KARAKA THEORY OF NAVYA-NYAYA PHILOSOPHY

topsalmonAI and Robotics

Feb 23, 2014 (3 years and 3 months ago)

675 views





KARAKA THEORY OF NAVYA
-
NYAYA PHILOSOPHY










Prof. Keshab Chandra Dash, Puri





1.
PROLOGUE

(Definition & Division)



Kāraka is a relation between an action and actors. The action is meant by verb and
the actions by nominals verb is not a kārak
a, but it determines the karaka of nominal words
used in a sentence. Normally, verbs are related (ańvita) to nominal words in different aspects
for which kārakas are said to be different. Therefore, for every verb there occur many
kārakas but no vice
-
ver
sa. That means for different kārakas there is no need of many verbs.
If there is no verb in a sentence there will be no kāraka. In that case vibhakatis (inflections)
followed by the words or word alone like prati or upari etc., become prominent to deter
mine
the aspects. These aspects, according to the Navya. Nyāya Philosophy (NNP) are eight
kinds (i) kartŗ (nominative or subjective). (ii) karma (accusative or objective), (iii) karaņa
(instrumental), (iv) sampradāna (dative), (v) apādāna (ablative), (v
i) sambandha (genitive),
(vii) adhikarana (locative ) and (viii) sambodhana (vocative). But kārakas are only six
excluding genitive and vocative . That means a verb is related to nominal words on the basis
of these six aspects. Therefore to begin with,

Kāraka theory deals with two fold aspects
namely, kāraka
-
vibhakti (Syntactico
-
Semantic
-

Relation : SSR) and upapada
-
vibhakti
(Lexico
-
Syntactic
-
Relation : LSR). For instance: bhūtale ghaţah (pot on the ground). In this
sentence verb is absent (non
-
verbal
ised), yet we can ascertain bhūtala as ādhāra (locus) and
ghaţa as ādheya (locate). These locus and locates are determined by suffixes only. If the
sentence is of the form ‘bhūtale ghaţah asti’ (There is pot on the ground), then with respect
to the verb

‘sthā’ (is) the bhūtala as adhikaraņa
-
kāraka (locative case) and ghaţa as kartŗ
-
kāraka (subjective case) would be determined. (Here ādheya acts as kartŗ). Therefore, we
have to know the difference between (i) kartŗ and kartŗkāraka, (ii) karma and karmak
āraka,
(iii) karaņa and karaņakāraka, (iv) sampradāna and sampradāna
-
kāraka. (v) apādāna and
apādāna
-
kāraka and (vi) adhikaraņa and adhikaraņa
-
kāraka.


2.

ADVANCED VIEW



Up to this discussion we have mentioned both the definition and division of kāraka as

per the epistemology of NNP. This, of course is not contradictory to the Paninian grammar,
but in some cases NNP extends their theories. Such a case occurs in the context of sixth
inflection. NNP accepts SSR for sixth inflection, because it has relatio
n to the verb.
Jagadisa Tarkalankara, the most eminent Navya
-
Naiyāyika has proved it in his famous book
Śabdaśakti
-
prakāśtikā. In the sentence like ‘citrasya bhoktavyam’ (Caitra should have the
meal), here the verb bhuj determines caitra as nominative ca
se. Similarly, in grāmasya gantā
(He goes to the village), namely, grāma is predicated as objective case, since the result
samyoga of the action gam exists in the word grāma. Hence, the word grama is predicated as
objective case in spite of containing si
xth inflection.





Navya
-
Naiyāyikas raise another important occasion that in case of more than one
SSR. Many kārakas at the same time need to be predicated for a single nominal word. For
example: tarum tyajati (It leaves the tree) and taroh tyajati (It
leaves from the tree). In these
two contexts the nominal word taru (tree) demands to take both forms as objective and
ablative case. According to the definition of objective case the result vibhāga (disjunction)
exists in taru for which taru should be de
termined as objective case and at the same time
since, apaya (disjunction) is cognized by the verbal word tyaj, the word taru also demands to
be determined as ablative case. Jagadisa, in the same book postulates a kārika to solve the
situation as :




ap
ādāna
-
sampradāna
-
karaņā’dhārakarmaņām /



kartuśca bheda
-
samprāptau parameva pravartate //




The kārika postulates that for the context of two kārakas the latter kāraka is to be
predicated with respect to the list/order of the kārakas (mentioned in the kā
rika). Hence,
objective case is to be determined in the word ‘taru’. Thus, the correct sentence is tarum
tyajati.



3.

MUTUAL COMPLIMENTION




Naiyāyikas’ Kāraka theory is just not a simple grammatical theory. It is so paralleled
with the ontology of
NNP that’s why it is called semantic
-
grammatical theory. In other
words, both the ontology and epistemology of NNP are mutually complimentary for which
the validity of one with another is mutually determined. Here we have displayed a pre
-
logical table (N
o.1) to represent the theory.



Figure No.: 1










Nominative






























































































































Verb


Nominative

ctg

ctg

ctg

ctg

ctg

ctg

ctg

ctg

ctg

ctg

ctg

ctg

ctg

ctg

ctg

ctg

ctg

ctg

ctg

ctg

ctg

ctg

ctg

ctg

ctg

ctg

ctg

ctg

ctg

ctg


Objective


Locative

Instrumental


Dative


Ablative




(Here ctg., im
plies category and they maintain a systematic order in the figure.
Corresponding to the verb, various nominative categories are drawn in the table, since the
participants are different in accomplishing an activity. And at the same time respective
nominat
ive categories also take care respective kārakas).



4.

COGNITIVE STRUCTURE




Each and every cognitive structure in a Kāraka Model (KM) is presented in a
qualifier
-
qualificand structure and that can be presented schematically in such a model that is
call
ed PSV
-
Model, where P stands for prakāra (qualifier), S for samsarga (the relation
between P and V) and V for viśesya (qualificand). In the presentation of cognitive structure
by PSV
-
Model there is no contradiction between the Indian epistemological trad
itions. But,
the objection is which is to be accepted as qualificand (visesya). In this position NNP holds
the most important theory viz., prathamāntārtha
-
mukhya
-
viśesya
-
śābdabodha (word ending
with nominative case is chief qualificand), which has a ver
y wider application in the
computer for extracting meaning of any sentence. Not entering into the theoretical
discourses/complains/counter
-
complains etc., only by corresponding to the ontology of NNP,
it can be easily proved that why Naiyāyikas emphasize
on the word ending with nominative
case should be the chief qualificand. NNP concentrates the nominative case as chief
qualificand to maintain both the theories namely, epistemology and ontology in a parallel
state. In other words, whatever is expressed

in words or in sentence, the reality in external
world of that expression should remain same for all cases. If this is not the case for NNP,
then there occurs contradiction between ontology and epistemology. Let us see the position
of the sentence rūpa
vān manusyah calati. (coloured man walks).



Tradition

Step

Qualifier

Qualifica
nd

Grammar

S1

S2

S3


Ì¥Ì̏ÌÆ ˜ÌÌÙ­™Ì:



•Ì
+

¥ÌtÌÙ
ÌÆ ˜ÌÌÙ­™Ì
+

²ÌÙ


•Ì¥ÌzùÍ

Ì
-

˜Ì
ÌÙ­™ÌFòtÌÙÊFò
-

ZÌ¡ôÍtÌ

ZÌ¡Æô
+

ÍtÌ
•ÌÆ

ZÌ¡ô
Ì¥™Ì
Ì
ÌÌœú


NPP

S1

S2

S3

S4

S5

ZÌ¡ôÍt
Ì
•Ì¥ÌÌ•ÌÆ

ZÌ¡Æô
+

ÍtÌ
•ÌÆ •Ì
+

¥ÌtÌÙ
•ÌÆ

˜Ì
ÌÙ­™Ì:

˜Ì
ÌÙ­™Ì
+

²ÌÙ

ZÌ¡ô
•Ì¥ÌÌ•ÌÆ •Ì¥ÌÌ•ÌÆ


ÍFêò™ÌÌ¥ÌtÌÆ OÌÙsÌ¥ÌtÌÆ

ZÌ¡ô
ÌFßòÍt̘Ì̏ÌÆ
•Ì¥ÌzùÍ

Ì

˜Ì
ÌÙ­™Ì:

‡ù¥™Ì˜ÌÆ

˜Ì
ÌÙ­™Ì









Here S5 is the state of perceptual cognition, which co
rresponds to the verbal
cognition of S1. However, in the cognition S1 from which S5 is derived, S6 such as
ÍFêò™ÌÌ¥ÌtÌÆ OÌÙsÌ¥ÌtÌÆ `ÌÌÍtÌ¥ÌzÆù ‡ù¥™Ì˜ÌÆ
also can be derived, since the word
manuşya consists of the generic property viz., manuşyatv
a which is cognized from the word
manuşya. Similarly, the derivation for negative sentence namely,

ÌÜtÌ¡âô QÌhõÌ

ÌÌ¥Ì:

also corresponds to the category of absence (abhāva) as mentioned below.

S1

ÌÜtÌ¡âô QÌhõ²™Ì +

ÌÌ¥Ì:

S2

ÌÜtÌ¡ô
+

Ín÷ QÌhõ
+

n÷²ÌÆ +

ÌÌ¥Ì
+

²ÌÙ

S3

ÌÜtÌ¡ô
-
+
ÌÙ™ÌÌâÍOÌFò
-

QÌhõ
ÌëÍtÌ™ÌÌâÍOÌFò
-
+

ÌÌ¥Ì






These are the semantic structures as derived by NNP by which one can easily point
out the reality of certain verbalization. This derivation regarding PSV
-
Model in which
nominat
ive case is the chief qualificand keeps parallel balance with the verbal and perceptual
cognition which not only fits to the Nyāya ontology but also to the epistemological theory for
image comprehension in machine intelligence. After all, the architecture

of Machine
Translations (MT) is presently made on the basis of the Kāraka Model of Navya Nyāya
Philosophy. In this context, we have worked out two models viz, 1) Semantic Grammatical
Model by which, only the semantic is checked and edited and ii) Semanti
c Extract Model by
which the meaning of a sentence is extracted. The architecture of both the model is
presented here as;


Semantic Grammatical Model (SGM) and Semantic Extract Model (SEM).







Verb















(Here downward arrows repre
sent the SGM and upward arrows along with down
arrow from verb represent the SEM where nominative case acts as chief qualificand).



5.

RELATIONS IN KARAKA THEORY (Case & Non
-
case Relationship)




Kāraka theory admits PSV
-
Model in which S stands for samsarga or relation.
Normally, collocation of words used in juxtaposition expecting mutually the relational
coherence forms a sentence. A word is also meaningful when it represents itself in
associat
ion with some other words coherent therewith. When we think of such association
the word is put under several categories like radicals, suffixes and particles etc. But the term
association itself involves the relations, which in other words, point to mea
ningfulness of a
word.



It is quite reasonable to put those relations into different possible categories to
determine their role in different occasions. The major possible categories are (i)
Grammatical Relation, (ii) Logical Relation, (iii) Ontological
Relation, (iv) Dormant
Relation and (v) Conceptual Relation. Apparently, grammatical relations play a major role in
the organization of syntactic constructions. To begin with, the grammatical relations occur
between root words (i.e., prātipadika) and suf
fix (prtyaya) such as rāma + su and gam + tip.
After the relation between root word and suffix again they admit two types of relation such as
Nominal
-
Nominal (N
-
N) and Nominal
-
Verbal (N
-
V). The N
-
N relations are extensions N
-
V
relations and fairly cover
the major area of grammatical relations. These relations are
represented in the following examples.




1.

Case
-
ending Relations




(i)
Nominative

Case
; manusyah calati (The man walks)





calanānukūla
-
kŗtimān manuşya. (The man who possesses the



action of walking)

(ii)
Accusative


Case
; taņdulam pacati. (He cooks rice.)


taņdularūpa
-
parāvŗtti
-
janaka
-
taņdula
-
vŗtti
-
tejah
-


samyogāvacchinna
-
kriyāvān (One undertaking the act that


results in conjunction of heat, abiding in
rice constituting


transformation of colour (in rice).)

(iii)
Locative Case

; ghaţatvam ghaţe bhāsate (Potness appears in


pot) ghaţanişţha
-
viśeşyatā
-
nirūpita
-
vişayatāvad
-
ghaţatvam


(Potness is the content characterized by the substant
ive


possessed by the pot).




Nominative Case

Obj. Case

Inst. Case

Dat. Case

Abl. Case

Loc. Case

(iv)
Instrumental Case
; caitrahkalamena likhati. (Caitra writes


by pen) kalama
-
karanaka
-
likhānanukūla
-
kŗtimān


caitra.(Caitra who possesses the volition for the activity of


writing characterized
by the instrument pen).


(v) Dative Case
; brāhmaņāya dānam dhanasya. (Gift of wealth to a


Brahmin). Brahmana
-
nirupitam
-
yaddhanavrtti
-
svattvam
-


tajjanaka
-
tyāga. (The act of giving away that brings in title to the


wealth given awa
y in gift, the counter
-
co
-
relate of which is a


Brahmin)

(vi)
Ablative Case
; vŗkşāt vibhajate vānarah. (A monkey


separates from a tree). Vŗkşāvadhika
-
vibhāgānukūla
-
kŗtimān
-



vānara. (A monkey involved in the act of separation to w
hich the


boundary is a tree).



2.

Non
-
Case
-
ending Relation


(i)
Ist inflection
; (a) dhŗtih svāhā. (Oblation to Dhŗti).


dhŗtiuddeśvaka
-
svāhā. (Oblation to Dhŗti who is in view). (b)


caitrai vraja (Catra is go ) sambodhavatva
vān caitra
-
anumata
-


vrajanavān. (Caitra, having possessed of the state of being


addressed is possessed of the act of going which has been


approved of (by the speaker of such an expression))






(ii)

2
nd

Inflection;

pitaram abhi cai
trah (Caitra is same to his father).


Pitari
-
itthambhūtas
-
caitrah (Caitra is possessed of the common


properties belonging to his father.)



(iii)
3
rd

Inflection;

akşņā kāņah (Devoid

of sight by one eye). Vikŗta
-


golaka
-
vrttitva
-
visistam yat caksuh
-
sunyatvam tad
-
vat
-
golakavan
-


sacaksuskah. (One being possessed of an eye
-
ball with the state of


being devoid of sight, abiding the deformed eye
-
ball, is possessed



of sight)




(iv)
4
th

Inflection
; puşpam idam vişņave namah (This flower is


presented to lor Vişņu) vişņu
-
prīti
-
uddesyakamantra
-
karaņaka
-


tyāgasya karma
-
idam puş
pam. (This flower is the object of the act


of giving away in association with utterance of mantras with a view


to bringing about pleasure in lord Vişņu)



(v) 5
th

Inflection:

ghatāt anyah. (diff
erent from the pot) ghtanişţha
-


ghatatvavacchinna
-
avadhitaka
-
bhedavan.(The one possessed of


difference determined by ‘the state of being in respect of’, qualified


by potness abiding pot.)



(vi)
6th Inflection;

narāņ
ām kşatriyah śūrah (Kşatriya is valourous of


men.) kşatriya
-
anya
-
narah sura
-
bhinnah. Nara
-
abhinna
-
kşatriya
-


sūrah (Men. Other than ksatriyas are other than the valourous and


kşatriyas, not other tha
n men are valourous.)



(vii)
7th Inflection
: śaradi puşpanti saptacchadāh. (The seven leaf


trees blossom in autumn). Śarat
-
kāla
-
vŗttih yah puşpotpādas
-
tad
-




vantah saptacchadāh. (The seven
-
leaf trees are possessed of the


yield of flowers, which resort to autumn)



On the basis of these relations we can formulate a theory of relation for th
e KRS. The
relation in KRS is an outcome of element interactions conditioned by different extra
linguistic features in different levels of N
-
V and N
-
N set up leading to a definite relational
structure (Fig no.2)


























1.

Gr
ammatical







1. Context

2.

Logical








2. Convention

3.

Ontological







3. Intention

4.

Dormant

5.

Conceptual


Relational Structure











6.
EPILOGUE


The kāraka theory as treated by Navya Nāvya Philosophy (NNP) is other wise known as
sematic grammatical theory. It is so technical that can solve a lot of problems of Natural


Expression


Levels

N

N

V


Extra Linguistic feature

Language Processing (NLP), meaning extraction and semantic representation of any

given
ordinary language at large. In fact, the world is in need of such system by which all types of
solutions can be made/derived in the area of Artificial Intelligence (AI) specially in computer
science.


7.
REFERENCES


1.

Dash K.C. Relations in Knowled
ge Representation, Sri Garib Dass Oriental series
No. 115, Delhi, 1991, pp.9
-
38.

2.

Dash K.C. Sanskrit and Computer, Pratibha Prakashan, Delhi, 1995, Introduction
section.

3.

Dash Achyutananda, Karaka Theory for knowledge Representation (article),
SAMBHASA


13,

Dept. of Indian Philosophy, University of Nagoya, 1992.

4.

Jagadisa Tarkalankara, Śabdaśaktiprakāsikā. Chawkhambha Sanskrit Sansthan,
Varanasi, Samvat 2047, P.295.

5.

Dash K.C.
Logic of Non
-
case Relationship
, Pratibha Prakashan, Delhi 1992