Article published In:
Functions of Language: Online-First Articles

Doing things with grammar

Presupposition accommodation across grammatical categories

ORCID logo | Helsinki Collegium for Advanced Studies | University of Helsinki
ORCID logo | University of Helsinki
ORCID logo | University of Helsinki | HELSUS | University of Pretoria
This paper studies the way utterances project properties of the interactional context via the choice of grammatical indexicals. Our analysis is an original combination of existing theoretical developments including notions of grammatical indexicality (Silverstein 1976), of the relational structure of indexical reference (Hanks 2014) and of presupposition accommodation (von Fintel 2008; Heim 1982; Karttunen 1974, among others). While Silverstein (1976) suggested that different types of grammatical indexicals can be (relatively) context-creating or (relatively) context-presupposing, we argue that presupposition vs creativity is not a property of specific categories, but rather of tokens in a given context and that in natural interaction, they are subject to negotiation. While all indexicals are presupposing, there are two types of uses of pragmatic presupposition involved forming a scale (Mazzarella & Domaneschi 2018; Sbisà 1999): non-informative (when the presupposition is already part of common ground of the interlocutors) and informative (when the presupposition needs to be accommodated by the addressee). The theoretical analysis is grounded in a discussion of data on evidentiality, egophoricity, pronouns of address, demonstrative reference, and tense and is based on literature review, as well as first-hand recordings of conversations in Wutun (mixed Sinitic language, China) and Mano (Mande, Guinea).
Keywords: indexicality, presupposition accommodation, grammar in interaction
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Analytical frameworks
    • 2.1Linguistic indexicality: Presupposing vs. creative indexicals
    • 2.2Presupposition in indexical reference: Relational structure
    • 2.3Presupposition accommodation
    • 2.4Accommodation of indexical presupposition
  • 3.Accommodating information source: Evidentiality in Upper Napo Kichwa
  • 4.Accommodating solidarity and distancing: Pronouns of address in Russian
  • 5.Accommodating participation: Egophoricity in Wutun
  • 6.Accommodating common knowledge: Recognitional deixis in Mano
  • 7.Accommodating temporal distance: Tense marking in Shambala
  • 8.Summary and discussion
    • 8.1Summary
    • 8.2An alternative analytical framework: Stance
    • 8.3Conclusions and outlook
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 3 December 2024
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.23032.kha
References (129)
References
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2004. Evidentiality. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(ed.). 2018. The Oxford handbook of evidentiality. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Åkerman, Vesa. 2012. Inflection of finite verbs in Mongghul. SIL Electronic Working Papers 104(3). 1–60.Google Scholar
Ariel, Mira. 2016. Revisiting the typology of pragmatic interpretations. Intercultural Pragmatics. 13(1). 1–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beaver, David. I. 1999. Presupposition accommodation: A plea for common sense. In Lawrence S. Moss, Jonathan Ginzburg & Maarten de Rijke (eds.), Logic, language and computation, vol. 21, 21–44. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Beaver, David I., Bart Geurts & Kristie Denlinger. 2021. Presupposition. In Edward N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2021 edn.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Metaphysics Research Lab. Available online at [URL]
Becker, Laura. 2021. Articles in the world’s languages. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bergqvist, Henrik & Dominique Knuchel. 2017. Complexity in egophoric marking: from agents to attitude holders. Open Linguistics 31. 359–377. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bernander, Rasmus. 2017. Grammar and grammaticalization in Manda: An analysis of the wider TAM domain in a Tanzanian Bantu language. Gothenburg: University of Gothenburg PhD thesis.
Besha, Ruth Mfumbwa. 1989. A study of tense and aspect in Shambala. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer Verlag.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas & Edward Finegan. 1989. Styles of stance in English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect. Text 91. 93–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar. 1997. Spatial operations in deixis, cognition, and culture: Where to orient oneself in Belhare. In Jan Nuyts & Eric Pederson (eds.), Language and conceptualization, 46–83. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bochnak, M. Ryan & Peter Klecha. 2018. Temporal remoteness and vagueness in past time reference in Luganda. In Jason Kandybowicz, Travis Major, Harold Torrence & Philip T. Duncan (eds.), African linguistics on the prairie: Selected papers from the 45th Annual Conference on African Linguistics, 377–391. Berlin: Language Science Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bohnemeyer, J. 2018. Yucatec demonstratives in interaction: spontaneous versus elicited data. In Stephen C. Levinson, Sarah Cutfield, Michael J. Dunn, N. J. Enfield & Sérgio Meira (eds.), 176–205. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Botne, Robert. 2012. Remoteness distinctions. In Robert I. Binnick (ed.), The Oxford handbook of tense and aspect, 536–562. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Botne, Robert & Axel Fanego Palat (eds.). 2023. Domains and regions in Bantu tense and aspect. Köln: Rüdiger Köppe Verlag.Google Scholar
Botne, Robert & Tiffany L. Kershner. 2008. Tense and cognitive systems: On the organization of tense/aspect systems in Bantu languages and beyond. Cognitive Linguistics 191. 145–218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boye, Kasper. 2012. Epistemic meaning. A cross-linguistic and functional-cognitive study. Berlin: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, Roger & Albert Gilman. 2012 [1968]. The pronouns of power and solidarity. In Joshua A. Fishman (ed.), Readings in the sociology of language, 252–275. Berlin: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cable, Seth. 2013. Beyond the past, present, and future: Towards the semantics of ‘graded tense’ in Gĩkũyũ. Natural Language Semantics 21(3). 219–276. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. 1975. Bridging. In Bonnie Nash-Webber & Roger C. Schank (eds.), Theoretical issues in natural language processing, 169–174. Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. & Susan E. Haviland. 1977. Comprehension and the given–new contract. In Roy O. Freedle (ed.), Discourse production and comprehension, 1–40. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. & C. R. Marshall. 1981. Definite reference and mutual knowledge. In Aravind Joshi, Bonnie Webber & Ivan Sag (eds.), Elements of discourse understanding, 10–63. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H., Robert Schreuder & Samuel Buttrick. 1983. Common ground at the understanding of demonstrative reference. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 22(2). 245–258. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clift, Rebecca. 2006. Indexing stance: Reported speech as an interactional evidential. Journal of Sociolinguistics 10(5). 569–595. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Conrad, Susan & Douglas Biber. 2000. Adverbial marking of stance in speech and writing. In Susan Hunston & Geoff Thompson (eds.), Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse, 56–73. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Córdova, Rosa J. Garcia. 2002. The shifted reading of the Spanish simple past as dependent on presupposition accommodation. In Javier Gutiérrez-Rexach (ed.), From words to discourse, 289–305. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cornillie, Bert. 2017. On speaker commitment and speaker involvement. Evidence from evidentials in Spanish talk-in-interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 128(2). 161–170. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crane, Thera Marie. 2011. Beyond time: Temporal and extra-temporal functions of tense and aspect marking in Totela, a Bantu language of Zambia. Berkeley, CA: University of California PhD thesis.
. 2023. Non-metrical tense distinctions in isiNdebele (South Africa). In Robert Botne & Axel Fanego Palat (eds.), 105–127.Google Scholar
Curnow, Timothy Jowan. 2002. Conjunct/disjunct marking in Awa Pit. Linguistics 40(3). 611–627. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
DeLancey, Scott. 1992. The historical status of the conjunct/disjunct pattern in Tibeto-Burman. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 251. 39–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deppermann, Arnulf. 2015. When recipient design fails: Egocentric turn-design of instructions in driving school lessons leading to breakdowns of intersubjectivity. Gesprächsforschung 161. 63–101.Google Scholar
Diessel, Holger. 2006. Demonstratives, joint attention, and the emergence of grammar. Cognitive Linguistics 171. 463–489. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dom, Sebastian & Koen Bostoen. 2015. Examining variation in the expression of tense/aspect to classify the Kikongo Language Cluster. Africana Linguistica 211. 163–211. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Du Bois, John W. 2007. The stance triangle. In Robert Englebretson (ed.), Stancetaking in discourse: Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction, 139–182. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Duranti, Alessandro. 1994. From grammar to politics: Linguistic anthropology in a Western Samoan village. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1990. Politics and grammar: Agency in Samoan political discourse. American Ethnologist 17(4). 36–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Duranti, Alessandro & Charles Goodwin (eds.). 1992. Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Errington, Joseph. 1988. Structure and style in Javanese: A semiotic view of linguistic etiquette. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Enfield, Nick J. 2003. Demonstratives in space and interaction: Data from Lao speakers and implications for semantic analysis. Language 79 1. 82–117. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fintel, Kai von. 2008. What is presupposition accommodation, again? Philosophical Perspectives 221. 137–170. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Floyd, Simeon, Elisabeth Norcliffe & Lila San Roque (eds.). 2018. Egophoricity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Forker, Diana. 2020. Elevation as a grammatical and semantic category of demonstratives. Frontiers in Psychology 111. e1712. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Friedrich, Paul. 1972. Social context and semantic feature: The Russian pronominal usage. In John J. Gumperz & Dell Hymes (eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics: The ethnography of communication, 270–300. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Gipper, Sonja. 2017. Pre-semantic pragmatics encoded: A non-spatial account of Yurakaré demonstratives. Journal of Pragmatics 1201. 122–143. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grzech, Karolina. 2020. Managing common ground with epistemic marking: ‘Evidentials’ in Upper Napo Kichwa and their functions in interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 1681. 81–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2021. Using discourse markers to negotiate epistemic stance: A view from situated language use. Journal of Pragmatics 1771. 208–223. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gumperz, John J. 1992. Contextualization and understanding. In Alessandro Duranti & Charles Goodwin (eds.), 229–252.Google Scholar
Hale, Austin. 1980. Person markers: Finite conjunct and disjunct forms in Newari. In Ronald L. Trail et al. (eds.), Papers in Southeast Asian linguistics 7 1, 95–106. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hale, Austin & Kedār P. Shrestha. 2006. Newār (Nepal Bhāsā). Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar
Hanks, William F. 1990. Referential practice. Language and lived space among the Maya. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
1992. The indexical ground of deictic reference. In Alessandro Duranti & Charles Goodwin (eds.), 43–77.Google Scholar
2005. Explorations in the deictic field. Current Anthropology 46(2). 191–220. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009. Fieldwork on deixis. Journal of Pragmatics 411. 10–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014. Foreword. Evidentiality in social interaction. In: Janis Nuckolls and Lev Michael (eds.), Evidentiality in interaction, 1–12. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Harjunpää, Katariina, Arnulf Deppermann & Marja-Leena Sorjonen. 2021. Constructing the Chekhovian inner body in instructions: An interactional history of factuality and agentivity. Journal of Pragmatics 1711. 158–174. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Häsler, Katrin. 2001. An 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heim, Irene. 1982. On the semantics of definite and indefinite noun phrases. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts at Amherst PhD thesis.
. 1994. Comments on Abusch’s theory of tense. In Hans Kamp (ed.), Ellipsis, tense and questions, 143–170. Stuttgart: Dyana-2 Esprit Basic research Project 6852.Google Scholar
Heritage, John & Geoffrey Raymond. 2005. The terms of agreement: indexing epistemic authority and subordination in talk-in-interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly 68(1). 15–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John. 2012. Epistemics in action: action formation and territories of knowledge. Research on Language & Social Interaction 45(1). 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Himmelmann, Nikolaus P. 1996. Demonstratives in narrative discourse: A taxonomy of universal uses. In Barbara Fox (ed.), Studies in anaphora, 205–254. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hintz, Dan & Diane M. Hintz. 2017. The evidential category of mutual knowledge in Quechua. Lingua 186–1871. 88–109. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyman, Larry M. 1980. Relative time reference in the Bamileke tense system. Studies in African Linguistics 11(2). 227–237.Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman. 1971. Shifters, verbal categories, and the Russian verb. In Roman Jakobson, Selected Writings of Roman Jakobson 2 1, 130–147. The Hague: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Karttunen, Lauri. 1974. Presuppositions and linguistic context. Theoretical Linguistics 11. 181–194. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keating, Elizabeth & Alessandro Duranti. 2006. Honorific resources for the construction of hierarchy in Pohnpei and Samoa. The Journal of the Polynesian Society 115(2). 145–172.Google Scholar
Kershner, Tiffany L. 2002. The verb in Chisukwa: Aspect, tense, and time. Bloomington, IU: Indiana University PhD thesis.
Keenan, Edward L. 1971. Two kinds of presupposition in natural language. In Charles J. Fillmore & D. Terence Langndoen (eds.). Studies in linguistic semantics, 45–54. New York, NY: Irvington.Google Scholar
Khachaturyan, Maria. 2019. Knowing is belonging: Recognitional deixis and emergence of common ground in religious conversion. Signs and Society 7(2). 186–216. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2020. Common ground in demonstrative reference: The case of Mano (Mande). Frontiers in Psychology 111. e543549. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kiso, Andrea. 2012. Tense and aspect in Chichewa, Citumbuka and Cisena: A description and comparison of the tense-aspect systems in three southeastern Bantu languages. Stockholm: Stockholm University PhD thesis.
Kleifgen, Jo Anne. 2001. Assembling talk: Social alignments in the workplace. Research on Language & Social Interaction 34(3). 279–308. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klein, Wolfgang. 1994. Time in language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Küntay, Aylin C. & Asli Özyürek. 2006. Learning to use demonstratives in conversation: what do language specific strategies in Turkish reveal? Journal of Child Language 331. 303–320. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lermontov, Mikhail. 2012. A hero of our time. J. H. Wisdom & Marr Murray (trans.). New York, NY: Dover Publications.Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levinson, Stephen. C. 2000. Presumptive meanings: The theory of generalised conversational implicatures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. 2003. Contextualizing ‘contextualization cues’. In Susan L. Eerdmans, Carlo L. Prevignano & Paul J. Thibault (eds.), Language and interaction: Discussions with John J. Gumperz, 31–39. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2005. Living with Manny’s dangerous idea. Discourse Studies 71. 431–453. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018. Introduction: Demonstratives: Patterns in diversity. In Stephen C. Levinson, Sarah Cutfield, Michael J. Dunn, N. J. Enfield & Sérgio Meira (eds.), 1–42. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C., Sarah Cutfield, Michael J. Dunn, N. J. Enfield & Sérgio Meira (eds.). 2018. Demonstratives in cross-linguistic perspective. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lewis, David. 1979. Scorekeeping in a language game. Journal of Philosophical Logic 8(1). 339–359. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Machobane, Malilo. 1985. Tense and aspect in Sesotho. Bloomington, IN: Indiana Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Margetts, A. 2018. Saliba-Logea: exophoric demonstratives. In Stephen C. Levinson, Sarah Cutfield, Michael J. Dunn, N. J. Enfield & Sérgio Meira (eds.), 257–281. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mazzarella, Diana & Filippo Domaneschi. 2018. Presuppositional effects and ostensive-inferential communication. Journal of Pragmatics 1381. 17–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Michael, Lev. 2020. Rethinking the communicative functions of evidentiality: Event responsibility in Nanti (Arawakan) evidential practice. Cadernos de Etnolingüística 8(1). 95–123.Google Scholar
Michael, Lev & Janice Nuckolls. 2014. Evidentiality in interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mushin, Ilana. 2001. Evidentiality and epistemological stance: Narrative retelling. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. Making knowledge visible in discourse: Implications for the study of linguistic evidentiality. Discourse Studies 15(5). 627–645. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nakassis, Constantine V. 2018. Indexicality’s ambivalent ground. Signs and Society 6(1). 281–304. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Neely, Kelsey. 2019. The linguistic expression of affective stance in Yaminawa (Pano, Peru). Berkeley, CA: University of California PhD thesis.
Nurse, Derek. 2008. Tense and aspect in Bantu. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2019. Data for tense and aspect systems in Bantu. Tervuren: Royal Museum for Central Africa.Google Scholar
Ochs, Elinor. 1996. Linguistic resources for socializing humanity. In John J. Gumperz & Stephen C. Levinson (eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity, 407–437. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Petrukhin, Pavel. 2013. K pragmatike sverxsložnogo prošedšego vremeni v vostočnoslavjanskoj pis’mennosti [The pragmatics of the supercompound past tense in the East Slavic written texts]. Wiener Slavistisches Jahrbuch, Neue Folge 11. 74–98.Google Scholar
Post, Mark. 2013. Person-sensitive TAME marking in Galo: Historical origins and functional motivation. In Tim Thornes, Erik Andvik, Gwendolyn Hyslop & Joana Jansen (eds.), Functional-historical approaches to explanation: In honor of Scott DeLancey, 107–130. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Récanati, Frangois. 1987. Meaning and force: The pragmatics of performative utterances. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Riedel, Kristina. 2009. The syntax of object marking in Sambaa: A comparative Bantu perspective. Leiden: Leiden University PhD thesis.
Sandman, Erika. 2018. Egophoricity in Wutun. In Simeon Floyd, Elisabeth Norcliffe & Lila San Roque (eds.), 173–196. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
San Roque, Lila, Simeon Floyd & Elisabeth Norcliffe. 2018. Egophoricity: An introduction. In Simeon Floyd, Elisabeth Norcliffe & Lila San Roque (eds.), 1–77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sbisà, Marina. 1999. Ideology and the persuasive use of presupposition. In Jef Verschueren (ed.), Language and ideology. Selected papers from the 6th International Pragmatics Conference, 492–509. Antwerp: International Pragmatics Association.Google Scholar
. 2021. Presupposition and implicature: Varieties of implicit meaning in explicitation practices. Journal of Pragmatics 1821. 176–188. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schultze-Berndt, Eva. 2017. Shared vs. primary epistemic authority in Jaminjung/Ngaliwurru. Open Linguistics 31. 178–218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwarz, David S. 1977. On pragmatic presupposition. Linguistics and Philosophy 1(2). 247–257. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Silverstein, Michael. 1976. Shifters, linguistic categories and cultural description. In Keith H. Basso & Henry A. Selby (eds.). Meaning in anthropology, 11–55. Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico Press.Google Scholar
. 2022. Language in culture: Lectures on the social semiotics of language. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Simons, Mandy. 2003. Presupposition and accommodation: Understanding the Stalnakerian picture. Philosophical Studies 112(3). 251–278. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005. Presupposition and relevance. In Zoltan Gendler Szabo (ed.), Semantics versus pragmatics, 329–355. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Singh, Raj, Evelena Fedorenko, Kyle Mahowald & Edward Gibson. 2016. Accommodating presuppositions is inappropriate in implausible contexts. Cognitive Science 40(3). 607–634. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Skilton, Amalia. 2021. Demonstratives and visibility: Data from Ticuna and implications for theories of deixis. Language 97(4). 793–824. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slater, Keith W. 2003. A Grammar of Mangghuer: A Mongolic Language of China’s Qinghai-Gansu Sprachbund. London: Routledge Curzon.Google Scholar
Stalnaker, Robert. 1973. Presuppositions. Journal of Philosophical Logic 21. 447–457. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1974. Pragmatic presuppositions. In Milton Munitz & Peter Unger (eds.), Semantics and philosophy, 197–213. New York, NY: New York University Press.Google Scholar
. 1998. On the representation of context. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 7(1). 3–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stivers, Tanya. 2008. Stance, alignment, and affiliation during storytelling: When nodding is a token of affiliation. Research on Language & Social Interaction 41(1). 31–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stivers, Tanya, Lorenza Mondada & Jakob Steensig. 2011. Knowledge, morality and affiliation in social interaction. In Tanya Stivers, Lorenza Mondada & Jakob Steensig (eds.), The morality of knowledge in conversation, 3–24. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Strawson, Peter F. 1950. On referring. Mind 59(235). 320–344. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thomason, Richmond H. 1990. Accommodation, meaning, and implicature: Interdisciplinary foundations for pragmatics. In Philip Cohen, Jerry Morgan & Martha Pollack (eds.), Intentions in communication, 325–363. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tonhauser, Judith. 2015. Are ‘informative presuppositions’ presuppositions? Language and Linguistics Compass 9 (2). 77–101. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tonhauser, Judith, David Beaver, Craige Roberts & Mandy Simons. 2013. Toward a taxonomy of projective content. Language 891. 66–109. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas & Randy J. LaPolla. 2014. Towards a new approach to evidentiality: Issues and directions for research. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 37(2). 240–263. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Widmer, Manuel & Fernando Zúñiga. 2017. Egophoricity, involvement and semantic roles in Tibeto-Burman languages. Open Linguistics 31. 419–441. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Willett, Thomas. 1988. A cross-linguistic survey of the grammaticization of evidentiality. Studies in Language 12(1). 51–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yurchak, Alexei. 2005. Everything was forever, until it was no more: The last Soviet generation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar