The present paper focuses on some Vedic present formations that are traditionally considered as iteratives. These include the -aya-presents with the short root syllable of the type patayati ... Show moreThe present paper focuses on some Vedic present formations that are traditionally considered as iteratives. These include the -aya-presents with the short root syllable of the type patayati ‘flutters’ (as opposed to the -aya-causatives of the type pātayati ‘makes fly, makes fall’ with the long root syllable) and the reduplicated presents of the type bibharti ‘carries’. The author argues that the meaning of these formations should be described as atelic, rather than iterative (although in some contexts the iterative meaning may indeed appear). An atelic action or process, such as patayati ‘flutters’ or bibharti ‘carries’, does not suggest any inner terminal point built into the situation (“iterativ-ziellose Bedeutung” in terms of B. Delbruck). By contrast, actions or processes expressed by such presents as patati ‘flies’ or bharati ‘brings’ can be qualified as telic, that is, directed to a certain goal, as suggested by the very nature of this action/process. The paper also provides morphological and functional parallels of these formations outside Indo-Iranian, foremost in Slavic (of the type nositi ‘carry’). Show less
