The grammar of “one another”
In sentences such as:
- They talked to one another
Is the string one another a constituent, or are the two words part of a mandatorily gapped coordination of preposition phrases (or even verb phrases)?
If they are a constituent, are they an asyndetic coordination?
If they are not a coordination, is this a headed phrase? In which case which word is the head here, and which the complement?
grammar nouns pronouns grammatical-structure determiners
asked Oct 23 at 16:10
Araucaria
35.1k967145
add a comment |
In sentences such as:
- They talked to one another
Is the string one another a constituent, or are the two words part of a mandatorily gapped coordination of preposition phrases (or even verb phrases)?
If they are a constituent, are they an asyndetic coordination?
If they are not a coordination, is this a headed phrase? In which case which word is the head here, and which the complement?
grammar nouns pronouns grammatical-structure determiners
asked Oct 23 at 16:10
Araucaria
35.1k967145
1
One another is a version of the reciprocal each other, and they should be investigated together. I would say both are constituents, though they are both separable, and they play strange games with coreference restrictions. (For instance, how does the reflexive refer in Each man considers the other to be superior to himself?) I'd also say they are conjunctive -- dvandva compounds that function as reciprocal pronouns. As to headedness, this is a matter between you and your confessor; me, I think head is a very loose term that adds nothing to formal descriptions.
– John Lawler
Oct 23 at 16:43
1
@JohnLawler Ok, got it now. Thanks.
– Araucaria
Oct 23 at 19:21
2
For other readers: A dvandva (Sanskrit: dvandva "pair") is a linguistic compound in which multiple individual nouns are concatenated to form an agglomerated compound word in which the conjunction 'and' has been elided to form a new word with a distinct semantic field. So, for instance, the individual words 'brother' and 'sister' may be agglomerated to 'brothersister' to express "siblings". ... The term dvandva was borrowed from Sanskrit, a language in which these linguistic compounds are common.
– Araucaria
Oct 23 at 19:22
This question might be better served in the Linguistic SE site.
– user240918
Oct 23 at 20:08
2
@user240918 This is meant to be a site for linguists! ;) Linguistics SE doesn't accept questions about specific languages, so it would just get re-routed here ...
– Araucaria
Oct 23 at 20:10
add a comment |
In sentences such as:
- They talked to one another
Is the string one another a constituent, or are the two words part of a mandatorily gapped coordination of preposition phrases (or even verb phrases)?
If they are a constituent, are they an asyndetic coordination?
If they are not a coordination, is this a headed phrase? In which case which word is the head here, and which the complement?
grammar nouns pronouns grammatical-structure determiners
asked Oct 23 at 16:10
Araucaria
35.1k967145
In sentences such as:
- They talked to one another
Is the string one another a constituent, or are the two words part of a mandatorily gapped coordination of preposition phrases (or even verb phrases)?
If they are a constituent, are they an asyndetic coordination?
If they are not a coordination, is this a headed phrase? In which case which word is the head here, and which the complement?
grammar nouns pronouns grammatical-structure determiners
grammar nouns pronouns grammatical-structure determiners
asked Oct 23 at 16:10
Araucaria
35.1k967145
asked Oct 23 at 16:10
Araucaria
35.1k967145
asked Oct 23 at 16:10
Araucaria
35.1k967145
asked Oct 23 at 16:10
Araucaria
35.1k967145
asked Oct 23 at 16:10
Araucaria
35.1k967145
35.1k967145
1
One another is a version of the reciprocal each other, and they should be investigated together. I would say both are constituents, though they are both separable, and they play strange games with coreference restrictions. (For instance, how does the reflexive refer in Each man considers the other to be superior to himself?) I'd also say they are conjunctive -- dvandva compounds that function as reciprocal pronouns. As to headedness, this is a matter between you and your confessor; me, I think head is a very loose term that adds nothing to formal descriptions.
– John Lawler
Oct 23 at 16:43
1
@JohnLawler Ok, got it now. Thanks.
– Araucaria
Oct 23 at 19:21
2
For other readers: A dvandva (Sanskrit: dvandva "pair") is a linguistic compound in which multiple individual nouns are concatenated to form an agglomerated compound word in which the conjunction 'and' has been elided to form a new word with a distinct semantic field. So, for instance, the individual words 'brother' and 'sister' may be agglomerated to 'brothersister' to express "siblings". ... The term dvandva was borrowed from Sanskrit, a language in which these linguistic compounds are common.
– Araucaria
Oct 23 at 19:22
This question might be better served in the Linguistic SE site.
– user240918
Oct 23 at 20:08
2
@user240918 This is meant to be a site for linguists! ;) Linguistics SE doesn't accept questions about specific languages, so it would just get re-routed here ...
– Araucaria
Oct 23 at 20:10
add a comment |
1
One another is a version of the reciprocal each other, and they should be investigated together. I would say both are constituents, though they are both separable, and they play strange games with coreference restrictions. (For instance, how does the reflexive refer in Each man considers the other to be superior to himself?) I'd also say they are conjunctive -- dvandva compounds that function as reciprocal pronouns. As to headedness, this is a matter between you and your confessor; me, I think head is a very loose term that adds nothing to formal descriptions.
– John Lawler
Oct 23 at 16:43
1
@JohnLawler Ok, got it now. Thanks.
– Araucaria
Oct 23 at 19:21
2
For other readers: A dvandva (Sanskrit: dvandva "pair") is a linguistic compound in which multiple individual nouns are concatenated to form an agglomerated compound word in which the conjunction 'and' has been elided to form a new word with a distinct semantic field. So, for instance, the individual words 'brother' and 'sister' may be agglomerated to 'brothersister' to express "siblings". ... The term dvandva was borrowed from Sanskrit, a language in which these linguistic compounds are common.
– Araucaria
Oct 23 at 19:22
This question might be better served in the Linguistic SE site.
– user240918
Oct 23 at 20:08
2
@user240918 This is meant to be a site for linguists! ;) Linguistics SE doesn't accept questions about specific languages, so it would just get re-routed here ...
– Araucaria
Oct 23 at 20:10
1
1
One another is a version of the reciprocal each other, and they should be investigated together. I would say both are constituents, though they are both separable, and they play strange games with coreference restrictions. (For instance, how does the reflexive refer in Each man considers the other to be superior to himself?) I'd also say they are conjunctive -- dvandva compounds that function as reciprocal pronouns. As to headedness, this is a matter between you and your confessor; me, I think head is a very loose term that adds nothing to formal descriptions.
– John Lawler
Oct 23 at 16:43
One another is a version of the reciprocal each other, and they should be investigated together. I would say both are constituents, though they are both separable, and they play strange games with coreference restrictions. (For instance, how does the reflexive refer in Each man considers the other to be superior to himself?) I'd also say they are conjunctive -- dvandva compounds that function as reciprocal pronouns. As to headedness, this is a matter between you and your confessor; me, I think head is a very loose term that adds nothing to formal descriptions.
– John Lawler
Oct 23 at 16:43
1
1
@JohnLawler Ok, got it now. Thanks.
– Araucaria
Oct 23 at 19:21
@JohnLawler Ok, got it now. Thanks.
– Araucaria
Oct 23 at 19:21
2
2
For other readers: A dvandva (Sanskrit: dvandva "pair") is a linguistic compound in which multiple individual nouns are concatenated to form an agglomerated compound word in which the conjunction 'and' has been elided to form a new word with a distinct semantic field. So, for instance, the individual words 'brother' and 'sister' may be agglomerated to 'brothersister' to express "siblings". ... The term dvandva was borrowed from Sanskrit, a language in which these linguistic compounds are common.
– Araucaria
Oct 23 at 19:22
For other readers: A dvandva (Sanskrit: dvandva "pair") is a linguistic compound in which multiple individual nouns are concatenated to form an agglomerated compound word in which the conjunction 'and' has been elided to form a new word with a distinct semantic field. So, for instance, the individual words 'brother' and 'sister' may be agglomerated to 'brothersister' to express "siblings". ... The term dvandva was borrowed from Sanskrit, a language in which these linguistic compounds are common.
– Araucaria
Oct 23 at 19:22
This question might be better served in the Linguistic SE site.
– user240918
Oct 23 at 20:08
This question might be better served in the Linguistic SE site.
– user240918
Oct 23 at 20:08
2
2
@user240918 This is meant to be a site for linguists! ;) Linguistics SE doesn't accept questions about specific languages, so it would just get re-routed here ...
– Araucaria
Oct 23 at 20:10
@user240918 This is meant to be a site for linguists! ;) Linguistics SE doesn't accept questions about specific languages, so it would just get re-routed here ...
– Araucaria
Oct 23 at 20:10
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
(1) One another is not a syntactically complex phrase
The reciprocal one another is not well described as a case of asyndetic coordination because you cannot paraphrase its meaning as 'one AND another', as shown in (1).
(1) They talked to one another ≠ They talked to one and another.
Furthermore, one another is not correctly described as a complex syntactic phrase with a head and a complement either. The reason is that complement selection is productive whereas one another is a fixed expression, as shown in (2) and (3).
(2) one does not freely select a complement
a. They like one another.
b. *They like one other.
c. *They like one the other.
d. *They like one all.
etc.
(3) another does not freely select a complement
a. They like one another.
b. *They like all another.
c. *They like each another.
d. *They like themselves another.
etc.
It follows that one another should be analyzed as neither a case of asyndetic coordination nor a complex headed syntactic phrase with a head and a complement. Rather, the expression should be described as a third category.
(2) What we know about one another
We can list the following points about one another:
First, it distributes like any other nominal phrase. For instances, it can take possessive 's like other nominal phrases, as shown in (4). It can also be coordinated with another nominal phrase, as in (5). The item is therefore pronominal in nature. For syntactic purposes it behaves like a single word, or a single pronoun, replacing a noun phrase.
(4) They try to understand [one another]'s culture
(cf. [John]'s culture, [The Queen of England]'s culture)
(5) They love [the new Star Wars movie] and [one another].
Second, the internal structure of one another is likely [one [another]], with another more deeply embedded than one, rather than [[one] another], with one more deeply embedded that another. That's because the historical ancestor of the structure had the corresponding hierarchy. This is illustrated by historical examples where one and another were split by the main verb, as in (6). Hence, [one [ ... [another]]] like developed into [one [another]].
(6) they will [one] helpe [another] as brethren
Aggas, Edward (1588) The politicke and militarie discourses of the Lord de La Nouue
Third, there is no evidence that the modern form one another is a headed compound, as neither one nor another function as the semantic head of a compound. Hence, it not only functions as a single word from the perspective of syntax, but word-internally it also seems to be headless.
(7) one another ≠ a kind of another ≠ a kind of one
(cf. Orange juice = a kind of "juice")
Fourth and finally, the reason why there is no obvious head is likely that the historical ancestor involved a verb as the head of both one and another. Since the head was external to both items, the modern successor did not inherit an obvious head either.
answered Dec 18 at 12:38
Richard Z
751110
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f469755%2fthe-grammar-of-one-another%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
(1) One another is not a syntactically complex phrase
The reciprocal one another is not well described as a case of asyndetic coordination because you cannot paraphrase its meaning as 'one AND another', as shown in (1).
(1) They talked to one another ≠ They talked to one and another.
Furthermore, one another is not correctly described as a complex syntactic phrase with a head and a complement either. The reason is that complement selection is productive whereas one another is a fixed expression, as shown in (2) and (3).
(2) one does not freely select a complement
a. They like one another.
b. *They like one other.
c. *They like one the other.
d. *They like one all.
etc.
(3) another does not freely select a complement
a. They like one another.
b. *They like all another.
c. *They like each another.
d. *They like themselves another.
etc.
It follows that one another should be analyzed as neither a case of asyndetic coordination nor a complex headed syntactic phrase with a head and a complement. Rather, the expression should be described as a third category.
(2) What we know about one another
We can list the following points about one another:
First, it distributes like any other nominal phrase. For instances, it can take possessive 's like other nominal phrases, as shown in (4). It can also be coordinated with another nominal phrase, as in (5). The item is therefore pronominal in nature. For syntactic purposes it behaves like a single word, or a single pronoun, replacing a noun phrase.
(4) They try to understand [one another]'s culture
(cf. [John]'s culture, [The Queen of England]'s culture)
(5) They love [the new Star Wars movie] and [one another].
Second, the internal structure of one another is likely [one [another]], with another more deeply embedded than one, rather than [[one] another], with one more deeply embedded that another. That's because the historical ancestor of the structure had the corresponding hierarchy. This is illustrated by historical examples where one and another were split by the main verb, as in (6). Hence, [one [ ... [another]]] like developed into [one [another]].
(6) they will [one] helpe [another] as brethren
Aggas, Edward (1588) The politicke and militarie discourses of the Lord de La Nouue
Third, there is no evidence that the modern form one another is a headed compound, as neither one nor another function as the semantic head of a compound. Hence, it not only functions as a single word from the perspective of syntax, but word-internally it also seems to be headless.
(7) one another ≠ a kind of another ≠ a kind of one
(cf. Orange juice = a kind of "juice")
Fourth and finally, the reason why there is no obvious head is likely that the historical ancestor involved a verb as the head of both one and another. Since the head was external to both items, the modern successor did not inherit an obvious head either.
answered Dec 18 at 12:38
Richard Z
751110
add a comment |
(1) One another is not a syntactically complex phrase
The reciprocal one another is not well described as a case of asyndetic coordination because you cannot paraphrase its meaning as 'one AND another', as shown in (1).
(1) They talked to one another ≠ They talked to one and another.
Furthermore, one another is not correctly described as a complex syntactic phrase with a head and a complement either. The reason is that complement selection is productive whereas one another is a fixed expression, as shown in (2) and (3).
(2) one does not freely select a complement
a. They like one another.
b. *They like one other.
c. *They like one the other.
d. *They like one all.
etc.
(3) another does not freely select a complement
a. They like one another.
b. *They like all another.
c. *They like each another.
d. *They like themselves another.
etc.
It follows that one another should be analyzed as neither a case of asyndetic coordination nor a complex headed syntactic phrase with a head and a complement. Rather, the expression should be described as a third category.
(2) What we know about one another
We can list the following points about one another:
First, it distributes like any other nominal phrase. For instances, it can take possessive 's like other nominal phrases, as shown in (4). It can also be coordinated with another nominal phrase, as in (5). The item is therefore pronominal in nature. For syntactic purposes it behaves like a single word, or a single pronoun, replacing a noun phrase.
(4) They try to understand [one another]'s culture
(cf. [John]'s culture, [The Queen of England]'s culture)
(5) They love [the new Star Wars movie] and [one another].
Second, the internal structure of one another is likely [one [another]], with another more deeply embedded than one, rather than [[one] another], with one more deeply embedded that another. That's because the historical ancestor of the structure had the corresponding hierarchy. This is illustrated by historical examples where one and another were split by the main verb, as in (6). Hence, [one [ ... [another]]] like developed into [one [another]].
(6) they will [one] helpe [another] as brethren
Aggas, Edward (1588) The politicke and militarie discourses of the Lord de La Nouue
Third, there is no evidence that the modern form one another is a headed compound, as neither one nor another function as the semantic head of a compound. Hence, it not only functions as a single word from the perspective of syntax, but word-internally it also seems to be headless.
(7) one another ≠ a kind of another ≠ a kind of one
(cf. Orange juice = a kind of "juice")
Fourth and finally, the reason why there is no obvious head is likely that the historical ancestor involved a verb as the head of both one and another. Since the head was external to both items, the modern successor did not inherit an obvious head either.
answered Dec 18 at 12:38
Richard Z
751110
add a comment |
(1) One another is not a syntactically complex phrase
The reciprocal one another is not well described as a case of asyndetic coordination because you cannot paraphrase its meaning as 'one AND another', as shown in (1).
(1) They talked to one another ≠ They talked to one and another.
Furthermore, one another is not correctly described as a complex syntactic phrase with a head and a complement either. The reason is that complement selection is productive whereas one another is a fixed expression, as shown in (2) and (3).
(2) one does not freely select a complement
a. They like one another.
b. *They like one other.
c. *They like one the other.
d. *They like one all.
etc.
(3) another does not freely select a complement
a. They like one another.
b. *They like all another.
c. *They like each another.
d. *They like themselves another.
etc.
It follows that one another should be analyzed as neither a case of asyndetic coordination nor a complex headed syntactic phrase with a head and a complement. Rather, the expression should be described as a third category.
(2) What we know about one another
We can list the following points about one another:
First, it distributes like any other nominal phrase. For instances, it can take possessive 's like other nominal phrases, as shown in (4). It can also be coordinated with another nominal phrase, as in (5). The item is therefore pronominal in nature. For syntactic purposes it behaves like a single word, or a single pronoun, replacing a noun phrase.
(4) They try to understand [one another]'s culture
(cf. [John]'s culture, [The Queen of England]'s culture)
(5) They love [the new Star Wars movie] and [one another].
Second, the internal structure of one another is likely [one [another]], with another more deeply embedded than one, rather than [[one] another], with one more deeply embedded that another. That's because the historical ancestor of the structure had the corresponding hierarchy. This is illustrated by historical examples where one and another were split by the main verb, as in (6). Hence, [one [ ... [another]]] like developed into [one [another]].
(6) they will [one] helpe [another] as brethren
Aggas, Edward (1588) The politicke and militarie discourses of the Lord de La Nouue
Third, there is no evidence that the modern form one another is a headed compound, as neither one nor another function as the semantic head of a compound. Hence, it not only functions as a single word from the perspective of syntax, but word-internally it also seems to be headless.
(7) one another ≠ a kind of another ≠ a kind of one
(cf. Orange juice = a kind of "juice")
Fourth and finally, the reason why there is no obvious head is likely that the historical ancestor involved a verb as the head of both one and another. Since the head was external to both items, the modern successor did not inherit an obvious head either.
answered Dec 18 at 12:38
Richard Z
751110
(1) One another is not a syntactically complex phrase
The reciprocal one another is not well described as a case of asyndetic coordination because you cannot paraphrase its meaning as 'one AND another', as shown in (1).
(1) They talked to one another ≠ They talked to one and another.
Furthermore, one another is not correctly described as a complex syntactic phrase with a head and a complement either. The reason is that complement selection is productive whereas one another is a fixed expression, as shown in (2) and (3).
(2) one does not freely select a complement
a. They like one another.
b. *They like one other.
c. *They like one the other.
d. *They like one all.
etc.
(3) another does not freely select a complement
a. They like one another.
b. *They like all another.
c. *They like each another.
d. *They like themselves another.
etc.
It follows that one another should be analyzed as neither a case of asyndetic coordination nor a complex headed syntactic phrase with a head and a complement. Rather, the expression should be described as a third category.
(2) What we know about one another
We can list the following points about one another:
First, it distributes like any other nominal phrase. For instances, it can take possessive 's like other nominal phrases, as shown in (4). It can also be coordinated with another nominal phrase, as in (5). The item is therefore pronominal in nature. For syntactic purposes it behaves like a single word, or a single pronoun, replacing a noun phrase.
(4) They try to understand [one another]'s culture
(cf. [John]'s culture, [The Queen of England]'s culture)
(5) They love [the new Star Wars movie] and [one another].
Second, the internal structure of one another is likely [one [another]], with another more deeply embedded than one, rather than [[one] another], with one more deeply embedded that another. That's because the historical ancestor of the structure had the corresponding hierarchy. This is illustrated by historical examples where one and another were split by the main verb, as in (6). Hence, [one [ ... [another]]] like developed into [one [another]].
(6) they will [one] helpe [another] as brethren
Aggas, Edward (1588) The politicke and militarie discourses of the Lord de La Nouue
Third, there is no evidence that the modern form one another is a headed compound, as neither one nor another function as the semantic head of a compound. Hence, it not only functions as a single word from the perspective of syntax, but word-internally it also seems to be headless.
(7) one another ≠ a kind of another ≠ a kind of one
(cf. Orange juice = a kind of "juice")
Fourth and finally, the reason why there is no obvious head is likely that the historical ancestor involved a verb as the head of both one and another. Since the head was external to both items, the modern successor did not inherit an obvious head either.
answered Dec 18 at 12:38
Richard Z
751110
edited yesterday
answered Dec 18 at 12:38
Richard Z
751110
answered Dec 18 at 12:38
Richard Z
751110
answered Dec 18 at 12:38
Richard Z
751110
751110
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f469755%2fthe-grammar-of-one-another%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
One another is a version of the reciprocal each other, and they should be investigated together. I would say both are constituents, though they are both separable, and they play strange games with coreference restrictions. (For instance, how does the reflexive refer in Each man considers the other to be superior to himself?) I'd also say they are conjunctive -- dvandva compounds that function as reciprocal pronouns. As to headedness, this is a matter between you and your confessor; me, I think head is a very loose term that adds nothing to formal descriptions.
– John Lawler
Oct 23 at 16:43
1
@JohnLawler Ok, got it now. Thanks.
– Araucaria
Oct 23 at 19:21
2
For other readers: A dvandva (Sanskrit: dvandva "pair") is a linguistic compound in which multiple individual nouns are concatenated to form an agglomerated compound word in which the conjunction 'and' has been elided to form a new word with a distinct semantic field. So, for instance, the individual words 'brother' and 'sister' may be agglomerated to 'brothersister' to express "siblings". ... The term dvandva was borrowed from Sanskrit, a language in which these linguistic compounds are common.
– Araucaria
Oct 23 at 19:22
This question might be better served in the Linguistic SE site.
– user240918
Oct 23 at 20:08
2
@user240918 This is meant to be a site for linguists! ;) Linguistics SE doesn't accept questions about specific languages, so it would just get re-routed here ...
– Araucaria
Oct 23 at 20:10