15.48 t ɕheppa dʑak-kuk. TE97
rain VBZR-PROG;VIS ‘It rains.’
The noun ‘rain’ is not a ‘dummy’ but it actually collocates with other verbs and it really has the sense ‘rain’.
15.49 sajøn gat ɕen dʑap-a bet.
tremors many VBZR-NMLZ;Q AUX ‘A lot of tremors took place.’
This refers to minor earthquakes which do not really cause damage. 15.50 nam-
saŋ toŋ-kuk. sky-good send;VBZR-PROG;VIS
‘It is a sunny day.’ The verb
toŋ here is another verbalizer which is a ‘dummy’. It is tempting to think that this has had an agent a god which has been dropped nowadays.
16 Modality verbs
Givón 2001:55 lists the following syntactic characteristics for modality verbs: • “The subject of the main verb is also the subject of complement clause.
• The subject of the complement clause is zero-coded. • The complement-clause verb is commonly non-finite or nominalized.
• The complement is analogous to the object of the main clause OV or VO. • The complement clause tends to fall under a unified intonation contour with the main
clause.” Typically modality verbs in Lhomi are the main verbs in the construction of a clausal or sentential
complement which is a nominalized clause. In this current section I follow Givón’s definition above.
16.1 Epistemic modality
In the current chapter I partly follow the scheme Austin Hale has developed in his paper, Hale 2011. Some terms used in this chapter come from Givón 2001 and some from Palmer 2001.
16.1.1 Evidentials
I refer the reader to chapter 14. Treating Lhomi evidentials is such a huge and dominant part of the Lhomi grammar that I have put it under a separate heading. In section 16.1.2, I discuss some left-overs
from chapter 14.
16.1.2 Judgements
This heading comes from Austin Hale’s paper Hale 2011. Nominalizer -tokpa with an existential copula as main verb
16.1.2.1 This modality combines with most types of verbs, also with existentials and copulas.It has the following
syntactic characteristics:
• The complement-clause verb is nominalized with -tokpa. I simply call this morpheme a nominalizer NMLZ.
• The main verb is an existential copula. • When the main verb is in a non-finite position it is replaced with the verb t
ɕhit because existential verbs do not typically occur in non-final or final position of a clause chain.
• The main verb may be negated or used in a question. • Subject of the complement clause and subject of the main clause are co-referential.
• The rest of the complement clause is the predicate nominal of the main clause unless the
existential is replaced by t ɕhit in which case it is the object of the agentive complement-
clause. • The meaning of this modality construction is almost identical with “Speakerhearer’s
inference from circumstancial evidence” which is treated in section 14.2.4. I have treated the current inference structure here because it syntactically fits better under the current heading.
• This modality is based on speaker’s visual or sensory observation of the circumstances except when speaker is speaking about himself see example 16.3 below. In the first person
reference it still is inference from circumstances based on patients inner feelings. The following examples illustrate this modality:
16.1 u-pa ɖik-tokpa min-tuk
that-PL2 reconcile-NMLZ NEG-EXIST.VIS sin-na ar-mi di-p-e sik-ken bet. TE55
say-NFNT1 between-man DEF-HUM1-ERG say-NMLZ;CONJ AUX ‘The arbitrators say: “They do not seem to become reconciled.”’
This is from a story which tells about old village customs. Arbitrators have not been able to reconcile two men.
16.2 phumu u-ko nama-la ɖo-tokpa duk=ka?
girl that-head wife-DAT go-NMLZ EXIST.VIS=Q ‘Does that girl seem to be ready for marriage?’
Speaker asks this question from a friend who knows the girl. Speaker may have intentions later to marry her. The wording is very generic.
16 .3 ŋa ʈhak-tokpa jøt?
1SG be.healed-NMLZ EXIST.EXP ‘It seems I am going to become well.’
Patient feels that he is getting better and states this to someone else. 16.4 u-ko
ɕi-tokpa duk. that-head die-NMLZ EXIST.VIS
‘It seems he is going to die.’ Speaker has been able to see the patient often and seen that he is getting more and more sick. Then
he may state this to someone else. This is speaker’s inference from circumstances based on his sensory observation.
16.5 ɕen ŋis-so khartsa mip-pa-la
otherwise 1PL.EXCL-PL1 expenses NEG.EXIST.EXP-NMLZ;Q-DAT ɖo tshuu-tokpa min-tuk. TE75
go be.able-NMLZ NEG-EXIST.VIS ‘Otherwise it seems we cannot go since we have no money.’
Speaker writes to someone to ask for money and states that unless he gets money he and his companions will not be able to go.
16.6 ni u-ki doŋ-tu ajekpa tshap-tokpa tɕhi-na
theme that-GEN in.front.of-LOC ayekpa be.in.hurry-NMLZ do;VBZR-NFNT1 nam-la mirek bar-
soŋ sin-na sky-DAT large.fire get.burning-PST.VIS say-NFNT1
kha-na aŋtam ɕøt-loŋ jøp=pa tɕhi-pa bet. TE69
where-IN big.lie tell-PUNC EXIST.EXP=Q say-NMLZ;Q AUX ‘In his presence Ayekpa appeared to be in a hurry and said…’
Ayekpa is a well known bad character among Lhomis. This is from one of the many stories about him.
16.7 tam-ki dokpu t ɕik=raŋ jøt-tokpa tɕhi-na
speech-GEN meaning one=FOC EXIST-NMLZ do;VBZR-NFNT1 døk-ken bet. TE49
stay-NMLZ;CONJ AUX ‘He seems to say only little bit and stays quiet.’
This refers to a healer lama who has failed in his efforts to heal the patient. He still tries one more trick but is very cautious and quiet. The verb t
ɕhit replaces the existential verb in this clause chain. Nominalizers -pa and -ken with the main verb ‘it looks like’
16.1.2.2 ‘It looks like’ modal verb combines with all kinds of verbs including existentials and copulas. The
syntactic characteristics of this modality are as follows: • The complement clause is nominalized with either one of the two common nominalizers -
pa- ja-a NMLZ;Q or -ken NMLZ;CONJ.
• The verb of the main clause is ɖa- ‘to look alike, to look like, be alike’. When this verb is used
as a modality verb it accepts only inchoative suffix - pet-jet-et INCH. This is understandable
because the information is inferred from the circumstances and the speaker is not claiming any epistemic certainty at all for his statement.
• The inference is based on only visual observation. This follows from the fact that the main verb means ‘to look like, to be like’.
• The subject of the complement clause is co-referential with the subject of the main clause and the rest of the complement clause is the object of the main clause which is I type.
• The complement clause may be negated but the main clause may not. There are some real complexities which show up in examples 16.8–16.17. Typically when the
complement-clause is a nominalized relative clause the verb hin is the copula and not an auxiliary and it has lost its evidential value COP.EXP also. The following examples illustrate this modality the main
verb is underlined.
16.8 u-ko mat-li-pa ɖa-jet.
that-head NEG-arrive[PST]-NMLZ;Q look.like-INCH ‘It looks like he has not arrived.’ Or: ‘It looks like he did not arrive.’
Speaker knows that the person has been away and it looks like he has not arrived—lights are not burning. This is a response to someone’s enquiry.
16.9 u-ko tuwa sa-ken him-pa ɖa-jet.
that-head food eat-NMLZ;CONJ COP-NMLZ;Q look.like-INCH ‘He looks like one who eats.’
Speaker refers primarily to the man who eats rather than to the eating activity. There is more about this kind of relative clauses in section 14.2.1.
16.10 u-ko tuwa sa-ken ɖa-jet.
that-head food eat-NMLZ;CONJ look.like-INCH ‘He looks like he’s eating.’
Speaker refers primarily to eating in contrast to some other activity. 16.11 u-ko tuwa sa-ken
hiŋ-køp-pa ɖa-jet. that-head food eat-NMLZ;CONJ COP-PROG;EXP-NMLZ;Q look.like-INCH
‘It looks like he is in the process of eating.’ Speaker infers this statement from visual circumstances and the primary reference is to eating
activity which is going on. Note that the complement-clause verb hin is a copula and not an auxiliary. The suffix -køt has lost its evidential value but retained the progressive meaning.
16 .12 ŋa na-ken him-pa ɖa-jet.
1SG become.sick-NMLZ;Q COP-NMLZ;CONJ look.like-INCH ‘It looks like I am one who is sick.’
Speaker’s primary reference is to himself as the one who may be sick. The embedded clause is a relative clause without head.
16.13 u-ko na-køp-pa ɖa-jet.
that-head become.sick-PROG;EXP-NMLZ;Q look.like-INCH ‘It looks like he is sick.’
This is about the present state of affairs. Note that in this example the evidentiality strategy marking EXP is reduced and the primary grammatical meaning, progressive PROG, remains.
16.14 u-ko na-køp-pa hiŋ-køp-pa ɖa-jet.
that-head become.sick-PROG;EXP-NMLZ;Q AUX-PROG;EXP-NMLZ;Q look.like-INCH ‘It looks like he has been sick.’
This refers to the state of being sick which is both current and past. It is the habitual aspect marked in the auxiliary that signals that the patient has been sick in the past also.
16.15 u-ko na-ja him-pa ɖa-jet.
that-head become.sick-NMLZ;Q AUX-NMLZ;Q look.like-INCH ‘It looks like he has been sick.’
Speaker infers that the person has been sick but is no longer. Note that the complement clause is in past tense. Past sickness is viewed as an event.
16.16 u-ko na-ja hiŋ-køp-pa ɖa-jet.
that-head become.sick-NMLZ;Q AUX-PROG;EXP-NMLZ;Q look.like-INCH ‘It looks like he had become sick but is no more.’
This refers primarily to the sickness which has taken place in the past and is viewed as past event which has ended now.
16.17 u-ko na-ken hiŋ-køp-pa ɖa-jet.
that-head become.sick-NMLZ;CONJ COP-PROG;EXP-NMLZ;Q look.like-INCH ‘It looks like he is currently sick.’ Or: ‘It looks like he is the one being sick.’
The complement clause is again a headless relative clause. Speaker draws his conclusion after seeing the patient. It is still an inference.
Existential copular verbs in a complement-clause 16.18 roo-raŋ-ki khim ʈaŋpu jøp-pa ɖa-jet.
3SG-self-GEN house poor EXIST-NMLZ;Q look.like-INCH ‘His own house looks like being poor.’
Speaker corrects someone who thinks that the man is wealthy. But he does not have definite knowledge either, only inference from circumstances.
16.19 roo-raŋ-la sajikal mip-pa ɖa-jet. 3SG-self-DAT bike NEG.EXIST-NMLZ;Q look.like-INCH
‘It looks like he himself does not have a bike.’ Speaker corrects someone who thinks that the fellow owns the bike which he is using.
16.20 u-ko iki ɖok ɕii-ken him-pa ɖa-jet. that-head writing read know-NMLZ;CONJ COP-NMLZ;Q look.like-INCH
‘It looks like he is one who can read.’ The nominalized complement clause is a headless relative clause.
Probability 16.1.2.3
The probability modality has to do with the level of certainty. Speaker has no definite evidence for the epistemic value of his statement and what he says may or may not materialize. I follow David Watters
2002:285 in using this term. English meaning for Lhomi probability is ‘maybe’, ‘perhaps’, ‘possibly’, or ‘probably’. I have chosen to deal with this in the current section on judgements rather than under
evidentials. The following syntactic features characterize this modality: •
It is marked by the probability marker -ʈo which is attached to the nonpast progressive marker PROG -køt of the main verb or to the COP hin or to the EXIST jøt.
• Probability marker neutralizes the grammatical meaning of the preceding suffix or any
evidential markers of the verb to which it is attached, e.g. hin-ʈo, loŋ-køʈ-ʈo. •
The equative copular verb hin may also occur as an auxiliary and then it is the auxiliary that gets the marker -ʈo, as in 16.27–28.
• The verb marked for probability may be negated in a normal way.
• This modality cannot be used in questions, which is obvious.
• The tense of the probability is either nonpast or past.
• This modality combines with almost any type of verb. There are also a couple of examples
about probability in section 10.2.10 on confirmation particle. Consider the following examples the potentiality marker is underlined:
16.21 daku loŋ-køʈ-ʈo.
friend get.up-PROG;EXP-PROB ‘Perhaps the friend will get up.’
Speaker is expecting the friend to get up but is hesitant to go and wake him up. 16.22 gotta-la phitsa
kii-køʈ-ʈo. 3SG-DAT child be.born-PROG;EXP-PROB
‘Perhaps she will get a baby.’
Speaker has either no information or just a little information about the possibility that the other person is expecting a baby. The PROG does not mark here any evidentiality strategy but only nonpast
progressive. 16.23 t
ɕhu mat-kø-na ʈhoppa na-køʈ-ʈo. water NEG-boil-NFNT1 stomach become.sick-PROG;EXP-PROB
‘Unless you boil the water your stomach may become sick.’ 16.24 hi-ki mi hi-ko gara
hin- ʈo.
this-GEN man this-head blacksmith COP.EXP-PROB ‘Perhaps this man is a blacksmith.’
This is a typical equative copular clause with a NP subject and gara as predicate nominal. 16.25 hi-ki mi hi-ko gara men-
ʈo. this-GEN man this-head blacksmith NEG.COP.EXP-PROB
‘Probably this man is not a blacksmith.’ The copular verb looses its evidential value EXP in this example. This statement ranks lower in
epistemic value than e.g. meŋ-køppet which entails that the speaker infers his information from the
circumstances see more on evidentials in section 14.2.4. 16
.26 ni tiŋ-laa hassøt dzeŋ theme after-ADVZR VIP everything
ha khoo-kø ʈ-ʈo.
aud.impact hear;understand-PROG;EXP-PROB ‘Perhaps they will afterwards fully understand it.’
16.27 u-ki iki ɖok ɕii-køp-pa hin-ʈo.
that-ERG writing read know-PROG;EXP-NMLZ;Q AUX-PROB ‘Probably he has known how to read.’ Or: ‘Perhaps he has been able to read.’
Speaker has not been aware that this person knows how to read. Something triggers him to state this probability.
16.28 u-ki iki ɖok ɕii-pa hin-ʈo.
that-ERG writing read know-NMLZ;Q AUX-PROB ‘Perhaps he has learned to read.’
This refers to an event of learning which may have taken place in the past. There is more about the semantic shift of this kind in a verb in section 14.1.1 on evidentiality.
16.29 hi-ni men di-la pajisak gak si-kø ʈ-ʈo wa. TE42
this-ABL medicine DEF-DAT money much say-PROG;EXP-PROB MIR ‘Perhaps he will say that the medicine costs a lot.’
Speaker is seeking for medicine but figures in his mind that it may cost too much.
Table 16.1. Summary of the syntactic options of the probability marker - ʈo within a VP
A verb without auxiliary
A verb root + auxiliary Existential
copula as main verb
Equative copula as
main verb Nonpast
affirmative V-
køʈ-ʈo Nonpast negated mit-V-
køʈ-ʈo Past affirmative
V-pa hin- ʈo
V-køp-pa hin- ʈo
V.root jøʈ-ʈo Past negated
mat-V-pa hin- ʈo
mit-V-køp-pa hin- ʈo
Affirmative jøʈ-ʈo
hin- ʈo
Negated miʈ-ʈo
men- ʈo
Pretense modality 16.1.2.4
This judgement modality has the following characteristics: • The complement-clause verb is nominalized with the pretense marker -top which is attached
to the nonpast root of the verb. This is a rarely used modality and I use the generic morpheme gloss for it, NMLZ. Speaker bases his truth claim on his own inference of the
event. • The main verb is t
ɕhit ‘do;VBZR’ with the finite clause affixation. • Complement-clause verbs of this modality are typically agentive or I verbs.
• Subjects are co-referential and the rest of the complement-clause is the object of the main clause.
• The main verb has all the inflections of an agentive verb, e.g. t ɕhi-pen, do;VBZR-1PST
Consider the following examples. 16.30 am-e phitsa-la lap
ɕa toŋ-top tɕhi-soŋ. mother-ERG child-DAT reprimand send;VBZR-NMLZ do;VBZR-PST.VIS
‘Mother pretended to rebuke the child.’ To please someone else, mother pretends to rebuke the child. She does not really do it but only
pretends. 16.31 roo-
raŋ ʈhø-top tɕhi-pa bet. 3SG-self excape-NMLZ do;VBZR-NMLZ;Q AUX
‘He himself pretended to run away.’ Actually he did not intend to run away but only pretended.
16.32 go- maa di ŋa-raŋ thar-top tɕhi-pen.
first-ADJVZR DEF 1SG-self become.saved-NMLZ do;VBZR-1PST ‘At first I acted pretending to save only myself.’
Permission modality 16.1.2.5
The meaning of this modality is: ‘be allowed, be permitted, be legal, be OK’. When negated, this modality construction means: ‘be not allowed, be illegal, be not proper’. This modality has the following
syntactic characteristics:
• The ordinary verb juŋ- ‘to come’ becomes the verb of the main clause which is ST1 type.
• The complement-clause verb is nominalized with the subjunctive marker -t ɕe and it combines
only with nonpast general knowledge marker, - ken bet.
• The subject of the complement-clause is governed by the complement-clause verb. • The complement-clause verb may be almost any verb type except existential or equative
copular. • The subject of the complement clause and the subject of the main clause are co-referential
and the rest of the complement clause is the O of the main clause. The following examples illustrate this modality.
16.33 gott-e phitsa-la tuwa luk-t ɕe juŋ-ken bet.
3SG-ERG child-DAT porridge feed-SBJV come-NMLZ;CONJ AUX ‘He is allowed to feed the porridge to the child.’
Not the speaker but someone else has given him permission to feed the baby. 16
.34 ŋa tshoolempu-la dzek-tɕe juŋ-ken bet. 1SG makalu-DAT climb-SBJV come-NMLZ;CONJ AUX
‘I am allowed to climb to Makalu.’ Or: ‘I am permitted to climb to Makalu.’ 16.35 ni gempu karm-
e jaŋ khit ma di jari-ki village.leader karma-ERG CONTR2 2.PL CONTR1 DEF some-ERG
t ɕhøtmi pek-ken jari-ki jaŋ khanʈa ak
religious.lamp show.light some-ERG CONTR2 what INCLN t
ɕhit-tɕe mit-juŋ-ken bet sik-ken. TE58 do;VBZR-SBJV NEG-come-NMLZ;CONJ AUX say-NMLZ;CONJ.Q
‘The village leader Karma said, “Some of you actually burn religious lamps but at the same time others are the ones who say, ‘Nothing is allowed.’”’
Opportunity modality 16.1.2.6
Both the main verb and the complement-clause verb are in past tense. This verb
noŋ indicates a chance or an opportunity. It is preceded by the nominalized clause whose verb is past root and the main clause verb is in past tense with finite verb markings.
• The tense of the main clause T1 type is past and so is the complement-clause verb. • This matrix verb may also be negated or used in interrogative.
• Subjects of the main clause and complement clause are co-referential. • The main clause combines with most verbs except existential and equative copular.
• Case markings of the subject of the complement clause are governed by the complement-
clause verb. • The rest of the complement clause is the object of the main clause.
Consider the following examples opportunity verb is underlined. 16.36 gott-e khim sø
noŋ-a bet. 3SG-ERG house build[PST] get.opportunity-NMLZ;Q AUX
‘He got a chance to build a house.’ Note that the ergative case of the subject is determined by the complement-clause verb so.
16 .37 ŋa jampu-la phin mat-noŋ.
1SG Kathmandu-DAT go.come[PST] NEG-get.opportunity[PST] ‘I haven’t had a chance to go to Kathmandu.’ Or: ‘I did not have a chance to go to
Kathmandu.’ This example provides further evidence that it is the modal verb which is the main verb of the
whole contruction. It is the modal which is negated and the structure of the negated modal verb has typically negated first person past marking negated past root.
16.38 u-ki tam u- ko ŋik-ki ha khoo
that-GEN message that-head 1PL.EXCL-ERG aud.impact hear;understand[PST] mat-
noŋ. NEG-get.opportunity[PST]
‘We did not have a chance to hear that story.’ The whole construction of this modality typically looks as follows:
+V[PST] NEG- ’nong[PST] -finite suffixation AUX
16.2 Modal attitude verbs
