Grammatical gender assignment is arbitrary yet skews feminine for abstractions

Evidence

In equivocation, ambiguity comes from changing meanings of the word; in amphibology, ambiguity comes from the grammatical structure. The double meaning lies not in the word but in the syntax or grammatical construction of a sentence or sentences. — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1207 (#expands, via linked claim)

The linguistic intergroup bias (Maass, Salvi, Arcuri, & Semin, 1989) carries the same message, only more subtly. Outgroup negative behavior merits abstract descriptions (“aggressive”), suggesting stability, whereas the identical ingroup behavior nets only the specifics of the particular instance (“punched somebody”). And positive behavior elicits the converse communication style. — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 313 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

  • XREF: connects to: Word embeddings’ gender skew correlates with real occupational gender ratios; Language encodes bias through abstract versus concrete verb choices — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years…, 313; Common language carries more gender bias than objective metrics show — Brian Christian, The Alignment Problem, 221 (+4 more)

Broader Connections