From: churchh@ut-emx.uucp (Henry Churchyard)
Newsgroups: sci.lang,alt.usage.english,soc.culture.usa
Subject: Re: Problem with 'they' (etc) as 3p singular common gender pron.
Summary: Zande
Date: 5 Sep 92 14:57:03 GMT
Followup-To: sci.lang,alt.usage.english
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas

In article <1992Sep2.160536.28325@nosc.mil>, sampson@nosc.mil (Charles H. Sampson) writes:
>
> [some] lan-
> guages have only a masculine and feminine, so they have no way to ex-
> press sex uncertainty either.  German has a neuter, but it's a gender
> in its own right.  You can't switch from masculine or feminine to neuter
> to express sex uncertainty.
> 
>      Does anyone know of a language that has a "apparently gramatical"
> way of expressing sex uncertainty?  

Here's an earlier post of mine from the LINGUIST list: 

}From:	UTXVMS::LIFY436      "Henry Churchyard"  5-APR-1992 02:35:13.62
}To:	IN%"linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@tamvm1.tamu.edu"
}Subj:	RE: 3.275 Gender, Spanish la - el
}
}
}In Linguist List 3.275, Michael Newman <MNEHC@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU> states:
}
}> As regards gender-neutral pronominals, I'm in the midst of a rather
}>large study (actually it's my dissertation) on the theme of pronominal
}>variations with human reference antecedents; so I've seen a lot of data.
}>On the specific issue involved here, it seems that it is a gross
}>oversimplification to imagine that the third person singular subparadigm
}>is neatly divided up into masculine, feminine and neuter with a gaping
}>hole in the middle for uncertain, unspecified, indistinct or irrelevant,
}>just waiting for the right element to come along and fill it.
}
}   I am aware of one language (Azande or Zande) which actually has just
}such a fourth indeterminate entity in its pronominal system.  In
}addition to Masculine, Feminine, and Inanimate pronouns, the language
}also posesses a fourth pronominal gender category, `Animal'.  In
}addition to denoting animals, pronouns of this fourth category are also
}used for infants and supernatural beings (which are problematic
}categories for Masculine/Feminine/Inanimate gender assignment), as seen
}in the following quotations from E.E. Evans-Pritchard, _Social_
}_Anthropology_and_Other_Essays_ (1962):
}
}  p.246: ``This idea of a new-born babe as not yet constituting a full
}human being is further displayed in linguistic usage, for one commonly
}hears the foetus spoken of as _si_ (the [inanimate] pronoun used for
}things), though often it is referred to as _u_ (the pronoun used for
}animals and birds), and they continue to speak of a baby as _u_ until it
}grows strong and they have no doubt it will live, when they begin to
}talk of it as _ko_ (the masculine pronoun) or as _li_ (the feminine
}pronoun) according to its sex.''
}
}  p.311 (quoting a discussion of whether a certain vague culture-hero is
}conceived of as a supernatural entity): ``He comments, `What the people
}imagine Baati to be is difficult to say.  Were he accepted as a spirit,
}or as a personification of the deity Mbali, he would undoubtedly be
}accorded the neuter [animal] gender [...].  He must have [...] the power
}of responding to calls made for him at his various haunting places; and
}yet the Azande interrogated replied, "_Ko_wa_boro_, he is like a
}person", again using the masculine _ko_ and not the supernatural neuter
}_u_.' ''
}
}   (For information on the linguistic forms of these pronouns, as
}opposed to their contextual use, see _Linguistic_Analyses:_The_Non-_
}_Bantu_Languages_of_North-Eastern_Africa_, by A.N. Tucker and M.A.
}Bryan (1966), p.146ff.)
}  
}      --Henry Churchyard    lify436@utxvms.cc.utexas.edu
}
--
         --Henry Churchyard     churchh@emx.cc.utexas.edu
Newsgroups: sci.lang