This article focuses on two types of constructional effects of indirect evidential marking in Harakmbut (isolate, Peru). Both types originate in a clash of interpretation: the use of indirect evidential marking indicates a shift of perspective away from the speaker (as if they did not witness the event, thus disclaiming epistemic authority), while the events referred to are in principle directly accessible to them. As the signalled shift is not fully realized in interpretation, the effects will be characterized as showing perspective persistence. The first type involves constructions with a first person agent, and indirect evidential marking is found to produce the interpretation that the speaker performed the action referred to unintentionally, finding out about the outcome of this action only later. Other types of non-volitional events – without pragmatic inference on the part of the speaker – are found not to carry indirect evidential marking; they use different linguistic means to signal non-volitionality. The second type involves constructions with impersonal predicates referring to the cycle of the sun, and the use of indirect evidential marking yields emphasis on the completion of the event referred to. It is proposed that both types of effects can be explained in terms of endpoint emphasis (cf. DeLancey 1985).
{"title":"Constructional effects of indirect evidential marking in Harakmbut","authors":"A. Linden","doi":"10.1075/fol.20004.lin","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.20004.lin","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article focuses on two types of constructional effects of indirect evidential marking in Harakmbut (isolate,\u0000 Peru). Both types originate in a clash of interpretation: the use of indirect evidential marking indicates a shift of perspective\u0000 away from the speaker (as if they did not witness the event, thus disclaiming epistemic authority), while the events referred to\u0000 are in principle directly accessible to them. As the signalled shift is not fully realized in interpretation, the effects will be\u0000 characterized as showing perspective persistence. The first type involves constructions with a first person agent, and indirect\u0000 evidential marking is found to produce the interpretation that the speaker performed the action referred to unintentionally,\u0000 finding out about the outcome of this action only later. Other types of non-volitional events – without pragmatic inference on the\u0000 part of the speaker – are found not to carry indirect evidential marking; they use different linguistic means to signal\u0000 non-volitionality. The second type involves constructions with impersonal predicates referring to the cycle of the sun, and the\u0000 use of indirect evidential marking yields emphasis on the completion of the event referred to. It is proposed that both types of\u0000 effects can be explained in terms of endpoint emphasis (cf. DeLancey 1985).","PeriodicalId":166733,"journal":{"name":"Notes from the field on perspective-indexing constructions","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134550351","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：