A Study of Neo-grammarians' theory of karaka

1.根据新语法学家的定义，动词词根的意义被定义为有利于产生结果的活动(Phalanukulavypara)，其中，kotr(施事)被认为是活动的轨迹(Phalasraya)，kotr(对象)被认为是其结果的轨迹。词根的意义有两个方面：活动及其结果，这一观点可以适当地追溯到帕坦伽利的大乘法论。2.巴托吉·迪克西塔建立了名义上的结束的意义是：一个轨迹(Asraya)、一个起点(Avadhi)、一个目标(Uddesya)、一个目标(Uddesya)和关系(Samband Ha)的理论，最后使Karakavibhakti-S的意义是完成一个动作的能力(sakti，samarthya)。3.在Bhartrhari阐述的Karaka理论中，根据Karaka的理论，带来行动的Karaka是实现该行动的能力，构成语言对应世界的实体被视为具有多种能力的综合体。与要实现的不同动作相关联，参与这些动作的单个实体可以在某个时间是代理，而在另一个时间是对象。卡拉卡语作为一种能力的概念使人能够通过引入说话者的意图(Vivaksa)来解释涉及单个实体的各种口头表达。卡提亚纳已经正确地认识到，说话者的意图在言语表达中起着重要的作用，这成为后来卡拉卡理论发展的基本因素之一。关于Bhartrhari如何看待能力的本体论地位的问题，还有很多事情要做。

1.According to Neo-grammarians, the meaning of a verbal root is defined as activity conducive to the production of a result (phalanukulavyapara) , whereby a kartr (agent) is considered to be a locus of activity (phalasraya) and a kartr (object) a locus of its result. The idea that a meaning of a verbal root has two aspects : activity and its result may properly be traced back to Patanjali's Mahabhasya.2.Bhattoji Diksita established the theory that meanings of nominal endings are : a locus (asraya) , a starting point (avadhi) , an objective to be aimed at (uddesya) , and relation (sambandha) , finally making meanings of karakavibhakti-s out to be a capacity (sakti, samarthya) for accomplishing an action.3.In the theory of karaka elaborated by Bhartrhari, according to which a karaka which brings an action to accomplishment is a capacity to bring it out, an entity which constitutes the corresponding world to language is viewed as a complex of multiple capacities. In correlation to different actions to be realized, a single entity participating in them can be an agent at one time and an object at another. The notion of a karaka as a capacity enables one to explain various verbal expressions with reference to a single entity by introducing a speaker's intention (vivaksa). The speaker's intention which Katyayana has already justly recognized plays an important role in verbal expression becomes one of the fundamental factors in later development of the karaka-theory.Much still remains to be done concerning the question of how the ontological status of a capacity is thought of by Bhartrhari.