1. Evidentiality in typological perspective

Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y.

doi:10.1075/tsl.54.04aik

Cited by 173 publications

(122 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Implícita nessa visão é a noção de hierarquização das categorias de forma que: evidência direta > evidência indireta, evidência primeira-mão > informação relatada, evidência visual > outros tipos de evidência sensorial (Willett, 1988;Barnes, 1984). Por outro lado, há autores que defendem a 'neutralidade' dos evidenciais com relação a valores epistêmicos, e afirmam que evidência e certeza são campos semânticos distintos (de Haan, 1999;Aikhenvald, 2003;2004a). Há ainda quem propõe uma reavaliação completa dos conceitos de modalidade epistêmica e do papel dos evidenciais na codificação de proposições (Givón, 1982;, enquanto outros procuram entender a relação entre evidencialidade e valores epistêmicos por via de conceitos como dêixis (Gomes-Imbert, 1999;Floyd, 1999;de Haan, 2001a).…”

Section: Considerações Finaisunclassified

“…No decorrer desse debate, têm surgido novas descrições de línguas, análises do funcionamento e organização de sistemas de evidencialidade que mostram que afirmações 'a priori' quanto à semântica de categorias de evidencialidade não são possíveis. Estudos comparativos como os de Chafe e Nichols (1986) e de Aikhenvald (2003;2004b) nos mostram tendências, mas cada língua revela uma organização própria das relações entre essas categorias e um conjunto de meios utilizados para codificá-las.…”

Section: Considerações Finaisunclassified

“…A evidencialidade é uma categoria gramatical que indica a fonte de informação na qual o falante baseia uma afirmação (Chafe e Nichols, 1986;Aikhenvald, 2003). Tipologicamente, a evidencialidade é uma categoria relativamente rara e que tende a ocorrer como traço areal em algumas poucas regiões geográficas 2 .…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

See 2 more Smart Citations

As categorias de evidencialidade em Wanano (Tukano Oriental)

Stenzel

2012

LIAMES: Ling. Indig. Am.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper describes the complex and typologically interesting evidential system in Wanano, one of the sixteen languages of the Eastern Tukanoan family spoken in northwest Amazonia. Wanano verb morphology is quite complex and includes obligatory verb-final marking of clause modality, organized into four major categories by which statements, questions, and 'oriented' utterances are grammatically marked. The most complex sub-system of clause modality is the evidential system, which marks (primarily) realis statements. The paper explores the core semantics-linked to source of evidence-of each of the five evidential categories: HEARSAY (RELATADA), VISUAL, NON (NÃO)-VISUAL, INFERENCE (INFERÊNCIA), and ASSERTION (SUPOSIÇÃO). It also explores instances which show the extended use of evidentials to code other types of situations as well as areas of semantic overlap. It also outlines questions related to the relationship between evidentials and epistemic values, and to the relationship between evidentiality and the notions of realis/irrealis. It shows that Wanano evidential categories display sensitivity to scalar values of speaker commitment and that certain evidential categories span the frontier between the spheres of realis/irrealis. KEYWORDS: Eastern Tukanoan languages; Evidentiality; Typology of evidential systems; Epistemic modality. RESUMO:Este artigo descreve o sistema de marcação da evidencialidade, complexo e tipologicamente interessante, do Wanano, uma das dezesseis línguas da família Tukano Oriental, faladas no noroeste amazônico. A morfologia verbal em Wanano é bastante rica e inclui marcação obrigatória de modalidade oracional, organizada em quatro categorias principais pelas quais afirmações, perguntas e falas 'orientadas' são gramaticalmente indicadas. O subsistema de modalidade oracional mais complexo é o sistema de evidencialidade, que marca (primariamente) afirmações no modo realis. Minha análise explora a semântica básica -baseada em fonte de informação/evidência -das cinco categorias de evidencialidade: RELATADA, VISUAL, NÃO-VISUAL, INFERÊNCIA e SUPOSIÇÃO. Exemplifica, também, as extensões semânticas de algumas categorias a outras situações e aponta áreas de sobreposição semântica. Coloca questões ligadas à relação entre marcação de evidencialidade e a expressão de valores epistêmicos, bem como à relação entre a marcação de evidencialidade e os conceitos de realis/irrealis. Mostra que as categorias de evidencialidade em Wanano exprimem valores epistêmicos e que uma das categorias ocupa um território de fronteira entre os domínios do realis e do irrealis. PALAVRAS-CHAVE: Família lingüística Tukano Oriental; Evidencialidade; Tipologia de sistemas de evidenciais; Modalidade epistêmica.

show abstract

Section: Considerações Finaisunclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation

As categorias de evidencialidade em Wanano (Tukano Oriental)

Stenzel

2012

LIAMES: Ling. Indig. Am.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The morphological elements that qualify truth commitments as regards the nature of the evidence are called EVIDENTIALS or EVIDENTIAL MARKERS. The corresponding semantic category is generally called EVIDENTIALITY (Aikhenvald 2003: 1). Aikhenvald's (2003) typological survey shows that in languages which have them, evidentials tend to choose their semantic load from the subcategories of ± EYEWITNESS, ± REPORTED, ± INFERRED, in various combinations and sometimes with further subdistinctions.…”

Section: The Notion Of Evidentialitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Semantic conditioning of syntactic rules: evidentiality and auxiliation in English and Dutch

Seuren

Hamans²

2009

Flin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ever since the category of evidentiality has been identified in the verbal grammar of certain languages, it has been assumed that evidentiality plays no role in the grammars of those languages that have not incorporated it into their verb morphology or at least their verb clusters. The present paper attempts to show that even if evidentiality is not visible in the verbal grammar of English and Dutch, it appears to be a motivating factor, both historically and synchronically, in the process whereby evidential predicates are made to play a subordinate syntactic role with regard to their embedded subject clause. This process, known as AUXILIATION (Kuteva, Auxiliation: an enquiry into the nature of grammaticalization, Oxford University Press, 2001), appears to manifest itself in a variety of, often successive, grammatical processes or rules, such as Subject-to-Subject Raising (the subject of the embedded clause becomes the subject of the main verb, as in John is likely to be late), V-ING (as in The man stopped breathing), Incorporation-by-Lowering (the evidential main verb is lowered on to the V-constituent of the embedded subject clause, as in John may have left), or Incorporation-by-Raising (also known as Predicate Raising), not or hardly attested in English but dominant in Dutch. A list is provided of those English (and Dutch) predicates that induce one of the above-mentioned auxiliation rules and it is checked how many of those have an evidential meaning. This is set off against evidential predicates that do not induce an auxiliation rule. It results that, for English and Dutch, lexical evidentiality is a powerful determinant for the induction of syntactic auxiliation.

show abstract

“…Hence, when using ʁadɪ, the speaker casts doubt on the whole content of his/her utterance. Following Aikhenvald (2003) and Alhaisoni, et al (2011), among many others, it can be suggested that this particle is an evidential particle. Consider the difference in meaning between sentence (1) (without ʁadɪ) and sentence (2) (with ʁadɪ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pragmatic Analysis of the Particle ʁadɪ in Najdi Arabic

Alshamari¹

2015

IJL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ultimate goal of this paper is to investigate the pragmatic use of the particle ʁadɪ in Najdi Arabic. To do just this, both Grice's Theory of Conversation and the Relevance Theory (RT) are used. In addition to indicating the speaker's personal certainty of his/her utterance, ʁadɪ is assumed to encode the speaker's lack of positive evidence to confirm the propositional content of his/her utterance, nonetheless. For Grice, ʁadɪ generates an implicature due to flouting the maxim of Quality 'Try to make your contribution one that is true'. As a result, the hearer does not repose the speaker's confidence of his/her utterance. Differently, for RT, ʁadɪ manifests a procedural meaning. This type of meaning guides the hearer not to rely heavily on the speaker's own certainty which is, in principle, driven by anecdotal (nor conclusive) evidence. Additionally, this paper concludes that ʁadɪ fares better within the general framework of RT which provides a more robust account of its semantic import and pragmatic usage.

show abstract

1. Evidentiality in typological perspective

Cited by 173 publications

References 0 publications

As categorias de evidencialidade em Wanano (Tukano Oriental)

As categorias de evidencialidade em Wanano (Tukano Oriental)

Semantic conditioning of syntactic rules: evidentiality and auxiliation in English and Dutch

Pragmatic Analysis of the Particle ʁadɪ in Najdi Arabic

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About