University of Connecticut OpenCommons@UConn Doctoral Dissertations University of Connecticut Graduate School 10-31-2020 On the Semantics of Evidentials in Southern Aymara Gabriel A. Martinez Vera University of Connecticut - Storrs, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://opencommons.uconn.edu/dissertations Recommended Citation Martinez Vera, Gabriel A., "On the Semantics of Evidentials in Southern Aymara" (2020). Doctoral Dissertations. 2639. https://opencommons.uconn.edu/dissertations/2639 On the Semantics of Evidentials in Southern Aymara Gabriel Antonio Mart´ınez Vera, Ph.D. University of Connecticut, 2020 This dissertation addresses a number of phenomena in the semantics and syntax-semantics of evidentiality focusing on Southern Aymara within a cross-linguistic perspective. Traditionally, the literature has identified three evidentials in this language: the direct evidential enclitic =wa, the indirect evidential suffix -tay, and the reportative evidential free morpheme siwa. This dissertation concentrates on four issues in connection to these markers. The first issue I address is the association of evidentiality and focus in the same marker, namely, the direct evidential =wa. This is a topic that has been previously acknowledged (Muysken 1995; Faller 2002), but has remained unaccounted for. More generally, =wa is likened to focus particles, such as English even, in an approach that makes explicit how an evidential meaning fits with a focus meaning. Then I analyze the discourse contrasts in sentences involving direct evidentiality. By showing that there is a con- trast between sentences with and without =wa, I make the novel observation that sentences with and without =wa differ with regard to who is held responsible for the evidence that is available, and discuss the conse- quences of this contrast, which is tied to, e.g., storytelling. I also discuss indirect evidentiality and mirativity. Adopting a comparative approach contrasting Quechua and Southern Aymara, two Andean languages that are typologically nearly identical, I discuss different analyses that account for indirect evidentiality and argue that an analysis that introduces a learning time (i.e., a time at which the speaker acquires relevant ev- idence) is more appropriate. I extend the analysis to account for cases involving mirativity. Finally, I focus on clauses with more than one evidential in Aymara. I provide an analysis that involves syntactic and seman- tic considerations that make explicit under what conditions evidentials can co-occur, making explicit how different evidential meanings can be combined in a single clause, and extend the analysis to other languages for which this phenomenon has been reported. On the Semantics of Evidentials in Southern Aymara Gabriel Antonio Mart´ınez Vera Licentiate, Pontificia Universidad Catolica´ del Peru,´ 2014 B.A., Pontificia Universidad Catolica´ del Peru,´ 2014 M.A., University of Connecticut, 2018 A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the University of Connecticut 2020 Copyright by Gabriel Antonio Mart´ınez Vera 2020 ii APPROVAL PAGE Doctor of Philosophy Dissertation On the Semantics of Evidentials in Southern Aymara Presented by Gabriel Antonio Mart´ınez Vera, B.A., Licentiate, M.A. Major Advisor Jon Gajewski Associate Advisor Zeljkoˇ Boskoviˇ c´ Associate Advisor Magdalena Kaufmann Associate Advisor Stefan Kaufmann University of Connecticut 2020 iii Acknowledgements The dissertation is perhaps the biggest product somebody writes down when pursuing a Ph.D. It is the product of the work somebody has undertaken in the last couple of years in order to hopefully make a contribution to their field. That somebody graduating, however, is not just that piece of writing. But getting a Ph.D. is more than just the work presented in a dissertation, it is the transformation of a student to a scholar. These acknowledgment pages aim at showing what is normally a hidden transformation by making explicit some of the landmarks of my life as a graduate student at UConn in connection to the people who were crucial in the process. Without their help, things would have been much more difficult to say the least. In my case, everything starts with a good dose of belief—but not in a religious way. I must have believed in myself; otherwise, things would not have happened. In the absence of self-confidence, a Ph.D. does not occur. Here is where my family has been, perhaps, the most important. I come from a small city in South America, Guayaquil, in Ecuador (although my work might suggest to some people that I am Peruvian), where people have traditional occupations (doctors, lawyers, etc.). Being a linguist, an uncommon and misunderstood career, is something that needs explanation. While this is common with the Humanities in general, as is well-known, Linguistics is not Philosophy. This is where my family comes in. My parents, Pablo and Maribel, my siblings, Pablo and Mar´ıa Fernanda, and, more generally, my extended family, including my grandparents, Diego, Hada, Gilberto and Cuty, my aunts and uncles, Lizzie, Diego, Claudia, David, Tania and Martha, and my cousins, Sebastian, Diego, Mar´ıa Belen,´ Analuc´ıa, Camila, Mar´ıa del Mar, Isabella, Jorge Ignacio, Rafael and Juan Carlos, have always believed in me and have always taught me to believe in myself. They encouraged me to pursue my dreams, including becoming a linguist. More recently, my family has expanded including my mother-in-law, Amparo, and my siblings-in-law, Gisela and Andres,´ as well as my nieces Rafaela and Luc´ıa, and my nephews, Pablo Joaqu´ın and Mart´ın. Importantly, they all share this belief, which has been fundamental in my upbringing. Gracias, mi querida familia, por creer en m´ı y por darme las herramientas para que yo tambien´ crea en m´ı mismo. While I have started chronologically, the last twelve years of my life would not have been the same without my wife, Tania. She is the one by my side everyday encouraging me to keep going. She has always encouraged me to pursue my ideas and to never discard what I think is worth pursuing regardless of the iv reactions of other people, even when I encounter a lot of rejection in the process. She has always been there believing in me. Gracias, Tanita,˜ por acompanarme˜ en todo este proceso. UConn has been an ideal place for me. Both the faculty members and my peers have been very support- ive. I would like to thank the faculty members for making an effort so that graduate students feel comfortable and supported. This has been ideal for me. I personally work better in an environment where people support each other, and this has certainly been the case at UConn. My time here was also made easier with Tamara Cohen in the mix: she knows exactly how to make things work in an expedite way, which suits me very well, because I am just like that. Here, I would like to mention some specific people at UConn. First and foremost, I would like to thank Jon Gajewski. Of all the things I could say about him, here are a few highlights. First, he takes me seriously. When I had gone to his office as a first year and told him that I wanted to do semantics, his response was for us to have weekly meetings for the rest of the semester reading classical papers in the field. Maybe this ended up being a nightmare for him, because we have been having weekly meetings ever since. A lot of the linguistics that I do now was learned in these meetings which goes to show the part that Jon played in this process. Second, he believes in me. Even when I had doubted my skills during a particular moment in my second year, Jon never lost faith in me. Third, he is a good listener. I sometimes speak a lot; I like to express my ideas out loud. Jon always made the effort to understand what I was trying to say and ask the questions that would make me think deeper. My Ph.D. experience would not have been the same without Zeljkoˇ Boskoviˇ c.´ He has been fundamental as well. First and foremost, I would like to thank him for strongly encouraging me to not stop doing syntax— this was, after all, my background before UConn. Because of Zeljko,ˇ I have become interested in islands. Zeljkoˇ has taught me a number of things that I will carry with me for life. The first one was how to write anything and everything. He has read and corrected my abstracts and papers countless times. Because of him, I know how to structure my writing. The second thing is that Zeljkoˇ keeps it real. He would always give me an honest opinion as to what I could expect from anything (e.g., whether a paper is likely to be accepted, etc.). The third thing I have learned from Zeljkoˇ is that you can make something out of the smallest things: no matter how ridiculous you think an idea you had is, Zeljkoˇ can always spin it in a way that becomes interesting. While this is a good approach for linguistics, it is also good more generally: you can always make something out of what you think is trivial. I would also like to especially thank Magda Kaufmann. She has taught me different ways of looking at v problems. Whenever I come in with an idea, she has a way to make me think about it in a different light. I have deeply enjoyed our conversations, and I appreciate that she has always read my work very carefully. Her incisive comments have always been spot on; she has trained me on how to be explicit when discussing things.