Universal #1997

Legacy number: 1997

 Number  1991
 Original  As a "natural" semantic shift alternative (a) [human vs. non-human > human male vs. other] is much less motivated than alternative (b) [human male vs. other > human vs. non-human].
 Standardized  It is more natural for a two-term gender distinction in the plural, human vs. non-human, to come about, through semantic reanalysis, from the two-term distinction human male vs. other than the other way round.
 Keywords  gender, animacy, human, masculine, feminine
 Domain  inflection, syntax, semantics
 Type  target < source
 Status  diachronic
 Quality  statistical
 Basis  impressionistic, based on Dravidian and reconstruction of Proto-Dravidian
 Source  Krishnamurti 1975/2001: 139-143

← Back to Universals Archive

Discussion
Notes
The allegedly more natural reanalysis would consist in extending [human male] to [human] and restricting [non-male] to [non-human] – which is a simplification, feature-wise. The less natural reverse reanalysis would consist in restricting [human] to [human male] and extending [non-human] to [non-human, human female] – which is a complication. Also, the [human male] forms are the resolution forms for mixed groups also including human females in Dravidian, hence should alleviate the semantic reanalysis.<Author's reasoning, FP>
Comment
Frans Plank · 3 Aug 2006
The allegedly more natural reanalysis would consist in extending [human male] to [human] and restricting [non-male] to [non-human] – which is a simplification, feature-wise. The less natural reverse reanalysis would consist in restricting [human] to [human male] and extending [non-human] to [non-human, human female] – which is a complication. Also, the [human male] forms are the resolution forms for mixed groups also including human females in Dravidian, hence should alleviate the semantic reanalysis. <Author's reasoning, FP>