TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: Generic "he" summary From:"Jean D. Ichbiah" <ichbiah -at- JDI -dot- TIAC -dot- NET> Date:Wed, 9 Aug 1995 22:28:38 -0400
In article <199508090034 -dot- RAA28847 -at- infinity -dot- c2 -dot- org> Richard Mateosian
<srm -at- c2 -dot- org> writes:
>4. In some cases, generic "he" gives prose an immediacy that no readily
> available reformulation can match
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>This is a subjective matter, but I don't really see a noticable difference
>in immediacy among the following:
>When a doctor hears his patient's pleas, what is he to do? Where will he
>find the answer? In his training? In his faith in God? In his innermost
>soul? When he faces the patient, he faces himself.
>When doctors hear their patients' pleas, what are they to do? Where will
>they find the answer? In their training? In their faith in God? In their
>innermost soul? When they face the patient, they face themselves.
Really? You do not see the difference? Literally, the second is collective
and applies to several doctors receiving several pleas - not to one doctor
receiving one plea.
