Bergqvist H., Kittilä S. (eds.) Evidentiality, egophoricity, and engagement

Berlin: Language Science Press, 2020. — 293 p. — (Studies in Diversity Linguistics 30). — ISBN 978-3-96110-269-3.The expression of knowledge in language (i.e. epistemicity) consists of a number of distinct notions and proposed categories that are only partly related to a well explored forms like epistemic modals. The aim of the volume is therefore to contribute to the ongoing exploration of epistemic marking systems in lesser-documented languages from the Americas, Papua New Guinea, and Central Asia from the perspective of language description and cross-linguistic comparison. As the title of the volume suggests, part of this exploration consists of situating already established notions (such as evidentiality) with the diversity of systems found in individual languages. Epistemic forms that feature in the present volume include ones that singal how speakers claim knowledge based on perceptual-cognitive access (evidentials); the speaker’s involvement as a basis for claiming epistemic authority (egophorics); the distribution of knowledge between the speechparticipants where the speaker signals assumptions about the addressee’s knowledge of an event as either shared, or non-shared with the speaker (engagement marking).Henrik Bergqvist, Seppo Kittilä. Epistemic perspectives: Evidentiality, egophoricity, and engagement.
Karolina Grzech. Epistemic primacy, Common Ground management, and epistemic perspective.
Alan Rumsey. Egophoricity, engagement, and the centring of subjectivity.
Jonathon Lum. An egophoric analysis of Dhivehi verbal morphology.
Henrik Liljegren. Emerging epistemic marking in Indo-Aryan Palula.
Geny Gonzales Castaño. On the existence of egophoricity across clause types in Totoró Namtrik.
Ellen B. Basso. Interpersonal alignments and epistemic marking in Kalapalo (Southern Cariban, Brazil).
Geraldine Quartararo. Epistemic uses of the pretérito pluscuamperfecto in La Paz Spanish.
Manuel Widmer. Same same but different: On the relationship between egophoricity and evidentiality.