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 -ya-: j yate, mriyáte, and yabhyate. 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 j yate is born and mriyáte dies cannot be taken as passives and never belonged to this category, while yabhyate, is fucked, futuitur, on the contrary, could not be anything but passive.