Speakerhearers direct sensory observation marked in existential copulas

Interrogative 2.person subject and the assumed hearer’s direct sensory observation of the process. 3.person subject and the assumed hearer’s direct sensory observation of the third person’s process.

14.2.3 Speakerhearers direct sensory observation marked in existential copulas

The inflected existential copula for direct sensory observation is duk EXIST.VIS. This is morphologically an existential which does not share the same root with jøt. It contrasts with the jøk- ken bet EXIST- NMLZ;CONJ AUX which is the general knowledge existential. DeLancey 2001:371 argues that mirativity in Lhasa Tibetan is a distinct grammatical category from evidentiality. In Lhomi this eyewitness observation existential copular verb duk often refers also to new information which is recently observed. However I have not set up another category for mirativity. Besides, Lhomi has a mirativity particle wa see section 10.2.5 which often co-occurs with this existential duk to mark it as a surprise to the observerspeaker. When two Lhomi persons are arguing about something, one may refer to a written source to support his argument. When he quotes the written source that supports him, he may use visual observation duk which implies that the companion does not know the written source. If he assumes that his companion also knows the passage then he uses the general knowledge periphrastic form jøk- ken bet. Speakerhearer’s direct sensory observation marked in existential copulas, duk and jøk-ken bet 14.2.3.1 Declarative, possessive copular clause type 14 .79 aku tshiriŋ-la ŋaa tɕik duk. uncle tshiring-DAT drum INDF EXIST.VIS ‘Uncle Chiring has a large drum.’ Recent observation Speaker either just saw it or is seeing it while he utters this. Speaker assumes that the hearer does not know. If the speaker and hearer both were in a position to observe then there would be no need for this statement. Therefore sensory observation in Lhomi generally entails the speaker’s assumption that the information he passes is new to the hearer. This is particularly true about written material the speaker may be speaking about. In reality it may or may not be new information for the hearer. Declarative, descriptive copular clause type 14 .80 aku tshiriŋ thaŋ-puwa duk. uncle tshiring health-ADJVZR EXIST.VIS ‘I saw uncle Chiring being well.’ Or: ‘Uncle Chiring is well.’ Speaker has just visited the uncle and reports this right away. This is recent observation, no prior knowledge, only firsthand eyewitness. Speaker also assumes that the hearer does not know. This is not general factual knowledge, which would be jøk- ken bet. Declarative, descriptive copula clause type 14 .81 ŋa lo di-ntikma duk. 1SG will warm.up-ADJVZR EXIST.VIS ‘I am happy and free of worries.’ Lit. ‘My inner being is warm.’ The NP which has the noun and modifying adjective is the predicate nominal of this clause. Descriptive copulas may have predicate nominals and predicate adjectives. Why does this one have duk rather than jøt? The speaker is passing recently discovered information about himself to someone who does not know it. Interrogative, descriptive copular clause type 14 .82 aku tshiriŋ thaŋ-puwa duk=ka? uncle tshiring health-ADJVZR EXIST.VIS=Q ‘Is uncle Chiring healthy?’ Or: ‘Have you seen uncle Chiring being healthy?’ Speaker assumes that the hearer is in a position to have seen uncle Chiring recently and therefore has been able to observe whether he is well or not. This is a predicate adjective. Negated declarative, descriptive copular clause type 14 .83 aku tshiriŋ thaŋ-tɕe min-tuk. uncle tshiring health-ADJVZR NEG-EXIST.VIS ‘Uncle Chiring is not healthy.’ Speaker has recently seen uncle Chiring and his observation was that uncle was not well. Table 14.18. Summary of the ways direct sensory observation is realized in possessive and descriptive copular clauses Declarative 1.person subject and speaker’s recent discovery of his own state of affairs inner feelings. 3.person subject and speaker’s direct sensory observation of the state. Negated declarative 3.person subject and speaker’s direct sensory observation of negated state. Interrogative 3.person subject and the assumed hearer’s direct sensory observation of the state.

14.2.4 Speaker’s inference from circumstantial evidence