PIE gender

[WR Schmidt]

At 09:17 PM 2/19/99 -0500, you wrote:
>There has been some discusion here of the (assumed) fact that
>the feminine gender is an innovation, and one not shared by
>the Anatolian lgs.  However, there is one thing that has long
>troubled me in this connection.  There is a fact that seems
>to argue that the feminine was quite old, viz.,that some
>languages use neuter pl. for a group consisting of a
>masculine and a feminine.  I don't now recall which lgs
>these are, but as I recall this is recognized as an archaic
>feature.  (I do know that it survives in some Slavic lgs,
>incl. Polish, but apparently not Russian).  I recall once
>trying to get an Anatolianist to make sure that this rule
>does NOT leave any traces in Anatolian, for if it did, then
>we would have a very good argument FOR feminine in PIE, but
>I never got the answer.   AMR

The origins and significance of linguistic gender has remained problematic
for some time, despite numerous attempts to explain it. However, I'd like
to suggest that linguistic gender may have once been more related to
biological gender than - AFAIK - has heretofore been thought, because the
former evolved at a time when the world-view of our IE ancestors was
similar - if not identical - to:

1) The world view that led the ancient Chinese to postulate that objects,
concepts and aspects of reality were comprised of feminine (yin) and
masculine (yang) essences or spirits; and/or

2) The type of animism that led, e.g., the Egyptians to anthropomorphize
these essences as male, female, hermaphroditic and neutered deities.

But in either case, words labeling concepts, objects and aspects of reality
would have been masculinized, feminized or neutered, depending on the
gender of the essence(s) or deity each concept, object or aspect of reality
embodied.

As the IE world-view shifted from animism to naturalism, the philosophical
basis of gender was evidently lost. But by that time, the use of gender had
been so thoroughly built into the structure of language itself that it has
remained so to this day.

Any comments supporting or refuting this theory, which I provide as "food
for thought,"  would be appreciated.

WRSchmidt