| (105) |
|
*baccha apneap aur ma ki madad se phal kata
i i
child himself and mother CM help CM fruit cut
paya
able+PAST |
|
|
|
| Deletion of
either apneap or ma ki madad se renders
the sentence grammatical. |
| Furthermore,
that apneap is a human instrumental is clear
from the fact that it cannot occur if the predicate
in not one that takes a "human instrument"; dekh
(see ), for instance, can take an "inanimate instrument",
whereas, it cannot take a "human instrument". In
(100), this verb occurs with an "inanimate instrument"
whereas in (107) it occurs with a "human instrument"
and (107) is ungrammatical. |
| (106) |
|
ram ne durbin se mohan ko dekha
ram CM binacular CM mohan CM see+PAST
(Ram saw Mohan through binaculars) |
| (107) |
|
*ram ne shyam ki madad se mohan ko dekha
ram CM shyam CM help CM mohan CM see+PAST |
|
That apneap is a "human instrumental"
is clear from ungrammaticality of (108):
|
| (108) |
|
*ram ne apneap mohan ko dekha
i i
ram CM himself mohan CM see+PAST |
| |
|
In sum, it is it clear
now why apneap, like svayam, can take
agent alone as antecedent. |
| Like apneap
and svayam, paraspar is also exclusively
agentive. This remains to be accounted for. Paraspar
is a reciprocal anaphor like ek dusre, from
which it differs in that it is a N.A.-anaphor whereas
ek dusre is an A-anaphor, and it always occurs with
symmetric predicates such as yudh kar/ ho,
vartalap kar/ ho, etc. The symmetrical nature
of vartalap kar is evident when contrasted
with kah (say, abuse) which is not a symmetric
predicate. Consider the following sentences. |
|
|
|
| (109) |
|
*ram ne shyam se vartalap
kiya lekin
ram CM shyam CM conversation do+PAST but
shyam ne (ram se) kuch nahi kaha
shyam CM (ram CM) nothing NEG say+PAST |
| (110) |
|
ram ne shyam se bahut
kuch kaha lekin
ram CM shyam CM many things said but
shyam ne kuch nahi kaha
shyam CM nothing NEG say+PAST
(Ram said many things to Shyam but Shyam did not
say anything) |
| The lekin
clause in (109) negates the symmetrical sense of
the predicate, giving rise to a contradiction. (110)
is grammatical because kah is not a symmetric
predicate and as such the negation clause in (110)
does not give rise to any contradiction. |
|
|
|
|
