t ɕhøtnø tɕik juŋ-ken bet. TE36
Religious functionary INDF come-NMLZ;CONJ AUX ‘Then a religious functionary [who performs kurim rites of that area], comes.’
It is the genitive marker that is the relativizer and the head NP is ‘a religious functionary’. Typically, ken NMLZ is an agent nominalizer in Lhomi though it does also nominalize verbs of other types. The
tense of this relative clause here is nonpast which is marked by the verb root and -ken. 17
.4 [phu naŋ-keŋ-ki ] lama tɕik jøk-ken bet. TE18 son give[HON]-NMLZ;CONJ-GEN lama INDF EXIST-NMLZ;CONJ AUX
NPCL-GEN NPHead ‘There is a lama [who gives a son].’
This entails that the lama does it by religious rituals for someone who has been barren. Genitive marker -ki is the relativizer and lama is the head NP.
17.5 ni sama nam-e natso khajet di food many-GEN kinds plur DEF
[u-na jøp-p-e ] mi khajet di-ki kurik that-IN EXIST-NMLZ;Q-GEN man plural DEF-ERG all
gø-na se toŋ-ken bet. TE49
divide-NFNT1 eat[PST] IMMED-NMLZ;CONJ AUX ‘As for the different kinds of food, all men [who arewere there] divide it all up and eat.’
Object relative clause with external head 17
.6 [ aku passaŋ-ki sø-p-e ] khim di hi-ko bet. uncle passang-ERG build-NMLZ;Q-GEN house DEF this-head COP
NPCL-GEN NPHead ‘The house [which uncle Passang built], is this one.’
The nominalizer -pa produces typically object nominalization with agentive verbs. 17.7 [hat
ɕa-raŋ-ki khim-ki naŋ-la 1PL.INCL-self-ERG house-GEN inside-DAT
tim-p-e ] lha di-la ket d ʑak-køp=pa? TE48
consecrate-NMLZ;Q-GEN god DEF-DAT voice VBZR-PROG;EXP=Q NPCL-GEN NPHead
‘Do you invoke the god [which we all have consecrated and placed] inside of our houses?’
17.2.2 Headless relative clause
Payne explains that “headless relative clauses are those clauses which themselves refer to the noun that they modify” 1997:293. The whole relative clause is nominalized and it refers to the missing head
NP.The following examples illustrate this the relative clause is in square brackets.
Headless subject relative clause 17.8 [hi-ki khim hi-ko so-ken
di ] aku passaŋ bet. this-GEN house this-head build-NMLZ;CONJ DEF uncle passang COP
‘[He who builds this house] is uncle Passang.’
The head noun has been dropped. The relativizer is the definite article which is in absolutive case. It is actually more common in Lhomi to drop the head noun than to retain it in a construction like this.
17.9 [roo-ki u-tu tuwa sa-ken] hiŋ-køppet.
3SG-ERG that-LOC food eat-NMLZ;CONJ COP-INFER ‘I think he is [the one who eats over there].’ Or: ‘I think he is [the one eating over there.]’
Speaker sees the person while he makes this statement. He also sees the referent making some preparations like getting the fire going etc. Then he infers this statement. The relative clause
construction highlights here the person rather than the eating process. 17.10 u-ko [saar-la
ɖo-ken] hiŋ-køppet. that-head city-DAT go-NMLZ;CONJ COP-INFER
‘In my opinion he is [the one who goes to town].’ This is speaker’s inference from circumstances. The relative clause becomes the predicate nominal
of the equative copular clause. This highlights the person going to town rather than the activity of going. This is the reason why I feel that it is better to analyse this as a copular clause rather than regarding
hiŋ- køppet as an auxiliary. If the activity of going were in focus then the speaker would say: u-
ko saar-la ɖo- køppet ‘I think he goes to town.’
17 .11 ŋa [na-ken] hiŋ-køppet.
1SG get.sick-NMLZ;CONJ COP-INFER ‘I think I am [one who is sick].’ Or: ‘I feel [one who is sick].’
This is inference based on circumstances see more in chapter on evidentials, section 14.2.4. The verb ‘to get sick’ is nominalized and it becomes a predicate nominal of the equative copular clause. This
clause refers more to the person who feels sick. On the other hand ŋa na-køppet which is also inference
refers more to the process of being sick. 17
.12 ŋ-e iki ŋii-pa hi-ko ʈhi-tɕe-ki thøn di 1SG-GEN letter two-ORD this-head write-SBJV-GEN purpose DEF
eŋ-ki kettɕa di ʈhen-sø laŋ-na khit-raŋ-ki sim-la before-GEN message DEF remember-survive raise-NFNT1 2PL-self-GEN mind-DAT
nørik tsaŋ-ma tɕhar-tɕe jøp-pa-la [ ʈhii-pa ] hin.
thinking pure-F2 rise.up-SBJV EXIST-NMLZ;Q.DAT write[PST]-NMLZ;Q COP.EXP ‘As for the purpose of this second letter of mine, [I am one who wrote] this in order to
remind you about the earlier letter and in order that you would have pure thoughts in your heart.’
It is not very common to use headless relative clause with a finite copula e.g. ʈhii-pa hin but it does
occur occasionally. The more frequent finite form for agentive verbs is ʈhii-pen write[PST]-1PST ‘I wrote’.
So what is the difference between these two? To use a headless relative clause and copula ʈhii-pa hin puts
a lot more emphasis on the first person agent. In other words it topicalizes it. In this example, typical object nominalizer -pa is actually a subject nominalizer.
It is obvious that the more common ʈhii-pen has come from ʈhii-pa hin by a mergercontraction. For
the time being I prefer my current analysis but it is possible to analyze the current form ʈhii-pa hin also as
write[PST]-NMLZ;Q AUX. This latter analysis would have implications on section 13.6.1. Lhomi uses a lot of headless relative clauses and that further strengthens my analysis that the finite verb is an equative
copular verb rather than an auxiliary.
Headless object relative clause 17.2.2.1
The following examples illustrate the headless object relative clause relative clause is in square brackets.
17 .13 [tiŋ-la dik-ken di-ki ] [u-ki tiŋ-la
after-DAT chase-NMLZ;CONJ DEF-ERG that-GEN after-DAT tshar
ɖo-ken u-ki jok-jaa di-pa ] remain go-NMLZ;CONJ that-GEN weakness-COMP2 that-PL2
lhø t ɕhi-na dit-na juŋ
easy do;VBZR-NFNT1 chase-NFNT1 come go-ken bet. TE30
have.to-NMLZ;CONJ AUX ‘[One who herds the sheep from behind] has to herd cautiously [those who lag
behind], the weaker ones.’ This is from the story of a sheep shepherd. One of the shepherds has to herd the sheep from behind
the flock, because the weaker ones are slow. It is the latter headless relative clause which is the object in this clause. The first one in brackets is subject relative clause.
17.14 [ ɕi-ja] him-pa na [sø-pa] him-pa
die-NMLZ;Q COP-NMLZ;Q or survive-NMLZ;Q COP-NMLZ;Q ha mit-khoo-ken bek=o. TE51
aud.impact NEG-hear;understand-NMLZ;CONJ AUX=NEW.INF ‘You do not understand whether you are [dead one] or [survived one].’ Or: ‘You do
not understand whether you are [the one who has died] or [the one who has survived].’ Lama is giving his instructions to a dead soul. The conjunction na joins two headless object relative
clauses here. Headless locative relative clause
17.2.2.2 In the next illustration relativizer sa makes a headless relative clause from the existential copula; sa
never produces a locative relative clause with head. 17.15 u-
ki jaŋ-la [ɕiŋka-la mi-raŋ ŋii yös-sa-ni] that-GEN time-DAT field-DAT man-FOC two EXIST-ground-ABL
t ɕik ʈhik-ken bet.
INDF fetch-NMLZ;CONJ AUX ‘At that time Jesus will fetch only one man [from two men who are in the field].’
17.16 hiko thuk-la je ɕuu juukaŋ-la mat-ɕuu-pa,
this until-DAT Jesus village-DAT NEG-enter-NMLZ;Q, [maarthaa
ʈhes-sa di-na-raŋ] yöp-pa bet. Martha meet-ground DEF-IN-FOC EXIST-NMLZ;Q AUX
‘So far Jesus had not entered the village but was [at the place where He had met Martha].’
17.2.3 Internally headed relative clause
