not_IO@lemmy.blahaj.zone to Microblog Memes@lemmy.worldEnglish · 9 days agothey don't mindlemmy.blahaj.zoneimagemessage-square113linkfedilinkarrow-up1694arrow-down117file-text
arrow-up1677arrow-down1imagethey don't mindlemmy.blahaj.zonenot_IO@lemmy.blahaj.zone to Microblog Memes@lemmy.worldEnglish · 9 days agomessage-square113linkfedilinkfile-text
minus-squarestinky@redlemmy.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4arrow-down2·8 days agoyou did though, it was your first line: My hot take: there’s no such thing as “singular they”
minus-squareJankatarch@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·edit-23 days agoThey are saying plural means 1 or many while singular means only 1. So ‘they’ was always plural and plural always included singular. Sadly dictionary definition says plural does not include 1.
minus-squareMeThisGuy@feddit.nllinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·8 days agopedantic language nerds on Lemmy? no way!
minus-squareMeThisGuy@feddit.nllinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·8 days agonm, the rest of the thread is the same… you are not alone.
minus-squareprocrastitron@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·edit-28 days agoIt’s obvious what I meant from that is the opposite of how you are construing it. You need to actually read the entire comment.
minus-squarestinky@redlemmy.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·8 days agoit’s not obvious, sorry. if it were, people would be agreeing with you
you did though, it was your first line:
They are saying plural means 1 or many while singular means only 1. So ‘they’ was always plural and plural always included singular.
Sadly dictionary definition says plural does not include 1.
pedantic language nerds on Lemmy? no way!
nm, the rest of the thread is the same… you are not alone.
It’s obvious what I meant from that is the opposite of how you are construing it. You need to actually read the entire comment.
it’s not obvious, sorry. if it were, people would be agreeing with you