Review published in:
Studies in Language
Vol. 36:2 (2012) ► pp. 431–439
Book review

Gabriele Diewald & Elena Smirnova (eds.). Linguistic realization of evidentiality in European languages
Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, 2010.

Reviewed by
| The Cairns Institute, James Cook University
Published online: 15 October 2012
https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.36.2.07aik
References
Adelaar, Willem F. H.
2004 (with Pieter Muysken). The languages of the Andes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y.
2004 Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2007 Information source and evidentiality: What can we conclude? Rivista di Linguistica 19: 1, Mario Squartini (ed.), Special issue on evidentiality between lexicon and grammar, 207–227.Google Scholar
2010 Evidentiality. In Patrick Hogan (ed.), Cambridge encyclopedia of language sciences, 294–5. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2011 Oxford bibliography online: Evidentials. General Editor: Mark Aronoff. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. & Randy J. LaPolla
2007 ‘New perspectives on evidentials: A view from Tibeto-Burman’. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 30(2). 1–12.Google Scholar
Boas, Frans
1911 Kwakiutl. In Part 1, Franz Boas (ed.), Handbook of American Indian languages, 423–557. Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 401.Google Scholar
1938 Language. In Franz Boas (ed.), General anthropology, 124–45. Boston, New York: D. C. Heath and Company.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard
2000 Evidentials: Semantics and history. In Johanson & Utas (eds.), 1–12.Google Scholar
1985 Tense. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
DeLancey, Scott
1992 The historical status of the conjunct-disjunct pattern in Tibeto-Burman. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 251: 39–62. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W.
2010 Basic linguistic theory. Volume 11. Methodology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Epps, Patience
2006 The Vaupés melting pot: Tucanoan influence on Hup. In Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald and R. M. Dixon (eds.), Grammars in contact, 267–89. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gronemeyer, C.
1997 Evidentiality in Lithuanian. Working Papers 461: 93–112. Lund University, Department of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Haberland, Hartmut
2011 Ownership and maintenance of a language in transnational use: Should we leave our lingua franca alone? Journal of pragmatics 431: 937–949. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Isaksson, Bo
2000 Expressions of evidentiality in two semitic languages  – Hebrew and Arabic. In Johanson & Utas (eds.), 383–399.Google Scholar
Jacobsen, W. H., Jr.
1986 The heterogeneity of evidentials in Makah. In Wallace L. Chafe & Johanna Nichols (eds.), Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology, 3–28. Norwood, NJ.: Ablex.Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman
1957 Shifters, verbal categories, and the Russian verb. Cambridge: Harvard University.Google Scholar
Jochel’son, Vladimir
1905 Essay on the grammar of the Yukaghir Language. American Anthropologist Supplement 71: 369–424.Google Scholar
Johanson, Lars & Bo Utas
(eds.) 2000 Evidentials. Turkic, Iranian and neighbouring languages. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kracke, Waud H.
1999 A language of dreaming: Dreams of an Amazonian insomniac. The International Journal of Psycho-analysis 801: 257–75. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Metslang, Helle & Karl Pajusalu
2002 ‘Evidentiality in South Estonian. Linguistica Uralica 21. 98–109.Google Scholar
Michael, Lev
2008 Nanti evidential practice: Language, knowledge and social action in an Amazonian society. PhD diss, Uuniversity of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
Miller, Cynthia L. & Leoma G. Gilley
2007 Evidentiality and mirativity in Shilluk, In Mechthild Reh & Doris L. Payne (eds.), Proceedings of the 8th International Nilo-Saharan Linguistics Colloquium, 191–206. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
Mithun, Marianne
1999 The languages of native North America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Palmer, Frank R.
1986 Mood and modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Plungian, Vladimir A.
2001 The place of evidentiality within the universal grammatical space. Journal of Pragmatics 331. 349–58. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stolz, Thomas
1991 Sprachbund im Baltikum? Estnisch und Lettisch im Zentrum einer sprachlichen Konvergenzlandschaft. Bochum: Universitätsverlag Dr. N. Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Storch, Anne
2005 Aspect and evidentiality in Luwo. In A. Abu-Manga, L. Gilley & A. Storch (eds.), Insights into Nilo-Saharan language, history and culture. Proceedings of the IX. Nilo-Saharan linguistics colloquium, Khartoum 2004, 393–402. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
Sun, J. T. S.
1993 Evidentials in Amdo-Tibetan. Bulletin of the institute of history and philology, academia sinica 63–641. 945–1001.Google Scholar
Thurgood, Graham & Randy J. LaPolla
(eds.) 2003 The Sino-Tibetan languages. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Timberlake, Alan
1982 The impersonal passive in Lithuanian. Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 508–23.Google Scholar
Travis, Catherine E.
2005 Discourse markers in Colombian Spanish: A study in polysemy. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Willerslev, Rane
2007 Soul hunters: hunting, animism, and personhood among the Siberian Yukaghirs. Berkeley: University of California Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Bernárdez, Enrique
2017.  In Advances in Cultural Linguistics [Cultural Linguistics, ], ► pp. 433 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 18 april 2022. 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.