<p>Calling <code>li</code> a <em>particle</em> or <em>predicate marker</em> is correct and not misleading. A Toki Pona clause can have more than one predicate. <code>li</code> never marks a non-predicate. It also appears on every predicate except when that predicate <em>is the first one in the clause and the subject is</em> exactly <em><code>mi</code> or</em> exactly <em><code>sina</code></em> (101) or when preceded by the vocative/imperative particle <code>o</code> (102).</p>

<p>I think a good way to analyze this would be to say that every indicative predicate obligatorily has a predicate marker, but sometimes it's null.</p>

<pre><code>mi  moku  li   pakala. (101)
I   food  LI  mistake.
I eat and destroy.

o   lukin     e    ni. (102)
IMP   see  DObj  that.
watch this.
</code></pre>

<p>Here's a fragment of (my best guess of) the Toki Pona grammar. I haven't seen any examples of stacking imperative phrases, so I don't know whether <em>look and say</em> would be <code>o lukin li toki</code> or <code>o lukin o toki</code>.</p>

<p>Also, in Toki Pona verb phrases and noun phrases are different syntactically. For instance, <code>*sina moku e soweli ala soweli.</code> cannot be used to mean <em>are you a vegetarian</em>.</p>

<pre><code>LI        := 0 | "li"
PredInd   := LI VP {PP} | LI NP
ClauseInd := NP [PredInd]
PredImp   := "o" VP {PP} | "o" NP
ClauseImp := NP PredImp | PredImp
</code></pre>

<p>I'm not thrilled with this analysis because of the asymmetry between indicative and imperative clauses. Unifying the clause types, however, would predict that <code>*li moku.</code> is valid. As far as I can tell, Toki Pona does not permit null subjects in indicative clauses.</p>

<p>I can think of two potential alternative analyses for <code>li</code>: A) it's a pronoun (like in Example 4 Longgu <a href="https://wals.info/chapter/101" rel="noreferrer">on this WALS article</a> or B) it's a preposition.  I'll try to show that both of those analyses lead to bad predictions.</p>

<p>A) <code>li</code> as pronoun.</p>

<p>This falls apart for a couple of reasons. It predicts that <code>mi moku li pakala</code> would be invalid and that the correct form would be <code>mi moku mi pakala</code>. In reality, both forms are fine.</p>

<p><code>li</code> as a pronoun also predicts that <code>*li moku</code> would be valid since it would contain an explicit subject under that analysis.</p>

<p>Also, <code>*mi moku li.</code> cannot be used to mean <em>I eat it</em>.</p>

<p>B) <code>li</code> as preposition.</p>

<p>If <code>li</code> were a preposition, (103) and (104) would both be valid.</p>

<pre><code>Mi pakala e moku. (103)
I ruin the food.

*Mi e moku li pakala. (104)
*I ruin the food.
</code></pre>

<p>If <code>li</code> were a preposition, the following would be invalid.</p>

<pre><code>Ona mute li toki ala toki? (105)
Are they speaking?
</code></pre>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-07-05T17:03:04.040Z
2019-07-05T17:03:04.040Z
Greg Nisbet
<p>Mapping word class jargon from one language to another is a dicy project. Lojbanists decided that they needed to invent entirely new words for word class jargon. That said...</p>

<p>All the toki pona particles (o, li, e, pi, la) act most similar to Japanese particles or English clitics, eg. "the". Clitics bind to a phrase. There are other <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clitic" rel="noreferrer">tests for what counts as a clitic.</a></p>

<p>They are semantically bleached, do not act like <em>content</em> words. "li" in particular introduces a noun phrase or a verb phrase. </p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-03-01T15:57:32.480Z
2018-03-01T16:10:27.463Z
2018-03-01T16:10:27.463Z
MatthewMartin
<p>The syntactical li structure was inspired by Toki Pisin ... </p>

<p>and in an online Tok Pisin grammar I found :</p>

<p>[...] Tok Pisin has its own grammatical rules.</p>

<p>First of all, look at the following sentences:</p>

<p>Mi wok. 'I worked.'
Yu wok.  'You worked.'
Em i wok.  'He/she worked.'
Tom i wok.  'Tom worked.'</p>

<p>Note that the last two sentences have the little word i before the verb. (Remember that in Tok Pisin, i is pronounced something like "ee".) This little word is called a "predicate marker", and it must occur in a sentence when subject is em or a noun (like "Tom" or "the bicycle"). This rule is certainly different from anything found in English.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.hawaii.edu/satocenter/langnet/definitions/tokpisin.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.hawaii.edu/satocenter/langnet/definitions/tokpisin.html</a></p>

<p>So I presume that 'li' is also a "predicate marker" ...</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-10-14T04:38:09.933Z
I hope participants here need not be told to pronounce the letter ‹i› as IPA /i/ by default!
Anton Sherwood
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-03-28T21:38:55.040Z
I'd guess that *i* marker evolved from English 3rd person pronouns? Of course, that doesn't mean it's still a pronoun in Tok Pisin, since reanalysis is very much a thing in language evolution.
Ilmari Karonen
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-09-28T18:39:11.360Z
2018-09-28T18:39:11.360Z
Pite Janseke
<p>In some sentences it's a lot like 'は' in Japanese 'タナカさん<strong>は</strong>先生です' Mr Tanaka <strong>is</strong> a teacher. The toki pona equivalent would be 'jan Tanaka <strong>li</strong> jan pi pana sona'.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-02-27T21:45:33.577Z
2020-02-27T21:45:33.577Z
jastako
<p><em>Li</em> in these examples could be described as a <a href="https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copula_(linguistics)" rel="noreferrer">copula</a> - this is the name for a word whose function is to link a subject and predicate.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-02-22T08:29:43.427Z
I guess the lack of an explicit verb for “to be” is what makes this confusing. Are you saying li is a copula both when it means ”animals are eating” and ”animals are food”? In the first case, li goes between the subject and verb, in the second case there is no visible verb, just “animal li food” - it's more like in this case, li means “to be”? Or is it maybe “moku” that goes from meaning “eating” to mean ”be food”, rather than just “food”?
peterorme
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-02-22T14:07:49.560Z
"To be" does function as a copula in English (among other things), but I would not say that this means *li* means "to be", as it is not a verb and is not used in the same ways. Many languages lack a verb for "to be", and Toki Pona is one of them. However, it serves a similar function when in a NOUN = NOUN context.
Sparksbet
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-02-22T06:21:44.427Z
2018-02-22T06:21:44.427Z
Sparksbet
<p>In Toki pona, words are never inflected, and many words can act as a noun, verb or adjective in different contexts. The word "li" usually separates the subject from a predicate, and “e” goes before the object (in SVO order). With soweli (animal), moku (eat, food) and kili (fruit), one can say:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>soweli li moku e kili</p>
</blockquote>

<p>The animal eats the fruit.</p>

<p>This is the usage listed in the dictionary section of the official book, Toki Pona: the Language of Good:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>li. PARTICLE (between any subject except <em>mi</em> alone or <em>sina</em> alone and its verb; also to introduce a new verb for the same subject)</p>
</blockquote>

<p>But there is <strong>another</strong> usage, as seen in phrase:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>soweli li ijo</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Animals are things (<em>ijo</em> means thing). </p>

<p>It seems that this usage increases the ambiguity, because </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>soweli li moku</p>
</blockquote>

<p>can mean both ”The animal is eating” (with moku as an intransitive verb), or ”animals are food”. </p>

<p>What role does the <em>li</em> actually have in this phrase? </p>

<grammar><toki-pona>
What is the word “li” in Toki pona, grammatically?
# What is the word “li” in Toki pona, grammatically?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2018-02-22)

In Toki pona, words are never inflected, and many words can act as a noun, verb or adjective in different contexts. The word "li" usually separates the subject from a predicate, and “e” goes before the object (in SVO order). With soweli (animal), moku (eat, food) and kili (fruit), one can say:

> soweli li moku e kili

The animal eats the fruit.

This is the usage listed in the dictionary section of the official book, Toki Pona: the Language of Good:

> li. PARTICLE (between any subject except *mi* alone or *sina* alone and its verb; also to introduce a new verb for the same subject)

But there is **another** usage, as seen in phrase:

> soweli li ijo

Animals are things (*ijo* means thing).

It seems that this usage increases the ambiguity, because

> soweli li moku

can mean both ”The animal is eating” (with moku as an intransitive verb), or ”animals are food”.

What role does the *li* actually have in this phrase?

**Tags:** grammar, toki-pona


---

## 5 answers

### Answer by username_7 on 2018-02-22. Score: 6 | Accepted answer

*Li* in these examples could be described as a [copula](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copula_(linguistics)) - this is the name for a word whose function is to link a subject and predicate.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: I guess the lack of an explicit verb for “to be” is what makes this confusing. Are you saying li is a copula both when it means ”animals are eating” and ”animals are food”? In the first case, li goes between the subject and verb, in the second case there is no visible verb, just “animal li food” - it's more like in this case, li means “to be”? Or is it maybe “moku” that goes from meaning “eating” to mean ”be food”, rather than just “food”?  
> **username_7**: "To be" does function as a copula in English (among other things), but I would not say that this means *li* means "to be", as it is not a verb and is not used in the same ways. Many languages lack a verb for "to be", and Toki Pona is one of them. However, it serves a similar function when in a NOUN = NOUN context.  

---

### Answer by username_1 on 2019-07-05. Score: 7

Calling `li` a *particle* or *predicate marker* is correct and not misleading. A Toki Pona clause can have more than one predicate. `li` never marks a non-predicate. It also appears on every predicate except when that predicate *is the first one in the clause and the subject is* exactly *`mi` or* exactly *`sina`* (101) or when preceded by the vocative/imperative particle `o` (102).

I think a good way to analyze this would be to say that every indicative predicate obligatorily has a predicate marker, but sometimes it's null.

```
mi  moku  li   pakala. (101)
I   food  LI  mistake.
I eat and destroy.

o   lukin     e    ni. (102)
IMP   see  DObj  that.
watch this.

```

Here's a fragment of (my best guess of) the Toki Pona grammar. I haven't seen any examples of stacking imperative phrases, so I don't know whether *look and say* would be `o lukin li toki` or `o lukin o toki`.

Also, in Toki Pona verb phrases and noun phrases are different syntactically. For instance, `*sina moku e soweli ala soweli.` cannot be used to mean *are you a vegetarian*.

```
LI        := 0 | "li"
PredInd   := LI VP {PP} | LI NP
ClauseInd := NP [PredInd]
PredImp   := "o" VP {PP} | "o" NP
ClauseImp := NP PredImp | PredImp

```

I'm not thrilled with this analysis because of the asymmetry between indicative and imperative clauses. Unifying the clause types, however, would predict that `*li moku.` is valid. As far as I can tell, Toki Pona does not permit null subjects in indicative clauses.

I can think of two potential alternative analyses for `li`: A) it's a pronoun (like in Example 4 Longgu [on this WALS article](https://wals.info/chapter/101) or B) it's a preposition. I'll try to show that both of those analyses lead to bad predictions.

A) `li` as pronoun.

This falls apart for a couple of reasons. It predicts that `mi moku li pakala` would be invalid and that the correct form would be `mi moku mi pakala`. In reality, both forms are fine.

`li` as a pronoun also predicts that `*li moku` would be valid since it would contain an explicit subject under that analysis.

Also, `*mi moku li.` cannot be used to mean *I eat it*.

B) `li` as preposition.

If `li` were a preposition, (103) and (104) would both be valid.

```
Mi pakala e moku. (103)
I ruin the food.

*Mi e moku li pakala. (104)
*I ruin the food.

```

If `li` were a preposition, the following would be invalid.

```
Ona mute li toki ala toki? (105)
Are they speaking?

```


---

### Answer by username_2 on 2018-03-01. Score: 6

Mapping word class jargon from one language to another is a dicy project. Lojbanists decided that they needed to invent entirely new words for word class jargon. That said...

All the toki pona particles (o, li, e, pi, la) act most similar to Japanese particles or English clitics, eg. "the". Clitics bind to a phrase. There are other [tests for what counts as a clitic.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clitic)

They are semantically bleached, do not act like *content* words. "li" in particular introduces a noun phrase or a verb phrase.


---

### Answer by username_3 on 2018-09-28. Score: 3

The syntactical li structure was inspired by Toki Pisin ...

and in an online Tok Pisin grammar I found :

[...] Tok Pisin has its own grammatical rules.

First of all, look at the following sentences:

Mi wok. 'I worked.'
Yu wok. 'You worked.'
Em i wok. 'He/she worked.'
Tom i wok. 'Tom worked.'

Note that the last two sentences have the little word i before the verb. (Remember that in Tok Pisin, i is pronounced something like "ee".) This little word is called a "predicate marker", and it must occur in a sentence when subject is em or a noun (like "Tom" or "the bicycle"). This rule is certainly different from anything found in English.

<http://www.hawaii.edu/satocenter/langnet/definitions/tokpisin.html>

So I presume that 'li' is also a "predicate marker" ...

> **Comments:**
> **username_4**: I hope participants here need not be told to pronounce the letter ‹i› as IPA /i/ by default!  
> **username_5**: I'd guess that *i* marker evolved from English 3rd person pronouns? Of course, that doesn't mean it's still a pronoun in Tok Pisin, since reanalysis is very much a thing in language evolution.  

---

### Answer by username_6 on 2020-02-27. Score: 0

In some sentences it's a lot like 'は' in Japanese 'タナカさん**は**先生です' Mr Tanaka **is** a teacher. The toki pona equivalent would be 'jan Tanaka **li** jan pi pana sona'.


---

