quotational lexical bifurcation in telugu as a ka:rmik linguistic theory word-formation process

40th

ISDL QLB as a Telugu Word-formation Process: A Ka:rmik Linguistic Analysis

1

DISPOSITIONAL CREATIVITY IN QLB AS A TELUGU WORD-FORMATION

PROCESS: EVIDENCE FOR KA:RMIK LINGUISTIC THEORY

Chilukuri Bhuvaneswar, Proverbial Linguistics Group, Hyderabad

Abstract Recently I discovered a Telugu word-formation process in which a word within a word is formed

by bifurcating it with a quotation within the word which I call Quotational Lexical Bifurcation

(QLB). For example, da:runa „terrible‟ is a word in Telugu. This word is bifurcated into two

words by using a quotation marks: “da: ‘runa’” “terrible „loan‟” (quotational lexical

bifurcation by “… „ ‟ ”) to include a contextual action of “agricultural loans” given by banks

and thereby express two concepts within a word. This process is very productive yielding

regularly a large number of words in Telugu journalese since 1997(?) - as far as I know - to

encapsulate a contextual action meaning within the bifurcated word. This word-formation

process is immensely significant because it offers conclusive evidence to show that it is neither

genetically inherited (as in generative grammar) nor socially generated (as in SFL and other

functional grammars) but dispositionally created and then collectively (socially) promoted to

survive as a new word-formation process in Telugu with a spill-over effect into English also –

„Saga‟r, „break‟through, real e„state‟, „mini‟mum risk, etc are some examples of QLB. With

empirical linguistic evidence using the Cause – Means – Effect (Goal) Processing Model of

Language, it will be shown that language is as it is not merely because of what it has to do

(Halliday 1973: 34) but because of what it is intended to do what it has to do (Bhuvaneswar

2009,2011) – as the workman, so is his work.

References

Bhuvaneswar, Chilukuri (2009). “Theory and Practice of Paremiology: A Plea for Proverbial

Linguistics as a Special Branch”. Keynote Address, The Third International Colloquium on

Paremiology, Tavira, Portugal

--------- (2011). “Proverbial Linguistics: Theory and Practice in the Ka:rmik

Linguistic Paradigm”. Plenary Speech, International Symposium on Proverbs, University of

Diderot, Paris, France

Halliday, M.A.K. (1973). Explorations in the Functions of Language. London: Edward Arnold

I. Introduction

There are many word-formation processes in Telugu such as affixation, compounding, and

reduplication which basically involve only oral application of the sound system and not the

written system of the language. However, around 15 years ago, in Telugu journalism, a new

trend in word-formation was initiated by bifurcating a word with quotation marks and creating a

new word by forming a word-within-a-word. This new word brings forth novelty, surprise, and

brevity in its form by capturing a new contextual meaning and not only saves printing space but

also enhances the aesthetic appeal of the news it reports. Thus, it aims to attract the reader‟s

attention quickly and increase the popularity of the concerned newspaper on a competitive basis.

This new trend has become very productive and survived for all these years to merit our attention

as a specific word-formation process along with other word-formation processes in Telugu.

40th


2

From a linguistic perspective, such word-formation processes cannot be provided a principled

account by the well-known theories such as the Transformational-Generative Grammar,

Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, and the Cognitive Linguistic Theory that originated in

the west and are popular throughout the world. It is so because the motivation of such a word-

formation process is rooted in dispositional creativity and dispositional choice which are not

included in formal, functional, and cognitive linguistic descriptions. Only a dispositional, socio-

cognitive linguistic theory – such as the Ka:rmik Linguistic Theory of Bhuvaneswar – can

provide a principled account of such a word-formation process.

In this paper, an attempt has been made to apply the Ka:rmik Linguistic Theory and motivate the

formation of such a word-formation process, which I call Quotational Lexical Bifurcation (QLB).

II. Literature Review

QLB is a new word-formation process and – as far as I know – it has not attracted the attention

of researchers so far. It is new because it creates a new use for quotation marks by the

dispositional creativity of the journalist. Usually, quotation marks are used to cite

“a quotation, direct speech, or a literal title or name. Quotation marks can also be used

to indicate a different meaning of a word or phrase than the one typically associated with

it and are often used to express irony. Quotation marks are sometimes used to provide

emphasis, although this is usually considered incorrect (Wikipedia).”

In Telugu journalism also, these important functions are made use of. For example, we come

across many quotations using quotation marks; for example, „si: em ajina ve:La manchidi

ka:de:mo: (Va;rth 16.4.2012)‟ „The time for becoming the C.M. might not be good!‟ is a citation

of direct speech by the C.M. Mr. Kiran Kumar Reddy of Andhra Pradesh. We also see quotation

marks used to indicate a different meaning of a word or phrase than the one typically associated

with it.: vai es a:r si: ka:ryakarta da:Dilo: „de:sam‟ vargi:yuDi mruti „In an attack by the

Y.S.R.C worker, the death of a „De:sam‟ member (Va:rtha 17.6.2012)‟ – De:sam has the general

meaning of „country‟ but here it denotes the Telugu De:sam Party. We also see regularly

quotation marks used for indicating the titles of movies – for example, adbhutamaina grafiks to:

vastunna „I:ga‟ „the film „Fly‟ coming with wonderful graphics (Va:rtha 16.6.2012)‟;

‟Rudramade:vi‟ hero:yin ko:sam Gunasekhar prayatna:lu „For „Rudramade:vi‟s heroine,

Gunasekhar‟s efforts (ibid.).‟ Surprisingly, quotation marks are also used for emphasis in Telugu

journalism!: Anubhavale:mito: „metro‟ satamatam „Without experience, confusion in the Metro

(Rail Project)‟ (Va:rtha 1.6.2012); Camuru kampani:lapai „pannu ba:duDu‟ (Va:rtha

28.3.2012)‟ “„Taxation‟ on Oil Companies”.

In addition, quotation marks are also used in blends which is not the case in English. For

example, mudurutunna „aNu‟pa:kam, etc. are examples of blends with QLB. These are examples

of pure blends. Other examples of QLB by adaptation are as follows. For example, „Pa:Ta‟sa:ri

„song-farer‟ is a blend created by analogy with ba:Tasa:ri „wayfarer‟ with quotation marks for

„Pa:Ta‟ meaning „song‟; fee„julum‟ „excesses (julum) –an Urdu word - of collecting fees‟;

„aNu‟ma:na:lu po:va:li (Va:rtha 28.3.2012) „Nuclear doubts (doubts about the safety of nuclear

plants) should go‟. In „Da:ha:‟nalam (Va:rtha: 17th

February, 2005) similar to Da:va:nalam

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony

40th


3

means a conflagration of thirst – it is formed by blending da:ham and da:va:nalam by

substituting da:va: by da:ha: „thirst‟. Quotational blending can also occur at the initial, medial,

and final positions. In the caption: a:ha: a: ‘ro:ga’Sri (Va:rtha: 9th

June, 2012): where a:ro:gya

„health‟ is replaced by ro:ga „disease‟, the quote-blend occurs at the medial position of the name.

It is a blend derived from the name a:ro:gyaSri: pathakam „a:ro:gya (health)Sri: (wealth)

pathakam (project) to express the meaning that this project instead of restoring health is causing

ill-health because of delays and inefficiency. However, the use of quotation marks for bifurcating

a word within a word to create a new meaning is unique and it has been initiated in Telugu

journalism and it is slowly spreading into English journalism also with a word or two making its

way into print once in a way. All these options can be captured in the following network.

Affixation

Oral Compounding

Reduplication….etc.

Telugu

Word-formation

Processes Quotational Specification

Written Quotational Blending

Quotationl Lexical Bifurcation (QLB)

Ceativity: Novelty

Expressivity: Surprise Aesthetic Appeal

Spatiality: Brevity

Network : Basic Types of Word-formation processes in Telugu

It is a process that requires a description of choices at the dispositional, contextual and lingual

levels at the same time. The three important linguistic theories: formal, functional, and cognitive

are limited in their scope and they have not taken disposition into consideration in their

theoretical framework and hence they cannot motivate the QLB word-formation process in a

principled manner but it is possible in Ka:rmik Linguistic Theory. A brief review is given below

to show this difference in their approaches.

2. 1. Motivation of QLB as a Word-formation Process by KLT Dell Hymes, Geoffrey Leech, and Deborah Schiffrin have commented on the differences

between formal and functional theories in a nutshell in their works. For example, Leech (1983)

in his Principles of Pragmatics distinguishes four important differences which are discussed

below.

1. The formal approach studies language as an autonomous system whereas the functional

approach studies language as a social system and the cognitive approach as a conceptual

system. However, the ka:rmik approach studies language as a ka:rmik (dispositional)

system which is not only used as resource for the construction of dispositional (ka:rmik)

reality but also produced out of it. It is produced by disposition by a unified apparent

categorical transformation (vivartham) [indicated by the symbol „to be read as

40th


4

„apparently transforms into‟] of both sound and meaning into a linguistic system that is

used as a means for the construction of Ka:rmik Reality via Dispositional Reality evolved

through a Cognitive Reality of Socioculturalspiritual Reality-to-Contextual Actional

Reality-to- (Lingual) Actional Reality as Experiential Reality.

(0a) Sound [Meaning + Function + Material Form] Linguistic System

(0b) Linguistic System Means Experiential Reality Ka:rmik Reality

Karmaphalabho:gam

(0c) Disposition Action Experience Karmaphalabho:gam

2. To explain it further, according to the formalists such as Chomsky, language is as it is

because of a common genetic linguistic inheritance of the human species from which

language universals are derived. So, as a human being is born, there is a language faculty

or programme already wired up in the human brain with a Universal Grammar and

Principles and Parameters that implement it. And according to the functionalists such as

Halliday, language is as it is because of the universality of the uses to which language is

put in human societies from which language universals are derived. So there is no

language faculty or programme already wired up in the human brain as a human being is

born but it evolved socially as human beings conducted their living to fulfill their needs.

As a result, language is as it is because of what it has to do. In other words, the formal

and functional approaches to language are diametrically opposite in their fundamental

premise of how language is created: formalists view language as genetic; and

functionalists as social. The cognitivists view grammar as conceptualization and

language is developed as it is used and they also do not agree with the innateness

hypothesis of the formalists.

The ka:rmik linguist believes that language evolved as dispositional action from a

ka:rmik processing of language. In this view, human beings are genetically endowed with

Prakruthi (Nature) that consists of three GuNa:s as its internal constituents entwined like

three strands in a rope which serve as the source of all phenomenal creation in its

supracosmic-macrocosmic-microcosmic variety-range-depth. It manifests itself in human

beings as a qualified energy (avidya, literally ignorance) complex of sattva (luminosity),

rajas (activity), and tamas (inertia). In each and every human being, it is constituted in a

particular composition and that serves as the entire basis for forming likes and dislikes

leading to traits, acquiring knowledge leading to his (phenomenal) knowledge base, and

ways of performing action leading to va:sana:s (internalized habits of doing things

instinctively). All these three components form a homogeneous complex of human

personality which is called svabha:vam (disposition). In this svabha:vam, there is a

linguistic component that genetically inherits the hardware (but not the software) of the

language programme, that is, va:gindriyam (the vocal organ) which acts in collaboration

with the power of vimarsa (analyticity) that conceptualizes, patterns and structures, and

materializes all the three types of human activity- mental, vocal, and physical – according

to the qualities of svabha:vam of the individual/group. Since language has the power of

semiosis, it is used to observe, interpret, identify, represent, create, communicate,

initiate, coordinate, and experience action. What is more, the goal of lingual action is to

serve as a means to construct dispositional reality and fulfill one‟s desires for their

40th


5

experience through the results of action. However, the software is not genetically

inherited. To explain further, the Universal Grammar of Language with its Principles and

Parameters is not genetically inherited but all that is required to process the experience of

language and produce the output of a particular grammar of language through vimarsa

(analyticity) is genetically inherited. This vimarsa processes the experience of language

through the Universal Science of Action via the Universal Science of Lingual Action via

the Universal Science of Living to produce the output of the grammar of language in an

individual. In other words, principles like the locality principle in UG, or parameters like

wh-parameter, null subject parameter, and head position parameter are discovered in their

experience of language, but not identified from a previous knowledge of them already

transferred genetically in the genes. Subsequently, they use this grammar to construct

their dispositional reality. As a matter of fact, language acquisition takes place owing to

this dispositional functional pressure in children (for acquisition of their native language)

– look at how the first cry of a child erupts out of dispositional functional pressure that

impels a desire to seek milk – or elders (for second language acquisition) to construct

their dispositional reality and its experience through the results of their activity. The

proof of such a view is in the creation of new languages by bifurcation of an existing

autopoietic and dissipative structure of language and its components by dispositional

choices. The ka:rmik linguist also believes that function is not the primary cause for the

creation, or acquisition, or transmission of language since a particular function may or

may not be realized by all the human beings through the same means: there are always

alternate ways of saying the same thing or doing it – the same function can be expressed

by a variety of forms or the same form can serve many functions in language. Hence,

choice and variation in language typology cannot be motivated by a mere functional

explanation without invoking dispositional choice. For example, the same meaning is

conveyed either by an SVO pattern in English, or SOV pattern in Telugu, or an OVS

pattern Hixkaryana to express the act of “X - eating - an apple”. Moreover, function in

conscious action is a product of disposition – for example, the same means, say, the

internet can be assigned different functions of searching for knowledge, or sending

business messages or simply chatting, or even arranging marriages – the functions

emerge out of dispositional creativity by antecedence; alternatively, the same function,

say, sending a message, can be performed through post, couriers, or telephone, or through

doves – again, the same function is performed by different means through dispositional

creativity. Therefore, according to KLT, language is at it is not because of what it does

(a la Halliday) but because of what it is intended to do what it does. Healthy human

beings, for example, have been genetically inherited with a disposition that produces a

dispositional functional pressure to desire to construct their dispositional reality through

coordination of coordination of action by lingual communication by dispositional choice

– this is due to their complex disposition that impels complex desires that require

semiotic communication to fulfill them, for example, a desire to bring their children up in

a particular cultural tradition.

3. The formalists (e.g., Chomsky) regard language primarily as a mental phenomenon

whereas the functionalists (e.g., Halliday) regard it as a societal phenomenon. Again,

there is a contradiction in the conceptualization of language. From this perspective,

according to the formalists, language is a psychological phenomenon whereas according

40th


6

to the functionalists, it is a social phenomenon. To explain it further, language is an

internal phenomenon according to the formalists and the social and cognitive functions of

language do not impinge on the internal organization of language. On the other hand,

according to the functionalists, language has functions that are external to the linguistic

system itself and most importantly the external functions influence the internal

organization of the linguistic system. Therefore, there is another contradiction in these

two theories with regard to the influence of external forces: formalists say that external

forces do not influence the internal organization of language while the functionalists say

that they do. The ka:rmik linguist regards language as a semiotic system dispositionally

created and used as an internal reaction to the external context to observe, interpret,

identify, represent, communicate, initiate, coordinate action for the experience of its

results.

4. The formal approach (e.g., Chomsky) explains the acquisition of language by a child due

to a built in capacity to learn a language. Functionalists (e.g., Halliday) explain it in

terms of the development of the child's communicative needs and abilities in society.

Again, there is contradiction with respect to the acquisition of language: formalists

support "nature" and functionalists "nurture". The ka:rmik linguists explain the

acquisition of language by a child due to a built in capacity to learn a language to fulfill

its desires in the context and experience the results of action, i.e, by nature which is

nurtured.

Dell Hymes (1974) in his article "Why Linguistics needs the Sociolinguist" discusses some

of the important problems not answered by the formalists and lists them in seven points as

explained below:

5. The structural (i.e. formalist) approach considers the structure of language (code) as

grammar whereas the functional approach considers the structure of speech (act, event)

as ways of speaking. In other words, the structural approach focuses on language as a

formal autonomous system of phonology, syntax, and semantics. As such it is

independent of the purposes or functions which these forms are used to serve in human

affairs. The functional approach on the other hand considers language as language in use

which consists of speech acts, events, and situations and so dependent on the purposes or

functions which these forms are designed to serve in human affairs. Hence, there is an

opposition in these views: independent Vs dependent. The ka:rmik approach considers

language as language in experience, as a means for experience, an I-I-I system of form-

function-cognition generated-specified-directed-materialized by disposition in a context

for the experience of results of action. As such it is an experiential system in which form,

its cognition, and use (function) join together as means for experience – it is language in

use through its dispositional choice and experience. The structure of language

(grammar) is dispositionally derived from the ways of speaking (function) which is

dispositionally derived from its conceptualization by cognition which is dispositionally

derived from its ways of construction of experience by Individual-Collective-Contextual-

Conjunction (ICCC) of disposition. To sum up, it is a product of dispositional reality.

40th


7

6. Use merely implements what is analyzed as code and the analysis of code should be prior

to the analysis of use – this is the formalist view of language structure and use. The

functionalist view is opposite to this view: analysis of use should be prior to the analysis

of code because organization of use discloses additional features and relations. In the

functionalist view, use and code are in an integral (dialectical) relation - note the spelling

of dialectical derived from dialectic: it is not dialectal which is derived from dialect, one

variety of language. In the formalist view, they are in a sort of linear relation. Hence,

both the views are contradictory in their premises. The ka:rmik linguist views disposition

(and experience) as prior to use and code since both code and its use are disposition

dependent. Semantics of formalists becomes pragmatics of functionalists which becomes

ka:rmatics (ka;rmik pragmatics) of ka:rmik linguists.

7. According to the formalists, language is referential in its function with fully semanticized

uses as the norm whereas the functionalists deal with the gamut of stylistic or social

functions. In other words, formalism is concerned with the sentential meaning while

functionalism with the utterance meaning. Ka:rmik linguistics is concerned with

experiential meaning as it is derived from a dispositional understanding of sentence

meaning as utterance meaning.

8. Elements and structures are analytically arbitrary (in a cross-cultural or historical

perspective) or universal (in a theoretical perspective) in formalism while they are

ethnographically appropriate in functionalism. In KLT, elements and structures are

dispositional representations of action from the Universal Science of Action by the

Universal Science of Lingual Action through the Universal Science of Living. Hence

their universality is derived from the universality of action patterns as their particularity

in a culture.

9. There is a functional equivalence of all languages in formalism while there is functional

differentiation of languages, varieties, and styles in functionalism. All languages are

essentially (potentially) equal in the formalist paradigm while they are not necessarily

existentially (actually) equivalent. In ka:rmik linguistics, there is an experiential

equivalence in languages with a formal-functional differentiation.

10. Formalism studies language in terms of a single homogeneous code and community

("replication of uniformity") while functionalism studies it in terms of the speech

community as the matrix of code-repertoires or speech styles ("organization of diversity).

Ka:rmik linguistics studies language in terms of the Universal Science of Living

mediated through the Universal Science of Lingual Action derived from the Universal

Science of Action by the individuals collectively in a language community (dispositionally organized gradual evolution of diversity from the unity of action).

11. Formalism takes for granted or arbitrarily postulates fundamental concepts such as

speech community, speech act, fluent speaker, functions of speech and of languages

whereas functionalism considers them as problematic and therefore to be investigated.

40th


8

Ka:rmik linguistics considers them as dispositionally conceptualized and therefore should

be interpreted through the universal sciences of action-living-lingual action.

As language has not only formal but also functional properties, we need a theory that can

accommodate both these properties. However, in view of the differences in their theoretical

premises, it is difficult to combine both the paradigms and try to account for the formal and

functional properties of language together in an eclectic approach.

The basic principle of Ka:rmik Linguistic Theory is based on the fundamental assumption that all

action is dispositionally generated, specified and directed. Lingual action is also no exception to

this since it is one type of action human beings perform. In this view, disposition is at the base of

all activity and any action springs from disposition as follows:

(1) Disposition Effort Action Result Experience.

Again, whenever an action is performed, it is performed by a choice as follows:

(2) Disposition Dispositional Bias Response Bias Choice Action.

Even if there are no two explicit options required to trigger a response bias, there is always an

inherent set of options to do or not do an action and as such there will always be a response bias

for an action and consequently a dispositional bias to trigger the response bias and finally a

dispositional basis and disposition to create the dispositional bias.

One interesting fallout of this equation is the emergence of uniform, deviational, and randomly

coincidental or divergent linguistic behavior in the formation, and application of language

depending on the similarity or dissimilarity in the choice-making process of word-formation. As

such we get processes which exhibit total, or partial, or randomly identical realizations in the

output. For example, if we look at QLB from a post-QLB creation perspective, then we may

come across examples which uniformly observe the unmarked process of QLB as a quotational

word-formation process as well as divergent examples when quotation marks are used differently

which do not fit in the main rule; from a formal perspective, it becomes a problem -formalists

tend to push them under the rug and functionalists cannot say that it is as it is because of what it

does.

In addition, any type of action is hierarchically evolutionary in its structure as follows:

(3a) Concept (Process) evolving into Pattern evolving into Structure

where the concept and pattern are abstract (in the form of imagination) and the structure is

material (in the form of sound). In systems thinking also such a view is held. According to Fritjof

Capra's New Synthesis Model (1996), the structure embodies the pattern but the pattern is

embodied by the process in a three tier model of an autopoietic structure. For example, a house is

conceived (concept/process) by an engineer and its blue print (pattern) is visualized and made on

a drawing paper and finally materialized by the construction of the house with cement, bricks,

etc. In the view of the New Synthesis Model, the physical structure of the house embodies its

40th


9

pattern of organization; but the process (conception) of the house embodies the pattern of

organization of the house. So, the pattern is at the centre of action. In KLT, it is viewed in terms

of karma srushti (gradual evolution) by vivartham (apparent transformation) like that of a seed

(concept) into a sprout (pattern) into a tree (structure). This is a linear process of evolution of

concept into pattern into structure in the relative world or reality (vya:ha:rika prapancham or

satta) which is radial in the pra;tibha:sika satta (temporary or dream-like state). However, the

desire to construct a house and its design are generated, specified and directed by the disposition

of the engineer. Hence, another level of disposition has to be added to this model which makes it

tetrafacial. If we include karma as the ultimate source of action, then it becomes pentafacial. In

this ka:rmik view, it is as follows: the structure embodies the pattern [e.g., sound as structure

attendant with its quality of length, loudness, and pitch (with stress and intonation) embodies the

words in the form of a sentence as pattern]; pattern as syntax embodies the concept of the form

(as a phonetic object); again, the phonetic form embodies meaning (as a semantic object) at its

semiotic level; finally, both form and meaning embody disposition (as dispositional action).

Meaning is also structured as concept-pattern-structure. The concept is the propositional content

and its pattern is participants-action-relation in the case of action and type-class-individual in the

case of an object and its structure is the proposition as thought or awareness or meaning. But in

general use, we only consider the form together with its meaning. Ultimately, disposition

embodies karma. From the perspective of the structure as the final phase of evolution of lingual

action, it embodies not only pattern, but also form and meaning as well as disposition and karma

in an a:nushangik relation (like the pot inheriting the properties of clay) shown by the symbol as

as follows:

(3b) Karma Disposition [+ Karma] Desire [+Disposition +Karma]

Action [+ Desire + Disposition + Karma]

(3c) Lingual Action [Concept of Meaning/Form [+ Action]

Pattern [+ Concept + Action] Structure [+ Pattern + Concept + Action])

What is more, every action is not a mere patterned structure of meaning and form but it has

another important dimension to it: it has a function as well. In fact, form, meaning, function, and

disposition are also interconnected-interrelated-interdependent by the Principle of Radial

Reciprocal Interaction:

(4) Disposition Function Action [Meaning/Form Pattern Structure]

Result Experience.

In other words, there are mainly two dimensions to every action: form and function. In addition,

we can consider cognition and disposition which are less observable (see Bhuvaneswar 2011 for

more details on these types of action). In our real life, we come across mainly two types of easily

observable action: 1.formal-functional action; 2. functional-formal action:

(5) Action: Formal – Functional or Functional – Formal.

In formal-functional action, action proceeds from an already existing form by giving it a function

(e.g., in firewood, already existing wood (form) is endowed with a function of creating fire by

40th


10

burning it) and in functional-formal action, action proceeds from a conceived function to form

(e.g., a car (form) is created out of a function to transport people). Another dimension that can be

brought into the picture is the cognition of the formal-functional or functional-formal action.

This is basically a psychological process that involves the main aspects such as attention, focus,

and memory and affects the processing of action through the mind. When the memory is weak,

there will be slips in the content (errors in factuality occur) and even the form; when the attention

is weak, malaproposims occur; and when the focus is not there errors in the selection of the

content and style occur. These properties are a part of the biological constitution of the speaker‟s

brain/mind and impact on the formation of traits-knowledge-va:sana:s (of svabha:vam).

Furthermore, cognition first impacts on the socioculturalspirituality of the individual as a

member of the collective and socioculturalspirituality also impacts on the form-function-

cognition of action by the reversal of order principle (A affects B and then B affects A after its

creation).

Applying this concept to language formation, we can say that meaning is abstract as

differentiated awareness of this and that and it manifests itself in concrete form via

symbolization, (i.e., semiotic representation) and this symbolization requires a system or a

pattern which is phono-lexico-syntax [sound (phonetics) evolving into lexis and lexis evolving

into syntax]. Finally, this pattern materialized as sound manifests it in the form of speech.

However, the desire to create a language as well as its design are generated, specified and

directed by the disposition of the language community.

(6) Disposition - Semantics - Phono-Lexico-Syntax (Grammar or Syntax in the

Traditional Sense) - Speech or Language

As a language such as Telugu or English or Arabic is not already there in the formative stages of

its evolution, we can say that a language is a functional-formal creation. Of course, as it is

transmitted to a child as it grows up, it is transmitted as a formal-functional product: the child

makes use of an already existing system.

The creation of the language system is an action and as such it follows equation (4) and therefore

function and form are interrelated-interconnected-interdependent in a radial relationship.

Furthermore, its cognition is also a part of the whole process.

Language process is more complex than the construction of a house and as such there are so

many other factors involved in its formation. These include the inclusion of the cognitive, the

sociculturalspiritual, the contextual actional, and actional planes of action on the one hand and

the individual-collective standardization of the language, atomic-holistic functionality of

phonemes-words-sentences-discourse-action-result-experience to construct the dispositional

reality (as the ka:rmik reality) of the human beings. But the point is that all these factors are parts

of the whole process where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts and the whole is even

beyond the sum of the parts. All the same, as a language is created, it is created functional-

formally and so form and function are interrelated-interconnected-interdependent. In Ka:rmik

Linguistic Theory, form, function, cognition, and disposition are all integrated in a hierarchical

evolutionary structure through the five realities posited in the evolution of ka:rmik reality as

follows:

(7) Ka:rmik Reality Dispositional Reality Socioculturalspiritual Reality

40th


11

Cognitive Reality Contextual Reality Actional Reality

and then

(8) Disposition Desire Function Meaning

Form [Process Pattern Structure] Action.

Therefore, Ka:rmik Linguistic Theory is holistic in its framework and tries to avoid the pitfalls of

the formal and functional theories.

If language is innate or cognitive or social action, then it is difficult to account for both the

internal and external variation in language on the one hand and the extensive expansion of

language in its variety, range, and depth. The empirical evidence we get from all the levels of

language from phonetics to semantics; from pragmatics to discourse points out the role of choice

in language. Wherever there is a choice, there is a response bias and a causative dispositional

bias and disposition behind it:

(9) Disposition Disposition Bias Response Bias

Choice Variation Lingual Action

If we look at language from a process and product perspective, historical linguistics points out

that in the formation and use of language there is an interconnected-interrelated-interdependent

networking of

i. cognitive abilities; ii. phenomenal knowledge; iii. living demands;

iv. dispositional creativity; and v. experientiality

out of which only the cognitive abilities and dispositional creativity are genetically inherited but

contextually harnessed. The remaining two except experientiality are externally anchored. Every

word that came into existence would not have come into existence without the networking of all

the four factors. It is impossible for a human being to create vocabulary without phenomenal

knowledge of the real, possible, or imaginary worlds; or without creativity; or without the

dispositional functional pressure to fulfill his desires; or getting the experience of the desired

results without using language. Such linguistic creation depends on the dispositional social

semiotic cognition of action and therefore such action is decisively not innate. So also it is not

social even though society plays the crucial role of individual-collective-contextual application,

standardization and transmission of language but not the actual creation of language. It is so

because it is a creative phenomenon and requires individual intellectual initiative to

communicate with others by using such intellectual principles such as superimposition, etc.

In Ka:rmik Linguistic Theory, the formation of language is considered from the gradual

evolution perspective. In this perspective, a phenomenon gradually evolves from another

phenomenon and inherits its features (the material cause). Language evolved from human beings

and therefore it is formed by inheriting the features of human beings. First, its material cause

sound is the breath-sound produced by human beings and constitutes the form (matter); second,

the pattern, superimposed on the sound energy, is a product of dispositional conceptualization,

cognized in the mental space of the speaker by gradual evolution from that of a phoneme to a

word to a sentence to discourse; third, the patterning is turned into a semiotic system and

endowed with meaning by the same dispositional conceptualization; fourth, this system is used

as a reality-constructing resource for its experience (e.g., actional-dispositional-experiential

reality network). In other words, breath evolves into patterned structures of sound as a sign

system which further evolves into a semiotic system which further evolves into an experiential

system by gradual evolution.

40th


12

III. Quotational Lexical Bifurcation: A Ka :rmik Linguistic Analysis

In Telugu journalism, a word-formation process was initiated around the late nineties which I

call "Quotational Lexical Bifurcation" - a word within a word is created by the Principle of

Creation of a New Variable (CNV) through an innovation procedure: using quotation marks

within a word and by quotationally bifurcating the original word such as da:runa 'terrible' into

da:'runa' meaning da:runa 'terrible + runa ‘loan' = da:runa runam ‘terrible loan’ in the

context of terrible irrepayable loans given to farmers which became bandhamulu 'chains' in the

title of the report da:‘runa’ bandhamulu - is another classic example which proves very clearly

that at the word-formation level, these processes and consequently the words in those processes

are dispositionally generated, specified (chosen), directed, formed, and used according to the

dispositional creativity of the maker of the words. In this case, a reporter created this new way of

forming words by “quotefixation” - a la affixation - to capture the attention of the reader with

novelty and expressivity and report the contextual action with more brevity. This, he did it at his

own sweet will and dispositional creativity without any functional compulsion since the

alternative way of saying the same thing served the purpose earlier for decades. This emergent

contrast was not discovered earlier and hence not there. Therefore, there was no binary

opposition also prior to this invention.

To motivate this word-formation process of QLB, the formal, functional, and cognitive linguistic

theories are inadequate because of the absence of disposition as a component in their theories.

Hence, a ka:rmik linguistic analysis is chosen to motivate this word-formation process in a

principled manner in the following stages: 1. Stage of Inspiration; 2. Stage of [i.

Conceptualization; ii. Composition; iii. Creation]; 3. Stage of Application; 4. Stage of

Transmission; and 5. Stage of Perpetuation. These are the stages in the construction of actional

reality which is a part of the five realities (dispositional-cognitive-socioculturalspiritual-

contextual actional- (lingual) actional) for the construction of ka:rmik reality. This lingual action

is performed to construct lingual actional reality to further construct contextual actional reality

which is constructed from socioculturalspiritual, cognitive reality out of the choices made from

disposition to construct dispositional reality. This dispositional reality constructs the final

ka:rmik reality.

3. 1. Stage of Inspiration

In this stage, a creator of new words gets inspiration to create new words. This inspiration can be

from any direction of his experience. Generally, there will be a historical background to such

creations. In the case of Telugu, quotation marks were not originally used in the Old Telugu

tradition. They were – I think - borrowed from the European languages (English?). In the English

language, there is a tradition of using quotation marks to cite “a quotation, direct speech, or a

literal title or name. Quotation marks can also be used to indicate a different meaning of a word

or phrase than the one typically associated with it and are often used to express irony. Quotation

marks are sometimes used to provide emphasis, although this is usually considered incorrect

(Wikipedia).” Unfortunately, I could not get the very first attempt of using this QLB and meet

the creator of this process but I noticed this process in 1997 when I was collecting information

on the use of proverbs in titles in Telugu journalism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony

40th


13

Using effect-to-cause logic to infer the cause (inspiration), we can propose three possible

functional causes for creating QLB by the news reporter: 1. desire for novelty; 2. Desire for

surprise by innovation; 3. desire to save space by brevity of expression; 4. desire for more than

one of 1, and 2 and 3.

According to KLT, a choice is dispositionally made. Desire for novelty, or surprise by

innovation can be considered Sa:ttvik-Rajasik because rajas is associated with activity and

movement away from inertia or status quo. Here, the reporter wants to break away from the

normal way of reporting and so should be rajasik. Again, sattva is associated with luminosity and

creativity and the desire for novelty, innovation, and pleasant surprise are sa:ttvik. However,

brevity is tha:masik but since the meaning is enhanced in a single word, it becomes compact

without distortion and hence it does not apply here. [However, if the creation of a word by QLB

does not give the meaning compactly and evocatively, it becomes Tha:masik-Ra:jasik.]

Therefore, the news reporter should be in a Sa:ttvik-Ra:jasik state at the time of successfully

creating QLB; otherwise, his dispositional impulsions will not lead him to this process. This

sa:ttvik-ra:jasik state of his disposition creates those traits of liking novelty, surprise, innovation,

etc. and these traits impact on the knowledge component of grammar and other types of

phenomenal knowledge to create his dispositional knowledge on which his va:sana:s of doing

innovative things with novelty and surprise impact to inspire him.

Once the reporter is inspired like that, D.F.P. sets in, produces the desire for QLB and urges him

to do Exploration of Contextual Variables (ECV)by which the available variables are explored,

Productive Extension of Variables (PEV) by which an available variable‟s use is modified and

extended productively, or Creation of New Variables (CNV) by which a new variable is

dispositionally created and find a solution by Intuitive Understanding of the Phenomenon (IUP),

troubleshooting, and problem solving strategies. In that process, by a flash of dispositional

creativity through analogical reasoning, or scientific knowledge of the principle of insertion of

one thing in another thing or detachment, etc., the news reporter hits at the idea of using

quotation marks to bifurcate a word-within-a-word to capture the contextual meaning. Once, the

idea flashes, he makes an effort to create the new variable by CNV. The following network 1

given in the next page captures the process.

3. 2. Stage of [i. Conceptualization; ii. Composition; iii. Creation]

In this stage, an effort will be made to fulfill the desire to create novelty and surprise by brevity

of expression through innovation. It consists of conceptualizing the QLB as a process, as a

concept of this and that as so and so in such and such manner in its unmanifest state as a seed, or

as a vision of a house; its patterning and structuration in a semi-manifest state, as a sprout, as a

blue print of a house; and its manifestation as a tree, as a built house.

3. 2. 1. Conceptualization

What happened here is this:

1. First, there is the Dispositional functional Pressure for Novelty and Innovation. Owing to

D.F.P., the Trait for Novelty and Innovation impacted on the Knowledge component and

did Contextual Exploration of Variables and found out that no existing process gives the

opportunity for innovation.

40th


14

[Sometimes, when an existing process can lead to novelty, such as in the case of

adaptation of a foreign language (Italian?) process (e.g. the affixation of the English

suffix /-fication/ in the case of Telugu neologisms such as suththi-fication, dabba-

fication, etc., or /-o:/ accompanied by a high rise in the intonation in the Sebha dialect of

Libyan Arabic in such words as kala:ss-o: „finished?‟; miza:ll-o: „still?‟; tayyib-o

„good?‟: ; kwaiss-o: „allright?‟ ; imshi-o: „going?‟; etc., such an analogical process may

be chosen if the people develop a liking for it. In such cases, the process starts as a

humourous idiosyncratic innovation by application, and becomes a trend by diffusion,

which eventually becomes a pattern by standardization and then an established process

by perpetuation.]

Sa:ttvik

Rajas Rajasik

Ta:masik

News Reporter Karma Nature Sattva

Tamas

Novelty

Surprise

Traits

Innovation

Choice of QLB Brevity

Disposition D.F.P Desire

(for QLB)

Knowledge/ Analyticity (Jna:nam)

Knowledge of Grammar D.F.P = „Dispositional

Habits (Va:sana:s) Functional Pressure‟

Internalized Habits of Word-formation

Network 1. Ka:rmik Network for Inspiration of QLB

2. Second, he knew from his previous knowledge (or background knowledge) that there is a

process of quotational marking. This knowledge is latent.

3. Third, through memory of words related to the contextual meaning and an I.U.P.

(intuitive understanding of the phenomenon) of the association of a part of the word as

related to the contextual meaning, an insight into the nature of words denoting words-

within-words to denote meaning-within-meaning developed. This knowledge is obtained

because of the inherent powers of analyticity, and associativity of the previous

knowledge with the present action knowledge (or contextual knowledge), and future

action knowledge (or dispositional creativity knowledge):

40th


15

(10) Traits [Previous + Present + Future] Knowledge Insight

4. This knowledge is new and is activated by the D.F.P. (Dispsoitional Functional

Pressure)

5. Fourth, through a process of dispositional creativity, he got a flash of thought from the

new knowledge that words-within-words can be used to denote meaning-within-meaning

and this can be done through the means of quotationally marking the new word-within-

the original word. Thus, QLB is seen as a word-formation process in its un-manifest

state. The world is already made and out there before we came into it, and we use

language to make out what is there in it after we came into it, and we use language to

shape what is there in it as we can by creating a new awareness out of it.

(11) Desire Insight Flash of Creativity Innovation of Q. L. B.

Once this insight is obtained, he applies this to the concerned linguistic unit for QLB.

3. 2. 2. Composition

1. The desire for novelty and innovation is fulfilled by the effort of conceptualizing a new

word-within-a-base-word by DESYNTHESIS – as opposed to the familiar linguistic

process of Reanalysis – first by apparently splitting the word along the syntagmatic axis

into two, and next by merging the split words into the single base word through an

apparent transformation of the bifurcated words by conceptual pragmatic reanalysis by

Q.L.B. along the paradigmatic axis. This conceptualization process (which I call

quotefixation) gave birth to a new variable at the paradigmatic level which is Q.L.B. and

subsequently brought about variation in its structure from its application at the

syntagmatic level: initial, medial, and final positions in quotefixation. Thus, the

conceptual (cognemic) axis is crucial in developing the paradigmatic and syntagmatic

axes which were not there before the dispositional conceptualization of QLB. [They

came into existence and evolved eventually into their new structures along the

syntagmatic axis as the dispositional creativity of the users of this process branched out

exploring the contextual variables in the universal science of action as well as lingual

action. Then, they become models for further analogical creation of new words; later on

they are modified and adapted; and finally, as users get tired of their usage, they are

abandoned for new ways of word-formation] In fact, the paradigm is like the reverse

and the syntagm is like the obverse of the cogneme which is like the coin. Without the

coin, there is neither the paradigmatic nor the syntagmatic axes but there can be the

cogneme without them since it is an abstract meaning (in its unmanifest, causal state) –

paradigm and syntagm come into existence only at the level of pattern and structure

which are semi-manifest and fully manifest. It is the dispositional conception that decides

the form in

1. the creative stages of lingual action; and

2. it is only later on the form becomes the typical model for further productivity when its

pattern is 2a. either completely copied or 2b. partially modified, or 2c. completely

replaced, again, according to the dispositional choices made by the maker of new words.

That is why we see some new words appealing (formally, or functionally, or

40th


16

semantically, or aesthetically) and some not. For example, words like da:„runa‟ fit in the

context well and others such as:

(12a) ‘manthrula’ sibbandi “ „staff‟ of ministers” and

(12b) ‘sa:ri:’ lato: in ‘sa:ri:’ lato: Ga:ndhi:ma:rgam pattina sabha “ „with excuses‟ the assembly following the Gandhi-path”

(Va:rtha 31st July, 2009: 1)

become unappealing. In the first case it is simply redundant; there is no special meaning

attached to „manthrula‟ by quotefixing it. It is a case of abuse of quotefixation. In the

second case, the quotation marks serve the purpose of showing the wor d as a foreign

word but have no other value. There is no aesthetic appeal. This is a good example to

show how language in use illustrates how language is created by dispositional

conceptualization and how a prototype degenerates in its value: first, a model (i.e., QLB)

is created; second, it is popularized; and then it is abused and ripped of its appeal and

novelty in a historical process by the maker‟s poor (dispositional) conceptualization.

(12b) can be contrasted with the same news item presented in another newspaper Sa:kshi

(31st July, 2009: 1) as (12c):

(12c) ‘sa:ri:’gamalu “ „Sa:…Ri:‟.. and Ga ”

It is appealing as it adapted an existing word sarigamalu (the first four musical notes in

karnatic music similar to fa..so..la..do in western music) and quotefixed the first two

words sa, and ri by lengthening the first and second vowels to mean sorry (in fact, they

are lengthened as short vowels in singing) to give „sa:ri:‟gamalu: As the workman, so is

his work; as you think, so you speak. This word sorry pronounced sa:ri: is a productive

quotefix: it is also used to convey the meaning again in Telugu. For example, in (12d)

given below, it is quotefixed with a pun in that sense.

(12d) maro:’sa:ri:’ haidra:ma ”another „sorry‟ high dra:ma/once again „sorry‟ high

dra:ma (Andhrajyothi 24th

January, 2005: 1)

Hence, the supremacy of the conceptual axis.

P E

A M

R E

A N

Quotational D G Paradigm + Syntagm (Concept)

Lexical Bifurcation I O da:”runa”

ω : σ…σ….n /“σ..n” G C

M

S Y N T A G M

Disposition σ + Quotefix Word (Quotefix in the final position)

ω σ “σσ”

Graph 1. Third Quadrant (Actional Reality):

The Triaxial Graph of Conceptual Process in Ka:rmik Linguistic Theory

40th


17

Of course, the conceptualization is rooted in svabha:vam (disposition) which generates, specifies,

directs, and materializes it. It can be shown in a graph by representing the paradigm and the

syntagm as the vertical and horizontal axes and the cogneme as the intersection of the two axes

and as the projection of disposition from the diagonal quadrant of the whole graph. It is shown in

Graph 1: Third Quadrant in the previous page.

The factors of Traits and Va:sana:s impact on Dispositional Knowledge (Phenomenal) in the

Disposition Quadrant 1 (as shown in Graph Ia) and impel the cognition of the QLB Cogneme in

terms of the paradigmatic and syntagmatic axes to generate, specify, direct, and materialize the

QLB process. And this is processed through the background of the second quadrant which is the

World View (Socioculturalspiritual) Quadrant shown in Graph 1b below.

Spirituality/

World View Society

GuNa

Dispositional/

Phenomenal

Knowledge Va:sana Culture

TGCP Graph 1a. First Quadrant: TGCP Graph 1b. Second Quadrant:

Dispositional/Phenomenal Knowledge Spirituality/World View

2. Structuration of the Quotefix

There are only three possibilities for the quotefix to occur in a word: 1. Initial; 2. Medial;

and 3. Final. Obviously, the first syllable should start with the quotefix if QLB occurs in

the initial position. The length of the quote fix can be from 1…n syllables in the initial

position; in the medial position, the quotefix should be from the second to the

penultimate syllable; again, it can be from 2….to… the penultimate syllable of the word;

in the case of the final position, any number of syllables from the last to the second

syllable of the word can be quotefixed. A few examples are given below.

2. i. Initial Position The quotefix can be at the initial position, for example, as “ala” „wave‟ in the word

“ala”na:ti „once upon a time‟ in (13) ‘ala’na:ti smruthulu „memories of the (tsunami)

wave‟ for a caption of a photograph taken long after the tsunami wave havoc.

Another simple example is (14) ‘Siksha’Na “„Siksha (Punishment)‟ Na‟ „Training‟ to

indicate the sorry state of a person who was still performing the duties of a constable

even after finishing training as a Head Constable one year before.

The quotefix can also be a combination from two words as in the example (15) gi:tala

madhya ‘o: vi’sha:da va:kyam „In between the lines (cartoons), one sad line‟ (Va:rta:

31st March, 2005). In this QLB word, the quotefix indicates the name of the cartoonist

and novelist O.V. Vijayan by taking the first two letters O.V. The contextual meaning is:

40th


18

The sad line or report (visha:da va:kyam) of the death of the cartoonist (gi:thala Madhya)

O.V. Vijayan which can be recovered from the report at the end. In this QLB word, the

quotefix „o: vi‟ is formed by joining o: „one‟ with the first syllable vi of the word

visha:da „sad‟. Here, a numeral adjective „o:‟ is combined with the first syllable of

another adjective visha;da to form the quote fix „o: vi‟ which is the abbreviated name of

the Malayalee cartoonist and novelist OTTipulakal Ve:lukuTTi Vijayan, popularly known

as O.V. Vijayan.

The quotefix can come at the initial position of the word but it can be placed in any

position in the matrix phrase or clause: (16) kaLinga ‘hasta’sa:mudrikam ‘Orissa

palmistry’ (Andhra Prabha: p. 8, 22nd

Auguat, 1999). Here, the quotefix „hasta‟ „hand‟

stands for the symbol of the Congress Party and it gives the contextual meaning: An

analysis of the future of the Congress Party (Palmistry „hasta‟sa:mudrikam) in the

ensuing Lok Sabha elections.

In the example:

(17) manTallo: ‘ka:li’fo:rnia

14 mandi a:huti * 650 iLLu dagdham

ka:lifo:rnialo: da:va:nala dzva:lalu

We have a complex quotefix whose grammatical meaning is ambiguous.

As a non-QLB phrase: manTallo: ka:lifo:rnia, we get the reading: California in fire.

As a QLB phrase, it can mean

manTallo: ka:lifo:rnia ‘ka:li’ (cause) 14 mandi a:huti * 650 iLLu dagdham (effect)

Fire in California „getting burnt‟ 14 people die and 650 houses burn

„(As) Califo:rnia is being burnt in fire, 14 people (are) dead and 650 houses (are) burnt‟

Or It can simply mean ungrammatically- we have to supply „unna‟ to make it clear:

‘manTallo: ka:li unna ka:lifornia’

„ fire in being burnt (being in the state of) California‟

„California in the state of being burnt by fire‟…

14 people (are) dead and 650 houses (are) burnt‟

This deletion of unna is not attested in usage like the deletion of gain straight (–ga) veLLu „go(-

as) straight‟; brown(-ga) undi „brown(-as) is‟ in the Telangana dialect. Here, language came to

be as it is because of the desire to use QLB; otherwise such a structure is not used. That is why

language is as it is because of what it is intended to do what it does and not because of what it

does.

ii. Medial Position At the medial position, for example, as (18) re’lie’yance nilvalanni: ‘gyas’ „ „Reliance

storages (are) all gas‟ (Andhra Prabha 28th

March, 2012) where an English word is

bifurcated to create a QLB in the first instance of „lie‟ and the quotation marks for the

second word „gyas‟ are not in QLB but they are apt to indicate the meaning of „bluff‟.

In the example, (19) ka‘rNa:Takam’lo: ma:rina si:n (Va:rtha p.1, 28th

January, 2006),

na:Takam is the quotefix which occurs at the end of the word Karnatakam but in the

medial position because of the postposition lo: „in‟,

40th


19

or in (20) vyava’sa:yam’pai va:Di ve:Di charcha’ „Heated discussion on farming‟, the

quotefix ‘sa:yam’ „help‟ also occurs in the medial position in a similar way:

vyava‟sa:yam‟pai: [vyavasa:yam= farming; sa:yam= help; pai=on].

va:‘rasa’vattaram (va:rasa „inherited‟+ rasavattaram „interesting‟= va:rasa rasavattaram

= va:‟rasa‟vattaram by blending = interesting inheritance) in (21) va:ri charitra

va:‘rasa’vattaram (Andhra Prabha 15th

August,1999: 7) is more complex. A quotefix

„rasa‟ is created by bifurcating it from both the words and at the same time making it a

part of both the words by a linguistic feat: for the first word va: „rasa‟, the quotefix is at

the final position; for the second word „rasa‟vattaram, it is at the initial position; and

finally, it is at the medial position for the new word va:„rasa‟vattaram.

In sa:’ra:’ju „liquor-king‟ in (22) sa:’ra:’ju Sidda:puram - ide: a: grama:niki

ji:vanam „Liquor-king Sidda:puram – this is the livelihood for that village‟ (Va:rtha 5th

January, 2004) also we come across such a linguistic principle in operation: using a

common quotefix for two words such as sa:ra „liquor‟ and ra:ju „king‟. However, here

the quotefix „ra‟ has no meaning by itself as a syllable – „ra‟ which means come is not

applicable since it is not used in that sense.

iii. Final Position

The quotefix can be at the final position as in (23) ‘a:‘ja:du:’ mantram phalistunda:?

“Will the magic manthram of A;ja:d succeed?” (Va:rtha 5th

June, 2012). Ajad is the name

of the Congress leader who wants to bring in success for the Congress Party by putting

corruption cases against Jagan, the son of the ex-chief minister Y. S. Rajasekhara Reddi,

and bring down his popularity.

In paiki‘pampu’ „sending above (killing) / pump‟ in (24) jana:nni paiki‘pampu’ ni:ru

(Va:rtha 28th

May, 2008: 2), the contaminated water in the pipes of Hyderabad City

Corporation is referred to. It is so dangerous that people may die out of diseases by

drinking it.

(25) da: ‘ruNa:lu’ „terrible loans‟ (Andhra Jyothi: p.3, 24th

January, 2005) is a caption of

a news item to express the contextual meaning of tragic deaths (suicides) of three farmers

owing to loans.

In the example, (26) muddu si:nla si‘ta:ra’ „Kissing Scenes Si„tara‟ (Andhra Prabha (?):

26th

July, 1999: 8), the quotefix „ta:ra‟ „star‟ occurs at the final position of the word

Sita:ra which means a cinema actress. In addition, Ta:ra is also the first name of the

cinema actress Ta:ra Deshpandey who became popular by her kissing scenes. The

caption informs the reader about a cinema star becoming popular because of kissing

scenes in her films.

In the example, (27) antarra:shtra samasyanu adhigaminchina po:la‘varam’ (Va:rtha

21st June, 2004), varam „boon‟ is at the final position of the name of the town Polavaram

in Andhra Pradesh where a proposal to construct a dam was made. The contextual

40th


20

meaning of this QLB word is: The varam (boon) (which is the Polavaram Dam Project)

of Polavaram has overcome the interstate problem of flooding many villages in Andhra,

Orissa, and Chattisgarh by reducing 12 metres height of the crest level of the dam.

iv. Multilingualism in QLB Quotefixes

As it is observed in the examples of Reliance and A:ja:du:, and pumpu, QLB is

polylingual. The quotefix can be formed from any language in Telugu if it brings in the

desired contextual meaning. The QLB is a process and as such it can be applied in a

reverse direction as in the example (28) ‘Te:ku’ it i:zy (Andhrajyo:ti p.1, 1st April, 2005)

which is an English sentence with a Telugu word te:ku ‘teak wood’ meaning both teak

and take (=te:ku in borrowing) in Telugu. Here, the quotefix is used to comment on how

the Sanghi industries cheated the public by starting the Teak Plantation Scheme and

collecting 50 crores for that purpose and telling the people to take back the money after

the trees were neglected. In (29) Sen ‘Sation’, an English word is used to capture a

Tamilian name Se:shan in it as a quotefix. Seshan was the Chief Election Commissioner

who created a sensation by his radical reformation of the electoral system. All these show

the role of dispositional creativity in the formation of words and prove that word-

formation is not a UG phenomenon or social phenomenon or a cognitive phenomenon –

the creator of this does dispositional exploration of variables available in the context and

hits at the new QLB word by a flash of dispositional creativity.

v. QLB without a Distinct Word

Sometimes, a quotefix can be chosen out of the word even though the word formed from

the quotefix is not a distinct word from the whole word. For example, in (30) ‘Bhu:’

Prakampanalu „Earth tremors‟ (Va:rtha 7.6.2007), the word bhu: „earth‟ is not a distinct

word as in siksha (punishment) of sikshaNa (training), or (31) In’dhanam’ (dhanam=

wealth; indhanam = oil). However, its meaning is specifically related to land grabbing

by land grabbers in Bandlagu:Da area of the Old City (Hyderabad). The phrase means

that there is violence (stone throwing) as the Revenue Officials tried to reclaim the land

grabbed in Upparipalli at the other side of Bandlagu:Da. Another example is (32)

‘aNu’ma:tra:nike: de:sam ta:kaTTu „For the sake of „atom‟ic energy, mortgaging the

country‟ (aNu=atom which means a negligible quantity in the original meaning which is

changed to atomic energy by quotation marks to suit the context.

vi. Grammar in Quotefixation

The quotefix can occur in any part of speech in principle if the contextual activity fits into

that part of speech. In practice, it is observed that noun phrases attract quotefixation more

than other parts of speech but this cannot be taken seriously because such frequencies are

not dependent on grammar but on contextual activity and resourcefulness and

dispositional creativity of the journalist. For example, in (33) e: ‘ma:ya’no:!

siksa:.kya:cha: „Lo! What happened? Is it six or catch?‟(Andhra Jyo:thi, p.9, 14th

June,

2012), the QLB is formed out of e:mi „what‟ and a:yanu „happened‟ o: „question marker

o:‟ by choosing „ma:ya‟ from the sandhi form e: ma:yano: e:mi + a:yano: to

comment on the outcome of the bye-elections in which Y.S.R.C. Party of Jaganmohana

Reddi (son of the ex-chief minister of Andhra Pradesh Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddi) is

expected to win many seats. This caption is made over a photo of the present Chief

40th


21

Minister Kiran Kumar Reddi hitting a cricket ball to inaugurate the games tournament of

the Secretariat employees in Hyderabad and requires dispositional creativity (ingenuity)

and resourcefulness for its creation. It is complicated because a verb a:ya ‘happened’ is

converted into a noun ma:ya „illusion or magic‟ to speculate on what will happen in the

bye-elcetions: will the present C.M. win (siksa: „sixer‟ ..) or lose (kya:tcha „catch‟)?

vii. Adaptation in Quotefixation by Blending

Sometimes, the exact quotefix may not give the required contextual meaning or may be

ungrammatical in its insertion in the word, or phrase, or sentence. In such cases, the

reporter adapts the word in the quotefix to suit the contextual meaning. For example, in

(34) satta: cha:Tanunna va:li:‘ba:luru’ (Va:rtha p.10, 10th

July, 2004), va:li:ba:lu

„volley ball‟ is the word proper in Telugu, but by changing ba:lu into ba:luru „boys‟, the

word is changed and the QLB becomes a blend of va:li:(ba:lu) + ba:luru=

va:li:‘ba:luru’ by adaptation of the quotefix. To explain further, the quotefix is already

a part of the existing word like ba:lu in va:li:ba:lu, futba:lu, handba:lu, etc. but it has

been changed into another word by its adaptation either by addition or substitution of

letters. In the example, (35) a:ha.. a: ‘ro:ga’Sri: (Va:rtha p.8, 9th

June, 2009), there is an

adaptation of the stem a:ro:gya of the word a:ro:gyam by changing it into a:„ro:ga‟

„disease‟ by blending. Similar examples are: (36) apasvara:la ‘sanghi:’tam’-3

(Andhrajyo:ti p.1, 1st April, 2005) where sangi:tam „music‟ is replaced by sanghi: the

name of the famous industrialist in Hyderabad; (37) praja:‘patha’nisalu (Va:rtha p.1,

12th

April, 2005) where nisalu is added to praja:patha(m), a welfare project undertaken

by the Government of Andhra Pradesh. Padanisalu means the notes pa, da, ni, sa of

Karnatic Music. A quotational blend is created from the two words to express the

meaning of heated discussion between Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddi and the Telugu De:sam

Party. In a pure blending process by QLB, the entire word is replaced as mentioned

earlier about the use of quotational marks to show how new words are formed by

blending as in „pa:Ta‟sa:ri, and fi: „zulum‟ (see Literature Review (p.2)).

Here, the syntagmatic axis (as shown in Graph Ic as relation in the third quadrant) is

manipulated to suit the contextual meaning according to the universal science of action in

universal science of lingual action by dispositional conceptualization. Finally, what is

cognized as a cogneme is materialized as lingual action in the fourth quadrant as shown

in Graph Id) These „parameters‟ are not a part of the Universal Grammar (of Chomsky)

but a part of the Universal Science of Lingual Action (of Bhuvaneswar) – spatial

(syntagmatic) ordering of linguistic units. They are not genetically inherited but

dispositionally cognized and contextually evolved when they are created by the

individuals.

Incidentally, with reference to rank of the word also, the conceptual axis plays a crucial role in

deciding the size of the unit. Traditionally, a word can be divided into: word, syllable, and

phoneme. [In SFL, Halliday (1967: 12) recognizes a phonological rank scale of, in descending

order, tone group, foot, syllable and phoneme for English such that each higher ranking unit

consists of one or more complete units of the rank immediately below.] Later on, foot is also

added to the rank. This in turn leads to the inclusion of mora into the rank level. In KLT, the

cogneme and disposition are also added to motivate the size of the word. To explain it further,

40th


22

the size of the word is decided by the conceptualization of the word- that is how the word should

look like: should it be expanded as in the case of kala:sso-o: in Libyan Arabic (Sebha Dialect)?;

should it be contracted as in the case of can‟t or gonna in British and American English, or

acronyms, and initialisms?; or should it be retained as it is in the case of normal words? As a

result, the number of syllables is decided at the conceptual level which is of course generated,

specified, directed and materialized by disposition at the causal level.

Participants Cogneme / Concept Context

Relation Action

Contextual/Lingual

Action

GCP Graph 1c. Third Quadrant: TGCP Graph 1d. Fourth Quadrant:

Cogneme/Concept Contextual/Lingual Action

3. 2. 3. Creation The creation stage is the final stage in the creation process. Here, the binding of the various

components of the lingual cogneme is done by I-I-Iing the components together at the cognitive

stage and realizing it at the phonation level by vivartham (an apparent transformation) of the

mental thought as this and that to be so and so in such and such manner into a sound structure.

On the one hand, there is a phonetic form that is the object of binding and the other hand, there

is the semantic form (propositional content) also which undergoes binding.

Graph 1: Combined Triaxial Graphs of Cognitive Actionality Quadrants (KLT)

Legend

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 gives rise to

s 1.inner (pasyanthi „cognitive‟); 2. medial ( madhyama „pattern‟); 3. outer (vaikhari „form or phonic‟)

levels of realization of language

Spirituality Ideology Cogneme Concept

Society Ptcpants (Participants)

World View Quadrant II Concept Quadrant III Outer Circle Culture Relation (Vaikahari)

Guna:s Context Medial Circle

Disposition Quadrant I Context Quadrant IV (Madhyama)

Vasanas Activity Inner Circle

(Dispositional) (Phenomenal) Contextual Actionality (Pasyanthi)

Knowledge Knowledge Actionality (lingual)

KLT Graphs: 2. Combined Triaxial Quadrants of Cognitive Actionality ; 3. Tricircled D-Q-C Creating Action (KLT)

40th


23

Finally, the QLB word is materialized in ink and paper begetting the qualities intended, again,

dispositionally by the news reporter and the publisher. It evolves from its conceptualization into

its Pattern and Structure and Material Form in three stages as shown in Graph 3. The ji:va who is

Disposition (D)-qualified (q)-Consciousness (C) is shown by the star enclosed by a triangle.

When he reflects in his disposition, it becomes C-q-D. This cognizes the QLB as a concept

which is shown by the first inner circle; when the concept evolves into a pattern and structure, it

is shown by the medial circle; and finally, when the pattern and structure gain matter as ink on

paper, it is shown by the outer circle. These are the three stages of evolution of an

object/action/state of being and this is how the QLB word evolves. Qualities such as the type,

size, thickness, and colour of the letters as well as the colour, thickness, and type of the printing

paper come into play in the printed medium. In binding, it is pertinent to note the relationships

between the parts and the whole.

3. 2. 3. 1. Relationships in Ka:rmik Processing

A. The Formal – Ka:rmik Process Relationships in the Word da:runa

(1) da: + runa = da:runa „terrible‟

Part I + Part 2 = Whole

(The whole is the sum of the parts.)

(2) da:runa + runa = da:runa „terrible‟ runa(mu) „loan‟ =„terrible loan‟=da:‟runa‟

P1+P2 + (P2) = P1+P2 P2 = Whole

(The whole is greater than the sum of the parts by deletion.)

(3) da:‟runa‟ bandhamulu = „terrible irrepayable agricultural loan bonds‟

The derivation of this meaning „terrible irrepayable agricultural loan‟ in da:‟runa‟

bandhamulu „terrible loan bonds‟ is possible only in the context of the irrepayable agricultural

loans given to the farmers (as reported in the newspaper column) by desynthesis and a

pragmatic reanalysis of the meaning and is therefore beyond the whole because it is context

dependent.

B. The Functional – Ka:rmik Process Relationships in the Word da:runa

1. As mentioned in A.3 above, the derivation of the meaning is context dependent, i.e.,

functional: the system-structure relationship is generated, specified, and directed dispositional-

contextually to perform the function of conveying the desired meaning through the desired

structure.

2. In addition, the function of the phrase is also to fulfill the desire to capture the attention of the

reader through the novel use of such a word-formation process.

3. Furthermore, the use of this phrase functions to serve the purpose of achieving recognition for

such a creative use of language to the news reporter. All the three functions come into play with

(2), and (3) to be decided according to the personal dispositional impulsions of the news reporter.

C. The Cognitive – Ka:rmik Process Relationships in the Word da:runa

40th


24

For the phrase da:runa bandhamulu to be used, it has to be cognized as such. In other words, the

cognitive capability of the news reporter should facilitate such cognition of the phrase by his

analyticity, reasoning, memory, inclination, focus, alertness, and binding power.

D. The Dispositional– Ka:rmik Process Relationships in the Word da:runa

Unless and otherwise, the news reporter is dispositionally driven by the desire to use the QLB

process, he will not attempt to create that phrase at all. As such, the phrase is generated,

specified, directed, and materialized by disposition at a deeper level of his creativity.

E. The Causal – Ka:rmik Process Relationships in the Word da:runa

This impulsion to do so is ka:rmikally caused because it is done specifically by an individual at a

specific spatio-temporal-material, socio-cultural-spiritual context through an inclinational-

informational-habitual dispositional impulsion. This is the mother of all causes that is

responsible to bring forth the lingual action of using the phrase da:runa bandhamulu in the

following linear order:

(38) Karma – Disposition – Cognitivity – Socioculturalspirituality –

Contextual Actionality – Lingual Actionality.

Ka:rmik Process is a causal process as opposed to the other processes such as linear, parallel,

cyclic, and spiral processes which may or may not be. In the above equation, karma is the

ultimate cause, socioculturalspiritual dispositionality is the potential cause, cognition is the

kinetic cause, contextual actionality and lingual actionality are the synoptic cause for the ultimate

effect of experientiality (karmaphalabho:gam) of the results (karmaphalam) of the lingual action

(karma) of using the phrase da:runa bandhamulu. The ka:rmik process is a (W)holistic process

that is interconnected-interrelated-interdependent in a radial network with the causal, potential,

kinetic, synoptic, and experience levels as its spokes and ka:rmik process as the hub of a wheel.

From a linear perspective, it is the disposition which decides the initial impulsion, generates the

desire, specifies the processing, and directs it contextually to produce the concerned action. Here,

what lies in a latent state (potential) becomes dynamic as it is processed and reaches its

completion (synoptic) state. As the action is completed, it paves the way for its experience.

From this perspective of its experience to be this and that as so and so in such and such a

manner, we can attribute its ultimate causality to the karma of the individual as discussed earlier.

(39) Linear Processing of Lingual Action:

Karma – Disposition [(Potential Desire – Dynamic Effort – Synoptic Effect) of Lingual

Action] – Experience of Action.

The same process when viewed from a Ka:rmik Processing Model will be I-I-I and can be shown

in a radial network as shown in Graphs 1 and 2 where Karma, Disposition, Action, (Result, and

Experience) are I-I-I and evolve from the Causal-to-(Pattern-to-Structure)-to-Matter states in its

STM realization. The whole network can be captured as follows.

40th


25

Cause: Karma (Experiential)

Potential

Ka:rmik Process Means Kinetic :Disposition

(personality)

(at the Word Level): Synoptic

Effect: Act /Result/Experience

Network 2: Network of Ka:rmik Processing in Language Formation

(Word Level)

3. 2. 3. 2. The Principle of Q.L.B.

When a word that captures a part of the contextual action meaning and contains another word

that captures another part of the contextual meaning, Q.L.B. processing may be invoked

dispositionally with a shift in stress on to the first syllable of the quotefixed word as follows:

ω ω

„σ “σ σ” ( …. σ) σ „ω‟ … σ

Fig.1. Formation of a QLB Word

So, in the case of "Quotational Lexical Bifurcation", it is dispositionally chosen and repeatedly

used and so popularized in Telugu.

In a similar way, affixation can also be shown to be such a process. Prefixation, suffixation,

infixation, and circumfixation are some of the variables cognized according to the linear order

principle in the universal science of action, chosen, and used according to the dispositional traits

of the language community in which they are created and used. So also, the other processes of

conversion, compounding, reduplication, blending and acronomy can be shown to be

dispositional choices made from among the variables from the mathematical concept of addition.

[See the note at the end in which Affixation is shown in systemic networks of choices for further

clarification.]

So also is the case with the choice of the infixation and triconsonantal root fixation for word-

formation in Arabic. Even the regular and irregular verb formation processes in English can be

similarly argued out as due to dispositional choices of the speakers - see for example, how some

irregular verb forms still survive and some others die.

3. 2. 3. 3. Ka:rmik Algorithmic Network for Quotational Lexical Bifurcation

(Choice) In the case of the formation of lexical quotational bifurcation (LQB), the point of departure sets

in at the very onset of the word-formation processes. The Maker of the Process is not satisfied

with the existing processes as he explores the existing processes by CEV. So he rejects them by a

dispositional choice (negative choice) and embarks upon CNV by another dispositional choice.

At this level, he again embarks on CEV – impelled by rajasik-sattvik disposition - to find out

40th


26

what innovative options would satisfy his desire to form a suitable word. In the process, his

sa:ttvik-ra:jasik disposition impels him to choose quotation marks from among the other choices

of hyphen, dash, bold, italic, etc. punctuation marks and create the bifurcation of the word into

two to mean two-in-one meaning in a compact manner; otherwise, it will be ta:masik-ra:jasik.

A very simplified network will be as follows.

Network 3. Ka:rmik Algorithmic Network for Quotational Lexical Bifurcation (Choice)

Affixation

Word-formation

Processes Compounding

+

CEV Conversion Dispositional Choice

_

Reduplication

…….. etc Rejection of the Variables

Hyphen

Dispositional Choice

Dash C.N.V. (Desire for New Variables) D.F.P.

………….

Quotation

Marks

CEV Initial

Dispositional Choice of Quotation Marks Medial

Final position of the

“ “ word da:runa

Choice

da:”runa”

Once the variables are chosen and the process is created, the next stage is its application,

standardization, and transmission.

4. Stage of Application Application of QLB is context bound as a dispositional action-reaction to the contextual action.

In the absolute sense, QLB is dispositionally bound since the user has the ultimate choice to use

or not use it in a context. When his dispositional cognition impacts on ( ) the contextual action,

he will perceive the contextual meaning of what he wants to write and then by a dispositional

bias leading to a QLB response bias chooses a QLB form of the word and uses it.

(40) Disposition in Context Contextual Action Contextual Meaning

Form of the Word QLB.

40th


27

5. Stage of Transmission

QLB process of word-formation is dispositional-contextual and so is inherently neologistic. This

is a very interesting extension of both neologisms and pragmatics. Generally, what is transmitted

is the QLB word-formation process and not the QLB word per se. However, when the same

context recurs with the same type of action, a QLB word is repeatedly used. For example, a word

like (41) na’garam’ garam “city (is) „hot‟ hot” indicating hot temperatures, (42) vi‘chitra’

va:rta “surprising „picture‟ news”, etc. as a picture caption recur in newspapers; in addition,

words like (43) Ja‘gun’ “Jagan „gun‟fighting”are also seen repeatedly since their similar

contextual uses recur in the context of action. However, repetitions lose their surprise and

novelty and innovation value and such words function like ordinary words, and sometimes, they

will be irritating.

Transmission of QLB is done by the technique of Individual-Collective-Contextual Conjunction

of Action and its Standardization (ICCCS) as shown in the following network 4.

Material Layer 3

Temporal Layer Context Spatial Layer

2 4

a. 1

Legend: transmission from ….. to ….. I-I-I Relation Cognitive Reality I Individual; C Collective; I / CI Individual / Collective IPC Interpersonal Communication

1. Dispositional; 2. Socioculturalspiritual; 3 Contextual Actional; 4 Lingual Actional Realities

Network 4. a. Ka:rmik Network for Transmission of Language as a Dispositional Process by ICCC

The ka:rmik network has three boundary layers indicating the spatio-temporal-material

environment in which QLB takes place. It has four doors indicating dispositional,

socioculturalspiritual, and contextual actional, and QLB lingual actional realities. The circle

indicates the cognitive reality through which all the other four realities are cognized. The

individual news reporter (I) creates a QLB by his dispositional creativity and gets it published in

the news paper. The reader of the news item in which a QLB word is used reads it by Newspaper

Interpersonal Communication (N IPC) instead of I IPC in the case of conversational

communication and experiences the reading of it. Since a newspaper is a mass communication

device, thousands of people will come to know about it in a day‟s time and so it will become

Collective Knowledge (C) very rapidly by feedback loops in the network. The newspaper

reporter will get a filtered and limited feedback either from the readers, or from his Office about

its popularity or unpopularity. There is a big difference between this type of communication and

N IPC

I C

O/NR IPC

40th


28

ordinary spread of language items. In the case of ordinary language, it is person-to-person

communication whereas here it is News Reporter-via-Newspaper-to-Readers-to-Office-to-News

Reporter communication. Here, the editor plays a role in deciding the style of reporting

depending on his feedback and reaction. This is how QLB is transmitted from the news reporter

to the readers and back. In the case of Telugu journalism, the use of QLB is productive and it

has sustained for about 15 years which shows its popularity with the reporters.

6. Stage of Perpetuation

QLB as a process will be perpetuated as long as the reporters like the process and they find it

productive in generating contextual meanings. Once, they are tired of it, they will abandon it.

IV. Conclusion

From the analysis conducted above, we find that QLB is a dispositionally generated-specified-

directed-materialized phenomenon whose choice cannot be motivated without taking disposition

into consideration. By saying that “because the news reporter needs to reduce the space and

create novelty or surprise, he created QLB” is not psychologically valid since previous reporters

did not do it even though there was also a need for such a function. This is an alternative way of

doing the same thing and so is born out of a conscious dispositionally creative choice. Hence, a

functional explanation does not hold good. It also suffers from descriptive inadequacy because

mere function alone cannot motivate a specific form – you need a choice component to choose a

specific form and not another one. Consequently, a functional explanation suffers from

explanatory inadequacy also. A cognitive linguistic explanation of this QLB process as

conceptualization is also inadequate because its choice has to be motivated. Finally there is no

genetic inheritance of this quotational marking as the introduction of quotations into Telugu or

even English (around 16th

century A.D.) is a recent phenomenon. Thus, the most plausible

explanation among the four alternative theories comes from the ka:rmik linguistic theory.

References

[All the daily news papers Andhra Prabha, Andhra Jyothi, Va:rtha, and Sakshi are published from

Hyderabad.]

Bhuvaneswar, Chilukuri (2009). “Theory and Practice of Paremiology: A Plea for Proverbial Linguistics

as a Special Branch”. Keynote Address, The Third International Colloquium on Paremiology, Tavira,

Portugal

--------- (2011). “Proverbial Linguistics: Theory and Practice in the Ka:rmik

Linguistic Paradigm”. Plenary Speech. International Symposium on Proverbs, University of Diderot,

Paris, France

Capra, Fritjof (1996). The Web of Life. p. 153-171

Halliday, M.A.K. (1967). “Linguistics and the Teaching of English”. James N. Britton (ed.) Talking and

Writing: A Handbook for English Teachers. London: Methuen.

Halliday, M.A.K. (1973). Explorations in the Functions of Language. London: Edward Arnold

Hymes, Dell (1974). "Why Linguistics needs the Sociolinguist." In Foundations in Sociolinguistics: an

Ethnographic Approach. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. p. 69-82

40th


29

.

Leech, Geoffeey N. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman

Schiffrin, Deborah [1994]. Approaches to Discourse. Oxford: Blackwell

quotational lexical bifurcation in telugu as a ka:rmik linguistic theory word-formation process

Documents

telugu wordformation

new wordformation process

wordformation processes

bifurcated word

quotation marks

linguistic perspective

telugu journalism

wordformation process