In English, an obviative form of a verb is used to differentiate two otherwise ambiguous third-person pronouns. For instance, the sentence “Melanie borrowed Linda’s car” can be expressed as “She borrowed her car,” or even more ambiguous, “Melanie likes what Linda likes” can be expressed as “She likes what she likes.” So, an obviative form would likely be a marker—some sort of affix—used to differentiate “she” from “her” or “she” from “she.”
Of course, in English we don’t have an obviative form. We allow for the ambiguity, relying on the speaker—or writer—to avoid using pronouns in ambiguous situations. So, for the cost of a single, extra rule of grammar, we pay by having a limitation imposed on the language.
The reason I bring this up—other than to show that English has its limitations—is to point out that we have words in English that exist only as a means to express things we don’t do.
“Obviative” is an English word that describes something we don’t do in English.
I use this to illustrate the fact that, while there are plenty of things that we do that don’t make sense, there, too, are plenty of things we don’t do that do make sense. But we still don’t do them.
In both cases, change comes with rationality. Or reality.
Or a gentle prod from someone who cares.
