['< sod > in 1808, poet samuel taylor coleridge wrote : < blockquote > " whether we may not, nay ought not, to use a neutral pronoun, relative or representative, to the word " person ", where it hath been used in the sense of homo, mensch, or noun of the common gender, in order to avoid particularising man or woman, or in order to express either sex indifferently? if this be incorrect in syntax, the whole use of the word person is lost in a number of instances, or only retained by some stiff and strange position of the words, as – " not letting the person be aware wherein offense has been given " – instead of – " wherein he or she has offended ". in my [ judgment ] both the specific intention and general etymon of " person " in such sentences fully authorise the use of it and which instead of he, she, him, her, who, whom. " < / blockquote > < blockquote > - - samuel taylor coleridge, as written in anima poetæ : from the unpublished note - books of samuel taylor coleridge, edited by ernest coleridge ( 1895 ), p. 190. < ref > { { cite book | title = anima poetae : from the unpublished note - books of samuel taylor coleridge | last = coleridge | first = samuel | publisher = william heinemann | year = 1895 | isbn = | location = london, england | pages = 190 | quote = " whether we may not, nay ought not, to use a neutral pronoun, relative or representative, to the word " person ", where it hath been used in the sense of homo, mensch, or noun of the common gender, in order to avoid particularising man or woman, or in order to express either sex indifferently? if this be incorrect in syntax, the whole use of the word person is lost in a number of instances, or only retained by some stiff and strange position of the words, as – " not letting the person be aware wherein offense has been given " – instead of – " wherein he or she has offended ". in my [ judgment ] both the specific intention and general etymon of " person " in such sentences will fully authorise the use of it and which instead of he, she, him, her, who, whom. " | via = collections of harvard university } } < / ref > < / blockquote > in the second half of the 20th century, people expressed more widespread concern at the use of sexist and male - oriented language. { { sfn | miller | swift | 1995 | pp = 1 – 9 } } < eod > < sod > in 1808, poet samuel taylor coleridge wrote : < blockquote > " whether we may not, nay ought not, to use a neutral pronoun, relative or representative, to the word " person ", where it hath been used in the sense of homo, mensch, or noun of the common gender, in order to avoid particularising man or woman, or in order to express either sex indifferently? if this be incorrect in syntax, the whole use of the word person is lost in a number of instances, or only retained by some stiff and strange position of the words, as – " not letting the person be aware wherein offense has been given " – instead of – " wherein he or she has offended ". in my [ judgment ] both the specific intention and general etymon of " person " in such sentences fully authorise the use of it and which instead of he, she, him, her, who, whom. " < / blockquote > < blockquote > - - samuel taylor coleridge, as written in anima poetæ : from the unpublished note - books of samuel taylor coleridge, edited by ernest coleridge ( 1895 ), p. 190. < ref > { { cite book | title = anima poetae : from the unpublished note - books of samuel taylor coleridge | last = coleridge | first = samuel | publisher = william heinemann | year = 1895 | isbn = | location = london, england | pages = 190 | via = collections of harvard university } } < / ref > { { cn } } < / blockquote > < eod >']