Pronouns, anyone?

No, this post is not about that. 

I once said, snarkily and yes, inappropriately, that my preferred pronouns are "I, me, and my." I would say they are for everyone. 

Which brings me to the use of "MY."

I was listening to one of my favorite podcasts, Hidden Brain, with Shankar Vedantam. I recommend it anyone who is interested in motivation and human psychology, although for me a lot of it is a review and redolent of what I've taught for years. 

In a recent one a guest told the story of being in a meeting with the Dali Lama and being scolded by him (berated sounds more like it). The reason? the guest, a professor of psychology who studies meditation, had referred to one of the grad students who works with him doing research as "my grad student" and "my research assistant." The Dali Lama took great umbrage with it. "Don’t call her your student." 

 

I would argue here that Tenzin Gyatso doesn't understand idiomatic and colloquial English, or American culture. The personal possessive pronoun doesn't always mean possession; in fact, it almost never does in regard to human beings. It means close connection. I have had to explain this to my English as Second Language students. The professor obviously did not mean he owned the graduate student, that she was his slave. For Tenzin to conclude that and get upset seems actually rather non-Dali-Lama-ish of him. 

 

Yes, to a non-English speaker, it may seem strange. So whose problem is it? The Dali Lama for not understanding idiomatic English (he's been here before and been treated pretty well), or for us Americans and Western English speakers for using “my” about something other than possession?

 

One of my past college president bosses actually said the same thing, that he did not refer to the faculty as "my faculty." This is a wise saying. While I may feel ownership of responsibility toward and deep commitment to "my colleagues" and "my departmental faculty," it might be better to reframe it as "the faculty who work in the department I'm chair of." On the other hand, conciseness demands "my faculty," two words instead of ten. And in context, everyone knows what I mean. 

 

*That is the Dali Lama's real name. Not being a Buddhist, I am not led to call him "His Holiness," any more than I would the pope, although in the basic meaning of "holy," "separate" I suppose it fits. They are separated from everyone else. But I'll reserve His Holiness for The Lord God Almighty, thank you. 

 

However, let me add that that Tenzin Gyatso has a very impressive history and I didn't know he was that old, accomplished, and politically influential and important. And let me add that Americans are dunces about Buddhism; they think Buddha is "their god," when Buddhism doesn't really have a god or deity. A discussion for another time. Buddhism has a tenet of incarnation, too. 

 

Addendum: this reminds me of a discussion with me students, where I was trying to get them to see the superiority of "I believe" or "I think" over "I feel." They weren't buying it, which actually explains a deeper problem; they privilege their emotions. "It means I really believe it when I say 'I feel'" one said.  I don't quite get that logic, but there it is.