Speakerhearer’s direct sensory observation of the event of a finite verb marked by -

14.2 Direct Evidentials

To use the terminology of Aikhenvald, Lhomi has a five-term system of grammatically marked evidentiality. This is in addition to what she calls “evidentiality strategies” which were described in section 14.1. The five terms of evidentiality in Lhomi are: • Direct sensory observation 14.2.1–3 • Speaker’s inference from circumstances 14.2.4 • Assumption based on general knowledge 14.2.5 • Quotative with reference to the quoted source 14.2.6 • Hearsay, for reported information rumour with no reference to one who reported 14.2.7

14.2.1 Speakerhearer’s direct sensory observation of the event of a finite verb marked by -

soŋ Direct sensory observation of the source of information is normally visual but may occasionally also be an auditory observation or feeling, e.g. feeling sick. I talk about sensory observaton but the gloss is VIS on morphemes, because non-visual sensory observation is so rare compared to visual. The grammatical meaning of this marker can be summarized as follows: • The suffix - soŋ marks primarily sensory observation of an event and secondarily past tense. • The primary grammatical meaning of this marker is sensory observation; therefore, it can be called a direct evidential rather than an evidential extention of tense or aspect. • Interrogative forms do occur and also negated interrogatives. The examples have been grouped based on clause types. This is done because there are occasionally some semantic shifts. Speakerhearer’s direct sensory observation of an event with finite agentive verbs 14.2.1.1 Declarative, clause type BT 14 .53 aku tshiriŋ-ki ŋ-e toto-la ra tɕik tsoŋ-soŋ. uncle tshiring-ERG 1SG-GEN brother-DAT goat INDF sell-PST.VIS ‘Uncle Chiring sold a goat to my brother.’ Speaker has seen the event of selling. This is his firsthand sensory observation. Interrogative, clause type BT 14 .54 aku tshiriŋ-ki ŋ-e toto-la ra tɕik tsoŋ-soŋ=a? uncle ‘tshiring-ERG 1SG-GEN brother-DAT goat INDF sell-PST.VIS=Q ‘Did uncle Chiring sell a goat to my brother?’ Or: ‘Did you see uncle Chiring selling a goat to my brother?’ Speaker assumes that the hearer has been able to see the event and phrases his question accordingly. The hearer replies with his own evidentials: Negated declarative, clause type BT, reply to 14.54 14.55 aku tshiriŋ-ki raŋ-ki toto-la ra tɕik mat-tsoŋ-soŋ. uncle Chiring-ERG 2SG-GEN brother-DAT goat INDF NEG-sell-PST.VIS ‘I saw that uncle Chiring did not sell a goat to your brother.’ Speaker has been at the scene, and has been able to observe that selling did not actually take place. This also entails that the third person has made an attempt to sell or at least talked about the deal. Interrogative, clause type ST1 14 .56 ŋa khim-la lis-soŋ=a? 1SG home-DAT come-PST.VIS=Q ‘Did you see that I came home?’ Valid question only if the speaker has forgotten what has happened, e.g. being drunk. Table 14.12. Summary of the ways direct sensory observation of an event is realized with finite agentive verbs marked by - soŋ Declarative 2-3.person agentsubject and speaker’s direct sensory observation of the event Negated declarative 2-3.person agentsubject and speaker’s direct sensory observation of the negated event Interrogative 1 or 3.person agentsubject and assumed hearer’s direct observation of the event in question Speakerhearer’s direct sensory observation of an event of the finite ST1, ST2, I and ambient type 14.2.1.2 verb which is marked by –soŋ. Declarative, clause type ST1 14.57 ani passaŋ-la phu tɕik kii-soŋ. aunt Passang-DAT son INDF be.born-PST.VIS ‘A baby boy was born I saw the event to aunt Passang.’ Speaker is the midwife who has seen the event of delivery but is not related to the family. She may have been deeply involved in actual delivery but is not related to the mother. Therefore she would never be able to say kii-t ɕuŋ. Interrogative, clause type ST1 14.58 ani passaŋ-la phu tɕik kii-soŋ=a? aunt passang-DAT son INDF be.born-PST.VIS=Q ‘Was a baby boy born to aunt Passang?’ The addressee can be anyone who has been on the scene but is not a kin to the mother. Negated declarative, clause type ST1 14.59 ani passaŋ-la phu tɕik mat-kii-soŋ. aunt passang-DAT son INDF NEG-be.born-PST.VIS ‘A baby boy was not born to aunt Passang.’ This is a reply to the question in 14.58. Declarative, clause type ST2 14.60 u-ko doŋpu-ni tshar-soŋ. that-head tree-ABL fall.down-PST.VIS ‘He fell I saw it down from a tree.’ Speaker has seen the event of falling. Declarative, clause type I 14.61 aku passaŋ daŋ na-soŋ. Uncle passang yesterday get.sick-PST.VIS ‘Uncle Passang got sick yesterday.’ Speaker is an eyewitness of the event of uncle Passang becoming sick. The verb is a non-control verb and the marker - soŋ marks the starting point of illness or a sudden pain which may have vanished by the time of the current speech act. Declarative, ambient clause type 14.62 t ɕheppa dʑap-soŋ. rain VBZR-PST.VIS ‘It rained.’ Or: ‘I saw the rain starting.’ Speaker has been inside and seen when it started to rain. This can refer either to the starting point of rain or to raining as a past event, e.g. it rained yesterday. Declarative, clause type I 14 .63 wak ŋ-e sir-ku tor-soŋ. TE31 MIR 1SG-GEN gold-idol become.lost-PST.VIS ‘My golden idol is lost.’ Or: ‘My golden idol has become lost.’ Speaker has just realized that the idol is no more in its place in the house where it used to be. She uses the direct sensory observation though she has not seen the event of stealing or the idol getting lost. Logically it would be more natural to use perfect of results, -tuk, because she only observed the visual results of its getting lost. However the use of direct observation marker makes it a fact rather than an inference from the results of an event. Aikhenvald 2004:321 talks about epistemic overtones with direct evidentials. Table 14.13. Summary of the ways direct sensory observation is realized with ST1, ST2, I, and ambient type verbs marked by - soŋ Declarative 3.person subject and speaker’s direct sensory observation of the event. 3.person subject and speaker’s direct sensory observation of the event. Negated declarative 3.person subject and speaker’s direct sensory observation of the negated event. 3.person subject and speaker’s direct observation of the negated event Interrogative 3.person subject and hearer’s assumed direct observation of the event. 3.person subject and hearer’s assumed direct observation of the event. Speakerhearer’s direct sensory observation of an event of the finite T2 type verb which is marked by 14.2.1.3 – soŋ. With verbs of T2 type the sensory observation marker - soŋ makes it an event rather than a state and that often produces a semantic shift in the verb. The next examples illustrate this: Declarative, clause type T1 14.64 gott-e iki ɖok ɕii-soŋ. 3SG-ERG writing read know-PST.VIS ‘He learned to read.’ Speaker has seen the event when his student or a friend reaches the point of fluency. It is an event, change of state.The modal verb here is so called PCU verb perception, cognition or utterance verb. From now on the student knows how to read. Interrogative, clause type T1 14.65 khok-ki pap-e iki ɖok ɕii-soŋ=a? 2SG-GEN father-ERG writing read know-PST.VIS=Q ‘Was your father able to read the letter I sent?’ Did your father know how to read the letter which I sent? The writer assumes that the hearer has been able to watch how his father handled the letter which had arrived. The writer of the letter speaker may be a teacher. Although there is kinship relation, ɕii-tɕuŋ-a cannot be used in this one. The current example refers to one particular event of reading a certain letter. Declarative, clause type T1 14 .66 ŋ-e ʈhim-la ŋii-soŋ. 1SG-ERG law-DAT breach-PST.VIS ‘I breached the law.’ This is an unintentional verb. This verb does not combine with -pen 1PST which would mark it definitely as an agentive verb. It becomes a genuine volitional verb only when nominalized and a transitivizer is added, e.g. ŋii-pa tɕhi-pen see chapter 15. Speaker realizes afterwards that he has committed an unvolitional illegal act and of course he has directly observed it. Table 14.14. Summary of the ways direct sensory observation is realized with T1 type verbs marked by -so ŋ Declarative 1.person subject and speaker’s direct sensory observation of the event. 3.person subject and speaker’s direct sensory observation of the event. Negated declarative 1.person subject and speaker’s direct sensory observation of the negated event. 3.person subject and speaker’s direct sensory observation of the negated event. Interrogative 1.person subject and the assumed hearer’s direct sensory observation of the event. 3.person subject and the assumed hearer’s direct sensory observation of the event.

14.2.2 Speakerhearer’s direct sensory observation of the process of a finite verb marked by -kuk