Affiliation:
1. University of Hamburg, Institute of English and American Studies , Überseering 35 , 22297 Hamburg , Germany
Abstract
Abstract
The aim of this study is to scrutinize Greenberg’s Universal 43, which predicts pronominal gender in the presence of nominal gender. On the basis of a sample of 500 gendered and ungendered languages, gender marking is examined in nouns, personal pronouns, possessors and possessums. Ungendered languages outnumber gendered languages. Eight out of 12 logically possible gender constellations are attested in the database. In keeping with Greenberg, languages with nominal gender show a strong bias towards gendered pronouns. There is a strong correlation between gendered personal pronouns and gendered possessors. Gendered possessums are cross-linguistically uncommon. The empirical patterns are brought about by a small set of theoretical principles. Gender is independently specified for each category. Gender marking is an effort. The strength of the correlation depends on the “distance” between two given gender sites. Coding gender twice in the same time frame creates a processing difficulty. Natural and grammatical gender conspire to generate the gender sensitivity of individual categories.
Reference74 articles.
1. Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2016. How gender shapes the world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2. Ariel, Mira. 2000. The development of person agreement markers: From pronouns to higher accessibility markers. In Michael Barlow & Suzanne Kemmer (eds.), Usage-based models of language, 197–260. Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information.
3. Audring, Jenny. 2008. Gender assignment and gender agreement: Evidence from pronominal gender languages. Morphology 18. 93–116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11525-009-9124-y.
4. Audring, Jenny. 2013. A pronominal view of gender agreement. Language Sciences 35. 32–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2012.10.001.
5. Bakker, Dik & Siewierska Anna. 2009. Weighing semantic distinctions in person forms. In Johannes Helmbrecht, Yoko Nishina, Yong-Min Shin, Stavros Skopeteas & Elisabeth Verhoeven (eds.), Form and function in language research, 25–56. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter.
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献