‘Attraction’ and Co-Ordination in the Veda

J. Gonda

doi:10.1017/S0041977X0006184X

‘Attraction’ and Co-Ordination in the Veda

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 December 2009

J. Gonda

Article contents

Extract
References

Get access

Rights & Permissions

Extract

The frequent Vedic construction exemplified by ṚV 5, 31, 4 indram … arkaír évardhayann éhaye héntav u ‘they strengthened Indra with hymns to slay the serpent’ has since Delbriick's days been the subject of some discussion and difference of opinion. Whitney expressed the view that the frequent use of the dative beside a so-called infinitive dative to denote the subject or the object of the action constitutes a case of attraction: in the above sentence one would, in accordance with the implication of this term, expect the accusative ahint, whereas in ṚV 1, 24, 8 cakira sryāya pánthām ánvetav u ‘he made a track for the sun to follow’, the dative of the noun denoting the being on whose behalf the path is made is understandable at first sight. Hence no doubt the comment made by Whitney before quoting the latter line: the construction is in part a perfectly simple one, but is stretched beyond its natural boundaries by a kind of attraction.

Type: Articles
Information: Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , Volume 20 , Issue 1 , February 1957 , pp. 279 - 289

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X0006184X [Opens in a new window]
Copyright: Copyright © School of Oriental and African Studies 1957

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

^{page 279 note 1} W.D. Whitney, A Sanskrit grammar, § 982 a. See also Ludwig, A., Der Infinitiv im Veda,Prag, 1871,Google Scholar pp. 32 ff.

^{page 279 note 2} Brugmann, K., Grundriss d. vergl. Gramm. d. indogerm. Sprachen. Zweite Bearb., II, 3, Strassburg, 1916, 917.Google Scholar

^{page 279 note 3} See e.g. Macdonell, A.A., A Vedic grammar for students, Oxford, 1916 (repr. 1953), 315:Google Scholar ‘ … an accusative is attracted by a dative infinitive’; Kirk, W.H., Trans. Amer. Phil. Ass., LXXIII, 296;Google Scholar Renou, L., Grammaire védique, Lyon, Paris, 1952, 349 Google Scholar (ṚV 10,88,1); 360 (ṚV 8,7,8;10,125,6). In writing the present article the criticism pronounced by Miss Hahn, E.A. (Language, XXIX, 1953,Google Scholar 246 ff.), was unknown to me; I fear, however, that I am not able to follow the American authoress in considering double datives of the above type manifestations of the so-called partitive apposition or for which see further on. Nor does there seem to be much use in distinguishing, in the ‘double dative’ construction, a dative of reference and a dative of purpose.

^{page 279 note 4} Gaedicke, C., Der Accusativ im Veda, Breslau, 1880, 254.Google Scholar

^{page 279 note 5} Delbrück, B., Altindische Syntax, Halle a. S., 1888,Google Scholar 88 ff.

^{page 279 note 6} cf. also Speyer, J.S., Vedische und Sanskrit-Syntax, Strassburg, 1896, 83.CrossRef Google Scholar

^{page 280 note 1} cf. also The character of the Indo-European Moods, Wiesbaden, 1956,Google Scholar 105 ff.

^{page 280 note 2} Discussed by Wackernagel, J., Vorlesungen über Syntax. Zweite Aufl., I, Basel, 1926, 53.Google Scholar

^{page 280 note 3} For other examples see Ernout, A. and Thomas, F., Syntaxe latine, Paris, 1953,Google Scholar 130 ff.

^{page 280 note 4} See also the author's observations in Lingua, IV, 1, 1954, 21 if.; Oertel, H., ‘Über grammatische Perseverationserscheinungen’, Indog. Forsch., XXXI, 1912/1913,Google Scholar 49 ff.

^{page 280 note 5} For other instances of the double dative see also Delbrück, Altind. Syntax, 149.

^{page 281 note 1} GarPur. Pretak. 6, 61 ‘(this cow) will deliver him, at the time of his death (antakālam) from his sins’ is in my opinion no case of attraction (see Renou, , Grammaire sanskrite, Paris, 1930, 317,Google Scholar and Abegg, E., Der Pretakalpa des GaruḍaPurāṇa, Berlin, Leipzig, 1921, 118),Google Scholar but an example of the use of the accusative instead of the locative; see the author's papers on the accusative in the Belvalkar Festschrift and the A. Martinet Festschrift.

^{page 281 note 2} See Böhtlingk, O., ќhāndogjopanishad, Leipzig, 1889,Google Scholar 107 f.

^{page 281 note 3} Böhtlingk, O., ‘Über eine eigenthümliche Genus-Attraction im Sanskrit’, ZDMG, XLIII, 1889,Google Scholar 607 ff.; otherwise R. O. Franke, ibidem, XLIV, 481 f.

^{page 281 note 4} See e.g. Macdonell, Vedic grammar for students, 338: ‘the object may … by attraction be in the ablative’; Speyer, Ved. S.-Synt., p. 66 (§ 217), ‘an einigen Stellen liegt Attraction vor, wie TS 6, 1, 3, 8 purā dakṡiṇābhyo netoḥ “vor dem Herbeibringen der Opferlohne” (Object im Abl.)’; cf., however, Delbrück, Altind. Syntax, 111.

^{page 281 note 5} Delbrück, Altindische Syntax, 90, ‘mit mehr Recht spricht man von einer Attraction, wenn mit ablativischen Infinitiven auf as und tos Substantive im Ablativ verbunden erscheinen, wo uns dieser Casus nicht gemeint scheint. ṚV 2, 29, 6 …’.

^{page 281 note 6} ‘with attracted object’, Macdonell, Vedic reader, 158.

^{page 281 note 7} Caland, W., Pañcaviṃśa-brāhmaṇa, Calcutta, 1931, 134.Google Scholar

^{page 281 note 8} Delbrück, Altindische Syntax, 149.

^{page 281 note 9} Speyer, , Sanskrit syntax, Leiden, 1886, 185.Google Scholar

^{page 282 note 1} ‘Die Akk. sind mehrfach vom Infin. attrahiert’, Geldner, Der Rigveda übersetzt, I, 148.

^{page 282 note 2} Bollensen, F., ZDMG, XXII, 1868, 577,Google Scholar comparing the type ṚV 5, 2, 7 śunaś cic chepam.

^{page 282 note 3} Geldner, K.F, Der Rigveda. Aus dem Sanskrit … übersetzt (Harvard Oriental Series), I, Harvard University Press, 1951, 87;Google Scholar cf. also Oldenberg, H., Ṛgveda. Textkritische und exegetische Noten, I, Berlin, 1909, 74.Google Scholar

^{page 282 note 4} Geldner, ibid., 174.

^{page 282 note 5} Thus the same scholar, Der Rigveda in Auswahl, II, Stuttgart, 1909, 24.Google Scholar

^{page 282 note 6} Grassmann's ‘conjecture’ giribhyaḥ (Wōrterbuch zum Rigveda, 401) is to be rejected. See especially Bergaigne, A., ‘La syntaxe des comparaisons védiques’, Mélanges Rénter, Paris, 1886, 101,Google Scholar and Oldenberg, Ṛgveda, Noten, I, 411 (whose argument does not, however, appear to be right in all respects): ‘Statt der Waseer, die von den Bergen kommen, hatte sich das ganze Bild der Szenerie, die Berge, die Wasser, ohne Ordnung der einzelnen Elemente, der Phantasie aufgedrängt’.

^{page 282 note 7} ‘Geldner, Rigveda übersetzt, II, 169.

^{page 282 note 8} Geldner, , Rigveda in Auswahl, I, Glossar, Stuttgart, 1907, 108.Google Scholar

^{page 283 note 1} Geldner, Rigveda übersetzt, I, 320.

^{page 283 note 2} Here Grassmann was no doubt mistaken in proposing to read sūras (op. cit., 432).

^{page 283 note 3} cf. especially Aspects of early Viṡṇuism, Utrecht, 1954,Google Scholar 73 ff.

^{page 283 note 4} ‘l’ un des deux substantifs reprend pléonastiquement l'idée de l'autre (type citt dákṡaiḥ)’, Renou, L., Études védiques et pāṇinéennes, I, Paris, 1955:Google Scholar this is not to imply that both the terms used were synonyms in the strict sense of the term.

^{page 284 note 1} Or in the more correct form hendiadyoin. In his Rigveda in Auswdhl Geldner used this term also.

^{page 284 note 2} Müller, C.W.F., ‘Über das sogenannte hendiadyoin im Lateinischen’, Philologus, VII, 1852, 300.Google Scholar

^{page 284 note 3} = Inscr. Graec., II, III, 3004 (Athens).

^{page 284 note 4} cf. also Löfstedt, E., Eranos, VIII, 1908, 99,Google Scholar and Rhein. Museum für Philologie, N. F., LXVII, 1912, 224;Google Scholar Nachmanson, E., ‘Beiträge zur Kenntnis der altgriechischen Volkssprache’, Skrifter Kungl. Hum. Vet. Samf. Uppsala, XIII, 4, 1910, 69.Google Scholar

^{page 284 note 5} See also L཯stedt, , Philologischer Kommentar zur Peregrinatio Aetheriae, Uppsala, Leipzig, 1911, 326.Google Scholar

^{page 284 note 6} Many instances of this idiom were expressed by Müller, C.F.W.,‘Zu Caesars bellum civile’, Festschrift für L. Friedländer, Leipzig, 1895,Google Scholar 543 ff.

^{page 284 note 7} Thomson, A., Indog. Forsch., XXVIII, 1911, 110.Google Scholar

^{page 284 note 8} See Bezzenberger, A., Beiträge zur Geschichte der litauischen Sprache, Göttingen, 1877, 187.Google Scholar

^{page 285 note 1} See Speyer, J.S., Sanskrit syntax, Leiden, 1886, 153.Google Scholar

^{page 285 note 2} Behaghel, O., Deutsche Syntax, I, Heidelberg, 1923, 538.Google Scholar

^{page 285 note 3} Other examples are given by Stoett, F.A., Middelnederlandsche spraakkunst, 1923, 250.Google Scholar

^{page 285 note 4} See Poutsma, H., A grammar of late modern English, I, Groningen, 1904, 365.Google Scholar

^{page 285 note 5} For other examples: Blümel, R., Indog. Forsch., XXXIV, 1914/1915,Google Scholar 285 ff.

^{page 285 note 6} The Dutch poet Perk wrote èn zang èn lof ‘and song and praise’ instead of ‘ hymn of praise’; see e.g. Overdiep, G.S., Stilistische grammatica van het moderne Nederlandsch, Zwolle, 1937, 567.Google Scholar

^{page 285 note 7} cf. Müller, C.F.W., Festschrift für L. Friedländer, Leipzig, 1895,Google Scholar 543 ff.; Wackernagel, J., Vorlesungen über Syntax. Zweite Aufl., I, Basel, 1926,Google Scholar 61 f.; Havers, W., Handbuch der erklärenden Syntax, Heidelberg, 1931, 46.Google Scholar For the use of an apposition instead of a genitive in Latin—e.g. CIL, IV, 5714 liquamen flos optimum; Petr. 37, 8 argentum in ostiarii illius cella plus iacet see e.g. Väänänen, V., Le Latin vulgaire des inscriptions pompéiennes, thesis, Helsinki, 1937, 139;Google Scholar Nelson, H.L.W., Petronius en zijn ‘Vulgair’ Latijn, I, thesis, Utrecht, 1947, 139.Google Scholar

^{page 285 note 8} Quoted by Havers, W., Handbuch der erklärenden Syntax, Heidelberg, 1931, 46.Google Scholar

^{page 285 note 9} Gaedicke, op. cit., 252, ‘von zwei Nominibus in gleichem Casus ist der Gegenstand des einen in dem des andern enthalten oder zu ihm gehörig’.

^{page 286 note 1} Smith, H., A critical Pāli dictionary, I, pp. xxvi and 32;Google Scholar cf. also Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique, XXXIII, 1932, 172,Google Scholar and Renou, , Language, XXIX, 1953, 236.Google Scholar

^{page 286 note 2} Geldner, Der Rigveda in Auswahl, 241.

^{page 286 note 3} Geldner, , Rigveda übersetzt, I, 452;Google Scholar Auswahl, 72.

^{page 286 note 4} See further on.

^{page 286 note 5} Geldner, Auswahl, 82.

^{page 286 note 6} Geldner, Auswahl, 96.

^{page 286 note 7} For ṚV 3, 48, 3 and 4, 23, 1 sómam dhaḥ (Geldner, Auswahl, 55), see the same author's Rigveda übersetzt, I, 388 and 449; for ṚV 5, 56, 3, ibidem, II, 64; for ṚV 8, 102, 15, ibidem, II, 433.

^{page 287 note 1} Geldner, Auswahl, 106.

^{page 287 note 2} Geldner, Auswahl, 134.

^{page 287 note 3} Renou, L., ‘Observations sur les composés nominaux du Rgveda’, Language, XXIX, 1953, 235.Google Scholar

^{page 287 note 4} Geldner, Auswahl, 191.

^{page 287 note 5} For the interpretation of this passage see Miss de Zwart, H.J., in Orientalia Neerlandica, Leiden, 1948, 366.Google Scholar

^{page 287 note 6} Geldner, , Rigveda übersetzt, III, 303;Google Scholar cf. also Auswahl, 194.

^{page 287 note 7} Speyer, Sanskrit syntax, 209.

^{page 287 note 8} cf. also ṚV 1, 89, 10; 95, 8; 10, 10, 4; 107, 7.

^{page 287 note 9} For ‘perseveration’ in expressions such as the German in einer Zeit wie der heutigen, see also Porzig, W., Das Wunder der Sprache, Bern, 1950,Google Scholar 123 f.; in Latin, Ter. Phorm. 591 f. hominem callidiorem vidi neminem / quam Phormionem.

^{page 287 note 10} See Geldner, , Rigveda übersetzt, III, 288.Google Scholar

^{page 288 note 1} For ṚV 9, 96, 15, see Geldner, , Rigveda übersetzt, III, 93;Google Scholar for 1, 95, 6, Geldner, Auswahl, 221, and Rigveda übersetzt, I, 124. Ait. Ār. 3, 2, 1 was discussed by Keith, A.B., The Aitareya Āraṇyaka, Oxford, 1909, 59.Google Scholar

^{page 288 note 2} See also Geldner, , ZDMG, LXXI, 1917,Google Scholar 318 f., who is, however, incorrect in calling this syntactic feature a ‘rhetoiische Figur’.

^{page 288 note 3} See Geldner, , Rigveda übersetzt, II, 30.Google Scholar

^{page 288 note 4} See e.g. Brugmann, , Indog. Forsch., XXVII, 1910,Google Scholar 121 ff.; R. Blümel, ibidem, XXXIV, 1914/15, 285 ff.; Hofmann, ibidem, XLII, 1924,81 ff.; Debrunner, E. Schwyzer-A., Griechische Grammatik, III, München, 1953, 379;Google Scholar Delbrück, B., Vergleichende Syntax der indogermanischen Sprachen, I, Strassburg, 1893,Google Scholar 385 f.

^{page 288 note 5} cf. Behaghel, O., Deutsche Syntax, I, Heidelberg, 1923,Google Scholar 698 f.; R. Blümel, loc. cit.

^{page 288 note 6} See Littmann, E., Indog. Forsch., XXXV, 1915,Google Scholar 244 ff.

^{page 288 note 7} Renou, , Études véd. et pān., I, 67.Google Scholar

^{page 288 note 8} ‘‘Sukzessive Denkweise’, Havers, W., Handbuch der erklärenden Syntax, Heidelberg, 1931, 43 ff., 88.Google Scholar

^{page 289 note 1} Combinations of imperatives are fairly frequent, e.g. Mbh. 3, 297, 20 nivarta gaccha; Rām. 3, 47, 1 gaccha jānīhi.

^{page 289 note 2} cf. also Havers, op. cit., 220 (bibliography), and the present author, ‘Universele tendensen in de Indonesische syntaxis’, Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde, CVII, 1951,Google Scholar esp. 189 f.

^{page 289 note 3} ‘Der Eweer beschreibt … jeden Vorgang in alien Einzelheiten vom Beginn bis zum Ende und drückt jede solche Einzelhandlung durch ein besonderes Verbum aus …’, Westermann, D., Grammatik der Ewe-Sprache, Berlin, 1907, 95.CrossRef Google Scholar

Article contents

‘Attraction’ and Co-Ordination in the Veda

Extract

Access options

References

Save article to Kindle

Save article to Dropbox

Save article to Google Drive

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

You have entered the maximum number of contributors

Conflicting interests