54. Seven-ish Evidentials From My Thought-Language
(Epistemic status: A linguistic study. Still not real, but also still the kind of not-real that's real.)
[Language] has a rich set of evidentials to express how a speaker came by a piece of information, and while the use of evidentials isn't technically obligatory, their lack is notable and at least a little suspicious. While like other languages [Language] marks evidentiality through an affix to the verb or stative, unlike most evidential-bearing languages like Turkish, Aymara, Dagestanian, Tibetan, and Bulgarian, [Language] has numerous evidential classes, categorizes evidentiality differently, combines mirativity with a couple of the evidential classes, and permits the use of explicit numerical parameters in evidentials when appropriate. Its use of evidentials is closest to Lojban's use, though the resemblance is only moderate. We list the most commonly-used ones.
1. Direct perception. This can be sight, hearing, smell, or any other variety of direct sensory perception; [Language] draws no particular distinction. e.g.: "He [left], as I saw." or "Fire [was burning], as I smelled."
2. Inference. This indicates that while direct perception didn't suffice to know the claim to be true, nonetheless ordinary common sense lead the speaker to a reasonable or obvious-seeming conclusion. e.g.:"Well, he's not at the party anymore, so he [must have left]." or "From the glowing coals and warm ashes, there [must have been] a campfire here recently."
3. Secondhand accounts and quotatives. This indicates that the speaker did not personally perceive or infer the claim, but rather that another person conveyed it to them. For quotatives especially, affixes for other evidentials affix after the quotative evidential. e.g.: "The bus already [left], or at least that's what the ticket stand worker told me." or "He said, 'They'll be fine - I saw that they already [ate] an hour ago.'" For hearsay and quotative evidentials, a phonological (usually vowel) shift marks the speaker's degree of trust in the conveyed information. e.g.: "The bus already [left], or so says the (trustworthy) ticket stand worker." vs "The bus already [left], but who knows whether that guy who told me that actually knows that."
4. Mathematical proof or solid deduction. Technically, this evidential is only for use with mathematical or propositional proof, but lay usage has extended it to extremely reliable deductions. e.g.: "Therefore, [there exists] no field of order 12.", "Thus, Socrates [is] mortal.", or (slightly spuriously) "The drive over takes at least half an hour, and he left ten minutes before the event started, so he['ll be late]."
5. Direct revelation - dreams and visions. A relatively rarely-used evidential, its most common uses are fiction, historical literature, and the sourceless "knowledge" one often has in dreams. e.g.: "The prophet cried out, 'the stars [are] right!'." or "In the dream, I somehow [recognized] her as my sister, but also as a friend from high school I'd lost touch with."
6. Best guesses. The speaker might have any or none of the other sources of knowledge listed here, and has synthesized them into a best guess at the truth without knowing for sure. Unusual both in that in the past tense or perfective aspect, this becomes a mirative (a surprise-marking affix), and that unlike the other categories, an explicit numerical value (usually) strictly between 0 and 1 - or an equivalent - is required as part of the evidential - to decline is ungrammatical. e.g.: "I [claim] (75%) that lunch today will be tomato soup." or "Wow, I [hadn't expected] (3%) the Green Team to pull out a win there." To use 0 or 1 is poor form.
7. Doxa; nebulous culturally or socially conveyed information or best practices. In "when in Rome, do as the Romans [do]", the second "do" takes this affix. e.g.: "Wearing shoes in the house [isn't] allowed." or "[It's] fine to touch other people here."
[Language] has a rich set of evidentials to express how a speaker came by a piece of information, and while the use of evidentials isn't technically obligatory, their lack is notable and at least a little suspicious. While like other languages [Language] marks evidentiality through an affix to the verb or stative, unlike most evidential-bearing languages like Turkish, Aymara, Dagestanian, Tibetan, and Bulgarian, [Language] has numerous evidential classes, categorizes evidentiality differently, combines mirativity with a couple of the evidential classes, and permits the use of explicit numerical parameters in evidentials when appropriate. Its use of evidentials is closest to Lojban's use, though the resemblance is only moderate. We list the most commonly-used ones.
1. Direct perception. This can be sight, hearing, smell, or any other variety of direct sensory perception; [Language] draws no particular distinction. e.g.: "He [left], as I saw." or "Fire [was burning], as I smelled."
2. Inference. This indicates that while direct perception didn't suffice to know the claim to be true, nonetheless ordinary common sense lead the speaker to a reasonable or obvious-seeming conclusion. e.g.:"Well, he's not at the party anymore, so he [must have left]." or "From the glowing coals and warm ashes, there [must have been] a campfire here recently."
3. Secondhand accounts and quotatives. This indicates that the speaker did not personally perceive or infer the claim, but rather that another person conveyed it to them. For quotatives especially, affixes for other evidentials affix after the quotative evidential. e.g.: "The bus already [left], or at least that's what the ticket stand worker told me." or "He said, 'They'll be fine - I saw that they already [ate] an hour ago.'" For hearsay and quotative evidentials, a phonological (usually vowel) shift marks the speaker's degree of trust in the conveyed information. e.g.: "The bus already [left], or so says the (trustworthy) ticket stand worker." vs "The bus already [left], but who knows whether that guy who told me that actually knows that."
4. Mathematical proof or solid deduction. Technically, this evidential is only for use with mathematical or propositional proof, but lay usage has extended it to extremely reliable deductions. e.g.: "Therefore, [there exists] no field of order 12.", "Thus, Socrates [is] mortal.", or (slightly spuriously) "The drive over takes at least half an hour, and he left ten minutes before the event started, so he['ll be late]."
5. Direct revelation - dreams and visions. A relatively rarely-used evidential, its most common uses are fiction, historical literature, and the sourceless "knowledge" one often has in dreams. e.g.: "The prophet cried out, 'the stars [are] right!'." or "In the dream, I somehow [recognized] her as my sister, but also as a friend from high school I'd lost touch with."
6. Best guesses. The speaker might have any or none of the other sources of knowledge listed here, and has synthesized them into a best guess at the truth without knowing for sure. Unusual both in that in the past tense or perfective aspect, this becomes a mirative (a surprise-marking affix), and that unlike the other categories, an explicit numerical value (usually) strictly between 0 and 1 - or an equivalent - is required as part of the evidential - to decline is ungrammatical. e.g.: "I [claim] (75%) that lunch today will be tomato soup." or "Wow, I [hadn't expected] (3%) the Green Team to pull out a win there." To use 0 or 1 is poor form.
7. Doxa; nebulous culturally or socially conveyed information or best practices. In "when in Rome, do as the Romans [do]", the second "do" takes this affix. e.g.: "Wearing shoes in the house [isn't] allowed." or "[It's] fine to touch other people here."
Comments
Post a Comment