dissertation grammatical gender

A-Z Publications

Annual Review of Linguistics

Volume 6, 2020, review article, grammatical gender: a close look at gender assignment across languages.

Ruth Kramer 1
View Affiliations Hide Affiliations Affiliations: Department of Linguistics, Georgetown University, Washington, DC 20057, USA; email: [email protected]
Vol. 6:45-66 (Volume publication date January 2020) https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-011718-012450
Copyright © 2020 by Annual Reviews. All rights reserved

This review takes a broad perspective on one of the most fundamental issues for gender research in linguistics: gender assignment (i.e., how different nouns are sorted into different genders). I first build on previous typological research to draw together the main generalizations about gender assignment. I then compare lexical and structural approaches to gender assignment in linguistic theory and argue that a structural approach is likely more successful at explaining gender assignment cross-linguistically.

Article metrics loading...

Full text loading...

Literature Cited

Acquaviva P. 2008 . Lexical Plurals : A Morphosemantic Approach Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
Acquaviva P. 2018 . Categorization as noun construction: gender, number, and entity types. Gender and Noun Classification É Mathieu, M Dali, G Zareikar 41– 63 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
Aksenov AT. 1984 . K probleme èkstralingvističeskoj motivacii grammatičeskoj kategorii roda. Vopr. Jazyk. 1 : 14– 25 [Google Scholar]
Alexiadou A. 2004 . Inflection class, gender and DP-internal structure. Explorations in Nominal Inflection G Müller, L Gunkel, G Zifonun 21– 50 Berlin: de Gruyter [Google Scholar]
Alexiadou A , Lohndal T , Åfarli TA , Grimstad MB 2015 . Language mixing: a Distributed Morphology approach. Proceedings of NELS 45 T Bui, D Özyildiz 25– 38 Amherst, MA: Univ. Mass. Amherst Grad. Linguist. Stud. Assoc. [Google Scholar]
Alexiadou A , Müller G. 2008 . Class features as probes. Inflectional Identity A Bachrach, A Nevins 101– 55 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
Arad M. 2003 . Locality constraints on the interpretations of roots. Nat. Lang. Linguist. Theory 21 : 737– 78 [Google Scholar]
Arad M. 2005 . Roots and Patterns: Hebrew Morpho-Syntax Dordrecht, Neth.: Springer [Google Scholar]
Asher RE. 1982 . Tamil Amsterdam: North-Holland [Google Scholar]
Austin PK. 2011 . A Grammar of Diyari, South Australia. , 2nd ed.., version 2.0, updated Feb. 2011. https://www.academia.edu/2491078/A_Grammar_of_Diyari_South_Australia [Google Scholar]
Bailyn JF , Nevins A. 2008 . Russian genitive plurals are impostors. Inflectional Identity A Bachrach, A Nevins 237– 70 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
Beard R. 1995 . The gender-animacy hypothesis. J. Slav. Linguist. 3 : 59– 96 [Google Scholar]
Bermúdez-Otero R. 2013 . The Spanish lexicon stores stems with theme vowels, not roots with inflectional class features. Probus 25 : 3– 103 [Google Scholar]
Bernstein J. 1993 . Topics in the syntax of nominal structure across Romance and Germanic languages PhD Diss., City Univ New York, New York: [Google Scholar]
Bobaljik JD. 2008 . Where's Phi? Agreement as a post-syntactic operation. Phi Theory: Phi-Features Across Interfaces and Modules D Adger, S Béjar, D Harbour 295– 328 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
Brody M. 1997 . Perfect chains. Elements of Grammar Liliane Haegeman 139– 67 Dordrecht, Neth.: Kluwer [Google Scholar]
Butler J. 1990 . Gender Trouble New York: Routledge [Google Scholar]
Butt J , Benjamin C. 2011 . A New Reference Grammar of Modern Spanish Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
Carlson R. 1994 . A Grammar of Supyire Berlin: de Gruyter [Google Scholar]
Carstens V. 2010 . Implications of grammatical gender for the theory of uninterpretable features. Exploring Crash-Proof Grammars M Putnam 31– 57 Amsterdam: Benjamins [Google Scholar]
Carstens V. 2011 . Hyperactivity and hyperagreement in Bantu. Lingua 121 : 721– 41 [Google Scholar]
Chomsky N. 2000 . Minimalist inquiries, the framework. Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik R Martin, D Michaels, J Uriagereka 89– 155 Cambridge, MA: MIT Press [Google Scholar]
Chomsky N. 2001 . Derivation by phase. Ken Hale: A Life in Language M Kenstowicz 1– 52 Cambridge, MA: MIT Press [Google Scholar]
Corbett G. 1979 . The agreement hierarchy. J. Linguist. 15 : 203– 24 [Google Scholar]
Corbett G. 1991 . Gender Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
Corbett G. 2006 . Agreement Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
Corbett G. 2013 . Sex-based and non-sex-based gender systems. The World Atlas of Language Structures Online MS Dryer, M Haspelmath Leipzig, Ger: Max Planck Inst. Evol. Anthropol https://wals.info/chapter/31 [Google Scholar]
Corbett G 2014a . The Expression of Gender Berlin: de Gruyter [Google Scholar]
Corbett G. 2014b . Gender typology. The Expression of Gender G Corbett 87– 130 Berlin: de Gruyter [Google Scholar]
Corbett G , Fedden S. 2016 . Canonical gender. J. Linguist. 52 : 495– 531 [Google Scholar]
Corbett G , Fraser N. 2000 . Gender assignment: a typology and model. Systems of Nominal Classification G Senft 293– 325 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
Dahl Ö 2000 . Animacy and the notion of semantic gender. Gender in Grammar and Cognition. Part I: Approaches to Gender B Unterbeck 99– 116 Berlin: de Gruyter [Google Scholar]
Déchaine R-M. 2018 . Partitioning the nominal domain: the convergence of morphology, syntax, semantics, and pragmatics. Gender and Noun Classification É Mathieu, M Dali, G Zareikar 17– 40 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
Doleschal U. 2000 . Gender assignment revisited. Gender in Grammar and Cognition. Part I: Approaches to Gender B Unterbeck 117– 65 Berlin: de Gruyter [Google Scholar]
Durrell M. 2011 . Hammer's German Grammar and Usage London: Hodder Education, 5th ed.. [Google Scholar]
Embick D , Halle M. 2005 . On the status of stems in morphological theory. Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2003 T Geerts, I von Ginneken, H Jacobs 37– 62 Amsterdam: Benjamins [Google Scholar]
Evans N , Brown D , Corbett G 2002 . The semantics of gender in Mayali: partially parallel systems and formal implementation. Language 78 : 111– 55 [Google Scholar]
Fassi Fehri A. 2018 . Multiple facets of constructional Arabic gender and ‘functional universalism’ in the DP. Gender and Noun Classification É Mathieu, M Dali, G Zareikar 67– 92 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
Ferrari F. 2005 . A syntactic analysis of the nominal systems of Italian and Luganda: how nouns can be formed in the syntax PhD Diss., New York Univ. New York: [Google Scholar]
Foris DP. 2000 . A Grammar of Sochiapan Chinantec Dallas, TX: SIL Int. [Google Scholar]
Frantz DG. 2017 . Blackfoot Grammar Toronto: Univ. Toronto Press, 3rd ed.. [Google Scholar]
Fraser NM , Corbett G. 1995 . Gender, animacy, and declensional class assignment: a unified account for Russian. Yearbook of Morphology 1994 , ed. G Booji , J van Marle pp. 123 – 50 Dordrecht, Neth. Springer: [Google Scholar]
Fuchs Z , van der Wal J 2018 . Bantu DP structure: an analysis of gender Paper presented at the 2018 Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America Salt Lake City, UT: Jan. 4–7 [Google Scholar]
Goddard I. 2002 . Grammatical gender in Algonquian. Proceedings of the 33rd Algonquian Conference HC Wolfart 195– 231 Winnipeg, Can.: Univ. Manit. Press [Google Scholar]
Greenberg JH. 1978 . How does a language acquire gender markers?. Universals of Human Language , Vol. 3: Word Structure JH Greenberg 47– 82 Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
Halle M. 1997 . Distributed Morphology: impoverishment and fission. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 30: Papers at the Interface B Bruening, Y Kang, M McGinnis 425– 49 Cambridge, MA: MIT Work. Pap. Linguist. [Google Scholar]
Harris J. 1991 . The exponence of gender in Spanish. Linguist. Inq. 22 : 27– 62 [Google Scholar]
Hedinger R. 2008 . A Grammar of Akɔɔse: A Northwest Bantu Language Dallas, TX: SIL Int. [Google Scholar]
Hellinger M , Bußmann H 2001–2015 . Gender Across Languages: The Linguistic Representation of Women and Men Amsterdam: Benjamins [Google Scholar]
Hockett CF. 1958 . A Course in Modern Linguistics New York: Macmillan [Google Scholar]
Kihm A. 2005 . Noun class, gender and the lexicon-syntax-morphology interfaces: a comparative study of Niger-Congo and Romance languages. The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Syntax G Cinque, RS Kayne 459– 512 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
Kilarski M. 2013 . Nominal Classification: A History of Its Study from the Classical Period to the Present Amsterdam: Benjamins [Google Scholar]
King KE. 2015 . Mixed gender agreement in Russian DPs MA Thesis: Univ. Wash., Seattle [Google Scholar]
Kramer R. 2009 . Definite markers, phi-features, and agreement: a morphosyntactic investigation of the Amharic DP PhD Diss. Univ. Calif., Santa Cruz [Google Scholar]
Kramer R. 2014 . Gender in Amharic: a morphosyntactic approach to natural and grammatical gender. Lang. Sci. 43 : 102– 15 [Google Scholar]
Kramer R. 2015 . The Morphosyntax of Gender Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
Kramer R. 2016 . The location of gender features in the syntax. Lang. Linguist. Compass 10 : 661– 77 [Google Scholar]
Lecarme J. 2002 . Gender “polarity”: theoretical aspects of Somali nominal morphology. Many Morphologies P Boucher, M Plénat 109– 41 Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press [Google Scholar]
Leslau W. 1995 . Reference Grammar of Amharic Wiesbaden, Ger.: Harrassowitz [Google Scholar]
Lowenstamm J. 2008 . On little n, √, and types of nouns. Sounds of Silence: Empty Elements in Syntax and Phonology J Hartmann, V Hegedűs, H van Riemsdijk 105– 44 Amsterdam: Elsevier [Google Scholar]
Marantz A. 1991 . Case and licensing. Proceedings of the 1991 Eastern States Conference on Linguistics 234– 53 Columbus, OH: Ohio State Univ. [Google Scholar]
Marantz A. 1997 . No escape from syntax. Univ. Pa. Work. Pap. Linguist. 4 : 201– 25 [Google Scholar]
Marantz A. 2001 . Words Paper presented at the 20th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics Los Angeles, CA: Feb. 23–25 [Google Scholar]
Matasović R. 2004 . Gender in Indo-European Heidelberg, Ger.: Winter [Google Scholar]
Mathieu É , Dali M , Zareikar G 2018 . Gender and Noun Classification Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
Morin R. 2010 . Terminal letters, phonemes, and morphemes in Spanish gender assignment. Linguistics 48 : 143– 69 [Google Scholar]
Müller G. 2004 . A Distributed Morphology approach to syncretism in Russian noun inflection. Proceedings of Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics 12 O Arnaudova, W Browne, ML Rivero, D Stojanović 353– 74 Ann Arbor, MI: Mich. Slav. Publ. [Google Scholar]
Nesset T. 2006 . Gender meets the usage-based model: four principles of rule interaction in gender assignment. Lingua 116 : 1369– 93 [Google Scholar]
Newman P. 1979 . Explaining Hausa feminines. Stud. Afr. Linguist. 10 : 197– 224 [Google Scholar]
Newman P. 2000 . The Hausa Language New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
Nichols J. 1992 . Linguistic Diversity in Space and Time Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press [Google Scholar]
Nikunlassi A. 2000 . On gender assignment in Russian. Gender in Grammar and Cognition B Unterbeck 771– 92 Berlin: de Gruyter [Google Scholar]
Oltra-Massuet MI. 1999 . On the notion of theme vowel: a new approach to Catalan verbal morphology MS Thesis, Mass. Inst. Technol Cambridge, MA: [Google Scholar]
Oltra-Massuet MI , Arregi K. 2005 . Stress-by-structure in Spanish. Linguist. Inq. 36 : 43– 84 [Google Scholar]
Pereltsvaig A. 2006 . Small nominals. Nat. Lang. Linguist. Theory 24 : 433– 500 [Google Scholar]
Pesetsky D. 2013 . Russian Case Morphology and the Syntactic Categories Cambridge, MA: MIT Press [Google Scholar]
Pesetsky D , Torrego E. 2001 . T-to-C movement: causes and consequences. Ken Hale: A Life in Language M Kenstowicz 355– 426 Cambridge, MA: MIT Press [Google Scholar]
Pesetsky D , Torrego E. 2007 . The syntax of valuation and the interpretability of features. Phrasal and Clausal Architecture S Karimi, V Samiian, WK Wilkins 262– 94 Amsterdam: Benjamins [Google Scholar]
Picallo MC. 2008 . Gender and number in Romance. Ling. Linguaggio 7 : 47– 66 [Google Scholar]
Plaster K , Polinsky M , Harizanov B 2013 . Noun classes grow on trees: noun classification in the North-East Caucasus. Language Typology and Historical Contingency B Bickel, LA Grenoble, DA Peterson, A Timberlake 153– 70 Amsterdam: Benjamins [Google Scholar]
Ralli A. 2002 . The role of morphology in gender determination: evidence from Modern Greek. Linguistics 40 : 519– 51 [Google Scholar]
Rappaport GC. 2013 . Determiner phrases and mixed agreement in Slavic. The Nominal Structure in Slavic and Beyond L Schürcks, A Giannakidou, U Etxeberria 343– 90 Berlin: de Gruyter [Google Scholar]
Rice C. 2006 . Optimizing gender. Lingua 116 : 1394– 417 [Google Scholar]
Riente L. 2003 . Ladies first: the pivotal role of gender in the Italian nominal inflection system. McGill Work. Pap. Linguist. 17 : 2 1– 54 [Google Scholar]
Roca IM. 1989 . The organisation of grammatical gender. Trans. Philol. Soc. 87 : 1– 32 [Google Scholar]
Sande H. 2018 . Phonologically determined nominal concord as post-syntactic: evidence from Guébie. J. Linguist. 55 : 831 – 78 [Google Scholar]
Sauerland U. 2004 . A comprehensive semantics for agreement Work. Pap., ZAS Berlin: https://www.academia.edu/336216/A_Comprehensive_Semantics_for_Agreement [Google Scholar]
Schiller NO. 2014 . Psycholinguistic approaches to the investigation of grammatical gender. The Expression of Gender G Corbett 161– 90 Berlin: de Gruyter [Google Scholar]
Steriopolo O. 2018 . Morphosyntax of gender in Russian sex-differentiable nouns. J. Slav. Linguist. 26 : 1– 29 [Google Scholar]
Steriopolo O , Wiltschko M. 2010 . Distributed GENDER hypothesis. Formal Studies in Slavic Linguistics: Proceedings of the Formal Description of Slavic Languages 7.5 G Zybatow, P Dudchuk, S Minor, E Pshehotskaya 155– 72 New York: Peter Lang [Google Scholar]
Thornton AM. 2009 . Constraining gender assignment rules. Lang. Sci. 31 : 14– 32 [Google Scholar]
Tryon DT. 1974 . Daly Family Languages, Australia . Canberra, Aust.: Aust. Natl. Univ. [Google Scholar]
Tucker AN , Bryan MA. 1966 . Linguistic Analyses of the Non-Bantu Languages of North-Eastern Africa Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
Wechsler S , Zlatić L. 2003 . The Many Faces of Agreement Stanford, CA: Cent. Study Lang. Inf. [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

Article Type: Review Article

Most Read This Month

Most cited most cited rss feed, bilingualism, mind, and brain, how nature meets nurture: universal grammar and statistical learning, the indo-european homeland from linguistic and archaeological perspectives, sign language typology: the contribution of rural sign languages, correlational studies in typological and historical linguistics, advances in dialectometry, genetics and the language sciences, ditransitive constructions, diachronic semantics, language abilities in neanderthals.

The resolution of natural and grammatical gender conflicts

Heloise ungless - linguistics.

My linguistics dissertation was on the topic of grammatical gender. Grammatical gender refers to the phenomenon of dividing nouns into two or more classes. It may seem odd to divide all nouns into such groups, but this is the case for over half the world’s languages (and used to be true of English).

In some languages the classes are based on properties such as whether the noun refers to humans, or whether they have spiritual connotations. In other words, the classes have some meaningful basis, and you can generally guess a noun’s class if you know what it refers to. In other languages, classification is largely not based on the meaning of the word but on its “form” – how it sounds, or how it was created (for example, if it was developed from an adjective, as with words like “happiness”). The classes will always have some meaningful differences between them, but largely words belong to a class by virtue of their form. This is the case for French. In French, as in many European languages, the classes that the nouns belong to are known as “masculine” and “feminine” (some, such as German and Russian also have “neuter”). My dissertation focused on languages with masculine and feminine grammatical gender classes, in particular French.

Grammatical gender is reflected in agreement patterns on other elements: this is one of its defining properties. In other words, if a noun belongs to gender A, then related verbs, articles (a/the), adjectives, etc may be modified to reflect this, having “gender A” agreement. Speakers of English will be familiar with agreement on verbs, for example with “the boy run s ” versus “I run”. The “ s ” on the verb marks that the subject “the boy” is third person, singular and that it is in the present tense. In languages such as Russian a verb might also have to mark that “the boy” is masculine.

Whilst it intuitively makes sense that the noun “boy” should belong to the masculine class, German would also include tables in that category. A table (ein Tisch) has no inherent properties that motivate it being masculine, and indeed the word is feminine in French. In my dissertation I referred to examples such as this as having “arbitrary grammatical gender”.

In French, “the boy” is also masculine – “le garçon” – but this is not the case for all nouns that refer to men. For example, the French word for revered religious leaders such as the Pope – “Sainteté” – is grammatically feminine, and there has never been a female in the role. This is an example of what I called “natural- grammatical gender conflict”, i.e. when the natural, meaningful gender of the person a noun refers to doesn’t match with the grammatical gender of the noun itself. Natural-grammatical gender conflicts were the main focus of my dissertation.

Many papers have been published which look at words like “Sainteté”, and how speakers decide which agreement forms to use: whether they opt for using arbitrary feminine agreement, or for meaningful masculine agreement. Certain patterns of speaker behaviour occur across languages. For example, the further removed from the noun the other element (that “carries” the agreement marker) is, the more likely speakers are to opt for using meaningful gender agreement. This “distance” effect is true both literally (ie relating to how “far apart” the noun and the other element is) and figuratively. To use a French example from a written corpus (aka a giant bank of actual language examples): “ Sa Sainteté est né sous le nom de Nazir Gayed”. This translates as “ his holiness was born under the name of Nazir Gayed”. Whilst the word “sa” (his) is modified to show agreement with the feminine noun, the past participle “né” (born) does not show feminine agreement, but rather masculine agreement, matching Nazir’s actual gender. Whilst “sa” and “né” are not very different with regards to distance from the noun, they are different types of word. “Sa” is known as an attributive word, and “né” a predicate. In French, predicates sometimes show meaningful agreement (as here), but attributives never do. Across speakers, across languages, across the world, people are more likely to use “meaningful” gender agreement on a predicate than an attributive, whatever their relative position. This probability difference can be represented in what is known as the “Agreement Hierarchy”, formulated by Greville Corbett. The hierarchy also includes relative pronouns, as in “who”, and personal pronouns, as in “he”. Personal pronouns are always the most likely to show “meaningful” gender agreement.

Attributive > Predicate > Relative Pronouns > Personal Pronouns

So, whilst this particular kind of natural-grammatical gender conflict had been much discussed, I focused on a related but very understudied phenomenon. I looked at examples where a spontaneously invented nickname had a different grammatical gender from the speaker’s own. I studied how people used agreement in these examples. The kind of “nickname” I studied involved metonymy. Metonymy means referring to something by some related property or item. A man might be referred to as “the blue suit”, for example, or a customer as “the full English”. In French, the existence of grammatical gender means that when using such “nicknames”, speakers must decide which gender to opt for with agreement: the person’s or the item’s.

I created a simple “complete the sentence” exercise to gather data on this phenomenon. I created two scenarios in which all the people involved were only women, or only men (plus two “distractor” scenarios so participants wouldn’t think gender was my focus, which might have interfered with their natural behaviour). After reading a scenario, my participants were presented with 6 sentence pairs. In the first sentence, a person was referred to using an item of clothing they were wearing. To give an English example, “the red dress is so bossy!”. Participants were asked to complete the following sentence, which was designed in such a way as to prompt them to use a pronoun to refer back to this person. I looked at examples where the item of clothing’s arbitrary grammatical gender did not match the person’s gender. For example, when a woman was referred to as “le pantalon gris” (the grey trousers), “trousers” being masculine in French. I found that speakers varied as to whether they used meaningful natural gender agreement or arbitrary grammatical gender agreement. This was true not only when comparing speakers, but also looking at an individual participant’s performance: people switched which kind of agreement they used, sentence to sentence, or scenario to scenario.

Whilst the conclusions I drew in my dissertation were of a highly theoretical nature, what is clear is that there is no set method by which speakers “resolve the conflict” between natural and grammatical gender, hence the variation. Elements near the noun are “biased” towards arbitrary grammatical gender, but pronouns (which are figuratively and usually literally further removed) are an active point of contention for native speakers of French!

Some further information on grammatical gender relating to my dissertation: https://www.jstor.org/stable/4175494?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

Some studies looking at how grammatical gender can influence how we perceive an object: http://podbay.fm/show/500673866/e/1335760200?autostart=1 http://www-psych.stanford.edu/~lera/papers/gender.pdf

Tools and Resources
Customer Services
Applied Linguistics
Biology of Language
Cognitive Science
Computational Linguistics
Historical Linguistics
History of Linguistics
Language Families/Areas/Contact
Linguistic Theories
Neurolinguistics
Phonetics/Phonology
Psycholinguistics
Sign Languages
Sociolinguistics
Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

Jenny Audring Jenny Audring Leiden University
https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.43
Published online: 07 July 2016

Gender is a grammatical feature, in a family with person, number, and case. In the languages that have grammatical gender—according to a representative typological sample, almost half of the languages in the world—it is a property that separates nouns into classes. These classes are often meaningful and often linked to biological sex, which is why many languages are said to have a “masculine” and a “feminine” gender. A typical example is Italian, which has masculine words for male persons ( il bambino “the. m little boy”) and feminine words for female persons ( la bambina “the. f little girl”). However, gender systems may be based on other semantic distinctions or may reflect formal properties of the noun. In all cases, the defining property is agreement: the behavior of associated words. In Italian, the masculine gender of the noun bambino matches its meaning as well as its form—the noun ends in – o and inflects like a regular –o class noun—but the true indicator of gender is the form of the article. This can be seen in words like la mano “the. f hand,” which is feminine despite its final - o , and il soprano “the. m soprano,” which is masculine, although it usually refers to a woman. For the same reasons, we speak of grammatical gender only if the distinction is reflected in syntax; a language that has words for male and female persons or animals does not necessarily have a gender system.

Across the languages of the world, gender systems vary widely. They differ in the number of classes, in the underlying assignment rules, and in how and where gender is marked. Since agreement is a definitional property, gender is generally absent in isolating languages as well as in young languages with little bound morphology, including sign languages. Therefore, gender is considered a mature phenomenon in language.

Gender interacts in various ways with other grammatical features. For example, it may be limited to the singular number or the third person, and it may be crosscut by case distinctions. These and other interrelations can complicate the task of figuring out a gender system in first or second language acquisition. Yet, children master gender early, making use of a broad variety of cues. By contrast, gender is famously difficult for second-language learners. This is especially true for adults and for learners whose first language does not have a gender system. Nevertheless, tests show that even for this group, native-like competence is possible to attain.

morphosyntax
classification

1. What is Grammatical Gender?

In everyday speech, the word “gender” is associated with the biological and social differences between women and men. In addition, people might know that languages can have masculine and feminine words . So at first blush, it may seem that grammatical gender is a reflection of natural gender in grammar.

1.1 Kinds and Concepts

The view that grammatical gender mirrors natural gender has been widespread since antiquity and is still evident in the terms “masculine,” “feminine,” and “neuter” (historically meaning “neither”), which are used to label individual gender distinctions, especially in Indo-European languages. Indeed, many languages show a match between natural and grammatical gender. Clear examples from across the world are Tamil in India, Dizi in Ethiopia, Diyari in Southern Australia (now extinct), and Bagvalal in the Caucasus (Corbett, 1991 ; Kibort & Corbett, 2008 ). In these and many other languages, nouns denoting male persons are masculine, and nouns denoting female persons are feminine. Other nouns are treated in varied ways: they may be added to the masculine or the feminine gender or may occupy one or several genders of their own.

However, not all languages function like this. First, many languages—slightly more than half of the languages in a representative sample (Corbett, 2013a )—do not have grammatical gender at all. Of those that do, some disregard the difference between male and female and assign all words for humans or for living beings to the same class. Yet other languages have a special “vegetable” gender for plants, a gender for foodstuffs, a gender for large or important things, a gender for liquids or abstracts, and many more. Such patterns remind us that the word gender (Greek: γένος ‎) originally meant “kind” rather than “sex.” While the split into male and female is the most common semantic base of gender systems (Corbett, 2013b ), it is by no means the only option.

Relaxing the expectation that grammatical gender is always related to biological sex also opens up the possibility that a language may have more than two or three genders. Indeed, systems can be far richer, with a maximum of around 20 different genders found in Fula, a language of the Niger-Congo family spoken in Nigeria. In descriptions of such large systems, it is common practice to label the various classes with numbers rather than names. This is not only more practical, it also reflects the fact that not all of these classes are meaningful. In fact, most classes in Fula do not have a clear semantic content (Breedveld, 1995 , p. 297).

The observation that gender does not always perfectly align with meaning holds for almost half of the relevant languages (47% of the 112 gender languages in Corbett, 2013c ). This may mean either that one or two classes are meaningful while the others are not, or that all classes contain words for semantic as well as non-semantic reasons. The first situation can be seen in the Nakh-Daghestanian language Tsez (Comrie, 1999 , example 1 ), the second in the Indo-European language Latvian (example 2 ).

(1) Tsez (Nakh-Daghestanian): Open in new tab Gender I – male persons Gender II – female persons + various other Gender III – various Gender IV – various Open in new tab

(2) Latvian (IE, Baltic, Heiko Marten p.c.): Open in new tab vecā māte ‘old mother’ – feminine for semantic reasons vecā māja ‘old house’ – feminine for formal reasons vecais tēvs ‘old father’ – masculine for semantic reasons vecais koks ‘old tree’ – masculine for formal reasons Open in new tab

The imperfect match between gender and meaning has inspired two diverging lines of thinking, both dating back to the early Greek scholars (see Kilarski, 2013 for an overview of the scientific history). The first sought to restore the match with the help of hidden layers of meaning attributed to metaphorical extension, personification, or culture-specific classification often inaccessible to the outside observer (notable advocates of this view were Grimm, 1831 and von Humboldt, 1822 ), but the idea also appears in Lakoff ( 1987 ). The second acknowledges that gender is, to a large extent, a matter of grammar—a classification of nouns rather than of kinds and concepts.

1.2 Classifying Nouns

Gender is one of the systems of noun classification, alongside classifiers on one end (3) and inflectional classes on the other (4).

(3) Classifiers in Jacaltec (Kanjobalan Mayan: Craig, 1992 , p. 284; adapted from Aikhenvald, 2000 , p. 82). Open in new tab xil naj xuwan no7 lab’a saw CL:MAN John CL:ANIMAL snake ‘(man) John saw the (animal) snake’ Open in new tab

(4) Inflectional classes in Latin (from Haspelmath & Sims, 2010 , p. 159) Open in new tab o-class u-class Nominative singular hort-us grad-us Genitive singular hort-ī grad-ūs Open in new tab

In (3), the classifiers naj “man” and no7 “animal” indicate that John is a person, while the snake is an animal. In (4), the nouns hortus “garden” and gradus “step” have the same ending in the nominative singular, but different endings in other cases. The different forms used to express the same feature, here genitive singular, show that the two nouns belong to different inflection classes or “declensions.” While both classifiers and declensions are means to classify nouns, they differ in many respects. Among other things, classifiers are meaningful, while most inflectional class systems have at best weak links with semantics.

Gender seems to have affinities with both systems. We find historical evidence that gender may develop out of classifier systems (see section 3.1, The Birth of Gender Systems). On the other hand, genders often partially match inflectional classes when a language has both, leading linguists to think that the systems strive to cooperate or—arguably—that one determines the other (Doleschal, 2000 ; Faarlund, Lie, & Vannebo, 1997 ; Bittner, 2000 ; Kürschner & Nübling, 2011 ; see Enger, 2004 and Thornton, 2001 for critical discussion, and Aronoff, 1994 on the general relation between inflectional class and gender).

Gender also has links with derivational morphology. Many languages have morphological means of deriving words for male and female persons and animals, with morphemes that resemble the gender markers found elsewhere in the language. For example, the South-American language Mosetén has pairs of nouns as in (5), whose endings, – si’ (feminine) and – tyi’ (masculine), also appear as agreement markers on adjectives, relative clause markers, numerals, and other words (Sakel, 2004 , pp. 86–88, translations adjusted).

(5) nanasi’ ‘girl’ nanatyi’ ‘boy’ minsi’ ‘female person’ mintyi’ ‘male person’

The argument for analyzing nominal – si’ and – tyi’ in (5) as derivational morphemes rather than as gender markers is that the language does not usually express gender overtly on the noun (Sakel, 2004 , p. 86).

In addition, derivational suffixes are typically associated with a fixed gender value. For example, French nouns ending in - elle are feminine: ruelle “alleyway,” dentelle “lace.” Such regularities may even override semantic motivations in favor of another gender value. A classic example is the French noun sentinelle “guard,” which often denotes a male person but is feminine nonetheless.

1.3 Agreement Classes

The property that sets gender apart from other types of noun classification is agreement, the morphological expression on words other than the noun. While languages can mark gender on the noun itself—such systems are called overt gender systems—this is not a necessary characteristic. Marking on associated words, however, is required: without agreement, we have no evidence for gender (Corbett, 1991 ; Hockett, 1958 , p. 231; see Audring ( 2011 ) for a number of key references from the extensive literature on gender agreement). Common places where gender agreement shows up are adjectives, verbs, and pronouns, and many languages also mark gender on articles, numerals, and question words (see example 6 from Russian).

(6) Russian, gender agreement on numerals, adjectives, and verbs (Stephan Audring, p.c.) Open in new tab odn-a pust-aja butylka upal-a one- f.sg empty- f.sg bottle( f)sg fall.over. pst - f.sg ‘one empty bottle fell over’ Open in new tab

More rarely, gender agreement can be found on adverbs, prepositions, conjunctions, and even words for “yes” and “no”—see example ( 7 ) from a variety of Dutch spoken in Belgium.

(7) Wambeek Dutch, gender marked on “yes” (Van Craenenbroeck, 2010 , p. 211) Open in new tab Kom Marie mergen? – Jui-s. come. prs.3sg Mary tomorrow – yes- f.sg ‘Is Mary coming tomorrow? – Yes, she is.’ Open in new tab

Agreement is what makes gender a morphosyntactic feature, together with number and person, and distinguishes it from inflectional class and from classes of derived words. Examples ( 8 ) and ( 9 ) illustrate the difference.

(8) Gender vs. inflectional class (Italian; Thornton, 2001 , p. 485) Open in new tab Gender Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Class 5 Class 6 sg. – o , sg. – a , sg. – e , sg. – a , sg. – o , invariable pl. - i pl. - e pl. - i pl. - i pl. - a Masculine libro – padre papa uovo bar ‘book’ ‘father’ ‘pope’ ‘egg’ ‘coffee shop’ Feminine mano casa madre ala uova star ‘hand’ ‘house’ ‘mother’ ‘wing’ ‘eggs’ ‘famous person’ Open in new tab

Table ( 8 ) shows that the relation between gender and inflectional class in Italian is not 1 to 1—every inflectional class except class 2 contains nouns of both genders, although there are large statistical tendencies (e.g., class 1 nouns are typically masculine). For gender, agreement is decisive; although mano inflects like a masculine noun, it takes feminine agreements, while papa looks like it should be feminine but takes masculine agreements.

(9) Gender vs. classes of derived words (German) Open in new tab Suffix Example Gender - heit die Freiheit ‘the freedom’ feminine - ung die Ordnung ‘the order’ feminine - (i)tät die Kontinuität ‘the continuity’ feminine - nis die Finsternis ‘the darkness’ feminine das Gedächtnis ‘the memory’ neuter - tum der Reichtum ‘the wealth’ masculine das Wachstum ‘the growth’ neuter Open in new tab

In Table ( 9 ), we see that gender and suffix classes are not equivalent; the suffixes - heit, -ung , and -(i)tät take the same gender agreement in German, while the suffix - nis is found in both feminine and neuter nouns, and the suffix - tum is associated with masculine or neuter gender. Again, agreement is what is decisive for gender, not the noun’s own morphology.

Summing up, gender can be viewed from three basic angles. First, it can be seen as a classification system for concepts, based on properties such as sex or animacy, or shape and size. Second, it can be taken as a system for classifying nouns, which highlights its affinities with inflectional and derivational morphology as well as with classifiers. Third, gender can be viewed as a system of agreement classes, defined via the behavior of associated words. The last view, which takes a syntactic rather than a semantic criterion as foundational, is prevalent in the current linguistic literature.

1.4 Gender and Other Grammatical Features

Gender interacts in various ways with other grammatical features, especially person, number, and case, but also tense. These interactions often manifest themselves in the form of conditions; gender marking may be restricted to a part of the paradigm. A well-known condition has been formulated as one of Greenberg’s universals: “A language never has more gender categories in nonsingular numbers than in the singular” (Greenberg, 1963 , p. 112; Universal 37). While a number of counterexamples have been found (Plank & Schellinger, 1997 ), it appears to be generally true that many languages mark fewer genders in the plural than in the singular, or that they neutralize gender completely in non-singular environments. Similar conditions can be found between other features. Another proposed universal is that “[i]f a language has gender distinctions in the first person, it always has gender distinctions in the second or third person, or in both” (Greenberg, 1963 , p. 96; Universal 44). This means that gender marking in pronominal paradigms is often present in the second and/or third person, but absent in the first. In other cases, conditions apply between gender and tense. In Russian, for example, verbs agree in gender (example 6 ), but only in the past tense.

A further complexity in many languages is the interaction between gender and case. Especially when the same morphological markers express both features at once, children may have a harder time figuring out the forms and functions of the two systems (see section 4.1 below).

1.5 A Canonical Gender System

Languages across the world vary widely and interestingly. In some instances, there may be doubts whether a language has grammatical gender or not. Therefore, it is useful to look at a few basic properties expected in a gender system, and some common divergences (for more on canonical agreement, canonical features, and canonical gender, see Corbett, 2006 , Corbett, 2012 , and Corbett & Fedden, 2015 ).

First, we expect that if a language has grammatical gender, then every noun in that language should belong to exactly one gender. This means that the system accommodates all nouns (rather than just a subset) and that, in principle, each noun has only one fixed gender value. Divergences from this ideal can be sporadic or systematic. In sporadic cases, we find individual nouns varying in the agreements they trigger. For example in Hebrew, a few nouns are reported to have either feminine or masculine gender, for instance, dereh “road, way” (Aikhenvald, 2000 , p. 44). This is an example of a double-gender noun (Corbett, 1991 , pp. 181–182). A different case is hybrid nouns (Corbett, 1991 , pp. 183–184) such as the Dutch diminutive zusje “(little) sister,” which belongs to the neuter gender but often takes feminine pronouns.

Especially interesting are more systematic cases of variation, where the gender of nouns can be manipulated by the speaker. For example, in languages that associate certain genders with size, high value, or importance, it may be possible to upgrade or downgrade a person or object by placing it into another gender. Example ( 10 ) comes from the Nigerian Bantu language Herero (also known as Otjiherero). The noun for “knife” belongs to class 11, as indicated by the prefix (o)ru - (10a), but it can be used with the class 7 prefix (o)tji - to mean “big knife” (10b). The new class prefix is added before the existing one. Note how the class change is reflected in the agreement on the possessive pronoun.

(10) Herero (Kavari & Marten, 2009 ; glosses simplified) a. oru-vyó rw-ándje 11-knife 11-my ‘my knife’ b. otji-ru-vyó tjá-ndje 7-11-knife 7-my ‘my big knife’

In systems such as this, gender may be difficult to distinguish from (or indeed be intertwined with) diminution and/or augmentation, as well as lexical derivation. Similar difficulties may arise when there is overlap between gender and number (see Corbett & Hayward, 1987 , for a famous case, the Cushitic language Bayso, whose plural is sometimes analyzed as a gender).

A second expected property of a gender system is that it has a semantic core (Corbett, 1991 , p. 63). This means that even when many or most nouns are assigned to a gender on the basis of their form (see section 2.2 below), some alignment between gender and semantics is expected. Even in languages for which the gender of nouns has been regarded as arbitrary (famously French and German, but see again 2.2), the system is semantically motivated to some degree, especially for persons and higher animals (11).

(11) Semantically motivated feminine/masculine noun pairs in French and German Open in new tab German (F/M) French (F/M) Translation die Frau/der Mann la femme/l’homme ‘the woman/the man’ die Nichte/der Neffe la nièce/le neveu ‘the niece/the nephew’ die Stute/der Hengst la jument/l’étalon ‘the mare/the stallion’ die Kuh/der Stier la vache/le taureau ‘the cow/the bull’ Open in new tab

On the other hand, when gender systems are perfectly semantic, researchers sometimes separate them from grammatical gender and speak of “semantic gender,” “natural gender,” “agreement in sex” or “animacy agreement,” which may be unhelpful, as it introduces artificial splits between otherwise equivalent systems.

A third canonical property is that gender agreement should occur in the form of affixes or (more rarely) clitics, and in more than one lexical category or more than one syntactic domain. This means that we expect languages to show gender on several words in the utterance, for instance on adjectives, verbs, and pronouns. The Bantu language Chichewa, for example, is highly canonical in this respect: in addition to marking gender on the noun itself, it clocks up the following list of agreement targets (Bentley & Kulemeka, 2001 ; Mchombo, 2004 ,):

Finite verbs (subject and object agreement).

Adjectives.

Demonstrative pronouns.

Relative pronouns.

Possessive pronouns.

Indefinite/quantitative pronouns.

Question words.

Associative markers (comparable to prepositions).

In general, more agreement results in an easier to recognize gender system. If agreement in a particular language is restricted to a single category, like pronouns, then the existence of grammatical gender in that language might be debatable. The most famous case is English, which only shows evidence for gender on personal and possessive pronouns, leading researchers (and laypersons) to argue about whether English has a gender system or not.

By looking at just three of the many ways in which gender systems can meet or defy expectations, the usefulness of typological knowledge about cross-linguistic variation becomes evident—an indispensable tool in analysis and theory.

2. Gender in the Languages of the World

In a sample of 257 languages from different geographical areas and linguistic families, 112 are shown to have a gender system (Corbett, 2013a ). Their distribution across the world is heterogeneous. Gender systems are common in Europe, in Africa, and in Australia, but they are comparatively rare in the Americas and practically absent in large parts of Asia and in the Pacific (Aikhenvald, 2000 , p. 78; Corbett, 2013a ). In the linguistic literature, the best-represented and most widely researched gender systems are those of the Indo-European and the Niger Congo languages, in particular from the Bantu genus. Aside from these, individual fame is enjoyed by languages such as Arapesh (Fortune, 1942 ; but especially thanks to Aronoff, 1994 ; see also Dobrin, 2012 ), Bayso (Corbett & Hayward, 1987 ), Dyirbal (Dixon, 1972 ; popularly known through Lakoff, 1987 ; but see also Plaster & Polinsky, 2010 ), Miraña (Seifart, 2004 ), Ngan’gityemmeri (Reid, 1997 ), Russian (Corbett, 1991 ), Yimas (Foley, 1991 ), and Zande (Aikhenvald, 2000 ; Claudi, 1985 ). These languages have gender systems that are seen as especially informative or challenging for various reasons, such as their many genders (Arapesh, Ngan’gityemmeri), their complex or unusual assignment systems (Arapesh, Dyirbal, Yimas), their history (Ngan’gityemmeri, Zande), or their interaction between gender and other features (Bayso, Miraña, Ngan’gityemmeri, Russian).

Gender systems come in a broad variety of shapes and sizes. Generally speaking, we can distinguish three parameters of variation:

The number of gender values.

The type of assignment rules.

The amount and place of agreement marking.

Let us briefly look at each in turn.

2.1 How Many Gender Values?

The smallest possible number of gender values is two, and two-gender-systems are the most common worldwide (Corbett, 2013a ). On the upper end, languages with more than a dozen classes have been identified, for instance, Arapesh, spoken on Papua New Guinea, with 13 genders (Aronoff, 1992 , 1994 ; Fortune, 1942 ), Ngan’gityemerri, a Daly language spoken in Australia, with 15 genders (Reid, 1997 ), and Nigerian Fula with more than 20 genders depending on dialect and analysis (Arnott, 1970 ; Breedveld, 1995 ).

Establishing how many genders a language has is not always simple and straightforward. Since the indicators for gender are agreeing words, any inconsistencies or mismatches within or among these words can complicate the analysis. For example, there are languages in which not all agreeing words mark the same array of genders. A case in point is Dutch, where gender is marked on definite articles, attributive adjectives, and relative and demonstrative pronouns. All of these distinguish two gender values: common and neuter. Furthermore, gender is marked on personal and possessive pronouns, and here we find three values: masculine, feminine, and neuter (with syncretism between masculine and neuter in the possessives). This makes it hard to say how many genders Dutch has—two or three—and this is indeed a matter of debate in the linguistic and pedagogical literature (see Audring, 2009 for discussion). In other languages, the number of genders is difficult to state for other reasons, for example, because markers are syncretic or otherwise ambiguous (e.g., in Romanian, see Corbett, 1991 , pp. 150–152; Corbett, 2014 , pp. 93–94). Moreover, small clusters of nouns may behave exceptionally (see Corbett, 1991 , pp. 170–175 on “inquorate genders”) or the gender system may overlap with other systems, such as location marking, diminution/augmentation, or grammatical number (see, e.g., Di Garbo, 2014 ).

2.2 Types of Assignment Rules

In some languages, gender appears to be more clearly rule-based than in others. Rules for gender assignment have two basic functions: they serve to motivate the gender of existing words, and they can be used productively to select a gender for loanwords and novel coinages. Generally speaking, there are three types of assignment rule: semantic, phonological, and morphological.

Semantic rules—already mentioned in section 1—are often based on general conceptual splits such as male/female, human/non-human, or animate/inanimate. For example, languages might work like Kolami, a Dravidian language spoken in India (Emeneau, 1955 ; discussed in Corbett, 1991 , p. 10), which attributes masculine gender to nouns denoting male persons and feminine gender to all others. However, not all semantic rules are as straightforward. Many languages have genders that combine a rather heterogeneous set of items, some of which belong to smaller semantic classes such as plants, fruits, or body parts. An example is Isangu, a Niger Congo (Bantu) language mentioned in Comrie ( 1999 , p. 463). As is the custom for Bantu languages, genders are notated as singular/plural pairs with a designated number for each member of a pair.

(12) Isangu genders. Open in new tab Gender Noun Agreement Semantic Characterization Sg Pl Sg Pl 1/2 mu- ba- wu- ba- only (but not all) humans 3/4 mu- mi- wu- mi- most plants; also some animals, concrete nouns, abstract nouns 5/6 di- ma- di- ma- most body parts, most fruits; also some humans, plants, concrete nouns, abstract nouns 7/8 ( γ ‎)i- bi- γ ‎i- bi- most artifacts; also some humans, plants, concrete nouns, abstract nouns 9/10 Ø- Ø-/ba- yi- tsi- most animals; also some plants, concrete nouns, abstract nouns Open in new tab

For yet other languages, linguists have proposed gender assignment rules that—rather than describing the semantics of a whole class—only cover individual clusters of nouns. These are regularities like the following, suggested for German (Köpcke & Zubin, 1983 ; Steinmetz & Rice, 1989 ):

Nouns for stones and minerals are masculine.

Nouns for tropical fruit are feminine.

Such rules are small in scope, and if a language employs them, the number of different rules will be large, as each regularity accounts for only a limited subset of the nouns (a critical account of such rules is given in Enger, 2009 ).

While semantic rules seem to be primary in the sense that genders—we believe—are born as semantic classes (see 3.1 below), languages can develop associations between gender and formal properties of nouns. Such associations can make reference to nearly any formal property, be it phonological (word-initial or word-final sounds or sound sequences, mono-syllabicity, but also patterns of word accent) or morphological (inflectional classes as well as derivational patterns, e.g., certain affixes).

Examples of form-based gender assignment are the following:

Phonological: monosyllabic nouns ending in /ʃ/ are masculine (German, Köpcke, 1982 ).

Morphological (inflection): nouns of declensional types II and III are feminine (Russian, Corbett, 1991 ).

Morphological (derivation): nouns with diminutive suffixes are neuter (Dutch).

Again, we can see a difference between “large rules” of broad scope and “small rules” of narrow scope. A famous example for a language with large phonological rules is the Cushitic language Qafar, for which it is claimed that nouns ending in an accented vowel are feminine, while all others are masculine (discussed in Corbett, 1991 ; Parker & Hayward, 1985 ). These rules appear to cover nearly all of the nouns in the language. Of the three formal rules mentioned above, the first is obviously an example of a small rule, while the second and (to a lesser extent) the third account for a wider array of nouns.

Among the languages in the world, mixed systems of semantic and formal rules are in a slight majority (Corbett, 2013c ), though their prevalence can be more pronounced in certain macro-areas (see Di Garbo, 2014 for Africa). For more references on gender assignment, see Audring ( 2011 ).

2.3 Amount and Place of Marking

The third dimension of complexity lies in the formal expression of gender. Typically, the gender of a noun is not visible on the noun itself—though in some languages it is—but is expressed via agreement on other words, such as the adjective, the predicate, and various pronouns. In some languages, agreement is so ubiquitous that nearly every word in the sentence carries a gender marker. The following example is from Chichewa (Bantu, spoken in East-Africa), where 7, 1, and 9 indicate noun classes (Mchombo, 2004 , p. 87; glosses adapted). Note that Chichewa is one of the languages that mark gender overtly on the noun itself, as well as by agreement.

(13) Ichi ndi chitsílu chi-méné kalulú a-na-chí-lémbélá kálata 7. dem be 7.fool 7- rel 1.hare 1- pst -7-write.to/for 9.letter ‘This is the fool that the hare wrote a letter to/for.’

With the exception of the copula, all words in the sentence express gender: either their own inherent value or the value of the noun they agree with. Also, in Archi, a Nakh-Daghestanian language spoken in the Caucasus, “almost every part of speech can agree in gender” (Chumakina & Corbett, 2015 ; Corbett, 2014 , p. 107; although this does not hold for every item within the parts of speech).

At the other extreme, there are languages with sparse expression of gender. The best-known example is English, where gender is visible only on the personal and possessive pronouns, with not more than seven distinct forms: he/she/it, him/her , and his / its . As mentioned in 1.4 above, languages with frequent marking have gender systems that are easier to spot in fieldwork and easier to defend analytically. Pronominal gender languages like English provide less clear evidence for a gender system. Interestingly, the same considerations appear relevant for the acquisition of gender, which will be discussed in section 4.1.

2.4 Gender in Sign Languages

It makes sense to conclude this brief typological survey with a look at sign languages. Whether there are sign languages that have gender systems is a matter of debate. Many scholars argue that sign languages systematically lack grammatical gender (Pfau, Steinbach, & Woll, 2012 , p. 234), partly because they are generally young languages, while gender (agreement) takes time to develop (see section 3.1). Two exceptions have been proposed. First, many sign languages have classifying handshapes that encode various properties of a referent, for example that it is a person, an animal, or a vehicle, or that its shape is long and thin or broad and flat. What makes such handshapes candidates for gender is that they can be carried over into the verb, which then reflects properties of its subject or object reminiscent of the way gender agreement on the verb reflects properties of nouns. For example, in the Sign Language of the Netherlands (Nederlandse Gebarentaal), the verb meaning “to fall” has a different handshape depending on whether the falling entity is cylindrical, long and thin, or legged (Zwitserlood & Van Gijn, 2006 , which analyzes the phenomenon as gender agreement). However, a more common analysis is that these markers are classifiers rather than genders, since they are clearly semantic, involve a large (and potentially open-ended) variety of classes, and are often optional.

Moreover, there are suggestions that sign languages may mark gender on pronouns. For example, Smith ( 1990 ) and Fischer ( 1996 ) describe masculine and feminine handshapes in personal pronouns in Japanese and Taiwan sign language, respectively. Byun, Zwitserlood, & De Vos ( 2015 ) discuss the same phenomenon for Korean sign language. Still, the evidence is debatable, as the markers are only used for persons and are probably optional. A careful and convincing analysis of such phenomena, however, might provide evidence for pronominal gender systems as—albeit non-canonical—cases of gender in sign language.

3. Rise, Development, and Fall

The issue of “young languages” brings us from typology to diachrony, and the next question to address is how gender systems arise, as well as how they develop and—possibly—decline.

3.1 The Birth of Gender Systems

Gender systems do not arise overnight. Since the central characteristic is agreement, the growth of a gender system requires the development of (bound) gender morphology, either from scratch or by repurposing existing morphological material, such as derivational morphemes, case or number affixes, or locative markers (Aikhenvald, 2000 ). For this reason, gender is counted among the “mature elements of language,” involving long chains of evolutionary events (Dahl, 2004 , p. 112). The same reason accounts for why gender is allegedly absent in pidgin and creole languages (McWhorter, 2001 , p. 163). However, the APiCS database (Maurer, 2013 ) lists at least one example, the Canadian mixed language Michif (Bakker, 1997 ), which shows an agreement system described as “truly weird” by Corbett ( 2006 , p. 269), since it involves not only one gender system but actually two, from both lexifier languages, French and Plains Cree. Applying a broader definition and including sporadic agreement as well as pronominal genders might yield more young languages with grammatical gender (Maurer, 2013 ).

If agreement is developed “from scratch,” several possible pathways have been proposed. Figure 1 summarizes them graphically. In most cases, the original sources are nouns, in particular nouns with classifying potential, such as “man,” “animal,” or “thing.” Such words can develop into classifiers that are used with other nouns to indicate their class membership (see example 3 in section 1.2). From here on, developments can proceed in two directions. Classifiers can be used for derivational purposes, as in constructions like man child “son”; this may then cause them to merge with their nouns and resemble derivational affixes or noun class markers. This development does not result in agreement, but in overt marking of gender on nouns. However, classifiers can be repeated within the noun phrase or beyond, and as such, give rise to agreement, via intermediate stages such as pronouns or articles (Corbett, 1991 , pp. 310–312 for examples and details; see also Givón, 1976 ; Greenberg, 1978 ,).

Figure 1. Developmental pathways of gender agreement.

We have assumed that gender agreement involves bound morphology. This is the canonical situation. Due to this criterion, gender systems are not generally found in isolating languages. However, there may be intermediate cases. The Austroasiatic language Khasi, for example, has gender-sensitive particles that function as articles and personal pronouns. What is interesting is that these particles can be repeated before adjectives and verbs:

(14) Open in new tab a. Ka kynthei ka baihbha prt.f woman prt.f handsome ‘a handsome woman’ (Pryse, 1855 , p. 22) Open in new tab Open in new tab b. U briw u Thoh prt.m man prt.m write ‘The man writes’ (Pryse, 1855 , p. 36) Open in new tab

This situation resembles an agreement system, except that the use of the gender particles is optional. However, stronger bonds with neighboring words can arise. For example, the relative pronouns are given as fused forms ( uba “who/that, m ”) and kaba “who/that, f ”), and some sources also list question words as fused: uei “who?/which ( m )?,” kaei “who?/which ( f )?” (Roberts, 1891 [1995] , p. 47). While Khasi gender is not canonical and violates expectations in several ways, the language can be argued to have a nascent gender system, despite the nearly complete absence of bound morphology.

3.2 Change and Loss of Gender

Once a language has a gender system, it appears to be a relatively stable feature in diachronic terms (Dahl, 2004 , p. 199). Yet, feature systems develop and change in various ways.

With regard to assignment rules, gender can become more form-based or more semantic over time. In the first scenario, a particular gender value becomes associated with a specific formal characteristic of a number of nouns. Since it is believed that all gender systems start out as semantics-based, this process must have occurred in all languages with a mixed assignment system. The opposite tendency is (re)semanticization, a development in which semantic rules are strengthened or (re)introduced. Again, this can be triggered by a cluster of nouns, but also by a flagship instance (Corbett, 1991 , p. 314 uses the term “Trojan horse”) defecting to another gender, pulling other nouns along and changing the semantic profile of their new class.

Note that changes in assignment rules do not in themselves lead to the loss of gender—they merely restructure the system. More consequential are changes in the agreement system.

In agreement systems, the following types of change are commonly found:

The birth of new agreement targets by grammaticalization.

The strengthening of gender markers on the noun or in agreement.

The rise of new gender values by reconfiguration and reanalysis of existing morphological markers.

The loss of individual gender values by syncretism or loss of the markers.

An instance of the first change can be seen in West Flemish, where the agreement targets have recently been expanded to include conjunctions and the words meaning “yes” and “no” (as we saw for Wambeek Dutch in example 7 above) (Bennis & Haegeman, 1984 ; De Vogelaer & Van der Auwera, 2010 ). The pronominal source of the agreements is still transparently visible. The second type of development can be seen in the history of English: in late Old English, the feminine pronoun had the form heo and was near-syncretic with the masculine pronoun in various dialects. The introduction of the new feminine pronoun she increased the formal distinctiveness of the genders (Curzan, 2003 , p. 45). For a wider sample of similar cross-linguistic cases, consult Corbett ( 1991 , p. 312).

The third type of change constitutes a reiteration of the steps outlined in the previous section: by repurposing or redistributing case or number markers, but also locative markers, new gender values can arise. Again, Corbett ( 1991 , p. 313–314) supplies illustrative examples and discussion.

The fourth type of change is the most familiar: gender markers can be caught up in processes of losing inflectional morphology, which may make them indistinguishable by syncretism or cause them to erode altogether. As a consequence, distinctions between individual genders may be blurred and eventually lost. Deflection processes of this kind have been described for many Indo-European languages—they are evident in all languages in which the three genders characteristic of the family have been reduced to two. Well-known examples are Spanish, Italian, and French (see, e.g., Polinsky & van Everbroek, 2003 , for a model of the changes from Latin to French), but also Scandinavian and Dutch. An interesting observation is that gender reduction or loss proceeds in cross-linguistically predictable ways (Demuth, Faraclas, & Marchese, 1986 ; Marchese, 1988 ; Priestly, 1983 ). Distinctions are typically retained longest on personal pronouns (Corbett, 1991 , p. 143).

Complete erosion of the markers can eventually result in the loss of gender as a grammatical feature. Within Indo-European, this fate has befallen most Iranian and many Indic languages (Corbett, 1991 , p. 318). In other languages, too, we find morphological markers that are recognizable as remnants of former gender systems.

Having considered the nature, the distribution, and the history of gender systems across the languages of the world, the final section will consider gender in the speaker’s mind—in particular, in language acquisition.

4. Acquiring Gender

Gender is a famously difficult property to acquire as an adult learner. This fact has prompted extensive research. However, the feature has also attracted the attention of first language acquisition researchers and psycholinguists in general. The following section sketches a number of interesting issues and findings from the vast literature.

4.1 Gender in First Language Acquisition

The task of acquiring a gender system is complex, as gender involves an intricate mixture of semantics, morphology, and syntax. Children have to figure out the function of the markers, their distribution across words, as well as the underlying syntactic dependencies. Moreover, they have to learn which noun belongs to which gender and—ideally—why.

Despite the complexities in the languages for which the relevant information is available (the overwhelming majority are Indo-European; for notable exceptions see, for instance, Demuth, 2003 ; Deen, 2005 ; Gagliardi & Lidz, 2014 ), gender appears to be acquired early and largely error-free. The average age of mastery appears to be 3 years, though later ages are mentioned for individual languages, like German (Eichler, Jansen, & Müller, 2013 ) and Dutch (Blom, Polišenská, & Weerman; 2008 ; Cornips & Hulk, 2008 ; van Kampen & Wijnen, 2000 ). Unfortunately, accounts are difficult to compare, as the target state of acquisition is not always clearly defined. First, it could be the case that the regularities of agreement may be in place early, while children may take longer to figure out the gender of individual nouns (Blom, Polišenská, & Weerman, 2006 ; Orgassa & Weerman, 2008 ). Second, the use of articles and other adnominal targets may be mastered earlier than the use of pronouns (Mills, 1986 , p. 86). This pattern can be explained by the hypothesis that children start out acquiring determiner-noun pairs as chunks or constructions (MacWhinney, 1978 , p. 60–61; Mills, 1986 , p. 63). Tighter constructions consisting of neighboring words are likely to be easier to entrench in memory.

Generally speaking, there seem to be three factors that influence the speed of acquisition: the complexity of the assignment system, the quality of the cues, and the interrelations with other features. In addition, individual genders may be established later if the language shows a strongly unequal distribution of nouns over genders: Dutch children, for example, are exceptionally late in correctly identifying nouns of neuter gender, as common gender nouns make up about 65%–75% of the noun vocabulary in the language (van Berkum, 1996 , p. 35).

As we saw above, gender assignment rules can be semantic or formal in nature (section 2.2). Children appear to be more responsive to formal than to semantic cues (Karmiloff-Smith, 1979 ; Mills, 1986 ; Müller, 2000 ; Pérez-Pereira, 1991 ; but cf. Mulford, 1985 ). Comrie ( 1999 ) reports that children in the Bantu language Isangu overgeneralize gender both ways: in favor of more regular form patterns as well as more regular semantics.

Aside from their type, an important difference between assignment rules is their reliability. While some rules may be categorical, others have a mere stochastic value. For example, the rule that French nouns ending in -/Ʒ/are masculine is true for 94% of the cases (Tucker, Lambert, & Rigault, 1977 ), while the rule that German monosyllables ending in a nasal followed by a consonant are masculine only holds for 70% of the relevant nouns (Köpcke & Zubin, 1984 , p. 29). Various studies show that more reliable rules are acquired earlier. Further facilitation has been shown to come from cues in child-directed speech, for example the frequent use of diminutives (Kempe, Brooks, Mironova, & Fedorova, 2003 ).

On the other hand, straightforward assignment rules do not necessarily result in an easy-to-acquire gender system. While English has particularly clear assignment rules, English children are comparatively slow in mastering the system (Corbett, 1991 , p. 82; Mills, 1986 ,). One of the reasons is the amount of syntactic evidence available to the child, which is low in a pronominal gender language like English. In German, by contrast, “gender is marked on many parts of speech [so] the German child has more opportunities to learn it” (Corbett, 1991 , p. 85). Hence, clearer and richer agreement systems can be expected to be beneficial for learning (Audring, 2014 ).

A complicating factor in many languages is the crosscutting of gender with other features, mainly number and case. This results in a more complex task for the child, as the various functions need to be figured out simultaneously. Eichler, Jansen, & Müller, 2013 argues that the presence of a case system is the main reason why German gender is acquired more slowly than French, Spanish, and Italian gender. Besides, more dimensions of orthogonal features can make for more complex patterns of syncretism, which lower the validity of each form as a cue to the learner.

In view of the complexity of the task, first language acquisition of gender proceeds remarkably smoothly. This fact stands in stark contrast to the acquisition of gender in adults.

Gender in Second Language Acquisition

As is widely known, gender is notoriously difficult to master in a second language, especially for adult learners (see, e.g. Bartning, 2000 ; Blom, Polišenská, & Unsworth, 2008 ; Bruhn de Garavito & White, 2000 ; Carroll, 1989 ; Dewaele and Véronique, 2001 ; Franceschina, 2005 ; Hawkins, 2001 ; Holmes & Dejean de la Batie, 1999 ; Rogers, 1987 ; Sabourin, 2003 ). This fact has been linked to the critical period hypothesis, which assumes maturational constraints on certain grammatical features. With regard to gender, the hypothesis predicts that, if the feature is not part of the speaker’s L1 (native language), it cannot be properly acquired in the L2 (second language) after childhood (Hawkins & Chan, 1997 ). Several questions follow:

Are younger L2 learners better at acquiring gender?

Does successful L2 acquisition of gender presuppose an L1 that also has a gender system?

Can adult learners ever hope to reach native competence?

Regarding the age of onset, studies report that child L2 learners show the same error patterns as monolingual children, while older children and adult learners make other kinds of error (Andersson, 1992 ; Bartning, 2000 ; Blom, Polišenská, & Weerman, 2008 , Dewaele & Veronique, 2001 ; Franceschina, 2005 ; Granfeldt, 2003 ; Hawkins & Franceschina, 2004 ). This suggests that early—but not late—L2 gender acquisition may be native-like.

The second question addresses the issue of transfer from the first to the second language. Various studies, e.g. Herschensohn ( 2009 ) and Hopp ( 2010 ), take transfer rather than age to be the major cause of delayed or unsuccessful gender acquisition. Broadly speaking, transfer effects can be positive or negative. On the positive side, an L1 that already has a gender system can prepare the ground for gender in the L2. Especially helpful might be a first language that is similar to the second. Various studies, such as Foucart & Frenck-Mestre ( 2011 ); Franceschina ( 2005 ); Sabourin, Stowe, & de Hann ( 2006 ), show such positive transfer effects in gender acquisition. However, the existence of a gender system in the L1 is not a necessary prerequisite for the successful acquisition of gender in the L2; English learners of French were able to acquire gender with great accuracy (White, Valenzuela, Macgregor, Leung, & Ben-Ayed, 2001 ), even showing native-like brain responses to gender violations (Foucart, 2009 ).

On the negative side, transfer can be in the way of successful second-language acquisition if learners attempt to process a second in terms of the first, arriving at the wrong results where the systems differ. Such effects, too, have been reported in the literature (Foucart & Frenck-Mestre, 2011 ; Ganushchak, Verdonschot, & Schiller, 2011 ; Sabourin, Stowe, & de Hann, 2006 ; Sabourin & Stowe, 2008 ; Tokowicz & MacWhinney, 2005 ).

The last question, in turn, inquires about ultimate attainment—can L2 learners learn gender to a native-like degree? In the literature, this question has been approached from two sides: behaviorally and neurolinguistically. Behavioral studies report that even highly proficient second-language learners retain a certain percentage of errors (Alarcón, 2011 ; Franceschina, 2005 ; Grüter, Lew-Williams, & Fernald, 2012 ; Montrul, Foote, & Perpiñán, 2008 ). However, these errors seem to be associated with gender assignment rather than gender agreement, especially under (experimental) time pressure (Hopp, 2013 ). This suggests that the central issue is not the inability to acquire the grammar of gender, but rather the amount of experience with the L2 that allows the learner to find out and store the gender of every noun. Indeed, the acquisition of gender may be “for a large part word-learning” (Unsworth, 2008 , p. 365).

Recently, the behavioral results have been complemented by electrophysiological data. Studies of event-related potentials (ERPs) show that in native speakers, the brain’s response to gender agreement errors is a P600 effect associated with syntactic violations. Do non-native speakers show the same response? Results differ. Meulman, Stowe, Sprenger, Bresser, & Schmid ( 2014 ) report that highly proficient L2 learners of Dutch consistently fail to show the expected P600 pattern, regardless of their age of acquisition, their length of residence in the Netherlands, their proficiency, or their offline knowledge about gender. This matches earlier findings, but contrasts with others (see Meulman et al., 2014 for references). One of the explanations suggested is that native-like electrophysiological responses only appear in the latest stages of proficiency, beyond the point where language tests indicate full mastery.

Across studies, the general outcome is positive: even if grammatical gender is a hard feature to acquire as an adult learner, native-like proficiency can be attained.

5. Critical Analysis of Scholarship: Gender in Linguistic Theory

In the linguistic literature, gender is enjoying considerable fame as “the most puzzling of the grammatical categories” (Corbett, 1991 , p. 1). One of the main reasons is the widespread uncertainty about its function. While number, person and tense have clear semantic correlates, gender information seems to contribute little to the semantics of an utterance. Indeed, scholars have famously claimed that gender is little more than “an accident of linguistic history” (Ibrahim, 1973 , p. 50). Defenders of functionality have stressed the fact that gender can help to keep track of referents across a stretch of discourse (Heath, 1975 ; Lyons, 1977 , p. 288; but see Contini-Morava & Kilarski, 2013 for wider considerations). On a critical note, this effect is often overrated in languages that only have two or three genders—the disambiguating power of gender will only be convincing in languages with a larger number of gender values.

Another major issue has been the regularity of gender. With a research tradition focusing on Indo-European, especially French and German, some of the 20th century literature pessimistically claims that gender assignment is arbitrary. In reaction, a variety of studies have appeared attempting to prove that gender assignment is actually regular and predictable. Famous accounts are Köpcke, 1982 ; as well as Köpcke & Zubin, 1984 ; or Zubin & Köpcke, 1986 for German, and Tucker, Lambert, & Rigault, 1977 for French. Since then, the issue has come to appear in a different light by the availability of a broader range of cross-linguistic data (mainly thanks to Corbett, 1991 ). Once the biasing focus on Indo-European is overcome, it turns out that many languages have gender assignment systems that are in fact quite regular.

A related issue is the way gender is transferred or assigned in borrowing and contact; an extensive literature is available, especially on English loanwords (see Corbett, 1991 , pp. 70–82 for an overview, and Audring, 2011 for more references; useful studies are Baetens-Beardsmore, 1971 ; Carstensen, 1980 ; Kilarski, 2001 ; and Poplack, Pousada, & Sankoff, 1982 ). While the focus on English makes good sense—first, because English loans are copious in many languages; second, because a genderless source language helps to control the number of factors to consider—it is doubtful how deeply we understand the mechanisms, especially since many of the borrowing languages investigated have highly complex assignment systems.

Gender is also a much-discussed subject in psycholinguistics, though predominantly in language acquisition research (see section 4). Recently, however, research efforts have turned to gender in processing and production, particularly in relation to models of the mental lexicon, the principles of lexical access, and the processing of grammatical information. Major issues are gender priming (see Bates, Devescovi, Hernandez, & Pizzamiglio, 1996 ; Friederici & Jacobsen, 1999 ), gender in speech errors (Berg, 1992 ), gender in tip-of-the-tongue states (Vigliocco, Antonini, & Garrett, 1997 ), as well as the brain’s reaction to gender violations (an early influential study is Hagoort & Brown, 1999 ; see section 4.2 for more references). A disadvantage is the scarcity of links between experimental and typological studies, though attempts are made to bridge the gap (e.g., Tsegaye, Mous, & Schiller, 2014 ).

Finally, a new line of typological research is currently emerging that investigates the interaction of gender with classifier systems in languages that have both (see the project page of the Surrey Morphology Group, Guildford, U.K.).

Links to Digital Materials

Audring, J. ( 2011 ). Gender . In Oxford Bibliographies: Linguistics. This is an annotated online bibliography of the literature on gender.

Surrey Morphology Group, project Combining Gender and Classifiers in Natural Language , University of Surrey, Surrey, U.K.

World Atlas of Language Structures Online is the best online resource; gender is covered in topics 30 , 31 , and 32 , as well as 44 .

Edinburgh Research Archive

ERA Home
Philosophy, Psychology and Language Sciences, School of
Linguistics and English Language
Linguistics and English Language PhD thesis collection

Grammatical gender in language production: psycholinguistic evidence from Greek

Collections.

Grammatical gender and linguistic complexity I: General issues and specific studies

The many facets of grammatical gender remain one of the most fruitful areas of linguistic research, and pose fascinating questions about the origins and development of complexity in language. The present work is a two-volume collection of 13 chapters on the topic of grammatical gender seen through the prism of linguistic complexity. The contributions discuss what counts as complex and/or simple in grammatical gender systems, whether the distribution of gender systems across the world’s languages relates to the language ecology and social history of speech communities. Contributors demonstrate how the complexity of gender systems can be studied synchronically, both in individual languages and over large cross-linguistic samples, and diachronically, by exploring how gender systems change over time. In addition to three chapters on the theoretical foundations of gender complexity, volume one contains six chapters on grammatical gender and complexity in individual languages and language families of Africa, New Guinea, and South Asia.

This volume is complemented by volume two , which consists of three chapters providing diachronic and typological case studies, followed by a final chapter discussing old and new theoretical and empirical challenges in the study of the dynamics of gender complexity.

Introduction Francesca Di Garbo, Bruno Olsson, Bernhard Wälchli Chapter 1
Canonical, complex, complicated? Jenny Audring Chapter 2
Gender: esoteric or exoteric? Östen Dahl Chapter 3
Why is gender so complex? Some typological considerations Johanna Nichols Chapter 4
Niger-Congo “noun classes” conflate gender with deriflection Tom Güldemann, Ines Fiedler Chapter 5
Gender in Uduk Don Killian Chapter 6
Gender in Walman Matthew S. Dryer Chapter 7
The gender system of Coastal Marind Bruno Olsson Chapter 8
Gender in New Guinea Erik Svärd Chapter 9
Gender typology and gender (in)stability in Hindu Kush Indo-Aryan languages Henrik Liljegren Chapter 10

Grammatical gender and linguistic complexity I: General issues and specific studies

Biographies

Francesca Di Garbo is a postdoctoral research fellow in General Linguistics at Stockholm University. She received a BA in Classics (2005) and an MA in Classical Philology and Historical Linguistics (2007) at the University of Palermo (Italy). In 2014, she received her PhD in Linguistics at Stockholm University (Sweden). Her doctoral dissertation is a typological investigation of gender and its interaction with number and evaluative morphology in the languages of Africa. Her publications include papers on: the typology of interactions between gender and number, and gender and evaluative morphology; the encoding of evaluative morphology and temperature evaluation in the Kwa language Selee, spoken in Ghana; linguistic complexity, with focus on grammatical gender and the relationship between language structures and social structures. She has taught at Stockholm University and the University of Helsinki. Her research interests include the synchronic and diachronic typology of nominal classification systems and number systems, evaluative morphology, African languages, linguistic complexity, and the relationship between language structure and the socio-historical and natural environment.

Bruno Olsson is a postdoctoral research fellow at the Australian National University. After completing an MA thesis on iamitive tense/aspect markers in Southeast Asian languages at Stockholm University (2013), Bruno pursued doctoral studies at Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, resulting in a description of the Coastal Marind language of New Guinea (2017). His current work includes descriptive and historical work on other languages of the Anim family, with emphasis on the Yaqay language and the development of the Anim gender systems. Some of his other research interests are morphosyntax, the semantics of tense-aspect categories, the typology of Papuan languages, and Kashaya (a language of Northern California).

Bernhard Wälchli is professor in General Linguistics at Stockholm University. He received his master’s degree in Slavic and Baltic studies at the University of Bern (Switzerland) in 1997 and his Ph.D. in General Linguistics at Stockholm University (Sweden) in 2003. His publications include the monograph Co-compounds and natural coordination published by Oxford University Press, in the series "Oxford Studies in Typology and Linguistic Theory", and he is a co-editor of several collections of articles and theme issues on typology, areal linguistics and grammaticalization, aggregation of features extracted from texts, parallel texts, and methodology in linguistics. His recent publications include work on the typology of motion events, morphological typology, word formation, measuring the similarity of languages, ideophones, logophoricity, and perception verbs. His major current research interests are the typology of gender, temporal clauses, tense and aspect, negation, Baltic linguistics, and the Mek languages in New Guinea. His earlier work on grammatical gender consists of case studies on the rise and decline of gender systems (The Mek language Nalca and Northwestern Latvian dialects).

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License .

Details about the available publication format: PDF

Isbn-13 (15), publication date (01), details about the available publication format: hardcover, usage statistics information.

We log anonymous usage statistics. Please read the privacy information for details.

Information

Information for readers
Proofreading queue
Information for authors
Editorial policies
Templates and tools
Submission checklist
Information for librarians and booksellers
Business model and open data
Transparency
Advisory board
Hall of fame
For authors
For readers
For editors
For librarians
Accessibility statement

Grammatical Gender and Anthropomorphism: “It” Depends on the Language

HEC Paris Research Paper No. MKG-2020-1386

64 Pages Posted: 18 Sep 2020 Last revised: 30 Sep 2020

Alican Mecit

HEC Paris - Marketing

Tina M. Lowrey

L. j. shrum.

Date Written: May 15, 2020

Consumers often anthropomorphize non-human entities. In this research, we investigate a novel antecedent of anthropomorphism: language. Some languages (e.g., English) make a grammatical distinction between humans (he, she) and non-humans (it), whereas other languages (e.g., French) do not (all objects are gender-marked). We propose that such grammatical structures of languages influence the way individuals mentally represent non-human entities, and as a result, their generalized tendencies to anthropomorphize such entities. Across 10 studies, we provide evidence that speakers of languages that do not grammatically distinguish between humans and non-humans (it-less languages) anthropomorphize more than do speakers of languages that do make this distinction (non-it-less languages). We demonstrate the effects across natural languages (French, Turkish, English) and by manipulating grammatical gender. We show that the effects are observable in naturally occurring consumer contexts (e.g., secondary sales data), and that gender-marking in it-less languages influences consumers’ interactions with brands, even though the gender-markings are semantically arbitrary, and that these effects occur nonconsciously. Our findings have implications for the broader debate on the extent to which language influences thought, and also suggest ways in which managers can leverage nonconscious grammatical anthropomorphism to influence consumer perceptions, attitudes, and behavior.

Keywords: psycholinguistics, anthropomorphism

Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation

Alican Mecit (Contact Author)

Hec paris - marketing ( email ).

Paris France

Tina Lowrey

Hec paris ( email ).

1 rue de la Liberation Jouy-en-Josas Cedex, 78351 France

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics, related ejournals, pedagogy ejournal.

Subscribe to this fee journal for more curated articles on this topic

HEC Paris Research Paper Series

Subscribe to this free journal for more curated articles on this topic

Linguistic Anthropology eJournal

Cognitive psychology ejournal, legal, medical & applied linguistics ejournal, psycholinguistics & neurolinguistics ejournal, neurobiology of cognitive perception, learning & memory ejournal.

By using the Google™ Search you agree to Google's privacy policy

Fred Weerman (Amsterdam): The rise and fall of grammatical gender

Although the way in which an abstract property like grammatical gender develops in IE languages may be more or less in accordance with a 'grammaticalization cline', this is hardly explanatory: it remains unclear why some (but not all) languages develop this characteristic, and why some (but not all) languages lose it again. Until recently it was only possible to speculate on these questions, but I will show that combining work from several linguistic sub disciplines (in particular theoretical linguistics, L1/L2 acquisition, typology, microvariation, historical linguistics) offers insightful answers, focusing on Germanic (and Dutch more in particular). 1. Gender features are not very likely candidates for a 'universal list'. I will assume that there is a discovery procedure that leads the language-learning child from lexical, distributional evidence to abstract features that feed the computational system. In fact, the lexical lexical and a more abstract 'rule based' side are clearly visible in gender systems. Although all kinds of (sub) regularities may play a role, it has to be stored that a particular noun or root in Germanic is, for instance or . And if grammatical gender does not go beyond determiner-noun agreement, it may in fact be argued that the entire phenomenon can be described in terms of rather superficial lexical rules. This becomes, however, much less likely as soon as features of grammatical gender pop up in several types of agreement (adjectival agreement, possessives, articles, determiners, ...). It can be shown that in Dutch L1 acquisition, the lexical side is relatively time consuming: it takes monolingual children over six years to find out which Dutch words are neuter (Modern (standard) Dutch has a twoway gender system: common versus neuter). It can be shown, however, that the abstract agreement rules (even the ones that are relatively opaque) are available in the same children at a very early age (cf. Blom, Polisenska & Weerman 2008 a.o.). Children are, in this respect, "little inflection machines" (Wexler 1998). Crucially, this is rather different in both adult and child L2 acquisition of (Dutch) gender. Although adults do make progress on the lexical side of gender, the type of abstracts features that are apparently relatively easily accessible in monolingual L1 acquisition, turn out to be hardly learnable in adult L2 acquisition. As a result, late learners of the Germanic gender system typically keep making overgeneralizations (in Dutch: common forms instead of neuter forms). 2. A first diachronic consequence of this state of affairs is that gender systems should not be simplified on the rule based side as long as their development is mainly dependent on monolingual transmission from one generation to another (since the rules do not seem to be problematic in any way for L1 children). Another prediction is that (robust) language contact will lead to changes on the rule based side of gender rather directly, in particular when language contact leads to (massive) L2 acquisition of the language in question. In addition, we predict which forms may survive in such a situation (namely the ones that are overgeneralized in the process of L2 acquisition). I will show that this is supported by evidence from diachronic developments in Dutch, English and (semi) creoles related to Dutch, like Afrikaans, Negerhollands and Berbice Dutch. 3. There is another diachronic prediction: if children are indeed "inflection machines" and are capable of acquiring abstract features much more easily than late learners, we may expect that they play an eminent role in the coming into being of a gender system. The implementation of abstract generalizations in complex spell-out rules may be due to their acquisition process. If this is the case a condition for the appearance of a gender system is the undisturbed successful transmission in (many) successive generations of L1 learners, where children reanalyse input and introduce abstract generalisations. That such a correlation makes sense for complex morphology in general is argued by Lupyan and Dale (2010), based on a corpus of over 2000 languages (their work also supports our conclusion in 2 that also the reverse holds, namely that contact leads to loss of inflectional properties). Focussing on the development of relatively new determiners (cf. Van der Velde 2011 and Weerman & Van der Velde 2014), I will show how indeed the interplay between early and late L1 acquisition is crucial in this process. 4. A scenario as just sketched does not directly shed light on the question what features may have triggered learners to form gender classes. It is probably impossible to reconstruct the relevant stages, but recent work on acquisition and variation in modern Dutch grammatical gender shows how semantic notions plays a role in modern varieties (cf. Audring 2009, Hulk & Cornips 2010). More precisely, Audring, for instance, argues that masculine and common gender pronouns in modern Dutch are used for referents with a high degree of individuation and neuter gender pronouns for referents with a low degree of individuation. Following Kraaikamp (2012), I will argue that the agreement pattern observed in Dutch pronouns today does not reflect a new interpretation of the pronouns, but rather a surfacing of a semantic interpretation of the genders that has always existed. In other words, these same semantic notions may have triggered the original gender categorization. Once gender is stored for a noun separately and formally expressed on agreeing elements via complex spell-out rules, the originally semantics-based agreement may be overruled by this new system. 5. In other words, I claim that the original semantic basis of the gender system is literally grammaticalised by successive generations of L1 learners, who, as "inflection machines", introduce generalizations based on abstract, purely formal features. Such a system may be (extremely) difficult to acquire by adults, leading to a dismantling of this system in situations of language contact. As a side effect, however, the semantic generalizations may surface more clearly again. References Audring, Jenny (2009). Reinventing pronoun gender. Utrecht: LOT dissertation. Blom, Elma, Daniela Polišenská & Fred. Weerman (2008). Articles, adjectives and age of onset: the acquisition of Dutch grammatical gender. Second Language Research, 24(3), 297-331. Hulk, Aafke & Leonie Cornips (2010). The role of gender and count features in the acquisition of het as a pronoun. In J. Costa, A. Castro, M. Lobo & F. Pratas (Eds.), Language Acquisition and Development, proceedings of GALA 2009, Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 229-240. Kraaikamp, Margot (2012). The Semantics of the Dutch Gender System. In Journal of Germanic Linguistics 24(3), 193-232. Lupyan Gary and Rick Dale (2010) Language Structure Is Partly Determined by Social Structure. PLoS ONE 5(1): e8559. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0008559. Wexler, Kenneth (1998). Very early parameter setting and the unique checking constraint: A new explanation of the optional infinitive stage. Lingua 106: 23-79

Bibliography
More Referencing guides Blog Automated transliteration Relevant bibliographies by topics
Automated transliteration
Relevant bibliographies by topics
Referencing guides

Supporting Dissertation Writers Through the Silent Struggle

While we want Ph.D. students to be independent, our practices can signal that we’re not available to support them when they need it, writes Ramon B. Goings.

By Ramon B. Goings

You have / 5 articles left. Sign up for a free account or log in.

Male professor and student sit together at a table working on a paper

shapecharge/iStock/Getty Images Plus

Consider the following discussion. A student tells me, “I have so much going on right now. I’m trying to write this dissertation, take care of my mom and raise my kids. I’m giving to everyone else and have nothing left to write.”

“Thanks for sharing,” I respond. “Have you reached out to your adviser to discuss what is happening and see what resources you might be able to access?”

“My adviser said they will meet with me when I have a document ready for them to review. They are too busy,” the student says. “I’ve just been struggling in silence and don’t know what to do.”

This conversation highlights the reality for many doctoral students—they may experience hardships in silence. The doctoral journey is an interesting experience during which students are provided structure through coursework and then, once they enter the dissertation phase, that structure is removed. They usually are in a position where they have to manage everything themselves.

As faculty members, we try to provide the space of intellectual curiosity for our students and allow them to explore their dissertation topics. However, while we want students to be independent, our practices can signal that we are not available to support them when they need it. What are some strategies that we should consider implementing to support our students who too often struggle in silence? Below are three that I have implemented in my chairing process.

Create an environment where students can share. Students want to meet our expectations and standards. Yet in efforts to not burden us, some students may choose not to reach out to us when they are experiencing challenges. In some instances, they also do not come to us due to the fear—and, at times, the reality—that they will face adverse consequence for doing so. While that can occur during the coursework phase, it is even more common when students are writing their dissertations, because they believe they must be independent scholars and figure everything out on their own.

To combat those situations, we as dissertation chairs must first create an environment where students can feel comfortable to share what they are going through. One simple way to foster that type of relationship is to first ensure that you make time to meet regularly with your advisees. While that may seem to be an obvious practice, I often hear from doctoral students, like the one in the opening vignette of this article, that they find it challenging just to get on their chair’s calendar. That can unintentionally signal to them that we as faculty members are not available. As a faculty member, I know we have many demands on our time. To support my students, I have dedicated times each week when students can meet with me as needed. Making the time consistent on my calendar allows me to ensure other activities do not get in the way of meeting with students. To be more efficient, I created a special Calendly meeting link that has time slots open for students to schedule.

Programs should also have regular faculty meetings to discuss student academic progress, along with any well-being challenges such as mental health and/or life challenges. Sometimes a student is more comfortable talking with a faculty member who is not on their dissertation committee, and having such conversations can provide a space for all faculty members to learn what is going on and potentially troubleshoot before a student’s difficulties gets worse.

Choose your words with care. As dissertation chairs, our words hold significant power with our advisees. Those words become even more important when our students are experiencing personal and/or professional challenges. To illustrate this point, I offer you one word that, when used, can be a trigger for students: concern.

Students have told me that if we use the word “concern” when talking with them, it signals something is drastically wrong with what they are doing. So if I am relaying information—especially feedback—to students, I ask myself the following before I speak:

Is what I need to share truly a concern? For example, some students receive a concern comment when minor or moderate editorial changes—grammar, syntax, formatting and the like—are needed. While those must be fixed, they don’t usually rise to the level of concern that impacts the integrity of the study, a misalignment between the research questions and methodology.
Can I express my thoughts in a more detailed way rather than just expressing concern? In the example above, if I thought the student’s editorial work needed updates, I would explain that to them and provide examples on how the student can make the changes that I am requesting.

I am certainly aware that interpretation is important, but while students can take feedback from us on their work, I have learned to be reflective about what I say. It can influence their self-confidence, a key component for completing the dissertation process.

Editors’ Picks

Title IX Legal Challenges Target LGBTQ+ Protections
A New Digital Divide: Student AI Use Surges, Leaving Faculty Behind
FAFSA Fiasco Pushes States to Mandate Universal Completion

Understand your role is not a problem solver but solution facilitator. When I talk with other faculty members, some are quick to declare they are scientists, not therapists, so supporting their students’ distinct life challenges isn’t in their job description. I also agree that it’s not our role as faculty members to solve students’ problems for them. But we can provide a listening ear and, most of all, connect students to the various resources that can support them in their decision making.

For instance, a chair I know was advising a doctoral student who was communicative when writing their proposal and moved through the process fairly quickly. Then, after the student collected their data, the chair noticed that the student slowed down their progress and that when they met the student exhibited some uncharacteristic behaviors. Fortunately, the two had established a positive rapport, so the faculty member was able to learn that the student was unexpectedly taking on caregiving responsibilities for a sibling while experiencing some housing instability. In that case, the faculty member was able to connect the student with a campus resource for caregivers and, through it, the student was able to find housing support.

I know many faculty members are already engaging in the practices that I’ve suggested, but I continue to encounter doctoral students at the dissertation phase who are suffering in silence.

I invite you to share with me in conversations on X any other successful strategies you’ve implemented to support your doctoral students. My mission is to bring to light some of these ideas so we can make our graduate programs spaces where our students can flourish.

Ramon B. Goings ( @ramongoings ) is an associate professor in the language, literacy and culture doctoral program at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, and founder of Done Dissertation .

Police officers can be seen moving toward a densely packed group of student protesters on a campus lawn.

Protect, Teach, Enforce

Ted Mitchell offers three core principles for handling campus protests.

Share This Article

Introducing the Engaged Associate Professor

Many of us are stuck well beyond the time it’s supposed to take to reach the rank of full professor, but that doesn't

Split screen image of young woman working at her computer at home casually, on one side, and the same woman working on her computer in professional clothes at an office with a clock and graph on the wall, on the other side

Strategies for a Successful Semester-Long Sabbatical

It can involve continued university responsibilities and geographical restrictions, writes Christine Tulley, who advi

The Richard Rodgers Theatre in New York City, site of Broadway premiere of the musical “Hamilton”

Higher Education Is Not a Musical

The narrative that faculty can overcome anything through individual agency may be similar to that of a Broadway hit,

Become a Member
Sign up for Newsletters
Learning & Assessment
Diversity & Equity
Career Development
Labor & Unionization
Shared Governance
Academic Freedom
Books & Publishing
Financial Aid
Residential Life
Free Speech
Physical & Mental Health
Race & Ethnicity
Sex & Gender
Socioeconomics
Traditional-Age
Adult & Post-Traditional
Teaching & Learning
Artificial Intelligence
Digital Publishing
Data Analytics
Administrative Tech
Alternative Credentials
Financial Health
Cost-Cutting
Revenue Strategies
Academic Programs
Physical Campuses
Mergers & Collaboration
Fundraising
Research Universities
Regional Public Universities
Community Colleges
Private Nonprofit Colleges
Minority-Serving Institutions
Religious Colleges
Women's Colleges
Specialized Colleges
For-Profit Colleges
Executive Leadership
Trustees & Regents
State Oversight
Accreditation
Politics & Elections
Supreme Court
Student Aid Policy
Science & Research Policy
State Policy
Colleges & Localities
Employee Satisfaction
Remote & Flexible Work
Staff Issues
Study Abroad
International Students in U.S.
U.S. Colleges in the World
Intellectual Affairs
Seeking a Faculty Job
Seeking an Administrative Job
Advancing as an Administrator
Beyond Transfer
Call to Action
Confessions of a Community College Dean
Higher Ed Gamma
Higher Ed Policy
Just Explain It to Me!
Just Visiting
Law, Policy—and IT?
Leadership & StratEDgy
Leadership in Higher Education
Learning Innovation
Online: Trending Now
Resident Scholar
University of Venus
Student Voice
Academic Life
Health & Wellness
The College Experience
Life After College
Academic Minute
Weekly Wisdom
Reports & Data
Quick Takes
Advertising & Marketing
Consulting Services
Data & Insights
Hiring & Jobs
Event Partnerships

4 /5 Articles remaining this month.

Sign up for a free account or log in.

Create Free Account

Grammatical Gender Systems: A Linguist's Assessment

Published: September 1999
Volume 28 , pages 457–466, ( 1999 )

Cite this article

Bernard Comrie 1

1632 Accesses

58 Citations

Explore all metrics

The notion of grammatical gender is defined and criteria for assigning nouns to genders are discussed, in particular semantic and formal criteria. Data from child language acquisition show that both semantic and formal criteria can be the basis of children's overgeneralizations, although the question of to what extent more opaque semantic or formal gender assignment criteria are available to children remains to be ascertained.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Semantic gender: Norms for 24,000 Dutch words and its role in word meaning

L1 Grammatical Gender Variation through the Representation in the Lexicon

Grammatical gender and linguistic relativity: A systematic review

Comrie, B., & Polinsky, M. (1999). Gender in a historical perspective: radial categories meet language change. In C. F. Justus & E. C. Polomé (Eds.), Language change and typological variation . Washington, DC: Institute for the Study of Man. In press.

Google Scholar

Comrie, B., Stone, G., and Polinsky, M. (1996). The Russian language in the twentieth century. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Corbett, G. (1986). Gender in German: A bibliography. Linguistische Berichte, 103, 280-286.

Corbett, G. (1991). Gender . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dixon, R. M. W. (1972). The Dyirbal language of northern Queensland. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gvozdev, A. N. (1949). Formirovanie u rebenka grammatičeskogo stroja russkogo jazyka [Development of the grammatical structure of Russian in the child], 1. Moscow: Akademija pedagogičeskix nauk.

Idiata, D. F. (1998). Quelques aspects de l'acquisition de la langue isangu par les enfants [Some aspects of the acquisition of the Isangu language by children]. Doctoral dissertation. Université Lumière Lyon 2. Munich: Lincom Europa. In Press.

Lakoff, G. (1990). Women, fire, and dangerous things. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Matthews, P. (1997). The concise Oxford dictionary of linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Rajabov, R. (1999). The class category in Tsez. In Howard I. Aronson (ed.), NSL-9. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. In press.

Zubin, D. A., & Köpcke, K.-M. (1981). Gender: a less than arbitrary grammatical category. In Roberta A. Hendrick, Carrie S. Masek, and Mary Frances Miller (eds.), Papers from the Seventeenth Regional Meeting Chicago Linguistic Society, 439-449. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Inselstrasse 22, D-04103, Leipzig, Germany

Bernard Comrie

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bernard Comrie .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Comrie, B. Grammatical Gender Systems: A Linguist's Assessment. J Psycholinguist Res 28 , 457–466 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023212225540

Download citation

Issue Date : September 1999

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023212225540

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Cognitive Psychology
Language Acquisition
Formal Criterion
Grammatical Gender
Child Language
Find a journal
Publish with us
Track your research

Spring 2025 Semester

Undergraduate courses.

Composition courses that offer many sections (ENGL 101, 201, 277 and 379) are not listed on this schedule unless they are tailored to specific thematic content or particularly appropriate for specific programs and majors.

100-200 level

ENGL 201.ST2 Composition II: The Mind/Body Connection

Dr. sharon smith.

In this online section of English 201, students will use research and writing to learn more about problems that are important to them and articulate ways to address those problems. The course will focus specifically on issues related to the body, the mind, and the relationship between them. The topics we will discuss during the course will include the correlation between social media and body image; the psychological effects of self-objectification; and the unique mental and physical challenges faced by college students today, including food insecurity and stress.

English 201 S06 and S11: Composition II with an emphasis in Environmental Writing

S06: MWF at 10–10:50 a.m. in Yeager Hall Addition 231

S11: MWF at 12–12:50 p.m. in Crothers Engineering Hall 217

Gwen Horsley

English 201 will help students develop skills to write effectively for other university courses, careers, and themselves. This course will provide opportunities to further develop research skills, to write vividly, and to share their own stories and ideas. Specifically, in this class, students will (1) focus on the relationships between world environments, land, animals and humankind; (2) read various essays by environmental, conservational, and regional authors; and (3) produce student writings. Students will improve their writing skills by reading essays and applying techniques they witness in others’ work and those learned in class. This class is also a course in logical and creative thought. Students will write about humankind’s place in the world and our influence on the land and animals, places that hold special meaning to them or have influenced their lives, and stories of their own families and their places and passions in the world. Students will practice writing in an informed and persuasive manner, in language that engages and enlivens readers by using vivid verbs and avoiding unnecessary passives, nominalizations, and expletive constructions.

Students will prepare writing assignments based on readings and discussions of essays included in Literature and the Environment and other sources. They will use The St. Martin’s Handbook to review grammar, punctuation, mechanics, and usage as needed.

Required Text: Literature and the Environment: A Reader On Nature and Culture. 2nd ed., edited by Lorraine Anderson, Scott Slovic, and John P. O’Grady.

LING 203.S01 English Grammar

TuTh 12:30-1:45 p.m.

Dr. Nathan Serfling

The South Dakota State University 2023-2024 Undergraduate Catalog describes LING 203 as consisting of “[i]nstruction in the theory and practice of traditional grammar including the study of parts of speech, parsing, and practical problems in usage.”

“Grammar” is a mercurial term, though. Typically, we think of it to mean “correct” sentence structure, and, indeed, that is one of its meanings. But Merriam-Webster reminds us “grammar” also refers to “the principles or rules of an art, science, or technique,” taking it beyond the confines of syntactic structures. Grammar also evolves in practice through application (and social, historical, economic changes, among others). Furthermore, grammar evolves as a concept as scholars and educators in the various fields of English studies debate the definition and nature of grammar, including how well its explicit instruction improves students’ writing. In this course, we will use the differing sensibilities, definitions, and fluctuations regarding grammar to guide our work. We will examine the parts of speech, address syntactic structures and functions, and parse and diagram sentences. We will also explore definitions of and debates about grammar. All of this will occur in units about the rules and structures of grammar; the application of grammar rhetorically and stylistically; and the debates surrounding various aspects of grammar, including, but not limited to, its instruction.

ENGL 210 Introduction to Literature

Jodi andrews.

Readings in fiction, drama and poetry to acquaint students with literature and aesthetic form. Prerequisites: ENGL 101. Notes: Course meets SGR #4 or IGR #3.

ENGL 222 British Literature II

TuTh 9:30-10:45 a.m.

This course serves as a chronological survey of the second half of British literature. Students will read a variety of texts from the Romantic period, the Victorian period, and the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, placing these texts within their historical and literary contexts and identifying the major characteristics of the literary periods and movements that produced them.

ENGL 240.ST1 Juvenile Literature

Randi l. anderson.

A survey of the history of literature written for children and adolescents, and a consideration of the various types of juvenile literature.

ENGL 240.ST1 Juvenile Literature: 5-12 Grade

In English 240 students will develop the skills to interpret and evaluate various genres of literature for juvenile readers. This particular section will focus on various works of literature at approximately the 5th-12th grade level.

Readings for this course include works such as Night, Brown Girl Dreaming, All American Boys, Esperanza Rising, Anne Frank’s Diary: A Graphic Adaptation, Animal Farm, Fahrenheit 451, The Giver, The Hobbit, Little Women, and Lord of the Flies . These readings will be paired with chapters from Reading Children’s Literature: A Critical Introduction to help develop understanding of various genres, themes, and concepts that are both related to juvenile literature, and also present in our readings.

In addition to exploring various genres of writing (poetry, non-fiction, fantasy, historical, non-fiction, graphic novels, etc.) this course will also allow students to engage in a discussion of larger themes present in these works such as censorship, race, rebellion and dissent, power and oppression, gender, knowledge, and the power of language and the written word. Students’ understanding of these works and concepts will be developed through readings, discussion posts, quizzes and exams.

ENGL 240.ST2 Juvenile Literature Elementary-5th Grade

April myrick.

A survey of the history of literature written for children and adolescents, and a consideration of the various genres of juvenile literature. Text selection will focus on the themes of imagination and breaking boundaries.

ENGL 242.S01 American Literature II

TuTh 11 a.m.-12:15 p.m.

Dr. Paul Baggett

This course surveys a range of U.S. literatures from about 1865 to the present, writings that treat the end of slavery and the development of a segregated America, increasingly urbanized and industrialized U.S. landscapes, waves of immigration, and the fulfilled promise of “America” as imperial nation. The class will explore the diversity of identities represented during that time, and the problems/potentials writers imagined in response to the century’s changes—especially literature’s critical power in a time of nation-building. Required texts for the course are The Norton Anthology of American Literature: 1865 to the Present and Toni Morrison’s A Mercy.

WMST 247.S01: Introduction to Women, Gender and Sexuality Studies

As an introduction to Women, Gender and Sexuality studies, this course considers the experiences of women and provides an overview of the history of feminist thought and activism, particularly within the United States. Students will also consider the concepts of gender and sexuality more broadly to encompass a diversity of gender identifications and sexualities and will explore the degree to which mainstream feminism has—and has not—accommodated this diversity. The course will focus in particular on the ways in which gender and sexuality intersect with race, class, ethnicity, and disability. Topics and concepts covered will include: movements for women’s and LGBTQ+ rights; gender, sexuality and the body; intersectionality; rape culture; domestic and gender violence; reproductive rights; Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women (MMIW); and more.

ENGL 283.S01 Introduction to Creative Writing

MWF 1-1:50 p.m.

Prof. Steven Wingate

Students will explore the various forms of creative writing (fiction, nonfiction and poetry) not one at a time in a survey format—as if there were decisive walls of separation between then—but as intensely related genres that share much of their creative DNA. Through close reading and work on personal texts, students will address the decisions that writers in any genre must face on voice, rhetorical position, relationship to audience, etc. Students will produce and revise portfolios of original creative work developed from prompts and research. This course fulfills the same SGR #2 requirements ENGL 201; note that the course will involve creative research projects. Successful completion of ENGL 101 (including by test or dual credit) is a prerequisite.

English 284: Introduction to Criticism

This course introduces students to selected traditions of literary and cultural theory and to some of the key issues that animate discussion among literary scholars today. These include questions about the production of cultural value, about ideology and hegemony, about the patriarchal and colonial bases of Western culture, and about the status of the cultural object, of the cultural critic, and of cultural theory itself.

To address these and other questions, we will survey the history of literary theory and criticism (a history spanning 2500 years) by focusing upon a number of key periods and -isms: Greek and Roman Classicism, The Middle Ages and Renaissance, The Enlightenment, Romanticism, Realism, Formalism, Historicism, Political Criticism (Marxism, Post-Colonialism, Feminism, et al.), and Psychological Criticism. We also will “test” various theories we discuss by examining how well they account for and help us to understand various works of poetry and fiction.

300-400 level

ENGL 330.S01 Shakespeare

TuTh 8-9:15 a.m.

Dr. Michael S. Nagy

This course will focus on William Shakespeare’s poetic and dramatic works and on the cultural and social contexts in which he wrote them. In this way, we will gain a greater appreciation of the fact that literature does not exist in a vacuum, for it both reflects and influences contemporary and subsequent cultures. Text: The Riverside Shakespeare: Complete Works. Ed. Evans, G. Blakemore and J. J. M. Tobin. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1997.

ENGL 363 Science Fiction

MWF 11-11:50 a.m.

This course explores one of the most significant literary genres of the past century in fiction and in film. We will focus in particular on the relationship between science fiction works and technological and social developments, with considerable attention paid to the role of artificial intelligence in the human imagination. Why does science fiction seem to predict the future? What do readers and writers of the genre hope to find in it? Through readings and viewings of original work, as well as selected criticism in the field, we will address these and other questions. Our reading and viewing selections will include such artists as Ursula K. LeGuin, Octavia Butler, Stanley Kubrick and Phillip K. Dick. Students will also have ample opportunity to introduce the rest of the class to their own favorite science fiction works.

ENGL 383.S01 Creative Writing I

MWF 2-2:50 p.m.

Amber Jensen

Creative Writing I encourages students to strengthen poetry, creative nonfiction, and/or fiction writing skills through sustained focus on creative projects throughout the course (for example, collections of shorter works focused on a particular form/style/theme, longer prose pieces, hybrid works, etc.). Students will engage in small- and large-group writing workshops as well as individual conferences with the instructor throughout the course to develop a portfolio of creative work. The class allows students to explore multiple genres through the processes of writing and revising their own creative texts and through writing workshop, emphasizing the application of craft concepts across genre, but also allows students to choose one genre of emphasis, which they will explore through analysis of self-select texts, which they will use to deepen their understanding of the genre and to contextualize their own creative work.

ENGL 475.S01 Creative Nonfiction

Mondays 3-5:50 p.m.

In this course, students will explore the expansive and exciting genre of creative nonfiction, including a variety of forms such as personal essay, braided essay, flash nonfiction, hermit crab essays, profiles and more. Through rhetorical reading, discussion, and workshop, students will engage published works, their own writing process, and peer work as they expand their understanding of the possibilities presented in this genre and the craft elements that can be used to shape readers’ experience of a text. Students will compile a portfolio of polished work that demonstrates their engagement with course concepts and the writing process.

ENGL 485.S01 Writing Center Tutoring

MW 8:30-9:45 a.m.

Since their beginnings in the 1920s and 30s, writing centers have come to serve numerous functions: as hubs for writing across the curriculum initiatives, sites to develop and deliver workshops, and resource centers for faculty as well as students, among other functions. But the primary function of writing centers has necessarily and rightfully remained the tutoring of student writers. This course will immerse you in that function in two parts. During the first four weeks, you will explore writing center praxis—that is, the dialogic interplay of theory and practice related to writing center work. This part of the course will orient you to writing center history, key theoretical tenets and practical aspects of writing center tutoring. Once we have developed and practiced this foundation, you will begin work in the writing center as a tutor, responsible for assisting a wide variety of student clients with numerous writing tasks. Through this work, you will learn to actively engage with student clients in the revision of a text, respond to different student needs and abilities, work with a variety of writing tasks and rhetorical situations and develop a richer sense of writing as a complex and negotiated social process.

ENGL 492.S01 The Vietnam War in Literature and Film

Tuesdays 3-5:50 p.m.

Dr. Jason McEntee

In 1975, the United States officially included its involvement in the Vietnam War, thus marking 2025 as the 50th anniversary of the conclusion (in name only) of one of the most chaotic, confusing, and complex periods in American history. In this course, we will consider how literature and film attempt to chronicle the Vietnam War and, perhaps more important, its aftermath. I have designed this course for those looking to extend their understanding of literature and film to include the ideas of art, experience, commercial products, and cultural documents. Learning how to interpret literature and movies remains the highest priority of the course, including, for movies, the study of such things as genre, mise-en-scene (camera movement, lighting, etc.), editing, sound and so forth.

We will read Dispatches , A Rumor of War , The Things They Carried , A Piece of My Heart , and Bloods , among others. Some of the movies that we will screen are: Apocalypse Now (the original version), Full Metal Jacket , Platoon , Coming Home , Born on the Fourth of July , Dead Presidents , and Hearts and Minds . Because we must do so, we will also look at some of the more fascinatingly outrageous yet culturally significant fantasies about the war, such as The Green Berets and Rambo: First Blood, Part II .

ENGL 492.S02 Classical Mythology

TuTh 3:30-4:45 p.m.

Drs. Michael S. Nagy and Graham Wrightson

Modern society’s fascination with mythology manifests itself in the continued success of novels, films and television programs about mythological or quasi-mythological characters such as Hercules, the Fisher King, and Gandalf the Grey, all of whom are celebrated for their perseverance or their daring deeds in the face of adversity. This preoccupation with mythological figures necessarily extends back to the cultures which first propagated these myths in early folk tales and poems about such figures as Oðin, King Arthur, Rhiannon, Gilgamesh, and Odysseus, to name just a few. English 492, a reading-intensive course cross-listed with History 492, primarily aims to expose students to the rich tradition of mythological literature written in languages as varied as French, Gaelic, Welsh, Old Icelandic, Greek, and Sumerian; to explore the historical, social, political, religious, and literary contexts in which these works flourished (if indeed they did); and to grapple with the deceptively simple question of what makes these myths continue to resonate with modern audiences. Likely topics and themes of this course will include: Theories of myth; Mythological Beginnings: Creation myths and the fall of man; Male and Female Gods in Myth; Foundation myths; Nature Myths; The Heroic Personality; the mythological portrayal of (evil/disruptive) women in myth; and Monsters in myth.

Likely Texts:

Dalley, Stephanie, trans. Myths from Mesopotamia: Creation, the Flood, Gilgamesh, and Others. Oxford World’s Classics, 2009
Faulkes, Anthony, trans. Edda. Everyman, 1995
Gregory, Lady Augusta. Cuchulain of Muirthemne: The Story of the Men of the Red Branch of Ulster. Forgotten Books, 2007
Jones, Gwyn, Thomas Jones, and Mair Jones. The Mabinogion. Everyman Paperback Classics, 1993
Larrington, Carolyne, trans. The Poetic Edda . Oxford World’s Classics, 2009
Matarasso, Pauline M., trans. The Quest of the Holy Grail. Penguin Classics, 1969
Apollodorus, Hesiod’s Theogony
Hesiod’s Works and Days
Ovid’s Metamorphoses, Homeric Hymns
Virgil’s Aeneid
Iliad, Odyssey
Apollonius of Rhodes Argonautica
Ovid’s Heroides
Greek tragedies: Orestaia, Oedipus trilogy, Trojan Women, Medea, Hippoolytus, Frogs, Seneca's Thyestes, Dyskolos, Amphitryon
Clash of the Titans, Hercules, Jason and the Argonauts, Troy (and recent miniseries), Oh Brother, Where Art Thou?

ENGL 492.ST1 Science Writing

Erica summerfield.

This course aims to teach the fundamentals of effective scientific writing and presentation. The course examines opportunities for covering science, the skills required to produce clear and understandable text about technical subjects, and important ethical and practical constraints that govern the reporting of scientific information. Students will learn to present technical and scientific issues to various audiences. Particular emphasis will be placed on conveying the significance of research, outlining the aims, and discussing the results for scientific papers and grant proposals. Students will learn to write effectively, concisely, and clearly while preparing a media post, fact sheet, and scientific manuscript or grant.

Graduate Courses

Engl 575.s01 creative nonfiction.

In this course, students will explore the expansive and exciting genre of creative nonfiction, including a variety of forms such as personal essay, braided essay, flash nonfiction, hermit crab essays, profiles, and more. Through rhetorical reading, discussion, and workshop, students will engage published works, their own writing process, and peer work as they expand their understanding of the possibilities presented in this genre and the craft elements that can be used to shape readers’ experience of a text. Students will compile a portfolio of polished work that demonstrates their engagement with course concepts and the writing process.

ENGL 592.S01: The Vietnam War in Literature and Film

Engl 704.s01 introduction to graduate studies.

Thursdays 3-5:50 p.m.

Introduction to Graduate Studies is required of all first-year graduate students. The primary purpose of this course is to introduce students to modern and contemporary literary theory and its applications. Students will write short response papers and will engage at least one theoretical approach in their own fifteen- to twenty-page scholarly research project. In addition, this course will further introduce students to the M.A. program in English at South Dakota State University and provide insight into issues related to the profession of English studies.

ENGL 792.ST1 Grant Writing

This online course will familiarize students with the language, rhetorical situation, and components of writing grant proposals. Students will explore various funding sources, learn to read an RFP, and develop an understanding of different professional contexts and the rhetorical and structural elements that suit those distinct contexts. Students will write a sample proposal throughout the course and offer feedback to their peers, who may be writing in different contexts, which will enhance their understanding of the varied applications of course content. Through their work in the course, students will gain confidence in their ability to find, apply for, and receive grant funding to support their communities and organizations.

COMMENTS

Grammatical Gender: A Close Look at Gender Assignment Across Languages
Correlational Studies in Typological and Historical Linguistics. D. Robert Ladd , Seán G. Roberts , and Dan Dediu. Vol. 1 (2015), pp. 221-241. More. This review takes a broad perspective on one of the most fundamental issues for gender research in linguistics: gender assignment (i.e., how different nouns are sorted into different genders).
Grammatical gender and linguistic relativity: A systematic review
Many languages assign nouns to a grammatical gender class, such that "bed" might be assigned masculine gender in one language (e.g., Italian) but feminine gender in another (e.g., Spanish). In the context of research assessing the potential for language to influence thought (the linguistic relativity hypothesis), a number of scholars have investigated whether grammatical gender assignment ...
Gender Bias in Natural Gender Language and Grammatical
A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy Liberty University ... Grammatical gender languages, also known as gendered languages, are ones in which nouns are designated to be either the female or male gender, with few neutral ...
PDF The Puzzle of Grammatical Gender
the category per se (e.g. the origin of gender differentiation) or the acquisition of grammatical gender and the processing of this category in language production. In contrast, the present dissertation looks at grammatical gender from a cognitive point of view. For the sake of this dissertation, cognitive perspective is
The resolution of natural and grammatical gender conflicts
This is an example of what I called "natural- grammatical gender conflict", i.e. when the natural, meaningful gender of the person a noun refers to doesn't match with the grammatical gender of the noun itself. Natural-grammatical gender conflicts were the main focus of my dissertation. Many papers have been published which look at words ...
PDF The linguistics of gender
The fact that grammatical gender is a property of individual nouns, and not of the referents of those nouns, is expressed by the alternative terms 'lexical gender' and 'word gender'. The property shows up in the behavior of syntactically associated words. In German, for example, we can tell that the word 'Mädchen' falls in the
PDF Empirical investigations of grammatical gender in American Heritage
speakers have developed a new pronoun system, which is based on referential gender instead of grammatical gender. In general, there is massive overgeneralization of the masculine form. The three-way distinction in the definite suffix is however retained for all speakers, and the use of definite suffix is to a great extent target-like.
PDF Gender in the Nominal Domain: Evidence From Bilingualism and Eye-Tracking
Genderinthenominaldomain:Evidence frombilingualismandeye-tracking adissertationpresented by ZuzannaFuchs to TheDepartmentofLinguistics ...
The Gendering of Language: A Comparison of Gender Equality ...
Feminists have long argued that sexist language can have real world consequences for gender relations and the relative status of men and women, and recent research suggests that grammatical gender can shape how people interpret the world around them along gender lines (Boroditsky 2009). Although others have theorized about the connection between grammatical gender in language and societal ...
Gender
In everyday speech, the word "gender" is associated with the biological and social differences between women and men. In addition, people might know that languages can have masculine and feminine words. So at first blush, it may seem that grammatical gender is a reflection of natural gender in grammar.
Lexical and Morphological Aspects of Gender and Their Effect Learners a
In this dissertation, I propose that gender is not an ideal candidate to address this question, because gender is ... Following Carstens (2000, 2010), I assume that grammatical gender feature is an inherent lexical feature on noun roots that triggers syntactic operations . 2 within the nominal domain. Gender is an ideal linguistic feature to ...
An epistemological approach to English gender : a grammar-based
gender has been regarded as a property of nouns - in other parts of speech, it is the indication of concord, or agreement, with the noun, like case or number iv. Down to the turn of the 20 th century, gender classes are defined solely in reference to sex. Thus the earliest grammar in the corpus
The mechanisms underlying grammatical gender selection in language
1. Introduction. The study of grammatical gender retrieval during language production has prompted heated debates regarding the mechanisms underlying gender selection (for an overview, see Wang & Schiller, 2019).Special attention has been given to the nature of these mechanisms, with some authors defending that they have a facilitative priming basis, others a competitive one, and others ...
PDF Asymmetric grammatical gender systems in the bilingual mental lexicon
especially with respect to formal features such as grammatical gender. While it is clear that non-nativelike production and processing of L2 grammatical gender persist even in highly-proficient adult bilinguals, the underlying representation of the L1 and L2 gender features and how this
Grammatical gender in language production: psycholinguistic evidence
This thesis is concerned with the representation and processing of grammatical gender in Greek. It addresses two issues. The first concerns the conditions under which gender priming can be obtained; the second concerns the relationship between gender and other nominal categories, particularly case and number.
The semantics of grammatical gender: A cross-cultural study
Although most present-day scholars claim that grammatical gender has no meaning correlates, anecdotal evidence dating back to the Greeks suggests that grammatical gender carries connotative meanings of femininity and masculinity. ... Language and thought: A cross-cultural study on the connotations of gender (Doctoral dissertation, University of ...
Grammatical gender and linguistic complexity I: General issues and
The many facets of grammatical gender remain one of the most fruitful areas of linguistic research, and pose fascinating questions about the origins and development of complexity in language. The present work is a two-volume collection of 13 chapters on the topic of grammatical gender seen through the prism of linguistic complexity. The contributions discuss what counts as complex and/or ...
PDF Grammatical Gender and Anthropomorphism: "It" Depends on the Language
portion of the doctoral dissertation of the first author under the co-supervision of the second and third authors. Supplementary materials are included in the web appendix accompanying the ... anthropomorphism by identifying the grammatical gender system of a language as a novel antecedent of anthropomorphism. To our knowledge, this is the ...
Fred Weerman (Amsterdam): The rise and fall of grammatical gender
Reinventing pronoun gender. Utrecht: LOT dissertation. Blom, Elma, Daniela Polišenská & Fred. Weerman (2008). Articles, adjectives and age of onset: the acquisition of Dutch grammatical gender. Second Language Research, 24(3), 297-331. Hulk, Aafke & Leonie Cornips (2010). The role of gender and count features in the acquisition of het as a ...
PDF Denoting female professionals: semantic and grammatical gender
pricepilas' 'clung herself' with feminine gender. This agreement is grammatical since the grammatical gender of vospitatel'nica 'female caregiver' is feminine. Example (19) illustrates the same pattern, but in a two target A-N-V structure: (19) Simpatiyu vyzvala ochen' rumyanaya, vysokogrudaya aktivistka
The semantics of grammatical gender: A cross-cultural study
Konishi. Semantic Differential Studies. A number of studies designed toelicit the semantic content of gram-matical gender have used semantic differential m thodology, a technique which is designed to measure connotative or aff ctive meaning, as op-posed to enotative meaning (Osgood, Suci, & Tannenbaum, 1957/1975).
Dissertations / Theses: 'Grammatical gender'
The present dissertation investigates grammatical gender representation and processing in Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) as a first (L1) and a second (L2) language. It mainly examines whether L2 can process gender agreement in a native-like manner, and the extent to which L2 processing is influenced by the properties of the L2 speakers' L1.
Dissertation chairs can better support Ph.D. student writers (opinion)
As dissertation chairs, our words hold significant power with our advisees. Those words become even more important when our students are experiencing personal and/or professional challenges. To illustrate this point, I offer you one word that, when used, can be a trigger for students: concern.
Grammatical Gender Systems: A Linguist's Assessment
The notion of grammatical gender is defined and criteria for assigning nouns to genders are discussed, in particular semantic and formal criteria. Data from child language acquisition show that both semantic and formal criteria can be the basis of children's overgeneralizations, although the question of to what extent more opaque semantic or formal gender assignment criteria are available to ...
Spring 2025 Semester
Grammar also evolves in practice through application (and social, historical, economic changes, among others). Furthermore, grammar evolves as a concept as scholars and educators in the various fields of English studies debate the definition and nature of grammar, including how well its explicit instruction improves students' writing.