Is there evidence for evidentiality in Gascony Occitan
Is there evidence for evidentiality in Gascony Occitan
复制标题
加斯科尼奥克西坦语中是否有证据表明证据性
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2007
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Claus D. Pusch
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Claus D. Pusch
在罗曼语中，大多数语言元素的证据标记的地位已经被假定，通过其词汇意义或其主要语法意义的语义扩展，属于模态或时间性领域的标记证据价值。作为证据价值的标记，这些成分或串大多只是弱语法化的。在这方面的贡献，加斯科涅欧西坦语的“宣言”，高度经常性和强烈的语法化前动词标记的范例，提出和分析作为一个候选人的“语法证据”在浪漫品种。主要来自口头来源的例子表明，这些词素的功能是与它们出现的命题相关的差异（积极）断言值的标记。断言和证据，虽然是不同的类别，可能是功能交织在一起，断言的公开标记传达证据意义，说话人从而指的是经验的元素或她/他自己或他人的权威。尽管如此，加斯科涅表达式可能不能算作该术语最强（或最弱）意义上的证据，即作为一个以信息来源的指示为其主要含义的元素，因为与说话者知识的来源和可靠性的语义-语用联系在这里也仅仅是间接的。* 1.自Chafe和Nichols的开创性卷（Chafe & Nichols 1986）以来，证据的概念，可以追溯到Franz Boas和Roman Jakobson的工作（cf. Aikhenvald 2004：11-17），在语言学研究中获得了越来越多的重要性，这个术语现在已经牢固确立并广泛使用。据素的基本定义是“一个语法范畴，其主要含义是信息来源”（Aikhenvald 2006：320）。信息来源的可能类型之间的区别取决于各自的证据系统的复杂性，但直接或第一手证据与间接或非第一手证据之间的基本区别可能是信息来源，间接/非第一手证据基于报告或推断，如Willett（1988：57）图式所概述的那样。根据《世界语言结构地图集》中关于证据编码类型的类型学调查（De哈安2005 a和2005 b），
In Romance languages, most linguistic elements for which the status of markers of evidentiality has been postulated, mark evidential values either through their lexical meaning or by semantic extensions of their primary grammatical meaning that belong to the realm of modality or temporality. As markers of evidential values, most of these elements or strings are only weakly grammaticalized. In this contribution, the Gascony Occitan ‘Enunciative’, a paradigm of highly recurrent and strongly grammaticalized preverbal markers, is presented and analyzed as a candidate for a ‘grammatical evidential’ in a Romance variety. Examples from mainly oral sources suggest that these morphemes function as markers of differential (positive) assertive values associated with the propositions in which they appear. It is claimed that assertivity and evidentiality, though being distinct categories, may be functionally intertwined and that the overt marking of assertion conveys evidential meaning in that the speaker thereby refers to elements of experience or to the authority of her-/himself or others. Still, the Gascon Enunciative probably cannot count as an evidential in the strongest (or narrowest) sense of the term, i.e. as an element that has the indication of the source of information as its primary meaning, as the semantic-pragmatic link to the source and reliability of the speaker’s knowledge is a merely indirect one here, too. * 1. The difficult task of identifying evidentiality in Romance Since Chafe’s and Nichols’ groundbreaking volume (Chafe & Nichols 1986), the notion of evidentiality, going back to work by Franz Boas and Roman Jakobson (cf. Aikhenvald 2004:11-17), has gained increasing importance in linguistic research, and the term is now firmly established and widely used. The basic definition of evidentiality is that of “a grammatical category that has source of information as its primary meaning” (Aikhenvald 2006:320). The distinctions among the possible types of sources of information depend on the complexity of the respective evidential system, but a fundamental distinction may be drawn between direct, or firsthand, evidence and indirect, or non-firsthand, evidence for the information source, with indirect / non-firsthand evidence being based on either report or inference, as outlined in Willett’s (1988:57) schema. According to the typological survey on types of evidential coding (De Haan 2005a and 2005b) included in the “World Atlas of Language Structures”