it” is not a personal pronoun—“it” refers to things.
I find that in certain situations (my last blog entry being an example), I am constantly having to write “he or she,” “him or her,” or “his or her.” The result, in my view, is writing that becomes repetitive, strained, and even awkward. Why must I continually have to insert two pronouns? Why isn’t there just one pronoun to account for this?
Let me sum up what I am trying to say by posing the problem like this: In the English language, there is no such thing as a singular, personal, but non-gender-specific pronoun. Again, if I am talking in a plural sense, I can use them or they. If I am talking about something that is not a person, I can use it. If I am talking about a male I can use he, and if a female, she. But if talking about a singular person where gender is not specified, I have to use two pronouns—“he or she,” “him or her,” or “his or her.” Are you still with me?
My solution to this problem is to invent three new words: sheem, shim, and hez. They sound funny when you first read or say them, I admit, but I suggest that the reason for this is because they’ve never been used before. Specifically, then, I propose that:
In instances where one would write or say “he or she,” the word sheem shall be used.
In instances where one would write or say “him or her,” the word shim shall be used.
In instances where one would write or say “his or her,” the word hez shall be used.
There are three reasons why I chose sheem, shim, and hez as the new words. First, any pronoun has to be short. Nobody wants to be saddled with pronouns that are two or three syllables, especially when we are all used to I, we, they, him, etc. Second, they need to have a “roll off the tongue” quality, much like our present pronouns. I believe that sheem, shim, and hez have that quality. I can picture young children quite naturally learning their pronouns—I, you, he, she, sheem, it, etc.—without skipping a beat. And third, the new words must have a similar sound to existing pronouns. I believe my new words do. In other words, sheem is a much better candidate to substitute for “he or she” than dup, or something like that.
As a quick example, you might recall that in my last blog entry I wrote the following sentence: “I think it would be nicer if the person just went on his or her way and did not hold the door for me.” Implementing my new words, this sentence would now be: “I think it would be nicer if the person just went on hez way and did not hold the door for me.” Much easier and less cumbersome, don’t you think?
So, do you like this idea? Would you be willing to accept and incorporate three new words into your daily vocabulary to repair this long-festering hole in the English language? I’m just asking you to think about it. Believe me, I wouldn’t force a person to do anything that sheem wouldn’t want to do.
The easiest solution, though politically incorrect in these times, is just to revert to “his” (encompassing ‘his and ‘hers’), “he” and “him”, the masculine encompassing the feminine as in “his”.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I am not especially pleased with your choices (sheem, shim and hez). “Hez”, for “his and “her”, I like fine. My problem with “sheem” and “shim” is that these two words have the feminine sound (“sh”) leading off; This takes me, and I think most folks, out of their comfort zone because we are HABITUATED to lead with the masculine sound, that is, “his and hers” not “hers and his”.
Thus, I would choose “hesh”, “hime” (OK, I not crazy about that one) and “hish” in place of “sheem”, “shim” and “hez”, respectively.
I suspect I would NOT be willing to incorporate these new words into my regular vocabulary usage, though, like you, I often find it tedious to have to say “him or her”, and so forth. These new words are just too weird!!!
Is there another language that has one word that means she or he, her or him, etc. I am just curious how other languages handle this.
ReplyDeleteAllen, I don't think it always simply a matter of political correctness. In writing anyway. Sometimes him or her helps identify the gender of the person being referenced. Usually the name is a dead giveaway but not always. And sometimes it does matter if the person being referenced is a her or him. For instance in running magazines when "she" wins the race and beats all the men.
I have noticed some writing styles that economize word usage and I can see using alternatives to she/he, etc being used in some circles. I can see a Latin word being used for instance that means he or she, etc.
I got to thinking after I wrote this that indeed, this is a (relatively) new problem. For in the past, we did just use the masculine form to cover non-gender specific situations. But you are right Dad, this is not politically correct as egalitarianism has won the day in our culture.
ReplyDeleteLove them. Sound rather Biblical to me!
ReplyDelete