> That seems sufficient to me.
I use standard (scientific) logic and it does not in it. Necessary and sufficient/if and only if (iff) means binary equivalence (in strict terms). For example, a human is a male iff it has a penis. It means that if a human is a male it has a penis; and if a human has penis it is a male. An alternative definition might be “a human is a male iff it has the Y chromosome”. If this definitions mean the same than you may combine them as you wish for your purposes. Forbes has provided only if part of the statement because I have proven the reverse statement does not work (the terms are not equivalent). If they were it would be very convenient for the discussion and would solve a lot of problems. That is why people prefer the most strict definitions they can invent. Though iff-definitions are probably not always possible.
> As far as I can tell, that example is completely irrelevant: English does not have gender.
To claim this one needs:
1. A strict definition of what the grammatical gender is and everyone agrees with it.
2. A formal proof of the statement.
On the definition of the grammatical gender. Personally I believe the state of the art as following:
1. There is a simple strict definition I do not know.
2. There is an extremely overcomplicated definition like the formal grammatical case definition. I have already mentioned somewhere in this forum that such a definition of the grammatical case was firstly provided in a talk or two famous mathematicians and it required a very solid understanding of the algebraic group theory.
3. There is a definition that has not been found yet.
4. There is no a suitable unambiguous definition.
And for a formal proof of the statement it is sometimes much simpler to provide a counterexample that demonstrates the statement is not true. I believe I have done it with my counterexamples for a definition of the grammatical gender close to what Forbes has provided. These examples may be irrelevant if you do not agree with the definition (but I believe you should provide yours one in this very case). Personally I also believe that the grammatical gender is a kind of a feature that makes nearby words to change their form. But I do understand that such a definition is not enough, ambiguous, vague and so on. I do not know a better one.
> Generally any non-human "people" (especially characters in fiction) are referred
> to as "he" or "she" based on their assumed gender roles.
Thank you. It looks like the behavior is absolutely identical to the languages that no doubt have the grammatical gender. Personally I was not sure about this very case and “he is such a bitch” statement correctness in English.
>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_the_Tank_EngineUnbelievable. I have never heard about it but now I can guess that the Russian “The Little Steam-Engine from Romashkovo” is probably inspired by your Thomas.
> Generally "he", because of his voice and name.
Russian The Steam-Engine’s name is The Little Steam-Engine so he is male. Though his voice is the voice of an actress but it was made to make him sound as a teenager I believe.
The owl from the Winnie-the-pooh is female in Russian. It is female in the official translation, the cartoon and the most of the piratical translations. I do not know why it was not translated as the eagle owl (the most appropriate male word and it preserves all the characteristics and nuances of the personage) or the horned owl (a more morose male equivalent but still appropriate). Probably it was due to the first historical translation.
By the way, if I were a native English speaker Winnie would sound a little bit female for me. Though it is pretty male in Russian.
> I'm not really following the significance of this discussion at this point.
We have started to discuss the grammatical gender itself. The original poster just wanted to get a list of scientific literature on it. I believe he failed.
And your statements on the grammatical gender in English make feel it is not a science but a kind of a religion so far. But personally I find the discussion very useful because I have found that if a Russian boat floats in a river (female) then the boat floats in her; if the boat floats in a gulf (male) then the boat floats in him; if the boat floats in a lake (neutral) then the boat floats in him (I find it interesting); but if it floats in something neutral and vague (like in your dream) then the boat floats in it (very interesting). So, I will probably investigate the case (I mean I will address the professionals and see if they will be able to provide a satisfactory explanation for me).