, pp. 1-44.
P. Chilton, Analysing Political Discourse. London and New York: Routeledge 2004.
S. Choi, Acquisition of modality. In W. Frawley, (Ed.) The Expression of Modality. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter 2005, pp. 141-171.
P. Collins, Modals and Quasi-modals in English. Amsterdam and New York: Rodopi 2009.
B. Cornillie, 2007. Evidentiality and EpistemicModality in Spanish (Semi-)Auxiliaries. Mouton de Gruyter: Berlin and New York.
B. Cornillie, Evidentiality and epistemicmodality. Functions of Language 16 (1/2009), 44-62.
G. David, et al
Zuzana Vokurková, Charles University in Prague
Epistemicmodalities in spoken Tibetan
Abstract: This article will discuss the main means of expressing epistemic modali-
ties in spoken Tibetan and will demonstrate that these are not expressed by modal
verbs, as is the case with many languages of the world but by other lexical and
grammatical means. These lexical means include, in particular, epistemic adverbs.
The chief grammatical means to be found in the spoken language are morpho-syn-
1 Introduction This paper provides a theoretical discussion and an operational model offering new tools to disentangle the three semantic–pragmatic domains of epistemicmodality, evidentiality, and factuality. As a matter of fact, there is still lack of agreement concerning the semantic–pragmatic boundaries that need to be drawn between some inferential functions of evidentiality and the inferential/evaluational reasoning at the core of epistemicmodality (e. g., Cornillie 2007 and Cornillie 2009 ; Mortelmans 2012 ; Nuyts 2001 ; Squartini 2008 and
Epistemicmodality and focus in Dutch1
JAN NUYTS and WIETSKE VONK
This paper reports on a ‘‘controlled data elicitation’’ experiment investigat-
ing the role of information structure in the use of epistemicmodal expression
forms in Dutch. Specifically, it investigates the effect of focality versus
nonfocality of an epistemicmodal evaluation of Dutch speakers’ selection
of a number of alternative expression types for epistemicmodality (adverbs,
predicative adjectives, modal auxiliaries, mental-state predicates, and par-
ticles). In the experiment
Epistemicmodality, evidentiality, quotativity
and echoic use
Abstract: The purpose of the article is to shed light on the mutual relationships
between three distinct but related domains of linguistic marking. Whereas the
first two, epistemicmodality and evidentiality, are now firmly established in the
linguistic literature, the third, interpretive use, originally formulated in the frame-
work of linguistic pragmatics (Sperber & Wilson 1986), is still waiting for recog-
nition as a sui generis type of
lexical exponents of truth evaluation of propositions]. Katowice: Uniwersytet Śląski. Cheng, Winnie and Le Cheng. 2014. Epistemicmodality in court judgments: A corpus-driven comparison of civil cases in Hong Kong and Scotland. English for Specific Purposes 33: 15–26. Coulthard, Malcolm and Alison Johnson. 2010. The Routledge handbook of forensic linguistics . London: Routledge. Danielewiczowa, Magdalena, 2008a. Jak nie należy opisywać przysłówków epistemicznych [How not to describe epistemic adverbs]. Wiener Slawistischer Almanach 72: 109–128. Danielewiczowa
: Ablex Coates, Jennifer. 1983. The semantics of the modal auxiliaries. London & Canberra: Croom Helm. Cornillie, Bert. 2009. Evidentiality and epistemicmodality. On the close relationship between two different categories. Functions of Language 16(1). 44-62. DOI: 10.1075/fol.16.1.04cor Cornillie, Bert & Paola Pietrandrea. 2012. Modality at work. Cognitive, interactional and textual functions of modal markers. Journal of Pragmatics 44(15). 2109-2115. DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2012.10.004 Danielewiczowa, Magdalena. 2012. W głąb specjalizacji znaczeń. Przysłówkowe
University of Turin
ABSTRACT. So far, frames have been employed to provide a semantics for a
language of tense logic that includes a modal operator that expresses historical necessi-
ty. The operator is defined in terms of quantification over possible courses of events
that satisfy a certain constraint, namely, that of being alike up to a given point. How-
ever, a modal operator can as well be defined without placing that constraint. This pa-
per outlines a logic where an operator of the latter
Epistemicmodality and evidentiality
from an enunciative perspective
Abstract: The aim of this article is to briefly compare and distinguish epistemicmodalities and mediative enunciation in a network of concepts and to propose a
semantic map construed within the framework of enunciation theory. Using the
concept of enunciative stancetaking (Fr. ‘prise en charge énonciative’), we will
show that it must not be confused with the notions of commitment and engage-
ment (e.g. in assertions) which are
Epistemicmodality and perfect morphology
in Spanish and French
Abstract: In current approaches to the interaction between modality and tempo-
rality, there has been widespread consensus as to the fact that, in epistemic read-
ings, modal verbs outscope tense and aspect (Condoravdi 2001, Hacquard 2006,
Demirdache & Uribe-Etxeberria 2006, 2008 among many others). This generali-
zation, which is semantic in nature, conflicts with the actual realization of tense-
aspect morphology on epistemically interpreted