Advertisement

Indo-Iranian Journal

, Volume 34, Issue 1, pp 19–35 | Cite as

Ditransitive passive in Pā\(\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\cdot}$}}{n}\)ini

  • Madhav M. Deshpande
Article
  • 34 Downloads

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. Anderson, J. M. 1984. “Objecthood”. In Frans Plank 1984. Pp. 29–54.Google Scholar
  2. Blansitt, E. L., jrJr. 1984. “Dechticaetiative and Dative”. In Frans Plank 1984. Pp. 127–150.Google Scholar
  3. Deshpande, Madhav M. Forthcoming-a. “Ditransitive constructions in Patañjali's Mahābhā \(\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\cdot}$}}{s}\) ya. In Professor S. S. Janaki Felicitation Volume, Kuppuswami Sastri Research Institute, Madras.Google Scholar
  4. Deshpande, Madhav M. Forthcoming-b. “Prototypes in Pā\(\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\cdot}$}}{n}\)inian Syntax”. (To appear in JAOS.)Google Scholar
  5. Gaedicke, Carl. 1880. Der Accusativ im Veda. Breslau: Koebner.Google Scholar
  6. Hock, Hans Heinrich. 1981. “Sanskrit causative syntax: a diachronic study”. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 9–33.Google Scholar
  7. Hock, Hans Heinrich. 1985. “Sanskrit double-object constructions: will the real object please stand up?”. Prācī 35–03 Vijñāna, Indian Journal of Linguistics, Vol. 12, pp. 50–70.Google Scholar
  8. Joshi, S. D. and Roodbergen, J. A. F. 1975. Patañjali's 35–04–35–05, Kārakāhnika, with Introduction, Translation and Notes. Publications of the Centre of Advanced Study in Sanskrit, Class C, No. 10. Pune, India: University of Poona.Google Scholar
  9. Katz, J. J. 1972. Semantic Theory. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  10. MB, Mahābhā \(\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\cdot}$}}{s}\) ya of Patañjali, with the commentary Pradīpa by Kaiya\(\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\cdot}$}}{t}\)a and Uddyota by Nāgeśabha\(\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\cdot}$}}{t}\) \(\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\cdot}$}}{t}\)a. In three volumes. Delhi: Motilal Banarasidass, 1967.Google Scholar
  11. Osgood, C. E. and Tanz, C. 1977. “Wil the real direct object in bitransitive sentences please stand up?” In Linguistic Studies offered to Joseph Greenberg, Vol. 3., pp. 537–590. Saratoga, California: Anma Libri.Google Scholar
  12. Padavākyaratnākara of Gokulanāthopādhyāya. Edited by Nandinatha Misra. Sarasvatībhavana Granthamālā, No. 88. Banaras: Vārānaseya Sa\(\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\cdot}$}}{m}\)sk\(\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\cdot}$}}{r}\)ta Viśvavidyālaya, 1960.Google Scholar
  13. Plank, Frans. (Ed.). 1984. Objects: Towards a theory of grammatical relations. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  14. Siddhāntakaumudī of 35–10 35–11. Part I. With the commentaries Tattvabodhini, Bālamanoramā, Śabdenduśekhara and Subodini. Edited by Guruprasad Shastri. Rājasthāna-35–12-kāleja-granthamālā, No. 42. Banaras: Rājasthāna Sanskrit College, 1940.Google Scholar
  15. Tripathi, Ramdev. 1977. 35–13 kī bhāratīy paramparā aur 35–14 (in Hindi). Patna: Bihar Rashtrabhasha Parishad.Google Scholar
  16. Vākyapadīya of Bhart\(\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\cdot}$}}{r}\)hari. With the commentary of Helārāja. \(\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\cdot}$}}{n}\) \(\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\cdot}$}}{d}\) a III, Pt. I. Edited by K. A. Subramania Iyer. 1963. Pune: Deccan College.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Madhav M. Deshpande
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Michigan Ann ArborMichigan

Personalised recommendations