##  [The People Versus Persons](/favourite-articles/the-people-versus-persons)

##  Avertissement

Ce contenu est offert en anglais seulement.

Charles Skeete
(*Terminology Update*, Volume 34, Number 4, 2001, page 24)

*I would like to know your point of view on **persons**. Hopefully I am not the only **person** who can’t stand this word. I realize it is widely used and probably correct, but why not use **people**?*

This article was prompted by the quotation above, which clearly indicates that its author strongly objects to the use of **persons**, but not to its singular form **person**. This inconsistency is self-explanatory when one recalls that the term **persons** is used intentionally to emphasize that the subjects referred to are to be considered individually or are limited to a relatively small or exact number of individuals. It is also often used as a legal reference to human beings. **People** may be used synonymously in some contexts, depending on the level of language, but in many cases it cannot be considered an appropriate synonym. Examine the following sentences:

1. As an employer, we welcome diversity in the workplace and encourage applications from all qualified women and men, including Aboriginal peoples, **persons** with disabilities, and members of visible minorities.
2. The government promises to set up an on-line search site to help locate **missing persons**, lost loves, relatives or friends.
3. A number of mountain rescues and lost-**persons** incidents were reported over the weekend.
4. Let us never forget that in Canada women were considered **persons** only after 1929.
5. In this context, an advisory committee is a group of **persons** selected to offer advice and counsel to the school and department regarding the vocational program.
6. The project’s research specialists used the term "hard of hearing **persons**" to refer to individuals with any level of hearing loss, from mild to profound, whose primary method of communication is the spoken language.
7. The job competition notice stipulated that all eligible **persons** are invited to apply, regardless of age, race, religion or persuasion.

In the aforementioned sentences, would **people** be appropriate? The term normally refers to **persons** in general and would certainly not convey the same message in these contexts. Here, the subjects referred to are individuals identified by a particular legal document, policy, report or directive. Thus, in example 5, to describe an advisory committee as "a group of **people**" is incorrect, just as it would be if a mob were described as "a large number of **persons**." In 6, substituting "hard-of-hearing **people**" would identify not only those **persons** referred to in the project, but **persons** from all over the world.

On the other side of the coin, consider the following examples normally encountered in general writing where **persons** would be incorrect usage:

1. Despite her advanced years, my mother always found it easy to befriend younger **people**.
2. What will **people** think if I come to work wearing baggy pants, with rings in my ears and nose, tattoos on my arms, my hair painted blue and a skateboard under my arm?
3. **People** are always looking for a bargain at Wal-Mart.
4. Despite mounting evidence in the case of "The **People** Versus Microsoft," **people** still choose Bill Gates’ products.

Could we substitute **persons** for **people** in these examples? No. These contexts do not suggest that the subjects are to be considered individually. They clearly illustrate that **people** has a general connotation, and is not interchangeable with **persons**.

Why not use **people**? The answer to this question is evident: **people** is not appropriate in all contexts, and the use of **persons** in certain contexts is legitimate and often necessary.

In conclusion, I would like to add that, although we frequently find ourselves using **persons** in administrative material, some may consider its use somewhat stilted and prefer **people** as the plain-language alternative. Note too that the following sources consulted indicate that the practice of pluralizing **person** as a substitute for **people** is prevalent mainly in formal, legal and bureaucratic writing: *The Oxford Guide to Canadian English Usage*, 1997; *The New Fowler’s Modern English Usage*, 1999; the *New Oxford Dictionary of English*, 1998; the *Collins-Cobuild English Dictionary*, 1995; and the Longman’s *Dictionary of Contemporary English*, 1987.

##  Avis de droit d’auteur pour l’outil Favourite Articles

© Sa Majesté le Roi du chef du Canada, représenté par le ou la ministre des Services publics et de l’Approvisionnement
Un outil créé et mis en ligne par le Bureau de la traduction, Services publics et Approvisionnement Canada

## Rechercher par thèmes connexes

Vous voulez en apprendre davantage sur un thème abordé dans cette page? Cliquez sur un lien ci-dessous pour voir toutes les pages du Portail linguistique du Canada portant sur le thème choisi. Les résultats de recherche s’afficheront dans le [Navigateur linguistique](/fr/navigateur-navigator).

- [General knowledge](/fr/navigateur-navigator?search_api_fulltext=-&field_writing_tools=All&sort_by=views&f%5B1%5D=navigateur_navigator_english_theme%3A464#navigateur-navigator-resultats-results)

## Liens connexes

- [Favourite Articles](/fr/favourite-articles/index-fra) (page d’accueil)
- [Outils d’aide à la rédaction](/fr/outils-tools/index-fra)
- [Navigateur linguistique](/fr/navigateur-navigator) (permet de trouver rapidement des conseils linguistiques)
- [TERMIUM Plus®](http://www.btb.termiumplus.gc.ca/tpv2alpha/alpha-fra.html?lang=fra)
- [Communiquer avec le Portail linguistique du Canada](/fr/apropos-about-fra#a8)