看见和知道

IF 0.6 3区 文学 N/A LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Henrik Bergqvist
{"title":"看见和知道","authors":"Henrik Bergqvist","doi":"10.1075/fol.22006.ber","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The paper provides evidence against the claim that perceptual access is commonly encoded in direct evidentials.\n While visual, auditory, tactile and olfactory perception are conveyed by direct evidentials in contexts where such interpretations\n are appropriate, in others it is the speaker’s involvement, affectedness and established beliefs which are conveyed. These may be\n exclusive to the speaker or shared by the addressee. Instead of information source, it is argued that some direct evidentials\n encode the speaker’s epistemic authority regarding an event based on their primary relation to the event. Epistemic authority\n concerns the speaker’s rights over knowledge and is therefore a relational concept that captures some of the dynamics between\n speech act participants in terms of knowledge representation and attribution. Support for this argument comes from the diachronic\n development of direct evidentials, the effects of co-distribution between direct evidentials and person marking (egophoricity),\n and patterns of use. Data comes from the literature on evidentiality and frequently cited languages from Tucanoan and Quechuan\n languages that feature well-described, rich evidential systems.","PeriodicalId":44232,"journal":{"name":"Functions of Language","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Seeing and knowing\",\"authors\":\"Henrik Bergqvist\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/fol.22006.ber\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n The paper provides evidence against the claim that perceptual access is commonly encoded in direct evidentials.\\n While visual, auditory, tactile and olfactory perception are conveyed by direct evidentials in contexts where such interpretations\\n are appropriate, in others it is the speaker’s involvement, affectedness and established beliefs which are conveyed. These may be\\n exclusive to the speaker or shared by the addressee. Instead of information source, it is argued that some direct evidentials\\n encode the speaker’s epistemic authority regarding an event based on their primary relation to the event. Epistemic authority\\n concerns the speaker’s rights over knowledge and is therefore a relational concept that captures some of the dynamics between\\n speech act participants in terms of knowledge representation and attribution. Support for this argument comes from the diachronic\\n development of direct evidentials, the effects of co-distribution between direct evidentials and person marking (egophoricity),\\n and patterns of use. Data comes from the literature on evidentiality and frequently cited languages from Tucanoan and Quechuan\\n languages that feature well-described, rich evidential systems.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44232,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Functions of Language\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Functions of Language\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.22006.ber\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"N/A\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Functions of Language","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.22006.ber","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"N/A","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这篇论文提供了证据来反驳感知访问通常被编码在直接证据中的说法。虽然视觉、听觉、触觉和嗅觉感知是在这种解释合适的情况下通过直接证据来传达的,但在其他情况下,传达的是说话者的参与、做作和既定信念。这些可能是发言人独有的,也可能是收件人共享的。有人认为,一些直接证据不是信息来源,而是基于其与事件的主要关系来编码说话者对事件的认知权威。认知权威涉及说话人对知识的权利,因此是一个关系概念,它捕捉了言语行为参与者在知识表征和归因方面的一些动态。对这一论点的支持来自于直接证据的历时发展、直接证据和人称标记(自指性)之间的共同分布效应以及使用模式。数据来源于关于证据性的文献,以及经常被引用的图卡努语和确川语的语言,这些语言具有描述良好、丰富的证据系统。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Seeing and knowing
The paper provides evidence against the claim that perceptual access is commonly encoded in direct evidentials. While visual, auditory, tactile and olfactory perception are conveyed by direct evidentials in contexts where such interpretations are appropriate, in others it is the speaker’s involvement, affectedness and established beliefs which are conveyed. These may be exclusive to the speaker or shared by the addressee. Instead of information source, it is argued that some direct evidentials encode the speaker’s epistemic authority regarding an event based on their primary relation to the event. Epistemic authority concerns the speaker’s rights over knowledge and is therefore a relational concept that captures some of the dynamics between speech act participants in terms of knowledge representation and attribution. Support for this argument comes from the diachronic development of direct evidentials, the effects of co-distribution between direct evidentials and person marking (egophoricity), and patterns of use. Data comes from the literature on evidentiality and frequently cited languages from Tucanoan and Quechuan languages that feature well-described, rich evidential systems.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: Functions of Language is an international journal of linguistics which explores the functionalist perspective on the organisation and use of natural language. It encourages the interplay of theory and description, and provides space for the detailed analysis, qualitative or quantitative, of linguistic data from a broad range of languages. Its scope is broad, covering such matters as prosodic phenomena in phonology, the clause in its communicative context, and regularities of pragmatics, conversation and discourse, as well as the interaction between the various levels of analysis. The overall purpose is to contribute to our understanding of how the use of languages in speech and writing has impacted, and continues to impact, upon the structure of those languages.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信