Posts Tagged ‘pronouns’
I was nervous when the top executive asked me to come into his office to talk to me about the message I’d written for his annual report. Although he was a new client, I’d felt comfortable interviewing him and confident I’d captured his engaging message and warm personality.
But as I walked into his office, my eyes locked on the page in front of him: lots of words crossed off with thick black marker, as if he were redacting state secrets. As I sat down, he passed the paper across the desk and looked me in the eye. “Barb,” he stated. “This is a ‘we’ business.”
On the ink-pocked page, he had covered up every instance of the word “I.” In the margin, in the same stubby marker, he had written “We!!!!!!!”
He thought the use of “I” was so ego-centric. The company, he insisted, was all about the customers, suppliers and employees. I understood the sentiment. From all the nice things I’d heard about him, I knew he was sincere.
Besides, I don’t usually argue with strong opinions from confident executives. Easy to change. And he was happy with everything else.
But as I drove back, I kept thinking about how he would have come across as more human to these customers, suppliers and employees if he had allowed me to ghost write as “I” to “you.”
I’ve had similar conversations with many clients over the years. Old-school word stylists don’t feel comfortable budging from the traditional editorial “we.” Often content is intended to be an objective report from a faceless organization.
But when people want to bond with other people, especially with anything that bears their signature, they need to communication as “I” to “you.”
In this morning’s Globe and Mail, in an interview about the psychological impact of pronoun use, James W. Pennebaker, author of The Secret Life of Pronouns, cited the example of Rick Guiliani. The former New York mayor had appeared cold and distant when he used “we” before his heart attack, but as human and caring after switching to “I.”
According to Pennebaker’s research, “we” is the voice of liars and politicians at war. He also found that people who use the same pronouns and other language preferences are more likely to be compatible. Hmmm. Another book to read and ponder.
Thanks, Dr. Pennebaker, or should I call him Jim? More support for my position, expanded on in Write Like You Talk–Only Better, that you need to write as “I” to “you” and with the same words and style as the person you want to connect with.
And more reasons why I should get more assertive with the next well-intentioned client who wants me to write as “we.”
What do you think?
We all learned back in grammar class about using pronouns when referring again to our subject. Dick became he and Jane became she.
But Mrs. Clarke never told me what to do when it or he or she wants to become they.

As in, the team won the award because they are so good at customer service. Or the cyclist must obey traffic signals if they want to arrive safely.
Referring to the team as they makes sense, as we all know it’s made up of more than one person.
Calling the cyclist they works because your readers know you’re referring to cyclists in general. It also lets you side step the awkward but politically correct he or she, which was not an issue back in my time with Mrs. Clarke.
The trouble is the grammar purists hate this. So when I’m writing for them, I open my bag of tricks. Presto! I turn he or she or it into a plural.
So the team becomes the team members and the cyclist becomes cyclists.
Another way to avoid the awkward he or she construction is to alternate between referring to he and she. However, this works only in a longer text, when it can become obvious that you’re not showing any gender preference. You also need to avoid inadvertent stereotyping, such as referring to the executive team as he or the nursing unit as she.
As a recovered grammar Nazi, I understand the purists. It has taken me years to get comfortable with more casual grammar.
Personally, I’m comfortable with reading people who shuffle between the team or the cyclist and they. But because my brand is based on a dexterity with language, I prefer to keep both the casual and strict grammar people happy.
I think Mrs. Clarke would approve. Do you?












