Funny looking Truths
Prabhakar Vissavajjhala (vissa@cortex.neuro.mssm.edu)
Fri, 18 Jul 1997 14:23:23 -0500
'Concord' is one of the important grammar rules in English. It means
agreement. The agreement is between the 'subject' and the 'verb' of the
sentence, with reference to the 'number' (i.e., singular or plural). To be
simple one has to say
'He/she/it does that work' and 'They/we do that work',
where 'he' tallies with 'does' (both singular) and 'they' tallies with 'do'
(both pluaral). I am sure, many other languages also follow this
'agreement' in sentence structure.
However, in 'present tense', in English 'I' (self) though is singular, is
always blessed with a 'plural' verb!! For eg., 'I do that work'. This is
said to be a special rule. Probably, the English language is the only one
which gives lot of importance for the 'self' in the 'present'. We don't
see this in 'telugu or hindi' (I confess don't know about sanskrit or any
other languages.) In 'telugu', 'nEnu' is always used with a singlular verb
(for eg., 'nEnu vaccAnu' or mei AyA hum). May be an NTR like person may
say, 'mEmu vaccAmu', indicating a 'royal we', which is said to be a
'gaUrava bahuvacanam' for a singular person. It is so, only if some other
calls, but not if the 'self ' calls himself or herself. Then it is
invariably considered as egoistic. However, this is used for a third
person also in 'telugu and hindi' (i.e., singular person and plural verb).
For eg., 'Ayana vaccAru' or 'Ap AyiyE!'. However, there is nothing
like a third person (singular) is added with a plural verb in English at
any time to the best of my knowledge. Of course, they seem not bothered
much when it becomes 'past', as it is said 'He did that work' or 'They
did that work', with the same verb, without any discrimination for
'singular and plural' subjects.
Question/Inference: Does it mean the English don't give respect for others
as much as one gives to 'one self', however great the other may be but
singular, especially during 'present' times?!
'You' is said to be both singular and 'plural' in English. So, always used
with a plural verb but not with a singular verb. For eg., 'You do that
work'. However, the very 'you' is second person also. So, when this second
person becomes third person (he/she/it), the difference in the 'concord' is
reflected again in the sencentences. Like viz., if 'you' is singular and
gone out of sight and so becomes a athird person, 'he/she/it is referred
with a singular verb again. Of course, if 'you' is plural and when become
third persons, they are refferred as 'they' and with a plural verb again.
Inference: 'You' (even if singular) are respected (with a plural verb) as
long as you are second person, but your value comes down with you going out
of sight and becoming 'third person' for an English.
Of course, both for he/she, English gives the same verb. For eg., 'He
does/did' and 'She does/did'. So, the English can claim they don't show
'sex discrimination' with reference to the usage of verb, which 'telugu and
hindi' does. For eg., 'Ame cEsindi'. 'ataDu cESADu' in 'telugu' and
'...kartA hein, '...kartee hein' in 'hindi'. Being 'telugus', should
we say, 'We are more precise, rather than sex discriminatory?'
One more interesting thing is, the 'first person' of English is equivalent
to 'uttama purusha' of 'telugu and sanskrit' ('purusha' doesn't refer to
the gender; nor the adjective 'uttama' refers to being good in this
context). Similarly, the ' second person' of English tallies with 'madhyama
purusha' and quite surprisingly and interestingly, the 'third person' of
English should be considered equivalent to 'pradhama purusha' of 'telugu'
(sanskrit) grammar!
With regards,
Prabhakar Vissavajjhala
P.S.: I cut short the title for the length. The original title I thought was,
' Funny looking Truths/ True looking Fun/How to look more'.