[YG Conlang Archives] > [romconlang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Bon die Il es sexiste de derivar le nomes feminines de nomes masculine como per exemple in esperanto "edzino" de "edzo", como si il es normale de ser masculine e secondari de ser feminine. Le objectos non sexuate al contrario son ni feminine ni masculine. Per exemple un "tren" non dona un "trena" e un "treno" porque un tren es sempre neutre Il es inconsequente de pretender que le genere d'un ser sexuate es sempre indiferente! Un empleator pote recercar in un anunce un obrer (masculine o feminine, sin importantia) o plus precisemente un obrera (feminine) pro un labor delicate o ancora un obrero (masculine) pro un labor de fortia. Il pote ser utile a la politia de descovrir que un asasin recercate es un asasina e non un asasino. Il es utile a un director de zoo de precisar que il recerca un elefanta preferabilemente a un elefanto pro reproduction con un elefanto ja posedate e non un elefant sin precision. Cordialmente, Jacques --- In romconlang@yahoogroups.com, Padraic Brown <elemtilas@...> wrote: > > --- Jacques Dehée <jacquesdehe@...> wrote: > > > Le sistema " linguist - linguista - linguisto " > > es aplicabile > > a tote le caracteristicas humane, a tote le > > relationes parentale, > > a tote le profesiones, a tote le nationalitas, > > a tote le nomes > > de habitantes d'urbes e vilages, a tote le > > species animale sexuate, > > dunque a centos de miles de nomes. > > What are the different terminations supposed to > mean? > > In a Romance language context, obviously -a is > the feminine singular and -o is the masculine > singular. What does the null termination > reperesent? > > > Sur iste sistema egalitare reposa le futuro del > > linguas planificate. > > A pretty bold statement -- one quite suited to a > mere auxlang polemic. The blanket statement > misses the point entirely: a system that is based > on the Romance languages' notion of division of > gender and with all of the cultural and societal > baggage that goes with is inherently > _non_egalitarian. An egalitarian system either > does away with all notions of gender altogether, > so that everyone is neutered in equal measures, > or else it completely reinvents gender issues in > a cumbersome and unnatural way so that no one is > able to connect the new system with the old. > > And the whole system above begs the question once > again: why is it so important to distinguish > genders? What's the underlying need to > differentiate, *especially* in a "planned > interlanguage", between say, "la porta" and "le > edificio"? Especially given the context of the > stem system in the Romance languages as inherited > from the parent and grandparent languages (where > they were actually still sort of meaningful). > > > Cordialmente, Jacques > > Cheers, > Padraic > > > Camifi, Marusi, teterani, tester fuferios asteros; tamenio > vem Persaecion empuriase ed ec pasem emduriase! > --Pomperios Perfurios. > > -- > > Ill Bethisad -- > <http://www.bethisad.com> > > > Come visit The World! -- > <http://www.geocities.com/hawessos/> > > > > > > > > . >