# EN: make himself understood



## lowwa132

I have this sentence :
_ Nobody could succeed in being understood._


I have to change it...

Is "_Nobody could make himself understood_" correct ?


----------



## ramaud

lowwa132 said:


> I have this sentence :
> _Nobody could succeed in being understood._
> 
> 
> I have to change it...
> 
> Is "_Nobody could make himself understood_" correct ?


 

I'd say "nobody could make themselves understood"
nobody/everybody s'accorde avec le pluriel (car ne faisant référence à aucune personne en particulier - ni homme ni femme!)

but let's wait for the natives


----------



## lowwa132

OK c'était sur ce point précis sur lequel je n'étais absolument pas sûr


----------



## Suehil

'Nobody could make himself understood'  Nobody is singular.


----------



## lowwa132

OK thanks a lot


----------



## donques

It's really not that simple. There is a difference between how pronouns and verbs are treated with indefinite pronouns such as _nobody_.

After all, *nobody* in *their* (plural) right mind *believes* (singular) that this is a hard and fast rule; do *they* ?

It is obviously advisable for _anybody_ doing a test, where a prescriptive reply is desired, to write "Nobody can make _himself_ understood", but _they_ should understand that these constructions are semantically driven in everyday usage.


----------



## ramaud

donques said:


> It's really not that simple. There is a difference between how pronouns and verbs are treated with indefinite pronouns such as _nobody_.
> 
> After all, *nobody* in *their* (plural) right mind *believes* (singular) that this is a hard and fast rule; do *they* ?
> 
> It is obviously advisable for _anybody_ doing a test, where a prescriptive reply is desired, to write "Nobody can make _himself_ understood", but _they_ should understand that these constructions are semantically driven in everyday usage.


 

can you explain this to me, then?
you say "nobody in their mind......" so you consider 'nobody' as plural refering to several people, don't you??
but then you should say "nobody can make himself..." - here, nobody stands for only one person (singular!)

:?


----------



## Tim~!

Simple.

Because we dont want to get in a mess with saying "s/he", "his/her" all the time, we use "they", but it's singular.

"If you see *someone* on the ground, you should take *their* pulse and call a doctor for *them*" is a lot better than "If you see *someone* on the ground, you should take *his or her/the person's* pulse and call a doctor for *him or her/the person*." 

It's really not complicated.  "They" replaces "he" or "she" when we don't know the sex of the person to whom we are referring.  If it's used for a singular person, conjugate the verbs in the singular.


----------



## donques

Caesar: No Cleopatra. *No man* _goes_ to war to get killed.
Cleopatra: But *they* _do_ get killed
Caesar and Cleopatra by George Bernard Shaw

No question of gender confusion here.


----------



## ramaud

Tim~! said:


> Simple.
> 
> Because we dont want to get in a mess with saying "s/he", "his/her" all the time, we use "they", but it's singular.
> 
> "If you see *someone* on the ground, you should take *their* pulse and call a doctor for *them*" is a lot better than "If you see *someone* on the ground, you should take *his or her/the person's* pulse and call a doctor for *him or her/the person*."
> 
> It's really not complicated. "They" replaces "he" or "she" when we don't know the sex of the person to whom we are referring. If it's used for a singular person, conjugate the verbs in the singular.


 

I understand this and this is what I've been taught!!
but.... how come you should say 'nobody can make *himself* understood'
if I follow the rule it should be 'nobody can make *themselves* understood'
why do we suddenly have to use a gender?


----------



## Suehil

'Nobody' is grammatically singular, so 'himself' is actually correct.  Using 'themselves' is a convenience, not a rule, because there is no neutral singular pronoun.


----------



## donques

Ramaud, I *don't* insist on Iowwa132 writing "Nobody could make *himself* understood"
(S)He wrote that (s)he had to change one sentence into another form, hence I advise answering in this way if that is what is expected; if (s)he is being taught  English Grammar in a prescriptive way.
I hope the following link can help you
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alastair_Haines/Backup


----------



## rjfrt

This is an example of "the generic use of man". In English, there is a strong feminist, and now linguistic movement, to make non-specific (pro)nouns androgenous (sexless). 
Examples include: Fireman --> Firefighter, 'If he' --> 'If he/she'. etc.

Neither of the approaches outlined above by Donques or Suehil are wrong, but I would advise that 'himself' is now becoming less commonly used. And although 'their' should technically be grammatically incorrect in this context, the language has evolved to incorporate this politically correct usage.

The exception is that if all of the subjects in question are known to be men, himself may be used to emphasise this fact.


----------



## ramaud

Ok, thank you all for your explanation!!
(I'm not a feminist though!!  )


----------



## donques

The issue of gender is relevant to present day usage. However this issue arose long before political correctness. Look to the link below. 

http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=77931


----------



## rjfrt

I understand your point but it's a bit like saying the internet has been around since the 1920's. The internet has existed in a neglegible form since then, but it only showed up on the radar in the 80's/90's - which is relevant to the age it is generally given.

Moreover, I don't think that's the issue here, it's the current usage of the term... and either/or is acceptable: one is gramatically incorrect but socially accepted, the other is gramatically correct but is facing eventual extinction.


----------



## lowwa132

Hi,

My english teacher told me today : "make themselves understood"
He said that "Nobody" is a plural...


----------



## jann

lowwa132 said:


> My english teacher told me today : "make themselves understood"
> He said that "Nobody" is a plural...


There are two separate questions here.  

The first question is about "nobody."  I'm sorry, but your English teacher is simply incorrect.  This pronoun is *singular*.  You need only show your teacher a different example sentence to convince him of his error:

Nobody are here.  
Nobody is here 

Your teacher will agree that using the verb "are" for 3rd person plural sounds awful and is totally incorrrect.  We must use 3rd person singular.  "Nobody" is a singular pronoun.

The second question is about whether we should say "themselves" or "himself" in this particular sentence. People agree to disagree - because both are possible. On the one hand, we don't want to use "themselves" because it is plural. But on the other hand, we don't want to use "himself" because we are also thinking about women in addition to men. In other words, the sentence cannot be 100% accurate no matter what we do: we will have to pick between a gender-based usage (reflecting reality) and a number-based usage (reflecting grammar). These days, people tend towards gender-based usage.  Whether they are wrong to do so is a question outside the scope of this forum.

I hope that makes sense.


----------



## lowwa132

Yes, thank you for this answer and explainations of the other members 

If you want some lessons in french dont' hesitate


----------

