On converse lability and its decline from Vedic to Epic Sanskrit: The verb juṣ- ‘to enjoy’ and ‘to please’
PDF

Keywords

Converse lability of psych verbs
Indo-European middle polysemy
decline of lability in Sanskrit
Indo-European middle to active shift

How to Cite

Pooth, R. A. (2021). On converse lability and its decline from Vedic to Epic Sanskrit: The verb juṣ- ‘to enjoy’ and ‘to please’. Yearbook of the Poznan Linguistic Meeting, 7(1), 217–252. https://doi.org/10.14746/yplm.2021.7.9

Abstract

In the Early Vedic language, we encounter two different systems of active vs. middle voice and valency oppositions. The emergence of many thematic Vedic transitive active forms (e.g. īráya-ti ‘to raise sth. or so.’) is obviously innovative and secondary when compared to labile, and formally more archaic athematic active forms (e.g. íyar-ti ~ iyár-ti ‘to rise, to raise sth. or so.’). On this basis, it has been claimed that the original voice distinction was mainly driven by agency (i.e., volition, control, responsibility and animacy), whereas the secondary voice opposition was driven by transitivity distinctions and direct and indirect reflexive middle semantics (Pooth 2012, 2014). In this article, another verb in question, namely the psych verb juṣ- ‘to enjoy, to please’, will be examined as a parallel case to further discuss the general developments in the Vedic verb system, which are part of the general decline of lability and the increase of verb forms specified for transitive vs. intransitive behavior within Vedic (Kulikov 2014, 2012, 2006). This article will show that the Sanskrit psych verb juṣ- ‘to enjoy’ and ‘to please’ exhibits converse lability in Early Vedic Sanskrit, whereas it does not behave like this in Epic Sanskrit. The syntactic and semantic behavior of forms of juṣ- in both periods of Sanskrit will thus be compared.

https://doi.org/10.14746/yplm.2021.7.9
PDF

References

Barðdal, J. 2006. Predicting the productivity of argument structure constructions. BLS 32(1). (Published by the Berkeley Linguistics Society and the Linguistic Society of America.)

Barðdal, J. 2008. Productivity. Evidence from case and argument structure in Icelandic. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Bauer, L. 2001. Morphological productivity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Baum, D. 2006. The imperative in the Rigveda. (PhD dissertation, Leiden University.)

Beavers, J.T. 2006. Argument/oblique alternations and the structure of lexical meaning. (PhD dissertation, Stanford University.)

Bhattacharya, D. 2011. Paippalāda-Saṃhitā of the Atharvaveda. ... Volume Three. Consisting of the seventeenth and eightteenth kāṇḍas. Kolkata: The Asiatic Society.

Bloomfield, M. 1897. Hymns of the Atharvaveda, together with extracts from the ritual books and the commentaries… Oxford.

Bloomfield, M. 1899. The Atharvaveda and the Gopatha-Brahmaṇa. Strassburg.

Croft, W. 2001. Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford University Press

Dahl, E. 2005. Polymorphic thematic root presents in Vedic and the origin of the thematic conjugation. In D. Haug & E. Welo (eds.), Haptacahaptaitis. Festschrift for Frederik Thordarson on the occasionof his 77th birthday, 57–72. Oslo.

Dahl, E. 2010. Time, tense and aspect in Early Vedic grammar. Leiden: Brill.

Dowty, D. 1991. Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67. 547–619.

François, A. 2008. Semantic maps and the typology of colexification: intertwining polysemous networks across languages. In M. Vanhove (ed.), From polysemy to semantic change, 163–215. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Geldner RV = Karl Friedrich Geldner (1853–1929). Der Rig-Veda. Cambridge & London.

Goldberg, A.E. 1995. Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Gotō, T. 1987. Die „I. Präsensklasse“ im Vedischen. Wien: ÖAW.

Gotō, T. 1988. “Rev. of Jamison [1983]”. Indo-Iranian-Journal 31. 303–316.

Griffith, A. 2009. The Paippalādasaṃhitā of the Atharvaveda. Kāṇḍas 6 and 7. A new edition with translation and commentary. Groningen.

Grimm, S.M. 2005. The lattice of case and agentivity. (MSc thesis, University of Amsterdam.)

Härtl, H. 1999. “Fürchten vs. ängstigen: Thematische Rollen und Ereignisstrukturen psychischer Verben in einem Modell der Sprachproduktion”. In I. Wachsmuth & B. Jung (eds.), Proceedings der 4. Fachatgung der Gesellschaft für Kognitionswissenschaft, Bielefeld, 28. September - 1. Oktober 1999, 189–194. St. Augustin.

Hettrich, H. 2007. Materialen zu einer Kasussyntax des Ṛgveda. (Manuscript.)

Jacobs, J. 1994. Kontra Valenz. Trier.

Jacobs, J. 2009. “Valenzbindung oder Konstruktionsbindung? Eine Grundfrage der Grammatiktheorie”. Zeitschrift für germanistische Linguistik 37. 490–513.

Jamison, St.W. 1983. Function and form in the -áya-formations of the Rig Veda and Atharva Veda. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.

Jamison, S.W. & J.P. Brereton 2014. Rigveda translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Jasanoff, J.H. 1998. The thematic conjugation revisited. In. J.H. Jasanoff, H.G. Melchert & L. Oliver (eds.), Mír Curad. Studies in honor of Calvert Watkins, 301–316. Innsbruck.

Jasanoff, J.H. 2003. Hittite and the Indo-European verb. Oxford University Press.

Kim, J.-S. 2017a. Kāṇḍa 16 der Paippalādasaṃhitā des Atharvaveda. Eine verbesserte Version mit den Parallelstellen der Śaunakasaṃhitā. Mit einem Glückwunsch zum 70. Geburtstag von Heinrich Hettrich. Stand: September 2017. (Manuscript.) <https://www.phil.uni-wuerzburg.de/fileadmin/04080400/Kanda_16_Neu.pdf>

Kim, J.-S. 2017b. Index Verborum des Atharvaveda der Paippalādasaṃhitā und der Śaunakasaṃhitā (eine vorläufige Version). Stand: November 2017. <https://www.phil.uni-wuerzburg.de/fileadmin/04080400/Atharvaveda_Index_verborum_11.2017.pdf>

Kubisch, P. 2012. Paippalāda-Saṃhitā Kāṇḍa 20, Sūkta 1-30. Kritische Edition, Übersetzung, Kommentar. (PhD dissertation, Universität Bonn.)

Kulikov, L. 2007. The reflexive pronouns in Vedic: A diachronic and typological perspective. Lingua 117. 1412–1433.

Kulikov, L. 2012. The Vedic -ya-presents: Passives and intransitivity in Old Indo-Aryan. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

Kulikov, L. 2014. The decline of labile syntax in Old Indo-Aryan: A diachronic typological perspective. Linguistics 52(4). 1139–1165.

Kümmel, M.J. 1996. Stativ und Passivaorist im Vedischen. Göttingen.

Kümmel, M.J. 2000. Das Perfekt im Indoiranischen. Wiesbaden.

Kutscher, S. 2009. Kausalität und Argumentrealisierung. Zur Konstruktionsvarianz bei Psychverben in europäischen Sprachen. Tübingen: Niemeyer.

Lelli, D. 2015. The Paippalādasaṁhitā of the Atharvaveda. Kāṇḍa 15. A new edition with translation and commentary. (PhD dissertation, Leiden University.)

Letuchiy, A. 2009. Towards a typology of labile verbs: Lability vs. derivation. In A. Arkhipov & P. Epps (eds.), New challenges in typology. Transcending the borders and refining the distinctions. Berlin.

Levin, B. & M. Rappaport Hovav. 2005. Argument realization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

LIV = Lexikon der indogermanischen Verben. 2. erweiterte und verbesserte Auflage bearbeitet von H. Rix & M. Kümmel. Heidelberg 2001.

López, C.A. 2010. Atharvaveda-Paippalāda Kāṇḍas thirteen and fourteen. Text, transla-tion, commentary. Cambridge, MA.

Lubotsky, A. 1989. The Vedic -áya-formations. Indo-Iranian Journal 32(2). 89–113.

Lubotsky, A. 1997. A Ṛgvedic word concordance. (2 Volumes.) New Haven.

Lubotsky, A. 2002. Atharvaveda-Paippalāda Kāṇḍa five. Text, translation, commentary. Cambridge, MA.

Macdonell, A.A. 1910. Vedic grammar. Strassburg: Trübner.

Mayrhofer EWAia = Manfred M. (1986–1996–): Etymologisches Wörterbuch des Altindoarischen. (Vol. I, II, III.) Heidelberg.

Migron, S. 1988–1990. R̥gvedic juṣ- and joṣṭŕ̥-, Old Persian dauštar-: A semantic inves-tigation. Die Sprache 34(1). 124–134.

Monier-Williams 1899 (= SED). A Sanskrit–English dictionary. Oxford.

Oberlies, T. 2003. A grammar of Epic Sanskrit. Berlin & New York.

Oldenberg, H. 1888. Die Hymnen des Rigveda, Band I. Metrische und textgeschichtliche Prolegomena. Berlin.

Oldenberg, H. 1912. Ṛgveda. Textkritische und exegetische Noten. Siebentes bis Zehntes Buch. Berlin.

Orqueda, V. 2019. Reflexivity in Vedic. Leiden: Brill.

Orqueda, V. & R.A. Pooth. Forthc. Reflexive construction in Early Vedic. In K. Janić, N. Puddu and M. Haspelmath (eds.).

Pooth, R.A. 2000. Stativ vs. Medium im Vedischen und Avestischen. Historische Sprachforschung 113. 88–116.

Pooth, R.A. 2004: Zur Genese der späturidg. thematischen Konjugation aus frühuridg. Medialformen. Indogermanische Forschungen 109. 31–60.

Pooth, R.A. 2011. Die 2. und 3. Person Dual und das Medium. In Th. Krisch & Th. Lindner (eds.), Indogermanistik und Linguistik im Dialog. Akten der XIII. Fachtagung der Indogermanischen Gesellschaft ... in Salzburg, 473–483. Wiesbaden.

Pooth, R.A. 2012. Zum Aufkommen transitiver Verben in frühen Vedischen am Beispiel 1r̥. In H. Craig Melchert (ed.), The Indo-European verb. Proceedings of the Conference of the Society for Indo-European Studies, Los Angeles, 13–16 September 2010, 267–284. Wiesbaden: Reichert.

Pooth, R.A. 2014. Die Diathesen Aktiv vs. Medium und die Verbsemantik im Vedischen der R̥gveda-Saṃhitā. (PhD dissertation. Leiden University.) <https://leidenuniv.academia.edu/RolandPooth>

Pooth, R.A. 2019a. On the origin of the Vedic subjunctive. (Manuscript.) <https://leidenuniv.academia.edu/RolandPooth>

Pooth, R.A. 2019b. The Vedic pīpáya- stem: Synchronic and diachronic implications. On the prehistory of the Indo-European aspect system II. (Manuscript, submitted to Indo-European Linguistics.) <https://leidenuniv.academia.edu/RolandPooth>

Pooth, R.A., P.A. Kerkhof, L. Kulikov & J. Barðdal 2019. The origin of non-canonical case marking of subjects in Proto-Indo-European. Indogermanische Forschungen 124. 245–263.

Scheftelowitz, I. 1906. Die Apokryphen des R̥gveda. Breslau. (Reprinted in Hildesheim 1966.)

Selva, U. 2014. The Paippalādasaṃhitā of the Atharvaveda Kāṇḍa 17, First Anuvāka (PS 17.1-6) “To the Earth”. A new critical edition with metrical analysis, translation and commentary. (MA thesis, Leiden University.)

TITUS = Thesaurus Indogermanischer Text- und Sprachmaterialien. <http://titus.uni-frankfurt.de/indexd.htm>

Wackernagel, J. 1907. Indisches und Italisches. KZ 41. 305–319.

Watkins, C. 1969. Indogermanische Grammatik III/1. Geschichte der indogermanischen Verbalflexion. Heidelberg: Winter.

Whitney AV = William D. Whitney & Charles R. Lanman. 1905. Atharva-Veda Saṁhitā. (2 Vol.). Cambridge, MA.

Whitney, W.D. 1881. Index Verborum to the published texts of the Atharva-Veda. New Haven.

Whitney, W.D. 1885. The roots, verb-forms, and primary derivatives of the Sanskrit language. Leipzig.

Werba, C.H. 1997. Verba Indoarica. Wien: ÖAW.

Witzel, M. 1987. On the localisation of Vedic texts and schools (Materials on Vedic Śakhas, 7), India and the Ancient world. History, Trade and Culture before A.D. 650. In G. Pollet (ed.), P.H.L. Eggermont jubilee volume, 173–213. Leuven.

Witzel, M. 1989. Tracing the Vedic dialects. In C. Caillat (ed.), Dialectes dans les litteratures indo-aryennes, 97–264. Paris.

Witzel, M. 1991. Notes on Vedic dialects, 1. Zinbun, Annals of the Institute for Re-search in Humanities (Kyoto University) 67. 31–70.

Witzel, M. 1995a. Early Indian history: Linguistic and textual parameters. In G. Erdosy (ed.), The Indo-Aryans of Ancient South Asia, 85–125. Berlin & New York.

Witzel, M. 1995b. Ṛgvedic history: Poets, chieftains and polities. In G. Erdosy (ed.), The Indo-Aryans of Ancient South Asia, 307–354. Berlin & New York.

Witzel, M. 1997. The development of the Vedic Canon and its schools: The social and political milieu (Materials on Vedic Śakhas, 8). In M. Witzel (ed.), Inside the texts, beyond the texts. Cambridge, MA.

Witzel, M. & T. Gotō (eds.). 2007. Rig-Veda. Das heilige Wissen. Erster und zweiter Liederkreis. Frankfurt a.M. & Leipzig.

Zehnder, T 1999. Atharvaveda-Paippālada, Buch 2, Text, Übersetzung, Kommentar. Idstein.

All papers published by the Yearbook of the Poznań Linguistic Meeting are published in an Open Access model using the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 Creative Commons licence.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.