Re: Gz^rod|in (Some grammar now)

On Sun, 12 Mar 2000, Adrian Morgan wrote:

>My previous question about character representation
>in this medium still needs a verdict, but it should
>be possible to discuss _some_ grammar, at least, in
>the meantime.
>
>I have defined four genders, called Feminine,
>Masculine, Living and Inert. Alternatives for the
>last two would be more than welcome. Here are the
>definitions:
Sounds like your living/inert distinction could be well
served by good ol' "animate" / "inanimate". This removes
the connotations of biologically alive that "living" has.

For what it's worth, Talarian (a conlang whose genders are
common/neuter (aka animate/inanimate)) would agree in large
part with the divisions you give below. Animals are divided
somewhat respecting which gender they fall to. It doesn't
have m/f so no equivalence there.

Padraic.

>Inert entities are things like rocks.
>
>Living entities might be:
>- living things neither (specified as) male or
>  female;
>- dead things if the biological status is important,
>  e.g. carcass would be living but steak inert;
>- groups of living things;
>- words relating to _time_ such as Present or
>  Eternity;
>- Abstract nouns derived from verbs.
>
>Feminine and Masculine entities may be:
>- literally male or female;
>- groups of men or women if the sexual exclusiveness
>  is an attribute not a statistic;
>- nouns relating to _past_ are masculine, e.g.
>  history, yesterday, ruin
>- nouns relating to _future_ are feminine, e.g.
>  hope, devastation, tomorrow;
>- a masculine abstact noun derived from a verb
>  indicates commencement, e.g. masculine
>  _The go(ing)_ means, the leaving;
>- a feminine abstract noun derived from a verb
>  indicates completion, e.g. feminine _The
>  go(ing)_ means, the arriving.
>
>Adrian.
>--
>http://www.netyp.com/member/dragon
>http://www.flinders.edu.au
>