Re: Indo-European Languages and Gramatical Gender Loss
- From: Richard Herring <junk@[127.0.0.1]>
- Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 14:18:50 +0100
In message <4671316f$0$15302$8404b019@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Trond Engen <trondnet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes
[...]
I've been told (in an other group by a professional translator who had found it a point to be aware of in his work) that the British refer to any dog as "him"
That would be the sub-genus of British who distinguish between "dog" and "bitch"?
and any cat as "her".
Not when she's called "Tom"!
Referring to "the British" as though they behaved the same in this respect is an unjustifiably sweeping over-generalisation.
Personally, I refer to both dogs and cats as "it", unless the actual sex of the animal is both known and relevant, or the owner is in earshot.
--
Richard Herring
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Indo-European Languages and Gramatical Gender Loss
- From: Trond Engen
- Re: Indo-European Languages and Gramatical Gender Loss
- References:
- Indo-European Languages and Gramatical Gender Loss
- From: Suaprazzodi
- Re: Indo-European Languages and Gramatical Gender Loss
- From: VK
- Re: Indo-European Languages and Gramatical Gender Loss
- From: Andrew Woode
- Re: Indo-European Languages and Gramatical Gender Loss
- From: Trond Engen
- Indo-European Languages and Gramatical Gender Loss
- Prev by Date: Re: The secret of the number fourteen
- Next by Date: Re: Indo-European Languages and Gramatical Gender Loss
- Previous by thread: Re: Indo-European Languages and Gramatical Gender Loss
- Next by thread: Re: Indo-European Languages and Gramatical Gender Loss
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|