# he/she= it or they



## La_Nereida

Hi!

Me encontré con algunos problemas al traducir un texto en castellano que está redactado íntegramente en pasiva. Y el problema surge a la hora de encontrarle un "sujeto neutro" para poder armar esas oraciones en activa en inglés. Siempre tengo la misma duda al respecto. 

El contexto es una evaluación de desempeño de los empleados de una empresa y tiene oraciones cómo: (Cada item está dividido en grados y cada grado tiene un cierto puntaje)

"Grado D: En muchas ocasiones hay que controlarlo, registra deficiencias en su trabajo."

My shot:

" On many occasions, he /she needs to be controlled. He/she registers deficiencies in his/her quality of work. "


Thanks in advance!


----------



## Chris K

La_Nereida said:


> [...]
> 
> My shot:
> 
> " On many occasions, he /she needs to be controlled. He/she registers deficiencies in his/her quality of work. "
> 
> Thanks in advance!


 
Your version is fine, except that we probably would say "he or she" and "his or her," at least when speaking aloud. You can also do something like the following, however:

On many occasions, *the employee* needs to be controlled (managed?) , and deficiencies are noted in his / her work."


----------



## La_Nereida

Mmmm... okay. But is there a way to replace the ambiguity with a pronoum? I'm pretty sure you can use IT or THEY when you're not sure if the person you're refering to is male or female. I just don't know what will work best in this specific sentence.


----------



## Chris K

La_Nereida said:


> Mmmm... okay. But is there a way to replace the ambiguity is a pronoum? I'm pretty sure you can use IT or THEY when you're not sure if the person you're refering is male or female. I just don't know what will work best in this specific sentence.


 
"It" is never used for a person, except (very rarely) for babies. It's not unusual in spoken English to hear things like "every employee has to do their job on time," but it's not considered correct and should be avoided in written English. There are no gender-neutral singular pronouns for people, unfortunately.


----------



## Dlyons

La_Nereida said:


> Mmmm... okay. But is there a way to replace the ambiguity with a pronoum? I'm pretty sure you can use IT or THEY when you're not sure if the person you're refering to is male or female. I just don't know what will work best in this specific sentence.



You can use "their" e.g.

On many occasions, the employee needs to be controlled, and deficiencies are noted in *their *work."


----------



## La_Nereida

Mmmm.. now, I'm kinda lost.So, it is or it is not correct to use "their" in this specific usage in written English? I've seen it a bunch of times... but when it comes to being me the one who writes it, I wanna be extra-sure.


----------



## Chris K

La_Nereida said:


> Mmmm.. now, I'm kinda lost.So, it is or it is not correct to use "their" in this specific usage in written English? I've seen it a bunch of times... but when it comes to being me the one who writes it, I wanna be extra-sure.


 
As I said, you will see "they" and "their" used that way frequently. I might be a little more uncomfortable with using it than DLyons is, but speakers differ and there are some advantages to doing it his way. You have to decide how formal you want your document to be; in some contexts strict "correctness" in this instance might not be necessary. Otherwise you still have the option of saying "his or her" and "he and she."


----------



## Dlyons

Chris K said:


> As I said, you will see "they" and "their" used that way frequently. I might be a little more uncomfortable with using it than DLyons is, but speakers differ and there are some advantages to doing it his way. You have to decide how formal you want your document to be; in some contexts strict "correctness" in this instance might not be necessary. Otherwise you still have the option of saying "his or her" and "he and she."



Yes, speakers vary on this.  It might be seen as a little formal but, in these days of political correctness, it has the great advantage of being gender-neutral.


----------



## polyglotguy

> Mmmm.. now, I'm kinda lost.So, it is or it is not correct to use "their" in this specific usage in written English? I've seen it a bunch of times... but when it comes to being me the one who writes it, I wanna be extra-sure.



It's fine if it's conversational written English to use "they" as a singular pronoun. You can read more about "Singular they" here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they


----------



## La_Nereida

Well, all this has been very enlightening 
Thanks a bunch 

I'll probably copy and paste some sentences on this specific topic that I have doubts about. I hope I can get some comments from you. It'd be very useful! Thanks again


----------



## La_Nereida

Here I have an example of a sentence I'm doubtful about:

This item assesses the accuracy and tidiness with which *the employee* performs *their* tasks, without affecting the established workload, and showing they fully understand them. 
 
Thanks in advance


----------



## La_Nereida

Another example:

"The employee always makes excellent suggestions, provides suitable changes and has enough initiative to make changes on *their* own."

Sounds strange... but I just can't keep on using his/her all the time. There hundreds of sentences like this in the report, it ends up being a burden for the reader the HE/SHE thing. :/


----------



## dross

In British English it's perfectly acceptable to use they/their/them as a singular gender-neutral pronoun. In American English, as Chris K points out, it is informal if not wrong. There is usually a way around the awkward "he or she" constructs if you're working in American English.


----------



## PBSeattle

It is often possible to avoid this problem by omitting the pronoun entirely.  For example: 

"This item assesses the accuracy and tidiness with which the employee performs their tasks, without affecting the established workload, and showing they fully understand them."

A reduced-pronoun version does just as well:  "This item assess the accuracy and tidiness with which the employee performs tasks [or assigned tasks], without affecting the established workload, and shows full understanding of them."


----------



## La_Nereida

dross said:


> In British English it's perfectly acceptable to use they/their/them as a singular gender-neutral pronoun. In American English, as Chris K points out, it is informal if not wrong. There is usually a way around the awkward "he or she" constructs if you're working in American English.


 
Yes, I AM working on American English... and to be honest, I don't see a way around. The report is full if not based on these kind of sentences. It is madnesssssssssss!!!


----------



## dross

PBSeattle's suggestion can get you around one of them. Others can be done by pluralizing the subject: 
"This item assesses the accuracy and tidiness with which the employees perform their tasks, without affecting the established workload, and showing they fully understand them."


----------



## La_Nereida

PBSeattle said:


> It is often possible to avoid this problem by omitting the pronoun entirely. For example:
> 
> "This item assesses the accuracy and tidiness with which the employee performs their tasks, without affecting the established workload, and showing they fully understand them."
> 
> A reduced-pronoun version does just as well: "This item assess the accuracy and tidiness with which the employee performs tasks [or assigned tasks], without affecting the established workload, and shows full understanding of them."


 
Yes, I see what you mean. I have to re-read it looking carefully for ways around, like the one you've just pointed out. The thing is, I really don't dare leaving conjugated verbs without subject in English. It's too dangerous.


----------



## La_Nereida

dross said:


> PBSeattle's suggestion can get you around one of them. Others can be done by pluralizing the subject:
> "This item assesses the accuracy and tidiness with which the employees perform their tasks, without affecting the established workload, and showing they fully understand them."


 
This option is also a very good one, thanks 
It's a pity this "singular they" doesn't work in American English... because I've already translated the entire document with that structure and changing all that again is a headache :/.


----------



## dross

Och well. It may be worth doing all the same, as Americans really don't like it. You can always post more examples if you get stuck.


----------



## La_Nereida

dross said:


> Och well. It may be worth doing all the same, as Americans really don't like it. You can always post more examples if you get stuck.


 
Thank you  I really appreaciate all your help and I'll probably do so ^^


----------



## PBSeattle

Well in this case the subject of "shows" is "the employee".  As long as it's one sentence, the subject is carried along from clause to clause.  I agree, though, that relying on that is dangerous.  Especially in a document like an employee manual, where people are likely to be scrutinizing every word in the midst of tense situations. Having the "without..." clause between the two verbs makes it harder of course (and I'm not sure what that intermediate clause means, actually).


----------



## inib

I've found this discussion very interesting. While context nearly always sorts out ambiguity in the Spanish lack of subject pronouns and the repetition of other pronouns/adjectives (se, su, suyo etc), and admired the Spanish simplicity, I rather preferred the English exactness of number and gender. 
Nevertheless, these examples show that so much "he", "she" and "it" + "they" really don't help at all, especially in these days of political correctness. ¡Viva el "su"!
I'm sorry. I've only made a comment, but offered no help!


----------



## La_Nereida

inib said:


> I've found this discussion very interesting. While context nearly always sorts out ambiguity in the Spanish lack of subject pronouns and the repetition of other pronouns/adjectives (se, su, suyo etc), and admired the Spanish simplicity, I rather preferred the English exactness of number and gender.
> Nevertheless, these examples show that so much "he", "she" and "it" + "they" really don't help at all, especially in these days of political correctness. ¡Viva el "su"!
> I'm sorry. I've only made a comment, but offered no help!


 
I agree! It's a pain having to sort this things out!
All comments are welcome! Thank you


----------



## La_Nereida

PBSeattle said:


> Well in this case the subject of "shows" is "the employee". As long as it's one sentence, the subject is carried along from clause to clause. I agree, though, that relying on that is dangerous. Especially in a document like an employee manual, where people are likely to be scrutinizing every word in the midst of tense situations. Having the "without..." clause between the two verbs makes it harder of course (and I'm not sure what that intermediate clause means, actually).


 
Thank you, PB! Yes, the Spanish version is not very clear and that doesn't help AT-ALL. Now, I'll do my best to make all the changes necessary so that it sounds acceptable in American English and if any doubt arises I'll probably get back to you... to ALL of you


----------



## La_Nereida

Doubt #1: 
"The employee’s production is clearly superior to those of *their *partner’s or workmates’ in the company."

I guess that in this particular case the best thing is to replace "their" for "his/her"... right?

PS: THAT or THOSE is the one I should use here?
PS2: Unfortunately... in this particular case I cannot go with the "making it plural" solution because it's using the singular form in purpose to show that the production of THAT particular employee is higher than the rest of his/her workmates'.


----------



## La_Nereida

Doubt #2:
"The employee produces even amounts under normal circumstances and in general, (they) always complies with the recognized standards. "

I took that (they) out because I didn't dare leaving the second clause without subject, although it's a coordinate clause and I know I CAN do it... still, it's a long sentence. Opinions? Is it clear to a native this way?


----------



## La_Nereida

Doubt #3:
"Many times, he/she finishes his/her tasks before the deadline is due."

Is this OK?


----------



## La_Nereida

Doubt #4:

Mi first version:
"The employee needs closer monitoring than normal. Frequently, they do not meet the deadlines assigned."
 
My revised version:
"The employee needs closer monitoring than normal and does not frequently meet the deadlines assigned."


----------



## Dlyons

La_Nereida said:


> Doubt #1:
> "The employee’s production is clearly superior to those of *their *partner’s or workmates’ in the company."



"The employee’s production is clearly superior to that of partners or workmates in the company."

No need for their or his/hers.  Note apostrophes.


----------



## Dlyons

La_Nereida said:


> Doubt #2:
> "The employee produces even amounts under normal circumstances and in general, (they) always complies with the recognized standards. "



"The employee produces even amounts under normal circumstances and in general, always complies with the recognized standards. "

No need for "they".  "in general, always" is either contradictory or tautological depending on what exactly is meant by "in general"

"The employee produces even amounts under normal circumstances and *generally *complies with the recognized standards. " ???


----------



## Dlyons

La_Nereida said:


> Doubt #3:
> "Many times, he/she finishes his/her tasks before the deadline is due."
> 
> Is this OK?



"The employee often finishes assigned tasks before the deadline is due."


----------



## Dlyons

La_Nereida said:


> Doubt #4:
> 
> Mi first version:
> "The employee needs closer monitoring than normal. Frequently, they do not meet the deadlines assigned."
> 
> My revised version:
> "The employee needs closer monitoring than normal and does not frequently meet the deadlines assigned."



For me, "frequently doesn't meet" is considerably worse performance than "doesn't frequently  meet".


----------



## weeshus

Dlyons said:


> "The employee often finishes assigned tasks before the deadline is due." Assigned tasks are often completed by the employee (this employee) before the deadline is due






La_Nereida said:


> Doubt #2:
> "The employee produces even amounts under normal circumstances and in general, (they) always complies with the recognized standards. In general and under normal circumstances the employee/this employee produces even amounts and complies with the recognised standards"





La_Nereida said:


> Doubt #3:
> "Many times, he/she finishes his/her tasks before the deadline is due." Many times assigned tasks are completed by the employee/this employee before deadlines are due
> 
> Is this OK?



My suggestions above are to try to solve the political correctness stupidity that we all struggle with and also to attempt to avoid the he/she/they conundrum. 

Perhaps by *not starting* each sentence with "The employee" and thus "the employee" is no longer the subject the problem(s) can be circumvented.

I hope they help

regards
weeshus


----------



## inib

weeshus said:


> My suggestions above are to try to solve the political correctness stupidity that we all struggle with and also to attempt to avoid the he/she/they conundrum.
> 
> Perhaps by *not starting* each sentence with "The employee" and thus "the employee" is no longer the subject the problem(s) can be circumvented.
> 
> I hope they help
> 
> regards
> weeshus


 Congratulations Weehus. *How is it that none of us thought of it before?* 
It's late and I might be being a bit stupid, but when I read the original post saying that the structures  were in passive, I didn't quite agree, but I found the discussion fascinating, and have followed it avidly. 
Nevertheless, even with the hint offered by LaNereida, it never ocurred to me that the perfect solution was, indeed, the *passive*, and so, so natural in English.


----------



## La_Nereida

La_Nereida said:


> Hi!
> 
> Me encontré con algunos problemas al traducir un texto en castellano que está redactado íntegramente *CON SUJETO TÁCITO*. Y el problema surge a la hora de encontrarle un "sujeto neutro" para poder armar esas oraciones en activa en inglés. Siempre tengo la misma duda al respecto.
> 
> El contexto es una evaluación de desempeño de los empleados de una empresa y tiene oraciones cómo: (Cada item está dividido en grados y cada grado tiene un cierto puntaje)
> 
> "Grado D: En muchas ocasiones hay que controlarlo, registra deficiencias en su trabajo."
> 
> My shot:
> 
> " On many occasions, he /she needs to be controlled. He/she registers deficiencies in his/her quality of work. "
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance!


 
Aquí dejo enmendado el fisrt post que es el que tenía el error. Claramente, no es pasiva, sino que es sujeto tácito. Mil gracias, Inib, por la observación 
La voz pasiva es una buena alternativa, y creo que no la vimos desde un principio por mi identificación errónea  de cuál era el problema en cuestión y mi insistencia de no querer usar la pasiva en inglés. 

Ya tengo todo el documento escrito en voz activa, con todas las modificaciones y sugerencias que me fueron dando. Voy a sopesar la idea de cambiarlo, pero por ahora, me gusta como quedó. 

Mil gracias a todos los que aportaron su granito de arena "racking your brains" para tratar de ayudarme


----------



## La_Nereida

weeshus said:


> My suggestions above are to try to solve the political correctness stupidity that we all struggle with and also to attempt to avoid the he/she/they conundrum.
> 
> Perhaps by *not starting* each sentence with "The employee" and thus "the employee" is no longer the subject the problem(s) can be circumvented.
> 
> I hope they help
> 
> regards
> weeshus


 
Very goos suggestion, thanks a bunch Weeshus


----------



## La_Nereida

Dlyons said:


> For me, "frequently doesn't meet" is considerably worse performance than "doesn't frequently meet".


 
Thanks for taking the time to correct all my doubts. You rock!


----------



## inib

La_Nereida said:


> Aquí dejo enmendado el fisrt post que es el que tenía el error. Claramente, no es pasiva, sino que es sujeto tácito. Mil gracias, Inib, por la observación
> La voz pasiva es una buena alternativa, y creo que no la vimos desde un principio por mi identificación errónea de cuál era el problema en cuestión y mi insistencia de no querer usar la pasiva en inglés.
> 
> Ya tengo todo el documento escrito en voz activa, con todas las modificaciones y sugerencias que me fueron dando. Voy a sopesar la idea de cambiarlo, pero por ahora, me gusta como quedó.
> 
> Mil gracias a todos los que aportaron su granito de arena "racking your brains" para tratar de ayudarme


No merit of mine. It was Weehus who put us on the right track. And thanks to all for an interesting discussion.


----------

