18.14 khøt khan ʈa tɕhik-køp=pak
2SG what do;VBZR-PROG;EXP=Q ‘What are you doing?’
Progressive in Lhomi means that a person is in process of some activity. 18.15 kheta hi-ko
s- ʏ
khur-tuk=ka load this-head who-ERG carry-PRF.VIS=Q
‘Who has carried this load?’ Speaker sees the load in the destination but does not know who has carried it. This is what I have
elsewhere called perfect of results. 18.16 khit
mimaŋ khajet khanʈa-la pupu mit-so-ken TE46 2PL people plural what-DAT pupu NEG-raise.up-NMLZ;CONJ.Q
‘You people, why don’t you placate Pupu?’ Speaker is rebuking the villagers for not taking part in a ritual that would appease the village god
called Pupu. This is actually a rhetorical question, a reprimand. Table 18.2. Summary of interrogatives and negated interrogatives
for existential and equative copular verbs Interrogative
Negated interrogative Existential copulas
or auxiliaries jøp=pa
jøk-ken bek=ka duk=ka
jøp-pa bek=ka mip=pa
mip-pa bek=ka min-tuk=ka
mip-pa bek=ka
Equative copulas or auxiliaries
him=pa bek=ka
him-pa bek=ka hiŋ-køp-pa bek=ka
mem=pa mem-bek=ka
mem-pa bek=ka meŋ-køp-pa bek=ka
Table 18.2 only lists the interrogative forms of existential and equative copular verbs. They are explained more thoroughly elsewhere in this grammar.
18.1.5 Tag questions
“A tag question is a yesno question consisting of a declarative clause plus a ‘tag’ that requests confirmation or disconfirmation of the declarative clause” Payne 1997264.
A Lhomi speaker may ask for the listener’s confirmation by using a clitic =kaŋ SHC summoning for
hearer’s confirmation which is attached to the finite suffix of the finite verb just like a question clitic would be. However, the speaker is only requesting confirmation or agreement for his statement or
argument, or a suggestion or a promise, or for his command to a child. The clause has no question clitic and the speaker is not requesting any information, only confirmation or disconfirmation.
The following morphophonemic changes take place when this clitic is attached to the finite verb. The final alveo-dental stop of the copular verb
bet is dropped. With the existential jøt the final t is dropped and the front vowel ø changes to back vowel o. These verbs may be either auxiliaries or
main verbs in a clause. When the cilitic attaches to PROG;VIS -kuk the final velar stop is dropped. SHC clitic hardly ever
occurs in a written text but in oral conversation it is common. If one of the listeners is in doubt then the speaker may request confirmation from another listener
who is in a position to confirm his argument. Therefore typically at least three persons are needed. When the speaker is putting forward arguments to an audience, he may summon from his listeners a
confirmation for his argument. In that case the confirmation may be silent. The verbal confirmation is given by using the particle løni which may be glossed ‘yes, it is true’ or by unmarked copular verb
bet, ‘it is’.
Consider the following examples of the equative copula bet + kaŋ the markers are underlined.
18 .17 khattsiŋ jampu-la ŋa dep-pa be=kaŋ? løni.
few.weeks.ago Kathmandu-DAT 1SG stay-NMLZ;Q AUX=SHC HCP ‘“A few weeks ago I stayed in Kathmandu, didn’t I?” “Yes, you did.”’
Hearer responds and confirms speaker’s tag question with the particle løni. This is a fully acceptable and sensible first person question addressed to someone. However, there are no first person markers on
the verb dep-pen. A third person hearer does not believe the speaker, hence the request for confirmation.
18.18 hat ɕa-raŋ ɕa se-pa be=kaŋ? løni
1PL.INCL-self meat eat-NMLZ;Q AUX=SHC HCP ‘“We ate meat, didn’t we?” “Yes, we did.”’
One of the hearers is in doubt if the statement is true or not. Therefore the speaker summons his companion to confirm his statement. The pronoun refers to the speaker and his companion.
18 .19 thaŋpuu ta papa-raŋ-ki ta ŋit sep-pa be=kaŋ?
long.ago EMPHP father-self-ERG EMPHP 1PL.EXCL kill-NMLZ;Q AUX=SHC hi-ntuk t
ɕhi-na ŋ-e søk-ken this-ADVZR do;VBZR-NFNT1 1SG-ERG kill-NMLZ;CONJ
sin- na ŋit ʈhak-la dap-a be=kaŋ?
say-NFNT1 1PL.EXCL rock-DAT beat-NMLZ;Q AUX=SHC ha ŋik-ki hi-ntuk tɕhi-na papa-raŋ
now 1PL-ERG this-ADVZR do;VBZR-NFNT1 father-self ŋik-ki so go-ku=kaŋ? tɕhi-pa bet.
1PL.EXCL-ERG raise.up must-PROG;VIS=SHC say-NMLZ;Q AUX ni bet sin-ni ni hi-ni u-tsøt t
ɕik=raŋ bet. TE41 COP say-NFNT2 DM this-ABL that-amount INDF=FOC COP
‘They said, “Father, a long time ago you killed us, didn’t you? You beat us against a rock saying, ‘I kill you,’ didn’t you? But now we have to take care of you in this way,
don’t we?” He replied, “Yes, it is true” and so the story is finished.’ This is from a story in which a father has married a cannibal wife and upon her demand he had
tried to kill the children of his earlier marriage for the new wife to eat. Now the kids have grown up and try to save their father from the hands of his cannibal wife. The kids summon for confirmation from their
father who is about to die at the hands of his wife.
18.20 hi-ko ha khoo-ni ajekpa di-ki this-head aud.impact hear;understand-NFNT2 ayekpa DEF-ERG
ga- ntija=raŋ be=kaŋ ni? tɕhi-pa bet. TE67
feel.good-ADJVZR=FOC COP=SHC DM say-NMLZ;Q AUX ‘After Ayekpa heard it, he said, “It is true, isn’t it?”’
Ayekpa gets support for his claim from a third party who shouts it from a distance. The confirmation from the man nearby comes in the form of an action. An oral reply would have been too
embarrassing.
If the hearer agrees he uses one of the following particles: lawu, joŋ, lasso honorific. In connection
with commands the clitic =kaŋ is used only with children. Consider the following examples of
existential jøt + - kaŋ.
18 .21 ŋ-e pajisak bin joŋ
jo=kaŋ 1SG-ERG money give intend EXIST=SHC
‘I’ll give you some money, is it okay?’ Or: ‘I’ll give you some money, okay?’ 18.22 t
ɕhu khur-let jo=kaŋ water bring-SCI EXIST=SHC
‘Go and bring here some water, will you?’
18.2 Imperatives
