16.81 tuwa nøtt ɕa-la ɕoŋ go-ken bet.
porridge pot-DAT fit.into[NPST] have.to-NMLZ;CONJ AUX ‘The porridge has to fit into the pot.’
16.82 t ɕheppa dʑak go-ken bet.
rain VBZR[NPST] have.to-NMLZ;CONJ AUX ‘It has to rain.’ Or: ‘It must rain.’
Speaker sees the clouds or he may express a need for rain. The following example shows how this modal verb combines with a complement-clause non-
agentive verb. It has to be agentivized first before it can combine with this modality verb. The process changes the meaning somewhat. Consider the following example.
16 .83 ŋ-e tam hi-ko raŋ ha khoo-wa
I-GEN message this-head 2SG aud.impact hear;understand-NMLZ;Q t
ɕhit go-ken bet. do;VBZR[NPST] have.to-NMLZ;CONJ AUX
‘You must understand this message of mine.’ Or: ‘You have to make an effort to understand this message of mine.’
The meaning of ha khoo is typically ‘to understand, to hear’. When a transitivizer chyit is added it
becomes more like ‘making an effort to understand’. Speaker is talking about a difficult topic and the hearer has not grasped it.
16.3.3 Commissive modality ‘committed to’
The commissive modality is still an obligation but the speaker has more choice. There is no need for him to yield to outside pressure. Therefore the subject is always first person. The characteristics of this
modality are as follows: • The noun sa is attached to the root of the main verb in a clause which has obligative modal,
like one of those clauses in the previous section. The meaning of this noun sa is ‘a place, ground’.
• The main clause becomes nominalized and is the new complement-clause. • The equative copular
bet becomes the main verb. Note that this copula is unmarked for any evidentials the first person typically would be hin rather than
bet. • The subject of the complement clause is co-referential with the subject of the main clause.
The rest of the complement clause is the pedicate nominal of the equative copula bet.
• The main clause is equative copular type. Consider the following examples nominalized complement-clause verb and the main verb are
underlined. 16
.84 ŋa khim so go-sa bet. 1SG house build[NPST] have.to-ground COP
‘I am committed to build a house.’ Or: ‘It is a must for me to build a house.’ The challenge may come from outside but the decision is still in the hands of the speaker. NP is
predicate nominal of the copular verb. 16
.85 ŋa iki ɖok go-sa bet. 1SG writing read[NPST] have.to-ground COP
‘I feel I have to study.’
Just as in the previous example the NP is the predicate nominal. 16
.86 ŋit jampu-la ɖo go-sa bet. 1PL.EXCL Kathmandu-DAT go[NPST] have.to-ground COP
‘We are committed to go to Kathmandu.’
16.3.4 Subjunctive marked complement with an existential copula as main verb
I do not make any sharp distinction between modality and mood in this grammar sketch. Palmer says about subjunctive: “Yet subjunctive can also be used with second person subjects, to express weak
obligation” 2001:138. In Lhomi subjunctive has weak obligation and it occurs with 1–3 person subjects. That justifies its inclusion in this section of deontic modality. Subjunctive has the following
syntactic characteristics in Lhomi:
• The complement clause is nominalized with either -t ɕe the subjunctive marker or -tɕe-ma,
SBJV-F2. • The verb root is nonpast.
• The verb of the main clause is existential which gets all finite syntactic markings, e.g. evidentials.
• The main clause is a possessive copula or I type. The case markings of a human subject is determined either by the complement-clause verb or the finite existential verb. With non-human
subject it is the whole complement clause which is an object or a predicate nominal of the main clause.
• The English meaning of the declarative is ‘should’, ‘ought to’. • When the complement clause is negated its English meaning is: ‘should not’, ‘ought not to’.
• When the main clause is negated its English meaning is: ‘need not to’, ‘have no need to’. With
unvolitional verbs it often translates into English like ‘should not’. The following examples illustrate this weak obligation modality markers are underlined.
16.87 u-la tuwa mat-luk-t ɕe-ma duk.
that-DAT porridge NEG-put-SBJV-F2 EXIST.VIS ‘You should not feed the child.’
Speaker feels that the child is big enough to eat by himself. 16
.88 raŋ-la khim tɕik so-tɕe-ma duk. 2SG-DAT house INDF build-SBJV-F2 EXIST.VIS
‘You ought to build a house.’ Speaker sees the old rotten house and makes this comment.
16 .89 ŋa saar-la ɖo-tɕe-ma jøt.
1SG city-DAT go-SBJV-F2 EXIST.EXP ‘I ought to go to the city.’ Or: ‘I should go to the city.’
16 .90 ŋa saar-la ɖo-tɕe-ma mit.
1SG city-DAT go-SBJV-F2 NEG.EXIST.EXP ‘I do not have to go to the city.’ Or: ‘I have no need to go to the city.’
16.91 pha-la ʈuku kii-tɕe-ma jøk-ken bet.
cow-DAT calf be.born-SBJV-F2 EXIST-NMLZ;CONJ AUX ‘The cow ought to deliver a calf.’
Speaker knows, it is general knowledge about every cow. It is abnormal if it does not.
16.92 khit-la hi-ko ɕøt-tɕe jøp=pak? TE56
2PL-DAT this-head speak-SBJV EXIST=Q ‘Do you know this?’ Or: ‘Do you have this information?’
With the verb ɕøt ‘to speak, to tell someone something’ this whole construction has been
grammaticalized and simply means ‘to know, to have information’. The other Lhomi verb ɕii which often
is translated into English as ‘to know’ refers to “know how” abilitive or to a learning process see sections 16.2.3 and 14.1.
16 .93 ŋa-la tɕhampa khø-tɕe mit.
1SG-DAT flu contract-SBJV NEG.EXIST.EXP ‘I should not get the flu.’
16.94 t ɕheppa dʑak-tɕe-ma duk.
rain VBZR-SBJV-F2 EXIST.VIS ‘It ought to rain.’
Speaker states this when he sees how dry the soil is. The whole complement clause is the predicate NP of the main verb duk.
16.95 hi-ki tam hi-ko hat ɕa-raŋ-ki ʈheŋ-ki
this-GEN speech this-head 1PL.INCL-self-GEN memory-INS sø-t
ɕe-ma duk. survive-SBJV-F2 EXIST.VIS
‘We ought to keep this speech in mind.’ Or: ‘We ought to remember this speech.’ 16.96 u-ko hat
ɕa-raŋ-ki ɕii-tɕe-ma duk. that-head 1PL.INCL-self-ERG know-SBJV-F2 EXIST.VIS
‘We ought to know that.’ Speaker states this to his companions because they have just met others who seem to know
something they do not. All previous examples in this section refer to a state of affairs. The next example illustrates an event:
16.97 roo saar-la ɖo-tɕe tɕhuŋ-soŋ.
3SG city-DAT go-SBJV happen-PST.VIS ‘He had to go to the city.’
The person has gone to city and someone reports it. This is not perfect-subjunctive but rather past obligative. The verb of the main clause is t
ɕhuŋ-soŋ and the rest of the clause is its inanimate object.
16.3.5 Subjunctive marked complement with an equative copula as main verb
