Question 1 (Consolidate)
Complete the following table, indicating with a tick or a cross whether the given pronoun examples are part of a subjective/objective pair (taking different forms) and whether they’re marked for number (singular or plural), possession, person (1st, 2nd, 3rd), gender.
Answer/discussion
| | subjective/
objective | number | possession | person | gender |
| we | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ | ✓ | ✗ |
| them | ✓ | ?✗ | ✗ | ✓ | ✗ |
| you | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ | ✗ |
| he | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ | ✓ | ✓ |
| mine | ✗ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ |
With regard to the subjective/objective pairs, you and mine take the same forms in both subjective and objective positions. Although we is generally assumed to be plural (hence the tick), it’s occasionally used with a singular referent, such as the ‘royal we’. Them is primarily plural, but often refers to just one person, as in Someone’s in danger – I must help them. Mine can refer to both singular and plural referents, but it still means ‘belonging to a single speaker’:
singular
Which is your coat?
Mine is the bright blue one. / The bright blue one is mine.
plural
Which are your shoes?
Mine are the muddy ones / Those muddy ones are mine.
Question 2 (Explore)
In certain circumstances, the fact that the pronoun you can refer to one or to more than one person can lead to confusion. Teacher/student classroom interaction is an obvious example. Can you identify any strategies speakers use to clarify who is being spoken to?
Answers/ discussion
On a practical level, speakers often make it clear who they’re speaking to simply by looking at the person(s) concerned. On a linguistic level, additional elements can be combined with you to make the addressee clear: you two, you all, you lot. A further strategy is to refer to someone by name or some other distinguishing feature: Luke/person with the red jumper, please could you open the window?
Question 3 (Explore)
For many decades, there has been an interest in establishing a gender-neutral third-person singular pronoun which is neither belittling (it) or over-formal (one). They has recently become the preferred non-binary option, although some speakers prefer alternatives such as zie or per. Linguistically, how likely is it that a (currently) less-known option like this could become fully integrated into the pronoun system?
Answer/discussion
Changes to the small sets of grammatical words are rare, not least because the sets are perceived as complete. However, changes have taken place to the pronoun system over time (see Section 13.11) so it’s not impossible that a new element could be added. The adoption of any new word relies on a recognised need and then widespread acceptance. One possible obstacle to acceptance is when a word feels unfamiliar and, if encountered first in a written form, speakers are uncertain how to pronounce it. A further problem with a new pronoun is the uncertainty surrounding its inflectional forms. Would the proposed form stand for both subjective and objective functions, and how would the possessive and reflexive functions be expressed? The degree of irregularity and suppletion in the pronoun system makes it much harder for speakers to predict these forms, in contrast to being able to add regular inflections to new nouns or verbs, for example.
