BE Auxiliary Verb Constructions in Kihehe

Abstract

Kihehe (G62) has a rich inventory of auxiliary constructions (> 120) grounded in different forms of be: copula -li and -ʋa ‘be’. This paper addresses those constructions in which the auxiliary is marked for one of three pasts – hodiernal, pre-hodiernal, or remote – or one of two futures – near and remote – comparing the differences in use and distribution. The study investigates both single and double auxiliary constructions in which the main verb is in the simple perfective form: sm-B(ase)-iȻ-e. I describe two evolutionary paths of auxiliary forms derived from these recent and remote past forms of be: sm-ká-li > sm-ké > ké= and sm-aá-li > sm-eé, all of which continue in use, although having different senses at different times. The 18 past constructions all have an English translation of ‘had verbed’, the four future constructions a translation of ‘will have verbed’. In addition, there are three double auxiliary constructions with -ké/ké= or -eé plus the future of -ʋa that induce a modal interpretation, ‘would have verbed’. The study analyses the differences noted above in the Domains and Regions framework (Botne 2025), elucidating the differences between these constructions in tense/tenor and the referential/indexical roles of the auxiliary verbs.