Reminding Starbucks that Beautiful Code Should Make Beautiful Language • Hacker News Board

Re: Reminding Starbucks that Beautiful Code Should Make Beautiful Language

#31

Post by ndnichols » Wed, Jul 17, 2013, 5:06 PM UTC

jofer wrote: post #9

I don't understand the outrage over singular "they". I agree that it's not particularly logical, but what part of the English language is?? It sounds natural, at least. It's certainly widely used, and will likely become a "correct" form within a few decades. The OP suggests guessing gender from names. There are too many unusual cases and gender-neutral names to be able to guess gender from a name alone. Even ignoring…

I'm with you 100%. John McWhorter wrote a nice piece on it recently for TNR: http://www.newrepublic.com/article/112896/tyranny-pronouns-f...

Re: Reminding Starbucks that Beautiful Code Should Make Beautiful Language

#32

Post by apdinin » Wed, Jul 17, 2013, 5:09 PM UTC

As the author, I should probably take my own advice and do what I always tell my students. If the structure of the sentence causes so much controversy that it distracts from the meaning, change the sentence. Allow me to offer an alternative that solves everything:

"Matt Hofstadt wanted to make your day by sending you a $20.00 USD Starbucks Card eGift to spend on your favorite beverage."

Re: Reminding Starbucks that Beautiful Code Should Make Beautiful Language

#33

Post by lubujackson » Wed, Jul 17, 2013, 5:11 PM UTC

jofer wrote: post #9

I don't understand the outrage over singular "they". I agree that it's not particularly logical, but what part of the English language is?? It sounds natural, at least. It's certainly widely used, and will likely become a "correct" form within a few decades. The OP suggests guessing gender from names. There are too many unusual cases and gender-neutral names to be able to guess gender from a name alone. Even ignoring…

Luckily, grammar rule don't evolve from what grammaticians want but from what people use. And a singular "they" sounds natural and follows the trend of language streamlining where it is most heavily used (there's a trend of irregular verbs becoming regular verbs based on usage).

Re: Reminding Starbucks that Beautiful Code Should Make Beautiful Language

#34

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Jul 17, 2013, 5:11 PM UTC

PhasmaFelis wrote: post #4

As a grammar nerd, I call bullshit. "They" as gender-neutral singular pronoun has been part of the English language for centuries, and it's only in the last hundred years or so (give or take a bit, I don't have time to look it up right now) that prescriptivists have started freaking out about it. Yeah, it's a little awkward, but modern English NEEDS a gender-neutral singular pronoun, and "they" is the best we have. I…

[deleted]

Re: Reminding Starbucks that Beautiful Code Should Make Beautiful Language

#35

Post by noctolater » Wed, Jul 17, 2013, 5:13 PM UTC

Something a lot of people are missing: Not all cultures do [first name] [last name].

Re: Reminding Starbucks that Beautiful Code Should Make Beautiful Language

#36

Post by jlgreco » Wed, Jul 17, 2013, 5:15 PM UTC

apdinin wrote: post #32

As the author, I should probably take my own advice and do what I always tell my students. If the structure of the sentence causes so much controversy that it distracts from the meaning, change the sentence. Allow me to offer an alternative that solves everything: "Matt Hofstadt wanted to make your day by sending you a $20.00 USD Starbucks Card eGift to spend on your favorite beverage."

> "As the author, I should probably take my own advice and do what I always tell my students."

The structure of that sentence irrationally infuriates me. I find it so distracting that I have been unable to glean any meaning from the rest of your post. You should therefore change it.

Re: Reminding Starbucks that Beautiful Code Should Make Beautiful Language

#37

Post by pasquinelli » Wed, Jul 17, 2013, 5:27 PM UTC

they can be used for singular. grammarians are, necessarily, several decades behind their actual language (but they never seem to want to admit it).

anyway, if Aaron Dinin really wants a fix, they (!!!) should've just removed the sickening and pointless, "wanted to make your day". so:

"Matt Hofstadt sent you a $20.00 USD Starbucks Card eGift to...", blah blah blah blah blah.

Re: Reminding Starbucks that Beautiful Code Should Make Beautiful Language

#38

Post by gruseom » Wed, Jul 17, 2013, 5:32 PM UTC

lmm wrote: post #2

"Matt Hofstadt wanted to make your day so Matt sent you..." is uglier and less pleasant to read than the version with "they've". I don't see any argument in the article for what's actually wrong with using "they" - sure, it violates one of English's alleged rules, but the author acknowledges that those rules don't actually matter. (Personally I think women should insist on being called "he" - "she" is a grammatical d…

"she" is a grammatical diminutive which implies inferiority

No it isn't. No it doesn't! Where'd you get that from?

Re: Reminding Starbucks that Beautiful Code Should Make Beautiful Language

#39

Post by gojomo » Wed, Jul 17, 2013, 5:35 PM UTC

noctolater wrote: post #35

Something a lot of people are missing: Not all cultures do [first name] [last name].

Indeed, and asking for (and subsequently handling) first-name/last-name splits can thus be awkward.

Also, while I haven't stepped through Starbucks' gifting flow recently, gift cards might be given by collective entities as well, like "Your friends on the swim team" or "The Middleton Book Club".

'They' works better for that, too.

Starbucks' copywriter (or copywriters) knew what they were doing.

Re: Reminding Starbucks that Beautiful Code Should Make Beautiful Language

#40

Post by bashinator » Wed, Jul 17, 2013, 6:18 PM UTC

FireBeyond wrote: post #22

kyllo wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read the article? The point he made was, if you don't know which gendered pronoun to use, just use their name! "In a case like the generic email I got from Starbucks where the gender of the purchaser is likely unknown, the solution is even easier. Try this little programmatic trick: [$first_name] [$last_name] wanted to make your day so [$first_name] sent you a $20.00 USD Starbucks Card eGift to spend on your…

Bleh. I think his "correction" is as 'horrific a travesty against language' as the original: "John Smith wanted to make your day so John sent you a gift card." That is not even remotely elegant.

A little creative writing can easily fix this. "John Smith wanted to make your day, so now you have this gift card." "John Smith sent you this gift card to make your day." "You got this gift card, because John Smith wanted to make your day."

It's not rocket surgery.