Speaker’s inference based on visual results of an event

Interrogative, equative copular clause type 14 .42 aku tshiriŋ him=pa? uncle tshiring COP.EXP=Q ‘Are you uncle Chiring?’ This is a common question to someone on the phone. It is the second person question though the personal pronoun subject is left out. Declarative, equative copular clause type 14.43 hi-ki pit ɕa hi-ko ŋ-e hin Or:… bet this-GEN book this-head 1SG-GEN COP.EXP COP ‘This book is mine.’ Speaker uses the experiencer copula hin which here signals possession. If the speaker does not want to highlight the possession he uses the unmarked form bet. Table 14.9. Summary of the ways direct experience is realized with finite verbs of equative copular type Declarative 1.person subject 3.person subject and speaker’s kinship relation to the 3.person complement of the copula. 3.person subject and speaker’s possessed item complement of the copula. Negated declarative 1.person subject 3.person subject and speaker’s kinship relation to the 3.person complement of the copula. Interrogative 2.person subject 3.person subject and the assumed hearer’s kinship relation to the 3.person. 3.person subject and speaker’s possessed item complement of the copula.

14.1.3 Speaker’s inference based on visual results of an event

Perfect of result 14.1.3.1 Lhomi has perfect of result also called resultative perfect and the grammatical marker is -tuk which is attached to the past root of the finite verb or its auxiliary see section 13.10.4. It combines with most verb types. This marker communicates the visible results of an action, activity, motion, or process. The tense of the finite verb is past. Speaker has not seen the actual motion, act, or process but he observes the visual results by which he can infer what has preceded. If the finite verb of a clause with the perfect of result marker is negated, it becomes negated inchoative. This is obvious because the speaker does not see the results of the event which has not taken place yet. Secondary meaning of the finite verbal marker -tuk This same marker -tuk which marks perfect of result also marks speaker’s inference based on visual results of an event or process. It is an inference because speaker has not seen the event that has led to the current results. Speaker must observe some outcome or results of the preceding event which he has not observed. Aikhenvald discusses resultatives and perfects in her book Evidentiality 2004:112–116. Throughout this sketch I have used the label -PRF.VIS for this perfect of result marker which is the primary meaning of this suffix. The examples that follow also illustrate how this same marker -tuk is used to mark the inference based on observation of visual results. The structure of the finite verb with this marker is as follows: Verb root[PST] -tuk. Speakerhearer’s inference based on visual results of an event in agentive verbs marked by -tuk 14.1.3.2 Clause type ST1 14 .44 juŋ-ni khim-tu lip-en. come-NFNT2 house-LOC arrive-1PST khim-tu t ɕhaŋ luk ɕak-tuk. TE3 house-LOC beer put put.leave-PRF.VIS ‘I came and finally arrived at home. Someone had placed a pot of beer there.’ Speaker reports how he came home and there was a pot of beer ready for him to drink. He did not see the event of putting the pot of beer ready for drinking, only the result of the activity. Interrogative, clause type BT 14 .45 aku tshiriŋ-ki ŋ-e toto-la ra tɕik tsoŋ-tuk=ka? uncle tshiring-ERG 1SG-GEN brother-DAT goat INDF sell-PRF.VIS=Q ‘Has uncle Chiring sold a goat to my brother?’ Speaker assumes that the hearer has seen the results, e.g. a goat in the yard. English perfect is often the right way to gloss the verb with this marker -tuk. Negated declarative, clause type BT 14 .46 aku tshiriŋ-ki ŋ-e toto-la ra tɕik mat-tsoŋ-et. uncle tshiring-ERG 1SG-GEN brother-DAT goat INDF NEG-sell-INCH ‘Uncle Chiring has not sold a goat to your brother.’ Speaker has been in a position to see that the selling event has had no visible results and infers that it has not taken place. Declarative, clause type T2 14 .47 ŋ-e ŋii-pa tɕhi-tuk. 1SG-ERG be.wrong-NMLZ;Q do;VBZR-PRF.VIS ‘I have committed wrong.’ This is a volitional verb but refers to an unintentional act. Speaker is apologising to a victim for his wrong doings while he had been drunk. He has done wrong unintentionally because he was drunk. He probably can remember what happened or at least can see the results of his actions. This seems to be also a way for a speaker to disclaim full responsibility for his actions. The intentional act would be ŋ-e ŋii-pa tɕhi-pen 1SG-ERG be.wrong-NMLZ;Q do;VBZR-1PST ‘I committed a wrong act.’ Table 14.10. Summary of how inference based on visual results is realized in BT, ST1, T2 type verbs marked by -tuk Declarative 1.person subject and speaker’s inference based on visual results of his unintentional act. 3.person subject and speaker’s inference based on visual results of an event. Interrogative 1.person subject and the assumed hearer’s inference based on visual results of speaker’s unintentional act. 3.person subject and speaker’s inference based on visual results of an event. Speakerhearer’s inference based on visual results of an event in some T1 and ST2 type verbs 14.1.3.3 Declarative, clause type ST2 14.48 u-ko doŋpu-ni tshar-tuk. that-head tree-ABL fall.down-PRF.VIS ‘He has fallen from the tree.’ Speaker has not seen the event of falling. However he has seen the results of falling, an injured man on trail under a tree. He bases his inference both on visual results andor a bystander’s report. Had the victim spoken to him he would quote him in reporting the event. Declarative, clause type T1 14 .49 lhakaŋ-tu døp-p-e jaŋ-la khim di-tu lama temple-LOC stay-NMLZ;Q-GEN time-DAT house DEF-LOC lama d ʑaap-ʏ ki-i muk-pa u-ko ha khoo-tuk ka d ʑaapu-GEN dog-ERG bark-NMLZ;Q that-head aud.impact hear-PRF.VIS CEP joŋma khajek-ki. TE37 other plural-ERG ‘While lama Jyaabu was in the village temple in fact others had heard lama’s dog barking in his house.’ The story tells how a golden idol was stolen from the house of a village lama. This is backgrounded information in the story, off the story line. Barking would indicate that someone was stealing the idol at the lama’s house as it eventually turned out. Spea kerhearer’s inference based on visual results of an event in some I and ambient type verbs. 14.1.3.4 Declarative, clause type I 14 .50 aku passaŋ na-tuk. uncle passang get.sick-PRF.VIS ‘Uncle Passang has been sick.’ Speaker has seen the patient but the sickness has started earlier. He reports this to someone else. The patient is getting well or may be well at the time of the speech act. Declarative, ambient clause type 14.51 t ɕheppa dʑap-tuk. rain VBZR-PRF.VIS ‘It has rained.’ Speaker has seen the results of rain wet ground etc. and infers that it must have rained. He has no other source of information. Declarative, clause type I 14 .52 ŋ-e lakpa di tɕhak-nat-tuk ka. 1SG-GEN arm DEF fracture-COMPL-PRF.VIS CEP ‘My arm had actually become broken.’ Speaker reports the traffic accident he has recently experienced. He flew up through the air and fell down on the ground and was shaken quit a bit. He examined his body and saw that his right arm had fractured. He had no pain, he did not feel any pain when his arm got fractured or did not realize how it all happened. He only discovers it afterwards, he sees the results of actual event of the fracture. Counter- expectation particle ka reinforces this. There is an element of surprise and therefore this resembles mirativity which DeLancey talks about 2001:379. Lhomi does also have a mirative particle see section 10.2.5. Table 14.11. Summary of how inference based on visual results of an event is realized in ST2, T1, I, and ambient verbs marked by -tuk Declarative 3.person subject and speaker’s inference based on the visual results of an event. 3.person subject and speaker’s inference based on the visual results of an event. Interrogative 3.person subject and assumed hearer’s inference based on the visual results of an event. 3.person subject and assumed hearer’s inference based on the visual results of an event. Figure 14.1. Summary of evidentiality strategies in Lhomi. Following figure 14.2, I have added some comments about the resultative perfect which could also be counted optionally as a direct evidential. For the time being I keep it as one of the evidentiality strategies. Aikhenvald 2004:61 talks about direct experience. Direct experience in Lhomi agentive verbs, as I have described it in section 14.1.1, comes actually very close to marking the information source. This is particularly true if we include only events of agentive verbs. As the current chapter has shown, the grammatical markers of Lhomi evidentiality strategies function in diffent ways depending on the type of verb they are attached to. The same is true of direct evidentials in section 14.2. Evidentialilty strategies Direct experience with speakerhearer involvement Inferenced from observed results Events - tɕuŋ - moŋ 14.1.1 Processesstates -køt 14.1.2 Existence yøt mit 14.1.2 Identity hin men 14.1.2 Resultative perfect -tuk 14.1.3

14.2 Direct Evidentials