Okay, I'm looking for opinions here. I'm sure I'll get some, and pretty sure I know who will say what, but I could be mistaken. Maybe this does not fall clearly along the usual P/D lines. This may have been discussed before. If so, feel free to point me, but I am interested in current opinions. Also, if you know what is currently being taught at the high school/college levels, please add that in.

English has no third person singular neutral pronoun. Most often the word "they" is kidnapped to take on the role, even though it is a plural pronoun. Is this correct usage?

If you don't believe there is any such thing as "correct usage", don't bother! You can console yourself with picking on spelling errors... he he ;0)

it is a very common usage, and IMO, only a true prescriptivist would have trouble with it.

well, I have trouble with it; but it's largely due to my being an OF, and set in my ways - I surely ain't no prescript.

in the past, here, I've suggested 1) not imputing gender bias where it quite possibly doesn't exist, 2) using he/she depending on the writer, in writing, or 3) using he/she depending on the listener, in speaking, or 4) alternating between he/she when the audience is mixed, 5) using "it" for all non-human transactions. (for the record, I really don't like the he/she construct; that truly is the cowards way out!)

all of these have been roundly ignored (at best) because, I hazard to guess, no one seems able to get beyond the gender bias she may perceive. ; )

"they"

The third person generic singular use of they goes back to Middle English. The earliest example I have seen is in Chaucer. It occurs in the King James version of the Bible. many reputable authors use: e.g., Swift and Jane Austen. The MWDEU as usual has a good entry on it (link). Although, I see the second page has a scanning mishap. The book is cheap, under $20 IIRC, on Amazon, and worth having in any person's library. As opposed to most usage and style guides, it gives the history of the prescription as well as a rather neutral view on the validity of same.

I, personally, wouldn't use it in formal written English, but I have no problem with it in informal written and spoken English.

And, just for the record, I don't believe there are no usage or grammar rules, but i do think that most prescriptivists don't know their passive voice from a hole in the ground and couldn't parse or diagram a sentence to save their lives. There are rules and people (both native speakers and foreign) make grammatical errors all the time. It's just that insisting that one oughtn't to end a sentence with a preposition or not split an infinitive is so much poppycock. Oh, and even sillier stuff like the that/which restrictive/non-restrictive relative clause ukaze. Talk about OFism. Yup, that's me.

oh, I should have mentioned that I know all about the "historical" precedence behind singular they; but I never learned all that until after I had plural they inculcated and *that's what is stuck in this OF's head.

From a strictly grammatical point of view it's no worse than using a plural personal pronoun in the singular in the second person and in fact it's even less incorrect*, since the second person pronoun uses the accusative/dative form in the nominative.

*Assuming that 'incorrect' is a valid term to use for a usage that has been with the language from the git-go. They/their them entered the language in the Middle English period, replacing the native hie/heora/him.