Sentence 2, part 2

Hanna oŋŋe ŋyehe: sa tɛndɛ kɨtlɛ na sa donava ludɨdɛn pɛstɛ giya.

They came to an agreement: he is stronger (is) he who can remove the cloak from the traveler.

The second part of this sentence contains two parallel clauses. These rename the destination of the previous clause, and so are considered subclauses with null evidentiality.

Of the verbs, we have seen tɛndɛ ((S) A ■ (D)) before, but pɛsi ((S) A →→) is new. pɛsi does not allow any destination, since the implied destination is away.

	imperfect [imp]	perfect [prf]	iterative [itr]
visual [vis] / Ø	pɛsi	pɛstɛ	pɛsna
non-visual [nvs]	pɛspi	pɛspɛtɛ	pɛspena
inferred [inf]	pɛsli	pɛslɛtɛ	pɛslena
reported [rep]	pɛse	opɛstɛ	pɛsena

Now for sa. Sa is counted among the classless deictic pronouns, even though it is deicticly neutral. It can mean one, the one, this one, that one, or the other one depending upon the context. Here it is perhaps best glossed as one. The other two deictic pronouns are ki this and du that. Since these are classless, I am not sure if they should inflect for motility and number, just number, or neither. Thoughts?

The first subclause is familiar, though the standard of comparison has been left out, but the second has two different noun phrases in the S role, one motile sa and one sessile donava. I mentioned earlier that sources can be either motile or sessile and agentive sources (like sa) are motile. making dona into a sessile source implies a lack of intention or volition on the part of the traveler. So the motile source is making/causing the sessile source to send the subject ludɨdɛn away.

Finally, giya is an adverb (it modifies the verb) that adds the idea of able to, can.

 
Thoughts?