Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2004. Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2011. Evidentials. Oxford Bibliographies Online. [URL]. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. & LaPolla, Randy J. 2007. New perspectives on evidentials: a view from Tibeto-Burman. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 30(2). 1–16.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bielmeier, Roland. 2000. Syntactic, semantic and pragmatic-epistemic functions of auxiliaries in Western Tibetan. LTBA 23(2). 79–125.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chafe, Wallace L., & Johanna Nichols (eds.). 1986. Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology (Advances in Discourse Processes 20). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
de Haan, Ferdinand. 1999. Evidentiality and epistemic modality: Setting boundaries. Southwest Journal of Linguistics 181. 83–101.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
de Haan, Ferdinand. 2001a. The relation between modality and evidentiality. In R. Müller & M. Reis (eds.), Modalität und Modalverben im Deutschen, 201–216. Hamburg: Helmut Buske Verlag.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
de Haan, Ferdinand. 2001b. The place of inference within the evidential system. International Journal of American Linguistics 67(2). 193–219. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
de Haan, Ferdinand. 2005. Encoding speaker perspective: Evidentials. In Z. Frajzyngier, A. Hodges & D.S. Rood (eds.), Linguistic diversity and language theories, 379–397. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: Benjamins. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
DeLancey, Scott. 1985. Lhasa Tibetan evidentials and the semantics of causation. Berkeley Linguistics Society 111. 65–72.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
DeLancey, Scott. 1986. Evidentiality and volitionality in Tibetan. In Chafe & Nichols (eds.), Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology, 203–213. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
DeLancey, Scott. 1989. New vs. assimilated knowledge as a semantic and grammatical category. Presented at the Winter Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, December 30, 1989.
DeLancey, Scott. 1990. Ergativity and the cognitive model of event structure in Lhasa Tibetan. Cognitive Linguistics 11. 289–321. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
DeLancey, Scott. 1992. The historical status of the conjunct/disjunct pattern in Tibeto-Burman. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 251. 39–62. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
DeLancey, Scott. 1997. Mirativity: The grammatical marking of unexpected information. Linguistic Typology 11. 33–52. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
DeLancey, Scott. 2001. The mirative and evidentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 331. 369–382. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
DeLancey, Scott. 2011. Optional ergativity in Tibeto-Burman languages. LTBA 34(2). 1–20.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
DeLancey, Scott. 2012. Still mirative after all these years. Linguistic Typology 16(3). 529–564.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
de Villiers, Jill G., & Jay Garfield. (2009). Evidentiality and narrative. Journal of Consciousness Studies 16 (6-8). 191–217.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
de Villiers, Jill G., Jay Garfield, Harper Gernet-Girard, Tom Roeper & Margaret Speas. (2009). Evidentials in Tibetan: Acquisition, semantics, and cognitive development. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development 1251. 29–47. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Diewald, Gabriele & Elena Smirnova. 2010. Introduction: Evidentiality in European languages – the lexical/grammatical distinction. In G. Diewald & E. Smirnova (eds.), Linguistic realization of evidentiality in European languages, 1–14. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Driem, George van. 1998. Dzongkha (Languages of the Greater Himalayan Region Vol. 1). Leiden: CNWS Publications.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ebihara, Shiho. 2014.
sNang as an evidential verb. Paper presented at the 24th Meeting of the Southeast Asian Linguistics Society, Yangon, 27-31 May, 2014.
Garrett, Edward. 2001. Evidentiality and assertion in Tibetan. University of California, Los Angeles PhD dissertation.
Gawne, Lauren. 2013. Lamjung Yolmo copulas in use: Evidentiality, reported speech and questions. University of Melbourne PhD dissertation.
Gesang Jumian & Gesang Yangjing. 2002. Zangyu fangyan gailun [Overview of Tibetan dialects]. Beijing: Minorities Publishing House.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Guentchéva, Zlatka (ed.). 1996. l’Énonciation médiatisée (Bibliothèque de l’Information Grammaticale). Leuven: Peeters.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Guentchéva, Zlatka & J. Landaburu (eds.) 2007. L’énonciation médiatisée II - Le traitement épistémologique de l’information: illustrations amérindiennes et caucasiennes (Bibliothèque de l’Information Grammaticale 63). VIII–433. Leuven: Peeters.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hagège, Claude. 1982. La structure des langues, Que sais-je? Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Hale, Austin. 1980. Person markers: finite conjunct and disjunct verb forms in Newari. In Trail, Ronald L. et al. (eds.), Papers in South East Asian linguistics 7, 95–106. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, The Australian National University.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Haller, Felix. 2001. Dialekt und Erzählungen von Shigatse (Beiträge zur tibetischen Erzählforschung 13). Bonn: VGH Wissenschaftsverlag.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Haller, Felix. 2004. Dialekt und Erzählungen von Themchen (Beiträge zur tibetischen Erzählforschung 14). Bonn: VGH Wissenschaftsverlag.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hargreaves, David. 2005. Agency and intentional action in Kathmandu Newar, Himalayan Linguistics 51. 1–48.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Häsler, Katrin. 1999. A grammar of the Tibetan Sde.dge dialect. University of Bern doctoral dissertation.
Hill, Nathan. 2012. “Mirativity” does not exist: ḥdug in “Lhasa” Tibetan and other suspects. Linguistic Typology 161. 389–433. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hill, Nathan. 2013.
ḥdug as a testimonial marker in Classical and Old Tibetan. Himalayan Linguistics 12(1). 1–16.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hongladarom, Krisadawan. 1993. Evidentials in Tibetan: a dialogic study of the interplay between form and meaning. Indiana University PhD dissertation.
Huber, Brigitte. 2005. The Tibetan Dialect of Lende (Kyirong): a grammatical description with historical annotations (Beiträge zur tibetischen Erzählforschung 15). Bonn: VGH Wissenschaftsverlag.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
LaPolla, Randy J. 2003. Evidentiality in Qiang. In A.Y. Aikhenvald & R.M.W. Dixon (eds.), Studies in evidentiality (Typological Studies in Language 54), 63–78. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
LaPolla, Randy J., with Chenglong Huang. 2003. A Grammar of Qiang, with Annotated Texts and Glossary (Mouton Grammar Library 39). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
LaPolla, Randy J. 2013. Arguments for a construction-based approach to the analysis of Chinese. In Tseng Chiu-yu (ed.), Human Language Resources and Linguistic Typology: Papers from the Fourth International Conference on Sinology, 33–57. Taipei: Academia Sinica.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lazard, Gilbert. 1956. Caractères distinctifs de la langue tadjik. Bulletin de la Société Linguistique de Paris 521. 117–186.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lessan-Pezechki, H. 2013. Contribution de la linguistique persane à la typologie du temps de l’aspect et des modalités. Habilitation à diriger des Recherches, Université d’Aix-Marseille.
Michael, Lev. 2007. The moral implications of evidentials in Nanti society: Epistemic distance as a pragmatic metaphor for moral responsibility. In Taryne Hallett, Simeon Floyd, Sae Oshima, and Aaron Shield (eds.), Texas Linguistic Forum Vol. 501. Austin: Texas Linguistic Forum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Michael, Lev. 2008. Nanti evidential practice: Language, knowledge, and social action in an Amazonian society. University of Texas at Austin PhD dissertation.
Montaut, Annie. forthcoming. Complex predicates in Hind/Urdu in correlation with some major typological shifts.
Oisel, Guillaume. 2013. Morphosyntaxe et sémantique des auxiliaires et des connecteurs du tibétain littéraire. Etude diachronique et synchronique. University of Paris 3 PhD dissertation.
Post, Mark. 2010. On the frontiers of person-marking and evidentiality: Egophoric and alterphoric marking in Tibeto-Burman. Paper presented at The Cairns Institute, James Cook University, Language and Culture Research Group Local Workshop on Person-Marking, 16th June, 2010.
Qu Aitang & Tan Kerang. 1983. Ali Zangyu [Ngari Tibetan]. Beijing: Zhongguo Shehui Kexue Chubanshe.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sapir, Edward. 1921. Language: An introduction to the study of speech. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sun, Jackson T.-S. 1993. Evidentials in Amdo Tibetan. The Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology 631. 945–1001.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Suzuki, Hiroyuki. 2012. Multiple usages of the verb snang in Gagatang Tibetan (Weixi, Yunnan). Himalayan Linguistics 11(1). 1–16.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tournadre, Nicolas. 1991. The rhetorical use of the Tibetan ergative. LTBA 14(1). 93–107.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tournadre, Nicolas. 1992. La déixis en tibétain: quelques faits remarquables. In Morel M.-A. et Danon-Boileau L. (dir.), La Deixis, 197–208. Paris, PUF.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tournadre, Nicolas. 1996a. L’ergativité en Tibétain moderne: Approche morphosyntaxique de la langue parlée (Bibliothèque de l’Information Grammaticale, 33). Paris/Leuven: Peeters.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tournadre, Nicolas. 1996b. Comparaison des systèmes médiatifs en tibétain central, ladakhi, dzongkha et amdo. In Zlatka Guentchéva (collectif ed.), L’´Enonciation médiatisée (Bibliothèque de l’Information Grammaticale, 35), 195–213. Paris/Leuven: Peeters.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tournadre, Nicolas. 2005. L’aire linguistique tibétaine et ses divers dialectes. Lalies n°25, Presses de l’Ecole Normale Supérieure, 7–56.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tournadre, Nicolas. 2008. Arguments against the concept of ‘conjunct’/‘disjunct’ in Tibetan. In B. Huber, M. Volkart, P. Widmer, P. Schwieger (eds.), Chomolangma, Demawend und Kasbek. Festschrift für Roland Bielmeier zu seinem 65. Geburtstag, Band 1, 281–308. Halle (Saale): International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies GmbH.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tournadre, Nicolas. 2014. The Tibetic languages and their classification. In Thomas Owen-Smith, & Nathan Hill (eds.), Trans-Himalayan linguistics, historical and descriptive linguistics of the Himalayan area, 105–130. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tournadre, Nicolas. 2014. Le Prisme des langues, essai sur la diversité linguistique et les difficultés des langues, préface de Claude Hagège. Paris: l’Asiathèque.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tournadre, Nicolas & Konchok Jiatso. 2001. Final auxiliary verbs in literary Tibetan and in the dialects. LTBA Special Issue on Person and Evidence in Himalayan Languages 24(1). 177–239.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tournadre, Nicolas & Sangda Dorje. 1998. Manuel de tibétain standard. Paris: l’Asiathèque, [re-ed. 2003, 2009]![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tournadre, Nicolas & Sangda Dorje. 2003. Manual of Standard Tibetan. Ithaca, New York: Snowlion. [translation of Manuel de tibétain standard, 1998]![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Vokurková, Zuzana. 2008. Epistemic modalities in Spoken Standard Tibetan. Charles University, Prague, and University of Paris 8 PhD dissertation.
Wiemer, Björn & Vladimir A. Plungjan. 2008. Lexikalische Evidentialitäts-Marker in slavischen Sprachen (Wiener Slawistischer Almanch, Linguistische Reihe, Sonderband 72). München, Wien: Sanger.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Zeisler, Bettina. 2004. Relative tense and aspectual values in Tibetan languages: A comparative study (Trends in Linguistics, Studies and Monographs 150). Berlin; New York: Mouton de Gruyter. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Zeisler, Bettina. Forthcoming. Evidence for the development of ‘evidentiality’ as a grammatical category in Tibetan.