this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2024
824 points (98.6% liked)

Microblog Memes

5765 readers
2220 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TheEighthDoctor@lemmy.world 27 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] leisesprecher@feddit.org 36 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

In many aspects English doesn't distinguish between genders at all.

I chose the words above specifically because they are gendered. I'm not a native speaker, but as far as I know, teacher, butcher, officer, warrior, president, welder, etc. can each mean male or female. There's maybe a connotation, but the words are not gendered. English also has no concept of a grammatical gender. Articles, adjectives, etc. are gendered in most European languages.

[–] Aqarius@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

English absolutely has grammatical gender, it just defaults to "male" so much people forget there's other options. For example, "teacheress" is a real word, it's just so archaic that the male word now means both, same with how "you" is both singular and plural.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

I mean if you want to go that far, there's an argument to be made that the gendered terms wifman, werman, man, woman, and men were all simplified, to the gender neutral term of man and the feminine specific term of woman. We seem to have gone back and forth linguistically.

[–] Aqarius@lemmy.world -2 points 3 weeks ago

Well, uh, yes. The thread OP notes greek (as in bible) uses generic masculine forms for plural. Modern English takes that tack much more broadly, using the theoretically masculine term for everything. And you can tell it's masculine, not neuter, because, eg. a steward (of Gondor) is a steward, but a (-n air) stewardess is now a flight attendant.

[–] leisesprecher@feddit.org 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Take "The has a yellow ". Which gender do these nouns have? In German, I could tell you. Both articles and the adjective have a gender.

Of course, you can use gendered nouns, but only a very small minority of nouns actually have female forms.

[–] Aqarius@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Being immediately identifiable isn't the standard, for example in languages that don't use the definite article (Slavic languages, for example) the first noun wouldn't necessarily exhibit it's grammatical gender, but it wouldn't mean it doesn't have one. Also, the brackets you used get parsed by boost as html tags.

The very existence of gendered nouns and pronouns means English has gender. It's just less noticeable because unlike the German "-innen" approach, English typically shoves most things into neuter and mostly defaults to male for persons and then hides it behind "he or she" or a singular "they". You can argue it's archaic or vestigial, and I'd agree, but it is there. Same how nouns don't exhibit cases, but pronouns do. Compare:

"The man stood there, the man's hand on the coffee cup, the cup warming the man".

"He stood there, his hand on the coffee cup, the cup warming him."

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Having some feminitives in lexicon is not the same as having grammatical gender. I mean, is having a word for werewolf the same as having a "wolf" gender?

[–] Aqarius@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

"Some feminitives" is disingenuous. It's an Indo-European language, it shares the structure of other IE languages, in some cases pared down and/or in disuse, but they're still there, same as vestigial base-12 counting.

I don't get why people are so upset about the concept of grammatical gender, though. It's gramatical, it's not actual gender - original division in PIE was "animate" and "inanimate". Hell, I vaguely remember a conlang that had separate genders for terrestrial and aquatic animals, so you could absolutely make one that has a gender for "wolf".

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm not talking about that, frankly. Just that grammatical gender means usually its own inflections for cases, for adjectives, for verbs. At least some of those.

[–] Aqarius@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Fair point. My point would be that English doesn't really inflect words at all, but when it does, namely pronouns, it has both cases and genders.

For comparison, in German, cases don't change nouns either (except some genitives - kinda like English, now that i think about it), they instead affect articles, and even then the nominative and accusative case are identical, except for masculine singular nouns, and first and second person pronouns. So, if n. and f. nouns dominate, you could make the case that German doesn't have an acc. case, and then make a carveout for m. noun "outliers". Except step into first and second person, and acc. pops back out, meaning it was always there, even for f. and n.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

OK, I agree with the argument, but one can call that a rudiment - same as for Russian some people say it has not 6, but 7 cases. That is, a vocative case (which archaic Russian speech would have, Belorussian and Ukrainian have without doubt, but standard Russian does not formally). It's used when calling someone by name, like "Вась, Петь, Миш, Маш".

Well, it's never clear cut with languages

[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 3 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

Hunter, huntress, huntsman

Waiter, waitress, waitsman

Actor, actress, actsman

[–] frezik@midwest.social 10 points 3 weeks ago

Consider that German and French gender basically everything. Your desk has a gender in those languages. English is almost genderless on comparison.

[–] Mongostein@lemmy.ca 10 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Nobody says waitman or actsman. I had to fight my phone’s autocorrect just to type those.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

No one uses Wifman and Werman anymore either. Doesn't make them any less some of the last gendered nouns for humans, in English, since if one goes back that far man is neutral gendered, and while woman exists, it's for a woman that is a spinster.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Interestingly, as the language has evolved, words like "actress" are falling out of favor. So there are times when non-gendered is preferred for the sake of equality.

[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz -4 points 3 weeks ago

Drag agrees. Drag is spreading knowledge of male gendered words in order to counteract the myth that the normal versions of the words are gendered. If someone tells drag that "actor" is for men, drag points out the existence of "actsman". Actor is a gender neutral term and we need to use linguistics to make people realise it sooner.

[–] DrBob@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 weeks ago

Aviator, aviatrix, aviatman.

Director, directrix, directman.

Executor, executrix, executman.

Chairman, chairwoman, chair.