| The following show that apna can occur in
other argument positions is well. |
| (27)
|
|
ram
ne apne ko shishe me dekha
i i
Ram CM self CM mirror CM see+PAST
(Ram saw himself in the mirror)
|
| |
|
|
| (28) |
|
ram
ko keval apne se hi pyar hai
i i
Ram
CM only self CM EMPH love be+PRES
(Ram
loves only himself.) |
| |
|
|
|
| |
| In (27) and (28), both, the antecedent of
apna is ram. In (27) ram is the agent, whereas
in (28) it is the perceiver. Thus the relevant facts concerning
apna too support the formulation (15). |
| |
| Consider, now, a construction which appears
to invalidate (15) |
| (29) |
|
ram
ne shyam ko [PRO apne sath khana
i j
j
i
Ram CM shyam CM PRO self's together food
khane ke liye] bulaya
Eat+Nom CM call+PAST
(Ram invited Shyam to dine with him.)
|
| |
|
|
| (30) |
|
ram
ne shyam se [PRO apne ghar chalne
i j
j
i
Ram
CM shyam CM PRO self's home come along
ke
liye] kaha
CM
say+PAST
(Ram
asked Shyam to come to his house.)
|
|
| These sentences seem to be problematic for
(15) in that in these apna does not have PRO, which
is an agent in each case, as its antecedent. That it antcedent
the agent of the matrix S does not explain why the more
proximate agent is not its antecedent. |
| |
| However, closer analysis reveals that these
sentences do not really reject (15). In fact, these sentences
are instances of the role semantic factors play in the
anaphor-antecedent relationship in Hindi. Semantic and
pragmatic and cultural considerations do play a role in
the determination of antecedents of the anaphors in Hindi.
First we discuss how semantic considerations influence
apna-antecedent relationship and then for pragmatic considerations
do the same. |
| |
| In (29), in the phrase apne sath,
the head noun sath denotes "togetherness".
Compare (29) with (31) below. In (31) the "togetherness"
meaning is not there because sath does not occur
in this construction. |
