gender, noun classes, and noun classification

[Zwitserlood, Inge]

Ingeborg and I suggest that classifiers (viz. the meaningful hand
configurations that appear on verbs of motion, location and existence) in
NGT are gender markers, similar to those in Bantu, NOT the same. We are very
well aware of the fact that Bantu languages use Noun class markers within
NPs as well as on verbs, whereas the markers in NGT occur only on a subgroup
of verbs. (In recent literature there is no longer a distinction between
gender and noun class, see Corbett 1999 I think) The similarity lies in the
fact that Bantu languages have a rather large set of gender markers, larger
than the set of gender markers we know from Indo european languages and
which set is not restricted to the genders male, female and neuter, but also
have classes indicating the shape of a referent.
In NGT, as in other signed languages, some referents (I hesitate to say
nouns, because so often there is no noun present in a clause) can be
represented by more than one classifier. This is indeed different from what
is said about gender systems, where a noun has only one marker in a
particular linguistic context (e.g. a verb). Thus, gender systems are
considered very strict systems. However, this is not totally true. In some
cases, depending on the viewpoint of the speaker, a different gender marker
can be used than the conventional one. So for instance a cow (that may
usually be represented by a gender marker for animals), dressed up and
acting as a human being, can be represented by a female gender marker. The
gender systems we know seem to allow very little of this variation, perhaps
because there is less possible overlap in the denotation of a gender marker.
(Unfortunately, I do not know much about possible variation in systems that
have large sets of gender markers. In the literature I have studied only the
conventional classification is described [and generalized as much as
possible], not possible cases of multiple classification.)
The classifiers we have in NGT allow some more variation, just as NS. For
instance, a CD can be represented by a flat handshape, indicating the
flatness of the entity, but also by a handshape with extended and bent index
finger and thumb, indicate the round shape of the entity. This depends on
the aspects of the CD that the signer considers important. Perhaps such
variability is possible because of the particular inventory of NGT
classifiers.

We have to be careful comparing the classifiers in signed languages with
classificatory verb stems in Athabaskan languages, as already stated by
several researchers. But the case of Koyukon Athabaskan gender prefixes is
interesting and I will certainly look into that (thanks for the reference!)

Best,
Inge


-----Original Message-----
From: Nobukatsu Minoura
To: SLLING-L at ADMIN.HUMBERC.ON.CA
Sent: 2-7-2002 9:22
Subject: gender, noun classes, and noun classification

> Susan Fischer wrote:
>> To follow up on Ulrike's point, the phenomenon in NS (NihonSyuwa)  is
not,
>> however, grammatical gender in the sense of assigning a
near-arbitrary
>> classification to a noun;

Ingeborg van Gijn wrote:
> This is exactly the kind of grammatical gender that according to Inge
> Zwitserlood and me IS present in all signed languages. In our work on
> agreement we argue for classifiers (in classifier predicates) being
gender
> agreement markers, because these classifiers are reminiscent of the
gender
> markers (or noun class markers) in Bantu languages. These languages
have
> sets of markers to indicate the shape characteristics of entities, to
> indicate males and females, animates, etc.

Is noun classification in sign languages the same as Bantu noun classes?
I
am not so sure about it.  Gender systems in Indo-European languages,
Afroasiatic languages, etc., noun classes in Bantu languages, and noun
classification in many languages of the world are related phenomena.
And
especially the gender system and the Bantu classes are very similar but
are
different in the number of the "classes" they have.  A gender system
usually
has 2 or 3 classes.  Bantu languages have 20 or more classes.  But the
gender systems and Bantu noun classes are similar in that they inflict
agreement  within noun phrases (head nouns with articles, adjectives,
numbers, demonstratives, possessive particles, etc.) and within clauses
with
the predicate verbs.

Noun "classes" in sign languages are not that through when it comes to
agreement.  It is more like classificatory verbs in Athabaskan
languages,
which are noun classifiers but do not form noun classes.  In Athabaskan
languages, the "agreement" is only between the noun and the predicate
verb
(or the relativized form thereof).  And also the biggest difference
between
Bantu noun classes and Athabaskan classificatory verbs is that an
Athabaskan
noun can take different classifiers according to its form or shape.
Bantu
nouns do not have that freedom.  A Bantu noun can switch between the
singular class (Swahili 'mtu', a man, M-class) and its corresponding
plural
class (Swahili 'watu', men, WA-class).  When it is assigned a different
class other than that, it is already a separate lexical item (Swahili
'kitu', a thing, KI-class; 'vitu', things, VI-class).

In Koyukon Athabaskan of Alaska, a noun can take different
classificatory
verbs (Chad L. Thompson, 1987, _An Introduction to Athabaskan
Languages_,
Yukon-Koyukuk School District -- available from Alaska Native Language
Center, University of Alaska, Fairbanks):

saahal la'onh   'a sugar cube is there'
saahal lidlo   'cubes or bags of sugar are there'
saahal lakkonh   'a bowl of sugar is there'
saahal daaltonh   'a box of sugar is there'
saahal alhidzok   'sugar cubes are scattered about'
saahal alhitlaakk   'wet, sticky sugar is there'
saahal daalhinokk   'loose, granulated sugar is there'

Saahal is a loanword from Russian sakhar (sugar).  And the
classificatory
verbs shown above all mean "is/are there," but they have different
roots/stems (i.e. are suppletive) and are chosen according to the
shape/form
of the noun.  Saahal above is presented with seven different verbs.  But
it
does not mean that saahal belongs to seven classes.  The different verbs
merely suggest the different shape/form of the sugar.

Koyukon Athabaskan and other northern Athabaskan languages also have
so-called gender prefixes, which are not found in southern Athabaskan
languages like Navajo and Apache.  Koyukon Athabaskan has 6 classes of
the
so-called gender.  And appropriate prefixes are assigned to certain
verbs
which require a gender prefix.

nizoonh   'it is good (0 gender)'
neezoonh   'it (face, rope) is good (ni gender)'
deezoonh   'it (stick-like object) is good (di gender)'
dineezoonh   'it (pencil, rock) is good (dini gender)'
hoozoonh   'it (house, area) is good (hu gender)'
Hudeezoonh   'it (weather) is good (hudi gender)'

These classes are more like noun classes and gender.  But it is not as
thorough as Bantu in that the agreement is only between the noun and the
verb.  But a noun does not cut across the "classes" here like in the
case
with classificatory verbs shown earlier.



In JSL (= NS), some nouns are assigned only one classifier (e.g. train,
airplane, etc.)  But other nouns can be assigned several classifiers.
E.g.
water can be in a cup, a bowl, etc.  Sugar perhaps can take different
classifiers, but it is probably often assigned the generic
open-B-handshape
classifier.  A woman can take a singular female person classifier (the
pinky
finger sticking up), a singular generic person classifier (the index
finger
sticking up or down), and even a singular male person classifier when
the
context allows and/or requires (!!! the thumb sticking up).  Do we still
have to say that a woman can belong to three (or four) "classes"?

Nobukatsu "Nobu" Minoura

--
Nobukatsu Minoura
Tokyo University of Foreign Studies
Asahicho 3-11-1
Fuchu, Tokyo 183-8534, Japan
Phone: +81-42-330-5370
Fax: +81-42-330-5408
mailto:minoura at fs.tufs.ac.jp, mailto:nobum at gol.com