Gerundive or Imperative? Marking a Prose Explanation Item
Thirty-eight answer scripts from a December unit test are being marked against a 3-mark item from the prescribed Gadya section. The printed sentence is: vidyayā vihīnaḥ puruṣaḥ paśubhiḥ samaḥ, na tu vidyā dhanena vikretavyā. The scheme awards 1 mark for correct word-meanings, 1 for grammatical parsing of the verbal form, and 1 for the complete idea in Marathi. Script A reads: "विद्येविना माणूस पशूसारखा असतो, पण विद्या पैशांनी विकली पाहिजे." Script B reads: "विद्येविना माणूस पशूसारखा असतो, पण विद्या पैशांसाठी विकू नये," and glosses vikretavyā simply as "विकणे". Script C gives the same correct Marathi as B but parses vikretavyā as vi + kretavyā and labels it a क्रियापद. There is no glossary entry for vikretavyā in the textbook. Two markers disagree about the parsing mark for B and C, and one argues A deserves 2 because the rest of the sentence is flawless.
1. State the correct grammatical description of *vikretavyā* and identify the two features a marker must see before awarding the parsing mark.
Read the worked answer
Vikretavyā is a kṛtya (gerundive) formed with the suffix -tavya from the root krī (to buy), with the prefix vi- giving the opposite sense, "to sell". Two features must be visible:
- Category - it is a gerundive with passive force ("to be sold"), not a finite verb, not an imperative, and not an abstract noun. A gerundive does not convey a command by itself; the command-like force comes from the negation na tu.
- Agreement - as a kṛtya it agrees with the thing sold. Vidyā is feminine singular, so the form is vikretavyā, never vikretavyam. A candidate who writes vikretavyam has missed the agreement test.
Script C's split vi + kretavyā is phonetically and morphologically acceptable; what fails is the label क्रियापद. The marker separates the split (fine) from the category (wrong).
2. Award marks to A, B and C, justifying each, and state the principle you apply when the Marathi sense is right but the grammatical label is wrong.
Read the worked answer
A - 1/3. The word-meanings (vidyā, vihīna, sama, paśu) are right, so the first mark stands. But na tu ... vikretavyā has been reversed into "should be sold", which destroys the sentence's argument; the idea mark fails. The parsing mark also fails, because a gerundive read as an imperative is exactly the error the mark tests.
B - 2/3. The Marathi "विकू नये" is faithful, so the idea mark is earned, but the gloss "विकणे" gives only the root meaning and never identifies the form as a gerundive agreeing with vidyā.
C - 2/3. Correct split, correct sense, wrong category. The split earns nothing extra because the sub-item asks for parsing, not division.
Principle: a translation can be right for the wrong reason. The parsing mark is evidence-based - it is awarded only when the candidate names the category and shows agreement; a correct rendering never buys a grammar mark.