THE SYNTAX OF PROVERBS ITHE SENTENCE IN AMERICAN ENGLISH PROVERBS:

A CASE STUDY IN QUIRK’S MODELChilukuri Bhuvaneswar, University of Sebha, Sebha

ABSTRACT

From a close examination of A Dictionary of American Proverbs by Mieder (1992), it can be seen that proverbs are formed in almost all the important structures of American English. As such, Mieder (ibid.) offers a counter example to the commonly held belief, stated by Dundes (1975:105), that “there appear to be a finite number of proverb compositional or architectural formulas“(emphasis mine).

Such statements should be confirmed only after extensive data driven studies of the overall syntactic profile of proverbs in a language as well as across other languages. That is why Dundes used the word ‘appear’ in his statement. As far as I know, such analyses in a given framework are lacking.

In this paper, a framework based on Quirk and Greenbaum (1989) has been formulated to include all the basic types of English sentence and it has been used to analyze the syntactic representation of English proverbs with numerous examples to prove the range and depth of the open-ended nature of the patterns. In addition, they are motivated in the ka:rmik linguistic model of Bhuvaneswar (2009). From such an attempt, it has been observed that English proverbs do occur in all the basic types of English sentence. The same is also observed in the case of Telugu also. However, their frequencies range from very low to very high.

This finding is useful in constructing an empirically, systematically, and corpus linguistically tested negative defining characteristic for the proverb reflecting the current trends in linguistic analysis. It rules out a syntactically motivated criterion for the definition of a proverb by showing the variability of syntax in proverbs within themselves with some structures present in some proverbs and some others not present (i.e., the syntactic criterion suffers from the defect of avya:pti ‘under extension’). In addition, the structures present in proverbs are not unique to proverbs alone and hence a syntactically motivated distinction cannot be made between proverbs and other genres (i.e., the syntactic criterion also suffers from the defect of ativya:pti ‘over extension’). Furthermore, it also indexes a positive defining characteristic, namely, prototypicality of proverbs by contrastively underlying it as a constant factor among all the variable syntactic structures. What is more, it offers counter evidence to the formal

1

(Chomskyan), functional (Hallidayan) and cognitive theories of language because the variation in proverbs is found to be neither genetically inherited nor socially generated nor cognitively anchored but dipositionally generated, specified, directed, and realized which supports The Ka:rmik Linguistic Theory of Language. Key Words and Phrasesbasic types; English sentence; syntactic representation of English proverbs; Telugu; defining characteristic; definition; avyapti; ativyapti; prototypicality; formal; functional; cognitive; dispositionally I. INTRODUCTIONIt is commonly believed that proverbs do occur in certain special structures. For example, Dundes (1987:962) feels that “there appear to be a finite number of proverb compositional or architectural formulas (emphasis mine)”; Abrahams (1972: 119-121) writes about binary construction, balanced phrasing, occasional inverted word order, and unusual construction in proverbs as their special syntactic features; and Krishenblatt-Gimblett (1987:821) mentions highly patterned repetitions and structural balance as their special features.

The issue of proverbs having special features is based on an observation of a limited number of examples from the huge corpus of proverbs in a language. As such there appears to be a special list of structures in which proverbs are framed. However, a close examination of this special list in terms of the overall structuration of proverbs in a language shatters the myth that proverb formation is circumscribed by a finite number of syntactic patterns.

In this paper, an attempt has been made to find out examples of different syntactic patterns of proverbs in English and frame them in a syntactic model which includes all the basic types of English syntax.

A. Aims and ObjectivesThe aim of this research is to investigate the syntactic structure of English proverbs at a broad level of their formation.

The objectives of the research are to: 1. examine the sentence patterns of English proverbs and list them out in a theoretical framework based on Quirk and Greenbaum (1989); 2. find out whether these patterns are close-ended or open-ended; 3. analyze how far the findings contribute towards the identification of the defining characteristics of proverbs; and

2

4. motivate their structuration in an appropriate theoretical model, namely, the Ka:rmik Linguistic Model.

B. Materials and Methods A Dictionary of American Proverbs (Mieder 1992) is taken as the source for picking up different proverbs as examples for different syntactic patterns in English. The choice of this dictionary is based on the fact that it is the only dictionary that contains a collection of American English proverbs as they are used by people in their day to day life during their conduct of linguistic action.

Quirk and Greenbaum (1989) has been used to construct a framework involving the basic types of English sentence. This is a grammar based on corpus linguistic studies and so reflects the actual usage in English. This model takes into consideration the important types of patterns at the macro-level of grammar and omits the micro-level aspect of grammar. For example, the seven basic types of a simple sentence are included for analysis while the sub-types of, say, noun phrases within the seven types are excluded from the analysis.

It is so done for two reasons:1. To limit and narrow down the scope of syntactic pattern investigation for

rigorous analysis;

2. To arrive at universally applicable observations with in the same language as well as across other languages; such a method will tell us positively to what extent a profile of syntactic patterning can be cut off to mark variability in the syntax of proverbs.

C. A Theoretical Framework of the Sentence Patterns in EnglishA framework for the sentential analysis of proverbs is formulated by taking the important divisions made in A University Grammar of English by Randolph Quirk and Sidney Greenbaum (1989). The details are discussed in Section III. Furthermore, the syntactic patterns of proverbs are motivated in a ka:rmik linguistic framework which describes the evolution of syntax from creative dispositionality.

D. HypothesisIt is hypothesized that English proverbs occur in a finite number of sentence patterns, specific to proverbs.

E. Scope and LimitationThis paper aims to look at the syntactic patterns of proverbs at a macro-level. As such, it offers an analysis of the patterns exemplified at the higher levels of simple and complex sentences. Hence, it is limited to a general

3

analysis of proverbial structure to serve the purpose of showing that it is not specially constrained and that it shares with ordinary language most of its clausal features.

F. Significance of the Study1. This study shows that proverbs are represented in all the basic types of English sentence as outlined in Quirk and Greenbaum (1989) and proves that their syntax is not constrained to a limited set of structures. 2. This study is also significant in showing that a syntactically motivated criterion cannot be used for defining a proverb. This is so because the syntactic characteristics of proverbs are equally shared by ordinary language and hence such a characterization for defining proverbs suffers from the defect of ativya:pti (over extension). In addition, it suffers from the defect of avya:pti (under extension) also because not all the structures in proverbs share the same features.

G. Explanation of Symbols and Definitions of Technical TermsA set of new symbols have to be introduced in order to discuss the concepts in the ka:rmik linguistic theory. These include arrows ( ), curved down arrows ( ), chevrons ( ), waves ( ), double waves ( ), stars ( ), bent arrows ( ), is equal to (=), etc. Their meanings are given below.

I. Arrows in Equations: or An arrow in an equation after a word or symbol indicates linear movement in the direction of the arrow, either forward: or backward: . It should be read as “impels or gives rise to”. For example, in the following equation, each arrow points forward and should be read as “impels or gives rise to” in the forward (left to right) direction:

(1) Karma Karmaphalam Karmaphalabho:gam Action Results of Action Experience of the Results of Action

(Karma gives rise to karmaphalam gives rise to Karmaphalabho:gam) (2) Disposition Desire Effort Action Result Experience (Disposition gives rise to Desire gives rise to Effort gives rise to Action gives

rise to Result gives rise to Experience. ORDisposition impels Desire impels Effort impels Action impels Result impels Experience.)

If the arrow points backward, the equation should be read from right to left. In a top-down process, the arrows point forward and in a bottom-up process, they point

4

backward. Some of these equations can also be a:nushangik (see elbow connectors for more details).

II. Curved Down Arrows: or A curved down arrow in an equation after a word or symbol indicates transformational movement in the direction of the arrow, either forward: or

backward: . It should be read as “typologically transforms into”. For example,

in the following equation, the curved down arrow points forward and should be read as “transforms into” in the forward (left to right) direction:

(3) Vishaya Jna:nam Bha:sha: Jna:nam

Vishaya jna:nam (phenomenal knowledge meaning knowledge about phenomena) typologically transforms into bha:sha: jna:nam (lingual knowledge meaning knowledge in language in this context and not about language). Here, vishayajna:nam is one type of knowledge and bha:sha:jna:nam is another type. But knowledge is the same and is constant. Only, its qualification is changed from phenomenal to lingual, from non-semiotic to semiotic. In addition, in phenomenal knowledge, the knowledge is intrinsic in the phenomena themselves. For example, in a red lotus, redness and lotusness are intrinsic in the red lotus and the knowledge of the red lotus is directly cognized from the red lotus itself. Here, there is no speech – no words red and lotus, and no phrase red lotus:

(4) The Object Red Lotus The Knowledge of Red Lotus

On the other hand, in the case of the phrase red lotus, the knowledge derived from the hearing of the phrase red lotus is extrinsic to the phrase. It is semiotic knowledge obtained by the semiosis of the phrase red lotus:

(5) The Phrase Red Lotus The Knowledge of Red Lotus

This knowledge is directly derived from the knowledge of the language, the knowledge of the phrase Red Lotus as a linguistic symbol and this symbol can be a symbol representing a real world phenomenon as in the case of the red lotus which is obtained in lakes or can be a possible world phenomenon such as a handless man (losing his hand in an accident) or an imaginary world phenomenon such as a bodyless man. This is the power of language that is used to produce inventions such as television, etc. – visualizing an imaginary phenomenon and realizing it in the real world.

III. Bent Arrows : or

5

The bent arrow pointing downward is used to indicate intrinsicness: and should be read as “intrinsically gives rise to”. The one pointing upward is used to indicate extrinsicness: and should be read as “extrinsically gives rise to”. Therefore, equations (4) and (5) can be rewritten as:

(4a) The Object Red Lotus The Knowledge of Red Lotus

(5a) The Phrase Red Lotus The Knowledge of Red Lotus.

IV. Chevron:The chevron indicates the analysis and qualification of a process. It should be read as “is analyzed and qualified as”. For example, in the equation (5):

(6) Concept Pattern (the blue print of Phonemes -in-Words-in-Syntax)

Structure (the Realization of the Pattern in Sound)

the chevron indicates a process of unmanifest impressional knowledge becoming manifest structure by its analysis and qualification. Hence, the equation should be read as “Concept is analyzed and qualified as Pattern and it (Pattern) gives rise to Structure”.

V. Waves: a. Single b. Double or The symbol wave indicates apparent transformation from one state to another state. It should be read as “apparently transform(s) into”. For example, in the following equation (6):

(7) Sound Phonemes Syllables Words Sentences

the symbol wave should be read as “apparently transforms into” and the equation should therefore be read as:

Sound apparently transforms into phonemes (which) apparently transform into syllables (which) apparently transform into words (which)

apparently transform into sentences.

When we want to indicate the transformation of phonemes into words, we can use the symbol for double waves as in the following equation (7):

(8) Phonemes words

and read the equation as “Phonemes apparently double transform into words” or “Phonemes form words by apparent double transformation”.

Similarly, triple, quadruple, etc. waves can be used to indicate triple, quadruple, etc. transformations.

VI. Star: in a Star Network

6

Stars are used to show networks by connecting different features to the tips of the twinkles (rays) of the stars. For example, the five important realities (dispositional, cognitive, socioculturalspiritual, contextual actional, and actional) in the formation of language can be shown by a star network. Each reality is shown at the tip of the twinkle (ray) and connected to the other reality by the sides of it through the two sides of the twinkle and to the core reality in a radial network. In addition, the diagonal lines radiate from the tips to the other two sides also. As a result, each feature is connected to every other feature as well as connected to the core at the centre also. The feature at the core also forms an inner radial network with the other features in the star. Thus, each feature impacts on the other in an interconnected-interrelated-interdependent (I-I-I) network. This is the basic network which is shown in Fig.1.a below.

Whenever a feature is more prominent in its function in the network, it is shown by bold lines as, say, cognitive and the other features are shown in normal letters, say, contextual. When a feature is thus focused, it can further form another network on its own as an extension network to the basic network shown in Fig.1.b below. Each network is either an apparent transformation of one into another (as in the case of sound-phoneme-syllable-word-sentence network) by typological transformation or categorial transformation (as shown in the case of disposition-desire-effort-action-result-experience where disposition (constitution), desire (knowledge), effort (energy as activity), and action (energy as a material phenomenon) are different categories.

In this type of a basic ka:rmik network, the core (nucleus) feature is always karma (as disposition) which generates, specifies, directs, and materializes all activity, including lingual activity, by floating the relevant features in the physical (the material space), mental (cognitive space in the mind), and spiritual spaces (Cosmic cognitive space) in an I-I-I process.

Furthermore, the core feature can float extended networks through each feature in the basic network (B.N.) one after the other recursively as the extended network (E.N.) 1, 2, 3….n like a sun and its planets and satellites. In the extended network, the feature around which the extended network is formed will be its nucleus, say, cognitive reality in the E.N.1, and meaning in E.N.2. (shown in Fig.1.b and c below).

In a simplified Star Network, the inner connections are not shown for the sake of quick representation. In a similar way, when two arcs are interconnected, it means that the first arc is doubly connected- first to the feature it directly connects, and second to the feature the second arc is connected, say, karma getting first connected to the cognitive reality

7

in the basic network and then to it again in the extended network as shown in the interconnected double arc. This is useful in simplified star networks where the inner connections are not shown.

The following example illustrates the operation of a star network.

c. Extended Network 2 (Satellite)

Function Dispositional Desire Meaning Form Actional Cognitive b.Extended Network 1 (Planet)

Contextual Actional Socioculturalspiritual

Fig. 1. a. Basic Network (Sun)

VII. Elbow Arrow Connector An elbow connector is used to indicate an a:nushangik relation which means a relation in which the properties of the cause are carried into the effect. For example, the meaning relation of a proverb used in a context is an a:nushangik relation. According to The ka:rmik linguistic theory, there are three meanings in a proverb: 1. Referential Meaning; 2. Prototypical Meaning; 3. Contextual Meaning. The referential meaning is the meaning of the proverb derived through the lexical meanings of the words in the proverb. “That flowers leave fragrance in the hand that bestower” is the referential meaning of the proverb Flowers leave fragrance in the hand that bestows them; “That a person who does good to others or wish others well is blessed by that act” is the prototypical meaning; “That a person A who helped another person B by giving an interest free loan to build his house is benefitted by a substantial pay hike” is the contextual meaning in the following conversational exchange that took place in Indian English: (9) A: I helped my brother-in-law to construct his house. B: Good! Flowers leave fragrance in the hand that bestows them.

8

You helped him and you are blessed by a pay hike.

The Proverb “Flowers leave fragrance in the hand that bestows them” carries all the three meanings a:nushangikally in this context one superimposed on the other by vivartam (apparent transformation). These two processes of meaning formation can be shown by the following equations (9) and (10). In semantic change by extension, the original meaning is lost, and the new meaning is retained whereas in a:nushangik meaning, a new meaning is added and highlighted and taken by superimposition. (10) A (Referential Meaning) B [(Referential Meaning +) Prototypical Meaning)

C [Referential Meaning + Prototypical Meaning +) Contextual Meaning]

(11) Referential Meaning Prototypical Meaning Contextual Meaning

The Principle of A:nushangikatvam is a basic principle in ka:rmik semiotics. For example, sound is apparently transformed into words into phrases into clauses into sentences at the lower level and they are transformed into meaning at the middle level; again, meaning is further transformed into functions into desires into disposition at the above level and finally into karma at the highest level. It operates at different levels in language and a comprehensive investigation is needed to study this principle in language.

VIII. Triangle and Centrally Dotted Triangle .A triangle is used to indicate any triadic I-I-I relationship between features, levels, factors, etc. For example, the interconnected-interrelated- interdependent relationship between the levels of form, function, and meaning can be captured by a triangle as shown in Fig. 2a Meaning Form Function Fig. 2 a. Meaning -Function-Form Triangle Sattva (cognitivity/luminosity)

. Rajas (activity) Tamas (inertia)

9

. = Consciousness b. Consciousness [- Sattva-Rajas-Tamas] Triangle

In (2b), There is a central dot which indicates consciousness as enclosed in the triangle whose three sides indicate the three components of traits; disposition (svabha:vam) can also be shown in this triangular form as a complex of guna:s (traits), jna:nam (knowledge), and va:sana:s (internalized habits). IX. Concentric Triple Circles . a. b. [a. Triple Concentric Materialization Circle; b. Triple Concentric Cognition Circle]

A concentric triple circle indicates gradual evolution from Process (concept) – first circle - to Patterned Structure or Pattern (second circle) to Material Patterned Structure (Form) – the third circle. This is similar to the way a seed evolves into a sprout into a tree. If a consciousness-sattva-rajas-tamas triangle is enclosed in it, it indicates the process of the evolution of a linguistic structure in its whole gamut.

The first triple materialization circle indicates the three levels of any type of objectification, action, or experience. In all the three cases, there is the concept, patterned structure, and the form. For example, a building has a concept as a HOUSE; this concept is turned into a PATTERN by a specific shape enclosed within a certain number of walls, rooms, etc. as a blue print; and this pattern is finally materialized with cement, blocks, sand, etc. into a FORM. This is with reference to its formal level of its creation as an object.

Again, this house is made use of for a certain purpose; to put it differently, it is given a FUNCTION and it performs that function in a CONTEXT to generate an EXPERIENCE of it. It can be given any number of functions depending on the dispositional choice of the owner but its intrinsic function is to function as a shelter, a dwelling place; and its extrinsic function is decided by the dispositional contextual choices of the owner such as, personal home, rented home, guest house, etc. This is with reference to its functional level of creation and application as an object. Generally, both form and function go together in planned activity; however, in unplanned activity, or contingent, future developmental activity, the form may be modified and thus gets distorted.

10

The second triple concentric cognition circle indicates the three levels of any type of objectification, action, or experience as a conscious process of a living system (human beings) as a meaning making process. This MEANING has a threefold distinction with reference to the object:

1. Meaning of the object ‘house’ as its structural conceptualization – its structure as an object;

2. Meaning as the functional conceptualization of the ‘house’ as ‘a dwelling place’ – its function as an object;

3. Meaning as the experience of the object, its action, and even the experience of the experience of the object, or the action.

This meaning is a Dispositionally-Qualified-Consciousness phenomenon. To mean something, one should be conscious and conscious dispositionally to qualify the meaning. Therefore, disposition and consciousness have to be included to show this process. It is done by putting a dot to indicate consciousness and enclosing it in a triangle to show disposition.

The entire process of cognition and manifestation of action is encapsulated in this second triple circle. A human being can be considered hypothetically as a complex of Consciousness and Energy. The Consciousness part is the owner of Energy. It is endowed with the power of knowing. The Energy part can be considered hypothetically to be (apparently) transformed into the body, the mind, and the feeling. It projects all activity – be it physical, mental, vocal, experiential, or mixed (an activity like language, if we distinguish between mere vocalization and symbolic vocalization) when charged with Consciousness – mere Energy is lifeless and hence cannot act by itself; it needs an agent to impart qualitative, material activity: coffee cannot be made by milk and coffee themselves without an agent; and so also, language cannot be made by itself without an agent creating the system as well as the system as a symbolic system. We know that language is a symbolic system and so its phonology, syntax, and semantics must have been dispositionally created (through conscious choices in a systemic form) and transmitted and not simply inherited – that is why in KLT, language is considered as ka:rmik action, and not mere mental or social action. In mental action, and social action, the choices cannot be motivated by mind or society – there is a need for a qualifying agent which is the dispositional ego in the human being. Even in the case of nails growing in the body, the growth of the nails is dependent on Life which is Consciousness – the state of coma is not absence of Consciousness, it is a

11

matter of absence of intellection since other activities in the body still persist which do not require intellection – such as the circulation of blood.

In the beginning, there is only consciousness with disposition as its inherent energy. Consciousness has the Power of Awareness and Disposition (Energy) has the Power of Qualification. This is the svarupa lakshanam (Inherent Characteristic) of individual consciousness.

As it reflects in disposition, disposition gets charged and when it is, as it were stirred, becomes active and projects first, qualified conceptualization, and second, brings about actualization of the concept in two stages in a linear process; first, something is conceptualized; second, what is conceptualized is given a form by superimposing it on a material medium – similar to a sculptor superimposing a figure (concept) on rock (material medium). Conceptualization and actualization go together in an automatic process but are separated in algorithmic and heuristic processes.

There is also anyo:nya:dhya:sam (mutual superimposition of one’s qualities on the other) between disposition and consciousness: disposition (a complex of traits, knowledge, and va:sana:s functioning as mind) appears to be conscious like iron in an iron fire ball that appears to be hot, but in reality it is the consciousness that makes the mind conscious like the fire that imparts heat to the iron ball; in a similar way, consciousness appears to be mind like the fire that appears to be the iron ball, but in reality it is iron that imparts the shape to fire. When consciousness does not reflect in a particular mode of disposition, that mode of disposition is not charged and therefore becomes inactive. That is why we get different states of disposition and different modes of thinking, and different types of action. This is what happens in between. This is the tatastha lakshanam (Functional Characteristic).

In the end, again, there is only consciousness with disposition as its inherent energy. In other words, all conceptualization, actualization, and experience of the concepts, actions, and their experience is a vivartam (apparent transformation) of knowledge where the vivartam is generated by disposition.

In the case of language, first, language is conceptualized into a tool, a system, and a resource through a long historical process as it is observed in the linguistic changes that took place in languages and studied in historical linguistics; second, it is retained in the memory of the members of a language community as a shared system of knowledge, as a skill, as it is used and transmitted (as recorded in anthropological linguistics and psycholinguistics); third, it is recalled and used in a context as a resource to construct one’s dispositional (+ ka:rmik) reality.

12

In an ontological perspective, there is only consciousness which is constant from birth to death in an individual. As he is born and grows, he acquires a language through his dispositional functional pressure, and innate abilities for symbolic representation, and starts using it, developing and improving it through dispositional creativity, and also forgetting it through loss of memory as a skill. Therefore, consciousness-charged-disposition as energy transforms itself from SOUND into PATTERNED SOUNDS into a SYSTEM of LANGUAGE (for example, as a system of syntactic structures), as CULTURAL KNOWLEDGE, as REMEMBERED KNOWLEDGE, as A UNIVERSAL HUMAN SKILL, and accompanies a man as a useful instrument to navigate HIS LIVING for ITS EXPERIENCE in A CONTEXT. Here, there is an interesting twist: sound is not produced by a material transformation of disposition but is produced by the activation of the airstream mechanism in the vocal organs; however, its cognition, and memory are products of disposition – one can say a sentence, say, “WHO AM I?” mentally without any movement of the vocal organs!!! And when you steadily probe deeper to find out the source of the sentence, the thought of it stops and simply awareness remains!!! – try saying “WHO … AM…“ slowly and stop at “I” without saying it again and again. You will eventually discover after very critical introspective awareness that AWARENESS!!! It is this awareness and the thought that superimpose mutually on each other to produce the effect of anyo:nya:dhya:sam. That means that there is something inside (Consciousness-qualified-Disposition) that impels a desire to say a sentence; make a dispositional choice (produced by traits) to say this particular sentence in this mental mode and memory to recall this sentence if it is already known; the knowledge of the English language; and the skill (va:sana:s or internalized habits) to say it as it is said mentally. In other words, awareness is differentiated into this mental utterance “Who am I?” by disposition: first awareness qualifies disposition; next, disposition qualifies awareness by mutual superimposition of one on the other like heat and iron in the iron ball. It is this dispositionally qualified awareness under the pressure of disposition that produces the cries in a new born baby and the language in a grown up man. The traits in disposition remain stable for long periods in life but they can undergo modification. How they undergo precise modifications in time is not known to science so far but that they undergo modifications is known from change in human behaviour.

13

a. b. c.

[a. Cognition Triangles; b. Materialization Triangles c. Dispositional Cognitional Action Conjunction]

Fig. 3. The Triangle Of Consciousness-Qualified-Svabha:vam

The triangle of consciousness-qualified-svabha:vam in the second triple circle of cognition can be resolved into four upward facing, concentric triangles of conceptualization: 1. Dispositional Cognition; 2. Mental Cognition; 3. Socioculturalspiritual Cognition; 4. Contextual Actional Cognition. In a similar way, the same triangle can be resolved into five downward facing, concentric triangles of materialization: 1. Dispositional Choice of the Lingual Action; 2. Conceptualization of the (Lingual) Action; 3. Patterning of the (Lingual) Action; 4. Materialization of the (Lingual) Action; and 5. Integration of the (Lingual) Action in the Context.

These triangles are directional, and apparent transformational. The upward direction points out the higher level of action - namely, cognition as an abstract, mental process; the downward direction points out the lower level of action – namely, materialization, as a concrete material process.

These two sets of cognition and materialization triangles get interlocked in the manifestation of action and produce the concerned lingual action. In the

case of proverbs, it will be proverbial lingual action in an appropriate manner.

XI. Networks: Star ; flowchart; and Single Line A B C ……Star networks are used to indicate I-I-I relations; flowchart networks are used to indicate systemic choices in the formation of language; and single line linear networks to indicate linear processes of action.

XII. Double Angular Brackets » or <<Double angular brackets are used to indicate the influence of one on the other in the direction of the brackets. Forward brackets indicate forward influence and backward brackets backward influence. In the following equation (12), the propositional content (semantics) influences form (syntactic structure) and that is indicated by » :

(12) Propositional Content (Semantics) » Form (Syntactic Structure)

However, the form is again influenced by the socioculturalspirituality of the speakers in a language community (the community which uses a particular

14

language in all its range, variety, and depth). Therefore, equation (12) gets modified as follows:

(13) Propositional Content (Semantics) » Socioculturalspirituality » Form (Syntactic Structure).

Even the choice of the lexis is influenced by the socioculturalspirituality of the speakers in a language community. Consequently, equation (13) gets further modified as follows:

(14) Propositional Content (Semantics) » Socioculturalspirituality » Form (Syntactic Structure + Lexis).

What is more, the pronunciation is also influenced by the socioculturalspirituality of the speakers in a language community. Consequently, equation (13) gets again modified as follows:

(15) Propositional Content (Semantics) » Socioculturalspirituality » Form (Syntactic Structure + Lexis + Phonetics and Phonology).

Proverbs are used in a context to perform a specific function. Therefore, there is an interrelationship between function and form since the form has to reflect the function. Again, the functions are mediated through the socioculturalspirituality of the speakers. As a result, equation (13) gets finally modified as follows:

(16) Propositional Content (Semantics) » Socioculturalspirituality » Function » Form (Syntactic Structure + Lexis + Phonetics and

Phonology).

A few more symbols are given below.

I-I-I Network Node; Delink

∧ Reflected on (like an adjunct) ∨ Reflected in (like a quality);

inter-categorially leads to Intra-categorially leads to

Through the Means of Connecting Node in a Cyclic Network

● Heart or Nucleus of the Circular/Cyclic Network;

Reversal of Order Impacts on

The Individual Consciousness (the Being)

The Triad of Qualities [sattva (luminosity or cognitivity) giving knowledge of activity; rajas (activity or analyticity) giving choice and

15

pattern of activity by traits; and tamas (inertia or substantivity) giving inertia or materiality of activity by va:sana:s] of Disposition.

Horizontal Line; Vertical Line; Diagonal Line = Horizontal, Vertical, and Diagonal Axes I, II, III, and IV; the quadrants 1, 2, 3, and 4

II. LITERATURE REVIEWDundes (1975: 104-105) cites the work of Kimmerle (1947) and Milner (1969) in particular in his discussion “On the Structure of the Proverb”. According to him, Kimmerle's analysis “was more of surface structure than deep structure to employ the Chomsky metaphor” (ibid.104). As he rightly points out, “it is highly questionable whether parts of speech per se can significantly illumine the structure of proverbs” (ibid). He also criticizes Milner's definition of proverbs as “traditional sayings consisting of quadripartite structure” (ibid. p.105). A quadripartite analysis assigns four quarters (minor segments) to a proverb and they are grouped into two halves (major segments) which match and balance each other. The opening half is called the ‘head’ while the word or words in each quarter are then assigned a plus or minus value as in:

(17) + - + - soon ripe soon rotten

The second half is labelled the ‘tail’. According to Dundes (ibid.107) “one cannot define any structural element in total isolation from the whole syntagmatic sequence or the whole paradigm” which is what Milner's quadripartite analysis does. Hence, it is rejected with the discussion of the proverb “England has mild winters but hard summers “. In this proverb, the structural significance of ‘winters’ cannot be understood without taking ‘summers’ into account. But clearly ‘winters’ and ‘summers’ are in opposition just as ‘mild’ and ‘hard’. Milner, however, “assigns plus or minus values to each of the quarters as though the other three quarters were not present” (ibid).

After rejecting Kimmerle (1947) and Milner (1969), he proposes his own structural definition of a proverb as:

(18) “a traditional propositional statement consisting of at least one descriptive element, a descriptive element consisting of a topic and

comment” (ibid.115).

He arrives at this definition from Westermarck (1930:5-6) by replacing his ‘subject’ and ‘predicate’ with ‘topic’ and ‘comment’.

The problem with this definition is that it is too broad, and so equally suffers from the defect of ativya:pti (our extension). For example, a cow cannot be

16

defined in terms of its “quadruped” quality. There are many other animals, say, horses and goats (different families), or horses and zebras (different species), or horses and mules (hybrids of species) which share the same quality. A milking cow should be defined in terms of its asa:dha:rana ka:rana (uncommon characteristic) only, namely having a dewlap among the domestic milking animals – domestic, and milking are two characteristics that distinguish it from elands which are wild, and thus make the uncommon characteristic a mixed characteristic. Any sentence that is not a proverb can have a topic and a comment. For example, both ‘topics’ and ‘comments’ are present as members of contrastive pairs in a traditional statement, such as, “A good man helps but a bad man harms” or “Good people are humble but bad people are arrogant” (A good man / Good people, A bad man / bad people; helps / humble, harms / arrogant). This is not a proverb whereas “Man proposes but God disposes” (Man/God; proposes/disposes) is a proverb. So also “A proverb is a short sentence of wisdom” (Mieder 1985: 109-143) can be contested by saying that shortness is a relative term but it can be fixed to contain a certain number of words and so can be taken as an essential textual characteristic of proverbs but not “a short sentence of wisdom” because “all short sentences (of wisdom) need not be proverbs. For example, ‘Honesty is the best policy’ is a proverb while ‘Dishonesty is the worst policy’ is not (Bhuvaneswar 2007: 34-35)”. So what is the use of digging a whole mountain to catch the rat of a descriptive element? It is easily caught and swallowed by the cat of ativya:pti (over extension). We need the ‘dewlap’ of a proverb which is a mixed uncommon characteristic. It is a ka:rmik linguistic characteristic found in the prototype - categorial instantiation property of proverbs (see Bhuvaneswar 1999 and 2002 for more details.)

In the discussion of advaitha siddhantha (theory of non-dualism), Sri: A:di Samkara Bhagavatpu:jyapa:dah not only offers the positive characteristics in the definition of Brahman (lit. that which has no limits and Ekam E:va:dviti:yam ‘Who is One Only Without a Second’) but also the negative characteristics in the famous logic of ‘neti, neti’ ‘Not this, Not this’. Adapting that line of logic of taking into consideration the concepts of ativya:pti (over extension), aya:pti (under extension), and asa:dha:rana ka:rana (the uncommon characteristic) into our linguistic analysis as a non-theological principle, we can look at the syntactic structure of proverbs to provide data driven evidence for showing that proverbs cannot be defined in terms of syntactic criteria alone. In the next section, based on Quirk and Greenbaum (1989), it will be shown that proverbs are represented in all the basic types of sentence.

III. A SURVEY OF THE SYNTACTIC STRUCTURE OF PROVERBSIn this section, the basic types of the simple and complex sentences will be taken up for an analysis of English proverbs. In the simple sentence, the seven clause types, which are SVA; SVC; SVO; SVOA, SVOC, SVOO, and SV,

17

will be analyzed with examples. In the complex sentence, both coordination and subordination will be discussed. In coordination, syndetic, asyndetic, and quasi-coordination will be considered while in subordination, the four important types of nominal, adverbial, comparative and comment clauses are considered. In addition, relative, contingent and verbless adjective clauses are also touched upon in the treatment of adjective clauses. Furthermore, the aphoristic sentence types such as: A. (1) a. The more, the merrier; b. The more danger, the more honour; c. The bigger the body, the larger the heart; d. The more the help, the lighter the work; e. Soon got, soon spent; f. The more you get, the more you want (2) a. Least said, soonest mended. b. Less said, more done. (3) a. Handsome is as handsome does. [b. Johnny is as Johnny does. c. Beauty is as beauty does. d. Foolish is as foolish does. e. Pretty is as pretty does.] (4) Easy come, easy go. (Quirk, et al 1976 : 412) (5) More haste, less speed

B. (6) More money, more sin. (7) Money when counted, women when spanked. (8) Them as lends, spends. (9) Done leisurely, done well. (10) The less the temptation, the greater the sin. (11) Always late, never succeed. (12) Better late than never/sorry; b. Better known than trusted. (13) a. Long fall, late spring; b. Great boaster, little doer; c. Big head, little sense; d. A rolling eye, a roving heart; e. A cold hand, a warm heart. (14) First love, last love, best love; b. Big head, little sense; c. Waste and want, save and have. (15) The fairer the hostess, the fouler the reckoning; b. The blacker the berry, the sweeter the juice; c. The greater the obstacle, the more glory in overcoming it; d. The bigger they come, the harder they fall. (16) Soon got, soon spent. (17) The first shall be last and the last, first; To err is human, to forgive divine; First is worst, second the same, last is best of all the game. (18) First come, first served.

18

(19) Self do, self have; b. Silly question, silly answer; c. (20) Conditions make, conditions break; b. Money makes, money mars; c. Always in a hurry, always behind; d. Good, better, best: never let it rest, until your good is better, and your better , best. (21) Better the fruit lost than the tree; b. Better be envied than pitied; c. Better a good dinner than a fine coat (22) Once a fool, always a fool; (23) Next to love, quietness.

will be taken up for discussion. At the end, it will bee shown that English syntax is not selectively but extensively represented in various syntactic structures of proverbs.

The discussion of the syntactic structure of proverbs is adapted from Bhuvaneswar 2002 (see section III.1.2) and presented below. A flowchart of the various syntactic structures is presented at the end of the Section III.

III. 1. Variation at the Syntactic LevelAt the formal linguistic level of syntax, variation occurs in structure and its figurative configuration. So also in proverbs. Let us take the case of English first and then extend its analysis to Telugu.

1. The Syntactic Structure of English ProverbsA sentence occurs in two clause patterns: 1. simple; and 2. complex (which includes both coordination and subordination) yielding four major syntactic classes: 1. Statements (declaratives); 2. Questions (interrogatives); 3. Commands (directives); 4. Exclamations (exclamatory). Again, each major syntactic class is further divided into different classes and types. In a similar way are also the clauses patterns. In addition, each dependent clause performs various functions such as subject, object, complement, or adverbial in the superordinate clause (Quirk and Greenbaum 1989: 315).A complete analysis of the structure of proverbs involving not only the simple and complex sentence clause patterns but also such aspects as phrasal coordination, apposition, phrase structure, etc. will be worthwhile to contrastively describe the structure of proverbial and normal languages. All the same, an analysis of proverbs up to the clause type level will be enough to estimate the range of the structural choices in them. Therefore, we limit our analysis up to that extent only and leave the analysis downward from the functional aspect.

19

As we are not attempting a functional analysis, the listed examples may not cover all the functional uses of a type. For example, in the major class of statements, in the clause pattern of complex sentence, in the (sub-) class of nominal clause, in the that-clause type, the that – clause performs five functions

[as the subject (e.g. That she is still alive (S) is a consolation.), direct object (e.g. {I told him / I knew} that he was wrong (D.O.).), subject complement (e.g. The assumption is that things will improve (S.C.).), appositive (e.g. Your assumption, that things will improve, is unfounded.), and adjectival complement (e.g. I’m sure that things will improve (Adj.C).]

in normal language (ibid 316 –17). Whereas in proverbs, only three functions are enumerated in the English examples. In spite of that, it does not mean the absence of the remaining two functions in proverbs; it only means that so far they have not been made use of, or not recorded, or not identified (by me owing to personal limitations). That it is so is because of the open ended nature of the form of proverbs. For example, the syntactic structure of a proverb is historically not found to be absolute as we see in different variations of the same proverb starting from the Biblical Time

(24) “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”:

i. Do as you would be done by;

ii. Do it to him before he does it to you;

iii. Do others before they do you;

iv. Do unto others as others do unto you;

v. Do unto others as though you were the others;

vi. Do unto others before they do to you;

vii. Don’t do to others what you would not have done to you; and

viii. What you do not like done to yourself – do not do to others.

From a bird’s eye view of the proverbs in ADAP (A Dictionary of American Proverbs by Mieder, et al 1992), it appears that almost all the major structures up to the clause type are made use of in the formation of proverbs. Owing to the constraints of space, only a few representative samples are provided.

20

A flowchart of the important syntactic structures starting from the sentence and leading up to the minor divisions in coordination and subordination discussed in the analysis is given below in the next page.

A Flowchart of the Important Structures in the General Framework of English Syntax

SVA

a. SENTENCE FLOWCHART 1 SVC

SVO

Statements SVOA

SVOC

SVOO

SV

Rhetorical Questions

Questions

Simple Q/A Proverbs

± Subject

With Let

Sentence Commands Negative commands

21

Persuasive Commands

Exclamations Syndetic

Coordination Asyndetic

Complex Quasi Coordination

Subordination Phrasal Coordination

Subordination (Continued in the Next Page)

b. SUBORDINATION FLOWCHART 2 Nominal Clause Time That -Clause Place Interrogative Clause Condition and Nominal Relative Clause Concession To-Infinitive Nominal Clause Reason or Cause

Nominal –ING Clause Circumstance

Bare Infinitive and Purpose Verbless Clauses Result Adverbial Clauses Manner and Comparison Comparative Sentence Correlation Proportion and

22

Preference Correlation Enough and Too Subordination Non-Infinitive So That and Such That and Verbless

Wellerisms Rhetorical Questions Comment Clauses Proverbs with Imperatives Parenthetic Matter Exclamations Other Syntactic Classes Wh-Word (Complex Sentence) Exclamations Relative Clause Adjective Clause Verbless Adjective Clause

Contingent Adjective Clause

1.1. Simple Sentence ProverbsAccording to Quirk and Greenbaum (1989: 166 – 67), simple sentences are divided into seven clause types, based on the presence of the normally obligatory elements in a clause:

1. SVA; 2. SVC ; 3. SVO; 4. SVOA; 5. SVOC; 6. SVOO; and 7. SV [where S is subject; V verb; O object; A adverbial; and C complement].

In proverbs also, all these are used even though the frequency of their occurrence may vary. For example, statements and commands are numerous while questions are very few and exclamations rare – as can be noticed from a reading of the two proverbial dictionaries ADAP and ODEP (The Oxford Dictionary of English Proverbs by Wilson) – in the major syntactic classes for simple sentence clause types. Possibly, even among the seven clause types, some may be more, some may be less. For example, the

23

incidence of SVOO and SVOC type clauses is less while that of others is more.

A few examples for simple sentence proverbs are furnished below.

a. Declarativesi. SVA [e.g. Mary is in the house.](25) A woman’s place is in the house; (26) The absent are always in the wrong.

ii. SVC [e.g. Mary is (kind / a nurse).](27) a. Love is blind; b. No one is infallible; (28) Ignorance is bliss;(29) A pig in the parlor is still a pig; (30) Aching teeth are ill tenants.

iii. SVO [e.g. Somebody caught the ball.](31) Familiarity breeds contempt; (32) A stitch in time saves nine.

iv. SVOA [e.g. I put the plate on the table.](33) You can’t put a round peg in a square hole; (34) Dogs don’t kill the sheep at home; (35) God builds a nest for the blind bird.

v. SVOC [e.g. We have proved him (wrong / a fool).](36) Six feet under make all men equal; (37) The pot calls the kettle black;(38) Muddy roads call de (the) milepost a liar; (39) The pot can’t call the kettle black ass.

vi. SVOO [e.g. She gives me expensive presents.](40) Every man thinks his own geese swans; (41) You can’t teach an old horse new tricks.

vii. SV [e.g. The child laughed.](42) Money talks; (43) Time flies; (44) A barking dog never bites.

b. InterrogativesAccording to Bhuvaneswar (1999 d, e), proverbs do not initiate an exchange in their basic form P1 (i.e., proverb only). A question is basically a request for an answer – be it an yes/no question or Wh - question or Alternative question – but proverbs are not requests for answers and hence they do not belong to the major class of interrogatives. They are not even exclamatory questions in the strictest sense but they are proper rhetorical questions implying positive or negative assertion [cf. Quirk and Greenbaum 1989: 191 – 200]. A few examples of interrogative proverbs are given below.

i. Rhetorical Questions

24

(45) Who will bell the cat? ; (46) What is a pound of butter among a kennel of hounds?; (47) What cannot gold do?

ii. Question / Answer ProverbsThere are some proverbs in English which have both a question and an answer joined together as a set, i.e., the rhetorical question is provided with the positive or negative assertion plus a comment as the answer – which will not be in rhetorical question type proverbs.

(48) Is a woman ever satisfied? No, if she were she wouldn’t be a woman.(49) Avarice and happiness never saw each other. How, then, should they be acquainted?

In a rare combination of a question with an answer to indicate refusal is listed as a proverb in ODEP (p.883):(50 a) Which way to London? A poke full of plums.

In another instance, an elicitation is given with an answer as part of the proverb:(50 b) What are little boys made of? Frogs and snails and puppy dog’s tails that’s what little boys are made of.(50 c) When shall we eat white bread? When the Puttock is dead.c. ImperativesCommands are classified as:

i. Commands with / without a Subject(51) You must cut your coat according to the cloth;(52) Every man should cultivate his own garden;(53) Don’t make a mountain out of a molehill;(54) Always look on the bright side.

ii. Commands with Let(55) Let every cat cover up his own stink; (56) Let one hat cover one face.

iii. Negative Commands(57) Don’t cast your pearls before swine; (58) Never cast an anchor in shifting sand.

iv. Persuasive ImperativesPersuasive imperatives are created by the addition of ‘do’ before the main verb in English and they are rare in English proverbs.

d. Exclamations

25

Exclamations in English proverbs are not common. However, ODEP gives a few examples of exclamations in simple and complex sentences.(59) God bless the duke of Argyle! (60) Farewell, Gentle Geoffrey!

Normally, proverbs in other syntactic classes can be converted into an exclamation depending upon the context. For example, a declarative proverb ‘ A stitch in time saves nine!’ into: ‘ A stitch in time saves nine! ’to express the emotional realization of the value of a stitch in time. Proverbs with what or how introducing the initial phrase are rare.

1.2. Complex Sentence ProverbsIn Quirk and Greenbaum (1989), unlike earlier classifications, a complex sentence which contains more than one clause consists of both coordinate and subordinate clauses. It can be finite, non-finite and verbless. In addition, it can have nominal, adverbial, comparative, and comment clauses. Moreover, each of these four clauses has its own sub-varieties. What is more, each sub-variety performs different functions such as subject, object, etc. in a sentence.

Based on the above-mentioned classification, let us now do a clausal analysis of English proverbs to know their syntactic structure at the complex sentence level.

a. Coordination in ProverbsIn proverbial clausal coordination, the three (important) coordinators and, or, and but are represented both syndetically (with coordinators present), and asyndetically (without coordinators). Quasi – coordination is expressed by as well as, as much as, rather than, and more than.

i. Syndetic Coordination by And, Or, and But(61) Give a beggar a horse and he’ll ride it to death;(62) Look before or you’ll find yourself behind;(63) Eagles fly alone, but sheep flock together.

ii. Asyndetic Coordination(64) You scratch my back; I’ll scratch yours. [(and) I’ll…](65) Sink, swim or die. [ (or) swim…](66) Beauty lasts only a day; ugly holds its own. [(but) ugly…] iii. Quasi – Coordination by As Well As, As Much As, Rather Than, and More than(67) Might as well be hanged for a sheep as a lamb;(68) You learn as much ripping as sewing;(69) There are few who would rather be hated than laughed at;(70) Keep no more cats than will catch mice(71) There is more than one way to kill a cat.

26

In addition to clausal coordination, and and or also function as phrasal coordinators in general while but is used to link adjective phrases and adverb phrases only in simple and complex sentences (Quirk & Greenbaum 1989: 267).

iv. Phrasal Coordination in Complex Sentences(72) Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me;(73) If you can’t go over or under, go through;(74) Whistling girls or crowing hens are neither fit for God nor men(75) Not by years but by disposition is wisdom acquired.

b. Subordination in ProverbsSubordination is a non-symmetrical relation, holding between two clauses in such a way that one is a constituent or part of the other (Quirk & Greenbaum 1989:309). In English proverbs, subordination occurs frequently and even with complexity of subordinate clauses (SC) within main and subordinate clauses.

(75) If you can’t beat them (1SC), join them ;(76) When you open a door (1SC) you do not know how many rooms lie beyond (2SC);

(77) If you do(1SC) what you should not (2SC), you must hear what you would not (3SC).(78) They may not know just what art is (1SC), but (coordination) they

know what they want (2SC).(79) He who fights (1SC) and (coordination of SCs) runs away (2SC) will

live to fight another day (3SC).

A few examples are given below for each main type of a subordinate clause.

b.1. Nominal ClauseUGE (A University Grammar of English by Quirk & Greenbaum 1989) mentions six types of nominal clauses. All these are used in the formation of English proverbs. A few examples are given below for each type of a clause (without an exhaustive treatment of their functions, which is beyond our scope).

i. That – Clause(80) The only sure thing about luck is that it will change. [- subject complement](81) It is not good that the man should be alone.

27

[- adjectival complement: It is the other form by extraposition of a clausal subject as in:

(82) ‘That the man should be alone is not good’ but not ‘That which had no force in the beginning can gain no strength from the lapse of time.’]

(83) If you fear that people will know, don’t do it. [- direct object]As mentioned in III.1.2.1, examples for the other two functions:

1. Appositive; and 2. Subject are not given.

In this case, they are not identified by me so far. Whether they have been made use of in the formation of proverbs recorded is to be verified.

ii. Interrogative Clause(84) It all depends on whose ox is gored;(85a) Adversity is the stuff that shows whether you are what you thought you were;(85b) Don’t stick your hand in boiling water to see if it is hot;(86) Tell me who your friends are and I will tell you who you are;(87) a) What one doesn’t know won’t hurt him; b) Who will do , will do;(88) You can’t tell what a man can do.

iii. Nominal Relative Clauses(89) Whoever steals the neighbour’s shirt usually dies without his own;(90) Home is where the heart is;(91) Who goes for a day into the forest should take bread for a week;(92) You get what you (pay/try) for.

iv. To-infinitive Nominal Clauses(93) To hoist one’s arm is, of course, painful;(94) It always takes two to make a bargain;(95) It is hard to carry a full cup;(96) The easiest way to lose ground in an argument is to throw mud.

v. Nominal – ing Clauses(97) Telling lies is a fault in a boy, an art in a lover, an accomplishment in

a bachelor, and second nature in a married man.(98) God never helps those who are caught helping themselves;(99) Life is jes pushin’ ‘ side yo ‘troubles and lookin’ for de light.(100) It is ill halting before a couple;(101) Doing nothing is doing ill;(102) A man in suffering finds relief in rehearsing his ills.

vi. Bare Infinitive and Verbless Clauses

28

Bare infinitive and verbless clauses are rare in proverbs. However, on common structure in which the to of the infinitive is optionally omitted is in the comparative constructions with better.

For example; (103) Better cut the shoe than pinch the foot;(104) Better be poor than wicked.

Such constructions are the elliptical forms of:

[It is better to … than to ….] Type.

So (103) and (104) are ellipses of: (103) [It is] better (to) cut the shoe than (to) pinch the foot and (104) [It is] better (to) be poor than (to be) wicked.

Sometimes, these constructions appear in their full form: (105) It is better to hear the lark sing than the mouse cheep. Nonetheless, they (sentences with the anticipatory subject it) should not be confused with the other comparative type: (106) ‘A live soldier is better than a dead hero’ which can also be ellipted to: Better a live soldier than a dead hero.

b. Adverbial ClauseAccording to UGE (P.322 - 330), adverbial clauses can be divided into twelve important types. They are illustrated below with proverbial examples.

i. Clauses of Time (with Subordinators after, before, until, till, when, etc.)(107) It is too late to close the well after the goat has fallen in; (108) Dig the well before you are thirsty; (109) Don’t lay down the plow until you are at the end of the furrow; (110) Make not your sauce till you have caught the fish; (111) When one door closes, another door opens; (112) While drinking from one cup, look not into another; (113) As soon as there are some to be governed, there are also some to govern; (114) Once a drunkard, always a drunkard.

ii. Clauses of Place (where, wherever)(115) For wheresoever the carcass is, there will the eagles be gathered together; (116) Fools rush in where angels fear to tread;

iii. Clauses of condition and concessiona. Condition

29

(117) a. If you want to dance, you must pay the fiddler;(117) b. Act as if it were impossible to fail;(118) You can’t cut corn unless there is corn to cut;

b. Concession(119) Though most be players, some must be spectators;(120) Though one grain fills not the sack, it helps;(121) While the cat’s away, the mice will play;(122) Don’t lick the honey off a briar even if it is sweet;(123a) If they can’t eat bread, let them eat cake; (123b) If the beard were all, the goat might preach;(124) No matter how fashions change, a ruffled temper will never be in style;(125) It doesn’t matter how high you jump provided you walk straight when you get down;(126) Aim for a star even though you hit a cow on the hillside;(127) Whatever way the wind does blow, some hearts are glad to have it so.

iv. Clauses of Reason or Cause(127) An ass thinks himself a scholar because he is loaded with books.(128) Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we may die ;(129) Every man dies as he must.

v. Clauses of CircumstanceClauses of circumstance with the special circumstantial compound conjunction ‘seeing (that)’ are rare in proverbs. However, because, since, and as are observed as clauses of circumstance in proverbs in addition to clauses of reason or cause.(130) Since we cannot get what we like, let us like what we can get.(131) Just because there’s snow on the roof, that doesn’t mean the fire is out inside.(132) A man’s pride in what he knows decreases as his knowledge grows.

vi. Clauses of Purpose(133) One must first scale the mountain in order to view the plain;(134) Don’t cut off your nose to spite your face;(135) Toot your own horn lest the same be never tooted; (136) Act so in the valley that you need not fear those who stand on the hill;

vii. Clauses of Result(137) The leopard is absent, so they play with the cubs; (138) You must never cry so hard about your hard luck that you can’t hear

opportunity knocking;

viii. Clauses of Manner and Comparison

30

(139) Short tailed dog wag his tail same as a long ’un;(140) Work as though you were to live forever;(141) Lose as if you like it; win as if you were used to it;(142) As you measure your neighbour he will measure back to you.

ix. Clauses of Proportion and Preference(143) The bigger the tree, the harder she falls; (144) As a man thinks, so he is;(145) Follow the wise few rather than the vulgar many;(146) A good name is sooner lost than one;

x. Non – finite and Verbless Clauses (Implied Subject)(147) Truth is simple, requiring neither study nor art;(148) (You) Don’t cut the sheet to mend a dishcloth;(149) Men and melodies are hard to know.

C. Comparative SentencesIn comparative clauses, “the comparative element can be any of the main elements of clause structure (apart from the verb) (Quirk, et al 1989). It can occur as the subject, subject complement, direct object, indirect object (very rarely), and an adjunct. A few examples are given below.

i. Equational (as…as) and Differentiating (less…than ; more….than) Sequences of Correlation(150) More things are wrought by prayer than this world dreams of;(151) (It is) better (to have) a dry morsel with quietness than (to have) a

house full of sacrifice with strife;(152) Nothing brings more pains than too much pleasure;(153) The brave man holds honor far more preciously than life;(154) It is a sad house where the hen crows louder than the cock;(155a) You are as old as you feel; (155b) A man is as strong as his will. (156b) Two eyes can see more than one;(156c) A cow needs her tail more than once in flytime; (156d) There is more than one frog in the puddle.(157) Good men and bad men are each less so than they seem.

ii. Enough and Too(158a) A rainbow is big enough for everyone to look at; (158b) A long life may not be good enough, but a good life is long enough.(159) You are never too wise to learn;(160) A secret is either too good to keep or too bad not to tell;

iii. So …. (that) and such….(that)(161) There is no pain so great that time will not soften;

31

(162) There is no such thing as a horse that can’t be rode or a cow boy that can’t be throwed.

E. Comment ClausesComment clauses may be disjuncts or conjuncts such as : 1. as you probably know ; 2. I believe (main clauses) ; 3. as you know (adverbial clause) ; 4. What’s more (relative clause) ; 5. to be honest (to – infinitive clause) ; 6. speaking as a layman (-ing clause) ; 7. stated bluntly (-ed clause), etc. (UGE P.335 – 36)

The very nature of comment clauses such as these which give informality or warmth are not a feature of proverbs. As such, their occurrence is very rare. For example, (163) The cat may look at a king, they say, but would rather look at a mouse any day. However, clauses that introduce direct speech may be considered comment clauses (ibid.337). Therefore, ‘Wellerisms’ can be analysed in terms of comment clauses – wellerisms are direct speech of notations.

i. Wellerisms(163b) “Neat but not gaudy”, said the monkey when he painted his tail blue;(164) “All’s well that ends well”, said the monkey when the lawn mower ran over his tail;(165) “Every man to his taste”, said the farmer when he kissed the cow ;(166) “The case is altered”, quoth Plowden; (167) “Many masters”, said the toad when the harrow turned him over; (167b) “Take what you want”, says God, “but pay for it”.

ii. Proverbs with Parenthetic MatterThere are certain proverbs which contain two units separated by dashes, commas, or semicolons – one main unit and another ‘aside’ or comment.(168) There are always two sides to every argument – his and the wrong side;(169) Success is a chain of gold – but it is a chain;(170) Curses, like chickens, come home to roost;(171) There is no good arguing with the inevitable; the only argument

available with the east wind is to put on your overcoat;(172) It is with narrow-souled people as with narrow – necked bottles: the

less they have in them, the more noise they make in pouring out.(173 a) When you ain’t got no money, well, you needn’t come around.(173 b) It doesn’t pay to hurry, as you pass up more than you catch.

F. Other Syntactic Classes (Complex Sentence)Among complex sentences also, we get questions, imperatives, and expressions in proverbs. Imperatives are very common while rhetorical questions are a few and expressives the least in American English.

32

i. Rhetorical Questions(174) What’s the good of a fair apple if it has a worm in its heart?(175) All are good girls but where do the bad wives come from?(176) When Adam delved and Eve span, who was then the gentleman?(177) Why are there more horse’s asses than there are horses?(178) How can the cat help it, if the maid be a fool?

ii. Imperatives (Complex Sentences)(179) When you see a mule’s fixing to throw you, you jes’ git off;(180) Don’t monkey with the bandwagon if you can’t play with the horn;(181) Let your will roar when your power can but whisper;(182) Help others as they help you;(183) Catch no more fish than you can salt; (184) Kindle not a fire that you cannot extinguish; (185) Get what you can, and what you get hold;(186) Notice that ideas start with “ I ”.

iii. Exclamations (Complex Sentence)(187) Your money or your life! [(Give me) your money or (I will take) your

life.(188) Walk, drab, walk!

Proverbs with the exclamatory structure introduced by wh - words such as:

(189) What a tangled web we weave when we first practice to deceive

with/without exclamation marks are not common as can be observed in ADAP.

(190) How ignorant are those who men say know it all. (Mieder 1992: 326) (191) How sharper than a serpent’s tooth it is to have a thankless child. ( Shakespeare, King Lear ) [ Mieder 1992: 532 ]

In addition to the above mentioned clauses, other types of adjective clauses are also discussed in Quirk and Greenbaum (1989. Their analysis is extended to proverbs also in the next section.

G. Other Types of Adjective ClausesQuirk and Greenbaum (1989 : 378 – 83; 119 – 20) analyse relative, verbless, and contingent adjective clauses.

i. Relative ClauseRelative clauses are very highly productive, especially, after pronouns occurring at the beginning of a proverb. The relative pronoun in a relative clause agrees with the head on the basis of a two-term gender system,

33

personal and non-personal. In such cases, the pronoun ‘who/which’ is used. However, in many cases in (American) English, a general pronoun ‘that’ which is ‘independent of the personal or non-personal character of the antecedent and also of the function of the pronoun in relative clause’ (i bid. 300) is used. A few examples are given below to illustrate its use in proverbs.

a) (192) He who scatters thorns should not go bare-footed.(193) She who is a beauty is half-married.(194) Compete not with persons who have means beyond your reach.(195) Little boys who play with matches get their fingers burned.(196a) The rat which has but one hole is soon caught.(196b) It is a poor frog who doesn’t play with his own pond.

b) (197) He cannot speak well that cannot hold his tongue.(198) They that sow in tears shall reap in joy.(199) It is hard to pay for bread that has been eaten.(200) The bee that gets the honey doesn’t hang around the hive.(201) There is a destiny that makes us brothers.(202) It is the difference of opinion which makes good horse races.

Case is used to indicate the status of the relative pronoun in its clause. The relative pronoun can indicate whether it is the subject of the relative clause or the object or the prepositional complement:

(203) He who laughs last just got the joke. [who as the subject of the relative clause]

(204) Give credit to (him) whom credit is due. [whom is the complement of the governing preposition to]

(205) He whose destiny is to be hanged will never be drowned. [whose is in a genitive relation to the noun head: He is to be hanged. It is his destiny]

(206) A friend whom you can buy can be bought from you. [whom is the object of the relative clause.]

A few more examples are given below.(207a) Whom the gods love die young.(207b) Whom the gods destroy they first make mad.(208) When you go to dance, take heed whom you take by the hand.(209) In whose heart there is no song, to him the miles are many

and long.

34

(210) The poorest man is he whose only wealth is money.

ii. Verbless Adjective ClauseAn adjective clause, according to Quirk and Greenbaum (1989 : 119), can function as a verbless clause as in the following examples :

a) (By then) nervous, the man opened the letter.b) She glanced with disgust at the cat, quiet (now) in her

daughter’s lap.c) Strange, it was she who initiated divorce proceedings.d) Long and untidy, his hair played in the breeze.

I have not come across this type of clauses in proverbs. However, there is a possibility to derive this structure from ordinary proverbs. For example,

a) A lean horse wins the race > Lean, a horse wins the race

b) Love is blind > Strange, love is blind.

c) The tongue offends, and the ears get the cuffing > Strange, the tongue offends, and the ear gets the cuffing.

d) The tongue can speak a word whose speed out steps the steed > Amazing, the tongue can speak a word whose speed out steps the steed.

[> gives rise to]Hence, there is equally a possibility to find such extensions in future if they are not already existent.

iii.Contingent Adjective ClauseA contingent adjective clause expresses the circumstance or condition under which what is said in the superordinate clause applies. For example,

(When) enthusiastic, they make good students.Such clauses are present in proverbs but they are not easily encountered. Two examples are given below.

(211). Friendship, like persimmons, is good only when ripe.(212). The vagabond, when rich, is called a tourist.

The former offers an interesting example of how syntactic structuration is variable and fluid. For example, in (213). ‘The time to pick berries is when they’re ripe’, ‘when they’re ripe’ is a full subordinate clause which is a little more expanded in another proverb (214). ‘Foxes, when they cannot reach the grapes, say they are not ripe’

35

by changing ‘they’re’ into ‘they are’ and ‘when they are not ripe’ into ‘when (they cannot reach the grapes, say) they are not ripe’. This is further ellipted into ‘when ripe’ in the proverb on friendship. Again, another variation, which is the most ellipted form, is given in the proverb (215). ‘The ripest peach is highest on the tree’. So we see a very fluid choice in the structure of proverbs from among the set of syntactic options available to fashion out the social or natural praxis propositional content in proverbs. It can be shown in a scale as follows:

(19) When they (fruits) are ripe > when they’re ripe > they are ripe > when ripe > ripe(st) fruit.

All these examples are interchangeable in terms of their structure, for example, as follows:

a) The ripest peach is highest on the tree.b) The peach is highest on the tree when it is ripest.c) The peach, when it is ripest, they say, is highest on the tree.d) The peach, when it is highest on the tree, they say is ripest.e) When ripe(st), the peach is highest on the tree.

In an SFL framework, a network can be proposed for such elliptical choices but the very choice itself cannot be motivated especially when the same proverb is ellipted as in the case of: (216). The bee that makes the honey doesn’t stand around the hive, and the man who makes the money has to worry, work, and strive.

a) The bee that gets the honey doesn’t hang around.

b) It’s the roving bee that gathers honey.

[(217). A bee works; a beaver works and plays].

The ellipsis can be motivated only in a karmik linguistic framework that offers an explanation for the motivation of all these choices as a dispositional socio – cognitive phenomenon (See Bhuvaneswar 2002 for an explanation).

IV. CONCLUSION AND MOTIVATION OF PROVERBS

A. CONCLUSION So far we have considered the important structures of English as outlined in Quirk and Greenbaum (1989) and examined them in proverbs. From the analysis, we come to the following conclusions.

1. We find that the range of syntactic choices is indeed extensive in English proverbs.

36

Almost all of the basic types of sentence structures are used in the formation of proverbs.

2. In spite of the variations in the form of the syntactic structures, they are frozen in a specific syntactic structure in which the proverb is cognized and patterned.

This empirical evidence has implications for understanding the nature of proverbs as follows:

a. They are syntactically free or open-ended and conclusively not fixed or close-

ended. As such, it disproves the hypothesis that English proverbs occur in a finite number of sentence patterns, specific to proverbs (see p.2).

b. Consequently, it also offers negative evidence for a definition of the proverbs

as not syntactically fixed-patterned structures and positive evidence that even though they are syntactically variable, they are textually frozen structures.

c. And finally, it informs the linguists on a theory of language formation from the perspective of the cognition of proverbs.

3. The variation in the syntactic structure of the same proverb points out the nature

of the stylistic choice and further the very choice of style. This has implication, again, for a theory of formation of language.

B. MOTIVATION OF PROVERBS IN THE THE KA:RMIK LINGUISTIC THEORYIn the following paragraphs, let us motivate a. why the syntactic patterns of the proverbs are open-ended but frozen;

b. why the same proverb is formed in different syntactic patterns; and

c. why the same syntactic pattern is used for different proverbs in the Ka:rmik Linguistic Model.

The ka:rmik linguistic theory is based on the fundamental principle that all action – be it mental, lingual, or physical - is generated, specified, directed, and materialized by disposition.

According to the ka:rmik linguistic theory, language is not only used as a resource for the construction of actional reality at the lower level,

37

dispositional reality at the middle level, and ka:rmik reality at the higher level but it is also produced from it. To explain it more, language is not only created dispositionally by human beings living in a context but also used dispositionally by them for living in a context. Hence, language is dispositional (ka:rmik) action but not mere mental action (a la Chomsky), or social action (a la Halliday), or cognitive action ( a la Langacker).

Language is created through the processing of five realities which are dispositional reality, cognitive reality, socioculturalspiritual reality, contextual actional reality, and (lingual) actional reality and a number of principles – this is the procedure. In order to process the formation of language, a number of techniques such as the technique of superimposition, a:nushangikatvam (cause inherited into the effect like clay into the pot), etc. are also used.

To motivate the syntactic structuration of proverbs in the ka:rmik linguistic model of Bhuvaneswar (see 2009 for a detailed discussion on this new linguistic approach), we need to first know what the basis of a particular syntactic structure for a proverb is. In addition, we must also know how the syntax of a language is created as a system of dispositional choices of representing the actional, and dispositional realities; then, how this dispositionally created system is used to fashion out proverbs.

First, let us briefly outline a how a syntactic system is created in a language by the language community.

1. The Motivation of a Syntactic System in a Language (English)

According to the Ka:rmik Linguistic Theory, a language is not only used as a resource for the construction of dispositional reality but is also produced from it. It is produced as follows:

1. The human beings are genetically endowed with the faculty of consciousness that enables them to be aware of: the actual world out there; the world in here (inside their being), the possible world by imagination of the worlds out there and in here, and finally the imaginary (psychic) worlds which are not actual and possible; and analyticity, memory, disposition, and vocalization. They conduct their living by pursuing different biological, sociological, psychological, and spiritual (not necessarily religious but anything related to world views) desires by mental, vocal, and physical contextual action, and experiencing their results as pleasure and pain.

2. Since they are dispositionally complex, their intellection, emotion, and experience are complex, and consequently get complex desires. These complex desires cannot be fulfilled by ordinary physical or mental action; they require complex means to achieve the complex effects (goals). Hence, a complex dispositional functional pressure builds up in their personalities and in the process erupts vocalization as a solution to solve the problem of fulfilling complex desires (for example, to communicate danger,

38

vocalizations erupt; and to communicate specific and complex danger, a specific vocalization is required; this builds up functional dispositional pressure and brings forth semiotic representation by gradual evolution of the vocalization into a patterned vocalization into a recognized vocalization as meaningful into a semiotic vocalization. The process is captured in the following equation:

(20) a. Dispositional Functional Pressure Vocalization Meaningful Vocalization Patterned Vocalization Semiotic

Vocalization Symbolic Communication

Once sounds are turned into symbols, language starts and a chain reaction sets in owing to the innate dispositional creativity of the human beings. People begin to explore, experiment, and create new sounds, new patterns, and increase the range, depth, and variety of the phonemic symbolic system.

b. Vocalization Sound Meaningful Sound Patterned Sound Phoneme

Phonemic System

Gradually, as human beings use, refine, and expand this system, they develop a lexical system by their dispositional creativity to meet the contextual needs. They do so by mathematical means of addition, subtraction, etc. of the phonemes. When this system is standardized by individual-collective-contextual- actional conjunction, it becomes the established lexical system of communication.

c. Sounds Phonemes Combined Sounds Phonemic Syllables

Patterned Syllables Meaningful Syllables Words

Gradually, as human beings use, refine, and expand this system, they develop a syntactic system. When this system is standardized by individual-collective-contextual- actional conjunction, it becomes the established syntactic system of communication.

d. Words Combined Words Phrases Patterned Phrases Systemic Phrases

e. Words Phrases Clauses Patterned Clauses Systemic Clauses

f. Sentences Patterned Sentences Meaningful Systemic Sentences

g. Utterances Turns Exchanges Transactions Discourse

Other systems within systems also develop in a similar way. Finally, a language is established but it is always in a continuous flux since disposition fluctuates synchronically and diachronically. However, this system is I-I-Ily

39

developed in combination with all the levels of language: Formal, Functional, Cognitive, Dispositional, Experiential. This established formal and functional system of language becomes the basis for the formation of proverbs.

2. The Motivation of a Proverbial Syntactic System in a Language (English)

1. Why is the structure of a proverb as it is and why is it not as it is not? [What is the basis for the choice of a particular syntactic structure for a proverb?]

In the formal structuration of a proverb, there are five levels: 1. Phonetics; 2. Phonology; 3. Lexis; 4. Syntax; 5. Semantics. All these five levels are interconnected-interrelated-interdependent in a formal network of creation of the proverb. At the same time, from the perspective of semiotic representation, we can posit a non-semiotic awareness of the propositional content of the proverb in the mind of the creator of the proverb. Later on, this propositional content is manifested in the form of speech. In other words, the concept is patterned and then structured as a text as shown in the following linear equation.

(21) a. Concept Pattern (the blue print of Phonemes -in-Words-in-Syntax)

Structure (the Realization of the Pattern in Sound)

At the level of patterning, all the four levels of form (phonetics-phonology-lexis-syntax) and their abstract meaning (semantics) are networked to give its manifest patterned structure. Their interconnection-interrelation-interdependence can be shown in the following figure.

Phonology Process (Concept)

Phonetics Lexis Semantics Syntax Pattern Structure

Fig. 4. a. Phonetics-to-Syntax Network b. Process-Pattern-Structure

To explain it further, the structure embodies the pattern, and the pattern further embodies the linguistic concept. At the same time, the structure embodies the linguistic concept also in an a:nushangik (the effect of inheriting the properties of the cause like the pot inheriting the clay) relationship – indicated by the symbol :

40

b. A (Concept) B [(Concept +) Pattern] C [(Concept + Pattern +) Structure)]

This is with reference to the proverbial structure as a linguistic concept (pasyanthi) in its unmanifest cognitive state in the consciousness which becomes a linguistic patterned structure (madhyama) in the mind, underlying the concept, and finally a linguistic form (vaikhari) underlying the concept and the pattern as vocal speech. [The patterned structure can be both seen as a text and heard mentally whereas the form can only be audible when uttered but the concept is an unmanifest impression in the memory which can only be recalled by will.] This networking takes place in the mind of a proverb user who already knows the proverb.

There is another process, namely, the process of symbolic representation. Here, the proverb as a concept is non-linguistic – there is no speech in its cognition; the concept is non-semiotic in awareness, that is, the practice (which is represented as the propositional content) is cognized as it is as a phenomenal structure with its own pattern and structure. Both the structure and the pattern of the activity are already out there in the external (or possible or imaginary) world of its occurrence. Only, its identification and selection for the purpose of proverbialization have not been made. As they are made, they are first non-semiotic. For example, the activity of flowers leaving fragrance in the hand of the bestower is cognized in terms of real flowers, fragrance, hand, and bestowing as an action and leaving fragrance in the hand as a result of this action in a cause - effect relation. This cognition may be a one-time cognition or multiple-time cognition of the practice. In the case of the former, there is only one specific instance which can be extended by deduction to other such instances. And in the case of the latter, there are many instances. As a result, there will be a general awareness by induction and insightful behaviour. This non-semiotic awareness (vishaya jna:nam ‘phenomenal knowledge’) is symbolically transformed into semiotic awareness (bha:sha jna:nam ‘lingual (semantic) knowledge’)) in its unmanifest state in the consciousness.

(22) Vishaya Jna:nam Bha:sha: Jna:nam

[In the case of animals, there is no such symbolic transformation into speech. For example, when a tiger attacks a deer, the deer does not know the attacking of the tiger as “Now, the tiger is attacking me; so, let me run” in speech. Nonetheless, it knows it either by non-semiotic awareness of the practice when it sees the tiger by being alert or by its own symbolic system of communication (vocalizations or calls) when it is commuinicated – otherwise it will not run away.]

Later on, this unmanifest semiotic knowledge as a concept is patterned and structured in the form of speech at its formal level of phonetics-phonology-

41

lexis-syntax by another categorial transformation, this time a categorial transformation from semiotic knowledge as awareness into knowledge as sound energy (matter):

(23) Concept (Patterned Sound) Energy [Matter =] Proverb

[There is an interesting inference to be made here. At the level of creation of this material universe, the concept of the material universe must also have been in a similar state in the Immanent Intelligence Principle of Nature (the Absolute Laws of Nature) which must have manifested it as matter through energy by double transformation from concept into energy into matter as given by Einstein’s famous mass – energy equation:

(24) Concept E (nergy) M(ass) C (velocity of light) ² = Universe.

In other words, the same principle which operates at the macrocosmic creation is also reflected in the microcosmic human creation. To put it differently, the human beings are endowed with the same ability of creation – within - creation but only with a limited power of patterning but not creating the sound (which is already designed by the Laws of Nature). That means the consciousness in human beings reflects the Absolute Consciousness in Nature – if there is one - just like the infinite water drops of the ocean reflect the sun. How this is done is a mystery which science has to resolve!]

It is at this primary level of cognition that the syntactic structure (along with other levels) is chosen. And it is chosen by a complex

networking of socioculturalspiritual, natural, and lingual praxis to construct the experiential reality for the proverb user by another set

of transformations as follows:

(25) Natural Praxis Socioculturalspiritual Praxis Lingual Praxis.

On the one hand, this lingual praxis is involved in the creation of the proverb; on the other hand, its further use is achieved by another set

of transformations as follows:

(26) Lingual Praxis Contextual Actional PraxisDispositional Speech Actional Praxis.

Finally, the speech actional praxis produces the experiential praxis via dispositional praxis by another set of transformations as follows:

(27) Speech Actional Praxis Dispositional Actional Praxis Experiential Praxis.

42

The creation of the lingual praxis (i.e., the formation of the proverb), its application in a context (i.e., its function or the cause of its application leading to the function), and its experience (i.e., the realization of the function or the effect of the application of the proverb in the context by both the speaker and the hearer) are all interconnected-interrelated-interdependent in a huge mind boggling network of action-reaction sequences for the construction of the experiential reality (i.e., the ka:rmik reality as the experiential principle of cause-effect reality) of the human being. It constitutes just one instance of experience in his living where his living is a sum total of such experiences from birth to death. This experiential reality which is living is created, sustained, and dissolved by another cardinal principle of networks-within-networks in which the formation, application, transmission, and retention of proverbs forms one optional network.

First, there is the macrocosmic creation network built with Time – Space – Matter- Action – Experience (Fig. 4a); within it, there is the macrocosmic actional network with objects –relationship – action – results (Fig. 4b); within that there is atomic action (of parts) - holistic action (of the whole unit) - spherical (radial) action (I-I-I action of the parts and the whole) - ka:rmik action (parts-whole-greater whole – beyond the whole) action)) with states of being and states of moving (Fig. 4c); and, there is the insentient-sentient-contextual-creational action (Fig 4d). Second, there is the microcosmic creation network of living systems built with existence-action-living-experience (Fig. 4e); within it, there is the action network built with mental-vocal-physical-experiential action (Fig. 4f).

These action networks are dispositionally generated, specified, directed, and materialized for the construction of ka:rmik reality. The ka:rmik reality is qualified by the type of action that is generated. For example, for mental action, it will be mental ka:rmik reality; for vocal action, vocal ka:rmik reality; and for physical action, physical ka:rmik reality. Furthermore, it can be successively qualified by taking the sub type of action. If the vocal (lingual) action reality is proverbial action, it will then become proverbial (lingual actional) ka:rmik reality.

Within that again, there is the causal network of action with disposition-desire-action-result-experience (Fig. 5a); and within that once again, there is the lingual (action) network again with form-function-meaning-cognition-disposition (Fig. 5b).

e. E.N. 4 Existence f. E.N. 5 Experiential

Sentient Living Action Physical Mental

43

Insentient Contextual Experience Vocal (Lingual)

d. E.N. 3 Creational Holistic c. Extended Network 2 (Satellite) Atomic Spherical Ka:rmik Phenomenal Action Matter Relation Results Objects Time Cosmic Action b.Extended Network 1 (Planet)

Space Experience Fig. 4. a. Basic Network (Sun)

Action Function

Desire Result Cognition Meaning

Disposition Experience Disposition Form

Fig. 5a. Causal Network 5b. Lingual (Functional – Formal) Network

The Proverbial Action Network again forms its own form – function – experience networks – within – networks. First, there is the Network of Nature-al Praxis (N.P.) - Socioculturalspiritual Praxis (S.C.P.) – Contextual Actional Praxis (C.A.P.) – Lingual Actional Praxis (L.A.P.); second, there is the network of Action – Phenomenal Action (P.A.) – Categorial Action (C.A.) – Prototypical Action (P.A.) – Symbolic Action (S.A.) – Dispositional Action (D.A.); third, there is the network of Context – Desire - Speech Act – Discourse - Contextual Action (Contextual A.). These are the basic networks for the function of proverbs as functional – formal actional structures as shown in Figures 6 a -d.

N.P. Phenomenal Action

44

S.C.P. Dispositional Action Categorial Action

L.A.P. C.A.P. Symbolic Action Prototypical Action

Fig. 6a. Network of Natural Praxis b. Network of Action

Desire Function

Context Speech Act Cognition Meaning

Contextual Action Discourse Disposition Form

c. Network of Contextual Action d. Lingual (Functional-Formal) Network

Proverbs can also be formed as formal – functional structures when they are transformed into proverbs from already written texts (especially literary) which have not yet become proverbs. For that, another network operates. In a formal – functional proverb network, there is the proverbialization of a text into a proverb by Text – Prototypicalization – Contextual Prototypicalization of a Categorial Action by the Text – Proverbialization as shown below in Fig.7.

Text

Prototypicalization Proverbialization Contextual Prototypicalization [ Blank Twinkle (not occupied)]

Fig. 7. Proverbialization (Formal-Functional) Network

Proverbs can also be formed as formal – functional structures when they are transformed into proverbs from already written texts (especially literary) which have not yet become proverbs. For that, another network operates. In a formal – functional proverb network, there is the proverbialization of a text into a proverb by Text – Prototypicalization – Contextual Prototypicalization of a Categorial Action by the Text – Proverbialization (Fig.7).

45

As texts become proverbs by performing a proverbial function, they are standardized by individual – collective – contextual conjunction of action at all the formal, functional, aesthetic, socioculturalspiritual, cognitive, and dispositional levels in I-I-I network. Consequently, so many factors come into play in generating, specifying, directing, materializing, and standardizing the proverbs. The natural and socioculturalspiritual practice; its aesthetic appeal; and the socioculturalspiritual acceptability of the practice and its form and its function; its dispositional choice and cognition as well as its cognitivity to be this and that as so and so in such and such form are all involved in the creation of a proverb.

The practice as it is observed is an assertion since it has been discovered that flowers transfer fragrance to the hand that carries them and when they are given to someone, still the fragrance lingers in the hand. The creator of this proverb – in its early state of origin – chose this observation and might have used it in that assertion form or might have arrived at it after a trial and error method. Consequently, the proverb is in its corresponding declarative sentence form. The people who received it accepted that form and used it again and again giving it currency and the frozen pattern. That means that there is 1. a dispositional cognition of the natural and social practice of flower- giving; 2. a semiotic representation of this practice; 3. a proverb formation out of this practice; and 4. its standardization by individual-collective-contextual conjunction. At all these levels, there is a dispositional cognition and choice as shown below in the following analysis of the choice of the syntactic structure. The same can be equally applied to all other proverbs and systematically motivate open-ended variation in their syntax.

In the following sections, a brief description of how a proverb is formed is motivated. Prior to the formation of a proverb, the linguistic system in which it is formed must have evolved since proverbs are products of a linguistic system, say, English or Telugu. A linguistic system also must have evolved in a similar way (see Bhuvaneswar 2000 for a detailed discussion on this topic).

A. Phase I : Dispositional Cognition of Natural and Social Praxis

Before the formation of the proverb, the propositional content of the proverb is derived from the observation (cognition) of natural or social praxis, its further interpretation as non-semiotic knowledge by insightful behavior and identification and transformation into semiotic knowledge. The mechanism of cognition involves the following processes and strategies (at the level of cognitive reality):

1. PerceptionAll living systems including human beings are endowed with the single most unique ability of awareness through sensory perception. In human beings

46

it is at the highest with five senses of perception (in animals it may be lesser than that). The impressions received by the senses are processed in a complex network to produce knowledge.

2. AlertnessOne needs to be alert to observe the natural or social praxis, for example, the natural practice of flowers imparting their fragrance to the objects in contact and the social practice of people offering flowers to others.

3. Attention and Focus One needs to interpret the observed practice as this and that (objectification or indeterminate identification); as so and so (specification or determinate identification); and as such and such (qualification or attributive specification), for example, interpreting the natural practice of flowers imparting their fragrance to the objects in contact as one practice (this practice in an indeterminate manner) and people offering flowers to others as another practice (that practice in an indeterminate manner by differentiation as two practices) and then identifying them to be so and so practices of flowers imparting fragrance and people offering flowers and further analyzing them to be such and such as the first practice to be as flowers having the property of imparting fragrance and the second practice as people having the cultural habit of offering flowers to others on special occasions, etc. . The first one is indeterminate awareness; the second determinate awareness; and the third qualitative awareness. The cognizer should also have interest in the practice as an interesting (salient) phenomenon and also as one that can be used purposefully. This interest will enable him to remember this practice and recollect it when there is a dispositional functional pressure to use it for proverbialization. Thus, this non-semiotic knowledge is held in memory. It gets reinforced by a repetitive observation of the practice in various contexts.

To summarise, Phase I contains the following stages of analysis: i. Sensory Perception (Observation); ii. Interpretation of the Sensory Impressions; iii. Identification; iv. Memory.

B. Phase II: The Process of Non-semiotic to Semiotic Transformation of KnowledgeIn order to gain semiotic awareness, the following stages in Phase II must have occurred.

1. Representation of FunctionThe non-semiotic knowledge held in memory and reinforced by a repetitive observation of the practice in various contexts is further internalized as a physio-social practice with its associative results: that offering flowers (a social practice) leaves fragrance in the hands of the bestower (a physical practice). The individual who first used this physio-social practice must have

47

had knowledge of similaic and metaphorical use of language, and by a flash of dispositional creativity gained by insightful behaviour (see Gleitman et al 2000: 139-41 for a detailed discussion on this topic of complex cognition) used this example of the social practice as a simile (…X… as/like flowers leave fragrance in the hands of the bestower where X is a contextually occurred social practice of helping the brother-in-law to build a house as given in the example (9) in P.8 of this article) to mean “people who do good things will be rewarded” as an assertion. Later on by its reception and repetitive use, someone must have changed the structure into a metaphor (see P.8 in this article for an actual use of this proverb in that form in Indian English). Another person might have chosen this proverb to perform another speech act function, say, an expressive by implicature derived from background knowledge as given in the hypothetical example with the same event:

(28) A: He has been promoted and got a good pay hike. B: Flowers leave fragrance in the hand of the bestower!

So the functions are derived one after the other by its frequent use through the dispositional creativity of the users. As they are used, their functions get familiarized and stored in the cultural memory of the people. At the same time, their form also will be standardized and gets transmitted from one person to another.

What is more, as the function is assigned, its meaning is also assigned in a triple manner as discussed previously (P. 8) and given below once again. Therefore, form, function, and meaning go together in an I-I-I network.

2. Representation of MeaningAccording to The ka:rmik linguistic theory, there are three meanings in a proverb: 1. Referential Meaning; 2. Prototypical Meaning; 3. Contextual Meaning. The referential meaning is the meaning of the proverb derived through the lexical meanings of the words in the proverb. “That flowers leave fragrance in the hand of that bestows them” is the referential meaning of the proverb Flowers leave fragrance in the hand that bestows them; “That a person who does good to others or wish others well is blessed by that act” is the prototypical meaning; “That a person A who helped another person B by giving an interest free loan to build his house is benefitted by a substantial pay hike” is the contextual meaning in the following conversational exchange that took place in Indian English:(29) A: I helped my brother-in-law to construct his house.

B: Good! Flowers leave fragrance in the hand that bestows them. You helped him and you are blessed by a pay hike.

The Proverb “Flowers leave fragrance in the hand that bestows them” carries all the three meanings a:nushangikally in this context one

48

superimposed on the other by vivartam (apparent transformation). These two processes of meaning formation can be shown by the following equations (10) and (11). In semantic change by extension, the original meaning is lost, and the new meaning is retained whereas in a:nushangik meaning, a new meaning is added and highlighted and taken by superimposition.

(30) A (Referential Meaning) B [(Referentail Meaning +) Prototypical Meaning)

C [Referentail Meaning + Prototypical Meaning +) Contextual Meaning]

(31) Referentail Meaning Prototypical Meaning Contextual Meaning

The Principle of A:nushangikatvam is a basic principle in ka:rmik semiotics. For example, sound is apparently transformed into words into phrases into clauses into sentences at the lower level and they are transformed into meaning at the middle level; again, meaning is further transformed into functions into desires into disposition at the above level and finally into karma at the highest level. It operates at different levels in language and a comprehensive investigation is needed to study this principle in language.

3. Representation of Form and BindingThe individual who has knowledge of the proverb in its entirety (i.e., who knows the function, meaning, and the fixed form of the proverb as it is standardized by the individual-contextual-collective conjunction of the proverbial usage) recalls it and uses it in the context. This is basically a complex cognitive process which is automatized as a va:sana (internalization of a habit). His complex cognition of the proverb and its choice and vocalization by insightful behavior are bound by the life of the individual (through disposition + mind + vocalization) because a dead man cannot utter a proverb in a context. It is shown in the following graph. His disposition shown in the first quadrant of the graph produces the inclination to use the proverb by impacting on the knowledge and the va:sana; second, as shown in the second quadrant, this proverb is culturally processed – it is already cognized contextually and becomes a cultural heritage prior to its use as a proverb – in the context of its use; and third, as shown in the third quadrant, it is cognized by recall for its use in the context as shown in the fourth quadrant, and finally it is used (in the context) as shown by the arrow at the tip of the axis in the third quadrant.

Graph 1: Combined Triaxial Graphs of Cognitive Actionality Quadrants in the Ka:rmik Linguistic Theory

Legend

49

The Individual Consciousness (the Being in the Human Being or the soul or the ji:va)

The Triad (sattva giving knowledge of activity; rajas giving choice of activity by traits; and tamas giving inertia or materiality of activity by va:sana:s) of Disposition.

Horizontal Line; Vertical Line; Diagonal Line: Horizontal, Vertical, and Diagonal Axes

I, II, III, and IV the quadrants 1, 2, 3, and 4 Spirituality Ideology Cogneme Concept

Society Participants II III

Culture Relation Guna:s Context

I IV

Vasanas Activity

Knowledge Knowledge Contextual Actionality (Dispositional) (Phenomenal) Actionality (lingual)

Graph 2 : Tricircled Disposition-Qualified-Conscoiusness Creating Action in The ka:rmik linguistic theory

Legend s 1.inner, 2. medial, 3. outer: pasyanthi ‘cognitive’; madhyama ‘pattern’; vaikhari ‘form or phonic’ levels of realization of language; The Triad of

Svabha:vam The graph indicating the formation of lingual action ● or The Individual Consciousness

Phase III

50

Once a potential proverbial utterance is semiotically cognized, the stage is set for its application in a context to coordinate the coordination of action and construct proverbial dispositional reality for its ultimate experience. Therefore, in phase III, we have the creation of the proverb (or its recollection if it is already created; or its modification, if it needs to be according to the dispositional choice of the user), its use, and its experience.

i. CreationA proverb (P) is pentafacial in its configuration: 1. Formal; 2. Functional; 3. Semantic; 4. Socioculturalspiritual Cognitive; and 5. Dispositional. Each one is interconnected-interrelated-interdependent with the other in a neural star network pattern with disposition as the nucleus. In this floating, spherical, cognitive network, disposition can choose a particular face and highlight it by connecting the other faces to it as the nucleus and thus orient the cognition with it as the centre. In that sense, it floats the five variables form (F), function (FU), meaning (M), socioculturalspirituality (S), and [traits (T) or qualitative inclinations in] dispositionality (D) and connects them by centering one of the variables.

It is spherical in the sense each variable is interconnected-interrelated-interdependent like the spokes in a wheel. It is cognitive in the sense that this networking of all the variables is cognized in the mental space of the mind and materialized in the physical space of the contextual action through sound in the vocal space as a part of the physical space. The cognition of the process, its patterning and final structuration as the utterance of the proverb (in its potential form) in speech or as the text in writing is controlled by the individual dispositionality of the maker of the proverb in the first instance, then by the interpersonal dispositionality of the users, and finally the collective dispositionality of the users of the proverb in the final stage of the standardization and freezing of the proverb as this or that to be so or so in such or such a manner. Thus, disposition generates, specifies, and directs the conceptualization of a proverb as this and that, so and so, and such and such.

Later on (in a linear view) or at the same time (spherical or ka:rmik view), the same disposition materializes the pattern as a specific patterned structure as this or that, so or so, and such or such. Consequently, we get formal cognition oriented proverbs, functional cognition oriented proverbs, semantic cognition oriented proverbs, socioculturalspiritual cognition oriented proverbs, and dispositional oriented proverbs from the formal and functional and semantic and socioculturalspiritual and dispositional networks of proverbs as shown in Figure 8: Proverb Cognition Networks.

51

P

S D

FU

F

M P

S M

F

D

FU

a. Formal Cognitional b. Functional Cognitional c. Semantic Cognitional Network Network Network

d. Socioculturalspiritual Cognitional Network e. Dispositional Network

Figure 8: Proverb Cognition Networks

There are five important factors in the formation of proverbs: 1. (the propositional content of) the social practice; 2. function; 3. form; 4. aesthetic appeal; 5. dispositionality.

First, the propositional content determines to a great extent (but not ultimately as will be shown later) the choice of a syntactic structure. Generally, the syntactic class, pattern and tense, aspect, and modality of the syntactic structure is generated by the context of the social practice in which the proverb is evolved. For example, if a practice involves the function of a directive, the structure also will have a directive but not question marks, or wh-words; if it does have an elicitation, then there will be such a structure as in the case of the following examples in English and Telugu.

(218). Never bark up the wrong tree. [There is a social practice of barking up the wrong tree. Hence, this directive to not to do so.]

(219). a. Never climb a crooked tree; b. Never comb a bald head.

(220). Never do anything yourself you can get somebody else to do.

(221). a. Never start off on the wrong foot; b. Never judge before you see.

(222). eluka tcha:vuki pilli mu:rcha po:tunda:?

52

P

S M

FU

D

F

P

D M

FU

F

SP

S M

FU

F

D

rat death to cat convulsion go into q.m.(question marker)

‘Will a cat (S) go into ((get)(V)) convulsion (O) over a rat ( ’s) death (Adv) ?’

(223) a. a:vu nalupaite: pa:lu nalupa: ? cow black being milk black q.m.

‘Cow being black (A), will milk (S) be (V) black (C – noun) ?’

b. gu:nu vi:pu kudurautunda: ? hunch back steady become q.m.

‘Does a hunchback (S) become (V) steady (c-Adj)’

c. ta:Ta:ku chappuLLaki kundeLLu beduruta:ya:? palm leaf sounds to rabbits frighten q.m.

‘Do rabbits (S) fear (V) to palm – leaf rattling (A)?’

d. arupula goDDu pitukuna: ? bellowing cow milks q.m.

‘Does a bellowing cow (S) milk (V)?’

[t = voiceless alveolar dental plosive; d = voiced alveolar dental plosive; T =

voiceless retroflex plosive; D = voiced retroflex plosive; L= voiced retroflex

lateral]

(32) Propositional Content (Semantics) » Form (Syntactic structure)

However, the form is again influenced by the socioculturalspirituality of the speakers in a language community (the community which uses a particular language in all its range, variety, and depth). Therefore, equation (2) gets modified as follows:

(33) Propositional Content (Semantics) » Socioculturalspirituality » Form (Syntactic Structure).

Even the choice of the lexis is influenced by the socioculturalspirituality of the speakers in a language community. Consequently, equation (3) gets modified as follows:

(34) Propositional Content (Semantics) » Socioculturalspirituality » Form (Syntactic Structure + Lexis).

53

What is more, the pronunciation is also influenced by the socioculturalspirituality of the speakers in a language community. Consequently, equation (3) gets modified as follows:

(35) Propositional Content (Semantics) » Socioculturalspirituality » Form (Syntactic Structure + Lexis + Phonetics and Phonology).

Proverbs are used in a context to perform a specific function. Therefore, there is an interrelationship between function and form since the form has to reflect the function. Again, the functions are mediated through the socioculturalaspirituality of the speakers. As a result, equation (3) gets modified as follows:

(36) Propositional Content (Semantics) » Socioculturalspirituality » Function » Form (Syntactic Structure + Lexis + Phonetics and

Phonology).

Ultimately, the propositional content is chosen by a response bias for one over the other as it can be seen by variation in the choice of the propositional content, function, and form for the same prototypical practice. But a response bias is a result of dispositional bias which is caused by variation in the underlying disposition. This can be captured in the following equation.

(37) Disposition Dispositional Bias Response Bias Choice Variation

Lingual Action Proverb

As a result, the content of the prototypical social praxis (semantics) along with the lexis (the soicoculturalspiritual choice of the words in terms of dialect, soiciolect, register, and standard), its pronunciation as a proverb, and the modality and the pattern of the syntactic structure (syntax) are inter-related in their semiotic representation. As the praxis, so (will be) the syntactic structure; but as the dispositional, socioculturalspiritual cognition, so will be the praxis. For example, see how the imperative in the variations of the following proverb is modified according to the dispositional variation in cognition of the socioculturalspiritual practice:

(224) When in doubt, leave it out.

(225) When in doubt do nothing; (226). When in doubt, do without; (227). When in doubt, don’t do it; (228). When in doubt, don’t; (229). When in doubt, say no;

[All the above variations are somewhat similar in their meaning: do nothing = do without = don’t do it = don’t; however, say no is a little different in its meaning.]

54

In the following examples, there is a variation in the cognition of the praxis as the maker of the proverb made a choice according to his own dispositional interpretation of the practice. The condition remained the same as it is the basis or anchor of the proverb, but the solution changed as there is a variation in the response to the condition or problem.

When in doubt,

(230) ask; (231) find out; (232) look about; (232) hesitate; (233) punt; (234) salute; (235) tell the truth.

In (230), asking is suggested as a solution; in (231), finding out is suggested which implies not merely asking which may or may not resolve the doubt but searching for the solution or clarification of the state of affairs by (232) looking about for (230) what has been asked – this is with reference to seeking a better understanding of the situation as it is not clear. Whereas in (232) hesitate, caution is prescribed in performing the action since the doubt refers to the reaction that will befall on the performer but not leaving out or finding out; and in (233) punt, lashing out or dribbling is offered as the solution.

Second, aesthetic appeal as well as mnemonic power of the complex of syntax, lexis, and semantics of the proverb influences the choice of the structure. This means that the semiotic representation of the prototypical social praxis is regulated at a more delicate level by the principles of dispositional cognition of aesthetics such as alliteration, balance, imagery, brevity, formality, standard of lexis, etc. It is generally this second consideration that causes variation in the same proverb at all the four levels of phonology, syntax, lexis and semantics. It also appears that certain structures with certain lexical items are more popular than others. They must have evolved over time and got established as such by the dispositional choice of the makers and users of proverbs. What is more, they are even identified as typical proverbial patterns and are used as models in the formation of new proverbs whenever it is viable. For example, “Don’t … before ….” structure in the complex, imperative (negative) pattern with ‘don’t’ is more popular than ‘never’. Therefore,

(236). “Don’t (but not ‘Never’) count your chickens before they are hatched”

which is more popular is used as a model in the formation of a later American proverb

(237). “Don’t count your new cars before they are built”.

The preference of ‘don’t’ over ‘never’ is further witnessed in proverbs such as:

55

(238 – 40). “Don’t [want your corpses/cross your rivers/build the pen] before [they are cold/you get to them/the litter comes]”.

Third, the popularity of one structure does not necessarily mean that other structures cannot yield good proverbs – it only means that they are not more productive. Some times, more than one structure may be popular as in the case of (241). “It is better to be late than never” versus (242). “Better to be late than never” versus (243). “Better late than never”. All these three patterns are equally productive and popular, the second and the third being more and most elliptical. Here, there is a tension between formal expansion and informal contraction (brevity by ellipsis).

Finally, a statistical frequency analysis of various proverbial syntactic patterns on the one hand and their preference to others on the other hand will throw more light on the stylistic choice of a structure and its implication in propositional content representation. For our purpose it will suffice to note that a proverb need not necessarily occur in one particular pattern only even though that pattern may be aesthetically and mnemonically more effective. Furthermore, pattern and proposition influence each other analogically either by an analogical structural, or functional, or aesthetic, or propositional appeal.

In order to suit the pattern, the proposition may be polished or changed, or sometimes made complex – and in order to suit the proposition and its style, the pattern may also be changed; sometimes the mood is changed; sometimes other features such as tense, etc. are changed. For example,

(244) ‘He who laughs last laughs best’ and

(245) ‘He who laughs first laughs loudest’ have the same syntactic structure:

(246) He who laughs last laughs best.

(247) He who laughs first laughs loudest.

Adj. Sub-ordinate Clause

Main Clause

In a similar way,

(248) “Better late than never, but better yet, never late” and (249) “It’s better late than never, but still better never late”

56

have the same proposition but different structures: one is an elliptical form of the other with a changed lexical item ‘yet’. Some times, completely different propositions may be expressed to convey almost similar prototypical meanings in the same structure by familiar analogical structural appeal:

(250) It is too late to cover the well when the child is drowned.(251) It is too late to lock the stable door when the steed is stolen.

In view of all these possibilities, we conclude that proverbs make use of some structures more and some less but without any restriction on the choice of a structure. As a proposition demands a structure, so does a structure mean a proposition as the society opts for it.

ii. Use or Application of a ProverbAs the context produces a conducive situation for the use of a proverb, the user uses it according to his disposition; he makes dispositional couplings with the context and reacts to the context in an appropriate dispositional manner – here, according to the The ka:rmik linguistic theory, the context does not control the use of the proverb, but only facilitates its use, that is, the choice is ultimately rests with the user but not with the context. In order to use a proverb in a context, he is guided by his va:sana to use a proverb, its knowledge, memory, and of course by the traits which impel the choice of the proverb genre, and the specific proverb with all its features by automaticity in application.

iii. Experience As the proverb user uses a proverb, he so uses it as a means to coordinate the coordination of action to construct his own proverbial dispositional (ka:rmik) reality and experiences the results of his (lingual) action in terms of success and failure bringing in pleasure and sorrow.

A similar type of analysis applied to Telugu (Bhuvaneswar 1998 a-g; 2005; 2009) gives us similar results by showing that proverbs are open ended without any restriction on the choice of a structure. In fact, the same framework can be adapted to proverbs in any other language also and the nature of the syntactic patterns can be verified.

REFERENCES

Abrahams, Roger D. (1972). “Proverbs and Proverbial Expressions”. Folklore and Folklife An Introduction. ed. By Richard M. Dorson. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 119-121

57

Bhuvaneswar, Chilukuri (1998a). “The Syntax of Proverbs 1: A Case Study of English Proverbs in Quirk’s Model”. A Part of PhD Work. Hyderabad: CIEFL, published in The EProverbiallinguist electronic journal in CD Rom.

________ (1998b). “The Syntax of Telugu Proverbs 1: The Sentence”. A Part of PhD Work. Hyderabad: CIEFL, published in The EProverbiallinguist electronic journal in CD Rom.

________ (1998c). “The Syntax of Telugu Proverbs 2: The Clause”. A Part of PhD Work. Hyderabad: CIEFL, published in The EProverbiallinguist electronic journal in CD Rom.

________ (1998d). “The Syntax of Telugu Proverbs 3: The Phrase in Telugu Proverbs I: A Case Study of Adjectival and Noun Phrases in Andhra Lo:ko:kthi Chandrika”. A Part of PhD Work. Hyderabad: CIEFL, published in The EProverbiallinguist electronic journal in CD Rom.

________ (1998e). “The Syntax of Telugu Proverbs 4: The Phrase in Telugu Proverbs II : A Case Study of Adverbial Phrases in Andhra Lo:ko:kthi Chandrika”. A Part of PhD Work. Hyderabad: CIEFL, published in The EProverbiallinguist electronic journal in CD Rom.

________ (1998f). “The Syntax of Telugu Proverbs 5: The Phrase in Telugu Proverbs III : A Case Study of Analogical Proverbs in Andhra Lo:ko:kthi Chandrika”. A Part of PhD Work. Hyderabad: CIEFL, published in The EProverbiallinguist electronic journal in CD Rom.

________ (1998g). “The Syntax of Telugu Proverbs 6: The Sama:sam Compound) in Telugu Proverbs : A Case Study of Andhra Lo:ko:kthi Chandrika”. A Part of PhD Work. Hyderabad: CIEFL, published in The EProverbiallinguist electronic journal in CD Rom.

------------ (1999). “The Structure of Telugu and English Proverbs in Inform/Elicit Exchanges: A Multilayered Systemic Analysis”. A Paper Presented at the Second International Congress on English Grammar. Hyderabad: CIEFL

------------ (2000). “Motivating the Formation of Syntax in a Language (English) ”. A Part of PhD Work. Hyderabad: CIEFL

---------- (2002). “Issues in the Description of Telugu and English Proverbs: Rethinking Systemic Theory as Karmik Theory”. A Workshop Paper Accepted for (but not Presented at) the 14th International Systemic Functional Linguistic Workshop, 2002. Lisbon: University of Lisbon.

---------- (2005). Down the Proverb Lane A Festschrift for Mieder at 62. The Proverbial Linguistic Group. Vermont: University of Vermont

-------- (2007). “A Bibliographical Review of English Proverb Literature (1400 – 2000): Evidence for The ka:rmik linguistic theory”. Paper Presented at the Inaugural Function of the Proverbial Linguistics Group. Sebha: University of Sebha

----------- (2009). “Linguistics in Proverbiology: A Plea for Proverbial Linguistics as a New Branch”. Keynote Address delivered (in absentia by Dr. Outi Lauhakangas) at the Third International Colloquium on Proverbs, Tavira, Portugal

58

Dundes, Alan (1968). “ An Introduction to the Second Edition”. Morphology of the Folktale by Vladimir Propp. Austin: Texas University.

--------- (1987). " On the Structure of the Proverb”. Proverbium 16 (1971) - 20(1975). ed. by Wolfgang Mieder. New York: Peter Lang. 961-973.

Gleitman, Henry, Fridlund, Alan J., and Daniel Reisberg (2000). Basic Psychology Fifth Edition. New York: W.W. Norton and Company

Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, Barbara(1987). “Toward a Theory of Proverb Meaning”. Proverbium 16 (1971) - 20 (1975). ed. by Wolfgang Mieder. New York: Peter Lang. 821-827

Kimmerle, Marjorie M. (1947). “A Method of Collecting and Classifying Folk Sayings”. Western Folklore 6. 351-366.

Mieder, Wolfgang (1985). “Popular Views of the Proverb”. Proverbium 2. 109- 143

----------- (1992). A Dictionary of American Proverbs. New York: Oxford University Press.

Milner, G.B. (6 February, 1969a). "What is a Proverb". New Society, 332. 199-202.

---------- (1969). "Quadripartite Structures". Proverbium 14, 379-383. ed. by Wolfgang Mieder. New York: Peter Lang.

Quirk, Randolf and Greenbaum, Sidney (1989). A University Grammar of English, Harlow: Longman Group Ltd.

Westermarck, Edward (1930). Wit and Wisdom in Morocco: A Study of Native Proverbs. London.

*****

59