Driving down the road, listening to NPR, I heard a newscast that reminded me of the conundrum over which pronoun to use when the gender is unknown. It has become common to use "they" as a singular pronoun.

Yet this grates on the ears of those of us inured to the idea that "they" is plural, only plural, and nothing but plural, come hell or high water. That, in fact, is what it was until a few decades ago, when the feminist movement took offense at the use of "he" when the gender was unknown. People began wringing their hands over what to do, and "he or she," or "he and she," or "he/she" was adopted as the solution to the vexing verbal dilemma. That soon was regarded as cumbersome, and "they" segued into general acceptance.

Much to my delight, the report on NPR inadvertently uncovered another conundrum. Which verb tense should follow the singular "they"? I didn’t have the opportunity to jot down the quote on NPR, and have forgotten it. But I will submit an equivalent situation:

“After the person was found guilty, they were jailed.” Is that awkward, or what? It’s a clear violation of the grammatical rule that subject and verb must agree in number: “The person were jailed” is nonsensical. Yet it wouldn’t sound any more appropriate to say, “After the person was found guilty, they was jailed.”

Ironically, it was a woman who came up with the idea of using the masculine pronoun form when the gender was unknown. The problem has been around for centuries, with some classic literary figures arousing controversy by using the plural "they" as a singular pronoun. In the mid-19th century, a woman editor decided to use the masculine "he" and its forms when the gender was in question. It caught on, and everything was hunky-dory until some woman or women made a stink about it.

What to do? There seems to be only one way out of this that won’t offend. We need a neutral pronoun and its forms.

Hmmm, let’s see ... he, she ... By George (or is it Georgina?), I think I’ve got it.

"Hesh." Eureka, that’s it! "Hesh" is a combination of "he" and "she." Hence, “After the person was found guilty of grammatical malfeasance, hesh was jailed.”

Now what to do about "him or her"?(Drumming on the table, staring into space.) Aha! "Herm." The objective forms of "he" and "she" are "him" and "her." Reverse the order, put them together, and we get "herm." Example: 'When hesh sticks a gun in your back, give herm the money."

Two down, one to go. "His" or "hers"? Looks like it’ll take two syllables to tango in this gender dance. "Hisers," as in, “The money belonged to one of them. It was 'hisers'.”

Actually, one more gender quandary can occur with use of pronouns. "It" should be used when referring to an animal, but what do you use if you want to indicate the animal's gender? That's easy. "Hermit."

That last one was a joke.

Okay, I came up with the idea. Anybody out there with the chutzpah to put it into effect?

Hey, don’t look at me.