OK, I’ll bite; do we need a concept for a “dual they” or a “ternary they”.
If so, then fine “singular they” deserves to be called out too. If not, then treating “singular they” as a special case just gives bigots space to claim that it’s some sort of deviation from the norm which then gives them cover for falsely claiming that usage is incorrect.
we don’t need a new pronoun, the existing singular “they” is fine. bigots don’t understand it, and think that it’s grammatically incorrect. they are wrong. we don’t need to cater to their ignorance.
OK, I’ll bite; do we need a concept for a “dual they” or a “ternary they”.
If so, then fine “singular they” deserves to be called out too. If not, then treating “singular they” as a special case just gives bigots space to claim that it’s some sort of deviation from the norm which then gives them cover for falsely claiming that usage is incorrect.
I think sanskrit has singular, dual, and ‘three and above’ nouns and pronouns
we don’t need a new pronoun, the existing singular “they” is fine. bigots don’t understand it, and think that it’s grammatically incorrect. they are wrong. we don’t need to cater to their ignorance.