death to singular 'they'

[fox]

'Note that if a child did not use the SDG [speaker's direction of gaze] strategy, they would be thrown back on the alternative, namely, assuming that a novel word uttered by a speaker refers to the object that they (the listener) are currently looking at.' from "Do Children with Autism Use the Speaker's Direction of Gaze Strategy to Crack the Code of Language?", by Simon Baron-Cohen, Dare A. Baldwin, and Mary Crowson, in Child Development, February 1997, 68(1), 48-57.

a child ... they. the listener are. can y'all hear me gouging my eyes out over here?

[eta: especially when there already is a plural antecedent! don't they see the confusion this can cause?! 'Parents do not announce to their infant, "look where I look when I utter a novel word" (because they wouldn't understand this anyway) ...']

answer me this: what the hell would have been wrong, in this context, with "if children did not use the SDG, they would be thrown back on the alternative, namely, assuming that a novel word uttered by a speaker refers [actually i'd prefer 'referred'] to the object that they (the listeners) are ['were'] currently looking at"? what?!

Comments

[the-emu.livejournal.com]

Though, I must add...

Since linguists are, at the very heart of what they do, looking at how we communicate, why, why oh why, are they such godawful communicators? Why do the very people who best understand how people take in information insist on using overly complex sentences, distanced style and impenetrable language?

Why are academic linguistic papers so fucking awfully written?

~deep breath~

I'd forgotten how much that bothered me.

8^-

in defense of linguists:

[darthfox.livejournal.com]

this is a psychology paper.

:-)