Passive, Anticausative and Intransitive? Interpretation of three Vedic present formations with the suffix -<i>ya</i>-: <i>j yate, mriyáte, and yabhyate</i>
The present paper focuses on three Vedic present formations with the suffix <i>-ya-</i>: <i>j yate</i>, <i>mriyáte</i>, and <i>yabhyate</i>. A study of the syntax and contexts in which these forms are attested leads to the conclusion that their interpretation in terms of the passive/anticausative (passive/non-passive) opposition adopted in Indo-European scholarship is inadequate in several respects. On the basis of system-related considerations, that is, relying on the analysis of these verbs within the system of Vedic present formations, one may conclude that <i>j yate </i>is born and <i>mriyáte </i>dies cannot be taken as passives and never belonged to this category, while <i>yabhyate</i>, is fucked, futuitur, on the contrary, could not be anything but passive.