In related news, I've been thinking how pronouns reflect the basic assumptions of a society. I don't know about every language, but most human languages have, I believe, three genders of pronouns (masculine, feminine, neuter), and at least in English the assumption that m/f means animate/personified and neuter means inanimate/objectified. This has been coming up because, among other reasons, I've gotten into several conversations with/about transgendered [which isn't in OS X's dictionary, unless I spelled it wrong] people and pronouns. Ben Lu was talking about how it's hard to remember to use a pronoun for someone when you met them when a different pronoun applied. I got to wondering how a language would be different if it evolved in a society with more than two biological genders, or if gender change was common when it evolved, or if sentient neuter people were common, or... I don't know... gendered eggplants, or something. Holly has gender, and some other plants, but most don't have a biological gender. Anyways, it's interesting. I'm not going to try to model it using game theory (or 6.001, for that matter), but it's still something. Call it random thought of the week. Now to put away leftovers before they turn into wombats.
1. The Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs = Programming 101
2. mka working (for money/jobness), because we're stereotypical like that
3. like for these footnotes