Gender conflicts in German possessives: comparing inanimate to human reference reveals asymmetries

Abstract Although German, as a grammatical gender language, requires noun–pronoun agreement in anaphora, exceptions to the rule occur, e.g., in possessive constructions when the gender-incongruent possessive pronoun sein (masculine/neuter, his/its) refers to feminine antecedents instead of congruent ihr (feminine, her). While this violation is merely grammatical for inanimate referents, it can provoke semantic mismatches for human possessors (especially gender-specific female nouns like die Hexe i – sein i (the witch – his/its), but less so with gender-indifferent human nouns, such as die Kontaktperson (the contact person). A self-paced reading (SPR) experiment tested the acceptability and processing of sentences in which incongruent sein referred to feminine possessors, which differed in animacy status (inanimate versus human). Introducing this agreement violation reduced acceptability and elevated reading and reaction times (RTs), but effects varied by antecedent animacy. These results suggest an animacy restriction in possessive reference and substantiate the impact of meaning-based gender cues on pronominalization.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Language and Cognition
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2025.10032
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Gender Studies in Language
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.87
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Gender conflicts in German possessives: comparing inanimate to human reference reveals asymmetries

Ulrike Domahs, Jürg Fleischer, Christin Schütze
1 citations
Language and Cognition
Gender Studies in Language
3.87
article

Gender conflicts in German possessives: comparing inanimate to human reference reveals asymmetries

Ulrike Domahs, Jürg Fleischer, Christin Schütze
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract Although German, as a grammatical gender language, requires noun–pronoun agreement in anaphora, exceptions to the rule occur, e.g., in possessive constructions when the gender-incongruent possessive pronoun sein (masculine/neuter, his/its) refers to feminine antecedents instead of congruent ihr (feminine, her). While this violation is merely grammatical for inanimate referents, it can provoke semantic mismatches for human possessors (especially gender-specific female nouns like die Hexe i – sein i (the witch – his/its), but less so with gender-indifferent human nouns, such as die Kontaktperson (the contact person). A self-paced reading (SPR) experiment tested the acceptability and processing of sentences in which incongruent sein referred to feminine possessors, which differed in animacy status (inanimate versus human). Introducing this agreement violation reduced acceptability and elevated reading and reaction times (RTs), but effects varied by antecedent animacy. These results suggest an animacy restriction in possessive reference and substantiate the impact of meaning-based gender cues on pronominalization.

Language and CognitionVol. 17
Philipps University of Marburg (DE), Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Gender Studies in Language
3.87
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Gender conflicts in German possessives: comparing inanimate to human reference reveals asymmetries — Ulrike Domahs, Jürg Fleischer, et al. · Language and Cognition (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS