Phi pamphlets — Appendix: quick reference

ReferenceThe four particles

Particle	Gloss	Claimed source	Example
`hi`	DIR	direct sensory perception of the event or state	`shia to hi wepu.`
`ke`	INFER	a conclusion from evidence specific to the case	`shia to ke wepu.`
`ti`	REP	information received from another source	`shia to ti wepu.`
`ho`	ASSUM	background expectation without case-specific evidence	`shia to ho wepu.`

An unmarked assertion names no source. There is no fifth, silent member of the set, and the grammar assigns the bare form no special level of confidence or care.

ReferencePosition

Slot 1 has one fixed order: Tense > Aspect > Voice > Evidentiality > Modality > Negation.

shia to si ke ma wepu.

3SG PST IPFV INFER NEG go.

(I infer that they were not leaving.)

One evidential particle is the limit for a clause. Stating two sources requires two clauses.

ReferenceThe founding contrast

pheralu to hi lepa.

rain PST DIR fall.

(Rain fell; I perceived it directly.)

pheralu to ke lepa.

rain PST INFER fall.

(I infer that rain fell.)

pheralu to ti lepa.

rain PST REP fall.

(Rain fell, according to a report.)

pheralu to ho lepa.

rain PST ASSUM fall.

(I assume that rain fell.)

The event described is the same. Only the speaker's stated source changes.

ReferenceBoundary rules

Past hi locates the original source in direct perception. The quality of present memory remains a separate question.
Hearing, smell, taste, touch, and sight can support hi when the event or state itself is perceived. A conclusion drawn from that perception takes ke.
When a witness tells someone else, the recipient uses ti if that report is their source. Later perception can establish a new direct account.
A speaker often leaves their own feeling unmarked. When discussing somebody else's state, inference or assumption may be relevant, and a question may be socially preferable.
Evidence specific to the case takes ke; background expectation takes ho.
ho does not grade confidence. po concerns possibility.
A sha ... sho quotation preserves the exact Phi source markers that were spoken. It does not insert or transfer them.
Settled knowledge can remain unmarked when provenance is irrelevant. Adding ti foregrounds how the information was received.

ReferenceUseful two-sentence patterns

suliwa ke nai. mia mua muila ruela nila.

snake INFER be. 1SG LOC earth path see.

(I infer that a snake is present. I see a trail in the earth.)

suliwa ti nai. ne siora mia shane.

snake REP be. NAME siora 1SG tell.

(There is a snake, according to a report. siora told me.)

suliwa ki ho wepu. suliwa lo miona ma lothea.

snake PFV ASSUM go. snake PL person NEG love.

(I assume the snake has gone. Snakes do not love crowds.)

These supporting clauses are useful, not mandatory. The first clause is complete without them.

ReferenceThe optional journal form

The three-line journal may place a perceived event, a present feeling, and a wish beside one another. hi appears only when direct perception matters to the first line. A report, inference, assumption, or unmarked assertion may take its place when the entry calls for one.

ReferenceVocabulary used throughout

Phi	Gloss
`suliwa`	snake
`phitura`	well
`ruela`	path, trail
`muila`	earth
`wiru`	basket
`shane`	tell
`shorui`	weary
`nulae`	sleep
`shewo`	true

ReferenceCross-references

Manual Part IV, chapter 16 defines all four evidentials and their relation to peace linguistics.
Manual chapters 9 and 14 give the particle system, tense, and aspect.
Manual chapter 19 gives reported speech, indirect complements, and quotations.
Manual chapter 23 offers the three-line journal form.
Primer chapter 24 tells the snake-at-the-well story. Four source particles are followed by a separate judgement that everyone spoke truly.