Part 3: Signs (ke)

ke marks the claim your reasoning reached from evidence your senses gathered. It is the working evidential of daily life, because most of what anyone "knows" arrived exactly this way: through traces, patterns, and absences. The manual (ch16) owns the definition; the skill here is the two-sentence habit.

The two-sentence habit

The elder at the well does not just conclude. The elder shows the work:

suliwa ke nai. mia suliwa ma nila. mia ruela mua muila nila.
snake INFER be. 1SG snake NEG see. 1SG path LOC earth see.
(There is a snake — I infer it. I do not see the snake. I see the trail in the earth.)

Claim with ke, then evidence unmarked. This is the pattern to drill until it is a reflex, because it is what makes ke conversationally complete: a ke claim invites the question what did you see?, and a good speaker answers it before it is asked. The manual's dispute scene runs on exactly this exchange: thia hina ke nila. (what did you infer from?) is a real question in Phi, and having an answer ready is part of what the particle means.

Absence is evidence too

Inference does not need a positive trace. The missing thing is a sign like any other:

melu to ke wepu. mia shia wiru ma nila.
friend PST INFER go. 1SG 3SG basket NEG see.
(The friend has left — I infer. I do not see her basket.)

Cultivate this pair shape with different absences: no light, no voice, no footprints, an unwatered garden. The reasoning stays honest as long as the absence is truly observed and the leap is truly acknowledged.

The hi/ke boundary, drilled

The boundary rule from Part 2: sense meets event → hi; sense meets trace, mind meets event → ke. Boundary cases build judgment:

mia pheralu hi hea.
1SG rain DIR hear.
(I hear the rain — hearing counts; the event itself is meeting my ears.)

pheralu to ke lepa. muila lue phialu nai.
rain PST INFER fall. earth ABL water be.
(It rained — I infer. The ground is wet.)

Hearing rain on the roof is witness: sound is the event's own body. Wet ground an hour later is inference. Between them lies a gradient every speaker walks daily; the particles do not remove the judgment, they record it.

Drill: mark the claim, not the evidence

Each item gives a perception and a conclusion. Produce two Phi sentences: the conclusion marked ke, the perception unmarked. Answers below.

1. The soup pot is empty → the household has eaten.
2. The dog is at the door, ears up → someone comes.
3. The garden earth is turned → the elder worked this morning.
4. Your friend's eyes are heavy → she is weary.

Answers (one good version each; yours may differ in vocabulary, not in placement):

1. lo mia to ke nuola. mia mua tomi mawha sulopa nila.
   PL 1SG PST INFER eat. 1SG LOC pot NONE soup see.
   (We have eaten — I infer. I see no soup in the pot.)

2. miona ke shua. lohau mua ponu nai.
   person INFER come. dog LOC door be.
   (Someone comes — I infer. The dog is at the door.)

3. wheo sui kelua to ke riola. muila to se helui.
   elder DURING morning PST INFER labor. earth PST PASS change.
   (The elder worked during the morning — I infer. The earth was turned.)

4. thia ke shorui nai.
   2SG INFER weary be.
   (You must be weary — I can see it.)

Item 4 has no second sentence, and that is a lesson in itself: when the evidence is the other person's own face, saying it aloud can be an intrusion. ke alone does the honest work: it admits the reading without conducting the examination in public. Part 5 returns to this courtesy from the other side.