Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site lsuc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!msb
From: msb@lsuc.UUCP (Mark Brader)
Newsgroups: net.nlang
Subject: Re: Grammar and Spelling on the Net (some solutions)
Message-ID: <1149@lsuc.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 12-Mar-86 01:29:38 EST
Article-I.D.: lsuc.1149
Posted: Wed Mar 12 01:29:38 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 12-Mar-86 04:43:26 EST
References: <697@usl.UUCP>
Reply-To: msb@lsuc.UUCP (Mark Brader)
Distribution: net
Organization: Law Society of Upper Canada, Toronto
Lines: 35
Summary: 

James E. Wilson (jew@usl.UUCP) considers:
>     "If a person can't take the time to learn their own language..."
>     "If a person can't take the time to learn his [own] language..."
>     "If a person can't take the time to learn her [own] language..."
>     "If a person can't take the time to learn his/her [own] language..."
>     "If a person can't take the time to learn the language..."
>     "If a person can't take the time to learn his or her [own] language..."
And prefers:
>     "If a person can't take the time to learn one's [own] language..."

Count me among those who like the first one.  But as to the last,
I would like to point out a few more options:

	"If one can't take the time to learn his own language..."

This is normal English in the U.S., but the rest of the English-speaking
world considers it illogical that a pronoun should be needed to replace
another pronoun, and I think that this time they have a point.
Besides, we're back to the original problem.  Englishmen* and I would say:

	"If one can't take the time to learn one's own language..."

which meets all requirements, except that it sounds odd to Americans.
But there is also this possibility:

	"If you can't take the time to learn your own language..."

which is the most forceful of the lot, and is in fact what the original
poster probably meant.

Conclusion: use the second person where possible.

*I haven't yet heard a "non-sexist replacement" for this one!

Mark Brader