Q. What is your preference for expletives (as in CMOS 5.30)? I have been taught that “It’s important that you eat breakfast” should be changed by a vigilant editor to something else, like “You really should eat breakfast” or “Breakfast is an important meal of the day.” Are expletives acceptable or not preferred?
A. Expletive pronouns are popularly prohibited, but an editor would be overstepping to disallow one that is used idiomatically and unambiguously (as in your sentence). Rather like the passive voice, which is essential to good writing but is routinely excised by overzealous editors, expletives are sometimes the most efficient, clear, and even elegant way to express something.
Q. I have seen some texts using the pronoun her to refer to a business: “Apple’s profit was high due to her impressive product designs.” I would like to learn when I should use the feminine pronoun and when I should avoid it.
A. Use the feminine pronoun when referring to a female person or animal. Avoid using it to refer to a business, a ship, or any nonliving entity—especially in the presence of a female person.
Q. This is an excerpt from an investigative report:
Officer Doe said that Sgt. Smith takes sleeping pills while on duty. Officer Jones stated that on a couple of occasions, Sgt. Smith gave him sleeping pills to help him relax. When asked what time of day he would take these pills, Officer Jones responded, around 11:30 p.m.
It was unclear to me who he referred to, and I asked the writer for clarification. The answer I received from the writer was “The pronoun he refers to the last male proper name mentioned, therefore Jones, but I’ll make it clearer.” I had not heard this before. Is this a rule of writing?
A. Although it’s true that readers tend to think that a pronoun refers to the last name or noun mentioned, it’s not true that the pronoun always does so. For example,
The policeman gave the sergeant his phone number.
No one would think his referred to the sergeant. Or
Jed loves music, and Mark knows he buys recordings of operas. When asked where he buys them, Mark said, “Online.”
Mark is the last male proper name, but he probably refers to Jed. So the actual rule is that if there’s any doubt, the writer must clarify. I agree with you that the sentence you quoted needs clarification.
Q. When referring to a zombie, should I use the relative pronoun who (which would refer to a person) or that (since, technically, the zombie is no longer living)? Essentially, does a zombie cease to become a “person” in the grammatical sense?
A. Let’s assume this is a serious question, in which case you, as the writer, get to decide just how much humanity (if any) and grammatical sense you wish to invest in said zombie. That will guide your choice of who or that.
Q. I hope I’m not losing my mind. I’ve been told that “they” and “their” are used incorrectly in this sentence: “The telltale sign of a right-winger: they can’t write in English to save their lives.” I agree that it’s an awkward sentence, but is “they/their” used incorrectly? Thanks!
A. The use of they as a singular pronoun is a hot topic in online grammar forums. By traditional standards, the sentence is incorrect because it contains no plural noun for they to refer to. Traditionally, the correct versions are “The telltale sign of right-wingers: they can’t write in English to save their lives” and “The telltale sign of a right-winger: he can’t write in English to save his life.”
The growing acceptance of they as singular is in response to a need for a gender-neutral pronoun that avoids the use of he to mean he or she. Good writers would make right-winger plural to avoid the appearance of incorrectness or gender bias, but in other sentences the plural is not a good option: “Someone ate my Twinkie, and they’d better watch out!” In those contexts, many language experts now approve of the use of they. You can learn more by searching online for “singular they.”
Q. I’ve always thought that to avoid confusion a pronoun should rename the closest noun to it, but an
author says “the pronoun it is most naturally taken to repeat the subject of the sentence.” The pronoun in question renamed a noun
that immediately preceded it (not the subject). Is the author correct? Should it always refer to the subject rather than to the closest noun or pronoun?
A. “Always”? Of course not. Your author has in mind a sentence where it does not refer to the subject and we sense an awkward ambiguity: The money in the pool of blood reddened as it spread. But
it’s just as easy to write a perfectly clear sentence where it does not refer to the subject—or for that matter to the nearest noun: Did you see the eclipse last
night when it peaked? Both you and your author would do well to stop searching for a rule to govern all your sentences and
simply rephrase if it isn’t crystal clear what it refers to.
Q. Should she or it be used as a pronoun for a country?
A. Never use she to refer to a country. You’ll sound as if you either don’t know English or last
studied it in 1950.
Q. I would swear that I saw a reference in your manual that approved of the use of “their” instead of a gender-biased singular pronoun. For example, “If the user has completed installing the program, they should put the CD-ROM back in the package,” instead of “If the user has completed installing the program, s/he should put the CD-ROM back in the package,” but on your Q&A, you dance around the answer to the question and suggest that you do NOT approve of the singular “their.” Can you tell us what is acceptable?
A. Yes, you saw it at 2.98 (note 9) in the fourteenth edition, but there was some regret at having written it, and we decided to abandon the idea for the fifteenth and sixteenth editions. Though some writers are comfortable with the occasional use of they as a singular pronoun, some are not, and it is better to do the necessary work to recast a sentence or, other options having been exhausted, use he or she. For a fuller discussion of this issue, see paragraph 5.227 in CMOS 16 and the entry for “he or she” under the “Glossary of Problematic Words and Phrases” at paragraph 5.220. [Update: As of the seventeenth edition, Chicago still recommends avoiding singular they as a generic reference, at least in formal writing. See paragraph 5.48, which now also discusses the use of singular they to refer to someone who does not identify with a gender-specific pronoun.]
Q. PLEASE tell me what you are recommending when people need a gender-neutral singular possessive pronoun. In order to avoid
saying “his mind” or “her mind” (or,
God forbid, “his/her mind”) people are saying “their mind”—and
it blows MY mind—unless, of course, those people could be sure “they”
are “of one mind”! If you have a discussion on this issue, I’d
be most happy to receive it or be directed to it.
A. I’m afraid your gender-neutral pronoun (at least in the sense you need) does not exist in our lexicon.
I agree that the plural pronoun with a singular noun seems inadequate; I would suggest that you recast the sentence altogether
or at least make “mind” plural for agreement: their minds. Other writers alternate
between using “his” and “her” in such
constructions in order to give equal status to each pronoun.
Q. This is from today’s op-ed column in the Washington Post: “Two top fundraisers for Newt Gingrich quit Tuesday. . . . Neither Thomas nor Heitman returned an e-mail seeking comment on their departure.” Should that pronoun be plural, really?
A. If the departure was a joint one, then “their” is apt; if the departures were individual and unrelated, “his departure” is Chicago’s preferred phrasing. Although the use of “their” in place of a singular pronoun has been discussed endlessly in online forums, and many language experts have accepted it as standard usage, CMOS still considers it to be informal (see CMOS 5.256) and recommends against using it in formal writing. You can Google “their as singular” and catch up on this conversation.