Editor for this issue: Sarah Murray <sarah
linguistlist.org>
I've read with interest this review, but I am writing to warn the potential readers that the paragraph in the review related to Serbian contains serious errors/omissions. The paragraph is quoted below: (SERBIAN The expression of gender in Serbian (287-309) Elke Hentschel) The events of the 1990s have divided Yugoslavia into three states with their own variety of Serbo-Croatian, no more describable as unitarian, and consequent language policies. The focus is here on Serbian, officially written only in Cyrillic; the Latin alphabet with the diacritic signs is used. Nouns denoting living beings are lexically male- and female-specific; gender-indefinite words for children or young animals are neuter. To most speakers' indifference towards or rejection of feminine names, feminists respond proposing how to handle the issue of female invisibility (see Savi,1998). Gender-related linguistic problems are still of marginal interest, in all three countries, and the future, for the Serbian, is hardly predictable. Everyone familiar with the recent history of Yugoslavia knows that Yugoslavia did not disintegrate into three, but rather into five (potentially even six) states: Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Hercegovina, Serbia-Montenegro, and Macedonia. "The three countries" from the last sentence probably refer to Croatia, Bosnia and Hercegovina and Serbia-Montenegro, since Slovene is spoken in Slovenia, and Macedonian in Macedonia. I hope this makes this presentation clearer. Mima DedaicMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue