The Confusing Use of Pronouns: A Comedy of Errors à la Abbott & Costello

 

The legendary comedy duo Abbott & Costello famously performed a baseball routine that has become the gold standard for illustrating the perils of miscommunication. In their classic sketch "Who's on First?", Abbott tries to explain the lineup of a baseball team to Costello, but the players' names—"Who," "What," and "I Don't Know"—are so unconventional that they lead to endless confusion. The dialogue is a masterpiece of wordplay and comic timing, as Abbott's straightforward explanations are hopelessly misunderstood by the increasingly frustrated Costello.

Abbott: Who's on first, What's on second, I Don't Know's on third.

Costello: That's what I want to find out. I want you to tell me the names of the fellows on the team.

Abbott: I'm telling you—Who's on first, What's on second, I Don't Know's on third.

Costello: You know the fellows' names?

Abbott: Yes.

Costello: Well, who's on first?

Abbott: Yes.

Costello: I mean the fellow's name.

Abbott: Who.

Costello: The guy on first.

Abbott: Who.

Costello: The first baseman.

Abbott: Who.

Costello: The guy playing first base.

Abbott: Who is on first!

Costello: I'm asking YOU who's on first!

Abbott: That's the man's name.

Costello: That's who's name?

Abbott: Yes.

And on and on it goes, with Costello increasingly exasperated by the seemingly nonsensical responses Abbott gives him. The brilliance of the routine lies in how it exploits the confusion that arises when words—specifically, names—are used in ways that defy primary uses in speech.

Now, imagine a similar scenario, but instead of baseball players, we're talking about non-binary pronouns. It's a dialogue where the confusion isn't just for comedic effect—it's the reality many face when navigating conversations involving newly minted or personalized pronouns. Let's play out a hypothetical situation:

Speaker 1: So, I was talking to Alex yesterday.

Speaker 2: Oh? What did they say?

Speaker 1: No, Alex prefers "ze."

Speaker 2: Right, but what did they say?

Speaker 1: I just told you—ze said ze was going to the store.

Speaker 2: Who?

Speaker 1: Ze.

Speaker 2: Ze, who?

Speaker 1: Ze is Alex.

Speaker 2: I thought Alex was they?

Speaker 1: No, Alex is ze now. They is Jamie.

Speaker 2: Who's Jamie?

Speaker 1: They.

Speaker 2: But didn't you say Alex is they?

Speaker 1: No, Alex was they, but now Alex is ze.

Speaker 2: Who's on first?

Speaker 1: Exactly.

Much like Abbott & Costello's baseball routine, this hypothetical exchange highlights the potential for comedic—and frustrating—misunderstandings when language is stretched beyond its conventional use. While the intention behind non-binary pronouns is to promote inclusivity, the reality is that the proliferation of new and individualized pronouns can create confusion that mirrors the famous sketch's chaotic dialogue.

The routine's humor stems from the absurdity of miscommunication, and in our own modern "Who's on First?" scenario, the confusion surrounding non-binary pronouns similarly exposes the limits of language when it's forced to accommodate too many exceptions and personal variations. In trying to be more inclusive, we risk creating a situation where, much like Costello, people find themselves lost in a maze of pronouns, desperately trying to understand who's who—or, in this case, who's ze, they, or whatever pronoun du jour might be in use.

In both cases, the result is the same: a communication breakdown that leaves everyone bewildered, exasperated, and perhaps even a little bit more skeptical of the whole exercise. And, much like Abbott's straight-faced delivery of increasingly baffling information, the insistence on non-binary pronouns can lead to situations where clarity is sacrificed on the altar of inclusivity, turning everyday conversations into comedic—and sometimes maddening—routines.

References

Abbott, B., & Costello, L. (1945). Who's on First?

Twain, M. (1993). Mark Twain's Letters, Volume 6: 1874–1875. University of California Press.