Talk:everybody

"Logically negates to not somebody?" Formally correct, but isn't it better to say "Logically negates to nobody"? Which is already mentioned in antonyms...


 * I agree, as somebody negates to nobody. "Not somebody" does not exist gramatically for the first definition of the word. And the proper negation of everybody would have to be logically equivalent to "not everybody", which this clearly is not. If "not everybody" is doing it, proper parsing of the language indicates that somebody or nobody is doing it. I suggest that a source be brought in to resolve this. Until then, I'm changing it so it makes sense to me.

Which gender can be used with it? I find some people writing "Everbody gets its share." However, I think everybody relates to persons, which cannot be neutral. So it should be "Everybody gets her/his share."? Knopffabrik 16:27, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Not really a question of gender in English. Most people would say "their" although in the case "everybody gets a share" seems better. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:43, 26 November 2009 (UTC)


 * "their" seems fallacious to me, if only because "everybody" is singular grammatically. 68.75.224.214 13:04, 11 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Many people do use "their" in this context, even though it isn't traditionally correct. "His/her" sounds laughable in spoken conversation. Equinox ◑ 13:09, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

errybody
is errybody sufficiently attested? --Backinstadiums (talk) 18:32, 20 March 2020 (UTC)