second-person-subject interrogative sentences, and the speaker's conjecture otherwise. may also have a future-tense interpretation. can only be followed by a small number of suffixes in Yang C., Yang S., and O'Grady 2019's analysis. Some analyses treat the initial vowel of the following suffix as part of an allomorph or nuanced variant of , so that "[I] will go" may be segmented as or . The realis or indicative mood marker indicates "a fact or habitual action in the nonpast" which the speaker perceives to be true in general, permanently, or over a longer duration of time, as demonstrated in the contrast below. The putative non-past-tense marker may also be analyzed as an allomorph of . In this context, the morpheme has also been interpreted as a perfect marker (not to be confused with the perfective marker). The existence of the Korean subject-honorific marker is controversial for Jeju, with some scholars arguing that it was entirely absent and others that it was restricted to higher registers. Ko J. 2011b notes that it was used only "by officials while referring to people of very high status and by the seonbi of the educated classes." Segmenting verb-final suffixes The segmentation of verb-final elements is controversial. The two recent extensive treatments of the topic, Yang C., Yang S., and O'Grady 2019 and Kim Jee-hong 2015, give incompatible analyses of the suffix paradigm. Yang C., Yang S., and O'Grady 2019 includes a slot for tense in the Jeju verb, with three dedicated markers. Non-past tense: Past tense: , with vowel-harmonic allomorph Future tense: They further divide verb-final suffixes into three categories: Type 1, which cannot occur with tense markers; Type 2, which must occur with either a tense marker or the aspect marker , which loses its underlying before a Type 2 suffix; and a mixed type, which can occur with the non-past marker but not with the other two tense markers. The vast majority of suffixes are categorized as Tense 1 and thus cannot follow a tense marker. Uniquely among pre-final suffixes, the past tense marker can also appear without a final suffix. Examples of Yang C., Yang S., and O'Grady 2019's segmentation are given below. In Kim Jee-hong's analysis, verb-final single morphemes are termed "canonical endings." Canonical endings are contrasted with a wide variety of "non-canonical endings," formed by the fusion of various grammatical elements such as multiple canonical endings, truncated conjunctive and