tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2629301231907528990.post1272894005126398647..comments2024-03-26T18:01:57.609+00:00Comments on Inky Fool: A Chubbingly BulchinM.H. Forsythhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01464964455944509750noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2629301231907528990.post-57477432964592479252012-02-06T18:30:23.208+00:002012-02-06T18:30:23.208+00:00It must be because we are superior and therefore d...It must be because we are superior and therefore do not need, nor desire, such a false division of pronoun...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2629301231907528990.post-20026414725028448052012-02-03T15:03:54.784+00:002012-02-03T15:03:54.784+00:00I have a question. If you look at any of the roman...I have a question. If you look at any of the romance languages, one thing that immediately springs out is the fact that objects have gender. So my question is this - Why does English lack the gender associated with objects the same way many romance languages do? From what I understand, German also uses the gender pronouns for what would otherwise be gender-less objects.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com