Tibetan Colloquial Disclaimer
Link to originalCAUTION
Those are my personal summarized notes on the great work done by Franziska Oertle and the SINI Sarnath International Nyingma Institute. They are not revised by teachers and I might have understood the material incorrectly. Also you will miss on the examples to illustrate the grammar points. Therefore they are not intended to be read on its own since it might confuse you. Some notes might not even be officially part of the material but reflections from our meetings!
Summary Table
Find a distilled table in Tibetan Table Auxiliaries of Probability
In Tibetan: ཐེ་ཚོམ་གྱི་ཚིག་གྲོགས།
They are ས་རེད་། པ་འདྲ། གི་རེད། འགྲོའོ།, and they are attached to auxiliaries or non-verbs.
Stay aware about translating ཡོད་ས་རེད། as must in the sense of having a strong speculation about the case (most → most probably), not in must as an obligation modal verb.
གཏན་གཏན་ can be used to express you are sure: དེ་རིང་དགོང་དག་གཏན་གཏན་ངལ་གསོ་རྒྱག་གི་ཡིན།
Agreed by Lhakpa Tsering and my Tutor Migmar Chödon and another my tutor) there seems to be a kind of rule set for selecting them:
| Auxiliary | When |
|---|---|
| ཡོད་ས་རེད། | No direct proof. When you don’t have any direct observation proof, just thinking, projecting, guessing, assuming, and are not sure at all. Based on reason. Tournadre says any formed with ་་་རེད། so that might include གི་རེད། |
| ཡོད་པ་འདྲ། | Direct proof. You are almost sure, you have some evidence that gave you the intuition for your guess so it’s not baseless. Tournadre says any formed ་་་འདྲ།. |
| འགྲོའོ། ཡིན་འགྲོའི། | Proof from observation, a guess from perception. E.g. you see someone among the crowd and say “Oh, he might be Tashi!“. |
Franziska Opposes
She says that ཡོད་ས་རེད། or པ་འདྲ། usually expresses you have a bit more certainty than གི་རེད། or འགྲོའོ།. Therefore གི་རེད། or འགྲོའོ། is would be mere guessing.
Using both verbs and auxiliaries together is OK. There’s no hard rule but they are used very often specially in the future tense and specially with non-volitional.
There are really no hard-wired rules, but based on observation let’s define some.
RULE 1: You don’t use the auxiliaries of probability for yourself with volitional verbs, only when speculating about others. In the case of speculating about yourself, then better use adverbs. When speculating about others you can use either auxiliaries, adverbs or both.
Adverbs:
- གཅིག་བྱས་ན། (most popular)
- ཕལ་ཆེར།
- ཧ་ལམ།
RULE 2: You can use the auxiliaries of probability for yourself with non-volitional verbs. The regular auxiliaries you would choose would be གཞན། side of the table, so that allows us also to use the probability ones. No need for the adverbs, but you can add them.
RULE 3: As an exception to RULE 1, in certain cases you can use the auxiliaries of probability for yourself with volitional verb. You do it if you don’t quite remember.
In questions it’s not common to use auxiliaries of probability… A question already is asked because it’s not sure… The only one it might work is ཡོད་ས་རེད། ཡོད་ས་མ་རེད། and not in all situations. The ཡོད་ས་རེད་པ། ཡོད་ས་མ་རེད་པ། works easier!
- ❌ ཁྱེ་ས་ཨ་མ་ལགས་ཚོང་ཁང་ལ་ཕེབས་ཡོད་ཀྱི་རེད་པས།
- ❌ ཁོང་ཚོ་ལ་སྤུ་གུ་གསུམ་ཡོད་པ་འདྲ་པས།
- ❌ མ་བྱན་ལགས་ཀྱིས་རྒྱ་གར་ཁ་ལག་བཟོ་གི་ཡོད་འདྲོའོ་པས་།
The only case it would be with ས་མ་རེད་པས། in sentences like:
- ✅ ཁྱེད་རང་ལས་ཀ་དཀའ་ལས་ཁག་པོ་འདི་འདྲས་བྱེད་ཐུབ་ས་རེད་པས། བྱེད་ཐུབ་ས་མ་རེད། Are you maybe able to do this difficult work? I might be able to do it.
- ✅ ཁོང་གི་ཁྱོ་ག་ཉེན་རྟོག་པ་ཡིན་ས་རེད་པ། (པས། sounds stranger) His/her husband is probably a police man/woman, right?
- ✅ ཁོང་ཚོ་ལ་གླ་ཆ་མང་པོ་ཡོད་ས་མ་རེད་པས། Maybe they don’t have a lot of salary?
In imaginary scenarios ས་རེད། (the short form of probability ་་་ཡག་ཡིན་ས་རེད།) would be translated as “would”: གལ་སྲིད་ང་ལ་གཤོག་པ་ཡོད་ན་ཁྱེད་རང་ལེན་གར་ད་ལྟ་ཡོང་ས་རེད།