J. Frank Parnell (ae/aem/aer/aern -sen)—What‽

Sorry. It's actually quite elegant: ae as in archaeology. And the inflection is based on they/them/their, -n possessive determiner, and -sen reflexivity, which I know is not entirely usual, but not without precedent, and isn't it neater than theirs or themself? And ae avoids the whole singular they confusion, which is perfectly valid english, but I don't like it. You might use the dipthong if you're feeling fancy. Don't.

I'm working on a highly unofficial russian translation of the neophytes' guide to Tilde.

Yeah, I'm russian. I don't wanna talk about it. Да, я вам. Прибрали бы мы наш бардак. А то как-то ниуютно никому. Но што поделаеш.. Родина. It's a real shitshow. I think I'm losing my russian after so long on the internet off рунэт, surrounded by the motherland in my nation of one two a few. Ambassadors or spies unofficial, unacknowledged but welcame, and some by half my own creation, or visitors, on tacit work visas, as tourists, or prospective immigrants.. Here's a petty tyrant mistaking aesen, regnant; my puppet for all I care.

My name comes from Alex Cox - 1984 - Repo Man, about an edge city punk, punked into repossessing, and a junk car for $2E5. A ¿proud?, careful?, insane? member of the United Fruitcake Outlet. Happyface.

Am I transgender? It's not important to you, and imprudent for me to share if I were. I don't know if I know any personally, except through the internet, from places less dangerous for aem—for now: it still seems precarious. I'd like to think mysen an ally.

But I don't always use the correct pronouns. I do that on purpose, for good reason. By default, I use ae as described above, as a generic 3 person pronoun. It's to mask the gender of a person otherwise unknown, even if I know aer gender, and even if some readers might correctly infer about whom I wrote. Often I read something about someone otherwise unknown to me, referred to by gendered pronouns. In some cases, there's an argument for neutral he but that's worse than singular they I think.

It's the principle of uninformation, of not sharing what doesn't need to be shared, what I don't need to share. It's the same as using a generic pronoun about a generally unknown or abstract or fictive exemplary person. Of course if it should be obvious to anyone whom I'm referring to, and what aer gender or pronomial preference is, then using aer preferred, or as implied by aer gender, pronouns is the only proper choice.

I don't actually like all the new pronouns. A lot of them are harsh on the eye, on the ear. They're fine grammatically, and that free grammar is one thing I like about english, but they don't really integrate esthetically with the language. I think that's a major factor against general acceptance. Of the attested pronouns, Elverson-Spivak are neatest. Elverson's ey is too like hey, especially where dropping prevowel h—ave you eard the umans' umor?

Spivak's e is a single letter, which is fine, but I already don't like a or I—there are only so many oneletter words we can have, only 26 to avoid lettercase ambiguities—I'd rather have them reserved as variables; one could restrict a to it's original an, one could reform the 1st person pronouns to be all based on m somehow, but I'm not sure I'm the one to do that. I've probably already performed too much surgery on the language. I'd want separate singular 2nd person pronouns back, too.

Here I am talking about english. I'm not sure I'm qualified. I didn't even learn it officially. I took half a class and dropped out. What I know comes from a mix of the contemporary classics of literature or cinema, the better-behaved anonymous messageboards, and too much dictionary spelunking. How I avoided picking up jargon is anyone's guess. (Did I avoid picking up jargon? Did I invent my own?)

My musical edification, on the other hand, is lacking; if you have any suggestions..