gor05 gor05 at rz.uni-kiel.d400.de
Thu Feb 16 11:34:11 UTC 1995

Hello fellow Indologists!

I am currently working on my doctorate on historical syntax in the Indo-
Aryan languages and have run into a problem that I was hoping someone out 
there in the list could help me with.
What I'm interested in finding out is this: in Classical Sanskrit, the PPP-
construction for the perfect normally has the agent in the instrumental, 
although this can also appear in the dative or genitive, although this is 
much more seldom. For example: mayA kaTaH kRtaH, or seldom: mama/mahyam 
kaTaH kRtaH.
The same is also true with the gerundivum ('participium 
necessitatis'): one normally says mayA kaTaH kartavyaH, but it is also 
allowed to say mama/mahyam kaTaH kartavyaH. As with the PPP, this is very 
seldomly used. Panini's rules as to which verbs take which case seem to 
have lost their validity early on.
I have also noticed that the same seems to hold true for (early) Pali texts 
(such as the MahAvagga).What I wanted to know is whether in Apabhramsa these 
constructions are as seldomly used with the genitive / dative as they are in 
Skt/Pali, or whether they - especially with the gerundive - appear more often 
with the genitive or dative than in Skt., as for example in Hindi:
mujhe (dative) kuch karnA hai - I have to do something. As I don't know any 
Apabhramsa, I am completely dependent on secondary literature. So far, all 
I have found is G. Tagare's: Historical Grammar of ApabhramSa, which doesn't 
seem to deal with syntax very much.
If there is enough interest, I'd be glad to post a summary. Please send any 
replies directly to me.

Thanks in advance!

John Peterson, Kiel, Germany
email: gor05 at rz.uni-kiel.d400.de

More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list