Re: OT: Corpses, etc. (was: Re: Gender in conlangs (was: Re: Umlauts (was Re: Elves and Ill Bethisad)))
|From:||Isidora Zamora <isidora@...>|
|Date:||Wednesday, November 12, 2003, 0:43|
>I'm not entirely certain what your asking, but the reason that _bil_ and _man_
>behaves differently is that the former is epicene and the later masculine.
>Let's do a little table of adj agreement endings:
>. weak sg strong sg pl
>masculine -e - -a
>feminine -a - -a
>epicene -a - -a
>neuter -a -t -a
>(The terms "weak" and "strong" are picked from German. Never having actually
>studied Swedish gramamr formally, I can't recall if they're actually normally
>used for Swedish too. At any rate, the "weak" forms are what you get after the
>definite article, and the "strong" ones after the indefinite.)
Ok. I can see from this that Swedish has a more complex agreement system
than Danish does. I had not been aware of that before. Thanks for showing me.
>BTW, this is, in my 'lect, pretty much the only place outside of pronouns
>where the three n-genders differ. I'm still waiting for a good explanation
>away of that masculine -e from those who want to describe Swedish as having
>only two genders ("t" and "n").
Danish really does have only the two genders.