Active Users:192 Time:19/05/2024 09:00:47 AM
It's how they're used and by whom Cannoli Send a noteboard - 20/09/2012 12:01:35 PM
I'm not some literary analyst or good at picking out details, and this is one of the few definite things I can say bothers me about Sanderson's writing. It's got nothing to do with the word itself so much as how it's used and Sanderson uses it where the same character would say "man" or "woman".

WoT has a very strong sense of gender identity, and Sanderson has completely missed that, retaining the modern usage.
Cannoli
“Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions.” GK Chesteron
Inde muagdhe Aes Sedai misain ye!
Deus Vult!
*MySmiley*
Reply to message
AMoL Prologue: DAMMIT SANDERSON! They are MEN and WOMEN, not PERSONS!!!!!!! - 19/09/2012 10:25:42 PM 1424 Views
Agreed. And isn't people the plural for person? *NM* - 19/09/2012 10:50:22 PM 304 Views
Re: Agreed. And isn't people the plural for person? - 20/09/2012 07:41:36 PM 590 Views
Tell me, honestly. - 20/09/2012 01:52:41 AM 1127 Views
Contractions - 20/09/2012 05:16:56 AM 801 Views
Oh Terez, - 20/09/2012 05:36:23 AM 832 Views
100% Death of Narg *NM* - 20/09/2012 06:03:06 AM 279 Views
Oh Terez... - 20/09/2012 09:07:32 AM 724 Views
Yes, it's called disdain for trollery *NM* - 20/09/2012 09:12:21 AM 309 Views
Oh Terez, - 20/09/2012 04:29:52 PM 556 Views
That's ... actually not entirely correct. - 20/09/2012 06:53:03 AM 812 Views
I did notice that on my reread - 20/09/2012 07:19:57 AM 653 Views
It's how they're used and by whom - 20/09/2012 12:01:35 PM 900 Views
Oh Cannoli, - 20/09/2012 05:26:34 AM 733 Views

Reply to Message