As one of the primary means of constructing gendered identities, language is a matter of central concern to transgender people (Zimman 2018). In this paper, we present an analysis of non-binary singular they; that is, they as used to refer to individuals whose gender identity is not, or is not exclusively, masculine or feminine. Despite singular they's widespread usage and long history in English, not all speakers judge this most recent innovation to be grammatical, even if they do not object to singular they in quantified, generic, or otherwise gender non-specific contexts, and even if they produce the latter sort of examples natively. We argue that resistance to this new use of they can, at least in part, be attributed to speakers' level of participation in a grammatical change in progress. Further, we propose that this change can be categorized into three distinct stages, with they's most recent broadening-that is, as a non-binary singular pronoun of referencedovetailing with wider socio-cultural changes (as well as featural changes beyond the pronominal system) that underscore the difficulty in separating grammatical and social judgements. As we aim to show, linguists from all subdisciplines-both theoretical and applied-are especially well suited to leverage theoretical insights to advocate for trans-affirming language practice.

While normativity has been central to queer linguistic research, the emergent field of trans linguistics (Zimman forthcoming) provides opportunities for greater nuance and elaboration on the concept. Drawing from interviews with non-binary people documenting their narratives of doctor-patient visits, I present a series of recounted interactional moments where what might be considered ‘normative’ is in fact a survival strategy, highlighting how we might view certain invocations of the transnormative (Johnson 2016) in more complicated ways. Notions of normativity and authenticity, which are too often weaponized against trans people as a means to measure their ‘success’ in approximating cisheteronormative ideals, are not easily transported from queer linguistics to trans linguistics. As concepts imbricated with a history of violence for trans people, they must be treated with care and responsibility, as part of an active devotion to dismantling transphobia.

Linguistic democratization, the goal or practice of increasing social equity through language, has not figured prominently in corpus studies. However, corpus-based approaches present the opportunity to probe questions of unequal linguistic representation on a large scale, providing crucial insights into how actors are classified in public discourse, especially with respect to the representation of gender relations and inequity. This paper draws on corpus methods to analyze the patterning of two generic, gendered nouns— woman and man—in American news television discourse. Results of both quantitative and qualitative analyses show that patterns for both grammatical factors (syntactic function, determiner type, pre-modification) and collocational behavior are largely consistent across networks, suggesting that gender ideologies expressed by newscasters and talk show hosts on both networks are not substantially different from one another. This study shows how elements of discourse that may be considered innocuous and below the level of consciousness—such as the position of certain nouns in the sentence, the determiners that specify them, and the adjectives that modify them—can provide valuable diagnostics of discourse-level democratization, and reveal deeper sociocultural ideologies about gendered individuals that are regularly perpetuated in public news discourse, regardless of the networks’ own political positioning.

While gender dysphoria is a real and acute distress for many transgender people, it is not universal, and it is experienced and oriented to in a myriad of ways. However, its status as a prerequisite for gender-affirming care can lead trans people to feel compelled to amplify its salience in their pursuits for medical support. Through a critical discourse analysis of non-binary healthcare narratives, I trace the relationship between linguistic practices in these care interactions and the gender and sexual logics of the transmedicalist model of transgender care. With a focus on excerpts that center on individuals’ descriptions of dysphoria in the consultation room, I contend that these experiences are not straightforward accounts of assimilation to transmedicalist expectations. Rather, when read from a trans linguistic perspective, these strategies are examples of non-binary patients enacting their own interventions on a process over which (it may seem) they have minimal control and present a critical thirding (Tuck 2009) of a dichotomous view of either transnormativity or resistance.