I don’t have a problem.
Gender and sex are used synonymously when referring to humans in English. We weren’t talking about doors. There aren’t 3 human genders in the English language.
But as we talked about before the people pushing trans stopped claiming there is a difference between sex and gender. Now they just really become women apparently.
This is the definition from the Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary.
I use it as the standard for understanding all subjects that predate 1828. That assures me that the definition has not devolved as many words have over time. Example: The US Constitution should be read with only the 1828 Dictionary as the standard for the meaning of the words therein.
. GEN’DER, noun [Latin genus, from geno, gigno; Gr.to beget, or to be born; Eng. kind. Gr. a woman, a wife; Sans. gena, a wife, and genaga, a father. We have begin from the same root. See Begin and Can.]
1. Properly, kind; sort.
2. A sex, male or female. Hence,
3. In grammar, a difference in words to express distinction of sex; usually a difference of termination in nouns, adjectives and participles, to express the distinction of male and female. But although this was the original design of different terminations, yet in the progress of language, other words having no relation to one sex or the other, came to have genders assigned them by custom. Words expressing males are said to be of the masculine gender; those expressing females, of the feminine gender; and in some languages, words expressing things having no sex, are of the neuter or neither gender
Not all nouns refer to humans.
And this particular subject is more recent than 1828. Regardless,
The subject of the original post. Yes.
For the subject you wrote: A definition was needed for clarification.
This is the current definition found in Webster and it shows that even now the primary meaning has not changed.
And here is neuter, note that neuter is indeed a gender.
The reader has no justification for deciding what meaning of a word that the writer chooses to pick from accepted meanings (in the dictionary of his choice). The writer (or speaker) has full right to choose the meaning of the word, whether it is the first, second, or even the last meaning.
Yes, but he doesn’t have the right to deny the existence of the other meanings. That’s going into my truth territory. So if I say that neuter is a gender, and the dictionary and grammarians in the actual languages in question say that neuter is indeed a gender; what right does a non speaker of those languages, and/or someone who is ignorant of the concept of grammatical gender, have to say that neuter is not a gender? What right does he have to say that thousands of years of neuter being recognized as a gender, by the very people who invented the word gender, is wrong?
And what if he doesn’t deny that there are other meanings?
Stephen Covey has a habit worth developing: “Seek first to understand, then to be understood.”
A challenging skill in this polarized environment.
There is no if so your question is irrelevant.
I can offer another habit worth developing: read the thread before commenting.
It is more about his interpretation than him being right or wrong in your eyes, or whether he is correct at all.
1828:
“Words expressing males are said to be of the masculine gender; those expressing females, of the feminine gender; and in some languages, words expressing things having no sex, are of the neuter or neither gender”
Isn’t it possible to read this and conclude that “neuter” is not a gender. “Neither gender” can be interpreted as the not one of the genders. If it is neither gender, it is therefore not a gender.
Neuter is a gender. You can disagree all you want but the fact is, it is. Ask anyone who took Latin how many genders it has. The same with German. Here’s an explanation in German:
Das grammatische Geschlecht ist in der deutschen Sprache sehr wichtig. Es gibt für Substantive drei unterschiedliche Geschlechter: männlich (maskulin), weiblich (feminin) und sächlich (neutrum).
Note: drei is German for three, Geschlechter means genders and Substantive means nouns. There is no two genders and neuter is something else.
No. That literally means it is not masculine or feminine. If I say a horse is neither a cow nor a dog, does it mean it is not an animal?
Your understanding of logic is extremely lacking. Definitely not a STEM.
Logic (logos) comes from philosophy and, gasp, language hence…
good thing we aren’t talking about STEM.
Your syllogism is as follows:
Masculine and feminine are genders.
Neuter is neither masculine nor feminine.
Therefore, neuter is not a gender.
Explain how your logic is not faulty.
Let’s start with your ridiculous logic:
Most everyone knows there are many types of animals. If an animal is neither a cow or a horse, all you can conclude is that it could be any animal but a cow or a dog. Absolutely horrible analogy to prove your point.
Here we have a case where everyone in the world at the time genders were assigned to nouns knew that the human race was made up of two different genders. No one questioned this “truth”. Therefore, if something is neither masculine of feminine it has no gender. From the two premises there is a simple conclusion: neuter has no gender.
Not a single one of my STEM friends would offer up your example of logic. For one thing, we would think he was pulling our leg, and we would be looking for the trap he laid. If we actually thought he was serious we would get a really good laugh: one that he would have to live with going forward.
Unfortunately, most everyone doesn’t know there are more than two genders. And for someone who brings up logic, you obviously don’t know what a syllogism is or how it works.
Wrong. Genders were assigned to nouns without any regard to SEX in many cases, and when the Latin word (genus), which is the root for the English word gender, meant type, not sex. They were also assigned at a time when, in ancient Greece, the word hermaphrodite came into existence.
This would be true if it were established that there are only two genders. Again, you don’t know how syllogisms work.
Here’s your problem. You bring up STEM as if that means anything. You bring it up arrogantly as if that makes you smarter or better educated than others. We aren’t talking about science however, and I started out majoring in a science so I am not ignorant in that regard.
We are talking linguistics, which is a science by the way which makes your STEM quips even more silly as I have studied linguistics, again, a science.
I am a native speaker of three languages and have studied several others. Go take a German class and when the professor states that there are three genders in German grammar tell him he is wrong. He’ ll laugh at you and ask you the same thing I am going to ask you:
Provide a legitimate source that states German , or Latin or ancient Greek, has only two grammatical genders. Good luck.
And yet, you did. So again, provide sources that state the German language only has two genders. Because your entire argument is based on “my truth.” That’s not very STEM of you.
And you want to critique my logic.
This started as how people interpret sentences.
I gave you a very logical interpretation of the definition in the 1828 dictionary.
I only use the English dictionary to determine the definition of words. I speak English and you are replying in English. Why use a teacher of German’s definition of an English word?
You might agree that a person can use the definition that he wishes. Maybe you don’t.
This is a fair point. So, are you saying that masculine nouns are assigned toward the masculine gender? And feminine nouns are assigned toward the feminine gender? And neuter nouns are assigned toward the hermaphrodite gender?
My entire argument is based on my interpretation of the English in the definition of gender. I don’t invent truth, I seek it.
I don’t hold German as any standard for interpreting English.
Reply in German and I won’t respond.
How could I leave that nonsense unchallenged?
You couldn’t get that from a 3rd grader.