Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

STUF - Language Typology and Universals

Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung

Editor-in-Chief: Stolz, Thomas

4 Issues per year

CiteScore 2017: 0.19

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.166
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 0.506

See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 68, Issue 2


Using you to get to me: Addressee perspective and speaker stance in Duna evidential marking

Lila San Roque
Published Online: 2015-06-17 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/stuf-2015-0010


Languages have complex and varied means for representing points of view, including constructions that can express multiple perspectives on the same event. This paper presents data on two evidential constructions in the language Duna (Papua New Guinea) that imply features of both speaker and addressee knowledge simultaneously. I discuss how talking about an addressee’s knowledge can occur in contexts of both coercion and co-operation, and, while apparently empathetic, can provide a covert way to both manipulate the addressee’s attention and express speaker stance. I speculate that ultimately, however, these multiple perspective constructions may play a pro-social role in building or repairing the interlocutors’ common ground.

Keywords: addressee perspective; Duna; evidentiality; interaction; multiple perspective; stance


  • Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2004. Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Anderson, Lloyd B. 1986. Evidentials, paths of change, and mental maps: Typologically regular asymmetries. In Wallace Chafe & Johanna Nichols (eds.), 273–312.Google Scholar

  • Bergqvist, Henrik. 2015. The role of perspective in epistemic marking. Lingua doi: 10.1016/j.lingua.2015.02.008

  • Chafe, Wallace & Johanna Nichols (eds.) 1986. Evidentiality: The linguistic encoding of epistemology. Norwood: Ablex.Google Scholar

  • Clark, Herbert H. 1996. Using language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Cochrane, Dennis & Nancy Cochrane. 1966. Duna essentials for translation. Manuscript submitted to the Grammar Department, SIL, PNG Branch.Google Scholar

  • Danziger, Eve & Alan Rumsey. 2013. Introduction: From opacity to intersubjectivity across languages and cultures. Language and Communication 33(3). 247–250.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Davidse, Kristin, Lieven Vandelanotte & Hubert Cuyckens (eds). 2010. Subjectification, intersubjectification and grammaticalization. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar

  • Du Bois, John W. 2007. The stance triangle. In Robert Engelbretson (ed.), Stancetaking in discourse, 139–182. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Duranti, Alessandro, 2010. Husserl, intersubjectivity and anthropology. Anthropological Theory 10(1). 1–20.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Evans, Nicholas. 2005. View with a view: Towards a typology of multiple perspective. Berkeley Linguistics Society 31. 93–120.Google Scholar

  • Fleck, David W. 2007. Evidentiality and double tense in Matses. Language 83(3). 589–614.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Fox, Barbara A., Sandra A. Thompson, Cecilia E. Ford & Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen. 2013. Conversation analysis and linguistics. In Jack Sidnell & Tanya Stivers (eds), The handbook of conversation analysis, 726–740. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

  • Frawley, William. 1992. Linguistic semantics. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

  • Giles, Glenda. nd. A guide to the pronunciation of Duna and Duna language lessons. Manuscript held at SIL PNG, Ukarumpa.Google Scholar

  • Haley, Nicole C. 2002. Ipakana yakaiya: Mapping landscapes, mapping lives. PhD dissertation, The Australian National University.Google Scholar

  • Hanks, William. 2005. Explorations in the deictic field. Current Anthropology 46. 191–220.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Hardman, Martha J. 1986. Data-source marking in the Jaqi languages. In Wallace Chafe & Johanna Nichols (eds.), 113–136.Google Scholar

  • Hayashi, Makoto, Geoffrey Raymond & Jack Sidnell (eds.). 2013. Conversational repair and human understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Hengeveld, Kees & Hella Olbertz. 2012. Didn’t you know? Mirativity does exist! Linguistic Typology 16(3). 487–503.Google Scholar

  • Heritage, John. 2012. Epistemics in action: Action formation and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction 45. 1–29.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Jakobson, Roman. 1957. Shifters and verbal categories. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, Dept. of Slavic Languages and Literatures. Reprinted in Linda R. Waugh & Monique Monville-Burston (eds.), 1990, On language, 386–392. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

  • Kockelman, Paul. 2004. Stance and subjectivity. Journal of Linguistic Anthroplogy 14(2). 127–50.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Landaburu, Jon. 2007. La modalisation du savoir en langue andoke (Amozonie Colombienne). In Zlatka Guéntcheva & Jon Landaburu (eds.), Enonciation médiatisée et modalité epistémique. Louvain: Peeters.Google Scholar

  • Levinson, Stephen C. 2012. Interrogative intimations: On a possible social economics of interrogatives. In Jan P. de Ruiter (ed.), Questions: Formal, functional and interactional perspectives, 11–32. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Lyons, J. 1982. Deixis and subjectivity: Loquor, ergo sum? In Robert J. Jarvella & Wolfgang Klein (eds.), Speech, place, and action: Studies in deixis and related topics, 101–124. Chichester and New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar

  • Madden, B. nd. [c.1960]. An introduction to Mendi grammar. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar

  • Mexas, Theocharis. 2013. Tracing mirativity in languages of the New Guinea Highlands. Paper presented at the Sixth Austronesian and Papuan Languages and Linguistics Conference, SOAS, London.Google Scholar

  • Molochieva, Zarina. 2006. Category of evidentiality and mirativity in Chechen. Handout from a paper presented at Languages of the Caucasus, 7-9 December, MPI EVA, Leipzig.Google Scholar

  • Nuyts, Jan. 2005. Modality: Overview and linguistic issues. In William Frawley (ed.), The expression of modality, 1–26. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

  • Rule, William M. (compiler). 1966. A grammatical description of the Duna (Yuna) language. Manuscript held at SIL PNG, Ukarumpa.Google Scholar

  • San Roque, Lila. 2008. An introduction to Duna grammar. PhD dissertation, The Australian National University.Google Scholar

  • San Roque, Lila & Robyn Loughane. 2012a. Inheritance, contact and change in the New Guinea Highlands evidentiality area. Language and Linguistics in Melanesia [Special Issue 2012 Part II]. 397–427.Google Scholar

  • San Roque, Lila & Robyn Loughane. 2012b. The New Guinea Highlands evidentiality area. Linguistic Typology 16. 111–167.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • San Roque, Lila, Simeon Floyd & Elisabeth Norcliffe. 2015. Evidentiality and interrogativity. Lingua. doi:10.1016/j.lingua.2014.11.003.

  • Schapper, Antoinette & Lila San Roque. 2011. Demonstratives and non-embedded nominalisations in three Papuan languages of the Timor-Alor-Pantar family. Studies in Language 35. 380–408.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Sillitoe, Paul. 2010. Trust in development: Some implications of knowing in indigenous knowledge. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 16(1). 12–30.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Traugott, Elisabeth. 2010. (Inter)subjectivity and (inter)subjectification: A reassessment. In Kristin Davidse, Lieven Vandelanotte & Hubert Cuyckens (eds.), Subjectification, intersubjectification and grammaticalization, 29–71. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar

  • Verhagen, Arie. 2008. Intersubjectivity and the architecture of the language system. In Jordan Zlatev, Timothy P. Racine, Chris Sinha & Esa Itkonen (eds.), The shared mind: Perspectives on intersubjectivity, 307–331. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Zariquiey Biondi, Roberto. 2011. A grammar of Kashibo-Kakataibo. PhD dissertation, La Trobe University.Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2015-06-17

Published in Print: 2015-07-01

Citation Information: STUF - Language Typology and Universals, Volume 68, Issue 2, Pages 187–210, ISSN (Online) 2196-7148, ISSN (Print) 1867-8319, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/stuf-2015-0010.

Export Citation

©2015 by De Gruyter Mouton.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in