Confused by the text of TR new omicron

Mephisto_style

It says, "they" where it seems like it would be singular, not plural. What do you mean by "they?"
"This word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

DarjeloSalas

Are you really confused? Or just looking for a subtle place to vent some anti-woke rage?

I mean it’s pretty obvious what it does, isn’t it?

Mephisto_style

DarjeloSalas wrote: »

Are you really confused? Or just looking for a subtle place to vent some anti-woke rage?

I mean it’s pretty obvious what it does, isn’t it?

Yes, in my life I am usually pretty good with my subject-verb agreement.
In the 1st few sentences where it refers to 1 person dying and "they" reviving it implies more than 1 person reviving. Although... I did drink 1 beer. Maybe my reading comprehension has comprehension-down debuff and I'm just not concluding the obvious.

TVF

Maybe this will help

The English language does not have a gender-neutral third-person singular personal pronoun, but in recent years they has gained considerable traction in this role. They has been officially recognized as correct by several key bodies such as the Associated Press. Similarly, the Chicago Manual of Style now notes that the singular "they" is common in informal communication (while acknowledging that it has yet to attain the same ubiquity in formal spaces).

Mephisto_style

TVF wrote: »

Maybe this will help

The English language does not have a gender-neutral third-person singular personal pronoun, but in recent years they has gained considerable traction in this role. They has been officially recognized as correct by several key bodies such as the Associated Press. Similarly, the Chicago Manual of Style now notes that the singular "they" is common in informal communication (while acknowledging that it has yet to attain the same ubiquity in formal spaces).

I'm actually hoping that is it.

FYI, this is actually a big deal if it is the case. More than you probably realize.

Firebrigade

Mephisto_style wrote: »

DarjeloSalas wrote: »

Are you really confused? Or just looking for a subtle place to vent some anti-woke rage?

I mean it’s pretty obvious what it does, isn’t it?

Yes, in my life I am usually pretty good with my subject-verb agreement.
In the 1st few sentences where it refers to 1 person dying and "they" reviving it implies more than 1 person reviving. Although... I did drink 1 beer. Maybe my reading comprehension has comprehension-down debuff and I'm just not concluding the obvious.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they

TVF

Mephisto_style wrote: »

TVF wrote: »

Maybe this will help

The English language does not have a gender-neutral third-person singular personal pronoun, but in recent years they has gained considerable traction in this role. They has been officially recognized as correct by several key bodies such as the Associated Press. Similarly, the Chicago Manual of Style now notes that the singular "they" is common in informal communication (while acknowledging that it has yet to attain the same ubiquity in formal spaces).

I'm actually hoping that is it.

FYI, this is actually a big deal if it is the case. More than you probably realize.

Is it?

Mephisto_style

Firebrigade wrote: »

Mephisto_style wrote: »

DarjeloSalas wrote: »

Are you really confused? Or just looking for a subtle place to vent some anti-woke rage?

I mean it’s pretty obvious what it does, isn’t it?

Yes, in my life I am usually pretty good with my subject-verb agreement.
In the 1st few sentences where it refers to 1 person dying and "they" reviving it implies more than 1 person reviving. Although... I did drink 1 beer. Maybe my reading comprehension has comprehension-down debuff and I'm just not concluding the obvious.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they

Has this occurred in any other kits in SWGOH? I'm a big proponent of gender neutral pronouns, but I honestly suspected a mistype or bad language before expecting CG/Disney to be linguistically progressive.

Mephisto_style

TVF wrote: »

Mephisto_style wrote: »

TVF wrote: »

Maybe this will help

The English language does not have a gender-neutral third-person singular personal pronoun, but in recent years they has gained considerable traction in this role. They has been officially recognized as correct by several key bodies such as the Associated Press. Similarly, the Chicago Manual of Style now notes that the singular "they" is common in informal communication (while acknowledging that it has yet to attain the same ubiquity in formal spaces).

I'm actually hoping that is it.

FYI, this is actually a big deal if it is the case. More than you probably realize.

Is it?

Yes.

Firebrigade

Mephisto_style wrote: »

Firebrigade wrote: »

Mephisto_style wrote: »

DarjeloSalas wrote: »

Are you really confused? Or just looking for a subtle place to vent some anti-woke rage?

I mean it’s pretty obvious what it does, isn’t it?

Yes, in my life I am usually pretty good with my subject-verb agreement.
In the 1st few sentences where it refers to 1 person dying and "they" reviving it implies more than 1 person reviving. Although... I did drink 1 beer. Maybe my reading comprehension has comprehension-down debuff and I'm just not concluding the obvious.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they

Has this occurred in any other kits in SWGOH? I'm a big proponent of gender neutral pronouns, but I honestly suspected a mistype or bad language before expecting CG/Disney to be linguistically progressive.

Like all over the place I think? Here’s Ackbar’s kit as it has been forever -

TVF

Mephisto_style wrote: »

TVF wrote: »

Mephisto_style wrote: »

TVF wrote: »

Maybe this will help

The English language does not have a gender-neutral third-person singular personal pronoun, but in recent years they has gained considerable traction in this role. They has been officially recognized as correct by several key bodies such as the Associated Press. Similarly, the Chicago Manual of Style now notes that the singular "they" is common in informal communication (while acknowledging that it has yet to attain the same ubiquity in formal spaces).

I'm actually hoping that is it.

FYI, this is actually a big deal if it is the case. More than you probably realize.

Is it?

Yes.

Or....no.

Firebrigade

Meant to edit my previous post, but quoted by accident instead -

Although you might be correct when it comes to self-referencing. Looks like CG typically defaults to using the name rather than “they” in cases like Wampa self-referencing in the kit.

Firebrigade

TVF wrote: »

Mephisto_style wrote: »

TVF wrote: »

Mephisto_style wrote: »

TVF wrote: »

Maybe this will help

The English language does not have a gender-neutral third-person singular personal pronoun, but in recent years they has gained considerable traction in this role. They has been officially recognized as correct by several key bodies such as the Associated Press. Similarly, the Chicago Manual of Style now notes that the singular "they" is common in informal communication (while acknowledging that it has yet to attain the same ubiquity in formal spaces).

I'm actually hoping that is it.

FYI, this is actually a big deal if it is the case. More than you probably realize.

Is it?

Yes.

Or....no.

Why not both? Let them be happy if it’s a big deal to them. Don’t make a big deal out of it if it isn’t to you…

TVF

Firebrigade wrote: »

TVF wrote: »

Mephisto_style wrote: »

TVF wrote: »

Mephisto_style wrote: »

TVF wrote: »

Maybe this will help

The English language does not have a gender-neutral third-person singular personal pronoun, but in recent years they has gained considerable traction in this role. They has been officially recognized as correct by several key bodies such as the Associated Press. Similarly, the Chicago Manual of Style now notes that the singular "they" is common in informal communication (while acknowledging that it has yet to attain the same ubiquity in formal spaces).

I'm actually hoping that is it.

FYI, this is actually a big deal if it is the case. More than you probably realize.

Is it?

Yes.

Or....no.

Why not both? Let them be happy if it’s a big deal to them. Don’t make a big deal out of it if it isn’t to you…

If they have any interest in explaining how they think it is actually a big deal I'm willing to listen.

Firebrigade

TVF wrote: »

Firebrigade wrote: »

TVF wrote: »

Mephisto_style wrote: »

TVF wrote: »

Mephisto_style wrote: »

TVF wrote: »

Maybe this will help

The English language does not have a gender-neutral third-person singular personal pronoun, but in recent years they has gained considerable traction in this role. They has been officially recognized as correct by several key bodies such as the Associated Press. Similarly, the Chicago Manual of Style now notes that the singular "they" is common in informal communication (while acknowledging that it has yet to attain the same ubiquity in formal spaces).

I'm actually hoping that is it.

FYI, this is actually a big deal if it is the case. More than you probably realize.

Is it?

Yes.

Or....no.

Why not both? Let them be happy if it’s a big deal to them. Don’t make a big deal out of it if it isn’t to you…

If they have any interest in explaining how they think it is actually a big deal I'm willing to listen.

Seems to me that they see it as acknowledgment/progress from CG/EA/Disney on gender pronouns?

Ultra

TVF wrote: »

Mephisto_style wrote: »

TVF wrote: »

Maybe this will help

The English language does not have a gender-neutral third-person singular personal pronoun, but in recent years they has gained considerable traction in this role. They has been officially recognized as correct by several key bodies such as the Associated Press. Similarly, the Chicago Manual of Style now notes that the singular "they" is common in informal communication (while acknowledging that it has yet to attain the same ubiquity in formal spaces).

I'm actually hoping that is it.

FYI, this is actually a big deal if it is the case. More than you probably realize.

Is it?

World changing stuff, really

TVF

Firebrigade wrote: »

TVF wrote: »

Firebrigade wrote: »

TVF wrote: »

Mephisto_style wrote: »

TVF wrote: »

Mephisto_style wrote: »

TVF wrote: »

Maybe this will help

The English language does not have a gender-neutral third-person singular personal pronoun, but in recent years they has gained considerable traction in this role. They has been officially recognized as correct by several key bodies such as the Associated Press. Similarly, the Chicago Manual of Style now notes that the singular "they" is common in informal communication (while acknowledging that it has yet to attain the same ubiquity in formal spaces).

I'm actually hoping that is it.

FYI, this is actually a big deal if it is the case. More than you probably realize.

Is it?

Yes.

Or....no.

Why not both? Let them be happy if it’s a big deal to them. Don’t make a big deal out of it if it isn’t to you…

If they have any interest in explaining how they think it is actually a big deal I'm willing to listen.

Seems to me that they see it as acknowledgment/progress from CG/EA/Disney on gender pronouns?

Haha for some reason I thought they meant in game, lol.

But whatever. I'm all for it, however I don't see it as some huge deal either.

DarjeloSalas

This is the second thread I’ve seen about this language issue (there was one about Talon as well).

I don’t think it’s progressive gender neutral language, tbh. Certainly not in Talon’s unique’s case.

Using “they” is really common these days and absolutely does not imply more than one person. I even found an excerpt of a recent email sent by the top brass at my school… “If any pupil is caught cheating in an exam, they can expect serious repercussions”. It’s a way of avoiding saying “he or she”, I guess.

As for Tusken raider, I don’t think there’s anything in the kit that specifies their gender. Maybe CG want to keep it a mystery?

CCyrilS

This isn't new at all. Did everyone forget Res Pilot unique?

Firebrigade

CCyrilS wrote: »

Did everyone forget Res Pilot?

FTFY. Sometimes I honestly forget about that unit lol

CCyrilS

Firebrigade wrote: »

CCyrilS wrote: »

Did everyone forget Res Pilot?

FTFY. Sometimes I honestly forget about that unit lol

I remember discussions long ago with people debating whether she was male or female. The "they" made it ambiguous, along with the uniform and helmet.

Firebrigade

Yeah, same with Trooper, although that was just because of the ambiguity of the sprite, nothing in the kit per se.