Documentation

Linglib.Studies.Carstens2026

Carstens 2026: The Grammar of Gender #

[Car26]

Carstens, Vicki. 2026. "The grammar of gender: Insights from Bantu asymmetries of AGR with conjoined subjects." Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 44:20.

Core claims #

  1. nP stacking: Bantu nominals have stacked nP structure where visible gender (class prefix) wraps around a semantic i-gender core. The internal structure is [nP₁ n1 [nP₂ n2+root]]; n2 is always the bearer of the semantic gender.

  2. Three semantic cores in Xhosa: genders A (1/2), D (7/8), E (9/10) have interpretable i[entity] flavors — [human], [inanimate], [animal] respectively. Genders B (3/4) and C (5/6) are uninterpretable.

  3. Resolution via percolation + intersection: Following [AA25], agreement with conjoined singulars works by percolating conjuncts' i-features to &P and intersecting them. u-features are excluded. Non-empty intersection → gender-matching plural agreement; empty intersection → default agreement.

  4. Diagnostic: Gender-matching plural agreement with uniform conjoined singulars succeeds iff the gender is interpretable (has i[entity] flavor).

  5. Shona confirmation: In Shona (8 genders), only 2 are interpretable ([human] 1/2 and [non-human] 7/8). The 6:2 ratio of uninterpretable to interpretable confirms that matching agreement is the exception, not the rule.

Formalization #

Resolution uses resolve — the single compositional endpoint — via statusToBundle which bridges Bantu GenderStatus to AnnotatedFeatures SemanticCore. Study-level theorems verify the mechanism's predictions against [Car26]'s empirical data.

A single interpretable nP layer bearing SemanticCore c.

Equations
Instances For

    An uninterpretable nP layer (no features to percolate).

    Equations
    Instances For

      Stack an outer gender layer on an inner core (outer ++ inner).

      Equations
      Instances For

        Convert GenderStatus to a feature bundle for resolve. Interpretable genders produce a singleton i-feature bundle; uninterpretable genders produce an empty bundle.

        Equations
        Instances For

          The central claim ([Car26]): for ANY Bantu gender, matching agreement with uniform conjoined singulars succeeds iff the gender is interpretable. This holds at the parameter type level, not just for specific Xhosa/Shona inventories.

          The language-specific xhosa_matching_iff_interpretable and shona_matching_iff_interpretable are corollaries of this theorem.

          Matching agreement available (interpretable genders) #

          [1&1] human conjuncts: intersection = [human] → matching cl 2 available. [Car26] Table 13: 100% ba- (matching = default for [human]).

          [7&7] inanimate conjuncts: intersection = [inanimate] → matching cl 8. [Car26] Table 13: 100% zi- for non-human [7&7].

          [9&9] animal conjuncts: intersection = [animal] → matching cl 10. [Car26] Table 13: 50% zi- matching + 40% ba- default for human [9&9]; 100% zi- for non-human [9&9].

          Matching agreement unavailable (uninterpretable genders) #

          [3&3] conjuncts: intersection = ∅ → default agreement only. [Car26] Table 13: 0% matching for human (100% ba-); 2.2% matching for non-human (73.3% zi- default).

          [5&5] conjuncts: intersection = ∅ → default agreement only. [Car26] Table 13: 0% matching; 63.33% ba- for human, 73.33% zi- for non-human.

          The core prediction: matching ↔ interpretability #

          Every Xhosa gender: matching agreement is available iff interpretable.

          Mismatched [human] conjuncts (e.g. [3&5] gangster + policeman): both have [human] core from stacking → intersection = [human]. [Car26] (85)a, (86)a: class 2 ba- agreement.

          Mismatched [inanimate] conjuncts (e.g. [3&5] carrot + egg): both have [inanimate] core from stacking → intersection = [inanimate]. [Car26] (85)b, (86)b: class 8 zi- agreement.

          Human + inanimate (e.g. [9&1a] girl + train): [human] ∩ [inanimate] = ∅ → ineffable. [Car26] (91)–(92): agreement with conjoined humans and inanimates is generally ineffable.

          Default for [animal]: class 8 zi- (class 10 = syncretic with 8 for default purposes; [Car26] §3.4).

          Shona [1&1]: class 2 va- (human matching/default). [Car26] (58): va- for conjoined [1&1] (consistent across speakers).

          Shona [7&7]: class 8 zvi- (non-human matching/default). [Car26] (62): zvi- for non-human [7&7] (consistent across speakers).

          Shona [3&3]: no matching → default only. [Car26] (59): zvi- (class 8 default) for non-human.

          Shona [9&9]: no matching → default only. Unlike Xhosa [9&9], Shona's [animal] core has bleached from 9/10. [Car26] §5.2, (64)b–d: va- for human, zvi- for non-human.

          Shona [14&14]: no matching → default only (abstract nouns). [Car26]: genderG (14/6) is uninterpretable.

          Shona [12&12]: no matching → default only (diminutives). [Car26]: conjoined diminutives take class 8 zvi-.

          Core insight ([Car26] §3.5, §5.2): in Shona, genders in which matching agreement succeeds are outnumbered by those where it fails by 6:2, confirming that matching is the exception.

          Canonical [human] nouns: visible = core (no stacking).

          [Human] nouns in class 3: stacked (visible ≠ core).

          [Human] nouns in class 5: stacked (visible ≠ core).

          Bantu SemanticCore → DM Interpretability bridge. Interpretable genders bear Interpretability.i (natural gender); uninterpretable genders bear Interpretability.u (arbitrary gender). [Car26] directly extends [Kra15]'s i/u distinction.

          Equations
          Instances For

            The bridge preserves the interpretability predicate.

            Bantu SemanticCore → typological SemanticBasis bridge. [Car26]'s cores map to [Kra20]'s core semantic bases. All are isCore = true.

            The [non-human] core (Shona 7/8) maps to .humanness because Shona's system is organized around the human/non-human distinction. Xhosa's finer [animal] and [inanimate] cores map to .animacy.

            Equations
            Instances For

              All Bantu semantic cores map to Kramer's semantic core bases.

              Xhosa gender profile ([Car26] §2.2: semantic cores for some genders, formal (class prefix) assignment for others). Stated in the [Cor91] study's Profile schema; Xhosa is WALS-silent for Chs 30/31/32, so the codings are this file's commitments.

              Equations
              • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
              Instances For

                Shona gender profile (WALS-grounded; cf. Corbett1991.basis_wals_grounded for the sample-side analogues).

                Equations
                • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                Instances For

                  Both profiles satisfy the Semantic Core Generalization ([Kra20] ex. 2/28).

                  Resolution with nP stacking: agreement is determined by the stack's semantic core, not the visible class. Two nouns in different visible classes but the same core gender resolve to that core. [Car26] (85)–(88): mismatched [3&5] humans → ba-, mismatched [3&5] inanimates → zi-.

                  Equations
                  Instances For

                    Criminal (cl3) + policeman (cl5): both [human] core → class 2 ba-. [Car26] (85)a, (86)a.

                    Carrot (cl3) + egg (cl5): both [inanimate] core → class 8 zi-. [Car26] (85)b, (86)b.

                    Medium (cl7, human) + girl (cl9, human): both have [human] core from nP stacking → [human] ∩ [human] = {[human]} → class 2 ba-. Visible genders differ (7 vs 9) but cores agree. [Car26] (87)a, (88)a.

                    Backpack (cl1a, inanimate) + book (cl9, inanimate): both have [inanimate] core → [inanimate] ∩ [inanimate] = {[inanimate]} → class 8 zi-. [Car26] (87)b, (88)b.

                    Swahili's 5 genders also instantiate the Bantu semantic core system. [Car26] §8 discusses Swahili's GAC (General Animate Concords) as evidence for a [+animate] feature.

                    The "deepest derivation" from the paper connects nP stacking to agreement outcome through the full chain:

                    1. **nP stacking**: assign feature bundles from layered nP structure
                    2. **Percolation**: exclude u-features
                    3. **Intersection**: find shared i-features
                    4. **Agreement**: matching (non-empty) or default (empty)
                    
                    Each theorem below traces this chain for a concrete example from
                    [carstens-2026] §5. 
                    

                    Feature bundle: citizen (class 1, canonical human — no stacking). Structure: [n₁/₂ √CITIZEN]. [Car26] (6)a, (72)a.

                    Equations
                    Instances For

                      Feature bundle: gangster (class 3, human core via stacking). Structure: [n₃/₄ [n₁/₂ √GULUKUDU]]. Outer n₃/₄ is u → excluded. Inner n₁/₂ is i[human] → percolates. [Car26] (28)d, (85)a, (86)a; structure type per (72)b.

                      Equations
                      Instances For

                        Feature bundle: policeman (class 5, human core via stacking). Structure: [n₅/₆ [n₁/₂ √POLISA]]. [Car26] (85)a; structure type per (72)c.

                        Equations
                        Instances For

                          Feature bundle: hat (class 3, no stacking — arbitrary inanimate in u-gender). Structure: [n₃/₄ √HAT]. No inner layer. [Car26] (38)a, (77)a.

                          Equations
                          Instances For

                            Feature bundle: carrot (class 3, inanimate core via stacking). Structure: [n₃/₄ [n₇/₈ √CARROT]]. [Car26] (86)b.

                            Equations
                            Instances For

                              Feature bundle: egg (class 5, inanimate core via stacking). Structure: [n₅/₆ [n₇/₈ √EGG]]. [Car26] (86)b.

                              Equations
                              Instances For

                                Feature bundle: elephant (class 9, canonical animal — no stacking). Structure: [n₉/₁₀ √ELEPHANT]. [Car26] (49)b, (73)a.

                                Equations
                                Instances For

                                  End-to-end derivation: citizen.1 & president.1 → matching [human]. [Car26] (6)a: class 2 ba- agreement.

                                  Chain: canonical class 1 → i[human] percolates → {human} ∩ {human} = {human} → matching → class 2 ba-.

                                  End-to-end derivation: gangster.3 & policeman.5 → matching [human]. [Car26] (86)a: class 2 ba- agreement.

                                  Chain: nP stacking gives u-outer + i[human]-inner → u excluded, {human} percolates from each → {human} ∩ {human} = {human} → matching → class 2 ba-.

                                  End-to-end derivation: carrot.3 & egg.5 → matching [inanimate]. [Car26] (86)b: class 8 zi- agreement.

                                  Chain: u-outer + i[inanimate]-inner → {inanimate} ∩ {inanimate} = {inanimate} → matching → class 8 zi-.

                                  End-to-end derivation: hat.3 & gun.3 → default. [Car26] (77)a, (38)a: class 8 zi- (default for non-human).

                                  Chain: u-gender, no stacking → no i-features to percolate → {} ∩ {} = {} → default → class 8 zi-.

                                  End-to-end derivation: elephant.9 & leopard.9 → matching [animal]. [Car26] (49)b, (82)a: class 10 zi- agreement.

                                  Chain: canonical class 9 → i[animal] percolates → {animal} ∩ {animal} = {animal} → matching → class 10 zi-.

                                  End-to-end derivation: human + inanimate → default (generally ineffable). [Car26] (91)–(92): *girl.9 & train.1a → no agreement.

                                  Chain: i[human] vs i[inanimate] → {human} ∩ {inanimate} = {} → default. But no default class satisfies both cores → ineffable.

                                  [Car26] §5.1, (78)–(81): when arbitrary members of interpretable genders stack in non-canonical classes, both the outer (arbitrary) and inner (core) i-features percolate to &P. The intersection then contains multiple features, and two grammars determine which one selects the agreement class.

                                  We use a structured feature type that carries both the class number
                                  (determining agreement morphology) and a core/arbitrary flag
                                  (determining BSM specificity). 
                                  

                                  Feature with core/arbitrary distinction for the two-grammars analysis. [Car26] (71): n₁ = i[entity] i[core]; n₂ = i[entity] (for arbitrary members). Core features are more specific.

                                  • classNum :
                                  • isCore : Bool
                                  Instances For
                                    def Carstens2026.instDecidableEqTwoGrammarFeature.decEq (x✝ x✝¹ : TwoGrammarFeature) :
                                    Decidable (x✝ = x✝¹)
                                    Equations
                                    • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                    Instances For
                                      Equations
                                      • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                      Instances For

                                        BSM specificity: core flavors outrank arbitrary i[entity].

                                        Equations
                                        Instances For

                                          Feature bundle for train.1a: [n₁ₐ(arbitrary) [n₇(core inanimate) √TRAIN]]. Outer: class 1, arbitrary i[entity] from gender A. Inner: class 7, core i[inanimate] from gender D. [Car26] (78)a, (79)a, (80)a.

                                          Equations
                                          • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                          Instances For

                                            Feature bundle for diviner.7: [n₇(arbitrary) [n₁(core human) √DIVINER]]. Outer: class 7, arbitrary i[entity] from gender D. Inner: class 1, core i[human] from gender A. [Car26] (78)b, (79)b, (80)b.

                                            Equations
                                            • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                            Instances For
                                              theorem Carstens2026.train_intersection :
                                              AdamsonAnagnostopoulou2025.resolve trainFeatures trainFeatures = some [{ classNum := 1, isCore := false }, { classNum := 7, isCore := true }]

                                              Intersection for train.1a & machine.1a: both layers survive. [Car26] (79)a: &P {1, {7}} ∩ {1, {7}} = {1, {7}}.

                                              theorem Carstens2026.diviner_intersection :
                                              AdamsonAnagnostopoulou2025.resolve divinerFeatures divinerFeatures = some [{ classNum := 7, isCore := false }, { classNum := 1, isCore := true }]

                                              Intersection for diviner.7 & scholar.7: both layers survive. [Car26] (79)b: &P {7, {1}} ∩ {7, {1}} = {7, {1}}.

                                              theorem Carstens2026.train_highest_wins :
                                              AdamsonAnagnostopoulou2025.selectFeature AdamsonAnagnostopoulou2025.SelectionGrammar.highestWins TwoGrammarFeature.specificity [{ classNum := 1, isCore := false }, { classNum := 7, isCore := true }] = some { classNum := 1, isCore := false }

                                              Highest Wins for train.1a & machine.1a: outermost = class 1 → cl 2 ba-. [Car26] (79)a.

                                              theorem Carstens2026.train_best_semantic_match :
                                              AdamsonAnagnostopoulou2025.selectFeature AdamsonAnagnostopoulou2025.SelectionGrammar.bestSemanticMatch TwoGrammarFeature.specificity [{ classNum := 1, isCore := false }, { classNum := 7, isCore := true }] = some { classNum := 7, isCore := true }

                                              BSM for train.1a & machine.1a: core class 7 (inanimate) → cl 8 zi-. [Car26] (80)a.

                                              theorem Carstens2026.diviner_highest_wins :
                                              AdamsonAnagnostopoulou2025.selectFeature AdamsonAnagnostopoulou2025.SelectionGrammar.highestWins TwoGrammarFeature.specificity [{ classNum := 7, isCore := false }, { classNum := 1, isCore := true }] = some { classNum := 7, isCore := false }

                                              Highest Wins for diviner.7 & scholar.7: outermost = class 7 → cl 8 zi-. [Car26] (79)b.

                                              theorem Carstens2026.diviner_best_semantic_match :
                                              AdamsonAnagnostopoulou2025.selectFeature AdamsonAnagnostopoulou2025.SelectionGrammar.bestSemanticMatch TwoGrammarFeature.specificity [{ classNum := 7, isCore := false }, { classNum := 1, isCore := true }] = some { classNum := 1, isCore := true }

                                              BSM for diviner.7 & scholar.7: core class 1 (human) → cl 2 ba-. [Car26] (80)b: 'The fool and the scholar are studying' with ba- agreement.

                                              The two grammars give DIFFERENT predictions for stacked nPs: for train.1a & machine.1a, HW picks class 1 (ba-) while BSM picks class 7 (zi-). Both are attested by Xhosa speakers. [Car26] (81)a: zi- for [L & M] = BSM; (45)a: ba- for [L & M] = HW.

                                              And they also differ for diviner.7 & scholar.7: HW → class 7 (zi-), BSM → class 1 (ba-).

                                              Coordinate φ-resolution (the &P composition) #

                                              Composes the three φ-dimensions for a conjoined DP, each independently: number by lattice join (Number.resolveIn, [Lin83]/[Har14a]), person by hierarchy (Person.resolve, [noyer-1997]), gender by percolation+intersection (resolve, above). Number and person always succeed; gender can fail (→ default). (Formerly Syntax/Minimalist/Agreement/CoordinateResolution.lean, dissolved to its one consumer; the per-dimension operations are the canonical Features/ ones, called directly.)

                                              Resolved φ-features for a conjoined DP (&P).

                                              • person : Option Person
                                              • number : Option Number
                                              • gender : Option (List G)
                                              Instances For
                                                def Carstens2026.resolveCoordinate {G : Type} [BEq G] (system : List Number) (dp1 dp2 : PhiBundle G) :

                                                Resolve all φ-features for two conjoined DPs, each dimension independently: number by Number.resolveIn (coarsened to system), person by Person.resolve, gender by percolation+intersection (resolve).

                                                Equations
                                                • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                                Instances For

                                                  Bantu coordinate-resolution outcomes #

                                                  The gender dimension, instantiated with `SemanticCore` via `statusToBundle`, gives
                                                  the expected outcomes for conjoined Bantu singular DPs. 
                                                  

                                                  A Bantu singular DP's phi-bundle: 3rd person (all full DPs are 3rd), singular number, gender from the noun's gender status.

                                                  Equations
                                                  • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                                  Instances For

                                                    Conjoined Bantu singulars → plural number (summation). Bantu languages have a {sg, pl} number system.

                                                    Conjoined Bantu singulars → 3rd person (full DPs are always 3rd).

                                                    Gender dimension of composed resolution matches direct resolve.

                                                    End-to-end: conjoined [human] Xhosa singulars via unified resolution. Person: 3rd + 3rd → 3rd. Number: sg + sg → pl. Gender: [human] ∩ [human] = some [human]. All three succeed.

                                                    End-to-end: conjoined uninterpretable Xhosa singulars. Person and number resolve; gender fails → default.

                                                    Shared mechanism #

                                                    [carstens-2026] explicitly adopts [adamson-anagnostopoulou-2025]'s
                                                    percolation-and-intersection mechanism. Both studies use the same
                                                    `resolve` function, instantiated with different
                                                    feature types:
                                                    - A&A: `GenderNode` (privative geometry nodes — CLASS, MASC, FEM, etc.)
                                                    - Carstens: `SemanticCore` (entity flavors — human, animal, inanimate)
                                                    
                                                    The bridge below proves this is not just a narrative claim but a
                                                    structural fact: both resolution functions are projections of the same
                                                    parameterized mechanism. 
                                                    

                                                    Both studies agree on the self-matching property for interpretable features: Bantu interpretable cores self-match via statusToBundle, and A&A singleton i-features self-match — both through resolve.

                                                    MRH failure in Bantu #

                                                    Unlike Greek/Icelandic ([adamson-anagnostopoulou-2025]), Bantu
                                                    does NOT satisfy MRH: uninterpretable genders produce empty
                                                    intersections, requiring default agreement. This is the structural
                                                    reason why default agreement is needed in Bantu but not in Greek. 
                                                    

                                                    Three or more conjuncts #

                                                    `resolveN` extends the mechanism to n-ary coordination.
                                                    Bantu predictions generalize cleanly: matching agreement requires
                                                    ALL conjuncts to share the same interpretable core. 
                                                    

                                                    Bridge to [TTML18]: shared classifier N ↔ matching agreement #

                                                    [TTML18] §2 reads the same conjoined-singular agreement data structurally: matching plural agreement succeeds iff the gender's singular and plural prefixes contain the same classifier N. [Car26]'s diagnostic is semantic: matching succeeds iff the gender has an interpretable core. On the Xhosa lexicon the two classifications coincide — the shared-N pairs (1/2, 7/8, 9/10) are exactly the interpretable genders (A, D, E).