In article <woKgj.17049$DR7.12462@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
"N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" <dlzc1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
<snip>
>
> The references I glanced at had the male-female dichotomy
> extending back to a couple of thousand years BC. Would that be
> Hindi then?
I don't think Hindi is anywhere near that old, but they could have been
referring to one of its ancestors, perhaps Sanskrit. Then again, it
might be a completely unrelated Dravidian or Sino-Tibetan language.
According to Wikipedia at <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindi>,
"In Hindi, there are only two genders for nouns. All male human beings
and male animals (or those animals and plants which are perceived to be
"masculine") are masculine. All female human beings and female animals
(or those animals and plants which are perceived to be "feminine") are
feminine. Things, inanimate articles and abstract nouns are also either
masculine or feminine according to convention, [...]"
Nothing there about an unmodified _vs_ modified distinction manifesting
in gender, but of course it's only a concise introduction.
--
Odysseus
|
