>Yuri;
>
>When I attended UC Berkeley, "their" was a term acceptable to the English Department. Then suddenly around 1970 it was deemed incorrect for a number of reasons. Call it political correctness or whatever. At the time women’s liberation had a great influence and wanted to have a specific sexual recognition and not be grouped into an indifferent object such as the word “their”.
>
>The use of and argument about the use of their can be found in a number of sources and this is but one.
>
>http://www.crossmyt.com/hc/linghebr/austheir.html
>
>When there is convention in the use of a word for 700 years (or for any period for that matter) and that convention changes then there is room for confusion and questioning.
>
>English being a dynamic language will perhaps change the use of this word or series of words in the future.
>
>I once saw a want add for a position of interest and contacted the HR department of the company posting the job. One of my questions was, “What does m/f/h/g/l mean”? The answer was, “Male, female, handicapped, gay and lesbian”. Perhaps we will use such a offering to replace the use of “their, and he/she”. After all, we must not neglect anyone. Gee I am thinking of additional groups that make the news. I had better not continue with that thought! :)
>

Tom

Maybe we should add some vowels and use it as a new word: mafuhogel < gd&r >