Benner
عباس حسن سلطان ( أستاذ مساعد )
كلية
[email protected]
07709976066
 
 
 
EVIDENTIALS IN SHABAKI
تحميل
بحث النوع:
لغات التخصص العام:
Dr Abbas H J Sultan اسم الناشر:
اسماء المساعدين:
جامعة نابولي ايطاليا الجهة الناشرة:
2015 No. 4  
2015 سنة النشر:

الخلاصة

Evidentials are those means by which any alleged fact whose truth is investigated is established or disproved. They indicate the source of evidence for the reality of a proposition. Languages differ greatly with respect to the sources of information they mark grammatically. In general, there are three subtypes of evidentiality: direct evidentiality, based on first-hand sensory evidence; indirect evidentiality, based on second- and third-hand evidence; and inferential evidentiality. The aim of this paper is to test the truth-conditional content of evidentials in Shabaki. The problem the paper will focus on concerns the interaction between evidentials and conditionals, negation, anaphors, tense and aspect. The corpus is based on the data excerpted from everyday communication in Shabaki. This language is classified as a modern Iranian northwest of the Indo-Iranian family spoken at north-east and south-east plateaus of Mosul, Iraq. The research questions include: Can evidentials be semantically embedded under conditionals and negation? How does evidential content affect anaphoric relations? And, do evidentials block anaphora in a way similar to modals in the absence of additional modal operators? The paper argues that evidentials are not a part of propositional (or at-issue) content. They can neither be semantically scoped under conditionals nor under negation. Besides, they do not behave like ordinary modals with respect to modal subordination. Modal subordination refers to the phenomenon of a modal being interpreted semantically subordinate to a modal in a preceding clause and it is best illustrated by anaphoric dependencies. It has been found that Shabaki can encode the three principal types of evidentials. Evidentials in Shabaki differ from modals in terms of their semantic behavior with respect to pronominal anaphors. They block anaphora in the absence of additional modal operators.