Re: [tied] Re: Dissimilation of gW/kWVw to gVw/kVw

On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 13:58:43 +0000, pielewe
<wrvermeer@...> wrote:

>Unless I am grievously mistaken the correlation holds only in the
>plural ("mensen" vs. "mensjes")

Not for me. I tried to Google for examples, but "mensje"
turns up mostly stuff about the writer Mensje van Keulen[*].
"Een mensje" mostly stuff about babies, but one example of
the usage I mean. The following poem (albeit by a Fleming):

>Een mensje is gevallen op de straat
>
>Een mensje is gevallen op de straat
>Een levend hoopje smart
>Eens kijken of er iemand helpen gaat
>De straat een leeg en roerloos part

[etc.]

When I read that, I'm almost 100% positive that it's about
an old lady.

That is only confirmed in the 5th. stanza:

>En ach mijn woorden zijn geen steun voor haar
>Zij brengt een dove hand naar het gehoor
>Onze armen schuiven de een in de ander door
>En wij voltrekken 't minder-meer gebaar

====

>, and even then not very strongly
>because one could easily use "mensjes" sex-indifferently to refer to
>a diminutive variety of humans. In my language the singular "mens"
>means either 'human being' (common gender) or 'woman' (neuter).

Right.

>The
>former meaning strikes me as bookish if provided with the definite
>article ("de mens"), but if provided with an indefinite article ("een
>mens") it's quite OK.

It's also OK in the plural ((de) mensen).

>The latter meaning is perceived only if some
>overt sign of the neuter gender is present somewhere, so the
>collocation "een mens" cannot easily mean 'a woman', but "een aardig
>mens" (where the absence of an ending in "aardig" signals the neuter
>gender) always means 'a nice/kind/friendly woman' and cannot even
>begin to mean *'a nice/kind/friendly person or human being'. The
>meaning 'woman' may strike one as strange at first sight in
>connection with the fact that the word has neuter gender, but the
>word tends to underplay or even deny the sexual or reproductive
>aspects of women, so the neuter gender does not jar the way it tends
>to do in the case of other neuter words referring to women
>("meisje", "wijf", "model", etc.). "Dat mens" [neuter] is a very
>unkind way of referring to a woman; on the other hand I can't think
>of a context in which "die mens" [common] would be appropriate
>(perhaps *'that species of hominid'(??)).
>
>
>[Much of this appears to be present in part or in whole in Danish and
>Swedish.]
>
>These facts come in useful if one needs to counter two idées reçues
>that are widespread among speakers of Dutch:
>
>
>(1) It is fairly easy to learn to speak a foreign language perfectly.
>
>
>(2) Dutch is simple.
>
>
>Nevertheless the diminutive suffix does impart a feminine element in
>some cases, as in "collega" 'colleague/co-worker of either sex'
>vs. "collega'tje" 'colleague/co-worker of the feminine sex'. It is
>not considered good form to use the latter word.

Mainly if you're a man (and there are women present). I've
heard women refer to collega'tjes without any reservations.

"Blondje" invariably refers to woman, and there is simply no
other way to say it.

[*] She's a female writer, bien sûr. Names are another area
where the diminutive suffix is used to mark female gender.
Guus is a boy, Guusje a girl.

=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...