[词典讨论] OED的he条目不收不分性别的用法？

• "Hastely hiȝed eche wiȝt..til þei neyȝþed so neiȝh..þere william & his worþi lef were liand i-fere." ("Each man hurried . . . till they drew near . . . where William and his darling were lying together.") - William of Palerne (1375)[31]
• "Eche on in þer craft ys wijs." ("Each one in their craft is wise.") — Wycliffe's Bible, Ecclus. 38.35 (1382)[32]
• "And whoso fyndeth hym out of swich blame, They wol come up..." — Chaucer, "The Pardoner's Prologue" of The Canterbury Tales (c. 1400)[33] quoted by Jespersen and thence in Merriam-Webster's Concise Dictionary of English Usage.[34]
• "Eche of theym sholde ... make theymselfe redy." — Caxton, Sonnes of Aymon (c. 1489)[35]
• "If a person is born of a ... gloomy temper ... they cannot help it." — Chesterfield, Letter to his son (1759);[36] quoted in Fowler's.[37]
• "A person can't help their birth." — Rosalind, in W. M. Thackeray, Vanity Fair (1848);[38] quoted from the OED by Curzan in Gender Shifts in the History of English.[39]
• "Now nobody does anything well that they cannot help doing" — Ruskin, The Crown of Wild Olive (1866);[40] quoted in Fowler's.[37]
• "Nobody in their senses would give sixpence on the strength of a promissory note of the kind." — Bagehot, The Liberal Magazine (1910);[41] quoted in Fowler's.[42]
  

• "If any one did not know it, it was his own fault." — George Washington Cable, Old Creole Days (1879);[44] quoted by Baskervill & Sewell.[45]
• "Every person who turns this page has his own little diary." — W. M. Thackeray, On Lett's Diary (1869);[46] quoted in Baskervill & Sewell, An English Grammar.[47]
• "Suppose the life and fortune of every one of us would depend on his winning or losing a game of chess." — Thomas Huxley, A Liberal Education (1868);[48] quoted by Baskervill & Sewell.[45]
• "No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality." — Article 15, Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948).[49]
  

When the antecedent includes both masculine and feminine, or is a distributive word, taking in each of many persons, – the preferred method is to put the pronoun following in the masculine singular ... Another way of referring to an antecedent which is a distributive pronoun [e.g. everybody] or a noun modified by a distributive adjective [e.g. every], is to use the plural of the pronoun following. This is not considered the best usage, the logical analysis requiring the singular pronoun in each case; but the construction is frequently found when the antecedent includes or implies both genders. The masculine does not really represent a feminine antecedent, and the expression his or her is avoided as being cumbrous.

• "Every one must judge according to their own feelings." — Lord Byron, Werner (1823),[57] quoted as "Every one must judge of [sic] their own feelings."[58]
• "Had the Doctor been contented to take my dining tables as any body in their senses would have done ..." — Jane Austen, Mansfield Park (1814);[59][58]
• "If the part deserve any comment, every considering Christian will make it to themselves as they go ..." — Daniel Defoe, The Family Instructor (1816);[60][58]
• "Every person's happiness depends in part upon the respect they meet in the world ..." — William Paley[61][58]
  

• "... let us keepe a naturall order, and set the man before the woman for manners sake". — Wilson, The arte of Rhetorique (1560);[62]
• "... the worthier is preferred and set before. As a man is set before a woman ..." — Wilson, The arte of Rhetorique (1560);[63]
  

• "The Masculine gender is more worthy than the Feminine." — Poole The English Accidence (1646);[64] cited by Bodine[65]
  

• indeterminate persons of both sexes:
  • "the ideal that every boy and girl should be so equipped that he shall not be handicapped in his struggle for social progress ..." — C. C. Fries, American English Grammar, (1940).[69]
    
• known persons of both sexes:
  • "She and Louis had a game – who could find the ugliest photograph of himself." — Joseph P. Lash, Eleanor and Franklin (1971)[70]
    
  
  

• "The patient should be informed of his therapeutic options." — a text about prostate cancer (2004)[71]
  

• "It wouldn't be as if the lone astronaut would be completely by himself." (2008)[72]
• "Kitchen table issues ... are ones the next president can actually do something about if he actually cares about it. More likely if she cares about it!" — Hillary Rodham Clinton (2008)[73]
  

• an indeterminate person of either sex:
  • "Now, a writer is entitled to have a Roget on his desk." — Barzun (1985);[74] quoted in Merriam-Webster's Concise Dictionary of English Usage[34]
  • "A Member of Parliament should always live in his constituency."[75]
    
  
  

• "Everyone did as he pleased"
  

From the earliest times until about the 1960s it was unquestionably acceptable to use the pronoun he (and him, himself, his) with indefinite reference to denote a person of either sex, especially after indefinite pronouns and determiners such as anybody,  ... every, etc., after gender-neutral nouns such as person ... [but] alternative devices are now usually resorted to. When a gender-neutral pronoun or determiner ... is needed, the options usually adopted are the plural forms they, their, themselves, etc., or he or she (his or her, etc.)

This section may stray from the topic of the article. Please help improve this section or discuss this issue on the talk page. (June 2019)

whether we may not, nay ought not, to use a neutral pronoun relative, or representative, to the word 'Person', where it hath been used in the sense of homo, mensch, or noun of the common gender, in order to avoid particularising man or woman, or in order to express either sex indifferently? If this be incorrect in syntax, the whole use of the word Person is lost in a number of instances, or only retained by some stiff and strange position of the words, as – 'not letting the person be aware wherein offense has been given' – instead of – 'wherein he or she has offended'. In my [judgment] both the specific intention and general etymon of 'Person' in such sentences fully authorise the use of it and which instead of he, she, him, her, who, whom."

The average American needs the small routines of getting ready for work. As he shaves or blow-dries his hair or pulls on his panty-hose, he is easing himself by small stages into the demands of the day.

• with somebody or someone:
  • "I feel that if someone is not doing their job it should be called to their attention." — an American newspaper (1984); quoted by Fowler.[97]
    
• with anybody or anyone:
  • "If anyone tells you that America's best days are behind her, then they're looking the wrong way." President George Bush, 1991 State of the Union Address;[98] quoted by Garner[99]
  • "Anyone can set themselves up as an acupuncturist." — Sarah Lonsdale "Sharp Practice Pricks Reputation of Acupuncture". Observer 15 December 1991, as cited by Garner[99]
  • "If anybody calls, take their name and ask them to call again later." Example given by Swan[1]
    
• with nobody or no one:
  • "No one put their hand up." Example given by Huddleston et al.[100]
  • "No one felt they had been misled." Example given by Huddleston et al.[2]
    
• even where the gender is known or assumed:
  • "Under new rules to be announced tomorrow, it will be illegal for anyone to donate an organ to their wife."[a] Ballantyne, "Transplant Jury to Vet Live Donors", Sunday Times (London) 25 3. 1990, as cited by Garner[99]
    
• with an interrogative pronoun as antecedent:
  • "Who thinks they can solve the problem?". Example given by Huddleston et al.; The Cambridge Grammar of the English language.[101]
    
• with everybody, everyone, etc.:
  • "Everyone promised to behave themselves." Example given by Huddleston et al.[2]
    
  
  

• "Everyone loves their mother."[104]
• "'I never did get into that football thing', she said after everyone returned to their seat."[105]
• "Everyone doubts themselves/themself at one time or another."
  

• "At first everyone in the room was singing; then they began to laugh." Example given by Kolln.[103]
• "Everybody was crouched behind the furniture to surprise me, and they tried to. But I already knew they were there." Example given by Garner.[106]
• "Nobody was late, were they?" Example given by Swan.[1]
  

• "At first everyone in the room was singing; then he or she began to laugh." Example given by Kolln.[103]
• "Everybody was crouched behind the furniture to surprise me, and he tried to. But I already knew he was there."
• "Nobody was late, was he?"
  

• "Everybody was crouched behind the furniture to surprise me, but they instead surprised themself."
  

Use with a generic noun as antecedent[edit]

The singular antecedent can also be a noun such as person, patient, or student:

• with a noun (e.g. person, student, patient) used generically (e.g. in the sense of any member of that class or a specific member unknown to the speaker or writer)
  • "... if the child possesses the nationality or citizenship of another country, they may lose this when they get a British passport." From a British passport application form; quoted by Swan.[1]
  • "cognitive dissonance: "a concept in psychology [that] describes the condition in which a person's attitudes conflict with their behaviour". — Macmillan Dictionary of Business and Management (1988), as cited by Garner.[99]
  • "A starting point would be to give more support to the company secretary. They are, or should be, privy to the confidential deliberations and secrets of the board and the company. — Ronald Severn. "Protecting the Secretary Bird". Financial Times, 6 January 1992; quoted by Garner.[99]
    
• with representatives of a class previously referred to in the singular
  • "I had to decide: Is this person being irrational or is he right? Of course, they were often right." — Robert Burchfield in U.S. News & World Report 11 August 1986, as cited in Merriam-Webster's Concise Dictionary of English Usage[34]
    
• Even when referring to a class of persons of known sex, they is sometimes used.[107]
  • "The sizing technology works via an iPhone app. To use it, a woman must take two pictures of themselves while wearing a tight fitted top in front of a mirror." Shane Hickey, "The innovators: the app promising the perfect-fitting bra", The Guardian 10 January 2015,[108] as cited by Mark Liberman on "Language Log"[109]
  • "I swear more when I'm talking to a boy, because I'm not afraid of shocking them". From an interview.[1]
  • "No mother should be forced to testify against their child".
    
• They may also be used with antecedents of mixed genders:
  • "Let me know if your father or your mother changes their mind." Example given by Huddleston et al.[2]
  • "Either the husband or the wife has perjured themself." Here themself might be acceptable to some, themselves seems less acceptable, and himself is unacceptable. Example given by Huddleston et al.[2]
    
• Even for a definite known person of known sex, they may be used in order to ignore or conceal the sex.
  • "I had a friend in Paris, and they had to go to hospital for a month." (definite person, not identified)[1]
    
• The word themself is also sometimes used when the antecedent is known or believed to be a single person:
  • "Someone has apparently locked themself in the office."[acceptability questionable][2]
    
  
  

Use for specific, known people, including non-binary people[edit]

Known individuals may be referred to as they if the individual's gender is unknown to the speaker.[110][111]

A known individual may also be referred to as they if the individual is non-binary or genderqueer, regards male or female pronouns as inappropriate, and prefers they instead.[110][111] Several social media applications permit account holders to choose to identify their gender using one of a variety of non-binary or genderqueer options,[112] such as gender fluid, agender, or bigender, and to designate a pronoun, including they/them, which they wish to be used when referring to them.[113] Though "singular they" has long been used with antecedents such as everybody or generic persons of unknown gender, this use, which may be chosen by an individual, is recent.[114]

The singular they in the meaning "gender-neutral singular pronoun for a known person, as a non-binary identifier"[115] was chosen by the American Dialect Society as their "Word of the Year" for 2015.[114] In 2016, the American Dialect Society wrote:

"While editors have increasingly moved to accepting singular they when used in a generic fashion, voters in the Word of the Year proceedings singled out its newer usage as an identifier for someone who may identify as non-binary in gender terms."[116]

The vote followed the previous year's approval of this use by The Washington Post style guide, when Bill Walsh, the Post's copy editor, said that the singular they is "the only sensible solution to English's lack of a gender-neutral third-person singular personal pronoun".[117]

In 2019, the non-binary they was added to Merriam-Webster's dictionary.[118][119][120]

The first non-binary main character on North American television appeared on the Showtime drama series Billions in 2017, with Asia Kate Dillon playing Taylor Mason.[121][122] Both actor and character use singular they.

Acceptability and prescriptive guidance[edit]

Parts of this article (those related to new versions such as Chicago 2017) need to be updated. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (April 2020)

Though both generic he and generic they have long histories of use, and both are still used, both are also systematically avoided by particular groups.[123]

Style guides that avoid expressing a preference for either approach sometimes recommend recasting a problem sentence, for instance replacing generic expressions with plurals to avoid the criticisms of either party.

The use of singular they may be more accepted in British English than in American English,[124] or vice versa.[125]

Usage guidance in American style guides[edit]Garner's Modern American Usage[edit]

Garner's Modern American Usage (2nd ed., 2003) recommends cautious use of singular they, and avoidance where possible because its use is stigmatized.

• "Where noun–pronoun disagreement can be avoided, avoid it. Where it can't be avoided, resort to it cautiously because some people will doubt your literacy ..."[126]
  

Garner suggests that use of singular they is more acceptable in British English:

• "Speakers of AmE resist this development more than speakers of BrE, in which the indeterminate they is already more or less standard."[124]
  

and apparently regrets the resistance by the American language community:

• "That it sets many literate Americans' teeth on edge is an unfortunate obstacle to what promises to be the ultimate solution to the problem."[124]
  

He regards the trend toward using singular they with antecedents like everybody, anyone and somebody as inevitable:

• "Disturbing though these developments may be to purists, they're irreversible. And nothing that a grammarian says will change them."[127]
  

The Chicago Manual of Style (1993–2010)[edit]

In the 14th edition (1993) of The Chicago Manual of Style, the University of Chicago Press explicitly recommended using singular they and their, noting a "revival" of this usage and citing "its venerable use by such writers as Addison, Austen, Chesterfield, Fielding, Ruskin, Scott, and Shakespeare."[128] From the 15th edition (2003), this was changed. In Chapter 5 of the 16th edition (2010), now written by Bryan A. Garner, the recommendations are:[129]

The singular they. A singular antecedent requires a singular referent pronoun. Because he is no longer accepted as a generic pronoun referring to a person of either sex, it has become common in speech and in informal writing to substitute the third-person plural pronouns they, them, their, and themselves, and the nonstandard singular themself. While this usage is accepted in casual context, it is still considered ungrammatical in formal writing.

and:[123]

Gender bias ... On the one hand, it is unacceptable to a great many reasonable readers to use the generic masculine pronoun (he in reference to no one in particular). On the other hand, it is unacceptable to a great many readers (often different readers) either to resort to non-traditional gimmicks to avoid the generic masculine (by using he/she or s/he, for example) or to use they as a kind of singular pronoun. Either way, credibility is lost with some readers.

The American Heritage Book of English Usage (1996)[edit]

According to The American Heritage Book of English Usage and its usage panel of selected writers, journalism professors, linguists, and other experts, many Americans avoid use of they to refer to a singular antecedent out of respect for a "traditional" grammatical rule, despite use of singular they by modern writers of note and mainstream publications:[130]

Most of the Usage Panel rejects the use of they with singular antecedents as ungrammatical, even in informal speech. Eighty-two percent find the sentence The typical student in the program takes about six years to complete their course work unacceptable ... panel members seem to make a distinction between singular nouns, such as the typical student and a person, and pronouns that are grammatically singular but semantically plural, such as anyone, everyone and no one. Sixty-four percent of panel members accept the sentence No one is willing to work for those wages anymore, are they?

Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association[edit]

The 6th edition of the American Psychological Association's Publication Manual rejects most use of singular they and gives the following example as "incorrect" usage:[131]

Neither the highest scorer nor the lowest scorer in the group had any doubt about their competence." while also specifically taking the position that generic he is unacceptable. The APA recommends using he or she, recasting the sentence with a plural subject to allow correct use of they, or simply rewriting the sentence to avoid issues with gender or number.

However, APA style endorses using "they" if it is someone's (for example, a non-binary person's) preferred pronoun.[132]

The 7th edition of the APA Publication Manual includes guidelines on using singular they for bias free writing.[133]

Strunk & White's The Elements of Style[edit]

William Strunk Jr. & E. B. White, the original authors of The Elements of Style, found use of they with a singular antecedent unacceptable and advised use of the singular pronoun (he). In the 3rd edition (1979), the recommendation was still:[134]

They. Not to be used when the antecedent is a distributive expression, such as each, each one. everybody, every one, many a man. Use the singular pronoun. ... A similar fault is the use of the plural pronoun with the antecedent anybody, anyone, somebody, someone ....

The assessment, in 1979, was:[134]

The use of he as pronoun for nouns embracing both genders is a simple, practical convention rooted in the beginnings of the English language. He has lost all suggestion of maleness in these circumstances. ... It has no pejorative connotation; it is never incorrect.

In the 4th edition (2000), use of singular they was still proscribed against, but use of generic he was no longer recommended.[135]

Joseph M. Williams's The Basics of Clarity and Grace (2009)[edit]

Joseph M. Williams, who wrote a number of books on writing with "clarity and grace", discusses the advantages and disadvantages of various solutions when faced with the problem of referring to an antecedent such as someone, everyone, no one or a noun that does not indicate gender and suggests that this will continue to be a problem for some time. He "suspect that eventually we will accept the plural they as a correct singular" but states that currently "formal usage requires a singular pronoun".[136]

The Little, Brown Handbook (1992)[edit]

According to The Little, Brown Handbook, most experts – and some teachers and employers – find use of singular they unacceptable:

Although some experts accept they, them, and their with singular indefinite words, most do not, and many teachers and employers regard the plural as incorrect. To be safe, work for agreement between singular indefinite words and the pronouns that refer to them ....

It recommends using he or she or avoiding the problem by rewriting the sentence to use a plural or omit the pronoun.[137]

Purdue Online Writing Lab[edit]

The Purdue Online Writing Lab (OWL) states that "grammar shifts and changes over time", that the use of singular they is acceptable,[138] and that singular "they" as a replacement for "he" or "she" is more inclusive:

When individuals whose gender is neither male nor female (e.g. nonbinary, agender, genderfluid, etc.) use the singular they to refer to themselves, they are using the language to express their identities. Adopting this language is one way writers can be inclusive of a range of people and identities.

— Purdue Writing Lab

The Washington Post[edit]

The Washington Post's stylebook, as of 2015, recommends trying to "write around the problem, perhaps by changing singulars to plurals, before using the singular they as a last resort" and specifically permits use of they for a "gender-nonconforming person".[110]

Associated Press Stylebook[edit]

The Associated Press Stylebook, as of 2017, recommends: "They/them/their is acceptable in limited cases as a singular and-or gender-neutral pronoun, when alternative wording is overly awkward or clumsy. However, rewording usually is possible and always is preferable."[139]

The Handbook of Nonsexist Writing[edit]

In The Handbook of Nonsexist Writing, Casey Miller and Kate Swift accept or recommend singular uses of they in cases where there is an element of semantic plurality expressed by a word such as "everyone" or where an indeterminate person is referred to, citing examples of such usage in formal speech. [140] They also suggest rewriting sentences to use a plural they, eliminating pronouns, or recasting sentences to use "one" or (for babies) "it".[141]

Usage guidance in British style guides[edit]

In the first edition of A Dictionary of Modern English Usage (published in 1926) use of the generic he is recommended.[142] It is stated that singular they is disapproved of by grammarians. Numerous examples of its use by eminent writers in the past are given, but it is stated that "few good modern writers would flout [grammarians] so conspicuously as Fielding and Thackeray", whose sentences are described as having an "old-fashioned sound".[42]

The second edition, Fowler's Modern English Usage (edited by Sir Ernest Gowers and published in 1965) continues to recommend use of the generic he; use of the singular they is called "the popular solution", which "sets the literary man's teeth on edge".[143] It is stated that singular they is disapproved of by grammarians but common in colloquial speech. Numerous examples of its use by eminent writers are given, but it is stated that "few good modern writers would flout [grammarians] so conspicuously as Fielding and Thackeray".[144]

According to the third edition, The New Fowler's Modern English Usage (edited by Burchfield and published in 1996) singular they has not only been widely used by good writers for centuries, but is now generally accepted, except by some conservative grammarians, including the Fowler of 1926, who, it is argued, ignored the evidence:

Over the centuries, writers of standing have used they, their, and them with anaphoric reference to a singular noun or pronoun, and the practice has continued in the 20C. to the point that, traditional grammarians aside, such constructions are hardly noticed any more or are not widely felt to lie in a prohibited zone. Fowler (1926) disliked the practice ... and gave a number of unattributed "faulty' examples ... The evidence presented in the OED points in another direction altogether.[37]

The Complete Plain Words was originally written in 1948 by Ernest Gowers, a civil servant, in an attempt by the British civil service to improve "official English". A second edition, edited by Sir Bruce Fraser, was published in 1973. It refers to they or them as the "equivalent of a singular pronoun of common sex" as "common in speech and not unknown in serious writing " but "stigmatized by grammarians as usage grammatically indefensible. The book's advice for "official writers" (civil servants) is to avoid its use and not to be tempted by its "greater convenience", though "necessity may eventually force it into the category of accepted idiom".[145]

A new edition of Plain Words, revised and updated by Gowers's great granddaughter, Rebecca Gowers, was published in 2014. It notes that singular they and them have become much more widespread since Gowers' original comments, but still finds it "safer" to treat a sentence like 'The reader may toss their book aside' as incorrect "in formal English", while rejecting even more strongly sentences like

• "There must be opportunity for the individual boy or girl to go as far as his keennness and ability will take him."[146]
  

The Times Style and Usage Guide (first published in 2003 by The Times of London) recommends avoiding sentences like

• "If someone loves animals, they should protect them."
  

by using a plural construction:

• "If people love animals, they should protect them."
  

The Cambridge Guide to English Usage (2004, Cambridge University Press) finds singular they "unremarkable":

For those listening or reading, it has become unremarkable – an element of common usage.[147]

It expresses several preferences.

• "Generic/universal their provides a gender-free pronoun, avoiding the exclusive his and the clumsy his/her. It avoids gratuitous sexism and gives the statement broadest reference ... They, them, their are now freely used in agreement with singular indefinite pronouns and determiners, those with universal implications such as any(one), every(one), no(one), as well as each and some(one), whose reference is often more individual ..."[147]
  

The Economist Style Guide refers to the use of they in sentences like

• "We can't afford to squander anyone's talents, whatever colour their skin is."
  

as "scrambled syntax that people adopt because they cannot bring themselves to use a singular pronoun".[148]

New Hart's Rules (Oxford University Press, 2012) is aimed at those engaged in copy editing, and the emphasis is on the formal elements of presentation including punctuation and typeface, rather than on linguistic style, although – like The Chicago Manual of Style – it makes occasional forays into matters of usage. It advises against use of the purportedly gender-neutral he, and suggests cautious use of they where he or she presents problems.

... it is now regarded ... as old-fashioned or sexist to use he in reference to a person of unspecified sex, as in every child needs to know that he is loved. The alternative he or she is often preferred, and in formal contexts probably the best solution, but can become tiresome or long-winded when used frequently. Use of they in this sense (everyone needs to feel that they matter) is becoming generally accepted both in speech and in writing, especially where it occurs after an indefinite pronoun such as everyone or someone, but should not be imposed by an editor if an author has used he or she consistently.[149]

The 2011 edition of the New International Version Bible uses singular they instead of the traditional he when translating pronouns that apply to both genders in the original Greek or Hebrew. This decision was based on research by a commission that studied modern English usage and determined that singular they (them/their) was by far the most common way that English-language speakers and writers today refer back to singular antecedents such as whoever, anyone, somebody, a person, no one, and the like."[150]

The British edition of The Handbook of Nonsexist Writing, modified in some respects from the original US edition to conform to differences in culture and vocabulary, preserved the same recommendations, allowing singular they with semantically plural terms like "everyone" and indeterminate ones like "person", but recommending a rewrite to avoid.[141]

Australian usage guidance[edit]

The Australian Federation Press Style Guide for Use in Preparation of Book Manuscripts recommends "gender-neutral language should be used", stating that use of they and their as singular pronouns is acceptable.[151]

Usage guidance in English grammars[edit]

According to A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language (1985):[125]

The pronoun they is commonly used as a 3rd person singular pronoun that is neutral between masculine and feminine ... At one time restricted to informal usage. it is now increasingly accepted in formal usage, especially in [American English].

The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language discusses the prescriptivist argument that they is a plural pronoun and that the use of they with a singular "antecedent" therefore violates the rule of agreement between antecedent and pronoun, but takes the view that they, though primarily plural, can also be singular in a secondary extended sense, comparable to the purportedly extended sense of he to include female gender.[16]

Use of singular they is stated to be "particularly common", even "stylistically neutral" with antecedents such as everyone, someone, and no one, but more restricted when referring to common nouns as antecedents, as in

• "The patient should be told at the outset how much they will be required to pay."[2]
• "A friend of mine has asked me to go over and help them ..."[16]
  

Use of the pronoun themself is described as being "rare" and "acceptable only to a minority of speakers", while use of the morphologically plural themselves is considered problematic when referring to someone rather than everyone (since only the latter implies a plural set).[16]

There are also issues of grammatical acceptability when reflexive pronouns refer to singular noun phrases joined by or, the following all being problematic:

• "Either the husband or the wife has perjured himself." [ungrammatical]
• "Either the husband or the wife has perjured themselves." [of questionable grammaticality]
• "Either the husband or the wife has perjured themself." [typically used by only some speakers of Standard English].[16]
  

On the motivation for using singular they, A Student's Introduction to English Grammar states:[152]

this avoidance of he can't be dismissed just as a matter of political correctness. The real problem with using he is that it unquestionably colours the interpretation, sometimes inappropriately ... he doesn't have a genuinely sex-neutral sense.

The alternative he or she can be "far too cumbersome", as in:

• "Everyone agreed that he or she would bring his or her lunch with him or her.
  

or even "flatly ungrammatical", as in

• "Everyone's here, isn't he or she?[152]
  

"Among younger speakers", use of singular they even with definite noun-phrase antecedents finds increasing acceptance, "sidestepping any presumption about the sex of the person referred to", as in:

• "You should ask your partner what they think."
• "The person I was with said they hated the film." Example given by Huddleston et al.[152]