1

THE SYNTAX OF PROVERBS I

THE SENTENCE IN AMERICAN ENGLISH PROVERBS:
A CASE STUDY IN QUIRK’S MODEL
Chilukuri Bhuvaneswar, University of Sebha, Sebha

ABSTRACT

From a close examination of A Dictionary of American Proverbs by Mieder

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

Such statements should be confirmed only after extensive data driven

studies of the overall syntactic profile of proverbs in a language as well as
across other languages. That is why Dundes used the word ‘appear’ in his
statement. As far as I know, such analyses in a given framework are lacking.

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

This finding is useful in constructing an empirically, systematically, and

corpus linguistically tested negative defining characteristic for the proverb
reflecting the current trends in linguistic analysis. It rules out a syntactically
motivated criterion for the definition of a proverb by showing the variability
of syntax in proverbs within themselves with some structures present in
some proverbs and some others not present (i.e., the syntactic criterion
suffers from the defect of avya:pti ‘under extension’). In addition, the
structures present in proverbs are not unique to proverbs alone and hence a
syntactically motivated distinction cannot be made between proverbs and
other genres (i.e., the syntactic criterion also suffers from the defect of
ativya:pti ‘over extension’). Furthermore, it also indexes a positive defining
characteristic, namely, prototypicality of proverbs by contrastively
underlying it as a constant factor among all the variable syntactic structures.
What is more, it offers counter evidence to the formal (Chomskyan),
functional (Hallidayan) and cognitive theories of language because the
 2

variation in proverbs is found to be neither genetically inherited nor socially

generated nor cognitively anchored but dipositionally generated, specified,
directed, and realized which supports The Ka:rmik Linguistic Theory of
Language.

Key Words and Phrases

basic types; English sentence; syntactic representation of English proverbs; Telugu;
defining characteristic; definition; avyapti; ativyapti; prototypicality; formal; functional;
cognitive; dispositionally

I. INTRODUCTION
It is commonly believed that proverbs do occur in certain special structures.
For example, Dundes (1987:962) feels that “there appear to be a finite
number of proverb compositional or architectural formulas (emphasis
mine)”; Abrahams (1972: 119-121) writes about binary construction,
balanced phrasing, occasional inverted word order, and unusual construction
in proverbs as their special syntactic features; and Krishenblatt-Gimblett
(1987:821) mentions highly patterned repetitions and structural balance as
their special features.

The issue of proverbs having special features is based on an observation of a

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

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

A. Aims and Objectives

The aim of this research is to investigate the syntactic structure of English
proverbs at a broad level of their formation.

The objectives of the research are to:

1. examine the sentence patterns of English proverbs and list them out in a
theoretical
framework based on Quirk and Greenbaum (1989);
2. find out whether these patterns are close-ended or open-ended;
3. analyze how far the findings contribute towards the identification of the
defining
characteristics of proverbs; and
4. motivate their structuration in an appropriate theoretical model, namely,
the Ka:rmik
Linguistic Model.
 3

B. Materials and Methods

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

Quirk and Greenbaum (1989) has been used to construct a framework

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

It is so done for two reasons:

1. To limit and narrow down the scope of syntactic pattern investigation for
rigorous analysis;

2. To arrive at universally applicable observations with in the same language

as well as across other languages; such a method will tell us positively to
what extent a profile of syntactic patterning can be cut off to mark
variability in the syntax of proverbs.

C. A Theoretical Framework of the Sentence Patterns in English

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

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

E. Scope and Limitation

This paper aims to look at the syntactic patterns of proverbs at a macro-
level. As such, it offers an analysis of the patterns exemplified at the higher
levels of simple and complex sentences. Hence, it is limited to a general
analysis of proverbial structure to serve the purpose of showing that it is not
specially constrained and that it shares with ordinary language most of its
clausal features.
 4

F. Significance of the Study

1. This study shows that proverbs are represented in all the basic types of
English sentence as outlined in Quirk and Greenbaum (1989) and proves that
their syntax is not constrained to a limited set of structures.

2. This study is also significant in showing that a syntactically motivated

criterion cannot be used for defining a proverb. This is so because the
syntactic characteristics of proverbs are equally shared by ordinary language
and hence such a characterization for defining proverbs suffers from the
defect of ativya:pti (over extension). In addition, it suffers from the defect of
avya:pti (under extension) also because not all the structures in proverbs
share the same features.

G. Explanation of Symbols and Definitions of Technical Terms

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

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

(1) Karma Karmaphalam

Karmaphalabho:gam
Action Results of Action Experience of the
Results of Action
(Karma gives rise to karmaphalam gives rise to Karmaphalabho:gam)
(2) Disposition Desire Effort Action Result
Experience
(Disposition gives rise to Desire gives rise to Effort gives rise to
Action gives
rise to Result gives rise to Experience. OR
Disposition impels Desire impels Effort impels Action impels Result impels
Experience.)

If the arrow points backward, the equation should be read from right to
left. In a top-down process, the arrows point forward and in a bottom-up
process, they point
backward. Some of these equations can also be a:nushangik (see elbow
connectors for more details).
 5

II. Curved Down Arrows: or

A curved down arrow in an equation after a word or symbol indicates
transformational movement in the direction of the arrow, either forward:
or
backward: . It should be read as “typologically transforms
into”. For example,
in the following equation, the curved down arrow points forward and
should be read as “transforms into” in the forward (left to right)
direction:

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

Vishaya jna:nam (phenomenal knowledge meaning knowledge about

phenomena) typologically transforms into bha:sha: jna:nam (lingual
knowledge meaning knowledge in language in this context and not about
language). Here, vishayajna:nam is one type of knowledge and
bha:sha:jna:nam is another type. But knowledge is the same and is
constant. Only, its qualification is changed from phenomenal to lingual,
from non-semiotic to semiotic. In addition, in phenomenal knowledge, the
knowledge is intrinsic in the phenomena themselves. For example, in a
red lotus, redness and lotusness are intrinsic in the red lotus and the
knowledge of the red lotus is directly cognized from the red lotus itself.
Here, there is no speech – no words red and lotus, and no phrase red
lotus:
(4) The Object Red Lotus The Knowledge of Red Lotus
On the other hand, in the case of the phrase red lotus, the knowledge
derived from the hearing of the phrase red lotus is extrinsic to the
phrase. It is semiotic knowledge obtained by the semiosis of the phrase
red lotus:
(5) The Phrase Red Lotus The Knowledge of Red Lotus
This knowledge is directly derived from the knowledge of the language,
the knowledge of the phrase Red Lotus as a linguistic symbol and this
symbol can be a symbol representing a real world phenomenon as in the
case of the red lotus which is obtained in lakes or can be a possible
world phenomenon such as a handless man (losing his hand in an
accident) or an imaginary world phenomenon such as a bodyless man.
This is the power of language that is used to produce inventions such as
television, etc. – visualizing an imaginary phenomenon and realizing it in
the real world.

III. Bent Arrows : or

The bent arrow pointing downward is used to indicate intrinsicness:

and should be read as “intrinsically gives rise to”. The one pointing
 6

upward is used to indicate extrinsicness: and should be read as

“extrinsically gives rise to”. Therefore, equations (4) and (5) can be
rewritten as:
(4a) The Object Red Lotus The Knowledge of Red Lotus
(5a) The Phrase Red Lotus The Knowledge of Red Lotus.
IV. Chevron:
The chevron indicates the analysis and qualification of a process. It
should be read as “is analyzed and qualified as”. For example, in the
equation (5):

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

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

V. Waves: a. Single b. Double or

The symbol wave indicates apparent transformation from one state to
another state. It should be read as “apparently transform(s) into”. For
example, in the following equation (6):
(7) Sound Phonemes Syllables Words
Sentences
the symbol wave should be read as “apparently transforms into” and
the equation should therefore be read as:
Sound apparently transforms into phonemes (which) apparently
transform into syllables (which) apparently transform into words (which)
apparently transform into sentences.

When we want to indicate the transformation of phonemes into words, we

can use the symbol for double waves as in the following equation (7):
(8) Phonemes words
and read the equation as “Phonemes apparently double transform into
words” or “Phonemes form words by apparent double transformation”.
Similarly, triple, quadruple, etc. waves can be used to indicate triple,
quadruple, etc. transformations.

VI. Star: in a Star Network

Stars are used to show networks by connecting different features to the
tips of the twinkles (rays) of the stars. For example, the five important
realities (dispositional, cognitive, socioculturalspiritual, contextual
 7

actional, and actional) in the formation of language can be shown by a

star network. Each reality is shown at the tip of the twinkle (ray) and
connected to the other reality by the sides of it through the two sides of
the twinkle and to the core reality in a radial network. In addition, the
diagonal lines radiate from the tips to the other two sides also. As a
result, each feature is connected to every other feature as well as
connected to the core at the centre also. The feature at the core also
forms an inner radial network with the other features in the star. Thus,
each feature impacts on the other in an interconnected-interrelated-
interdependent (I-I-I) network. This is the basic network which is shown
in Fig.1.a below.

Whenever a feature is more prominent in its function in the network, it is

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

In this type of a basic ka:rmik network, the core (nucleus) feature is

always karma (as disposition) which generates, specifies, directs, and
materializes all activity, including lingual activity, by floating the
relevant features in the physical (the material space), mental (cognitive
space in the mind), and spiritual spaces (Cosmic cognitive space) in an I-
I-I process.

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

In a simplified Star Network, the inner connections are not shown for the
sake of quick representation. In a similar way, when two arcs are
interconnected, it means that the first arc is doubly connected- first to
the feature it directly connects, and second to the feature the second arc
is connected, say, karma getting first connected to the cognitive reality in
the basic network and then to it again in the extended network as shown
in the interconnected double arc. This is useful in simplified star networks
where the inner connections are not shown.
 8

The following example illustrates the operation of a star network.

c. Extended Network
2 (Satellite)

Function

Dispositional Desire
Meaning

Form
Actional Cognitive
b. Extend
ed Network 1 (Planet)

Contextual Actional Socioculturalspiritual

Fig. 1. a. Basic Network (Sun)

VII. Elbow Arrow Connector

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

(9) A: I helped my brother-in-law to construct his house.

B: Good! Flowers leave fragrance in the hand that bestows them.
You helped him and you are blessed by a pay hike.
 9

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

(10) A (Referential Meaning) B [(Referential Meaning +)

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

(11) Referential Meaning Prototypical Meaning

Contextual Meaning

The Principle of A:nushangikatvam is a basic principle in ka:rmik

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

VIII. Triangle and Centrally Dotted Triangle .

A triangle is used to indicate any triadic I-I-I relationship between features,
levels, factors, etc. For example, the interconnected-interrelated-
interdependent relationship between the levels of form, function, and
meaning can be captured by a triangle as shown in Fig. 2a
Meaning

Form Function
Fig. 2 a. Meaning -Function-Form
Triangle

Sattva
(cognitivity/luminosity)

.
Rajas (activity) Tamas
(inertia)

. = Consciousness
 10

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

In (2b), There is a central dot which indicates consciousness as enclosed in

the triangle whose three sides indicate the three components of traits;
disposition (svabha:vam) can also be shown in this triangular form as a
complex of guna:s (traits), jna:nam (knowledge), and va:sana:s (internalized
habits).

IX. Concentric Triple Circles .

a. b.
[a. Triple Concentric Materialization Circle; b. Triple Concentric Cognition
Circle]

A concentric triple circle indicates gradual evolution from Process (concept) –

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

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

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

The second triple concentric cognition circle indicates the three levels of any
type of objectification, action, or experience as a conscious process
 11

of a living system (human beings) as a meaning making process.

This MEANING has a threefold distinction with reference to the object:
1. Meaning of the object ‘house’ as its structural conceptualization – its
structure as an
object;

2. Meaning as the functional conceptualization of the ‘house’ as ‘a dwelling

place’ – its
function as an object;
3. Meaning as the experience of the object, its action, and even the
experience of the
experience of the object, or the action.
This meaning is a Dispositionally-Qualified-Consciousness phenomenon.
To mean something, one should be conscious and conscious dispositionally
to qualify the meaning. Therefore, disposition and consciousness have to be
included to show this process. It is done by putting a dot to indicate
consciousness and enclosing it in a triangle to show disposition.

The entire process of cognition and manifestation of action is encapsulated

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

In the beginning, there is only consciousness with disposition as its inherent

energy. Consciousness has the Power of Awareness and Disposition (Energy)
 12

has the Power of Qualification. This is the svarupa lakshanam (Inherent

Characteristic) of individual consciousness.

As it reflects in disposition, disposition gets charged and when it is, as it were

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

There is also anyo:nya:dhya:sam (mutual superimposition of one’s qualities

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

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

In the case of language, first, language is conceptualized into a tool, a

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

In an ontological perspective, there is only consciousness which is constant

from birth to death in an individual. As he is born and grows, he acquires a
language through his dispositional functional pressure, and innate abilities
for symbolic representation, and starts using it, developing and improving it
through dispositional creativity, and also forgetting it through loss of
memory as a skill. Therefore, consciousness-charged-disposition as energy
 13

transforms itself from SOUND into PATTERNED SOUNDS into a SYSTEM of

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

a. b.
c.

[a. Cognition Triangles; b. Materialization Triangles c. Dispositional Cognitional

Action Conjunction]
 14

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

The triangle of consciousness-qualified-svabha:vam in the second triple circle

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

These triangles are directional, and apparent transformational. The upward

direction points out the higher level of action - namely, cognition as an
abstract, mental process; the downward direction points out the lower level
of action – namely, materialization, as a concrete material process.

These two sets of cognition and materialization triangles get interlocked in

the manifestation of action and produce the concerned lingual action. In the
case of proverbs, it will be proverbial lingual action in an appropriate
manner.

XI. Networks: Star ; flowchart; and Single Line A B C

……
Star networks are used to indicate I-I-I relations; flowchart networks are used
to indicate systemic choices in the formation of language; and single line
linear networks to indicate linear processes of action.

XII. Double Angular Brackets » or <<

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

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

However, the form is again influenced by the socioculturalspirituality of the

speakers in a language community (the community which uses a particular
language in all its range, variety, and depth). Therefore, equation (12) gets
modified as follows:

(13) Propositional Content (Semantics) » Socioculturalspirituality »

Form (Syntactic Structure).
 15

Even the choice of the lexis is influenced by the socioculturalspirituality of

the speakers in a language community. Consequently, equation (13) gets
further modified as follows:

(14) Propositional Content (Semantics) » Socioculturalspirituality »

Form (Syntactic Structure + Lexis).

What is more, the pronunciation is also influenced by the

socioculturalspirituality of the speakers in a language community.
Consequently, equation (13) gets again modified as follows:

(15) Propositional Content (Semantics) » Socioculturalspirituality »

Form (Syntactic Structure + Lexis + Phonetics and Phonology).

Proverbs are used in a context to perform a specific function. Therefore,

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

(16) Propositional Content (Semantics) » Socioculturalspirituality »

Function » Form (Syntactic Structure + Lexis + Phonetics and
Phonology).

A few more symbols are given below.

I-I-I Network Node; Delink

∧ Reflected on (like an adjunct) ∨ Reflected in (like
a quality);
inter-categorially leads to Intra-categorially
leads to
Through the Means of Connecting Node in
a Cyclic Network
● Heart or Nucleus of the Circular/Cyclic Network;
Reversal of Order Impacts on
The Individual Consciousness (the Being)
The Triad of Qualities [sattva (luminosity or cognitivity) giving
knowledge of activity; rajas (activity or analyticity) giving choice and pattern
of activity by traits; and tamas (inertia or substantivity) giving inertia or
materiality of activity by va:sana:s] of Disposition.
Horizontal Line; Vertical Line; Diagonal Line =
Horizontal, Vertical, and
Diagonal Axes I, II, III, and IV; the quadrants 1, 2, 3, and 4
 16

II. LITERATURE REVIEW

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

(17) + - + -
soon ripe soon rotten

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

After rejecting Kimmerle (1947) and Milner (1969), he proposes his own
structural definition of a proverb as:
(18) “a traditional propositional statement consisting of at least one
descriptive element, a descriptive element consisting of a topic and
comment” (ibid.115).

He arrives at this definition from Westermarck (1930:5-6) by replacing his

‘subject’ and ‘predicate’ with ‘topic’ and ‘comment’.

The problem with this definition is that it is too broad, and so equally suffers
from the defect of ativya:pti (our extension). For example, a cow cannot be
defined in terms of its “quadruped” quality. There are many other animals,
say, horses and goats (different families), or horses and zebras (different
species), or horses and mules (hybrids of species) which share the same
quality. A milking cow should be defined in terms of its asa:dha:rana ka:rana
(uncommon characteristic) only, namely having a dewlap among the
domestic milking animals – domestic, and milking are two characteristics
 17

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

In the discussion of advaitha siddhantha (theory of non-dualism), Sri: A:di

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

III. A SURVEY OF THE SYNTACTIC STRUCTURE OF PROVERBS

In this section, the basic types of the simple and complex sentences will be
taken up for an analysis of English proverbs. In the simple sentence, the
seven clause types, which are SVA; SVC; SVO; SVOA, SVOC, SVOO, and SV,
will be analyzed with examples. In the complex sentence, both coordination
and subordination will be discussed. In coordination, syndetic, asyndetic,
and quasi-coordination will be considered while in subordination, the four
important types of nominal, adverbial, comparative and comment clauses
are considered. In addition, relative, contingent and verbless adjective
 18

clauses are also touched upon in the treatment of adjective clauses.

Furthermore, the aphoristic sentence types such as:
A. (1) a. The more, the merrier;
b. The more danger, the more honour;
c. The bigger the body, the larger the heart;
d. The more the help, the lighter the work;
e. Soon got, soon spent;
f. The more you get, the more you want
(2) a. Least said, soonest mended.
b. Less said, more done.
(3) a. Handsome is as handsome does.
[b. Johnny is as Johnny does.
c. Beauty is as beauty does.
d. Foolish is as foolish does.
e. Pretty is as pretty does.]
(4) Easy come, easy go. (Quirk, et al 1976 : 412)
(5) More haste, less speed

B. (6) More money, more sin.

(7) Money when counted, women when spanked.
(8) Them as lends, spends.
(9) Done leisurely, done well.
(10) The less the temptation, the greater the sin.
(11) Always late, never succeed.
(12) Better late than never/sorry; b. Better known than trusted.
(13) a. Long fall, late spring; b. Great boaster, little doer; c. Big
head, little sense;
d. A rolling eye, a roving heart; e. A cold hand, a warm heart.
(14) First love, last love, best love; b. Big head, little sense; c.
Waste and want,
save and have.
(15) The fairer the hostess, the fouler the reckoning; b. The blacker
the berry, the
sweeter the juice; c. The greater the obstacle, the more glory in
overcoming
it; d. The bigger they come, the harder they fall.
(16) Soon got, soon spent.
(17) The first shall be last and the last, first; To err is human, to
forgive divine;
First is worst, second the same, last is best of all the game.
(18) First come, first served.
(19) Self do, self have; b. Silly question, silly answer; c.
(20) Conditions make, conditions break; b. Money makes, money
mars; c.
Always in a hurry, always behind; d. Good, better, best: never
let it rest,
 19

until your good is better, and your better , best.

(21) Better the fruit lost than the tree; b. Better be envied than
pitied; c. Better a
good dinner than a fine coat
(22) Once a fool, always a fool;
(23) Next to love, quietness.

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

The discussion of the syntactic structure of proverbs is adapted from

Bhuvaneswar 2002 (see section III.1.2) and presented below. A flowchart of
the various syntactic structures is presented at the end of the Section III.

III. 1. Variation at the Syntactic Level

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

1. The Syntactic Structure of English Proverbs

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

As we are not attempting a functional analysis, the listed examples may not
cover all the functional uses of a type. For example, in the major class of
statements, in the clause pattern of complex sentence, in the (sub-) class
of nominal clause, in the that-clause type, the that – clause performs five
functions
[as the subject (e.g. That she is still alive (S) is a consolation.),
 20

direct object (e.g. {I told him / I knew} that he was wrong (D.O.).),
subject complement (e.g. The assumption is that things will
improve (S.C.).),
appositive (e.g. Your assumption, that things will improve, is
unfounded.), and
adjectival complement (e.g. I’m sure that things will improve
(Adj.C).]
in normal language (ibid 316 –17). Whereas in proverbs, only three functions
are enumerated in the English examples. In spite of that, it does not mean
the absence of the remaining two functions in proverbs; it only means that
so far they have not been made use of, or not recorded, or not identified (by
me owing to personal limitations). That it is so is because of the open ended
nature of the form of proverbs. For example, the syntactic structure of a
proverb is historically not found to be absolute as we see in different
variations of the same proverb starting from the Biblical Time
(24) “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”:

i. Do as you would be done by;

ii. Do it to him before he does it to you;
iii. Do others before they do you;
iv. Do unto others as others do unto you;
v. Do unto others as though you were the others;
vi. Do unto others before they do to you;
vii. Don’t do to others what you would not have done to you;
and
viii. What you do not like done to yourself – do not do to
others.

From a bird’s eye view of the proverbs in ADAP (A Dictionary of American

Proverbs by Mieder, et al 1992), it appears that almost all the major
structures up to the clause type are made use of in the formation of
proverbs. Owing to the constraints of space, only a few representative
samples are provided.

A flowchart of the important syntactic structures starting from the sentence

and leading up to the minor divisions in coordination and subordination
discussed in the analysis is given below in the next page.
 21

A Flowchart of the Important Structures in the General

Framework of English Syntax
SVA

a. SENTENCE FLOWCHART 1 SVC

SVO

Statements SVOA

SVOC

SVOO

SV

Rhetorical
Questions

Questions

Simple Q/A Proverbs

± Subject

With Let

Sentence Commands Negative

commands

Persuasive
Commands

Exclamations Syndetic

Coordination Asyndetic
 22

Complex Quasi
Coordination

Subordination Phrasal
Coordination

Subordination (Continued in the Next Page)

b. SUBORDINATION FLOWCHART 2

Nominal Clause
Time
That -Clause

Place
Interrogative Clause

Condition and
Nominal Relative Clause
Concession

To-Infinitive Nominal Clause

Reason or Cause

Nominal –ING Clause

Circumstance

Bare Infinitive and

Purpose
Verbless Clauses

Result
Adverbial Clauses

Manner and

Comparison
Comparative Sentence
Correlation
Proportion and

Preference
Correlation Enough and Too
Subordination
Non-Infinitive
So That and Such That
and Verbless
 23

Wellerisms
Rhetorical

Questions
Comment
Clauses Proverbs with
Imperatives
Parenthetic Matter

Exclamations
Other Syntactic Classes
Wh-Word
(Complex Sentence)
Exclamations
Relative Clause

Adjective Clause Verbless Adjective Clause

Contingent Adjective
Clause

1.1. Simple Sentence Proverbs

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

1.SVA; 2. SVC ; 3. SVO; 4. SVOA; 5. SVOC; 6. SVOO; and 7. SV

[where S is subject; V verb; O object; A adverbial; and C complement].

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

A few examples for simple sentence proverbs are furnished below.

a. Declaratives
i. SVA [e.g. Mary is in the house.]
 24

(25) A woman’s place is in the house;

(26) The absent are always in the wrong.

ii. SVC [e.g. Mary is (kind / a nurse).]

(27) a. Love is blind; b. No one is infallible; (28) Ignorance is bliss;
(29) A pig in the parlor is still a pig; (30) Aching teeth are ill tenants.

iii. SVO [e.g. Somebody caught the ball.]

(31) Familiarity breeds contempt; (32) A stitch in time saves nine.

iv. SVOA [e.g. I put the plate on the table.]

(33) You can’t put a round peg in a square hole;
(34) Dogs don’t kill the sheep at home;
(35) God builds a nest for the blind bird.

v. SVOC [e.g. We have proved him (wrong / a fool).]

(36) Six feet under make all men equal; (37) The pot calls the kettle
black;
(38) Muddy roads call de (the) milepost a liar;
(39) The pot can’t call the kettle black ass.

vi. SVOO [e.g. She gives me expensive presents.]

(40) Every man thinks his own geese swans;
(41) You can’t teach an old horse new tricks.

vii. SV [e.g. The child laughed.]

(42) Money talks; (43) Time flies; (44) A barking dog never bites.

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

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

ii. Question / Answer Proverbs

There are some proverbs in English which have both a question and an
answer joined together as a set, i.e., the rhetorical question is provided with
 25

the positive or negative assertion plus a comment as the answer – which will
not be in rhetorical question type proverbs.

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

In a rare combination of a question with an answer to indicate refusal is

listed as a proverb in ODEP (p.883):
(50 a) Which way to London? A poke full of plums.
In another instance, an elicitation is given with an answer as part of the
proverb:
(50 b) What are little boys made of?
Frogs and snails and puppy dog’s tails that’s what little boys are
made of.
(50 c) When shall we eat white bread? When the Puttock is dead.
c. Imperatives
Commands are classified as:

i. Commands with / without a Subject

(51) You must cut your coat according to the cloth;
(52) Every man should cultivate his own garden;
(53) Don’t make a mountain out of a molehill;
(54) Always look on the bright side.

ii. Commands with Let

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

iii. Negative Commands

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

iv. Persuasive Imperatives

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

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

Normally, proverbs in other syntactic classes can be converted into an

exclamation depending upon the context. For example, a declarative proverb
‘ A stitch in time saves nine!’ into: ‘ A stitch in time saves nine! ’to express
 26

the emotional realization of the value of a stitch in time. Proverbs with what
or how introducing the initial phrase are rare.

1.2. Complex Sentence Proverbs

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

Based on the above-mentioned classification, let us now do a clausal analysis

of English proverbs to know their syntactic structure at the complex
sentence level.

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

i. Syndetic Coordination by And, Or, and But

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

ii. Asyndetic Coordination

(64) You scratch my back; I’ll scratch yours. [(and) I’ll…]
(65) Sink, swim or die. [ (or) swim…]
(66) Beauty lasts only a day; ugly holds its own. [(but) ugly…]

iii. Quasi – Coordination by

As Well As, As Much As, Rather Than, and More than
(67) Might as well be hanged for a sheep as a lamb;
(68) You learn as much ripping as sewing;
(69) There are few who would rather be hated than laughed at;
(70) Keep no more cats than will catch mice
(71) There is more than one way to kill a cat.

In addition to clausal coordination, and and or also function as phrasal

coordinators in general while but is used to link adjective phrases and
adverb phrases only in simple and complex sentences (Quirk & Greenbaum
1989: 267).

iv. Phrasal Coordination in Complex Sentences

 27

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

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

(75) If you can’t beat them (1SC), join them ;

(76) When you open a door (1SC) you do not know how many rooms lie
beyond (2SC);

(77) If you do(1SC) what you should not (2SC), you must hear what you
would not
(3SC).
(78) They may not know just what art is (1SC), but (coordination) they
know what they
want (2SC).
(79) He who fights (1SC) and (coordination of SCs) runs away (2SC) will
live to fight
another day (3SC).

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

b.1. Nominal Clause

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

i. That – Clause
(80) The only sure thing about luck is that it will change. [- subject
complement]
(81) It is not good that the man should be alone.
[- adjectival complement: It is the other form by extraposition of a clausal
subject as in:
(82) ‘That the man should be alone is not good’ but not
‘That which had no force in the beginning can gain no strength from the
lapse of time.’]
(83) If you fear that people will know, don’t do it. [- direct object]
 28

As mentioned in III.1.2.1, examples for the other two functions:

1. Appositive; and 2. Subject are not given.
In this case, they are not identified by me so far. Whether they have been
made use of in the formation of proverbs recorded is to be verified.

ii. Interrogative Clause

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

iii. Nominal Relative Clauses

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

iv. To-infinitive Nominal Clauses

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

v. Nominal – ing Clauses

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

vi. Bare Infinitive and Verbless Clauses

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

For example;
(103) Better cut the shoe than pinch the foot;
(104) Better be poor than wicked.
 29

Such constructions are the elliptical forms of:

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

Sometimes, these constructions appear in their full form:

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

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

i. Clauses of Time (with Subordinators after, before, until, till, when,

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

ii. Clauses of Place (where, wherever)

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

iii. Clauses of condition and concession

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

b. Concession
(119) Though most be players, some must be spectators;
(120) Though one grain fills not the sack, it helps;
(121) While the cat’s away, the mice will play;
 30

(122) Don’t lick the honey off a briar even if it is sweet;

(123a) If they can’t eat bread, let them eat cake;
(123b) If the beard were all, the goat might preach;
(124) No matter how fashions change, a ruffled temper will never be in
style;
(125) It doesn’t matter how high you jump provided you walk straight when
you
get down;
(126) Aim for a star even though you hit a cow on the hillside;
(127) Whatever way the wind does blow, some hearts are glad to have it so.

iv. Clauses of Reason or Cause

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

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

vi. Clauses of Purpose

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

vii. Clauses of Result

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

viii. Clauses of Manner and Comparison

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

ix. Clauses of Proportion and Preference

(143) The bigger the tree, the harder she falls;
(144) As a man thinks, so he is;
(145) Follow the wise few rather than the vulgar many;
 31

(146) A good name is sooner lost than one;

x. Non – finite and Verbless Clauses (Implied Subject)

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

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

i. Equational (as…as) and Differentiating (less…than ; more….than)

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

ii. Enough and Too

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

iii. So …. (that) and such….(that)

(161) There is no pain so great that time will not soften;
(162) There is no such thing as a horse that can’t be rode or a cow boy that
can’t be throwed.

E. Comment Clauses
Comment clauses may be disjuncts or conjuncts such as : 1. as you probably
know ; 2. I believe (main clauses) ; 3. as you know (adverbial clause) ; 4.
What’s more (relative clause) ; 5. to be honest (to – infinitive clause) ; 6.
speaking as a layman (-ing clause) ; 7. stated bluntly (-ed clause), etc. (UGE
P.335 – 36)
 32

The very nature of comment clauses such as these which give informality or
warmth are not a feature of proverbs. As such, their occurrence is very rare.
For example,
(163) The cat may look at a king, they say, but would rather look at a
mouse any day. However, clauses that introduce direct speech may be
considered comment clauses (ibid.337). Therefore, ‘Wellerisms’ can be
analysed in terms of comment clauses – wellerisms are direct speech of
notations.
i. Wellerisms
(163b) “Neat but not gaudy”, said the monkey when he painted his tail blue;
(164) “All’s well that ends well”, said the monkey when the lawn mower ran
over his tail;
(165) “Every man to his taste”, said the farmer when he kissed the cow ;
(166) “The case is altered”, quoth Plowden;
(167) “Many masters”, said the toad when the harrow turned him over;
(167b) “Take what you want”, says God, “but pay for it”.

ii. Proverbs with Parenthetic Matter

There are certain proverbs which contain two units separated by dashes,
commas, or semicolons – one main unit and another ‘aside’ or comment.
(168) There are always two sides to every argument – his and the wrong
side;
(169) Success is a chain of gold – but it is a chain;
(170) Curses, like chickens, come home to roost;
(171) There is no good arguing with the inevitable; the only argument
available with the east wind is to put on your overcoat;
(172) It is with narrow-souled people as with narrow – necked bottles: the
less they have in them, the more noise they make in pouring out.
(173 a) When you ain’t got no money, well, you needn’t come around.
(173 b) It doesn’t pay to hurry, as you pass up more than you catch.

F. Other Syntactic Classes (Complex Sentence)

Among complex sentences also, we get questions, imperatives, and
expressions in proverbs. Imperatives are very common while rhetorical
questions are a few and expressives the least in American English.

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

ii. Imperatives (Complex Sentences)

(179) When you see a mule’s fixing to throw you, you jes’ git off;
(180) Don’t monkey with the bandwagon if you can’t play with the horn;
 33

(181) Let your will roar when your power can but whisper;
(182) Help others as they help you;
(183) Catch no more fish than you can salt;
(184) Kindle not a fire that you cannot extinguish;
(185) Get what you can, and what you get hold;
(186) Notice that ideas start with “ I ”.

iii. Exclamations (Complex Sentence)

(187) Your money or your life! [(Give me) your money or (I will take) your
life.
(188) Walk, drab, walk!

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

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

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

ADAP.

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

In addition to the above mentioned clauses, other types of adjective clauses

are also discussed in Quirk and Greenbaum (1989. Their analysis is extended
to proverbs also in the next section.

G. Other Types of Adjective Clauses

Quirk and Greenbaum (1989 : 378 – 83; 119 – 20) analyse relative, verbless,
and contingent adjective clauses.

i. Relative Clause
Relative clauses are very highly productive, especially, after pronouns
occurring at the beginning of a proverb. The relative pronoun in a relative
clause agrees with the head on the basis of a two-term gender system,
personal and non-personal. In such cases, the pronoun ‘who/which’ is used.
However, in many cases in (American) English, a general pronoun ‘that’
which is ‘independent of the personal or non-personal character of the
antecedent and also of the function of the pronoun in relative clause’ (i bid.
300) is used. A few examples are given below to illustrate its use in
proverbs.

a) (192) He who scatters thorns should not go bare-footed.

(193) She who is a beauty is half-married.
 34

(194) Compete not with persons who have means beyond your
reach.
(195) Little boys who play with matches get their fingers burned.
(196a) The rat which has but one hole is soon caught.
(196b) It is a poor frog who doesn’t play with his own pond.

b) (197) He cannot speak well that cannot hold his tongue.

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

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

(203) He who laughs last just got the joke.

[who as the subject of the relative clause]

(204) Give credit to (him) whom credit is due.

[whom is the complement of the governing preposition to]

(205) He whose destiny is to be hanged will never be drowned.

[whose is in a genitive relation to the noun head: He is to be
hanged. It is
his destiny]

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

A few more examples are given below.

(207a) Whom the gods love die young.
(207b) Whom the gods destroy they first make mad.
(208) When you go to dance, take heed whom you take by the hand.
(209) In whose heart there is no song, to him the miles are many and
long.
(210) The poorest man is he whose only wealth is money.

ii. Verbless Adjective Clause

An adjective clause, according to Quirk and Greenbaum (1989 : 119), can
function as a verbless clause as in the following examples :

a) (By then) nervous, the man opened the letter.

b) She glanced with disgust at the cat, quiet (now) in her
daughter’s lap.
 35

c) Strange, it was she who initiated divorce proceedings.

d) Long and untidy, his hair played in the breeze.
I have not come across this type of clauses in proverbs. However, there is a
possibility to derive this structure from ordinary proverbs. For example,

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

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

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

d) The tongue can speak a word whose speed out steps the steed >
Amazing, the tongue can speak a word whose speed out steps the
steed.
[
> gives rise to]
Hence, there is equally a possibility to find such extensions in future if they
are not already existent.
iii.Contingent Adjective Clause
A contingent adjective clause expresses the circumstance or condition under
which what is said in the superordinate clause applies. For example,
(When) enthusiastic, they make good students.
Such clauses are present in proverbs but they are not easily encountered.
Two examples are given below.
(211). Friendship, like persimmons, is good only when ripe.
(212). The vagabond, when rich, is called a tourist.

The former offers an interesting example of how syntactic structuration is

variable and fluid. For example, in
(213). ‘The time to pick berries is when they’re ripe’,
‘when they’re ripe’ is a full subordinate clause which is a little more
expanded in another proverb
(214). ‘Foxes, when they cannot reach the grapes, say they are not
ripe’
by changing ‘they’re’ into ‘they are’ and ‘when they are not ripe’ into ‘when
(they cannot reach the grapes, say) they are not ripe’. This is further ellipted
into ‘when ripe’ in the proverb on friendship. Again, another variation, which
is the most ellipted form, is given in the proverb
(215). ‘The ripest peach is highest on the tree’.
So we see a very fluid choice in the structure of proverbs from among the set
of syntactic options available to fashion out the social or natural praxis
propositional content in proverbs. It can be shown in a scale as follows:
 36

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

All these examples are interchangeable in terms of their structure, for

example, as follows:

a) The ripest peach is highest on the tree.

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

In an SFL framework, a network can be proposed for such elliptical choices

but the very choice itself cannot be motivated especially when the same
proverb is ellipted as in the case of:
(216). The bee that makes the honey doesn’t stand around the hive,
and the man
who makes the money has to worry, work, and strive.
a) The bee that gets the honey doesn’t hang around.
b) It’s the roving bee that gathers honey.
[(217). A bee works; a beaver works and plays].

The ellipsis can be motivated only in a karmik linguistic framework that

offers an explanation for the motivation of all these choices as a dispositional
socio – cognitive phenomenon (See Bhuvaneswar 2002 for an explanation).

IV. CONCLUSION AND MOTIVATION OF PROVERBS

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

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

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

2. In spite of the variations in the form of the syntactic structures, they

are frozen in
a specific syntactic structure in which the proverb is cognized and
patterned.

This empirical evidence has implications for understanding the nature

of proverbs as follows:
 37

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

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

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

the proverbs
as not syntactically fixed-patterned structures and positive
evidence that even though they are syntactically
variable, they are textually frozen structures.
c. And finally, it informs the linguists on a theory of language
formation from
the perspective of the cognition of proverbs.

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

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

B. MOTIVATION OF PROVERBS IN THE THE KA:RMIK LINGUISTIC

THEORY
In the following paragraphs, let us motivate
a. why the syntactic patterns of the proverbs are open-ended but frozen;
b. why the same proverb is formed in different syntactic patterns; and
c. why the same syntactic pattern is used for different proverbs in the
Ka:rmik
Linguistic Model.
The ka:rmik linguistic theory is based on the fundamental principle that all
action – be it mental, lingual, or physical - is generated, specified, directed,
and materialized by disposition.

According to the ka:rmik linguistic theory, language is not only used as a

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

Language is created through the processing of five realities which are

dispositional reality, cognitive reality, socioculturalspiritual reality,
contextual actional reality, and (lingual) actional reality and a number of
 38

principles – this is the procedure. In order to process the formation of

language, a number of techniques such as the technique of superimposition,
a:nushangikatvam (cause inherited into the effect like clay into the pot), etc.
are also used.
To motivate the syntactic structuration of proverbs in the ka:rmik linguistic
model of Bhuvaneswar (see 2009 for a detailed discussion on this new
linguistic approach), we need to first know what the basis of a particular
syntactic structure for a proverb is. In addition, we must also know how the
syntax of a language is created as a system of dispositional choices of
representing the actional, and dispositional realities; then, how this
dispositionally created system is used to fashion out proverbs.
First, let us briefly outline a how a syntactic system is created in a language
by the language community.
1. The Motivation of a Syntactic System in a Language (English)
According to the Ka:rmik Linguistic Theory, a language is not only used as a
resource for the construction of dispositional reality but is also produced
from it. It is produced as follows:
1. The human beings are genetically endowed with the faculty of
consciousness that enables them to be aware of: the actual world out there;
the world in here (inside their being), the possible world by imagination of
the worlds out there and in here, and finally the imaginary (psychic) worlds
which are not actual and possible; and analyticity, memory, disposition, and
vocalization. They conduct their living by pursuing different biological,
sociological, psychological, and spiritual (not necessarily religious but
anything related to world views) desires by mental, vocal, and physical
contextual action, and experiencing their results as pleasure and pain.
2. Since they are dispositionally complex, their intellection, emotion, and
experience are complex, and consequently get complex desires. These
complex desires cannot be fulfilled by ordinary physical or mental action;
they require complex means to achieve the complex effects (goals). Hence,
a complex dispositional functional pressure builds up in their personalities
and in the process erupts vocalization as a solution to solve the problem of
fulfilling complex desires (for example, to communicate danger, vocalizations
erupt; and to communicate specific and complex danger, a specific
vocalization is required; this builds up functional dispositional pressure and
brings forth semiotic representation by gradual evolution of the vocalization
into a patterned vocalization into a recognized vocalization as meaningful
into a semiotic vocalization. The process is captured in the following
equation:
(20) a. Dispositional Functional Pressure Vocalization
Meaningful Vocalization Patterned Vocalization Semiotic
Vocalization Symbolic Communication
 39

Once sounds are turned into symbols, language starts and a chain reaction
sets in owing to the innate dispositional creativity of the human beings.
People begin to explore, experiment, and create new sounds, new patterns,
and increase the range, depth, and variety of the phonemic symbolic system.
b. Vocalization Sound Meaningful Sound Patterned Sound
Phoneme
Phonemic System
Gradually, as human beings use, refine, and expand this system, they
develop a lexical system by their dispositional creativity to meet the
contextual needs. They do so by mathematical means of addition,
subtraction, etc. of the phonemes. When this system is standardized by
individual-collective-contextual- actional conjunction, it becomes the
established lexical system of communication.
c. Sounds Phonemes Combined Sounds Phonemic
Syllables
Patterned Syllables Meaningful Syllables Words
Gradually, as human beings use, refine, and expand this system, they
develop a syntactic system. When this system is standardized by individual-
collective-contextual- actional conjunction, it becomes the established
syntactic system of communication.
d. Words Combined Words Phrases Patterned Phrases
Systemic Phrases
e. Words Phrases Clauses Patterned Clauses
Systemic Clauses
f. Sentences Patterned Sentences Meaningful
Systemic Sentences
g. Utterances Turns Exchanges Transactions
Discourse
Other systems within systems also develop in a similar way. Finally, a
language is established but it is always in a continuous flux since disposition
fluctuates synchronically and diachronically. However, this system is I-I-Ily
developed in combination with all the levels of language: Formal, Functional,
Cognitive, Dispositional, Experiential. This established formal and functional
system of language becomes the basis for the formation of proverbs.
2. The Motivation of a Proverbial Syntactic System in a Language
(English)

1. Why is the structure of a proverb as it is and why is it not as it is

not?
[What is the basis for the choice of a particular syntactic structure
for a proverb?]
 40

In the formal structuration of a proverb, there are five levels: 1. Phonetics; 2.

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

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

Words-in-Syntax)
Structure (the Realization of the Pattern in Sound)

At the level of patterning, all the four levels of form (phonetics-phonology-

lexis-syntax) and their abstract meaning (semantics) are networked to give
its manifest patterned structure. Their interconnection-interrelation-
interdependence can be shown in the following figure.

Phonology Process (Concept)

Phonetics Lexis

Semantics Syntax Pattern Structure

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

Structure

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

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

Pattern +) Structure)]

This is with reference to the proverbial structure as a linguistic concept

(pasyanthi) in its unmanifest cognitive state in the consciousness which
becomes a linguistic patterned structure (madhyama) in the mind,
underlying the concept, and finally a linguistic form (vaikhari) underlying the
concept and the pattern as vocal speech. [The patterned structure can be
both seen as a text and heard mentally whereas the form can only be
audible when uttered but the concept is an unmanifest impression in the
memory which can only be recalled by will.] This networking takes place in
the mind of a proverb user who already knows the proverb.
 41

There is another process, namely, the process of symbolic representation.

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

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

[In the case of animals, there is no such symbolic transformation into

speech. For example, when a tiger attacks a deer, the deer does not know
the attacking of the tiger as “Now, the tiger is attacking me; so, let me run”
in speech. Nonetheless, it knows it either by non-semiotic awareness of the
practice when it sees the tiger by being alert or by its own symbolic system
of communication (vocalizations or calls) when it is commuinicated –
otherwise it will not run away.]

Later on, this unmanifest semiotic knowledge as a concept is patterned and

structured in the form of speech at its formal level of phonetics-phonology-
lexis-syntax by another categorial transformation, this time a categorial
transformation from semiotic knowledge as awareness into knowledge as
sound energy (matter):

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

Proverb

[There is an interesting inference to be made here. At the level of creation of

this material universe, the concept of the material universe must also have
been in a similar state in the Immanent Intelligence Principle of Nature (the
Absolute Laws of Nature) which must have manifested it as matter through
energy by double transformation from concept into energy into matter as
given by Einstein’s famous mass – energy equation:
 42

(24) Concept E (nergy) M(ass) C (velocity of

light) ² = Universe.

In other words, the same principle which operates at the macrocosmic

creation is also reflected in the microcosmic human creation. To put it
differently, the human beings are endowed with the same ability of creation
– within - creation but only with a limited power of patterning but not
creating the sound (which is already designed by the Laws of Nature). That
means the consciousness in human beings reflects the Absolute
Consciousness in Nature – if there is one - just like the infinite water drops of
the ocean reflect the sun. How this is done is a mystery which science has to
resolve!]
It is at this primary level of cognition that the syntactic structure
(along with other levels) is chosen. And it is chosen by a complex
networking of socioculturalspiritual, natural, and lingual praxis to
construct the experiential reality for the proverb user by another
set of transformations as follows:
(25) Natural Praxis Socioculturalspiritual Praxis
Lingual Praxis.
On the one hand, this lingual praxis is involved in the creation of the
proverb; on the other hand, its further use is achieved by another
set of transformations as follows:
(26) Lingual Praxis Contextual Actional Praxis
Dispositional Speech Actional Praxis.
Finally, the speech actional praxis produces the experiential praxis
via dispositional praxis by another set of transformations as follows:
(27) Speech Actional Praxis Dispositional Actional Praxis
Experiential Praxis.

The creation of the lingual praxis (i.e., the formation of the proverb), its
application in a context (i.e., its function or the cause of its application
leading to the function), and its experience (i.e., the realization of the
function or the effect of the application of the proverb in the context by both
the speaker and the hearer) are all interconnected-interrelated-
interdependent in a huge mind boggling network of action-reaction
sequences for the construction of the experiential reality (i.e., the ka:rmik
reality as the experiential principle of cause-effect reality) of the human
being. It constitutes just one instance of experience in his living where his
living is a sum total of such experiences from birth to death. This experiential
reality which is living is created, sustained, and dissolved by another cardinal
principle of networks-within-networks in which the formation,
application, transmission, and retention of proverbs forms one optional
network.
 43

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

These action networks are dispositionally generated, specified, directed, and

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

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

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

Sentient Living Action Physical

Mental

Insentient Contextual Experience Vocal

(Lingual)

d. E.N. 3 Creational Holistic

c. Extended Network
2 (Satellite)
Atomic Spherical
Ka:rmik
Phenomenal Action

Matter Relation
Results

Objects
Time Cosmic Action
 44

b.Extend
ed Network 1 (Planet)

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

Action Function

Desire Result Cognition

Meaning

Disposition Experience Disposition Form

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

Formal) Network

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

N.P. Phenomenal Action

S.C.P. Dispositional Action

Categorial Action

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

Action

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

Desire Function
Context Speech Act Cognition
Meaning

Contextual Action Discourse Disposition Form

 45

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

Formal) Network

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

Text

Prototypicalization

Proverbialization Contextual Prototypicalization

[ Blank Twinkle (not occupied)]

Fig. 7. Proverbialization (Formal-Functional) Network

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

As texts become proverbs by performing a proverbial function, they are

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

The practice as it is observed is an assertion since it has been discovered

that flowers transfer fragrance to the hand that carries them and when they
are given to someone, still the fragrance lingers in the hand. The creator of
this proverb – in its early state of origin – chose this observation and might
have used it in that assertion form or might have arrived at it after a trial and
error method. Consequently, the proverb is in its corresponding declarative
sentence form. The people who received it accepted that form and used it
 46

again and again giving it currency and the frozen pattern. That means that
there is 1. a dispositional cognition of the natural and social practice of
flower- giving; 2. a semiotic representation of this practice; 3. a proverb
formation out of this practice; and 4. its standardization by individual-
collective-contextual conjunction. At all these levels, there is a dispositional
cognition and choice as shown below in the following analysis of the choice
of the syntactic structure. The same can be equally applied to all other
proverbs and systematically motivate open-ended variation in their syntax.

In the following sections, a brief description of how a proverb is formed is

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

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

Before the formation of the proverb, the propositional content of the proverb
is derived from the observation (cognition) of natural or social praxis, its
further interpretation as non-semiotic knowledge by insightful behavior and
identification and transformation into semiotic knowledge. The mechanism of
cognition involves the following processes and strategies (at the level of
cognitive reality):
1. Perception
All living systems including human beings are endowed with the single most
unique ability of awareness through sensory perception. In human beings it
is at the highest with five senses of perception (in animals it may be lesser
than that). The impressions received by the senses are processed in a
complex network to produce knowledge.

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

3. Attention and Focus

One needs to interpret the observed practice as this and that (objectification
or indeterminate identification); as so and so (specification or determinate
identification); and as such and such (qualification or attributive
specification), for example, interpreting the natural practice of flowers
imparting their fragrance to the objects in contact as one practice (this
practice in an indeterminate manner) and people offering flowers to others
as another practice (that practice in an indeterminate manner by
differentiation as two practices) and then identifying them to be so and so
practices of flowers imparting fragrance and people offering flowers and
further analyzing them to be such and such as the first practice to be as
 47

flowers having the property of imparting fragrance and the second practice
as people having the cultural habit of offering flowers to others on special
occasions, etc. . The first one is indeterminate awareness; the second
determinate awareness; and the third qualitative awareness. The cognizer
should also have interest in the practice as an interesting (salient)
phenomenon and also as one that can be used purposefully. This interest will
enable him to remember this practice and recollect it when there is a
dispositional functional pressure to use it for proverbialization. Thus, this
non-semiotic knowledge is held in memory. It gets reinforced by a repetitive
observation of the practice in various contexts.

To summarise, Phase I contains the following stages of analysis: i. Sensory

Perception (Observation); ii. Interpretation of the Sensory Impressions; iii.
Identification; iv. Memory.

B. Phase II: The Process of Non-semiotic to Semiotic Transformation

of Knowledge
In order to gain semiotic awareness, the following stages in Phase II must
have occurred.

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

(28) A: He has been promoted and got a good pay hike.

B: Flowers leave fragrance in the hand of the bestower!

So the functions are derived one after the other by its frequent use through
the dispositional creativity of the users. As they are used, their functions get
 48

familiarized and stored in the cultural memory of the people. At the same
time, their form also will be standardized and gets transmitted from one
person to another.

What is more, as the function is assigned, its meaning is also assigned in a

triple manner as discussed previously (P. 8) and given below once again.
Therefore, form, function, and meaning go together in an I-I-I network.

2. Representation of Meaning
According to The ka:rmik linguistic theory, there are three meanings in a
proverb: 1. Referential Meaning; 2. Prototypical Meaning; 3. Contextual
Meaning. The referential meaning is the meaning of the proverb derived
through the lexical meanings of the words in the proverb. “That flowers leave
fragrance in the hand of that bestows them” is the referential meaning of the
proverb Flowers leave fragrance in the hand that bestows them; “That a
person who does good to others or wish others well is blessed by that act” is
the prototypical meaning; “That a person A who helped another person B by
giving an interest free loan to build his house is benefitted by a substantial
pay hike” is the contextual meaning in the following conversational
exchange that took place in Indian English:
(29) A: I helped my brother-in-law to construct his house.
B: Good! Flowers leave fragrance in the hand that bestows them.
You helped him and you are blessed by a pay hike.
The Proverb “Flowers leave fragrance in the hand that bestows them” carries
all the three meanings a:nushangikally in this context one superimposed on
the other by vivartam (apparent transformation). These two processes of
meaning formation can be shown by the following equations (10) and (11). In
semantic change by extension, the original meaning is lost, and the new
meaning is retained whereas in a:nushangik meaning, a new meaning is
added and highlighted and taken by superimposition.
(30) A (Referential Meaning) B [(Referentail Meaning +)
Prototypical Meaning)
C [Referentail Meaning + Prototypical Meaning +) Contextual
Meaning]
(31) Referentail Meaning Prototypical Meaning
Contextual Meaning
The Principle of A:nushangikatvam is a basic principle in ka:rmik
semiotics. For example, sound is apparently transformed into words into
phrases into clauses into sentences at the lower level and they are
transformed into meaning at the middle level; again, meaning is further
transformed into functions into desires into disposition at the above level and
finally into karma at the highest level. It operates at different levels in
language and a comprehensive investigation is needed to study this principle
in language.
 49

3. Representation of Form and Binding

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

Graph 1: Combined Triaxial Graphs of Cognitive Actionality

Quadrants in the Ka:rmik Linguistic Theory
Legend

The Individual Consciousness (the Being in the Human Being or the soul or the ji:va)
The Triad (sattva giving knowledge of activity; rajas giving choice of activity by traits;
and tamas giving inertia or materiality of activity by va:sana:s) of Disposition.
Horizontal Line; Vertical Line; Diagonal Line: Horizontal, Vertical, and Diagonal
Axes
I, II, III, and IV the quadrants 1, 2, 3, and 4

Spirituality Ideology Cogneme Concept

Society Participants
II III

Culture Relation
Guna:s Context

I IV

Vasanas Activity

Knowledge Knowledge Contextual Actionality

(Dispositional) (Phenomenal) Actionality (lingual)
 50

Graph 2 : Tricircled Disposition-Qualified-Conscoiusness Creating

Action in The ka:rmik linguistic theory

Legend
s 1.inner, 2. medial, 3.
outer:
pasyanthi ‘cognitive’;
madhyama ‘pattern’;
vaikhari ‘form or phonic’
levels of
realization of language;
The Triad of
Svabha:vam
The graph
indicating the formation of
lingual action
● or The
Individual Consciousness

Phase III

Once a potential proverbial utterance is semiotically cognized, the stage is

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

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

It is spherical in the sense each variable is interconnected-interrelated-

interdependent like the spokes in a wheel. It is cognitive in the sense that
this networking of all the variables is cognized in the mental space of the
mind and materialized in the physical space of the contextual action
 51

through sound in the vocal space as a part of the physical space. The
cognition of the process, its patterning and final structuration as the
utterance of the proverb (in its potential form) in speech or as the text in
writing is controlled by the individual dispositionality of the maker of the
proverb in the first instance, then by the interpersonal dispositionality of the
users, and finally the collective dispositionality of the users of the proverb in
the final stage of the standardization and freezing of the proverb as this or
that to be so or so in such or such a manner. Thus, disposition generates,
specifies, and directs the conceptualization of a proverb as this and that, so
and so, and such and such.

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

D F
D
P F P FU
P FU FU M
F
S M S D
S M
a. Formal Cognitional b. Functional Cognitional c.
Semantic Cognitional
Network Network
Network

FF

PP FU
FU
SD

DS MM

d. Socioculturalspiritual Cognitional Network e.

Dispositional Network

Figure 8: Proverb Cognition Networks

 52

There are five important factors in the formation of proverbs: 1. (the

propositional content of) the social practice; 2. function; 3. form; 4. aesthetic
appeal; 5. dispositionality.

First, the propositional content determines to a great extent (but not

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

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

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

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

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

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

rat death to cat convulsion go into q.m.(question marker)
‘Will a cat (S) go into ((get)(V)) convulsion (O) over a rat ( ’s) death (Adv) ?’

(223) a. a:vu nalupaite: pa:lu nalupa: ?

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

b. gu:nu vi:pu kudurautunda: ?

hunch back steady become q.m.
‘Does a hunchback (S) become (V) steady (c-Adj)’

c. ta:Ta:ku chappuLLaki kundeLLu beduruta:ya:?

palm leaf sounds to rabbits frighten q.m.
‘Do rabbits (S) fear (V) to palm – leaf rattling (A)?’

d. arupula goDDu pitukuna: ?

bellowing cow milks q.m.
‘Does a bellowing cow (S) milk (V)?’
 53

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

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

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

However, the form is again influenced by the socioculturalspirituality of the

speakers in a language community (the community which uses a particular
language in all its range, variety, and depth). Therefore, equation (2) gets
modified as follows:

(33) Propositional Content (Semantics) » Socioculturalspirituality »

Form (Syntactic Structure).

Even the choice of the lexis is influenced by the socioculturalspirituality of

the speakers in a language community. Consequently, equation (3) gets
modified as follows:

(34) Propositional Content (Semantics) » Socioculturalspirituality »

Form (Syntactic Structure + Lexis).

What is more, the pronunciation is also influenced by the

socioculturalspirituality of the speakers in a language community.
Consequently, equation (3) gets modified as follows:

(35) Propositional Content (Semantics) » Socioculturalspirituality »

Form (Syntactic Structure + Lexis + Phonetics and Phonology).

Proverbs are used in a context to perform a specific function. Therefore,

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

(36) Propositional Content (Semantics) » Socioculturalspirituality »

Function » Form (Syntactic Structure + Lexis + Phonetics and
Phonology).

Ultimately, the propositional content is chosen by a response bias for one

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

(37) Disposition Dispositional Bias Response Bias Choice

Variation
 54

Lingual Action Proverb

As a result, the content of the prototypical social praxis (semantics) along

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

(224) When in doubt, leave it out.

(225) When in doubt do nothing; (226). When in doubt, do without; (227).

When in doubt, don’t do it; (228). When in doubt, don’t; (229). When in
doubt, say no;

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

In the following examples, there is a variation in the cognition of the praxis

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

When in doubt,

(230) ask; (231) find out; (232) look about; (232) hesitate; (233) punt; (234)
salute; (235) tell the truth.
In (230), asking is suggested as a solution; in (231), finding out is suggested
which implies not merely asking which may or may not resolve the doubt but
searching for the solution or clarification of the state of affairs by (232)
looking about for (230) what has been asked – this is with reference to
seeking a better understanding of the situation as it is not clear. Whereas in
(232) hesitate, caution is prescribed in performing the action since the doubt
refers to the reaction that will befall on the performer but not leaving out or
finding out; and in (233) punt, lashing out or dribbling is offered as the
solution.

Second, aesthetic appeal as well as mnemonic power of the complex of

syntax, lexis, and semantics of the proverb influences the choice of the
structure. This means that the semiotic representation of the prototypical
social praxis is regulated at a more delicate level by the principles of
 55

dispositional cognition of aesthetics such as alliteration, balance, imagery,

brevity, formality, standard of lexis, etc. It is generally this second
consideration that causes variation in the same proverb at all the four levels
of phonology, syntax, lexis and semantics. It also appears that certain
structures with certain lexical items are more popular than others. They
must have evolved over time and got established as such by the
dispositional choice of the makers and users of proverbs. What is more, they
are even identified as typical proverbial patterns and are used as models in
the formation of new proverbs whenever it is viable. For example, “Don’t …
before ….” structure in the complex, imperative (negative) pattern with
‘don’t’ is more popular than ‘never’. Therefore,
(236). “Don’t (but not ‘Never’) count your chickens before they are
hatched”
which is more popular is used as a model in the formation of a later
American proverb

(237). “Don’t count your new cars before they are built”.
The preference of ‘don’t’ over ‘never’ is further witnessed in proverbs such
as:
(238 – 40). “Don’t [want your corpses/cross your rivers/build the pen]
before
[they are cold/you get to them/the litter comes]”.

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

Finally, a statistical frequency analysis of various proverbial syntactic

patterns on the one hand and their preference to others on the other hand
will throw more light on the stylistic choice of a structure and its implication
in propositional content representation. For our purpose it will suffice to note
that a proverb need not necessarily occur in one particular pattern only even
though that pattern may be aesthetically and mnemonically more effective.
Furthermore, pattern and proposition influence each other analogically either
by an analogical structural, or functional, or aesthetic, or propositional
appeal.
 56

In order to suit the pattern, the proposition may be polished or changed, or

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

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

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

(246) He who laughs last laughs best.

(247) He who laughs first laughs loudest.

Adj. Sub-ordinate Clause

Main Clause

In a similar way,
(248) “Better late than never, but better yet, never late” and
(249) “It’s better late than never, but still better never late”
have the same proposition but different structures: one is an elliptical form
of the other with a changed lexical item ‘yet’. Some times, completely
different propositions may be expressed to convey almost similar
prototypical meanings in the same structure by familiar analogical structural
appeal:
(250) It is too late to cover the well when the child is drowned.
(251) It is too late to lock the stable door when the steed is stolen.

In view of all these possibilities, we conclude that proverbs make use of

some structures more and some less but without any restriction on the
choice of a structure. As a proposition demands a structure, so does a
structure mean a proposition as the society opts for it.

ii. Use or Application of a Proverb

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

iii. Experience
 57

As the proverb user uses a proverb, he so uses it as a means to coordinate

the coordination of action to construct his own proverbial dispositional
(ka:rmik) reality and experiences the results of his (lingual) action in terms of
success and failure bringing in pleasure and sorrow.

A similar type of analysis applied to Telugu (Bhuvaneswar 1998 a-g; 2005;

2009) gives us similar results by showing that proverbs are open ended
without any restriction on the choice of a structure. In fact, the same
framework can be adapted to proverbs in any other language also and the
nature of the syntactic patterns can be verified.

REFERENCES

Abrahams, Roger D. (1972). “Proverbs and Proverbial Expressions”. Folklore and

Folklife An Introduction. ed. By Richard M. Dorson. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press. 119-121

Bhuvaneswar, Chilukuri (1998a). “The Syntax of Proverbs 1: A Case Study of

English Proverbs in Quirk’s Model”. A Part of PhD Work. Hyderabad: CIEFL,
published in The EProverbiallinguist electronic journal in CD Rom.
________ (1998b). “The Syntax of Telugu Proverbs 1: The Sentence”.
A Part of PhD Work. Hyderabad: CIEFL, published in The EProverbiallinguist
electronic journal in CD Rom.
________ (1998c). “The Syntax of Telugu Proverbs 2: The Clause”.
A Part of PhD Work. Hyderabad: CIEFL, published in The EProverbiallinguist
electronic journal in CD Rom.
________ (1998d). “The Syntax of Telugu Proverbs 3: The Phrase in
Telugu Proverbs I: A Case Study of Adjectival and Noun Phrases in Andhra Lo:ko:kthi
Chandrika”. A Part of PhD Work. Hyderabad: CIEFL, published in The
EProverbiallinguist electronic journal in CD Rom.
________ (1998e). “The Syntax of Telugu Proverbs 4: The Phrase in
Telugu Proverbs II : A Case Study of Adverbial Phrases in Andhra Lo:ko:kthi
Chandrika”. A Part of PhD Work. Hyderabad: CIEFL, published in The
EProverbiallinguist electronic journal in CD Rom.
________ (1998f). “The Syntax of Telugu Proverbs 5: The Phrase in
Telugu Proverbs III : A Case Study of Analogical Proverbs in Andhra Lo:ko:kthi
Chandrika”. A Part of PhD Work. Hyderabad: CIEFL, published in The
EProverbiallinguist electronic journal in CD Rom.
________ (1998g). “The Syntax of Telugu Proverbs 6: The Sama:sam
Compound) in Telugu Proverbs : A Case Study of Andhra Lo:ko:kthi Chandrika”. A
Part of PhD Work. Hyderabad: CIEFL, published in The EProverbiallinguist electronic
journal in CD Rom.
 58

------------ (1999). “The Structure of Telugu and English Proverbs in

Inform/Elicit Exchanges: A Multilayered Systemic Analysis”. A Paper Presented at
the Second International Congress on English Grammar. Hyderabad: CIEFL

------------ (2000). “Motivating the Formation of Syntax in a Language

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

---------- (2005). Down the Proverb Lane A Festschrift for Mieder at

62. The Proverbial Linguistic Group. Vermont: University of Vermont

-------- (2007). “A Bibliographical Review of English Proverb

Literature (1400 – 2000): Evidence for The ka:rmik linguistic theory”. Paper
Presented at the Inaugural Function of the Proverbial Linguistics Group. Sebha:
University of Sebha
----------- (2009). “Linguistics in Proverbiology: A Plea for Proverbial
Linguistics as a New Branch”. Keynote Address delivered (in absentia by Dr. Outi
Lauhakangas) at the Third International Colloquium on Proverbs, Tavira, Portugal
Dundes, Alan (1968). “ An Introduction to the Second Edition”. Morphology of the
Folktale by Vladimir Propp. Austin: Texas University.
--------- (1987). " On the Structure of the Proverb”. Proverbium 16 (1971) - 20
(1975). ed. by Wolfgang Mieder. New York: Peter Lang. 961-973.
Gleitman, Henry, Fridlund, Alan J., and Daniel Reisberg (2000). Basic Psychology
Fifth Edition.
New York: W.W. Norton and Company
Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, Barbara(1987). “Toward a Theory of Proverb Meaning”.
Proverbium 16 (1971) - 20 (1975). ed. by Wolfgang Mieder. New York: Peter Lang.
821-827
Kimmerle, Marjorie M. (1947). “A Method of Collecting and Classifying Folk
Sayings”. Western Folklore 6. 351-366.
Mieder, Wolfgang (1985). “Popular Views of the Proverb”. Proverbium 2. 109- 143
----------- (1992). A Dictionary of American Proverbs. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Milner, G.B. (6 February, 1969a). "What is a Proverb". New Society, 332. 199-202.
---------- (1969). "Quadripartite Structures". Proverbium 14, 379-
383. ed. by Wolfgang Mieder. New York: Peter Lang.
Quirk, Randolf and Greenbaum, Sidney (1989). A University Grammar of English,
Harlow: Longman Group Ltd.
Westermarck, Edward (1930). Wit and Wisdom in Morocco: A Study of Native
Proverbs. London.
 59

*****