32.1637, Review: Cognitive Science; Historical Linguistics; Semantics: Di Garbo, Olsson, Wälchli (2019)

[The LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-32-1637. Tue May 11 2021. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 32.1637, Review: Cognitive Science; Historical Linguistics; Semantics: Di Garbo, Olsson, Wälchli (2019)

Moderator: Malgorzata E. Cavar (linguist at linguistlist.org)
Student Moderator: Jeremy Coburn, Lauren Perkins
Managing Editor: Becca Morris
Team: Helen Aristar-Dry, Everett Green, Sarah Robinson, Nils Hjortnaes, Joshua Sims, Billy Dickson
Jobs: jobs at linguistlist.org | Conferences: callconf at linguistlist.org | Pubs: pubs at linguistlist.org

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
           https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

Editor for this issue: Jeremy Coburn <jecoburn at linguistlist.org>
================================================================


Date: Tue, 11 May 2021 15:02:58
From: Mayowa Akinlotan [mayorakinsforpaper at yahoo.com]
Subject: Grammatical gender and linguistic complexity I

 
Discuss this message:
http://linguistlist.org/pubs/reviews/get-review.cfm?subid=36621017


Book announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/30/30-4176.html

EDITOR: Francesca  Di Garbo
EDITOR: Bruno  Olsson
EDITOR: Bernhard  Wälchli
TITLE: Grammatical gender and linguistic complexity I
SUBTITLE: General issues and specific studies
PUBLISHER: Language Science Press
YEAR: 2019

REVIEWER: Mayowa Akinlotan, Katholische Universität Eichstätt-Ingolstadt

SUMMARY

The book “Grammatical gender and linguistic complexity: general issues and
specific studies” is the Volume One of a two-volume collection of chapters
showing the relation between grammatical gender and linguistic complexity, in
individual languages and cross-linguistically. The present review focuses
specifically on the volume one, which is titled as aforementioned. The book is
interesting for many reasons, especially for its operationalisation of two
different linguistic concepts in completely fresh perspectives, such that new
understandings of these concepts emerge. This book puts together ten relevant
chapters that explicate the concept of grammatical gender in the light of
linguistic complexity. 

One, all of these chapters clearly illustrate and further affirm the idea that
grammatical gender, regardless of languages and their varieties, is
characterised and underlied with a complex system which contributes to the
complexity of these languages. Hence, one way to understand the complexity of
any language is perhaps to look keenly at its grammatical gender system.
Although it is not clearly stated in this volume, one can assert that the
degree of complexity of a gender system in a particular language can provide
insights into the overall (syntactical and semantic) complexities of many
language. Nevertheless, the ten excellent papers collected in this volume 
clearly show that we can have a meaningful insight into the origins and
development of a language through a measure of the varying degree of
complexity in its gender system. 

As a linguist of African origin, I am well assured that the gender systems of
most African languages allow for a penetration not only into their origins and
developments but also into their socio-cultural identities, attitudes,
ideologies, and worldviews. In addition to this reflection, the book also
shows the possible alternation between a complex and a simple gender system
across world languages, and how such a distinction, no matter how fuzzy it can
be, helps us understand the questions of language ecology and history of
speech communities. The book further makes significant contributions in terms
of how to study the relation between those concepts representing  gender
system and language complexity. 

For instance, all of the  chapters employed a variety of methods, showing how
this interaction can be investigated synchronically and diachronically, with
evidence provided cross-linguistically. Since the question of linguistic
complexity is intertwined with variation and change, this volume thus makes
conscious efforts to provide some answers to the question of how the gender
system of a language changes  over time. Another fact which distinguishes the
book is the scope of evidence provided. The different frameworks that make up
the concept of gender complexity are put to the test in languages from Africa,
and South Asia. The book is divided into four parts representing (I) General
issues (II) Africa (III) New Guinea and (IV) South Asia. Part I has four
chapters (1-4), Part II two chapters (4-6), Part III three chapters (7-9), and
Part IV one chapter (10). 

Chapter One, which is the introductory chapter, is co-written by the three
editors of the volume. The chapter introduces all the conceptual and
theoretical issues contained in the two volumes. These two volumes present us
with a wide range of concepts and issues including but not limited to
grammatical gender, its varying systems and complexity across languages,
including how we might measure gender complexity. 

Chapter Two Canonical, complex, complicated? discusses the issue of complexity
of grammatical gender in relation to three ideas of canonicity, complexity,
and difficulty. The author of the chapter, Jenny Audring, asserts that the
question of complexity of grammatical gender, just as any other matter of
linguistic complexity, can be understood in terms of different dimensions
relating to (1) canonicity - standards or benchmarks with which other similar
items are measured, (2) complexity - the varying degree of complexity that
characterises and underlies gender systems cross-linguistically, and (3)
complication - the varying degree of difficulty involved in (2) and (3) and
how it is reflected in different structures, meaning processing, and
discourse-pragmatic processing. 

These three concepts are fuzzy, and hardly can any fine-grained description
clarify these grey areas. However the author is able to shed lights on these
grey areas, arguing that “while canonicity, complexity, and difficulty are
related notions, …they are not identical: individual phenomena can be complex
but canonical, or complex but not difficult.” The extent to which this
assertion is tenable varies from one context to another. In a 32-page chapter,
the author nicely illustrates the idea that a clear distinction can be made
between complexity and difficulty on one hand, and then, (non)-canonicity and
complexity and/or difficulty on the other hand. In doing this, Audring
proposes a number of concepts that are  methodically and theoretically
relevant not only to the discussion of complexity of grammatical gender but
also to the discussion of other subsystems of linguistic complexities. 

Among many other ideas proposed in this chapter, the idea of profiling allows
us to identify and classify subtle characterisations of a system, including
properties projecting simplicity/complexity. This concept of profiling appears
to be flexible and aims at outlining the properties of gender systems, rather
than classifying them. Profiling a gender system will thus involve the
identification of (a) controllers (e.g. noun, pronoun), (b) targets (e.g.
adjectives, verbs, pronouns, articles), (c) domains (e.g. noun phrase,
clause), (d) values (e.g. 2 or 10 gender values), and (e) assignment values
(e.g. semantic, phonological). In addition to this outlining, author Audring
further provides evidence from first language acquisition, showing how
different dimensions and stages of acquisition reflect a varying degree of
difficulty and complexity. With this evidence, the author clearly makes the
point that understanding the (non)-canonicity, difficulty, and complexity of
grammatical gender systems requires a careful understanding of its typologies
in different domains, including those of first and second language acquisition
case studies.

Chapter 3, written by Osten Dahl, is titled Gender: esoteric or exoteric?
questions the distinction between esoteric and exoteric classification of
gender system. By asking this question, the chapter thus extends the
discussion in Chapter 2, moving beyond evidence shown in typological studies
to showing how ecological factors relate to the growth, maintenance and demise
of gender systems, including those of their synchronic patterns. In other
words, in order to understand the nature, development, and growth of the
complexity of gender system, one needs to look beyond patterns which are found
in typological studies and consider insights provided in synchronic studies.
Such synchronic/diachronic studies allow us to understand nuts and bolts of
gender systems, and its nature of complexity through prism of conditions that
underlie the rise, growth, and maturity of gender systems. 

In Chapter 4, author Johanna Nichols ambitiously tries to answer the big
question; why is gender so complex? Of course there cannot be an answer in
absolute terms. Nevertheless, the author offers a wide range of reasonable
arguments. One proposal is that, unlike other classificatory categories such
as the case, nouns, numeral, and possessive categories, a gender system is
non-referential and should be evaluated in more holistic terms. The author
provides some typological patterns to support the argument that gender system
is non-referential. As claimed in this chapter, the varying degree of
complexity of a gender system is related to the overall complexity of the
language within which the gender system operates. 

Also, the degree to which the gender system is complex is compensated for by
other subsystems, such as the case system. According to the author, “ the
reason why gender systems can be so complex is then that they have no
self-correcting mechanism like the hierarchical blueprint that might simplify
them, and they are stable enough that complexity can build up over time
without causing the whole system to be shed.” In other words, stability in the
gender system is a crucial condition for developing complexity. This could not
be in absolute terms as stability can as well turn out to resolve complexity
and complication. Although the argument that gender system is non-referential
needs more than the arguments presented in this chapter, the chapter makes
significant contribution to our understanding of complexity of gender system.

Chapter 5 opens the Part II in the book, and provides evidence on gender
systems from African languages, such as Swahili, Akan, Lelemi, Chumburung, and
Guang languages, showing how noun classes in Niger-Congo languages conflate
gender with deriflection. The author, Tom Guldermann, presents four analytical
concepts representing agreement class, gender, nominal form class, and
deriflection, which align the analyses of gender systems in these languages
with those of other languages. Also, the author claims that these proposals
are not only adequate for understanding the systems in Niger-Congo languages
but also that they are of universal values to other languages. 

According to the author, noun classes including that of the gender system in
Bantu and more of Benue-Congo (Niger-Congo) languages have often been
evaluated in terms that need re-evaluation, “for the sake of better
language-specific synchronic well as historical-comparative analyses.” This
will mean some sort of reanalysis framed around a cross-linguistic perspective
rather than a philological profiling. Chapter 6 is related to Chapter 5, and
specifically focuses on peculiarities in the gender marking system in the
African language Uduk, a Koman language spoken in Ethiopia and Sudan. Uduk
operates a zero marking system, and two systems of gender marking, which can
be classified as class 1 and 2, and unlike some Koman languages, the
operationalistion of these systems has little relation with semantics in its
class assignment. It is shown that Uduk does not differentiate gender in
person, and that all personal pronouns are classified to a particular group,
just the same way that nouns are classified. In other words, personal and
demonstrative pronouns act as controller for gender marking, which perhaps
arise from the fact that the gender marking system in Uduk is not related to
biological sex or any other semantic considerations common in many other
languages. 

Chapter 7, 8 and 9 form Part III of the book which focuses on languages
related to New Guinea. Chapter 7 deals with gender system in Walman, a
language spoken in Papua New Guinea. In this chapter, author Matthew Dryer
clearly illustrates the conditions and constraints underlying the alternation
between masculine and feminine gender marking in Walman, together with the
process and operationalisation of formal realisation of gender marking in this
language. According to the author, the predictability of the choice between
masculine and feminine is clearly related to the animacy system, supported
with evidence that “…the fact that inanimate nouns are always feminine.” 

With sufficient examples (valuable linguistic evidence missing in previous
chapters), the author clearly shows and operationalises two gender-like
phenomena representing “pluralia tantum nouns” and “a diminutive category”
characterising the realisation and working of the gender system in Walman.
Chapter 8 provides further discussion on the gender system from Coastal
Marind, another language from New Guinea. The author Bruno Olsson discusses
the complexity of the gender marking in this language within a theoretical
framework conceptualised as masterful grammar developed by Drabbe (1955).
Relying on this framework, the author is able to show how complexity and
consequently ambiguity develop from the different gender categories
representing animacy and number agreement. 

One peculiarity characterising Coastal Marind is the existence of a gender
category “the 4th gender (i.e. the second inanimate gender marking), which,
accroding to the author, must not be collapsed into another category. Doing so
will only result in ambiguity that undermines the usefulness of such category.
Chapter 9 further extends the discussion on gender system in New Guinea,
showing a wide range of classification of gender systems in 20 languages
spoken in New Guinea. As can be seen in the chapter, the author shows that
gender in New Guinea is vast, and that many of the languages in this speech
communities operate “two-gendered sex-based systems with semantic assignment.”

Four gender peculiarities are identified; (1) size and shape, which functions
as conditions for gender assignments representing masculine and feminine, (2)
the relation between two nominal classification systems, (3) a non-existence
of gender distinction is the usages of pronouns, and (4) verbs functioning as
the indexing target. Chapter 10, which is the last chapter, and the only
chapter in Part IV of the book, deals with gender typology and gender
instability in Hindu Kush Indo-Aryan languages, showing how gender marking
operates in Hindu Kush Indo-Aryan. Henrik Liljegren, the author, clearly
illustrates how two different types of gender systems operate in Hindu Kush
Indo-Aryan languages. It is also noted that there is a process of
entrenchment, in which there is “…a decline in pervasiveness moving from East
to West.”

EVALUATION

This first volume of the book certainly makes a great contribution to the
literature, especially to the discussion of grammatical gender systems,
linguistic complexity, and referential systems cross-linguistically. The book
stands out for the richness of its data, especially with the provision of data
from less-known languages representing Africa and South Asia. All of these
chapters present findings, arguments, and concepts that do not only provide
great insights into these less-represented languages but also that these
languages can indeed shed light on established linguistic theories across
linguistic varieties.

For instance, among many notable contributions, author Tom Guldemann shows
that we can learn more about gender system and its complexity through the
peculiarities identified in the gender system in Niger-Congo noun classes, and
how these categories conflate gender with deriflection. Also, readers who want
to learn more about the internal and external structure of African and South
Asian languages should read the book. Except for Chapter Seven, most of the
chapters provide only a small number of examples. Also, most of the chapters
lack quantification dimension of the data provided. Although quantification of
the data has not diminished the importance or clarity of arguments proposed,
such perspective can appease some linguists with quantitative orientations.

For instance, Chapter Seven promises to show how factors influence choice
between masculine and feminine, yet with little or no distribution on how such
factors relate to the possible gender choices. Nevertheless the analysis
presented does not obscure the fact that the movement between feminine and
masculine gender choices in Walman is clearly a matter of meaning processing.
Overall, the book represents state-of-the-art for researchers interested in
gender system and complexity, including their implications on grammatical
categories, meaning processing and a body of cultural ideologies underpinning
languages, which in turn reflect their origins, development, and  directions
for their future.


ABOUT THE REVIEWER

Mayowa Akinlotan is currently with University of Texas at Austin and also a
Humboldt Research Fellow with Alexander von Humboldt, a fellowship being
hosted at Katholische Universitait Eichstatt-Ingoldstadt, Germany.





------------------------------------------------------------------------------

***************************    LINGUIST List Support    ***************************
 The 2020 Fund Drive is under way! Please visit https://funddrive.linguistlist.org
  to find out how to donate and check how your university, country or discipline
     ranks in the fund drive challenges. Or go directly to the donation site:
                   https://crowdfunding.iu.edu/the-linguist-list

                        Let's make this a short fund drive!
                Please feel free to share the link to our campaign:
                    https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/
 


----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-32-1637	
----------------------------------------------------------