6.976, Disc: He/She

[The Linguist List]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List:  Vol-6-976. Mon Jul 17 1995. ISSN: 1068-4875. Lines:  118
 
Subject: 6.976, Disc: He/She
 
Moderators: Anthony Rodrigues Aristar: Texas A&M U. <aristar at tam2000.tamu.edu>
            Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan U. <hdry at emunix.emich.edu>
 
Assoc. Editor: Ljuba Veselinova <lveselin at emunix.emich.edu>
Asst. Editors: Ron Reck <rreck at emunix.emich.edu>
               Ann Dizdar <dizdar at tam2000.tamu.edu>
               Annemarie Valdez <avaldez at emunix.emich.edu>
 
Editor for this issue: dizdar at tam2000.tamu.edu (Ann Dizdar)
 
---------------------------------Directory-----------------------------------
1)
Date:  Thu, 13 Jul 1995 09:43:53 EDT
From:  Jefweb at aol.com
Subject:  Re: 6.959, Disc: He/She
 
---------------------------------Messages------------------------------------
1)
Date:  Thu, 13 Jul 1995 09:43:53 EDT
From:  Jefweb at aol.com
Subject:  Re: 6.959, Disc: He/She
 
 
My message 6.959, Disc He/She, that was posted this past week, demonstrates
that orthographical thorns do not send. I have replaced them with th-. Also,
middle English or Piers Plowman scholars who would like more lines from Piers
and the pronoun paradigms, please e-mail me. Also, can someone summarize the
patridominance in language  theory of Catherine Callaghan?
+++++++
 
[former post with thorns replaced]
Dear Linguist List Subscribers,
For the continuing discussion of the pronouns, I have some lines of data from
the 17 manuscripts of the A-Version of Piers Plowman. They can generally be
said to be representative of 15th century usage. Is it not strongly suggested
in the lines that "proverbial he", and perhaps the "original" morphology of
the so called "generic-he", was feminine, not masculine? What a strange thing
to say! Can this be accurate?
 
Looking at the Middle English pronouns, using the modern paradigm to evaluate
them, is misleading and inconclusive. When the development of Middle English
"his" or "him" is evaluated without taking into consideration their
development from Old English morphology, much of the story is lost -- that
these two "masculine" forms were also neuter, and in this later sense ("not
one or the other"), served well for the indefinite singular -- by way of
development from the OE masculine/neuter obliques; and the feminine forms
were morphologically related to the plural. In the following lines, the
h-stem subject is the feminine(/plural), NOT the masculine. Am I wrong?
 
(Playing for a moment the devil's advocate) don't these lines below fly in
the face of feminist theory as it sees the "he" "stealing cognitive space",
whereas in fact, they are feminine forms?
 
I would like to have some feminist theory input about these lines of
evidence. If so-goes-the-language, so-goes-the-culture (a la Whorf), what can
we make of the "hers" = "theirs" identity found widespread in Middle English
morpholgy, and what can we say about the "proverbial he" in the following
being feminine?
 
Is there anybody strong in feminist theory, particulary a feminist
him-/herself, who can discuss this in the general forum?  Is my understanding
correct that feminist history sees the h-stem feminine as having dropped from
living English by 1300? Please help.
 
 
Do not hesitate to contact me personally about any aspects of this, pro,con,
or indifferent.
 
LINES FROM PIERS
( * = unavailable character)
Passus III Line 229
 
A
Ch  And he that  gripeth               gifts,       so [?] god helpe,
D   And ho so    gripeth      here   gifts,       so me god helpe,
E   Thai that        grypith        such  gifts,       sa me god helpe,
H   But he that   gripeth       siche 3eftis,     so me god helpe,
H2  And he that  grypes      here   gifts,       so  me god helpe,
H3
J    And he that    gripith       mede,              so me god helpe,
K   And thay thatat grepyn     her     gifts,       so me god helpe,
L    And ho that   gripeth     heore  3eftes,    so me god helpe,
M   And 3e that   grypit       here   3iftis,      so me god helpe,
N   And he that   gripeth      3e      gift,        so me god helpe,
R   And he that   grypyt       3oure gifts,      so me god helpe,
T   And he that   gripith        here   gifts,      so me god helpe,
U   And he that   gripeth     here    gold,       so me god helpe,
V   And heo that  3iftus       heore  gifts,      so me god helpe,
W   He       that   gripeth     here   3eftes,    so me god helpe
 
 
Passus III Line 230
 
A   Schul ab*e [abide] it full bitterly   or ellis  the bok lyeth
Ch Shal   ab*e        bitterly   or         the bok lie*th
D   Shal  ab*e it      bitterly   or         the bok lyeth
E   Sall ab*e it full   bytter     as        the buke tellis
H   He schal abigge it bitterly or ellis  the bok li*eth
H2 Shal ab*e it        biterly    or         the bok lyeth
H3 Shal ab*e it        bitterly   or         the bok li*eth
J   Schulun aBugge wel bitterly or      the bok lyeth
K  Schallen abigge hit wel bitterly or  the bok lyeth
L   Shal ab*e hit wel bytter     or ellis  the bok lyeth
M  Scholyn abiggyn wol bytter or       the bok liet
N  Shal ab*e hit wel bitterly   ar          the bok lyeth
R  Shal ab*e ful       bitterly   or          the bok lyes
T  Shal ab*ie it        bitterly   or           the bok li*eth
U  Shal ab*e ful       bitere     or          the bok lyes
V  Thei schullen aBugge bitterly or       the bok li*eth
W  Shal ab*e it        bitterly  or           the bok ly
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-6-976.