[…] the distinctions of gender have been extirpated […] in our nouns. To us, the name or appellation of a person is masculine or feminine only according as the person is male or female; and of sex in the lower animals we make very small account; while our Anglo-Saxon ancestors were as much under the dominion of that old artificial grammatical distinction of all the objects of thought as masculine, feminine, and neuter, on a basis only in small part coinciding with actual sex […].
- Whitney (1875), a pag.104

Its foundations [distinction of gender] must, of course, lie in the distinction of sex in those creatures which have conspicuous sex; but such constitute only an exceedingly small part of the creation; and the distinctions of gender involve everything that exists, and in a manner which is only in the smallest part accordant with natural sex.
- Whitney (1875), a pag.206-207

There are […] characteristics of American speech, of universal or general prevalence, like the distinction of animate and inanimate gender (which would seem to be quite as significant, and as capable of being applied to higher formative uses, as is our own sexual gender) […].
- Whitney (1875), a pag.262