Is gender-based language needed?

[FlagOnce]

One thing important is as well to know the differences with languages and if they are worth or just make it more complicated. After all, a good language is a language having more of the easiest principles to follow and meanwhile stay nice to hear, write, and so on. And that's what happens there: is getting gender-based sentences important?

I mean, does it gives much information to have information about the gender? In English, for example, do you often miss the gender information? Do you find it missing and you would need it to understand better the sentence? Myself, I'm not often in situation where I hardly need that, because only one question helps to understand the sentence after all, while it removes all the hassle.

[Trellum]

I got used to it in English,  but it was weird at first the the adjectives didn't have an ending based on the gender of the thing being described. I kinda liked that actually. Now with Dutch I've noticed they often use  ''hij'' to refer to something like a car, when in English we often use ''she'' for example to refer to a car or any other inanimate object''   It's odd.  You get used to this kind of things eventually

[C_Decora]

I'm not sure we are all "on the same page" in terms of what we're referring to.

I agree a point of interest when comparing different language is the emphasis they put on gender. For example, Spanish has specific endings when the subject is male and female. English is quite simple in just using pronouns. And then, some languages, like Chinese, it's rather ambiguous, especially when spoken.

I think having a language structure that allows for more information is not a bad thing, it might be more confusing for learners but overcoming this difficulty, I think, they will appreciate it more.

And in reply to the "one question," certainly you can simply ask to clarify anything. But if the information was there to begin with, it expedites the exchange.

[FlagOnce]

I got used to it in English,  but it was weird at first the the adjectives didn't have an ending based on the gender of the thing being described. I kinda liked that actually. Now with Dutch I've noticed they often use  ''hij'' to refer to something like a car, when in English we often use ''she'' for example to refer to a car or any other inanimate object''   It's odd.  You get used to this kind of things eventually

Honestly, I don't usually saw anytime in English, or rather heard, "she" for talking about cars. I heard about "it", a lot of "it", but "she", maybe for tuning (too much) enthusiasts, but no more. That's why I'm surprised to hear that: can you explain a bit more where you heard that, in what context?

I'm not sure we are all "on the same page" in terms of what we're referring to.

I agree a point of interest when comparing different language is the emphasis they put on gender. For example, Spanish has specific endings when the subject is male and female. English is quite simple in just using pronouns. And then, some languages, like Chinese, it's rather ambiguous, especially when spoken.

I think having a language structure that allows for more information is not a bad thing, it might be more confusing for learners but overcoming this difficulty, I think, they will appreciate it more.

And in reply to the "one question," certainly you can simply ask to clarify anything. But if the information was there to begin with, it expedites the exchange.

The thing is, this "one question" fallback is, a fallback. Meaning that it is not the first solution you should use, but it is the solution you would use if you need clarifications. Often, the context gives enough information about the gender of the person (the name may gives that information, or when the person will use he/she, and you catch it). That's why I find it questionable, because my philosophy is more and more what's useless should be thrown away.

[lushlala]

To be fair, in English this is very rare. -especially compared to Latin languages, where it's entrenched within the languages, every single noun is a she or he. For me as an English speaker, this does pose a challenge in my learning process, because whether I like it or not,  I do have to master the 'art' of distinguishing which is which. But what can you do? If you're really passionate about the language, you'll learn it as is because whatever we feel about it, it's not likely to change any time soon!

[Wanda Kaishin]

@FlagOnce - It puzzles me why a French native speaker would start a thread about the difficulties of gender in English; French is much more anal about it than English. That would be like me starting a thread to discuss the difficulties of Spanish orthography

Back on topic - Mandarin native speakers really struggle with he/she/it when they speak English. That's because the words for them in Mandarin all have the same pronunciation:

he = 他 = ta1

she = 她 = ta1

it (animate) = 牠 = ta1

it (inanimate) = 它 = ta1

[FlagOnce]

@FlagOnce - It puzzles me why a French native speaker would start a thread about the difficulties of gender in English; French is much more anal about it than English. That would be like me starting a thread to discuss the difficulties of Spanish orthography

Back on topic - Mandarin native speakers really struggle with he/she/it when they speak English. That's because the words for them in Mandarin all have the same pronunciation:

he = 他 = ta1

she = 她 = ta1

it (animate) = 牠 = ta1

it (inanimate) = 它 = ta1

I didn't complain about English gender, I am questioning the purpose of gender in language like French or Spanish or Italian, since in English we have so much less information about gender and meanwhile it may give some information about the gender of who you speak about, often, you end up being in two cases: you would need to know more about the person you talk about, or you would already infer the gender with he/she used in the sentence. That means that anyway, it is unlikely you really need any gender-based language.

However, what I foresee isn't what that applies for everyone and I ask myself if there's a real need for that purpose, or if it's just something cultural but making the matters worst.

To be fair, in English this is very rare. -especially compared to Latin languages, where it's entrenched within the languages, every single noun is a she or he. For me as an English speaker, this does pose a challenge in my learning process, because whether I like it or not,  I do have to master the 'art' of distinguishing which is which. But what can you do? If you're really passionate about the language, you'll learn it as is because whatever we feel about it, it's not likely to change any time soon!

Yes, I agree that sometimes it is hard to see it change in the future, and it is not so likely, but I think that languages should be changed anyway and ways should be found to apply this change. We put too much in the "cultural" meanwhile a language is a way of communicating, and when it doesn't help the learning, a language isn't fulfilling its purpose. That's all.

[111kg]

I'm Romanian. Our language depends a lot of the gender. For instance "el" = him, while "ea" =her. Our neighbors, the Hungarians, don't have this kind of difference therefore whenever they try to speak in our language, they make a lot of innocent mistakes What I am trying to say is that, as long as there are still gender based languages that have active speakers, we have to learn them as they are, whether we like it or not.

[FlagOnce]

I'm Romanian. Our language depends a lot of the gender. For instance "el" = him, while "ea" =her. Our neighbors, the Hungarians, don't have this kind of difference therefore whenever they try to speak in our language, they make a lot of innocent mistakes What I am trying to say is that, as long as there are still gender based languages that have active speakers, we have to learn them as they are, whether we like it or not.

That's right, when you need to learn a gender-based language, you have to learn the gender distinction, that's part of the learning process and I'm not putting that into question. Rather, I put the purpose on question. If something is really useless, it should be looked at and considered as useless and not stay "as it is" because it is "as it is". I mean, languages are living because they're modifying themselves and trying to evolve, doesn't matter the way, and given the era we got with a lot of population wanting to communicate with other parts of the world, the challenge is also to ease the communication and think about what should be better ruled out. Many technologies were put under the carpet because of that "as it is" reason, and few years after some regrets that. I don't want the same to happens on language.

[lushlala]

 

Yes, I agree that sometimes it is hard to see it change in the future, and it is not so likely, but I think that languages should be changed anyway and ways should be found to apply this change. We put too much in the "cultural" meanwhile a language is a way of communicating, and when it doesn't help the learning, a language isn't fulfilling its purpose. That's all.

Language changes and evolves over time,  because it isn't static. It changes to take into account trends and modern times, so that you'll find new words come into the vocabulary, while some die out. It's not something that we 'consciously' change ourselves, it inevitably happens over time.

Somehow, I don't see how we can divorce language from the cultural aspect. I think you'll find a lot of people who are interested in their chosen foreign language, are by the same token equally as interested in the culture of the people who speak that language. Of course, some may not be interested at all, but I'm willing to bet that that number is negligible compared to those who are.

[lingualbabe]

In our language, there really is no distinction in the pronouns for males or females. The pronouns are gender neutral like:

Siya - he or she

Akin - her or his

But in certain speaker labels like Doctor, we add an "a" at the end for a female doctor. So I think it's still imperative to learn the gender language aspect of a language. It can save you some time if you learn the additions that a language adds in certain words, like in our language.

 

 

[lushlala]

I totally agree, languages ought to be learnt as they are, not 'simplified' to make it easier or suitable to foreign people who wish to learn them. Don't let's forget that what may be a difficult aspect of any one language to us as language learners comes naturally to those who speak that language as natives. Even if it were possible to change the languages, whose responsibility would that be and where would we actually draw the line? Could I for instance say I can't cope with the pronunciation of X, Y, Z in my chosen foreign language; shall we revise it and make it so that it's easier for me to wrap my tongue around it? I personally don't feel it's practical or even fair to change the makeup of any one language. As I said before, languages change and evolve over time, and as such in my humble opinion, it's not for us to take it upon ourselves to change them. Just my personal opinion.

[FlagOnce]

Language changes and evolves over time,  because it isn't static. It changes to take into account trends and modern times, so that you'll find new words come into the vocabulary, while some die out. It's not something that we 'consciously' change ourselves, it inevitably happens over time.

Somehow, I don't see how we can divorce language from the cultural aspect. I think you'll find a lot of people who are interested in their chosen foreign language, are by the same token equally as interested in the culture of the people who speak that language. Of course, some may not be interested at all, but I'm willing to bet that that number is negligible compared to those who are.

I totally agree, languages ought to be learnt as they are, not 'simplified' to make it easier or suitable to foreign people who wish to learn them. Don't let's forget that what may be a difficult aspect of any one language to us as language learners comes naturally to those who speak that language as natives. Even if it were possible to change the languages, whose responsibility would that be and where would we actually draw the line? Could I for instance say I can't cope with the pronunciation of X, Y, Z in my chosen foreign language; shall we revise it and make it so that it's easier for me to wrap my tongue around it? I personally don't feel it's practical or even fair to change the makeup of any one language. As I said before, languages change and evolve over time, and as such in my humble opinion, it's not for us to take it upon ourselves to change them. Just my personal opinion.

That's not so true about the cultural side. Take the English language. You may be interested about one culture in particular, like some will look at UK, others at US, yet another at Canada, and some at Australia, New Zealand, or India. After all, all these countries speaks English somehow, because of the colonial history of UK. But I don't see a lot of people knows the US and Australia culture at the same time. So language is relatively tied to the culture, but only in a relative way. It is important to take it into account, but hopefully, US people can speak to UK without much problem.

Now, about "who is the job to change the language?", the job may be a consortium, or I don't know. I am not questioning about "should we learn gender differences", for the time being we have to and I don't suddenly no longer use "il" or "elle" in French, eh. But if we are able to change our languages to add new words, and even use new times and verb modes, we can change it to make it simpler. In French, we used to use "Passé simple", and then we now use everyday "Passé composé". And then? Is that dramatic?

[lushlala]

Hmm! Nah, with all due respect, I still don't see where you are coming from at all. I also get the feeling you're not quite getting what I'm saying. BUT you do know we don't have to agree, right? We're all entitled to our own individual opinions without feeling like as if there's a right a wrong. Also, I'm not trying to convince you to see my way of thinking. I'm merely contributing to the discussion, and don't intend to hash out and re-hash this thing any more than I have.