this post was submitted on 27 May 2026
23 points (75.6% liked)

Books

8055 readers
213 users here now

A community for all things related to Books.

Rules

  1. Be Nice. No personal attacks or hate speech.
  2. No spam. All posts should be related to discussion or reviews related to books. (Please avoid posts that are just a link to the book and a generic summary)
  3. No self promotion.

Official Bingo Posts:

Related Communities

Community icon by IconsBox (from freepik.com)

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
dresden@discuss.online
dresden_do@lemmy.world
JaymesRS@literature.cafe
JaymesRS@lemmy.world
dresden@piefed.world
23
Reading "The Left Hand of Darkness" by Le Guin, did she forget about the singular "they" while writing this? (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by belluck@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/books@lemmy.world
52 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

It just seems incredibly odd for there to be so many lines in a book about gender insisting that there is no way to refer to someone (in the English language, at least) without implying gender. She even mentions the possibility of using „it“ at one point!

I’m liking the book otherwise, but every time the narrators ponder about pronouns without even considering „they“ I have to ask myself if there is any point in ignoring it or if she genuinely just forgot. I don’t think it’s possible for her to have not known about it considering how well-read she was and how long it’s been in use.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The singular version of "they" is "one". Fite me.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world -1 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

it only works in passive constructions.

'one bites the dog' is a legit sentence, but in English it is passive/detached/non-agenic. one is not actively biting the dog here and now, it is a statement of possibility or frequency.

that construction works in other languages, for sure though. because they aren't english and their use of 'one' does not have the same non-agentic interpretation. but that isn't how english works, formally or colloquially. one is not a nominative pronoun in english, but it's legitimate in dative or accustive cases, if it's replacing him/her/it.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 1 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

It just sounds unfamiliar. It's perfectly grammatical, comprehensible, and avoids the ambiguities I deal with speaking with and about singular "theys" ten times every fucking day. In the realm of neopronouns, you're not going to find one better.