Backward spreading of negation Double negation

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

The scope of negation in Lhomi typically covers the verb and the clause if it is the main verb which is negated. I have seen a couple of times when the negative prefix seems to be in a “wrong place”. Newar language [new] reportedly has the same sort of phenomenon see Hale and Shrestha 2006:187. Consider the following example which is from a Lhomi historical narrative. 13.35 ju di thoŋ-ni pupu tsʏntɕuŋ lipm-e iki di turquois DEF see-NFNT2 pupu ts ʏntɕung lipma-ERG writing DEF ʈhak-ki iki di phii-na mat-luk-pa blood-GEN writing DEF wipe.off-NFNT1 NEG-put-NMLZ;Q lop am ʈek-la luk taŋ-a bet. TE17 folding-DAT put IMMED-NMLZ;Q AUX ‘When Pupu C ʏntɕung Lipma saw the turquois, he did not wipe off the writing on it, the blood writing on it but put it quickly into his coat folding.’ Lit. ‘When Pupu C ʏntɕung Lipma saw the turquois, he did not put it into his coat folding wiping off the writing on it, the blood writing on it.’ The negation clearly covers also the preceding verb ‘to wipe’ and not only the verb ‘to put’. In this particular case the reason for the placement of the negative may be that the contrastive reading of these coordinate clauses requires the negated verb which also marks the contrastive ‘but’ relation see also section 18.10.

13.4.7 Double negation

The next example has a double negative which is not uncommon in Lhomi. The final clause is a headless subject relative clause which further highlights the speaker’s argument. Negation covers only the finite clause. The negated relative clause is the predicate nominal of the negated copular clause. 13.36 khit- raŋ-la ŋ-e ɕentoŋ tɕhi-na 2PL-self-DAT 1SG-ERG exploit do;VBZR-NFNT1 mit- neŋ-ken men =mit+hin. TE58 NEG-obey-NMLZ;CONJ NEG.COP.EXP ‘I am not one who does not obey you as a means of exploiting you.’ Speaker refutes the potential argument that may arise in the minds of his listeners. He is refusing to take part in certain community rituals which require payment. However, it is not to gain anything for himself. Double negative makes it a strong assertion.

13.4.8 Question word negation