Chapter 15 Evidentiality, Mirativity, and Related Categories

Kurtöp has an incredibly rich system system of evidentiality, mirativity, and related categories. The system makes use of finite verbal suffixes, copulas, clit- ics and particles in order to create an elaborate set of contrasts, which are best captured with the typological notions of evidentiality (source of knowledge), mirativity (expectations of knowledge), and egophoricity (privelaged access to knowledge). The discussion here is a summary of Hyslop (2011b, 2014b, to appear)1. This system of evidentiality, mirativity, egophoricity, and epistemicity, etc., is part and parcel of the verbal system; these categories are not optional; rather they are required in any finite clause, including questions. This chapter first presents the contrasts made in perfective aspect in §15.1, followed by a discussion of the mirative contrast in §15.2. Kurtöp has an elabo- rate set of affirmative and negative existential and equational copulas; their role in the evidential/mirative/epistemological system is presented in §15.3. Particles and clitics which participate in the system are presented in §15.4. Readers who are interested in a shorter summary of the system as a whole can turn directly to §15.5, which combines the categories present in these disparate aspects of the grammar.

15.1 Perfective Aspect

Kurtöp makes a five-way contrast in perfective aspect. Figure 18 summarises the contrasts made between whether the speaker is certain or uncertain, whether the speaker has personal knowledge or not, whether the knowledge was unexpected or not, and whether the speaker expects the interlocutor to share the knowledge or not. These are discussed in detail below. Kurtöp -shang is used to encode perfective aspect with direct evidential value when the speaker has direct evidence of the experience and there is no expectation that another speech-act participant would have direct evidence. This term is used here in a sense similar to that of Tournadre (2008: 295), who states ‘“egophoric” expresses personal knowledge or intention on the part of

1 Refer also to those references for a more thorough history of the ideas behind the theoretical constructs used in this section (ie. evidentiality, mirativity, egophoricity).

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���7 | doi ��.��63/9789004328747_016 300 Chapter 15

Epistemological Value

+ Certainty ‒ Certainty ‒ para

+ Personal ‒ Personal Knowledge Knowledge ‒ mu

+ Personal ‒ Unexpected ‒ na

+ Exclusive Knowledge ‒ Exclusive Knowledge ‒ shang ‒ pala Figure 18 Kurtöp perfective aspect suffixes (Hyslop 2014b).

the actual speaker’. Tournadre (2008: 297) describes a contrast between narrow and broad scope of egophorics. The use here in Kurtöp (where expectation of others’ knowledge is relevant) is more similar to narrow scope, though the Kurtöp category appears to be slightly different than the Tibetan category. This form occurs canonically with first person S or A arguments, as in (538) and (539).

(538) ngat geshang ngat ge-shang 1.sg.abs go-pfv:ego ‘I went.’

(539) khici mengya zhit geshang da khici meng=ya zhit ge-shang da 2.sg.gen name=also forget go-pfv:ego now ‘I also forgot his name now.’ PS20061206.P

It is also common if the O argument is first person, as in (540).