_Male._ _Female._ | _Male._ _Female._ | Actor Actress. | Lion Lioness.
Arbiter Arbitress. | Peer Peeress.
Baron Baroness. | Poet Poetess.
Benefactor Benefactress. | Sorcerer Sorceress.
Count Countess. | Songster Songstress.
Duke d.u.c.h.ess. | Tiger Tigress.
This, however, in strict grammatical language, is an approach to gender rather than gender itself. Its difference from true grammatical gender is as follows:--
Let the Latin words _genitor_ and _genitrix_ be declined:--
_Sing. Nom._ Genitor Genitrix.
_Gen._ Genitor-_is_ Genitric-_is_.
_Dat._ Genitor-_i_ Genitric-_i_.
_Acc._ Genitor-_em_ Genitric-_em_.
_Voc._ Genitor Genitrix.
_Plur. Nom._ Genitor-_es_ Genitric-_es_.
_Gen._ Genitor-_um_ Genitric-_um_.
_Dat._ Genitor-_ibus_ Genitric-_ibus_.
_Acc._ Genitor-_es_ Genitric-_es_.
_Voc._ Genitor-_es_ Genitric-_es_.
The syllables in italics are the signs of the cases and numbers. Now these signs are the same in each word, the difference of meaning (or s.e.x) not affecting them.
-- 274. Contrast, however, with the words _genitor_ and _genitrix_ the words _domina_=_a mistress_, and _dominus_=_a master_.
_Sing. Nom._ Domin-_a_ Domin-_us_.
_Gen._ Domin-_ae_ Domin-_i_.
_Dat._ Domin-_ae_ Domin-_o_.
_Acc._ Domin-_am_ Domin-_um_.
_Voc._ Domin-_a_ Domin-e.
_Plur. Nom._ Domin-_ae_ Domin-_i_.
_Gen._ Domin-_arum_ Domin-_orum_.
_Dat._ Domin-_abus_ Domin-_is_.
_Acc._ Domin-_as_ Domin-_os_.
_Voc._ Domin-_ae_ Domin-_i_.
{219}
Here the letters in italics, or the signs of the cases and numbers, are different, the difference being brought about by the difference of gender.
Now it is very evident that, if _genitrix_ be a specimen of gender, _domina_ is something more.
As terms, to be useful, must be limited, it may be laid down, as a sort of definition, that _there is no gender where there is no affection of the declension_: consequently, that, although we have, in English, words corresponding to _genitrix_ and _genitor_, we have no true genders until we find words corresponding to _dominus_ and _domina_.
-- 275. The second element in the notion of gender, although I will not venture to call it an essential one, is the following:--In the words _domina_ and _dominus_, _mistress_ and _master_, there is a _natural_ distinction of s.e.x; the one being masculine, or male, the other feminine, or female. In the words _sword_ and _lance_ there is _no natural_ distinction of s.e.x. Notwithstanding this, the word _hasta_, in Latin, is as much a feminine gender as _domina_, whilst _gladius_=_a sword_ is, like _dominus_, a masculine noun. From this we see that, in languages wherein there are true genders, a fict.i.tious or conventional s.e.x is attributed even to inanimate objects. s.e.x is a natural distinction, gender a grammatical one.
-- 276. "Although we have, in English, words corresponding to _genitrix_ and _genitor_, we have no true genders until we find _words corresponding to dominus and domina_."--The sentence was intentionally worded with caution.
Words like _dominus_ and _domina_, that is, words where the declension is affected by the s.e.x, _are_ to be found.
The p.r.o.noun _him_, from the Anglo-Saxon and English _he_, as compared with the p.r.o.noun _her_, from the Anglo-Saxon _he_, is affected in its declension by the difference of s.e.x, and is a true, though fragmentary, specimen of gender: for be it observed, that as both words are in the same case and number, the difference in form must be referred to a difference of s.e.x expressed by gender. The same is the case with the form _his_ as compared with _her_.
The p.r.o.noun _it_ (originally _hit_), as compared with _he_, is a specimen of gender. {220}
The relative _what_, as compared with the masculine _who_, is a specimen of gender.
The forms _it_ (for _hit_) and _he_ are as much genders as _hic_ and _haec_, and the forms _hic_ and _haec_ are as much genders as _dominus_ and _domina_.
-- 277. The formation of the neuter gender by the addition of _-t_, in words like _wha-t_, _i-t_, and _tha-t_, occurs in other Indo-European languages.
The _-t_ in _tha-t_ is the _-d_ in _istu-d_, Latin, and the _-t_ in _ta-t_, Sanskrit. Except, however, in the Gothic tongues, the inflection _-t_ is confined to the _p.r.o.nouns_. In the Gothic this is not the case. Throughout all those languages where there is a neuter form for _adjectives_ at all, that form is either _-t_, or a sound derived from it:--Moeso-Gothic, _blind-ata_; Old High German, _plint-ez_; Icelandic, _blind-t_; German, _blind-es_=_blind_, _caec-um_.--See Bopp"s Comparative Grammar, Eastwick and Wilson"s translation, p. 171.
_Which_, as seen below, is _not_ the neuter of _who_.
-- 278. Just as there are in English fragments of a gender modifying the declension, so are there, also, fragments of the second element of gender; _viz._, the attribution of s.e.x to objects naturally dest.i.tute of it. _The sun in _his_ glory_, _the moon in _her_ wane_, are examples of this. A sailor calls his ship _she_. A husbandman, according to Mr. Cobbett, does the same with his _plough_ and working implements:--"In speaking of a _ship_ we say _she_ and _her_. And you know that our country-folks in Hampshire call almost everything _he_ or _she_. It is curious to observe that country labourers give the feminine appellation to those things only which are more closely identified with themselves, and by the qualities or conditions of which their own efforts, and their character as workmen, are affected. The mower calls his _scythe_ a _she_, the ploughman calls his _plough_ a _she_; but a p.r.o.ng, or a shovel, or a harrow, which pa.s.ses promiscuously from hand to hand, and which is appropriated to no particular labourer, is called a _he_."--_English Grammar_, Letter V.
Now, although Mr. Cobbett"s statements may account for a sailor calling his ship _she_, they will not account for the custom of giving to the sun a masculine, and to the moon a {221} feminine, p.r.o.noun, as is done in the expressions quoted at the head of this section; still less will it account for the circ.u.mstance of the Germans reversing the gender, and making the _sun_ feminine, and the _moon_ masculine.
Let there be a period in the history of a nation wherein the sun and moon are dealt with, not as inanimate ma.s.ses of matter, but as animated divinities. Let there, in other words, be a period in the history of a nation wherein dead things are personified, and wherein there is a mythology. Let an object like the _sun_ be deemed a male, and an object like the _moon_ a female, deity.
The Germans say the _sun in _her_ glory_; the _moon in _his_ wane_. This difference between the usage of the two languages, like so many others, is explained by the influence of the cla.s.sical languages upon the English.--"_Mundilfori had two children; a son, Mani (Moon), and a daughter, Sol (Sun)._"--Such is an extract (taken second-hand from Grimm, vol. iii. p. 349) out of an Icelandic mythological work, _viz._, the prose Edda. In the cla.s.sical languages, however, _Phoebus_ and _Sol_ are masculine, and _Luna_ and _Diana_ feminine. Hence it is that, although in Anglo-Saxon and Old-Saxon the _sun_ is _feminine_, it is in English masculine.
_Philosophy_, _charity_, &c., or the names of abstract qualities personified, take a conventional s.e.x, and are feminine from their being feminine in Latin.
As in these words there is no change of form, the consideration of them is a point of rhetoric, rather than of etymology.
Upon phrases like _c.o.c.k Robin_, _Robin Redbreast_, _Jenny Wren_, expressive of s.e.x, much information may be collected from Grimm"s Deutsche Grammatik, vol. iii. p. 359.
-- 279. The remainder of this chapter is devoted to miscellaneous remarks upon the true and apparent genders of the English language.
1. With the false genders like _baron_, _baroness_, it is a general rule that the feminine form is derived from the masculine, and not the masculine from the feminine; as _peer_, _peeress_. The words _widower_, _gander_, and _drake_ are exceptions. For {222} the word _wizard_, from _witch_, see the section on augmentative forms.
2. The termination _-ess_, in which so large a portion of our feminine substantives terminate, is not of Saxon but of cla.s.sical origin, being derived from the termination _-ix_, _genitrix_.
3. The words _shepherdess_, _huntress_, and _hostess_ are faulty; the radical part of the word being Germanic, and the secondary part cla.s.sical: indeed, in strict English grammar, the termination _-ess_ has no place at all. It is a cla.s.sic, not a Gothic, element.
4. The termination _-inn_, so current in German, as the equivalent to _-ess_, and as a feminine affix (_freund_=_a friend_; _freundinn_=_a female friend_), is found only in one or two words in English.
There were five _carlins_ in the south That fell upon a scheme, To send a lad to London town To bring them tidings hame.
BURNS.
_Carlin_ means an _old woman_: Icelandic, _kerling_; Sw., _karing_; Dan.
_kaelling_. Root, _carl_.
_Vixen_ is a true feminine derivative from _fox_. German, _fuchsinn_.
_Bruin_=_the bear_, may be either a female form, as in Old High German _pero_=_a he-bear_, _pirinn_=_a she-bear_, or it may be the Norse form _bjorn_=_a bear_, male or female.
Words like _margravine_ and _landgravine_ prove nothing, being scarcely naturalised.