Negated existential copulas Negated equative copular verbs

13.19 d ʑaa-p-ʏ phu-mu di-ki mat-ɕi king-M1-GEN daughter-F1 DEF-ERG NEG-die[IMP] mat- ɕi mat-ɕi NEG-die[IMP] NEG-die[IMP] ŋ-e tam ɕet joŋ tɕhi-pa bet. TE21 1SG-ERG speech speak intend say-NMLZ;Q AUX ‘Then the princess said, “Do not die Do not die Do not die I am going to tell the story.”’ The one who had tied a rope around his neck badly wanted to know the story of the princess and this was the only way he could force the princess to tell. The verb ɕi ‘to die’ of course is an unvolitional verb of type I which cannot be used in imperative. However, the same verb when an instrument-case marked instrument role is added means to commit suicide which is a volitional verb, roo raŋ-ɕi-ki ɕi-soŋ ‘he died by himself, he committed suicide’. Hence the negated imperative may be used. 13.20 u- ki ŋ-e kettɕa ha that-ERG 1SG-GEN language aud.impact mit-khoo-ken bet. NEG-hear;understand-NMLZ;CONJ AUX ‘He does not understand my talk or my language.’ Negating speakerhearer’s direct experience: 13.21 toto lit- moŋ. elder.brother arrive-NEG.PST.EXP ‘Elder brother didnt come while I was at home.’ Speaker is the experiencer of the non-event of arrival which means that he was at home when the brother was supposed to come home. This negation marker occurs only in connection with this particular evidentiality strategy see more in section 14.1.1. 13 .22 ŋa-la dukɕi noŋ-tɕuŋ. 1SG-DAT hardship experience-PST.EXP ‘I experienced hardships’. Or: ‘I had a tough time.’ 13 .23 ŋa-la dukɕi noŋ-moŋ. 1SG-DAT hardship experience-NEG.PST.EXP ‘I experienced no hardships.’

13.4.4 Negated existential copulas

When we look at tables 13.4 and 13.5 above we see that the negative prefixes have merged in very complex ways with existential and equative copular verbs. There are a few examples of that below. 13 .24 thoŋpa khimki loo-na min-tuk. plough house-GEN beside-IN NEG-EXIST.VIS ‘The plough is not beside the house.’ 13 .25 ŋa-la tɕhampa jøt. 1SG-DAT flu EXIST.EXP ‘I have a cold.’ 13 .26 ŋa-la tɕhampa mit. 1SG-DAT flu NEG.EXIST.EXP ‘I have no cold.‘ This is the merger of mit- + jøt. 13.27 gotta-la khim t ɕik jøk-ken bet. 3SG-DAT house INDF EXIST-NMLZ;CONJ AUX ‘He has a house. Or: ‘He owns a house.’ 13.28 gotta-la khim t ɕik mip-pa bet. 3SG-DAT house INDF NEG.EXIST-NMLZ;Q AUX ‘He does not have a house.’ Note the merger of the negative prefix to the verb root jøt. Speaker is basing his statement on general knowledge. This is either a negated past perfect possessive copula or negated nonpast possessive copula. The previous would communicate parenthetical information in a discourse. The latter would be ordinary negated existential. There is more about this particular negated existential in section 13.9 on tense.

13.4.5 Negated equative copular verbs

13.29 aku lhakpa pempu bet. uncle Lhakpa headman COP ‘Uncle Lhakpa is the headman.’ This is a copula with a predicate noun. 13.30 aku lhakpa pempu mem-pet. uncle Lhakpa headman NEG-COP ‘Uncle Lhakpa is not the headman.’ 13 .31 ŋa pempu hin. 1SG headman COP.EXP ‘I am the headman.’ 13 .32 ŋa pempu men. 1SG headman NEG.COP.EXP ‘I am not the headman.’ 13.33 aku wantsin pempu hiŋ-køppet. uncle Wantsin headman COP.EXP-INFER ‘Uncle Wantsin seems to be the headman.’ Or: ‘In my opinion...’ Speaker infers this statement from circumstances see more about this on evidentiality in chapter 14. 13.34 aku wantsin pempu meŋ-køppet. uncle Wantsin headman NEG.COP.EXP-INFER ‘Uncle Wantsin seems not to be the headman.’ Or: In my opinion...’

13.4.6 Backward spreading of negation