itmaybeokay Posted November 16, 2017 Share #51 Posted November 16, 2017 I'm not going to delve into the merits and demerits of eliminating "ladies and gentlemen" - but since that train has sailed I think we can at least all agree that "attention passengers" is a hell of a lot less unsettling than "hello everyone" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CenSin Posted November 17, 2017 Share #52 Posted November 17, 2017 Today, a train conductor on the announced, “attention ladies and everyone.” 9 hours ago, quadcorder said: I'm gonna have to disagree with you - this change isn't new, you've likely just surrounded yourself with people who have resisted it. I'm not saying most people would say "That person over there, who are they?" but enough people would say that that most would understand it, at least in the under-25 age group. Resisted it? Nobody around me ever used it like that when I grew up no matter their beliefs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MysteriousBtrain Posted November 17, 2017 Share #53 Posted November 17, 2017 4 minutes ago, CenSin said: Today, a train conductor on the announced, “attention ladies and everyone.” Damn, I didn't think it would get worse than "Hello everyone", but I guess we found a way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R68OnBroadway Posted November 17, 2017 Share #54 Posted November 17, 2017 46 minutes ago, CenSin said: Today, a train conductor on the announced, “attention ladies and everyone.” He probably wanted to trigger all the entitled female 20-something SJWs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INDman Posted November 17, 2017 Share #55 Posted November 17, 2017 Could be worse, they could use my suggestions. “Hey a**holes...” ”Attention jerk**fs” ”Hey yous guys...” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deucey Posted November 17, 2017 Share #56 Posted November 17, 2017 “...This train is going local to 145th Street.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted November 17, 2017 Share #57 Posted November 17, 2017 On 11/16/2017 at 12:20 AM, Skipper said: There's not a man I meet but doth salute me As if I were their well-acquainted friend Now leaden slumber with life's strength doth fight; And every one to rest themselves betake, Save thieves, and cares, and troubled minds, that wake. It looks like Shakespeare is using the singular "they" correctly as I'd mentioned above. In response to: "Can someone tell Sam that they parked their car in front of a fire hydrant?" I would say: "Who are they? And what business is it of Sam's where they parked?" Does "That person over there, who are they?" make any sense? Really now. Perhaps now that I'm 28, I'm getting a bit fuddy duddy and anachronistic, but language doesn't change that quickly. None. None whatsoever. If anyone were to walk up to me & ask that question, I'd look at them like they were stupid & commence walking away..... Or reply with a simple "What?" if I'm in any sort of a mood to be of any assistance..... I don't proclaim to be any sort of an aficionado of grammar, but at the same time, people should learn to talk like they have some damn sense.... Far too many people are being egregiously lazy in their speech.... The prevalence of "internet" acronyms I strongly believe has a lot to do with this... I suppose I can be thrown in that same category of "fuddy duddy-ness", but something I'm doing much less of is trying to decipher what people are trying to say nowadays (there's even evidence of that in my posts on this forum alone, never mind the outside world).... Again, for me, it's a combination of the further bastardization of everyday speech with each ongoing generation and quite frankly, the amt. of tourists that are in this city that have different accents (and/or are ESL) that you have to deal with in some form or fashion..... On 11/14/2017 at 10:12 PM, GojiMet86 said: I've listened to a couple of these announcements already. "Hello everyone" is just weird. Say what you want about gender identies, but I am more annoyed that they used "Hello everyone" instead of the more familiar "Attention passengers". On 11/13/2017 at 8:58 AM, Lance said: Exactly. "Hello everyone" coming from the MTA sounds like those stupid corporate events you're forced into and the higher-ups always want to talk to you like you're best buddies. I don't know you like that. Why are you trying to be so friendly? It's freaking me out. Seriously though, not only does "attention passengers" sound more authoritative, it's more esthetically pleasing to the ears. On a side note, the MTA probably shouldn't use "may I have your attention please" as that phrase has become synonymous with either Showtime or someone selling candy for their basketball team. On 11/15/2017 at 4:17 PM, T to Dyre Avenue said: Agreed! Just say, “Attention passengers” (or even customers, riders or commuters) just like they used to before they said “Ladies and gentlemen”. This “Hello everybody” thing is ridiculous. Not to mention the (over)reaction to ditching “Ladies and gentlemen”. I got a dose of “Hello everybody, this is a Brooklyn-bound train, train” this morning on the R46 train borrowed from the line (which by the way was signed up front and in back as an train although the side signs were correctly set for the ). It just didn’t seem right. It sounded unprofessional and unauthoritative. Just say, “Attention passengers.” Though I did have a conductor this afternoon who announced to the “Ladies and gentlemen” that my train was going to go express after 74th St due to maintenance work that wasn’t quite finished. Oh well. At least my train wasn’t local all the way to Main Street. In concurrence with you all.... To add my spin on it, it sounds real gimmicky.... Inauthentic.... Almost sarcastic if you hear it enough. It's like I said in an earlier post in the thread, I'd rather you say nothing (salutation-wise) than this Hello everyone bit... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Porter Posted November 17, 2017 Share #58 Posted November 17, 2017 I think that the only person who should say "Hello Everyone" is a person whose name we already know, and ideally someone who knows our names as well (unless it's Fred Rogers himself). Simpsons case in point: "Hi Everybody!" "Hi Dr. Nick!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CenSin Posted November 19, 2017 Share #59 Posted November 19, 2017 This is a response to @RTS CNG Command’s signature: Quote Just because you have an opinion doesn't mean you get a free pass. Present it with great logic and sound reasoning, people will praise you even if they disagree. But argue with a poor sense of logic, pettiness, and many holes, expect people like myself to criticize you. I, myself, don't respect opinions. I respect arguments. So if you want to argue, argue WELL. - Point blank, there are no good reasons to ban people from marrying in the same gender. Logic cannot absolutely prove right or wrong in a moral sense. Because logic builds on a person’s values, it can only be shared among many members of a group if their values are the same. This whole debate can go on for so long because nobody shares the same values. And then nearly everyone has internally inconsistent values which cause conflict within. A resolution must necessarily create exceptions to weasel out of tough decisions, but not everyone comes up with the same exceptions. Example: Quote Killing is wrong and self-preservation is always justifiable (right). But a heinous killer murders hundreds in a rage, and police have caught up to kill the killer. Killing is wrong: The killer is wrong and would be wrong to continue killing. The police would be wrong if they killed the killer. Self-preservation is right: The killer can kill the police in an act of self-preservation. The police can kill the killer for the preservation of the defenseless (collective self-preservation). Most of us would take a collectivist view by agreeing that while killing is wrong, if it stops more killing then it is good… up to a certain point. This was also the rationale for dropping nuclear bombs on Japan and killing civilians to strongly encourage and end to the fighting with the Japanese. Should they have only dropped one bomb and avoided extra casualties while sending a strong message? So regarding homosexuality, the two opposing views can be both “right” in different situations, and the underlying values that birth the same views may not even be alike: Quote Situation 1 Homosexuality is wrong because I base my morals on the Bible. It is wrong no matter the society, environment, or situation. Homosexuality is unnatural (although I am not a Christian). It is not what I think nature intended. (Bear in mind that homosexuality is actually found in many non-human species, so basing homophobic views on this alone is errant.) Homosexuality decreases a population’s growth and population growth is needed to sustain the capitalist economy and social security system. Situation 2 Homosexuality should be promoted because it decreases a population’s growth and the planet is overpopulated. Homosexuality is a natural occurrence in any population and should not be looked at differently than heterosexuality. Situation 3 The Bible says to not judge others and to be compassionate, so I tolerate homosexuality even if I think it is sinful. I tolerate it as long as it doesn’t hit too close to home. (I will not tolerate a gay son or lesbian daughter.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MNR Beacon Line Posted November 27, 2017 Share #60 Posted November 27, 2017 On 11/17/2017 at 7:29 AM, B35 via Church said: None. None whatsoever. If anyone were to walk up to me & ask that question, I'd look at them like they were stupid & commence walking away..... Or reply with a simple "What?" if I'm in any sort of a mood to be of any assistance..... Collins Dictionaries specifically studied the prevalence of the singular they for the Committee on Bible Translation, and its results put you quite definitively in the minority: "1. Generic pronouns and determiners "This part of the study considered the types of pronouns and determiners that are used to refer to indefinite pronouns (such as someone, everybody and one) and non-gender specific nouns (such as a person, each child and any teacher): "A. masculine (he, his, himself, etc.); B. feminine (she, her, herself, etc.); C. plural/gender-neutral (they, them, one, themselves, etc.); D. alternative forms (s/he, him or her, his/her, etc.) "In all the varieties of English analyzed, plural/neutral pronouns and determiners account for the majority of usages. Between 1990 and 2009, instances of masculine generic pronouns and determiners, expressed as a percentage of total generic pronoun usage in general written English, fell from 22% to 8%. "e.g. ‘…when a person accepts unconditional responsibility, he denies himself the privilege of “complaining” and “finding faults.”’ "Instances of ‘alternative’ generic pronouns and determiners fell from 12% to 8%. "e.g. ‘Any citizen who wants to educate himself or herself has plenty of sources from which to do so.’ "Instances of plural/neutral generic pronouns and determiners rose from 65% to 84%. "e.g. ‘If you can identify an individual who metabolises nicotine faster you can treat them more effectively.’ "Figures for the other corpora analyzed in the study are broadly comparable with figures from the general written English corpus both in overall magnitude and in the general trend over time." You would almost certainly need to be deliberately obtuse to take offense to the example that you quoted. Standards in English are determined by usage, and common usage in formal and informal contexts has nearly entirely preferred the singular they to any other type of gender-nonspecific writing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted November 27, 2017 Share #61 Posted November 27, 2017 4 hours ago, MNR Beacon Line said: Collins Dictionaries specifically studied the prevalence of the singular they for the Committee on Bible Translation, and its results put you quite definitively in the minority: "1. Generic pronouns and determiners "This part of the study considered the types of pronouns and determiners that are used to refer to indefinite pronouns (such as someone, everybody and one) and non-gender specific nouns (such as a person, each child and any teacher): "A. masculine (he, his, himself, etc.); B. feminine (she, her, herself, etc.); C. plural/gender-neutral (they, them, one, themselves, etc.); D. alternative forms (s/he, him or her, his/her, etc.) "In all the varieties of English analyzed, plural/neutral pronouns and determiners account for the majority of usages. Between 1990 and 2009, instances of masculine generic pronouns and determiners, expressed as a percentage of total generic pronoun usage in general written English, fell from 22% to 8%. "e.g. ‘…when a person accepts unconditional responsibility, he denies himself the privilege of “complaining” and “finding faults.”’ "Instances of ‘alternative’ generic pronouns and determiners fell from 12% to 8%. "e.g. ‘Any citizen who wants to educate himself or herself has plenty of sources from which to do so.’ "Instances of plural/neutral generic pronouns and determiners rose from 65% to 84%. "e.g. ‘If you can identify an individual who metabolises nicotine faster you can treat them more effectively.’ "Figures for the other corpora analyzed in the study are broadly comparable with figures from the general written English corpus both in overall magnitude and in the general trend over time." You would almost certainly need to be deliberately obtuse to take offense to the example that you quoted. Standards in English are determined by usage, and common usage in formal and informal contexts has nearly entirely preferred the singular they to any other type of gender-nonspecific writing. In the example in question, I would not ask anyone about someone else by asking, verbatim, "That person over there, who are they?".... "That person over there, who is that?" sounds more sensible to me.... If that puts me in whatever unspecified minority you're talking about, then so be it..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.