Universal #93

Legacy number: 93

 Number  93
 Original  IF a language has pronominal gender in the 2nd person singular, THEN it has a greater probability of having this distinction in the 3rd person singular than of not having it.
 Standardized  IF there is a gender distinction in the 2nd person singular of pronouns, THEN the 3rd person singular is likelier to have than to lack a gender distinction.
 Formula  pronominal gender in 2Sg ⇒ pronominal gender in 3Sg
 Keywords  pronoun, gender, number, singular, person, 2, 3
 Domain  inflection
 Type  implication
 Status  achronic
 Quality  statistical, almost absolute
 Basis  ?
 Source  Greenberg, Osgood, & Jenkins 1963: xxi

← Back to Universals Archive

Discussion
Counterexamples
A few languages in central Nigeria have gender in 2nd person, but not in 3rd (Greenberg, Osgood, & Jenkins 1963).Tahaggart, Tuareg, Kabyle, Proto-Berber (Afro-Asiatic) have gender in 2SG but not in 3SG (Plank & Schellinger 1997).Written Late Egyptian (Afro-Asiatic) shows a facultative opposition between an unmarked (masc. or fem.) and a feminine form of the enclitic personal pronoun in 2SG (tw/tj vs. tw/tj/tw-WOMAN), while the contrast of gender in 3SG (extant in Earlier Egyptian) has become neutralized (sw/st/s). In spoken Late Egyptian, there is no gender distinction in 2SG (t) and 3SG (s). (F. Kammerzell, p.c.)
Notes
1. See also Plank & Schellinger 1997.2. Presumably, 3rd and 2nd person are supposed to have the SAME genders, rather than different ones (e.g., 3rd person person vs. thing, 2nd person masculine vs. feminine).
Comment
Frans Plank · 3 Aug 2006
1. See also Plank & Schellinger 1997.

2. Presumably, 3rd and 2nd person are supposed to have the SAME genders, rather than different ones (e.g., 3rd person person vs. thing, 2nd person masculine vs. feminine).