You should use she/her pronouns. It seems obvious to you that she presents as female so there's no reason you should use other pronouns. To use they/them pronouns would imply her gender is ambiguous, which according to the evidence you cited, it is obviously not so.
The general consensus (for the entire English speaking community) about the situation is at the moment in a lot of flux.
Historically (Early to 20th c Modern English), if you've seen or heard the person, then they present usually as one sex or the other (through clothes, name, or title) and you refer to them as either 'he' or 'she'. If you didn't know ...
Indeed artistic or poetic language, as is often found in novels, can be hard to understand by someone who isn't yet completely fluent in the language.
The incomplete sentence
Through the sopping grass and down towards the river.
This is an incomplete sentence, used for artistic effect. You could fill in the rest of the sentence like this:
She walked ...
It is correct to use "they" in reference to a singular noun because you don't know if the teacher is a man or a woman.
Someone has left their umbrella in the changing room.
One person left an umbrella. Unless I know for sure that this person is a woman or a man, I wouldn't say "his" or "her".
Only, in this context, is a way of emphasising that they will definitely grow stronger. It would typically be used when you know, or expect, that the people reading or hearing would hope that the opposite will happen.
Your daughter is very ill, I'm afraid, and it's only going to get worse.
The parents would obviously hope their daughter will get better, ...
You can use "she/her" to begin with given their gender is quite apparent to you as you say. If they correct you - that is they tell you not to use "she/her" and to instead use something they prefer - then you can by all means do that (if that is what you are willing to do). You can learn from what pronouns others are using to refer to them.
If you are a ...
In English, "his" cannot refer to a woman or girl. When I read that sentence, I understand it to mean that Narendra Modi's own 69th birthday was on Tuesday (not his mother's birthday). If that is not what the article meant, then there is a typo in it.
I think its fair to say that I'm acquainted with English's singular they, having used it in my own writing and speech since the early 1980's. At least with the US usage, I am.
The question mentions being familiar with the person via the internet, that's actually kind of a big deal to the answer IMHO.
So as big of a fan of singular they as I am, in this ...
In some sentences, it is not possible to determine the antecedent of a pronoun with 100% certainty. This sentence is one such example. Usually the determination is based on the context of the sentence. When in doubt, the nearest sensible noun is likely to be the antecedent, but this assumption is not always correct.
In this particular case and adhering to ...
The sentence is a bit loosely constructed. "Those" is clearly plural, but it is referring back to a thing that was not indicated as plural or even really as an event: "losing my temper".
It might have been more clearly written as "I thought about the times I lost my temper with Mom or Linsay or Mamaw, and how those were among the few times ...".
The troll told the king and queen that Elsa's powers would only grow
stronger. "Fear will be her enemy," he warned.
The adverb "only" is called a restrictive focusing modifier. It's used here to convey the Troll's conviction that Elsa’s powers would get stronger, not remain constant, get worse, or anything else.
Generally, pro-forms like "her" refer to ...
It is the river that is "wide and brown," and it is also the river that "rippled and churned." It is also the river that "looked strong, like a muscle." So all those it's refer back to the river to which, "through the sopping grass," she's decided to go, especially on a day when "everything looked varnished and bright after the rain."
As to the sentence in ...
Personally I try to use (singular) 'they' by default, whenever I am writing (and most of the time when speaking).
I do this because:
Using 'they' all the time, means I don't need to think about it; saving mental effort.
It means I don't make mistakes / use the wrong gender (e.g., referring to our new boss as a he when they are female or vice versa)
There's no one right answer to this, but if the person is obviously presenting as a particular gender and has not specifically told you to use certain pronouns, I would lean towards using the typical ones for the gender they present as (she/her in your case).
Singular they/them is perfectly valid both as someone's correct pronouns, and as a generic set of ...
Grammatically, the antecedent of which must be one of three things:
A breeze ruffled the neat hedges of Privet Drive (the entire independent clause)
the neat hedges of Privet Drive (a noun phrase)
Privet Drive (a smaller noun phrase)
To figure out which choice is best, just ask yourself which one makes sense:
In this case, 1 doesn't make any sense. For 1 ...
To whom it may concern" is a letter salutation used in business correspondence. The pronoun "it" is commonly known that its antecedent is this correspondence (cablegram, facsimile, letter, or memorandum) on which this salutation) appears. We can use "it" to refer to an unspecified or implied antecedent (The Free Dictionary).
Whatever follows your colon is the "antecedent." (Though in this case I guess it's a "subsequent."
Consider this sentence:
It's not clear to me what you contribute to this company.
'It' here clearly refers to 'what you contribute to this company." By the same token:
To whom it may concern: I demand the immediate return of my red Swingline stapler.
When the pronoun it is used like that, it is known under the names of impersonal pronoun, impersonal subject or simply dummy pronoun (all these terms mean the same thing). The idea with impersonal pronouns is that they don't really refer to anything (neither animated nor inanimate objects). They're just there to make the sentence syntactically complete. As ...
The main sentence of your question has already been answered well by Ben who has given a quite complete answer. Reading those lines though it occurs to me that not only is the author attempting poetic licence with the incomplete sentences without predicate but that they are failing to do so in a smooth naturalistic way. From 'came back in and slung the ...
The present tense is used, among other things, for general statements. Plastic bags have been found; this is something that has happened, so it is in the present perfect. Sea turtles in general think that carrier bags are jellyfish and try to eat them, so that is in the present tense.
This isn't to say that you couldn't use the past tense, in which case you ...
Yes, this sentence is correct. "His" has "PM Narendra Modi" as its antecedent, which is the noun it needs to match in terms of gender.
As long as the antecedent is male, his mother (his father, his friend, his daughter, his son, his wife) are all correct regardless of the gender of the following noun.
As one comment says, your first example is fine, but it's not really an example of what you're asking about.
If you're wondering if this:
In order to keep the colony size down, a predator, which keeps the colony size down by eating bacteria, is introduced.
means the same as this:
In order to keep the colony size down, a predator is introduced, ...
This sentence is talking about all teachers in general. We do not know who the teacher is so we cannot give them a gender, therefore we use the neutral of 'they', referring to all teachers.
If we were talking about a group of people who we knew were all female or were all male, it would be correct to say 'the best he can' or 'the best she can'. For example:...
Analyzing this sentence linguistically requires us to ignore the particular name "Bingo" and the particular nouns "man" and "dog", and instead assume that these are generic entities that have the possession relationship, can be named, and are of the correct syntactic gender.
So let us convert this sentence into
There was a Klingon [who] had a brother and ...
It's grammatical, but it makes parsing the sentence a little difficult. When a pronoun without a previous reference comes at the start of a sentence, before the noun that it's referring to, then you need to "suspend" your understanding until after the referent becomes clear. Everything being equal, this makes parsing the sentence more difficult than it needs ...
Responding to your first question, yes, you are right. It does not refer to 'brutal side', rather battle it out is a phrase which means to compete with each other until there is a clear winner.
Coming to your second question, the word 'even' is used to add a shock factor to the statement. "Even as" is used to refer to two actions which are going on at the ...
Dan Bron has correctly identified the antecedent to which and which.
But let's figure out why you have the problem you describe:
Would someone please identify the antecedents for the pronouns [1.]
thru [3.]? The 3 nouns in front of [1.] confuse me so much as to
thwart my attempts. Please explain and show all steps and thought
processes; I’d like to ...
No, “those” does not have “the two things most human beings would choose above all” as a grammatical antecedent. The phrase is synonymous with “the things that are worst for them”. If “those” had an antecedent, there couldn't be the qualifier “that are worst for them” after the noun.
Semantically, “those things that are worst for them” includes money and ...