In English the ship is she. In Russian the ship is he. The fisherman in "The old man and the sea" by Ernest Hemingway calls the fish he in russian the fish is she. What the THE is this?
Why
A ship isn't feminine in English its neutral.
And you might not fully understand yet, but ENGLISH isn't RUSSIAN!
And you might not fully understand yet, but ENGLISH isn't RUSSIAN!
*Some* English-speakers call ships 'she' (I don't)
It's just a convention. You could equally say 'it' as I do.
It's just a convention. You could equally say 'it' as I do.
Ship IS feminine in English.
But it's also neuter.
English has a very strange gender system.
But it's also neuter.
English has a very strange gender system.
Adam, English does *not* have grammatical gender, and what is indicated in personal pronouns does not necessarily correspond with any underlying grammatical gender system, if there is one in the first place. Actually, it is quite commonplace for distinctions to be present in the personal pronoun system of a language which do not otherwise exist in the overall grammar of a given language, and English is one of the languages for which such is the case. Furthermore, under normal circumstances, the third person singular in English corresponds to natural gender, not any supposed grammatical gender, and any uses of "she" for inanimate objects are a matter of convention rather than some sort of grammatical gender, as such is not grammaticalized at all and is purely optional in nature.
Real Deal:
We've been all through this.
There's a thread here on English and gender, check it out.
And the correct term for the gender is "neuter."
While "ship" is generally neuter in English, it is by no means unusual for a ship to be referred to as "she."
We've been all through this.
There's a thread here on English and gender, check it out.
And the correct term for the gender is "neuter."
While "ship" is generally neuter in English, it is by no means unusual for a ship to be referred to as "she."
The use of "she" for a ship, a car or a favourite motorbike may indeed be poetical but it is no less grammatical for that.
JJM, I *know* there is another thread about such on here, but I was responding to Adam in this thread (and NOT to you), with respect to his speaking about such in English as if it were an established fact, which it most definitely isn't, contrary to what you might like to believe. English does not have grammatical gender, period, and yes, it does have distinctions in its personal pronouns with respect to (mostly) natural gender, but personal pronoun systems having distinctions that do not normally exist in the overall grammar of a given language, such as gender, whether grammatical or natural, is not unusual at all.
"English does not have grammatical gender, period"
It must be pretty awesome being right all the time. How do you cope?
"Furthermore, under normal circumstances, the third person singular in English corresponds to natural gender, not any supposed grammatical gender"
How do you explain the use of "it" as the personal pronoun substitute for both "cat" (animate) and "table" (inanimate)? How is this "natural gender"?
It must be pretty awesome being right all the time. How do you cope?
"Furthermore, under normal circumstances, the third person singular in English corresponds to natural gender, not any supposed grammatical gender"
How do you explain the use of "it" as the personal pronoun substitute for both "cat" (animate) and "table" (inanimate)? How is this "natural gender"?
I may be wrong, but referring to a ship or a country (such as England) is not a grammatical but a cultural thing, mostly meant to be affectionate. And I agree it is mainly poetical or rhetorical, and is used if a given emotional response is to be elicited (England seems to have invariably been referred to as "she" in time of war). You may as well use "it" for a ship or a country in common speech, which is the "grammatical" way.
I may be wrong, but referring to a ship or a country (such as England) is not a grammatical but a cultural thing, mostly meant to be affectionate. And I agree it is mainly poetical or rhetorical, and is used if a given emotional response is to be elicited (England seems to have invariably been referred to as "she" in time of war). You may as well use "it" for a ship or a country in common speech, which is the "grammatical" way.
"I may be wrong, but referring to a ship or a country (such as England) is not a grammatical but a cultural thing, mostly meant to be affectionate."
However, you are missing the point.
If "she" is used for "ship" (as it is by every navy man, merchant seaman or weekend sailor I've ever known), even as a term of "affection," it is still no less grammatical for that.
However, you are missing the point.
If "she" is used for "ship" (as it is by every navy man, merchant seaman or weekend sailor I've ever known), even as a term of "affection," it is still no less grammatical for that.