Presented to you through Paradigm Publishing Services

John Benjamins Publishing Company

Home John Benjamins Publishing Company Chapter 9. Evidence for the development of ‘evidentiality’ as a grammatical category in the Tibetic languages
Chapter
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Chapter 9. Evidence for the development of ‘evidentiality’ as a grammatical category in the Tibetic languages

Abstract

The coding of evidentiality and/or the speaker’s attitude grammaticalized in most Modern Tibetic languages, whereas Classical Tibetan lacks a fully developed evidential system. The source for marking sensory perception is the hedging use of the verb ḥdug. Its lexical meaning of limited stay was extended to the notion of limited truth: ‘it seems’. This was further applied to situations merely perceived. ḥdug spread first into West Tibetan as an inferential marker; later it was re-borrowed as an experiential maker. This scenario allows reconstructing the timeline and the semantic path, and explaining the flexible use of ‘evidential’ markers in Tibetic languages.

Abstract

The coding of evidentiality and/or the speaker’s attitude grammaticalized in most Modern Tibetic languages, whereas Classical Tibetan lacks a fully developed evidential system. The source for marking sensory perception is the hedging use of the verb ḥdug. Its lexical meaning of limited stay was extended to the notion of limited truth: ‘it seems’. This was further applied to situations merely perceived. ḥdug spread first into West Tibetan as an inferential marker; later it was re-borrowed as an experiential maker. This scenario allows reconstructing the timeline and the semantic path, and explaining the flexible use of ‘evidential’ markers in Tibetic languages.

Downloaded on 26.3.2026 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1075/hcp.61.10zei/html
Scroll to top button