Cover not available
Article published In:
International Journal of Language and Culture
Vol. 3:1 (2016) ► pp.68–89

Gender, shape, and sociality

How humans are special in Manambu

Many languages of the world have genders, that is, grammatical agreement classes, based on such core semantic properties as animacy, sex and humanness, and also shape. In Manambu, a language of New Guinea, nouns are assigned genders according to the sex of a human referent, and to shape and size of any other referent. Men are assigned to the masculine, and women to the feminine gender. A long tube and a large house are masculine, and a round plate and a small house are feminine. Switching gender for humans has pejorative overtones: an unusually boisterous or bossy woman can be treated as masculine, and a squat fattish man who does not display fully masculine behaviour as feminine. Classifying humans by their shape and size implies downgrading them to the level of inanimates. Gender switch also reflects social stereotypes. Feminine gender is functionally unmarked for non-humans, but not for humans. The noun du, “man” can be used as a generic term for “human being.” Linguistic Gender of humans in Manambu unequivocally reflects Social Gender relations.

Keywords: Linguistic Gender, Papuan languages, Manambu, Social Gender, markedness
Published online: 5 August 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ijolc.3.1.04aik
References (39)
Aikhenvald, A.Y
(2000) Classifiers: A typology of noun categorization devices. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2004) Gender. Article 98. In G.E. Booij, C. Lehmann, J. Mugdan, & S. Skopeteas (Eds.), Morfologie/Morphology. Ein Handbuch zur Flexion und Wortbildung/A handbook on inflection and word formation, 2 Halbband (pp. 1031–1045). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
(2008) The Manambu language of East Sepik, Papua New Guinea. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2012) Round women and long men: Shape and size in gender choice in Papua New Guinea and beyond. Anthropological Linguistics, 54(1), 33–86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013) The language of value and the value of language. Hau: A Journal of Ethnographic Theory, 3(2), 55–73. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014) Double talk: Parallel structures in Manambu songs. Language and Linguistics in Melanesia, 32(2), 86–109.Google Scholar
(2015a) Classifiers: A bibliography. Oxford Bibliography Online. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2015b) Body, mind and spirit: Body parts in Manambu and their meanings. Studies in Language, 391, 85–117. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016) How gender shapes the world. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aikhenvald, A.Y., & Green, D
(1998) Palikur and the typology of classifiers. Anthropological Linguistics, 401, 429–480.Google Scholar
Alpher, B
(1987) Feminine as the unmarked gender: Buffalo girls are no fools. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 71, 169–187. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alvanoudi, Angeliki
2015 Grammatical gender in interaction: Cultural and cognitive aspects. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baron, D
(1986) Language and gender. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Beauvoir, S. de
(1949) Le deuxième sexe. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Braun, F
(1997) Making men out of people: The MAN principle in translating genderless forms. In H. Kotthof & R. Wodak (Eds.), Communicating gender in context (pp. 3–30). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chafe, W
(2004) Masculine and feminine in the Northern Iroquioan languages. In N.J. Enfield (Ed.), Ethnosyntax. Explorations in grammar and culture (pp. 99–109). Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coates, J
(1993) Women, men and language. London and New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Corbett, G
(1991) Gender. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014) Gender typology. In G. Corbett (Ed.), The expression of gender (pp. 87–130). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Dixon, R.M.W
(1972) The Dyirbal language of North Queensland. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1982) Where have all the adjectives gone? and other essays in semantics and syntax. Berlin: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2004) The Jarawara language of Southern Amazonia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2010) Basic linguistic theory, Vol. 11. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2015) Edible gender, mother-in-law style, and other grammatical wonders: Studies in Dyirbal, Yidiñ, and Warrgamay. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eckert, P., & McConnell-Ginet, S
(2003) Language and gender. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Georg, S
(2007) A descriptive grammar of Ket. Folkestone: Global Oriental Ltd. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harrison, S.J
(1990) Stealing people’s names: History and politics in a Sepik river cosmology. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hellinger, M., & Pauwels, A
(2007) Language and sexism. In M. Hellinger & A. Pauwels (Eds.), Handbook of language and communication: Diversity and change (pp. 651–681). Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Joseph, B.D., & Philippaki-Warburton, I
(1987) Modern Greek. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kilian-Hatz, C
(2008) A grammar of Modern Khwe (Central Khoisan). Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
McConnell-Ginet, S
(1979) Prototypes, pronouns and persons. In M. Mathiot (Ed.), Ethnology: Boas, Sapir and Whorf revisited (pp. 63–83). The Hague: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mills, S
(2008) Language and sexism. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Payne, J.K
(1989) Lecciones para el aprendizaje del idioma Ashéninca. Série Lingüística Peruana No. 28. Yarinacocha: Instituto Lingüístico del Verano.Google Scholar
Rapold, C.J
(2006) Towards a grammar of Benchnon. PhD thesis, University of Leiden.Google Scholar
Romani Miranda, M.M
(2004) Toponimia en el Gran Pajonal con especial atención a los Topónimos de Afiliación Ashaninka. PhD dissertation. Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima.Google Scholar
Roscoe, P.B
(2001) ‘Strength’ and ‘sexuality’: Sexual avoidance and masculinity in New Guinea and Amazonia. In T.A. Gregor & D. Tuzin (Eds.), Gender in Amazonia and Melanesia: An exploration of the comparative method (pp. 279–308). Berkeley: University of California Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sasse, H.-J
(1974) Notes on the structure of Galab. BSOAS, 371, 407–438. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shepard, Jr., G
(1997) Noun classification and ethnozoological classification in Machiguenga, an Arawakan language of the Peruvian Amazon. Journal of Amazonian Languages, 11, 29–57.Google Scholar
Speece, R
n.d.). Angave grammar. Ukarumpa: Summer Institute of Linguistics.
Cited by (2)

Cited by 2 other publications

Alvanoudi, Angeliki
2021. Aspects of the meaning of gender. International Journal of Language and Culture ► pp. 56 ff. DOI logo
Her, One-Soon & Marc Tang
2020. A Statistical Explanation of the Distribution of Sortal Classifiers in Languages of the World via Computational Classifiers. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics 27:2 ► pp. 93 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.