2015
DOI: 10.1515/lingty-2015-0007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Characterizing evidentiality

Abstract: This article examines theoretical and typological characterizations of evidentials. Based on the literature and newly analyzed data from Karuk (a Native American language of California), we argue that two properties are criterial: (i) marking source of evidence and (ii) membership in grammatical systems. Other properties vary crosslinguistically: presence of epistemic, illocutionary, or mirative meaning; speaker deixis; obligatoriness; complementarity of meaning with other items; and truth-conditionality. The … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0
3

Year Published

2017
2017
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
0
6
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…AnderBois, 2014; Hengeveld and Hattnher, 2015). Despite the many differences between the meaning of evidential morphemes in languages in which the category has grammaticalised, Brugman and Macaulay (2015) find that the presence of a 'source' is the only semantic property that all descriptions of evidentiality in the literature have in common. This function is reflected in the definition in (24).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…AnderBois, 2014; Hengeveld and Hattnher, 2015). Despite the many differences between the meaning of evidential morphemes in languages in which the category has grammaticalised, Brugman and Macaulay (2015) find that the presence of a 'source' is the only semantic property that all descriptions of evidentiality in the literature have in common. This function is reflected in the definition in (24).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Tuparí -pnẽ/-psira meets the core criteria expected of evidentials on the approaches of Aikhenvald (2018) or Brugman and Macaulay (2015). It is a bound morpheme whose height in the syntactic spine is absolutely fixed.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…This article follows much typological and formal work by defining evidentiality as the grammaticalized marking of the source of information that the speaker has for making a statement (see Jakobson 1957Jakobson /1971Chafe and Nichols 1986;Willett 1988;Aikhenvald 2004Aikhenvald , 2018Brugman and Macaulay 2015;Murray 2017, among others). As those authors note (see especially the recent work by Aikhenvald and by Brugman and Macaulay), this definition includes two key components.…”
Section: Background On Evidentialitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, it has long been known that evidential morphology can also represent nonspeaker perspectives. For example, questions typically take the evidential perspective of the addressee (Aikhenvald, 2004;San Roque, Floyd, & Norcliffe, 2017), while third person narratives may be at least partly told from the evidential perspective of a central protagonist (see examples in Brugman & Macaulay, 2015). Certain languages appear to have taken this ability to represent the evidence of others a step further, and encode not one but two evidential perspectives simultaneously: that of both the speaker and the hearer.…”
Section: Engagement Evidence and Other Epistemic Categoriesmentioning
confidence: 99%