| However, the preceiver cannot be the antecedent
of svayam. Observe (67), svayam cannot choose
mohan as its antecedent since 65 (ii) does not
permit it; it can not choose the perceiver, ram,
as its antecedent. So it remains uninterpreted and consequently,
the sentence is ungrammatical. (68) is unambiguous; the
only antecedent svayam can choose is mohan
in accordance with 65 (ii). ram cannot be chosen
as antecedent for the reason given above. |
| |
| (67) |
|
*ram
ko mohan svayam bahut pasand hai
i i
Ram CM mohan himself very much
like be+PRES
|
| |
|
|
| (68) |
|
ram ko svayam mohan bahut pasand
hai
j
j
ram CM himself mohan very much
like be+PRES
(Ram likes Mohan himself very
much.) |
|
| |
| Thus, the agentive and the dative subject
constructions behave differently with respect to the antecedent
choice of svayam. |
| |
| We turn now to the remaining N.A. emphatic
anaphor apna. The N.A. apna, like the A-anaphor
apna, occurs in possessive phrases alone which,
we assume are of the following type: |
| |
| (69) |
|
 |
| |
|
|
|
| Notice the difference between the occurrence
of the N.A.-anaphor apna above and the A-anaphor
apna which occurs in the NP in the following way: |
