Re: Another question: genders

On Thu, Aug 10, 2000 at 12:26:38PM -0400, Vasiliy Chernov wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Aug 2000 09:04:44 -0000, Lars Henrik Mathiesen <thorinn@...>
> wrote:
[snip]
> If I understand it correct, with the two weird genders there are two
> situations that seem logically possible:
>
> (a) One asserts that the noun has the quality of both sexes (applied to
> mixed groups and hermaphroditic creatures);
That is correct for the "ambivalent" gender in my conlang, although it
doesn't quite apply to mixed groups -- mixed groups are classified under
the other gender. (See below) This might sound odd, but the reason is that
each constituent of a mixed group isn't "ambivalent", therefore the
"ambiguous" gender is preferred. The "ambivalent" gender is reserved
specifically for *units* that are simultaneously both genders, such as
hermaphroditic creatures or couples (this latter is a product of the
underlying culture of the language).

> (b) One does not assert that the noun has the quality of either sex, or
> even denies to specify the sex.
Actually, the "ambiguous" gender in my conlang is more on the side of
asserting that the noun *has* the quality of one sex or the other (i.e.,
the noun cannot be neuter), but *declines to specify* which it might be
(and therefore, it encompasses mixed groups).

> IMO "epicene" and "common" are more typically applied to (a). I'd denote
> (b) as "indeterminate".
I think "epicene" sounds good... dunno why I never thought of it before,
since I've encountered epicene nouns before, in studying classical Greek
(e.g. "anthropos", man or woman, and "hippos", horse or mare). I guess I
was unconsciously misled by the fact that -os is a predominantly masculine
declension.

The only problem is, I'm not sure which of the two genders should get the
"epicene" label. Maybe it's better applied to the "ambiguous" gender,
since epicene is a "neutral" way of referring to a mixed group.

> I think _hermaphroditic_ and the like would point to creatures having
> the respective biological feature.
Well, hermaphroditic would be good... except that it would sound odd when
applied to nouns that, for example, refer to married couples. (Why the
language doesn't use the "ambiguous" gender in this case is something I
deliberately worked into the culture, and would be hard to change.)

Surely there's a better word to describe this? Or maybe I'll have to coin
a term for it :-)

[snip]
> If you accept neologisms, I'd propose: ambigeneric, amphogeneous,
> amphoid(al).
[snip]

Well, I don't really care if a word is a neologism or not... as long as it
conveys the intended meaning with minimal confusion. "Ambigeneric",
"amphogeneuos", etc., are all good, but I think I'll apply "epicene" to
the "ambiguous" gender.

But that means I still need to find a word for the "ambivalent" gender...


T