Cover not available
Article published In:
Expressing and Describing Surprise
Edited by Agnès Celle and Laure Lansari
[Review of Cognitive Linguistics 13:2] 2015
► pp. 314–352

Grammatical evidentiality and the unprepared mind

The aim of this paper is to investigate how evidentials are used to reflect the unprepared mind of the speaker. Lexical evidentials are typically used by speakers to encode the kinds of evidence they have for making statements about states, events and actions they did not personally witness or were a part of. However, under certain conditions evidentials can be used to express the surprise of the speaker. This is known in the literature under the label mirativity. The empirical factors that condition the mirative use of an evidential are first determined, and then using an information and schema-theoretic analysis it is shown that mirativity is the linguistic reflex of a series of mental events involving the processing of new information, coupled with other contextual factors involving speaker knowledge.
Keywords: Schema Theory, evidentiality, mirativity
Published online: 31 December 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.13.2.03pet
References (65)
Aikhenvald, A., & Dixon, R.M.W. (Eds.). (2003). Studies in evidentiality. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aikhenvald, A.Y. (2004). Evidentiality. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aksu-Koç, A., & Slobin, D. (1986). A psychological account of the development and use of evidentials in Turkish. In W. Chafe & J. Nichols (Eds.), Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology. Advances in Discourse Processes XX, (pp. 159–167). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Bar-Hillel, Y., & Carnap, R. (1953). An outline of a theory of semantic information. Reprinted in Bar-Hillel [1964].
Barwise, J., & Seligman, J. (1997). Information flow: The logic of distributed systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beaver, D., & Clark, B. (2008). Sense and sensitivity: How focus determines meaning. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chafe, Wallace L., & Nichols, J. (Eds.). (1986). Evidentiality: the linguistic coding of epistemology, Advances in Discourse Processes XX. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Curnow, T. (2000). Why ‘first/non-first person’ is not grammaticalized mirativity. In Proceedings of als2k, the 2000 conference of the australian linguistic society.
Davis, C., Potts, C., & Speas, M. (2007). The pragmatic values of evidential sentences. In M. Gibson & T. Friedman (Eds.), Proceedings of the 17th Conference on semantics and linguistic theory, (pp. 71–88). Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications.Google Scholar
Davis, H., Matthewson, L., & Rullmann, H. (2009). A unified modal semantics for out-of-control in St’át’imcets. In L. Hogeweg, H. de Hoop, & A. Malchukov (Eds.), Proceedings of the tamtam conference.
DeLancey, S. (1990). Notes on evidentiality in Hare. International Journal of American Linguistics, 56(1), 152–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (1992). The historical status of the conjunct/disjunct pattern in Tibeto-Burman. Acta Linguistica Havniensia, 251, 39–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (1997). Mirativity: The grammatical marking of unexpected infor- mation. Linguistic Typology, 11, 33–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2001). The mirative and evidentiality. Journal of Pragmatics, 331, 369–382. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dickinson, C. (2000). Mirativity in Tsafiki. Studies in Language, 241, 379–422. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Egerod, S. & Hansson, I.L. (1974). An Akha conversation on death and funeral. Acta Orientalia, 361, 225–284.Google Scholar
Ekman, P. (1980). Asymmetry in facial expression. Science, 2091, 833–834. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (1984). Expression and the nature of emotion. In Approaches to emotion (pp. 319–344). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Faller, M. (2002). Semantics and pragmatics of evidentials in Cuzco Quechua. Stanford dissertation.
. (2003). Propositional- and illocutionary-level evidentiality in Cuzco Quechua. In Proceedings of semantics of the under-represented languages of the americas 2. Amherst, MA: GLSA.
Floridi, L. (2011). Semantic conceptions of information. In E.N. Zalta (Ed.), The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, Spring 2011 edn.Google Scholar
Friedman, V.A. (2003). Evidentiality in the Balkans with special attention to Macedonian and Albanian. In A.Y. Aikhenvald & R.M.W. Dixon (Eds.), Studies in evidentiality Typological Studies in Language 54. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Geurts, B. (2010). Quantity implicatures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haller, F. (2000). Dialekt und erzählungen von shigatse. In D. Schuh (Ed.), Beiträge zur tibetischen erzählforschung 13. Bonn: VGH Wissenschaftsverlag.Google Scholar
Häsler, K. (2001). An empathy-based approach to to the decription of the verb system of the Dege dialect of Tibetan. Linguistic of the Tibeto-Burman Area, 24(1), 1–34.Google Scholar
Itti, L., & Baldi, P.F. (2005). A principled approach to detecting surprising events in video. In Proceedings of ieee conference on computer vision and pattern recognition (cvpr) (pp. 631–637). San Siego, CA.
Izard, C.E., & Malatesta, C.Z. (1987). Perspectives on emotional development I: Differential emotions theory of early emotional development. In Handbook of infant development (pp. 494–554). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Izvorski, R. (1997). The present perfect as an epistemic modal. In Proceedings of salt, vii1, 222–239. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jacobsen, W. (1964). A grammar of the washo language. Berkeley: University of California dissertation.Google Scholar
Kagan, J. (2002). Surprise, uncertainty, and mental structures. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Keenan, E.L. (1974). Logic and language. In M. Bloomfield & E. Haugen (Eds.), Language as a human problem (pp. 187–196). New York: W.W. Norton & Co.Google Scholar
Koev, T. (2011). Evidentiality and temporal distance learning. In A. Chereches, N. Ashton, & D. Lutz (Eds.), Proceedings of semantics and linguistics theory (salt), 211, 95–114.
Kratzer, A. (1991). Modality. In D. Wunderlich & A. von Stechow (Eds.), Semantics: An international handbook of contemporary research (pp. 639–656). Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
LaPolla, R. (2003). Evidentiality in Qiang. In A.Y. Aikhenvald & R.M.W. Dixon (Eds.), Studies in evidentiality, Typological Studies in Language 54, Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lazard, G. (1999). Pour une terminologie rigoureuse: Quelques principes et propositions. Mémoires de la Société de Linguistic de Paris, (6), 111–133.Google Scholar
Lorini, E. & Cristiano C. (2007). The cognitive structure of surprise: looking for basic principles. Topoi: An International Review of Philosophy, 26(1), 133–149. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Macedo, C.A., Reisenzein, R., Lorini, L., & Castelfranchi, C.L. (2009). Artificial surprise. In J. Vallverdú & D. Casacuberta (Eds.), Handbook of research on syn- thetic emotions and sociable robotics: New applications in affective computing and artificial intelligence (pp. 267–291). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mandler, G. (1984). Mind and body. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
McCready, E., & Norry O. (2007). Evidentiality, modality and probability. Linguistics and Philosophy, 30(2), 147–206. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McKinlay, S. (2008). Information, knowledge and confirmation holism. In A. Briggle, P. Brey, & K. Waelbers (Eds.), Current issues in computing and philosophy (collected essays). IOS Press.Google Scholar
Meyer, W.-U., & Niepel, M. (1994). Surprise. In Encyclopedia of human behavior, vol. 31, California: Academic press.Google Scholar
Meyer, W-U., Reisenzein, R., & Schützwohl, A. (1997). Toward a process analysis of emotions: The case of surprise. Motivation and Emotion, 21(3), 251–274. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nichols, J. (1986). The bottom line: Chinese Pidgin Russian. In W. Chafe & J. Nichols (Eds.), Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology. Advances in Discourse Processes XX (pp. 239–257). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Niepel, M., Rudolph, U., & Schötzwohl, A. (1994). Temporal characteristics of the surprise reaction induced by schema discrepant visual and auditory events. Cognition and Emotion, 8(5), 433–452. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Palmer, F. 2006. Mood and modality, 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Papafragou, A., Li, P., Choi, Y., & Han, C. (2007). Evidentiality in language and cognition. Cognition, 1031, 253–299. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peterson, T. (2010a). Epistemic modality and evidentiality in Gitksan at the semantics-pragmatics interface. University of British Columbia dissertation.
. (2010b). Examining the mirative and non-literal uses of evidentials. In T. Peterson & U. Sauerland (Eds.), Evidence from evidentiality, Vol. 281, Vancouver: University of British Columbia Working Papers in Linguistics.Google Scholar
. (2012). The role of the ordering source in Gitksan modals. In E. Bogal-Allbritten (Ed.), Proceedings of sula 6: Semantics of under-represented languages in the Americas. Amherst, MA: GLSA Publications.Google Scholar
Peterson, T., & U. Sauerland (Eds.). (2010). Evidence from evidentiality, Vol. 281. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Working Papers in Linguistics.Google Scholar
Portner, P., & Zanuttini, R. (2005). Nominal exclamatives in english. In R. Stainton &R. Elugardo (Eds.), Ellipsis and non-sentential speech, Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy (pp. 57–67). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Reisenzein, R. (2000). The subjective experience of surprise. In H. Bless & J. Forgas (Eds.), The message within: The role of subjective experience in social cognition and behavior. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Reisenzein, R., Meyer, W.-U., & Schützwohl, A. (1996). Reactions to surprising events: A paradigm for emotion research. In N.H. Frijda (Ed.), Proceedings of the 9th conference of the international society for research on emotions (pp. 292–296). Toronto: ISRE.Google Scholar
Rett, J. (2011). Exclamatives, degrees and speech acts. Linguistics and Philosophy, 34(5), 411–442. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rooryck, J. (2001a). Evidentiality, Part I. GLOT International, 51, 3–11.Google Scholar
. (2001b). Evidentiality, Part II. GLOT International, 51, 161–168.Google Scholar
Rumelhart, D.E. (1984). Schemata and the cognitive system. In R.S. Wyer & T.K. Srull (Eds.), Handbook of social cognition, Vol. 11 (pp. 161–188). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Scherer, K.R. (1984). On the nature and function of emotion: A component process approach. In Approaches to emotion (pp. 293–317). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Schützwohl, A. (1998). Surprise and schema strength. Journal of Experimental Psychology, Learning, Memory and Cognition, 24(5), 1182–1199. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slobin, D., & Aksu, A. (1982). Tense, aspect, and modality in the use of Turkish evidential. In P.J. Hopper (Ed.), Tense-aspect: Between semantics and pragmatics, Typological Studies in Language, (pp. 397–405). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Speas, M. (2008). On the syntax and semantics of evidentials. Language and Linguistics Compass, 2(5), 940–965. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Temürcü, C. (2007). A semantic framework for analyzing tense, aspect, and mood – an application to the ranges of polysemy of -xr, -dir, -iyor and -∅ in Turkish. Universiteit Antwerpen dissertation.
Wiklund, A.-L. (2009). The syntax of surprise: Unexpected event readings in complex predication. Working papers in scandinavian syntax 841, 181–224.Google Scholar
Willett, T. (1988). A cross-linguistic survey of the grammaticization of evidentiality. Studies in Language, 12(1), 51–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zanuttini, R., & Portner, P. (2003). Exclamative clauses: At the syntaxsemantics interface. Language, 79(1), 39–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (7)

Cited by seven other publications

Pancheva, Roumyana & Maria Luisa Zubizarreta
2024. The Orientation of Evidentials in Attitude Contexts: A Case Study Based on Narratives in Paraguayan Guarani. Languages 9:2 ► pp. 44 ff. DOI logo
Türkyılmaz, Bahar
2024. Özbek Türkçesinde Miratif (Beklenmeyen Bilgi) Kategorisi. Korkut Ata Türkiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi :15 ► pp. 507 ff. DOI logo
Choi, Soonja, Florian Goller, Ulrich Ansorge, Upyong Hong & Hongoak Yun
2022. Lexical expressions and grammatical markers for source of information: A contrast between German and Korean. Language Sciences 92 ► pp. 101475 ff. DOI logo
Andrade Ciudad, Luis
2020. Chapter 4. Evidentiality and epistemic modality in the Andean Spanish verb. In Variation and Evolution [Issues in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics, 29], ► pp. 76 ff. DOI logo
Serrano-Losada, Mario
2017. On Englishturn outand Spanishresultarmirative constructions. Journal of Historical Linguistics 7:1-2 ► pp. 160 ff. DOI logo
Peterson, Tyler
2016. Mirativity as Surprise: Evidentiality, Information, and Deixis. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 45:6 ► pp. 1327 ff. DOI logo
Peterson, Tyler
2017. Problematizing mirativity. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 15:2 ► pp. 312 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 16 july 2024. 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.