[Lingtyp] Kinship systems that distinguish age but not gender

bingfu Lu lubingfu at yahoo.com
Thu Jul 20 23:16:31 UTC 2017

I agree with Martin’s boldclaim.  It seems to be very natural inthe following senses.

First, from the formal perspective,babies are very likely to be neutralized in sex.  If there is a continuum of sex neutralizationfrom the point of being very young (babies) to the point of very old, then, theyounger section, which includes the babies, should be more likely to beneutralized.

Second,  from the perspective of linguistic iconicity,babies tend to be sex-neutralized because their sex features are least developing.And it is natural, the less sex-developing, the easier to besex-neutralized.  

According to the degrees ofdevelopment in sex features, it might to be predicted that there may be somelanguages where the very old elders are neutralized in linguistic form, sincevery old elders are sex-retrodegraded. 

In short, the sex neutralization ismore likely when the sex features are less strong and less important in age. 

On Wednesday, July 19, 2017, 5:10:32 PM GMT+8, Martin Haspelmath <haspelmath at shh.mpg.de> wrote:

 On the basis of Turkish (kardeş) and Minangkabau (adiak), which neutralize the sex distinction in the younger sibling term, one could propose the following universal:
 "If a language makes a distinction between elder and younger siblings and neutralizes sex only in one type, then it neutralizes in younger siblings."
 This may seem bold, but I think that such bold formulations are productive in that they are likely to elicit responses from language specialists whose language goes against the generalization. (And if the bold generalization makes it into print somewhere, then one can even write an abstract on the basis of one's data and argue against  a previous claim.)
 Now it so happens that a claim very similar to the one above has already been made, on p. 76-77 in Greenberg's chapter "Universals of kinship terminology", which is Chapter five of his most important work:
  Greenberg, Joseph H. 1966. Language universals, with special reference to feature hierarchies. The Hague: Mouton.
 Greenberg formulates the generalization in terms of one kind of kinship being "marked", the other "unmarked". "Marked" features tend to be neutralized, so saying that younger siblings are "marked" amounts to the same as the above claim. (In my view of things, this would mean that some kinds of kinship features are more frequently used than others.)
 (Greenberg also says somewhere that masculine/male is unmarked, so he probably predicts that female terms ternd to be neuralized for age, thus answering Siva Kalyan's question.)
 So there are a lot of interesting predictions that could be tested if someone finally made a comprehensive world-wide database on kinship terms (I think some people near Hedvig are working on this).
 On 19.07.17 10:50, David Gil wrote:
 Matt beat me to it on Malay/Indonesian!  I would just like to add that while many (most?) varieties that I am familiar with work the way Matt describes, some exhibit an asymmetry in which elder siblings are distinguished for gender while younger ones are not.  This pattern is also evident in closely-related Minangkabau:
 adiak - 'younger sibling'
 uda - 'elder brother'
 uni - 'elder sister'
 And I suspect that it is common in other languages of the region.
 On 19/07/2017 10:40, Matthew Carroll wrote:
 Hi Guys 
  What about Indonesian/Malay? kakak/adik for elder/younger sibling respectively.  
  Best, Matt  
 On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Hedvig Skirgård <hedvig.skirgard at gmail.com> wrote:
 Dear LINGTYP,  
  Does anyone know of a language that has a distinction in the kinship system for age of referent (younger/older) without also having a distinction for gender of referent? For example, a language that marks siblings as being younger or older to ego without reference to being sister or brother. 
  The hypothesis is that this doesn't happen/is very rare. We'd like to know if you've come across any examples of this. 
  I'm asking for my friend Alex (cc:ed) who is not on the list. Please direct any responses or comments to her. 
Tōfā soifua,
Hedvig Skirgård

 PhD Candidate
 The Wellsprings of Linguistic Diversity
ARC Centre of Excellence for the Dynamics of Language
School of Culture, History and Language
 College of Asia and the Pacific
Rm 4203, H.C. Coombs Building (#9)
 The Australian National University
Acton ACT 2601
 Co-chair of Public Relations
Board of the International Olympiad of Linguistics
 Blogger at Humans Who Read Grammars
 http://humans-who-read- grammars.blogspot.
 ______________________________ _________________
 Lingtyp mailing list
 Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist. org
 http://listserv.linguistlist. org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
Lingtyp mailing list
Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
David Gil

Department of Linguistic and Cultural Evolution
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History
Kahlaische Strasse 10, 07745 Jena, Germany

Email: gil at shh.mpg.de
Office Phone (Germany): +49-3641686834
Mobile Phone (Indonesia): +62-81281162816

 _______________________________________________Lingtyp mailing listLingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.orghttp://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp 
Martin Haspelmath (haspelmath at shh.mpg.de)
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History
Kahlaische Strasse 10	
D-07745 Jena  
Leipzig University 
IPF 141199
Nikolaistrasse 6-10
D-04109 Leipzig    

Lingtyp mailing list
Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20170720/51bece74/attachment.htm>

More information about the Lingtyp mailing list