Edited by Juana I. Marín-Arrese, Gerda Haßler and Marta Carretero
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 271] 2017
► pp. 57–83
This article reconsiders the semantic status of the traditional concept of evidentiality, typically featuring ‘experientiality’ as the coding of directness of information, and ‘inferentiality’ and ‘hearsay’ as the marking of two different types of indirect information sources, as well as of two less traditional categories often associated with evidentiality, viz. ‘mirativity’ and ‘subjectivity’. It argues that these dimensions do not constitute a semantically coherent domain. While inferentiality belongs in the system of ‘qualifications of SoAs’ (traditionally: ‘TAM markers’), and can be considered akin to categories such as deontic and epistemic modality (i.e., to be ‘attitudinal’), the four other dimensions have a very different nature, which positions them outside the ‘normal’ qualificational system.
Cited by other publications
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 august 2020. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.