Original grammar post

There are egophoric markers tu (< *tβɯˠ < *otaɣẽ; cf. V'eng tag) and çwi, perfective and imperfective respectively. These are descended from mildly irregular first-person-marked forms of the aspectual copulas: one of the oldest isoglosses in Hluic is the shift of pretonic o- to -β-, and Hlu itself is spoken just to the west of the dividing line. These particles take the second position in the phrase, but may fuse with the verb when appearing directly before it.

For example:

gwiʔ tw-ɤ-ɲɤm. yu tu-nɤ-ɲɤm ɤŋ
1S EGO-PST-drink. 2S EGO-2\PST-drink or
I drank. Did you drink?

gwiʔ tu βuya ɤ-ɲɤm. yu tu βuya nɤ-ɲɤm ɤŋ
1S EGO beer PST-drink. 2S EGO beer 2\PST-drink or

yæ çwi ɠeʄæɬ ɗɯ-la
house EGO.IPFV Gejaehl be_in-3
My house is on Gejaehl.

yæ ɠeʄæɬ ʄa (ɗi-a)
house Gejaehl be_in\PL-3
There are houses on Gejaehl.

(Etymological notes:

(Final -t becomes a glottal stop after fronting preceding vowels, after which -s > -t. This makes inalienably possessed nouns somewhat irregular because syllabification: ɓweʔ-yu 'your penis' but ɓoɗæʔ 'my penis'. This doesn't happen with verbs, however.)

Hlu preserves the second-person prefix n-, but has lost and reinnovated all other person-number marking by grafting pronouns onto the verb. (This is drawn from Tangut.)

The first-person marker -æʔ can't coexist with the egophoric particles, so it generally only appears in questions: (note the absence of the past tense marker; this is because of the adverb. tense is ~relative)

ⁿgwiʔ niⁿjwiɠa ɲɤm-æʔ ɤŋ
1S yesterday(ADV) drink-1S
Did I drink yesterday?

Or involuntary actions, which don't take egophoricity:

ⁿgwi yi ɓoɗæʔ ⁿdo hɤk-æʔ
1S because my_penis enormous trip-1S
I just tripped over my enormous penis.

Cf. (note the fusion of tu and yi — these fusional forms exist for many prepositions)

ⁿgwi twi ɓweʔyu ⁿdo çɤk
1S EGO-because your_penis enormous FUT\trip
I will (intentionally) trip over your enormous penis.

Or, in the second person:
yu yi ɓoɗæʔ ⁿdo n-ɤk-u
2S because my_penis enormous 2-trip-2S
You just tripped over my enormous penis.

(Etymological notes:

The history of the third-person pronouns is complicated. Hluic preserves the old semidistal demonstrative *ʔati > *ʔði, which compounded with *tengaCV and *hamatsi > *tŋa, *hmas to produce the gendered animate pronouns...

ʔði e tŋa > lyekŋa > yɤʔŋa
ʔði e hmas > lyehmas > yehmaɬ

ð > l is regular, ly > y is regular, place assimilation in PN clusters is regular. PN clusters usually become plain nasals in Hlu, but in some other Hluic languages they become geminate plosives, e.g. pre-Gyitha ʔðyekka. In some dialects these are compressed further, to yŋa yhmaɬ.

The third-person marker is -a for verbs that end in a consonant. For verbs that end in a vowel, -i -u -e -o become -ya -wa and low vowels take epenthetic -l-. As usual, this is reused for inalienable possession. Verbs that end in -ɯ and -ɤ (which are always singular) used to take zero-marked third person, but -la has spread by analogy.

Immediate future and far future are distinct. Far future is <y>, immediate future is... a verb that got grafted onto the complex, let's go with li. This means it also takes the person marking — and remember, ly > y, so for third-person subjects it's ya-.

ⁿgwi tu yɤʔŋa li-ɓæ
1S EGO 3S.M IMF-fuck
I am going to fuck him.

yɤʔŋa kwɤ-la ɗɯ-la ya-ɓæ-la ɤŋ
3S.M ass-3 in-3 IMF.3-fuck-3 or
Are you going to fuck him/her in the ass?

Alternatively, the adpositional phrase can be incorporated, in which case it doesn't take as much person marking; but since the object isn't specified by the possession marking, it has to be made overt:

yɤʔŋa yehmaɬ ɗɯ-kwɤ-li-ɓæ-la ɤŋ
3S.M 3S.F in-ass-IMF-fuck-3 or
Are you going to fuck her in the ass?

The sentence yɤʔŋa ɗɯkwɤɓæla ɤŋ would be interpreted as having a dropped subject: "Are you going to fuck him in the ass?"

(Note that the positions of the noun and the adposition are reversed. This is due to the particulars of serial verb chains and word order in Hathic, although it would be slightly more complicated there. Hluic has Hathic influence, but it doesn't have the mess of focus particles that Hathic does, and doesn't use these chains as extensively. In Hlu, unlike in Gyitha, agglutinative compounding derived from serial verb chains being reinterpreted as one unit isn't obligatory, so either yɤʔŋa kwɤla ɗɯla yaɓæla ɤŋ or yɤʔŋa yehmaɬ ɗɯkwɤɓæla ɤŋ are acceptable; Gyitha doesn't allow the cognate of the first construction.)

In some cases, Hlu preserves plural marking, descended from Proto-Yia -i.

Verbs ending in -k -w -ŋ mutate to end in -c -y -ɲ, with various effects on the vowels: (note the secundative syntax)

ⁿgwiʔ tu tʰuk
1SG EGO run
I am running.

ŋæʔ tu tʰuc
1PL.EXCL EGO run\PL
We are running.

ⁿgwiʔ tu kɯw
1SG EGO swim
I am swimming.

ŋæʔ tu kwi
1PL.EXCL EGO swim\PL
We are swimming.

In some cases, this also causes ablaut:

ⁿgwiʔ çwi ɬɤŋ
1SG EGO.IPFV ferment_a_beverage
I ferment beverages.

ŋæʔ çwi ɬiɲ
1PL.EXCL EGO.IPFV ferment_a_beverage
We ferment beverages.

-ɤ- can become either -i- or -u-. -a- becomes -ɤ-. Most velarized vowel irregularities have been analogized out, but here's one that hasn't:

tʰowæʔ ya çwi yiw ɗæ
hand-1.POSS INSTR EGO.IPFV brick break
I break bricks with my hands.

tʰowæʔ ya çwi yiw ɗi
hand-1.POSS INSTR EGO.IPFV brick break
We break bricks with our hands.

(Etymological notes: