It doesn’t really matter, it’s a stupid and shitty function that is at best vestigial, and at worst, not even consistent.

There’s a lot of things you can about Turkish being a shitty language, but at least vovel harmony is always consistent, and once you get enough language exposure, you can guess the correct mutations of suffixes correctly.

Also, you’re helping me prove my point that despite actualmente aprendiendo español, usandolo casi diariamente, ya es casi impossible para recordar las reglas absurdas de generos de objectos cotidianas fuera de contexto.

EDIT :

origins of grammatical gender are related to the function of the word

If this were true/functionally correct[1] you could teach newcomers to the language the function sets and how they are grouped so that people could reason their way though new objects and which gender they should have. It’s not even consistent with the ending of words (el agua/la mano)

It’s literally a vestigial feature. A proper language with prescriptivism would have gotten rid of it already, like … French? but they have lots of prescriptivism and shitty genders. Eugh.

Sidenote : The RAE are a lazy bunch of fucks.

[1] : it doesn’t matter that the origin of grammatical gender is a true statement if the language continued to work like that, which it doesn’t do anymore. The case can one of the following :

it is true, the origin of grammatical gender is true, and it continues to work with functionality of words determining the gender

it is true, the origin of grammatical gender is true, but it no longer works with the functionality of words determining the gender << our shitty reality, probably , but it’s moot point

it is false, the origin of grammatical gender is was not related to the function of the word, the functionality of words do not determine their gender

it is false, the origin of grammatical gender is was not related to the function of the word, but the functionality of words do determine their gender

Counterpoint: El asiento. Chairs are actually gender fluid.