Linguistically though, if the context suggested that "logos" were a thing instead of a person wouldn't it be correct to translate as "it"?
The pronoun for the Word had been correctly translated as "it", until the corruption of English which started since the Douay-Rheims and KJV. There is no linguistic rule which permits twisting a gender of a noun, regardless of the fact that the metaphor is used to describe a masculine person. Bad theology has indeed corrupted various languages, just because of a small group of English bible translators in recent centuries.
See John 1:2-3 in pre-KJV English bibles:
Matthew(i) 2 The same was in the begynnynge wyth God. 3 All thynges were made by it and without it was made nothynge that was made.
Great(i) 2 The same was in the begynnyng wyth God. 3 All thinges were made by it, & wythout it, was made nothynge that was made.
Geneva(i) 2 This same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by it, and without it was made nothing that was made.
Bishops(i) 2 The same was in the begynnyng with God 3 All thynges were made by it: and without it, was made nothyng that was made
DouayRheims(i) 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him: and without him was made nothing that was made.
It is a misconception that a living thing or a person has to have either "he" or "she" in English, and not "it". For example, the demon or the evil spirit in Matthew 12:45 and Luke 11:26 is translated "it", in the modern English translations. All the English versions until KJV and most others until the end of 20th century, translated the Holy Spirit as neuter (which/it). See Romans 8:16, 26; 1Peter 1:11. See this article by Will Kinney, in defense of KJV using "it" for the Holy Ghost.
Rom 8:16 KJV
The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God
and only a couple of modern translations follow the conventional English Grammar, such as NABRE and NTE of N. T. Wright. These are rebellious ones which go against the new English versions.
NTE: When that happens, it is the spirit itself giving supporting witness to what our own spirit is saying, that we are God’s children.
The reason why almost all English translators, both old and new ones, use "he" for the Spirit in John 14 and 16, is to maintain consistency of pronoun: masculine Helper, and neuter Spirit. The direct object is the masculine Helper, so they avoided translating Spirit as "it", because the Spirit is another name for the Helper. Except maybe a few which translated the spirit as "it", like SLT John 14:17 The Spirit of truth; which the world cannot receive, for it sees it not, neither knows: and ye know it; for it shall remain with you, and shall be in you.
NTE clarifies that the "he" in John 14:17 is for the helper, not for the spirit:
This other helper is the spirit of truth. The world can’t receive him, because it doesn’t see him or know him. But you know him, because he lives with you, and will be in you.
Grammatical gender as agreement or concord
Agreement, or concord, is a grammatical process in which certain words change their form so that values of certain grammatical categories match those of related words. Gender is one of the categories which frequently require agreement. In this case, nouns may be considered the "triggers" of the process, because they have an inherent gender, whereas related words that change their form to match the gender of the noun can be considered the "target" of these changes
In John 1:32, the dove is translated "it" in most of the versions, but only a few like the AMP, NKJV, NASB use "he" for the Spirit. The evil spirit in Matthew 12:45, Luke 11:26 and 1 Kings 22:22 is translated "he", in the old versions, because the person in the context is indicated as a demon Beelzebul (masculine) [Luke 11]. So we assume that all evil spirits are assumed as demon (masculine) by the old versions. Similarly, the context shows the Word in John 1:1-3 as a living person, namely Jesus. The translators avoided the inconsistency of neuter becoming masculine, for clarity or consistency. I am not aware of the specific explanations given for this from the translators, maybe the old Bible versions contained footnotes explaining this.
The reason why in English, the pronoun can be changed to conform to the related noun (the neuter word is masculine) is because English has very simple or weak declension. It does not require the strict declension of determiners, like article, pronouns and adjectives, to conform to the gender and case of the noun.
Declensions may apply to nouns, pronouns, adjectives, adverbs, and articles to indicate number (e.g., singular, dual, plural), case (e.g., nominative case, accusative case, genitive case, dative case), gender (e.g., masculine, neuter, feminine), and a number of other grammatical categories. In Modern English, the system of declensions is so simple compared to some other languages that the term declension is rarely used.
This does not change the fact that the new English Bible versions go against the conventional grammar rules of English, in rendering the gender of personal nouns, for reasons we can only speculate. The gender of the words in Greek, in this case, is irrelevant because in translation we do not follow the grammatical gender of the original language and render it the same way in the target language. It would destroy the grammar of the target language. However, many languages wrongfully follow the new English version's grammar to make the Holy Spirit masculine, when in fact their language requires that it should be feminine. Example Urdu, Hindi, and likely all the hundreds of languages of India, and possibly many other languages of the world, which is truly a global linguistic disaster created by the Bible Societies or translation committees.