This paper argues that evidential clitics in St'át'imcets (a.k.a. Lillooet; Northern Interior Salish) introduce quantification over possible worlds and must be analyzed as epistemic modals. We thus add to the growing body of evidence suggesting that the functions of encoding information source and encoding epistemic modality are not necessarily distinct. However, St'át'imcets evidentials differ from English modal auxiliaries not only in that the former explicitly encode the source of the speaker's evidence, but also in that they do not encode differences in quantificational force. We therefore argue that distinguishing quantificational strength is not an intrinsic property of modal elements.With respect to the syntax-semantics interface, we argue on the basis of data from St'át'imcets against attempts to establish a universally fixed position for evidentials in the functional hierarchy. We conclude that evidentiality is not a homogeneous category, either semantically or syntactically. On the semantic side, cross-linguistically and even * We are very grateful to St'át'imcets consultants Gertrude Ned, Laura Thevarge, Rose Agnes Whitley and the late Beverley Frank. We are also very grateful to Rose-Marie Déchaine, Martina

Modals in St'át'imcets (Lillooet Salish) show two differences from their counterparts in English. First, they show variable quantificational force, systematically allowing both possibility and necessity interpretations; and second, they lexically restrict the conversational background, distinguishing between deontic and (several kinds of) epistemic modality. We provide an analysis of the St'át'imcets modals according to which they are akin to specific indefinites in the nominal domain. They introduce free choice function variables which select a subset of the accessible worlds. Following Klinedinst (2005), we assume distributivity over the resulting set of worlds. St'át'imcets modals thus receive a uniform interpretation as (distributive) pluralities. The appearance of variability in modal force arises because the choice function can select a larger or smaller subset of accessible worlds. Finally, we discuss the implications of our analysis for the status of evidentials as epistemic modals, and for the analysis of modals in languages such as English. * We are very grateful to St'át'imcets consultants Laura Thevarge, Gertrude Ned Rose Agnes Whitley, and the late Beverley Frank, who passed away during the writing of this paper, and to whose memory we dedicate it. We are also indebted to

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract