[INDOLOGY] Accusative of direction

[Oliver Hellwig]

Dear Hans,

thanks a lot, esp. for the ditransitive paper. The summary in paragraph
14 is a great starting point, although it seems necessary to query the
corpus for verbs summed up under categories B-I.

Best wishes, Oliver

On 17/09/2019 16:58, Hock, Hans Henrich wrote:
> Dear Oliver,
>
> At Madhav’s suggestion I am adding two old papers of mine in which I address the issue (within broader contexts); see attached. (For one of the papers I include the original, since the published version is full of typos and, based on an old paper copy, not in the best of visual shapes).
>
> With all best wishes,
>
> Hans Henrich
>
>
>
>
>> On 17 Sep2019, at 09:38, Oliver Hellwig via INDOLOGY <indology at list.indology.info> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Madhav,
>>
>> thanks a lot to you (as well as to the other list members who answered
>> off list). This is exactly what I was looking for!
>>
>> Best wishes, Oliver
>>
>> On 17/09/2019 15:29, Madhav Deshpande wrote:
>>> Dear Oliver,
>>>
>>>       You may find discussions by grammarians on semantic sub-types of
>>> Karman useful in this respect.  Works from Bhartr̥hari's Vākyapadīya to
>>> Kauṇḍabhaṭṭa's Vaiyākaraṇa-Bhūṣaṇa and Nāgeśa's Laghumañjūṣā discuss
>>> these sub-types.  The discussions on verb semantics classifying verbs
>>> into kartr̥stha-kriyaka versus karmastha-kriyaka and kartr̥stha-bhāvaka
>>> versus karmastha-bhāvaka may also provide some clues.  I have discussed
>>> the effects of some semantic sub-types of Karman [affected versus
>>> non-affected] in the syntax of passives of dvikarmaka verbs.  You can
>>> see this in a sentence like ajāṃ grāmaṃ nayati > ajā grāmaṃ nīyate; but
>>> not ajāṃ grāmaḥ nīyate.  On the other hand, grāmaṃ gacchati can be
>>> passivized as grāmaḥ gamyate.  So grāma in relation to nayati and
>>> gacchati seems to have a somewhat different perception.  With respect to
>>> nayati, it may be more or less adverbial as you say.  On the other hand,
>>> with respect to gacchati, it has some closer semantic connection.  This
>>> looks like a great topic for deeper introspection.  Perhaps Hans Hock
>>> and George Cardona could add to this discussion.  With best wishes,
>>>
>>> Madhav
>>>
>>> Madhav M. Deshpande
>>> Professor Emeritus, Sanskrit and Linguistics
>>> University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
>>> Senior Fellow, Oxford Center for Hindu Studies
>>>
>>> [Residence: Campbell, California, USA]
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 3:29 AM Oliver Hellwig via INDOLOGY
>>> <indology at list.indology.info <mailto:indology at list.indology.info>> wrote:
>>>
>>>     Dear all,
>>>
>>>     this question probably has an obvious answer, but I don't find it:
>>>     Let's say we have a sentence like rAmo vanaM pravizati, where the acc.
>>>     vanam expresses the goal of a motion verb.
>>>
>>>     Are there any papers or any clues from the grammatical tradition that
>>>     could tell if the accusative vanam was "felt" like a real object in
>>>     actual language use (as the sun in "I see the sun"), or rather
>>>     considered as some kind of adverbial non-core argument to the verb?
>>>
>>>     Any hint is highly appreciated.
>>>
>>>     Best, Oliver
>>>
>>>     ---
>>>     Oliver Hellwig, IVS Zürich
>>>
>>>     _______________________________________________
>>>     INDOLOGY mailing list
>>>     INDOLOGY at list.indology.info <mailto:INDOLOGY at list.indology.info>
>>>     indology-owner at list.indology.info
>>>     <mailto:indology-owner at list.indology.info> (messages to the list's
>>>     managing committee)
>>>     http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list
>>>     options or unsubscribe)
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> INDOLOGY mailing list
>> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
>> indology-owner at list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing committee)
>> http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or unsubscribe)