It's one of the common quirks of human communication. Here's a quick breakdown about PIE for the Pie

We all have two competing "forces" when we speak: on the one hand, we're lazy by default, so we usually try to say as much as possible with as little effort as we can get away with. On the other hand, we also want to make sure we're being understood and our listener (or reader) knows what we're talking about. So, we give as many clues about what we're referring to as we can! For instance, we might tell our friends we like trance music and leave it at that because that's about all they'll know about the music we like anyway. But, when we're with our loved ones who know their trance music, it's probably best to be a little less concise because the label might refer to both progressive trance and full-on psychedelic trance, among other subgenres, so we might say something like "Uplifting Dutch trance" to really get the meaning across.

Now, as we tend to fall back on the same expressions over time, we start to slack off a little and the words get glued to one another if their presence is predictable. As a familiar example, people in ye olde England would say what they willed before doing stuff. "I will go" meant that they just wanted to go somewhere. Over time, you'd say you willed whatever happened in the future and "will" became obligatory whenever things happened in the future. This is what we call grammaticalisation and it's something all languages undergo. That's where grammar comes from: yesterday's words are today's morphemes.

I think something similar, but much more complex, must've happened to the ancestor of Proto-Indo-European because at some point in time all sorts of information became glued to nouns, such as whether it was the subject or the object. But here's the real kicker: different words became attached to different endings for some reason, and speakers just carried on with it keeping these differences and creating different word groups. These endings were then attached to the adjectives that modified these nouns, so that whoever you were speaking to could easily see what that trait belonged to. Let me give you an example. If a girl was the subject, the adjectives that described her would have one ending. If a boy was the subject, another ending would be attached to the adjective. This regular correlation leads to what we call "noun classes". Because there was a correlation with gender, the Europeans who first described grammar couldn't have known any better. They called the different noun classes in their languages and the agreements they entailed as... genders. That's something of a misnomer though because, sure, "girl" is feminine, and "boy" is masculine, but that's just a fraction of the words we use.

So, because genders (and number, and grammatical cases, and so on) all became well-established and obligatory in PIE by the time it spread over Europe and India and everything in-between, its descendants (be it English, Portuguese or Hindi) passed these grammatical genders on to us because we tend to learn the languages spoken around us as children and wing it as we go through life, instead of creating a whole new language from nothing every generation or so. It's quite tricky for a language to get rid of something so basic such as a whole grammatical category, and English only got away with it because the phonology changed dramatically in the British Isles due to viking presence there.

So, how did it come about? Speakers added regular information after nouns (such as grammatical role and number), distinguished between different groups, it became so common it was seen as obligatory and regular, and this led to different noun classes which we now call gender.

Now, on to why.

As to why anyone in their right mind would still do this despite none of us knowing why PIE speakers started doing it... it helps us make distinction when the speaker is talking about more than one thing at a time. I speak a language that's quite gendered compared to English, so if you want to say in Portuguese, it's much clearer to me if you say "as casas vermelhas e o pr�dio preto" for "the red houses and the black building" or "the houses red and the building black" (mind you, the number and gender agreement dovetails nicely with the words they refer to) than if you just say "o casas vermelho e o pr�dio preto" - which makes perfect sense in English, but I suddenly have questions in Portuguese as to how many houses there actually are what colour refers to what.

It's worth noting that many languages do something similar, with a different twist. Some African languages have up to 10 different classes (we don't tend to use the word gender in this case), and some East Asian languages distinguish nouns only when counting them, so you can tell for sure what's being counted.

So, yeah, I oversimplified it a bit because lots of stuff needs to happen for grammaticalisation to occur, but it's one of the coolest things in historical linguistics. Is there something more specific you might want to know though?

___________________
Indiana Clones Upcoming Sets
[ I May Upload Something Someday ]

LOL, "I oversimplified a bit." OKAY LIRA


I feel it's obvious which words and ideas, and why mixed groups would be genderfied. It's just the patriacrchy (lol).

What you're saying is what I suspected....over time it became convoluted and now that's just the way it is.



I do think there's a huge link between language and the collective unconscious, of which there is the concept of divine masculine and feminine, yin yang, etc., etc. Which is why I think it's so easy to understand and accept that words and ideas can have masculine or feminine designation.

But I am not a linguist lol.


I'm relearning French. This inquiry sponsored by my need to have more specific understanding.


THANKS

I do appreciate your thorough answer!

Last edited by Silky Johnson on Sep-25-2024 at 17:12

I'm glad you liked it

quote:

Originally posted by Silky Johnson LOL, "I oversimplified a bit." OKAY LIRA

No, seriously, the discussion around this is the stuff of nightmares, wars have been fought with less wrath

quote:

Originally posted by Silky Johnson I do think there's a huge link between language and the collective unconscious, of which there is the concept of divine masculine and feminine, yin yang, etc., etc. Which is why I think it's so easy to understand and accept that words and ideas can have masculine or feminine designation. But I am not a linguist lol.

You're on a path that quite a few linguists find interesting, actually. Look up the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis, it'll probably be of your interest.

quote:

Originally posted by Silky Johnson I'm relearning French. This inquiry sponsored by my need to have more specific understanding.

Yeah, French is chaos. Their counting system is further proof it's hard for speakers to shake off old habits, heh.

___________________
Indiana Clones Upcoming Sets
[ I May Upload Something Someday ]

quote:

Originally posted by Lira You're on a path that quite a few linguists find interesting, actually. Look up the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis, it'll probably be of your interest.

Fascinating. The scope of language is truly incredible.

quote:

Originally posted by Lira Yeah, French is chaos. Their counting system is further proof it's hard for speakers to shake off old habits, heh.

French came quite easily to me all through school but I lost interest after tenth grade. Relearning it has been something I've been saying I'd do for a few years now. The class is slow but the teacher is from France, so she's teaching us the formal way but also comparing how French Canadians speak it (lol). It comes back quick!


After French, Spanish!

Slightly off topic, but why do people yodel? Why did they begin yodelling? What are they trying to accomplish with a yodel? Did anyone ever tell them it doesn�t sound that cool?

We don't condone to yodeling over here. We jojk instead

___________________
soundcloud.com/kiskelfacit

quote:

Originally posted by Lira You're on a path that quite a few linguists find interesting, actually. Look up the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis, it'll probably be of your interest.

The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is the exact opposite of what Jenny is saying, if I'm reading the tea leaves right. She's saying that grammatical genders are reflecting some subconscious human tendency to think of inanimate objects as having genders. You're saying that language is shaping our perception of those inanimate objects so we begin thinking of them as having genders.

___________________
Mixes:
> Higher Peaks [Progressive House]
> Dance:Love:Hub Afterparty (The Return) 23.11.24
> Surface Tension [Progressive Trance]
> Back To Deep [Deep Trippy House]
> Terra Nova [Modern Progressive Trance]

If you enjoy any of these sets and want to hear me live, I'll be playing a 2 hour progressive trance set at Basing House in Shoreditch, London on 11th October.
I'm also a resident at our bi-monthly party Kibosh in Manchester: https://www.instagram.com/kibosh.mcr/

quote:

Originally posted by Silky Johnson

Dude lol I couldn�t watch ron and stampi when I was younger because it would give me migraines

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is the exact opposite of what Jenny is saying, if I'm reading the tea leaves right. She's saying that grammatical genders are reflecting some subconscious human tendency to think of inanimate objects as having genders. You're saying that language is shaping our perception of those inanimate objects so we begin thinking of them as having genders.

I wouldn't say that's opposite though. It definitely aligns right with it imo. It's chicken v. egg stuff I think.

Obviously way out of my wheelhouse, aside from simply being human and using language. It just seems to me there is an instinctual aspect to language... But is that because it's shaped by the collective unconscious or because language shapes the collective unconscious?

quote:

Originally posted by planetaryplayer Dude lol I couldn�t watch ron and stampi when I was younger because it would give me migraines

I JUST learned John K is a mega groomer/pedo/diddler.

Ren & Stimpy! Happy, happy, happy, joy, joy, joy

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is the exact opposite of what Jenny is saying, if I'm reading the tea leaves right. She's saying that grammatical genders are reflecting some subconscious human tendency to think of inanimate objects as having genders. You're saying that language is shaping our perception of those inanimate objects so we begin thinking of them as having genders.

I understand your point, but I told her she was on a path that linguists find interesting, not that there was a perfect match, because the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is closely related to what she's saying... albeit with the polarity reversed, depending on how you look at it.

Given her starting point, I could have suggested cognitive linguistics and mentioned "Fire, Women, and other Dangerous Things" which will always be my favourite book title... but the way she thinks about language reminds me a lot of my father, as he is heavily influenced by Jungian psychology and every time I tell him about my research he says "but can't that be explained by the collective unconscious?" so I thought that was the best place for her to start is the bit that really piqued his interest. My dad was thrilled when I told him about linguistic relativity, because it's sort of how he thinks, but on its head, whereas he finds cognitive linguistics "dry".

Funnily enough, I had also typed "chicken and egg" and clicked on preview reply to see if there were any typos when I realised she had beaten me to it.

quote:

Originally posted by planetaryplayer Slightly off topic, but why do people yodel? Why did they begin yodelling? What are they trying to accomplish with a yodel? Did anyone ever tell them it doesn�t sound that cool?

Of course, in true Lira fashion, I'm going to answer this funny question honestly, because I had something else to do but was quite curious myself, so I actually looked it up

Why do people yodel? There was no mobile phone coverage in the Alps before antennas were created. It's a format that works well over long distances, probably because it's so cringe that everyone can hear it. Apparently similar forms of communication have been created in other mountainous areas, such as the Solomon Islands and Romania, where people spend too much time alone and lose track of what is embarrassing.

What are they trying to accomplish with a yodel? Apart from talking to sheep and other animals, such as people, over long distances, it's a way of punishing people who have clearly lost a bet. Case in point, whatever that poor girl is doing:



Did anyone ever tell them it doesn�t sound that cool? I mean... Have you seen their clothes!? They're the hipsters of the Alps, I'm sure they yodel ironically.

Edit: WAIT, WHAT!? TELL ME JOHN K ISN'T WHO I THINK IT IS!

___________________
Indiana Clones Upcoming Sets
[ I May Upload Something Someday ]