>From: H�kan Lindgren <h5@...>
>The present discussion about neuter plurals and case endings made me want
>to ask: are the neuter plural and feminine singular nominative endings
>related in any way? When I studied Latin it struck me that they were always
>the same, and now I see that they are considered to have been the same also
>in Proto-IE. According to Babaev's essay Gender category in Indo-European
>some feminine singular words in -a were originally neuter collective
>plurals, like aqua "waters". Perhaps there is an interesting story waiting
>to be told here.....
I've been struck by this myself. And Piotr and I have been discussing these
matters as well. His earlier post and my reply answer your question, but I
think I'll add something else: My opinion on how exactly did the
three-gender system arise...
I sense that the neuter plural (or more precisely collective) equalling the
feminine singular comes from a notion that the neuter plural is "the mother"
of neuter singular. My theory on gender is that feminines are producers,
masculines are initiators, and neuters are results. In nature: egg, seed,
offspring. I'm not sure this is true for Afro-Asiatic, but very often
Semitic singular nouns literally change gender from feminine to masculine
and vice versa when they become plural, so the "collective" notion may apply
here as well. (You also have singulars with a vowel suffix that lose the
suffix in the plural: Arabic _g^inni_ "djinn, genie" > _g^inn_ "djinns".)
Danny Wier ����
Lufkin, Texas USA
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
http://www.hotmail.com