Article published in:
Notes from the field on perspective-indexing constructions: Irregular shifts and perspective persistence
Edited by Stef Spronck, An Van linden, Caroline Gentens and María Sol Sansiñena
[Functions of Language 27:1] 2020
► pp. 2954


Aikhenvald, Alexandra
2004Evidentiality. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Antonov, Anton & Guillaume Jacques
2014Semi-direct speech in Rtau. Paper presented at the conference Syntax of the World’s Languages VI, University of Pavia, September 8–10.
Bickel, Balthasar
2008Verb agreement and epistemic marking: A typological journey from the Himalayas to the Caucasus. In Brigitte Huber, Marianne Volkart & Paul Widmer (eds.), Chomolongma, Demawend und Kasbek: Festschrift für Roland Bielmeier zu seinem 65. Geburtstag, 1–14. Halle: International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies.Google Scholar
Bielmeier, Roland
2000Syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic-epistemic functions of auxiliaries in Western Tibetan. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 23(2). 79–126.Google Scholar
Boas, Franz
1910Kwakiutl. An illustrative sketch. Washington: Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Borchers, Dörte
2008A grammar of Sunwar: Descriptive grammar, paradigms, texts and glossary (Brill’s Tibetan Studies Library. Languages of the Greater Himalayan Region 5.7). Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace & Johanna Nichols
(eds.) 1986Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Creissels, Denis
2008Remarks on so-called “conjunct/disjunct” systems. Paper presented at the conference Syntax of the World’s Languages III, Free University of Berlin, September 25–28.
Curnow, Timothy
1997A grammar of Awa Pit. Canberra: Australian National University PhD thesis.Google Scholar
Daudey, Henriëtte
2014Volition and control in Wǎdū Pǔmǐ. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 37(1). 75–103. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
DeLancey, Scott
1986Evidentiality and volitionality in Tibetan. In: Wallace Chafe & Johanna Nichols (eds.), 203–213.Google Scholar
1992The historical status of the conjunct/disjunct pattern in Tibeto-Burman. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 25. 39–62. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Evans, Nicholas
2012Some problems in the typology of quotation: a canonical approach. In Dunstan Brown, Marina Chumakina & Greville G. Corbett (eds.), Canonical morphology and syntax, 66–98. Oxford: OUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Evans, Nicholas, Henrik Bergqvist & Lila San Roque
2017The grammar of engagement. Language and Cognition 10(1). 110–170. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Floyd, Simeon, Elisabeth Norcliffe, & Lila San Roque
(eds.) 2018Egophoricity. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Garrett, Edward John
2001Evidentiality and assertion in Tibetan. Los Angeles, CA: University of California PhD thesis.Google Scholar
Genetti, Carol
1994A descriptive and historical account of Dolakha Newari dialect (Monumenta Serindica 24). Tokyo: Institute for the Study of Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa.Google Scholar
2007A grammar of Dolakha Newar (Mouton Grammar Library 40). Berlin: Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 53 ]
2013Tense-aspect morphology from nominalizers in Newar. In Tim Thornes, Erik Andvik, Gwen Hyslop & Joana Jansen (eds.), Functional-historical approaches to explanation: In honor of Scott DeLancey, 195–220. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hale, Austin
1971Person markers: conjunct and disjunct forms. (Topics in Newari Grammar I.) SIL mimeograph.Google Scholar
1980Person markers: Finite conjunct and disjunct verb forms in Newari. In Stephen A. Wurm (ed.), Papers in South East Asian Linguistics 7 (Pacific Linguistics A 53), 95–106. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
Haller, Felix
2000Dialekt und Erzählungen von Shigatse (Beiträge zur tibetischen Erzählforschung, 13). Bonn: VGH Wissenschaftsverlag.Google Scholar
2004Dialekt und Erzählungen von Themchen: sprachwissenschaftliche Beschreibung eines Nomadendialekts aus Nord-Amdo (Beiträge zur tibetischen Erzählforschung, 14). Bonn: VGH Wissenschaftsverlag.Google Scholar
Hargreaves, David J.
2005Agency and intentional action in Kathmandu Newari. Himalayan Linguistics Journal 5. 1–48.Google Scholar
Häsler, Katrin
1999A Grammar of the Tibetan Dege Dialect. Zürich: Inauguraldissertation der Philosophisch-historischen Fakultät der Universität Bern zur Erlangung der Doktorwürde.Google Scholar
2001An empathy-based approach to the description of the verb system of the Dege dialect of Tibetan. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 24(1). 1–34.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume
2007Hybrid indirect speech in Rgyalrong. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Jäschke, Heinrich August
1881A Tibetan-English dictionary. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Koshal, Sanyukta
1979Ladakhi grammar. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.Google Scholar
Kretschmar, Monika
1995Erzählungen und Dialekt aus Südmustang. Untersuchungen zur Grammatik des Südmustang-Dialekts (Beiträge zur tibetischen Erzählforschung 12/1). Bonn: Vereinigung für Geisteswissenschaften Hochasiens Wissenschaftsverlag.Google Scholar
Nikitina, Tatiana
2012Personal deixis and reported discourse: Towards a typology of person alignment. Linguistic Typology 16. 233–263.Google Scholar
This issue. Logophoricity and shifts of perspective: New facts and a new account.
San Roque, Lila & Robyn Loughnane
2012The New Guinea Highlands evidentiality area. Linguistic Typology 16(1). 111–167. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Spronck, Stef & Tatiana Nikitina
2019Reported speech forms a dedicated syntactic domain. Linguistic Typology 23(1). 119–159. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sun, Jackson T.-S.
1993Evidentials in Amdo Tibetan. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica 63(4). 143–188.Google Scholar
Takahashi, Yoshiharu
2001A descriptive study of Kinnauri (Pangi dialect): A preliminary report. In Yasuhiko Nagano & Randy J. LaPolla (eds.), New research on Zhangzhung and related Himalayan languages (Bon Studies 3), 97–119. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology.Google Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas
1991The rhetorical use of the Tibetan ergative. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 14. 93–107.Google Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas & Randy LaPolla
2014Towards a new approach to evidentiality. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 37(2). 240–263. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 54 ]
Volkart, Marianne
2000The meaning of the auxiliary ’dug in the aspect systems of some Central Tibetan dialects. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 23(2). 127–153.Google Scholar
Willett, Thomas
1988A cross-linguistic survey of the grammaticizations of evidentiality. Studies in Language 12. 51–97. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Widmer, Manuel
2017A grammar of Bunan (Mouton Grammar Library 71). Berlin: Mouton.Google Scholar
Widmer, Manuel & Zemp
2017The epistemization of person markers in reported speech. Studies in Language 41(4). 33–75. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Willet, Thomas
1988A cross-linguistic survey of the grammaticalization of evidentiality. Studies in Language 12(1). 51–97. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Woodbury, A. C.
1986Interactions of tense and evidentiality: A study of Sherpa and English. In Wallace Chafe & Johanna Nichols (eds.), 188–202.Google Scholar
Zemp, Marius
2016A functional reconstruction of the Proto-Tibetan verbal system. Himalayan Linguistics 15(2). 88–135.Google Scholar
2017aEvidentiality in Purik. In Nathan Hill & Lauren Gawne (eds.), Evidential systems of Tibetan languages, 261–96. Berlin: Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2017bThe origin and evolution of the opposition between testimonial and factual evidentials in Purik and other varieties of Tibetan. Open Linguistics 3(1). 631–637. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2018A grammar of Purik Tibetan. Leiden: Brill. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2019The genesis of evidentiality in Tibetan. Paper presented in the workshop ‘Evidentiality in Tibetic languages and beyond – a closer look’, Tübingen, Feb. 16–17. Available online at https://​www​.academia​.edu​/38439855​/The​_genesis​_of​_evidentiality​_in​_Tibetan​.pdf