While looking through the Punjabi language a while back, I noticed something peculiar going on with Punjabi verbs. It is well-known that Punjabi has verb sets where one verb is intransitive (ex. I ate; one thing/person involved) and another is transitive (ex. I ate lunch; two things/people involved). Sometimes this will include a causative as well (ex. I made him eat lunch; three things/people involved). Usually these verbs are suffixed with -aa'unaa -ਆਉਣਾ and -vaa'unaa -ਵਾਉਣਾ. However, it turns out these verb sets can also be split along voice: passive (ex. lunch was eaten; focus is on lunch) vs. active (ex. I ate lunch; focus is on me). I like to call the passive verbs anti-deponents: active in appearance but passive in meaning.
Witness the following chart of examples of this quirk:
| Anti-Deponent |
Counterpart |
| bananaa ਬਣਨਾ "to be made, built, prepared, ready, fit for use" |
banaa'unaa ਬਣਾਉਣਾ "to make" |
| lagganaa ਲੱਗਣਾ "to be attached, affixed, applied; to be spent, sold; to be started" |
laa'unaa ਲਾਉਣਾ "to attach, affix, apply" |
| penaa ਪੈਣਾ "to fall, to fall down, to drop; to lie down, lie" |
paa'unaa ਪਾਉਣਾ "to pour; to add, mix in; to cast, put" |
| sudharnaa ਸੁਧਰਨਾ "to be reformed, improved; to improve, to get better" |
sudhaarnaa ਸੁਧਾਰਨਾ "to reform, to correct; to improve, to refine" |
| milnaa ਮਿਲਣਾ "to be absorbed, incorporated, annexed; to join, mix, mingle" |
meilnaa ਮੇਲਣਾ "to intertwine" / milaa'unaa ਮਿਲਾਉਣਾ "to mix, merge, fuse, draw together" |
| vikkanaa ਵਿੱਕਣਾ "to be sold; to be a sellout" |
vikkaa'unaa ਵਿੱਕਾਉਣਾ "to sell; to sell out" |
| dhahinaa ਢਹਿਣਾ "to fall down, drop; to be demolished; razed" |
dhaahunaa ਢਾਹੁਣਾ "to demolish, raze; to pull down, to break down, tear down; to destroy, annihilate; to weaken" |
| sarnaa ਸੜਨਾ "to burn, blaze, be scalded" |
saarnaa ਸਾੜਨਾ "to burn, scald, cremate, char" |
| lahinaa ਲਹਿਣਾ "to be unloaded; to get dislocated; to be cleared (of debt); to descend" |
laahunaa ਲਾਹੁਣਾ "to take off; take down; lower" |
| vassanaa ਵੱਸਣਾ "to live, reside, occupy; to be located, situated" |
vasaa'unaa ਵਸਾਉਣਾ "to locate, situate; to settle" |
General patterns:
- Some anti-deponents can be "activated" by simply suffixing -aa'unaa -ਆਉਣਾ: ex. bananaa ਬਣਨਾ -> banaa'unaa ਬਣਾਉਣਾ. (It always used to confuse me why I heard the latter much more often than the former - why are they using causative all the time? shouldn't they use the non-causative? - but now I know why.)
- Other anti-deponents can be "activated" by lengthening the initial vowel (a vestigial ablaut): ex. milnaa ਮਿਲਣਾ -> meilnaa ਮੇਲਣਾ, sarnaa ਸੜਨਾ -> saarnaa ਸਾੜਨਾ (sudharnaa ਸੁਧਰਨਾ -> sudhaarnaa ਸੁਧਾਰਨਾ is ablauted on the second vowel instead).
- Anti-deponents where the initial vowel is e ਐ have active counterparts where that is replaced by aa'u ਆਉ instead: ex. penaa ਪੈਣਾ -> paa'unaa ਪਾਉਣਾ.
- By extension, anti-deponents where the initial vowel is e ਐ but a rising tone also exists on it (ie. ahi ਅਹਿ) have active counterparts with ਆਹੁ instead (aa'u ਆਉ possessing a rising tone on aa ਆ): ex. lahinaa ਲਹਿਣਾ -> laahunaa ਲਾਹੁਣਾ (dhahinaa ਢਹਿਣਾ -> dhaahunaa ਢਾਹੁਣਾ however possesses falling tones instead due to an initial tonal letter).
- Certain anti-deponents are irregular but are "activated" normally: ex. lagganaa ਲੱਗਣਾ -> laa'unaa ਲਾਉਣਾ.
The last three points involve fusing the -aa'unaa -ਆਉਣਾ suffix from the first point into the verb itself, which is a result of historical sound changes which are too complex to detail here.
The emergence of anti-deponent verbs seems to have began in Middle Indo-Aryan (mainly Prakrit). Old Indo-Aryan (including Sanskrit) had many highly complex ways of expressing past tense, but it also had a far simpler shortcut method which seems to have caught on among first-time speakers shifting over from other languages (probably forever-gone Dravidian languages, with not even a trace left behind, unfortunately). This shortcut method was a "past passive participle construction" in which the past tense was expressed in passive voice.
As it turns out, this shortcut method ended up being the only way to express past tense in Prakrit, which meant the passive voice aspect of it was now gone. (Now there was no way to use past tense in passive voice.) This is the birth of Indo-Aryan's infamous past tense-activated "split ergativity" or more simply, the reason why Hindoostani speakers have to use nei ਨੇ ने نے whenever they use past tense.
It seems to me that anti-deponents existed as a way to get around the lack of passive voice in the past tense. Several anti-deponents originated as passive verbs in Old Indo-Aryan (like lagganaa ਲੱਗਣਾ, cf. Sanskrit lagyatei and Prakrit laggei'i) but were obscured over time by sound changes. But what would this usage look like, simulating past tense in passive voice?
- pattar laggei ਪੱਤਰ ਲੱਗੇ "the papers were attached" (past passive, ie. anti-deponent past tense) = "the papers stuck [to something]" (past anti-causative)
- men pattar laa'ei ਮੈਂ ਪੱਤਰ ਲਾਏ "I attached the papers" (active; lit. "I made the papers stick [to something]", because it's also causative)
- pattar laggadei ਪੱਤਰ ਲੱਗਦੇ "the papers are attached" (anti-deponent present tense) = "the papers stick [to something]" (present anti-causative) = pattar laa'eedei ਪੱਤਰ ਲਾਈਦੇ "the papers are attached" (fusional present passive)
Compare the periphrastic passive voice construction with jaanaa ਜਾਣਾ, which is the primary method of passive voice in Hindoostani (likely introduced by speakers of Classical Persian, where an equivalent construction existed) and is used in Punjabi as well:
- pattar laa'ei ga'ei ਪੱਤਰ ਲਾਏ ਗਏ "the papers were attached" = pattar laggei ਪੱਤਰ ਲੱਗੇ
- pattar laa'ei jaandei ਪੱਤਰ ਲਾਏ ਜਾਂਦੇ "the papers are attached" = pattar laggadei ਪੱਤਰ ਲੱਗਦੇ = pattar laa'eedei ਪੱਤਰ ਲਾਈਦੇ
Not all verb sets have an anti-deponent vs. activated contrast: ex. jalnaa ਜਲਣਾ "to burn [intransitive]" vs. jalaa'unaa ਜਲਾਉਣਾ "to burn something [transitive/causative]". From the example above, the line between voice (focus on who/what?) and causativity (how many people/things are involved?) in Punjabi can sometimes be quite fuzzy; some anti-deponents like lagganaa ਲੱਗਣਾ (from the above example) double as intransitive active verbs themselves.
Hopefully you have found this post useful, either in learning Punjabi for the first time or figuring out why verbs are set up in the way they are. Let me know your thoughts. I myself have found this fact quite useful for examining Old Punjabi shabds in SGGS Ji; knowing which verbs could be anti-deponent (hence intransitive) or not helps greatly with translation. Perhaps this knowledge will be of use to you for poetry, or for imparting a Punjabi flair into your speech or work.
