[vim/vim] Update usr_51.txt (PR #13496)
ccn
use their instead of his as the user may not be male
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/13496
Commit Summary
- afa3943 Update usr_51.txt
File Changes
(1 file)
- M runtime/doc/usr_51.txt (6)
Patch Links:
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
K.Takata
@k-takata commented on this pull request.
> @@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ NOT LOADING It is possible that a user doesn't always want to load this plugin. Or the system administrator has dropped it in the system-wide plugin directory, but a -user has his own plugin he wants to use. Then the user must have a chance to +user has their own plugin he wants to use. Then the user must have a chance to
"he" should be also changed?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Christian Brabandt
I am just mentioning it here for reference here: https://vimhelp.org/helphelp.txt.html#inclusion
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
errael
I am just mentioning it here for reference here: https://vimhelp.org/helphelp.txt.html#inclusion
:help inclusion says
Some people have suggested using "they",
but that is not regular English
Actually, it is "regular English".
I'm not sure when the above was written, but the Wikipedia article Singular they says
This use of singular they [as a gender-neutral third-person pronoun] had emerged
by the 14th century [and] has been commonly employed in everyday English ever since
and that it's use in formal writing was questioned but
Its continued use in modern standard English has become more common and
formally accepted with the move toward gender-neutral language ...
by 2020, most style guides accepted the singular they as a personal pronoun
And the following, unrelated to gender neutral documentation, is interesting to note.
In the early 21st century, use of singular they with known individuals
emerged for people who do not exclusively identify...
They in this context was named Word of the Year for 2015 by the American
Dialect Society, and for 2019 by Merriam-Webster. In 2020, the American
Dialect Society also selected it as Word of the Decade for the 2010s.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Shane-XB-Qian
>
> `:help inclusion` says
>
> > Some people have suggested using "they",
> > but that is not regular English
>
> Actually, it is "regular English".
this is a tech community it does waste many times to argu such.
// i supposed you were not english-native person too, let it be~ :smile:
--
shane.xb.qian
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Christian Brabandt
It might be regular English, but as a non-English native speaker, it sounded unusual to me (although I got used to it) and I don't remember being taught that this is regualar English.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
ccn
I had not read the inclusion section before I made this.
I'll leave it up to the main members to decide whether or not this should go through
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Shane-XB-Qian
> I'll leave it up to the main members to decide whether or not this should go through
wish or let's not make the 'main members' difficult to handle such "sensitive" but not much 'tech' kind stuff things.
// so let me try to answer you instead. :smile:
--
shane.xb.qian
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
D. Ben Knoble
Sticking our heads in the sand and refusing to deal with it because it isn't "technical" only means we are content with the status quo and won't change it. I'm not content with the status quo of "he" as "gender neutral" in technical writing. Singular "they" is accepted and encouraged in academic and technical writing:
- https://gist.github.com/0xabad1dea/8870b192fd1758743f66
- https://apastyle.apa.org/blog/singular-they
- https://writing.stackexchange.com/q/2979/33198
The use of "they" is very established and poses practically no problems (when ambiguity is introduced, we should be writing without pronouns anyway to remove it).
I am not saying we need to overhaul all of runtime/doc right now; perhaps it could be done gradually by requiring that changes to documentation also update the pronouns of touched lines? If someone wants to take the time to update the pronouns, why stop/discourage them?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Shane-XB-Qian
to be clear: here no one discourage something, but just same saying his/her/its /ones or my disagree / agree.
--
shane.xb.qian
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
dkearns
It might be regular English, but as a non-English native speaker, it sounded unusual to me (although I got used to it) and I don't remember being taught that this is regualar English.
Judging by your profile picture, I have a few years on you but I was taught this usage in the mid '80s. Use of he, he/she, or even she was openly derided by most of my teachers.
Whether we speak anything approaching regular English in Australia is open to debate.
Here's the old thread: #6535 (comment)
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Marvin Renich
> isn't "technical" only means we are content with the status quo and
> won't change it. I'm not content with the status quo of "he" as
> "gender neutral" in technical writing. Singular "they" is accepted and
> encouraged in academic and technical writing:
> - https://apastyle.apa.org/blog/singular-they
> - https://writing.stackexchange.com/q/2979/33198
> The use of "they" is very established and poses practically no
> problems (when ambiguity is introduced, we should be writing without
> pronouns anyway to remove it).
a pronoun that has since the beginning of the English language been
specifically plural, and trying to use it as sometimes-plural,
sometimes-singular, is extremely confusing in many circumstances.
Attempting to claim otherwise is sticking your head in the sand.
The analogy that "you" can be either singular or plural does not hold
any water at all. Again, this has been that way from the beginning of
the English language, and it still causes confusion occasionally, but
_everyone_ is aware of the potential confusion, and clarification is
usually made when necessary. This is not so with written documents that
may easily outlive any current political correctness, where the context
may be lost in the future.
Especially in technical writing, the use of "he" as gender-nonspecific
is absolutely clear; there is no specific person to whom the pronoun
refers, so it _must_ be nonspecific.
Several other suggestions from the gender variant community, such as
ze/zir, have been made that are completely unambiguous. Choose one of
those. Everyone, especially the gender variant community, should be
pushing back on the use of "they" as singular.
...Marvin
errael
no one discourage something
:help inclusion essentially says
- "he/his" are the pronouns to use in the help text
- "they/their" should not be used
Reading that full paragraph I see excuses and inaccuracies.
And to be clear, I do not see bad intentions.
The only sentences I wholeheartedly agree with is
- Vim is for everybody, no matter race, gender or anything.
- The goal is that the reader understands how Vim works, the exact wording is secondary.
But I don't see a reason or justification to recommend using outdated pronouns which some find offensive.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
errael
Here's the old thread: #6535 (comment)
Thanks. I have never seen a thread with more passionate participation; and Bram finally locking it with:
Looks like we heard all opinions at least twice now.
One thing that's fascinating to me: a lot of the dissension, to using "they/their", comes from non-native English speakers. That may have more to say about those responsible for their curriculum, rather than native English itself. That would fit with the statement
some grammarians, especially toward the end of the 1800s, declared that
singular “they” is incorrect grammar.
Taken from the entertaining article with it's many examples from literature.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
errael
I had not read the inclusion section before I made this.
I'll leave it up to the main members to decide whether or not this should go through
The change suggested in #13496 (comment) should be made before this would be included. (Not to say that it would be even if the suggested change is made)
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Ernie Rael
a pronoun, [they], that has since the beginning of the English language been specifically plural,
That statement is inaccurate; it's as though you're saying English sprang into existence fully formed and did not evolve. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they (or some of the several other references).
It would be useful if those taking the position that "they/their"
should not be used would provide some supporting references.
-ernie
D. Ben Knoble
It seems some mailing list comments are not being mirrored here. This is the mailing list thread for the PR if you want to subscribe: https://groups.google.com/g/vim_dev/c/ZrHIa9QMEUI
And thank you Ernie for responding to a message I had missed on the mailing list.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
ccn
@cuppajoeman pushed 1 commit.
- 76f6fad Update usr_51.txt
—
View it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
errael
However changing the whole documentation will be a huge effort. But if people are willing to do the work, than I am willing to merge (but it must serve the goal of keeping the documentation understandable).
The original PR, #6535, references the Google developer documentation style guide on how to write gender-neutral technical documentation.
I looked a little at that PR and compared it with what the doc is now. Instead of just substituting pronouns, the text can often be re-written such that pronouns are not required. That's also one of the suggestions I saw in at least one of the many references.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
ccn
I know it is controversial, but if this serves the goal of being more inclusive and people feel no longer hurt, it is fine with me. However changing the whole documentation will be a huge effort. But if people are willing to do the work, than I am willing to merge (but it must serve the goal of keeping the documentation understandable).
@cuppajoeman can you please also fix the mentioned "he" from Kens comment?
Yes, just fixed other instances.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
ccn
@cuppajoeman commented on this pull request.
> @@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ NOT LOADING It is possible that a user doesn't always want to load this plugin. Or the system administrator has dropped it in the system-wide plugin directory, but a -user has his own plugin he wants to use. Then the user must have a chance to +user has their own plugin he wants to use. Then the user must have a chance to
Newest commit fixes this
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Tony Mechelynck
[…]
One thing that's fascinating to me: a lot of the dissension, to using "they/their", comes from non-native English speakers. […]
Maybe so; but let us not forget that Vim, its developers and users, are a motley lot: I wouldn't be surprised if more than a majority (of active developers, anyway) had other mother languages than English. Bram himself was a Dutchman, Christian is German, I am Belgian, and several of the most active developers are Israeli, Russian, Chinese, Japanese, you name it; and among all these "second-language English speakers" only a few use what I would call "obviously awkward language" when writing in English.
I have come to tolerate this "plural they" use which was never used when I learnt English some 60 years or so ago, and later only in colloquial language or in militantly battle-of-all-sexes language; but I am reluctant to use it myself when talking about what is obviously a single person — I would prefer either some forms like "you", "(s)he", or to turn the phrase another way so that none of he, she or they (or their derivatives) would have to be used.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
errael
[…]
One thing that's fascinating to me: a lot of the dissension, to using "they/their", comes from non-native English speakers. […]
Maybe so; but let us not forget that Vim, its developers and users, are a motley lot: I wouldn't be surprised if more than a majority (of active developers, anyway) had other mother languages than English.
Yes, during this discussion I guessed over half. That contributed to the conjecture that the educational system gave a restricted sense of "proper English".
Bram himself was a Dutchman, Christian is German, I am Belgian, and several of the most active developers are Israeli, Russian, Chinese, Japanese, you name it; and among all these "second-language English speakers" only a few use what I would call "obviously awkward language" when writing in English.
I have come to tolerate this "plural they" use which was never used when I learnt English some 60 years or so ago, and later only in colloquial language or in militantly battle-of-all-sexes language;
Unless the references are incorrect, Singular they, has been around since the 14th century. It was criticized by the experts in the 18th century and experienced a resurgence with the early 21st century move toward gender-neutral language. It is now formally accepted.
but I am reluctant to use it myself when talking about what is obviously a single person — I would prefer either some forms like "you", "(s)he", or to turn the phrase another way so that none of he, she or they (or their derivatives) would have to be used.
I'm not a linguist or cultural anthropologist but one thing I'm curious about is how someone's native language affects their perception and use of a 2nd language. I wonder if the French, where everything has a gender, or the Germans, which don't have (AFAIK) gender neutral pronouns, are especially dismayed by rising popularity of gender-neutral language.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Shane-XB-Qian
I felt you already hurt yourself. ahahaha~
vim is a tech community, changing such things not sure if would improve the difference, or would say this perhaps just was not the right place (definitely there were some difference).
> Bram himself was a Dutchman, Christian is German, I am Belgian, and several of the most active developers are Israeli, Russian, Chinese, Japanese.
I am Chinese, not sure yepaggan where from.
I think the doc the main purpose should focus on clearing the meaning and giving direct specification, others not a matter unless he/she/it/one was doing it on purpose.
// yea, for example like this: he/she/it/one.
// how about changing to 'it' or 'one'. :smile:
// even it just was a 'he', supposed everyone knew it did not mean a "man" was doing that on purpose.
--
shane.xb.qian
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
D. Ben Knoble
I felt you already hurt yourself. ahahaha~
I don't understand this joke. I don't see how it's relevant here, either.
vim is a tech community, changing such things not sure if would improve the difference, or would say this perhaps just was not the right place (definitely there were some difference).
I thought "Vim is for everybody"? People use Vim for more than just programming. Or perhaps I've misunderstood what you meant by "vim is a tech community"–care to elaborate on what you mean and why that should impede using gender-neutral language?
I and others have said (repeatedly) that this change makes a difference and improves the status quo. Are you confused about how this improves matters? I'm sure we'd be happy to explain if there's something that isn't clear; you need only ask.
I am Chinese, not sure yepaggan where from. I think the doc the main purpose should focus on clearing the meaning and giving direct specification, others not a matter unless he/she/it/one was doing it on purpose. // yea, for example like this: he/she/it/one. // how about changing to 'it' or 'one'. 😄 // even it just was a 'he', supposed everyone knew it did not mean a "man" was doing that on purpose.
…
It's hard for me to understand this comment. I think I hear you say "The docs should focus on clarity." Is that right? (The rest seems like a joke about "it," which is an offensive way to refer to people in English.)
RE: clarity, I and others argue that at worst this does not harm clarity, and we have already established that it has other benefits. This makes it a net positive. I personally believe it is an improvement to clarity.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Shane-XB-Qian
about that word 'they' someone had answered you (in the mail) that's a not interested and perhaps wrong political correction.
// to be clear again: to me whatever you use, even let's speak Chinese (let's forget that horrible English) maybe better, :-)
--
shane.xb.qian
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
K.Takata
@k-takata commented on this pull request.
> +user has their own plugin they want to use. Then the user must have a chance to disable loading this specific plugin. These lines will make it possible: >⬇️ Suggested change
-user has their own plugin they want to use. Then the user must have a chance to -disable loading this specific plugin. These lines will make it possible: > +user has their own plugin they want to use. Then the user must have a chance +to disable loading this specific plugin. These lines will make it possible: >
> +But what if the user wants to define their own key sequence? We can allow that with this mechanism: >⬇️ Suggested change
-But what if the user wants to define their own key sequence? We can allow that -with this mechanism: > +But what if the user wants to define their own key sequence? We can allow +that with this mechanism: >
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
JohnBeckett
ccn
@cuppajoeman pushed 1 commit.
- f00fd34 Update runtime/doc/usr_51.txt
—
View it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
errael
To those interested, one way or the other, in the topic of gender neutral language there is #13509.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Christian Brabandt
Merged #13496 into master.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.