Pedants' Paradise

[oliver sudden]

I have noticed in team sports that a "player of the match" is now often preferred to the more alliterative "man of the match", although I have heard female commentators still using the term "man of the match" even when choosing the best player in an all woman match (possibly because that was the term they grew up hearing and the alliteration makes it an easier term to use and remember).

There’s a bit of work to do in general in terms of not having women’s sports perceived as the exception but at the same time avoiding absurdities such as one which made it to the Guardian a little while ago: a headline referring to 10.71” as the fastest 100m of the year followed by a bullet point referring to someone else running 9.92”.

[Old Grumpy]

A lot of organisations now use the term "Chair" rather than "Chairman" as a more obviously gender neutral term (mind you I used to work with a female Chairman who strongly objected to being referred to as an 'inanimate object") while some prefer "Chairperson".

I have noticed in team sports that a "player of the match" is now often preferred to the more alliterative "man of the match", although I have heard female commentators still using the term "man of the match" even when choosing the best player in an all woman match (possibly because that was the term they grew up hearing and the alliteration makes it an easier term to use and remember).

I am not a cricket follower but everyone holding the bat now seems to be a batter, perhaps a term which has rather unfortunate connotations - domestic abuse, Mars Bars etc

[smittims]

...not to mention fried fish!

I remember 'Hurricane Hattie' and others. I just wish it could be a number or a date.

I suppose the feminisation of machines came from the 'reationship' their male operators felt they had. I've heard steam loco drivers sayig 'you had to get to know the old lady and treat her right '.

[Serial_Apologist]

Perhaps the time has come to replace "chairman", "chairperson" or "chair" with a completely new word for the person in charge. "Chair" or "chairperson" have already gone halfway to that end - why not go the whole hog? After all, "CEO" has now become the acceptable abbreviation for any number of sins - sorry, for being the top company executive!

Why not "host"?

[french frank]

I've heard steam loco drivers sayig 'you had to get to know the old lady and treat her right '.

But there you have the nub of the problem in the year 2024. The man in charge treating his locomotive in the same way that he 'treats' his woman? Rather different from the naval analogy regarding ships, 'she' being thought of as the protecting goddess of the crew.

[vinteuil]

It's an interesting linguistic point. My feeling would be that the words 'masculine' and 'feminine' couldn't originally have been about gender as such - even though the concept existed in several linguistic families: Romance, Germanic &c. Why would a table be recognised as being female but a chair is male? I'm not sure where the grammatical nomenclature of masculine and feminine originated. It's not the kind of idea which seems rigid and preordained.

... I seem to recall instances in French where the gender has changed over time - oddly, the male member le vit becoming la bite...

[Padraig]

... I seem to recall instances in French where the gender has changed over time - oddly, the male member le vit becoming la bite...

From memory, in Irish the word for girl - cailin is a male noun.

Though names of countries are usually feminine, one exception is Sasana - England - which is a male proper noun. (It might be because it ends on a broad vowel).

[kernelbogey]

In her Guardian column today Zoe Williams wrote
Both papers have billionaire proprietors, one of whom’s daughter....
While I can see why she wrote this, surely this is wrong - or at least inelegant?
Wouldn't 'one of whose daughters...' have had the same meaning?

[Serial_Apologist]

In her Guardian column today Zoe Williams wrote
Both papers have billionaire proprietors, one of whom’s daughter....
While I can see why she wrote this, surely this is wrong - or at least inelegant?
Wouldn't 'one of whose daughters...' have had the same meaning?