<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Agreed. Surely a classifier is a structural/functional element that indicates the class to which some associated element belongs, and gender is one of the types of classes to which that element might belong. <div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">David</div><div class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Mar 21, 2017, at 1:44 PM, E. Bashir <<a href="mailto:ebashir@yahoo.com" class="">ebashir@yahoo.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div class=""><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-family: HelveticaNeue, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, 'Lucida Grande', sans-serif; font-size: 13px;" class=""><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1490107667193_150443" class=""><span class="">Sebastian Nordhoff's comment is on the mark, in my opinion.</span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1490107667193_150443" class=""><span class=""><br class=""></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1490107667193_150443" class=""><span class="">Elena Bashir</span></div><div class="qtdSeparateBR" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1490107667193_150442"><br class=""><br class=""></div><div class="yahoo_quoted" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1490107667193_150434" style="display: block;"> <div style="font-family: HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1490107667193_150433" class=""> <div style="font-family: HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1490107667193_150432" class=""> <div dir="ltr" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1490107667193_150431" class=""> <font size="2" face="Arial" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1490107667193_150430" class=""> <hr size="1" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1490107667193_150441" class=""> <b class=""><span style="font-weight:bold;" class="">From:</span></b> Sebastian Nordhoff <<a href="mailto:sebastian.nordhoff@glottotopia.de" class="">sebastian.nordhoff@glottotopia.de</a>><br class=""> <b class=""><span style="font-weight: bold;" class="">To:</span></b> <a href="mailto:lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" class="">lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a> <br class=""> <b class=""><span style="font-weight: bold;" class="">Sent:</span></b> Tuesday, March 21, 2017 2:39 PM<br class=""> <b class=""><span style="font-weight: bold;" class="">Subject:</span></b> Re: [Lingtyp] genifiers (gender markers/classifiers)<br class=""> </font> </div> <div class="y_msg_container" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1490107667193_150435"><br class=""><div dir="ltr" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1490107667193_150436" class="">Dear all,<br clear="none" class="">as someone who has not worked extensively on either of these concepts, I<br clear="none" class="">still have to say that the term "genifier" strikes me as odd. My first<br clear="none" class="">thought upon seeing the subject of the mail was "OK, this will be about<br clear="none" class="">making something a gender, or a gene, or a knee-like thing maybe, let's<br clear="none" class="">see". I was misled by terms such as "intensifier", used to make<br clear="none" class="">something more intense, and certainly also, albeit more on phonological<br clear="none" class="">grounds, by "gentrification", which is a widely debated topic where I live.<br clear="none" class=""><br clear="none" class="">The attempt to blend "GEnder" and "classiFIER" is not successful in my<br clear="none" class="">view, as "-fier" is not really the important formative here; "class" is.<br clear="none" class=""><br clear="none" class="">If there is a desire for a blend, I would rather go for "Clender" or<br clear="none" class="">"Clander", which would not lead to misparsings/misinterpretations as the<br clear="none" class="">one I had.<br clear="none" class=""><br clear="none" class="">As a final note, a "classifier" does something to an X, while "gender"<br clear="none" class="">is a property of an X.<br clear="none" class=""><br clear="none" class="">(1) /ladida/ is of gender X<br clear="none" class="">(2) ?/ladida/ is of classifier X<br clear="none" class="">(3) ?/-dada/ is a gender<br clear="none" class="">(4) /-dada/ is a classifier<br clear="none" class=""><br clear="none" class="">It is unclear to me whether the two concepts "gender" and "classifier"<br clear="none" class="">do actually have a superordinate concept. Possibly, one has to use<br clear="none" class="">"gender marker" and "classifier", or "noun class" and "gender" as<br clear="none" class="">subordinate concepts to arrive at a good superordinate concept.<br clear="none" class=""><br clear="none" class="">Best wishes<br clear="none" class="">Sebastian<br clear="none" class=""><br clear="none" class=""><br clear="none" class=""><br clear="none" class=""><br clear="none" class=""><br clear="none" class=""><br clear="none" class=""><br clear="none" class="">On 03/20/2017 04:05 PM, Martin Haspelmath wrote:<br clear="none" class="">> Dear typologists,<br clear="none" class="">> <br clear="none" class="">> Cross-linguistic terminology (comparative concepts) should be both clear<br clear="none" class="">> and conform to the tradition, in order to preserve continuity with the<br clear="none" class="">> older literature.<br clear="none" class="">> <br clear="none" class="">> In the case of the terms "gender" and "classifier", it seems that these<br clear="none" class="">> two goals cannot be achieved simultaneously without coining a new term<br clear="none" class="">> ("genifier").<br clear="none" class="">> <br clear="none" class="">> There is quite a bit of general literature on gender/classifiers (e.g.<br clear="none" class="">> Dixon 1986; Grinevald 2000; Aikhenvald 2000; Seifart 2010; Corbett &<br clear="none" class="">> Fedden 2016), but none of these works provide clear definitions of these<br clear="none" class="">> terms, and the more recent literature (e.g. Corbett & Fedden, and also<br clear="none" class="">> Seifart & Payne 2007) actually emphasizes that there is no reason to say<br clear="none" class="">> that gender markers and classifiers are distinct phenomena in the<br clear="none" class="">> world's languages.<br clear="none" class="">> <br clear="none" class="">> Thus, it seems to me that we need the new term "genifier", perhaps<br clear="none" class="">> defined as follows:<br clear="none" class="">> <br clear="none" class="">> A *genifier system* is a system of grammatical markers which occur on<br clear="none" class="">> nominal modifiers, predicates or anaphoric pronouns, and each of which<br clear="none" class="">> expresses (i.e. normally reflects, but sometimes contributes) a broad<br clear="none" class="">> property other than person and number of the controlling noun (i.e. for<br clear="none" class="">> nominal modifiers: the modificatum, for predicates: an argument, for<br clear="none" class="">> anaphoric pronouns: the antecedent).<br clear="none" class="">> <br clear="none" class="">> The alternative to coining a new term, it seems to me, would be to<br clear="none" class="">> extend the meaning of the term "gender" or of the term "classifier" in<br clear="none" class="">> such a way that there would be no more continuity with the earlier<br clear="none" class="">> literature.<br clear="none" class="">> <br clear="none" class="">> Given the above definition of genifier, we can perhaps define "gender"<br clear="none" class="">> and "numeral classifier" as follows (as arbitrary subcategories of<br clear="none" class="">> genifiers, defined just to preserve continuity with the older literature):<br clear="none" class="">> <br clear="none" class="">> A *gender system* (= a system of gender markers) is a system of<br clear="none" class="">> genifiers which includes no more than 20 genifiers and which is not<br clear="none" class="">> restricted to numeral modifiers.<br clear="none" class="">> <br clear="none" class="">> A *numeral classifier system* is a system of genifiers which is<br clear="none" class="">> restricted to numeral (plus optionally other adnominal) modifiers.<br clear="none" class="">> <br clear="none" class="">> I wonder if the above definitions have any obvious defects, i.e. any<br clear="none" class="">> cases that everyone would call gender or numeral classifier and that<br clear="none" class="">> wouldn't fall under the definitions, or cases that fall under them and<br clear="none" class="">> that nobody would call gender or numeral classifier.<br clear="none" class="">> <br clear="none" class="">> Note that the new term "genifier" also has the advantage that the whole<br clear="none" class="">> domain can be called *genification* (rather than the cumbersome "noun<br clear="none" class="">> classification/nominal classification", which is also vague because<br clear="none" class="">> there are all kinds of "classes" or "classifications" of nouns which<br clear="none" class="">> have nothing to do with genifiers).<br clear="none" class="">> <br clear="none" class="">> Any comments?<br clear="none" class="">> <br clear="none" class="">> Thanks,<br clear="none" class="">> Martin<br clear="none" class="">> <br clear="none" class="">> *************************<br clear="none" class="">> <br clear="none" class="">> References<br clear="none" class="">> <br clear="none" class="">> Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2000. /Classifiers: A typology of noun<br clear="none" class="">> categorization devices/. Oxford: Oxford University Press.<br clear="none" class="">> Corbett, Greville G. & Sebastian Fedden. 2016. Canonical gender.<br clear="none" class="">> /Journal of Linguistics/ 52(3). 495--531.<br clear="none" class="">> Dixon, R. M. W. 1986. Noun classes and noun classification in<br clear="none" class="">> typological perspective. In Colette Grinevald Craig (ed.), /Noun classes<br clear="none" class="">> and categorization/, 105--112. Amsterdam: Benjamins.<br clear="none" class="">> Grinevald, Colette G. 2000. A morphosyntactic typology of classifiers.<br clear="none" class="">> In Gunter Senft (ed.), /Systems of nominal classification/, 50--92.<br clear="none" class="">> Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br clear="none" class="">> Seifart, Frank. 2010. Nominal classification. /Language and Linguistics<br clear="none" class="">> Compass/ 4(8). 719--736.<br clear="none" class="">> Seifart, Frank & Doris L. Payne. 2007. Nominal classification in the<br clear="none" class="">> North West Amazon: Issues in areal diffusion and typological<br clear="none" class="">> characterization. /International Journal of American Linguistics/ 73(4).<br clear="none" class="">> 381--387.<br clear="none" class="">> <br clear="none" class="">> <br clear="none" class="">> <br clear="none" class="">> _______________________________________________<br clear="none" class="">> Lingtyp mailing list<br clear="none" class="">> <a shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" class="">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br clear="none" class="">> <a shape="rect" href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" target="_blank" class="">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><div class="yqt9914231687" id="yqtfd49062"><br clear="none" class="">> <br clear="none" class="">_______________________________________________<br clear="none" class="">Lingtyp mailing list<br clear="none" class=""><a shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" class="">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br clear="none" class=""><a shape="rect" href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" target="_blank" class="">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br clear="none" class=""></div></div><br class=""><br class=""></div> </div> </div> </div></div></div>_______________________________________________<br class="">Lingtyp mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" class="">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br class="">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp<br class=""></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></body></html>