What’s wrong with the following statements?

  • They’re building a new restaurant down the street.
  • I don’t know what they were thinking when they put a no-parking zone here.
  • Do you think they’ll build a commuter rail system here?

The problem is a single pronoun: they

When used in statements like this, I like to call it the royal “they.” This is a nod to the royal “we,” known as the majestic plural, used by monarchs and dignitaries when referring to themselves in first person. I haven’t done any research into the history of the majestic plural, but the “we” seems to imply that the person is not an individual but speaking on behalf of an assumed group. Similarly, what I’m calling the royal “they” implies an assumed group that is separate from us as individuals.

Why is the royal “they” such a problem? Here are my two reasons:

  1. Unlike the royal “we,” where we have some idea as to the people that “we” refers to, the royal “they” is left to the listener to determine. This changes the meaning of a given statement based on who’s reading it.
  2. The use of an anonymous third person implies that the speaker is disconnected from the group referred to as “they,” and, consequently, that the individual has no responsibilities within that group.

As a researcher and writer, the royal “they” is one of my pet peeves because of reason one above. Reason two bothers me for a completely different reason: its impact on public perception. To explain what I mean, I will use one of the statements above:

I don’t know what they were thinking when they put a no-parking zone here.

The first thing I want to ask when I hear something like this is, “Who are ‘they’?” If it’s private property, you might assume it’s the property owner. If it’s public property, you might assume it’s the government entity that owns it. If it’s a city street managed by a large municipal government, you might assume it’s bureaucrats running a department within that government. Without identifying the specific group, the speaker makes the following assumptions about that group:

  • The listener knows the group.
  • The listener isn’t part of the group.

If the “they” in the example statement is a government entity, the impact of the statement on public perception becomes more evident. To see this, read the example side-by-side with an improved version:

  • I don’t know what they were thinking when they put a no-parking zone here.
  • I don’t know what city planners were thinking when they put a no-parking zone here.

The first statement forces the listener to ignore the significance of the group referred to by “they.” Instead, they form an opinion of the actions “they” have taken without acknowledging the individuals who took those actions. In short, the statement, and thus the speaker, comes out sounding pretentious and dismissive.

The second statement invites the listener to evaluate the statement against any existing thoughts he or she has of the group. Not only is the statement more relevant for the listener, but the speaker sounds more intellectually engaged in the topic. Rather than pretension toward some anonymous “they,” the speaker conveys a true concern for the impact of the group on his or her life.

It’s another of my examples above, though, that reveals my deepest concern for how the royal “they” impacts public perception:

  • Do you think they’ll build a commuter rail system here?

    • What group is “they” in this question? Is it the people who actually build the rail or just those who plan and pay for it? Is the speaker assuming that a government entity is responsible, or will a group of private investors suffice? If it’s the government, which government: city? county? state? federal? The fact is, we don’t know. Instead, we’re left to assume only that “they” is not “me” or “we.” It’s the subtle pretension that we’ve grown accustomed to when we see ourselves as consumers rather than contributors.

    So, can we avoid the royal “they”? I know I’ll probably slip once in a while, but I am challenging myself and my readers to change that trend and observe how it impacts your feelings and conversations. You should be able to replace the pronoun, even in a generalized sense such as “people who live in my town” or “city officials” or “school teachers.” Here’s the tip: if your listeners have to ask “Who are they?” then don’t use “they” at all.