Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
5. CONCLUSION The sentence patterns of English and Kashmiri, studied contrastively in the preceding chapters, have shown that relativization, complementation and coordination are three important metfhanisms of sentence combination in the two languages. Yet they are only three of the numerous ways of linch-pinning various communicative contexts in our day-to-day life . However, an actual discourse or soliloquy, which is always supple, spontaneous and organic, has a complex pattern of its own which makes language functional and in which the constituent sentences are found not markedly discrete but inter-woven. A description of syntactic patterns, however hard we try to remain faithful to the actual discourse, remains after all a description of the written language. It is invariably the sentence of the written language that we describe in a syntactic study like the present one. it is likely, therefore, that some of the sentence types in Kashmiri, which correspond 8>o closely to those in English and have been cited as illustrative examples in this study, may seem a bit unfamiliar to some readers. Taking into account the immense possibilities of sentence patterning in a language, such sentences in Kashmiri have been seen as possible grammatical patterns notwithstanding the fact that they are not in common use. Ttle intuition of the native speaker has been assumed 239 to be the most reliable guide in recognising sentences (including the deviant forms) as grammatical. The apparent unfamiliarity of some Kashmiri sentences may also be attributed to the fact that Kashmiri prose is s till in its infancy and we do not find the variety of styles in it that wfe do in spoken Kashmiri, a variety it is Bound to exhibit in the years to come. Many contemporary Kashmiri w i t e r s and educated speakers in this region have had a background of education through English, inevitably, they must have been influenced by the syntactic patterns of English in framing sentences we come across in written discourses in Kashmiri, Since we do not have a long tradition of Kashmiri prose, a study of its historical syntax is out of the question, A speech act, as Halliday puts it, is "a simultaneous selection from among a large number of interlated options. These options represent the ’ meaning potential’ of language. In speaking we choose: whether to make a statement, or ask a Question, whether to generalize or particularise, whether to repeat or add something new, whether or not intrude our judgement, and so on,"-*- 1 M ,A. Halliday, The context of speech situation "Language 6tructure and Language Function," in NewHortZon& in Linguistics ed, John Lyons, (Penguine Books, 1970), p. 142, 240 conditions our options when we speak or write. For the purpose of convenience of description, we take account of various syntactic patterns separately, but a speech situation hardly arises for a separate syntactic pattern isolated from the other patterns. It is yet to be known whether a complex or compound sentence is produced independently or is the result of subordinating or coordinating smaller sentences. Dominant theories in modern linguistics, including generative transformational grammar, support the latter view. The relation between smaller underlying sentences in the deep structure and larger sentences in the surface structure, as discussed and illustrated at the appropriate places in the preceding chapters, is shown below diagrammatically: Deep structure Sur face structure Context of the speech situation s3 > Sentence combining rules Optional and obligatory transforma tional rules S. X c $2 2 = relativization _~ complementation ~ 3 ~ coordination S4 * Sn i s4 = S l+S2+S3 < n In the foregoing chapters of this thesis, we mainly studied the agreements and disagreements at the syntactic level between English and Kashmiri in respect of the three major sentence forming mechanisms mentioned. These agreements 241 and disagreements are summarised below: 1. For the purpose of modifying a noun phrase restrictively, a restrictive clause is used in both languages (see pp. 56-57) 2. In Kashmiri, a non-restrictive construction does not appear as a relative clause construction, while in English it does (see pp. 64-68) > 3. In English the relative pronoun is either an interrogative pronoun who, which, whose e t c ., or a connective that while in Kashmiri the relative pronoun is distinct from the interrogative and demonstrative pronouns, beginning invariably with morpheme (see pp. 69-70) 4 . In both languages, the choice of the relative pronoun depends on the personal and non-personal character of the antecedent. The personal pronoun in Kashmiri, however, agrees in number and gender with the antecedent noun phrase (see p. 71). 5 . in both languages, there are adverbial relative pronouns showing time, place and manner. In Kashmiri such relative pronouns, however, outnumber those in English (see p p.76-79) 6. in both languages, there are connective relatives: Eng. as, such + as, so + as, Kash. yuth + t'uth, yu:t + t 'u :t 242 in Kashmiri, unlike English, the connective relatives decline according to the number, gender and case of the antecedent (see pp. 79-83). 7* The word order of a relative clause in the two languages is dissimilar. (i) In Kashmiri, it is S - 0 - V - Aux (when the relative NP is the subject), and (ii) 0 - S - V - Aux (when the relative NP is the object) In English, on the other hand, the normal word order remains unchanged when the relative noun phrase is the subject, but the verb takes the final position when the relative noun phrase is the object (see pp. 86-91) 8. In Kashmiri, unlifce English, the antecedent noun phrase can be pro nominal ized while the relative noun phrase may be retained as a full lexical houn phrase after the relative pronoun (see pp. 91-94) 9. In both languages we find postnominal, replacive and extraposed relative clauses. 10. In both languages the postnominal relative clause at the sentence final position has the highest frequency (see P . 11. 96) In Kashmiri, unlike English, the relative clause can extraposed either to the left or right pf the clause be 243 containing the antecedent and there is a regular system o f correlative morphemes marking the two clauses (see pp. 101-10 2) Correlative relativization in English is possible only when the reference of the coreferential noun phrases is non specific while in Kashmiri it is permissible with specific reference as well (see p. 106) 13. In both languages the whole of the relative clause can be extraposed to sentence final position provided that the intervening material between the two clauses is not too long to blur the meaning 14. (see pp. 114-115) In both languages two or more than two relatrfceclauses can be coordinated to modify the same antecedent noun phrase. In Kashmiri, however, we come across double correlative relative clauses as well 15. (see p. H 8 ) The relative clause occurs in cleft sentences in languages. both In such sentences, a relative proform is obligatory in Kashmiri while in English it is optional (see p. 123). 16. The word order in cleft sentences is nearly identical in the two languages (see p. 124) 17. Complex complement, defining either the subject or object can occur after an intensive, a monotransitive or a ditransitive verb in both languages (see pp. 130-132) 244 18. A complement can appear in the form of either a finite or non-finite clause in both languages. 19. The word order of a finite clause in intensive complementation is nearly identical in the two languages; 20. The complementizer that / languages. zf or ki is optional in both There are two patterns of intensive compl ement at io n: (i) NP + be + Adj P + that/zi + S (i i) It /y i + be + Adj P + that/zi + S (in this case, there is a comment on a £active statement) 21. English finite clause is sometimes passivized, which is not commonly done in spoken Kashmiri (see p. 144) 22. In both languages, can an be modified by an adjective in an intensive relation infinitive when the subjectof the matrix clause is the object of the complement. However, in English, unlike Kashmiri, it can also be modified by an infinitive when the subject of the matrix clause is subject of the complement (see pp. 145 ) . 23. In Kashmiri, unlike English, a the non-finite clause complement can appear in the form of a past participle (see p. 149) 24. In Kashmiri, unlike English, an adjective in an intensive relation can be modified by a duplicated verb in past indefinite form (see p. 150). 245 25. In monotransitive complementation, a finite clause appears as a that/zi - clause or a question clause in both languages (see pp. 153-58) 26. The matrix clause in monotransitive complementation can be passivized in both languages (see p. 160) 27. In Kashmiri , there is no change in the person and tense of a finite clause in ditransitive complementation as it is in English, the reason being that there is no indirect narration in Kashmiri (see pp. 172-74) 28. In Kashmiri, unlike English, the subject noun phrase in a non-finite complement in ditransitive complementation always takes a genitive inflection (see p. 179) 29. In both languages there are three central coordinators: t i (=and), y a :/n a ti ( =or) , v^g^v/magar (=but). 30. In Kashmiri, there is a separate coordinator kini for interrogative, which corresponds to or in English (see p. 182 and p. 203) 31. In both languages, there are three correlative pairs of coordinators t i. . . t i (dboth.. .a n d ), y a :...n a t i (either. . .or) , n 3 . . . t i na (=neither.. .nor) (see pp. 209-214). 32. In phrasal coordination, the form of the verb in Kashmiri 246 agrees in number and gender with the noun phrase nearest to it; there is no such concord in English. However, in English the auxiliary or copula in the present and past tenses takes the plural form in phrasal coordination (see pp. 185-88) 33, Coordination by various coordinators occurs under similar semantic constraints in the two languages. 34. The two rules of coordination reduction, v i z . , Deletion Rule and Regrouping Rule operate in almost identical ways in the two languages. However, in Kashmiri, the regrouping rule not only restores the grammatical order of the constituents of the sentences after deletion but also adds necessary morphemes to them (see pp. 214-236) As we take a look at the observations listed above, it becomes evident that Kashmiri and English largely belong together in respect of syntax. The agreements between the two languages far outnumber the disagreements; the former are so striking that they cannot be expressed as simply a case of coincidence. The study has further demonstrated that syntactic typology provides an adequate basis for a contrastive study of languages such as English and Kashmiri, though genealogically and geographically they are so remote from each other.