I dealt with this in my MPhil dissertation (1986, University of Hyderabad) . It was written in Telugu.
I was applying the Paninian approach to case /kaaraka as delineated in Sādhanasamuddeśa of Vakyapadiya of Bhartrhari. Usually , Sambandha , the genitive / possessive case is presented as denoted by the 6th case marker. But this is not listed among the conventionally listed six kaarakas. But interestingly , Bhartrhari treats this as a kaaraka. sāmānyaṃ kārakaṃ tasya saptādyā bhedayonayaḥ / ṣaṭ karmākhyādibhedena śeṣabhedas tu saptamī // BVaky_3,7.44 // ( copied from the GRETIL website) Sādhanasamuddeśa of Vakyapadiya of Bhartrhari , after this verse has sections each called adhikāra dedicated to different kaarakas. śeṣa , 'the remainder' is dealt in śeṣādhikāraḥ [atha śeṣādhikāraḥ] saṃbandhaḥ kārakebhyo 'nyaḥ kriyākārakapūrvakaḥ / śrutāyām aśrutāyāṃ vā kriyāyāṃ so 'bhidhīyate // BVaky_3,7.156 // dviṣṭho 'py asau parārthatvād guṇeṣu vyatiricyate / tatrābhidhīyamānaḥ san pradhāne 'py upayujyate // BVaky_3,7.157 // nimittaniyamaḥ śabdāt saṃbandhasya na gṛhyate / karmapravacanīyais tu sa viśeṣo 'varudhyate // BVaky_3,7.158 // sādhanair vyapadiṣṭe ca śrūyamāṇakriye punaḥ / proktā pratipadaṃ ṣaṣṭhī samāsasya nivṛttaye // BVaky_3,7.159 // niṣṭhāyāṃ karmaviṣayā ṣaṣthī ca pratiṣidhyate / śeṣalakṣaṇayā ṣaṣṭhyā samāsastatra neṣyate // BVaky_3,7.160 // anyena vyapadiṣṭasya yasyānyatropajāyate / vyatirekaḥ sa dharmau dvau labhate viṣayāntare // BVaky_3,7.161 // prādhānyaṃ svaguṇe labdhvā pradhāne yāti śeṣatām / sahayoge svayoge 'taḥ pradhānatvaṃ na hīyate // BVaky_3,7.162 // [iti śeṣādhikāraḥ] ( copied from the GRETIL website) Here, he, very clearly, categorizes sambandha as a kaaraka in saṃbandhaḥ kārakebhyo 'nyaḥ kriyākārakapūrvakaḥ / śrutāyām aśrutāyāṃ vā kriyāyāṃ so 'bhidhīyate // BVaky_3,7.156 // Deriving from śrutāyām aśrutāyāṃ vā kriyāyāṃ , I identified śrutakriyā and aśrutakriyā as terms and concepts and under the influence of Chomskyan ideas , I translated them as ground structure verb and deep structure verb respectively. I compared Fillmore's analysis of Genitive in The Case for Case https://linguistics.berkeley.edu/~syntax-circle/syntax-group/spr08/fillmore.pdf to this approach. On Tue, May 5, 2026 at 12:43 PM Matthew Kapstein via INDOLOGY < [email protected]> wrote: > PS. Of course, that would be more oriented to current linguistic > approaches than to what the traditional grammars have to say. > > > Matthew T. Kapstein > Professor emeritus > Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, PSL Research University, Paris > > Associate > The University of Chicago Divinity School > > Member, American Academy of Arts and Sciences > > https://ephe.academia.edu/MatthewKapstein > > https://vajrabookshop.com/product/the-life-and-work-of-auleshi/ > > > https://www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/book/9781501716218/tibetan-manuscripts-and-early-printed-books-volume-i/#bookTabs=1 > > > https://www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/book/9781501771255/tibetan-manuscripts-and-early-printed-books-volume-ii/#bookTabs=1 > > https://brill.com/edcollbook/title/60949 > > > Sent from Proton Mail <https://proton.me/mail/home> for iOS. > > > -------- Original Message -------- > On Tuesday, 05/05/26 at 10:10 Matthew Kapstein <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Dear Adriano, > > I don’t have a copy on hand to check, but it may be useful to consult > Colin Masica, The Indo-Aryan Languages. > > Matthew > > > Matthew T. Kapstein > Professor emeritus > Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, PSL Research University, Paris > > Associate > The University of Chicago Divinity School > > Member, American Academy of Arts and Sciences > > https://ephe.academia.edu/MatthewKapstein > > https://vajrabookshop.com/product/the-life-and-work-of-auleshi/ > > > https://www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/book/9781501716218/tibetan-manuscripts-and-early-printed-books-volume-i/#bookTabs=1 > > > https://www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/book/9781501771255/tibetan-manuscripts-and-early-printed-books-volume-ii/#bookTabs=1 > > https://brill.com/edcollbook/title/60949 > > > Sent from Proton Mail <https://proton.me/mail/home> for iOS. > > > -------- Original Message -------- > On Monday, 05/04/26 at 15:21 Adriano Aprigliano via INDOLOGY < > [email protected]> wrote: > > Dear colleagues, > > A linguist friend asks me for references "that synthesize the Indian > grammatical tradition(s) analysis of possessive/genitive constructions". > > Does anyone have suggestions? > > Best regards > Adriano > > > > > *Prof. Dr. Adriano Aprigliano* > Língua e Literatura Sânscrita > Faculdade de Filosofia, Letras e Ciências Humanas > Universidade de São Paulo > > Av. Prof. Luciano Gualberto, 403 CEP: 05508-900 > Cidade Universitária, São Paulo - SP / Brasil > [email protected] > Gabinete 18, fone: 3091-4931 > +5511954675747 > > > _______________________________________________ > INDOLOGY mailing list > [email protected] > https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology > -- Nagaraj Paturi Hyderabad, Telangana-500044
_______________________________________________ INDOLOGY mailing list [email protected] https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology
