Selected Papers from the Fourteenth International ... - STIBA Malang

10 Letizia Vezzosi
North Germanic languages, such as Swedish, Danish and Norwegian, have a
two-gender system, i.e., uter gender – historically derived from the syncretism of
Old Germanic feminine and masculine – vs. neuter gender. Their distribution
is formally ruled. However, they can alternate in special circumstances, as is clear
in (17).
(17) a. Är färsk sill gott? [Swedish]
is fresh herring [uter] good [neuter]?
“is fresh herring good?”
b. Nyfångad sill är särskilt god [Swedish]
new-caught herring [uter] is specially good [uter]
“the herring, recently caught, is good in a special way”
Here, as in Present Day English varieties and dialects, the difference in gender
appears to correspond to a difference in perspectivisation. If a noun is
[+ individuated], then uter agreement is favoured. This also holds true in other
Germanic languages, such as Dutch: if ‘toothpaste’, which grammatically is of
common gender, is conceptualised as mass noun, the specific-gender pronoun is
neuter, but when ‘toothpaste’ is individuated it becomes of common gender (18).
(18) a. Is de tandpasta op? ja, het is op. [Dutch]
is the.common toothpaste up? yes, Pron-Neut. is up
“Is toothpaste finished’ Yes, it is”
b. Is de tube tandpasta leeg? Ja, hij (common) is leeg [Dutch]
Is the.common toothpaste empty? Yes, Pron.Common is empty
“Is the toothpaste tube finished’ Yes, it is”
To conclude, gender is traditionally described as a sort of ‘secondary grammatical
category’ of the noun (Ibrahim 1973: 26), because unlike other grammatical categories
it allows no choice and has no ‘authentic relation’ to conceptual categories.
Thus gender is given a special status. From the analysis of Old English data and
comparison with Germanic and cross-linguistic data, it clearly appears that gender
is either primarily or secondarily linked to some semantic or pragmatic factors,
in any gender assignment systems. Accordingly, if one thinks gender essentially
underlies the concept of [± individuality], then its function is no longer reduced
to agreement, but becomes a meaningful feature of the noun: among the nominal
grammatical categories, the function of gender can be categorised as ‘nominal
aspect’ or ‘perspectivisation’ of the noun.
Consequently, in periods such as Old English, gender deviance in no way signals
the disintegration of the category, but represents a special circumstance in
which the basic function of gender marking becomes more visible, thanks to a
weakening of the formal nominal inflectional system.