References
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y.
2004Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(ed.) 2018aThe Oxford handbook of evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018bEvidentiality: The framework. In Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald (ed.), The Oxford handbook of evidentiality, 1–44. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Axel-Tober, Katrin & Kalle Müller
2017Evidential adverbs in German: Diachronic development and present-day meaning. Journal of Historical Linguistics 7(1). 9–47. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bartee, Ellen Lynn
2007A grammar of Dongwang Tibetan. Santa Barbara: University of California at Santa Barbara PhD dissertation.
2011The role of animacy in the verbal morphology of Dongwang Tibetan. In Mark Turin & Bettina Zeisler (eds.), Himalayan languages and linguistics: Studies in phonology, semantics, morphology and syntax, 131–182. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Caplow, Nancy J.
2017Inference and deferred evidence in Tibetan. In Lauren Gawne & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Evidential systems in Tibetan languages, 225–257. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Causemann, Margret
1989Dialekt und Erzählungen der Nangchenpas. Bonn: Vereinigung für Geschichtswissenschaft Hochasiens Wissenschaftsverlag.Google Scholar
Chang, Betty Shefts & Kun Chang
1984The certainty hierarchy among spoken Tibetan verbs of being. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica 55(4). 603–634.Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott
1992Ergativity and the cognitive model of event structure in Lhasa Tibetan. Cognitive Linguistics 1(3). 289–321. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1997Mirativity: the grammatical marking of unexpected information. Linguistic Typology 11. 33–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Driem, George
1998Dzongkha. Leiden: Research School of Asian, African and Amerindian Studies.Google Scholar
Ebihara, Shiho
2017Evidentiality of the Tibetan verb snang . In Lauren Gawne & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Evidential systems in Tibetan languages, 41–60. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2019 Amudo-Tibettogo bunpoo [Grammar of Amdo Tibetan]. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.Google Scholar
Floyd, Simeon, Elisabeth Norcliffe & Lila San Roque
(eds.) 2018Egophoricity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gawne, Lauren
2016A sketch grammar of Lamjung Yolmo. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, The Australian National University. URI: [URL]
2017Egophoric evidentiality in Bodish languages. In Lauren Gawne & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Evidential systems in Tibetan languages, 61–94. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2021Reported evidentiality in Tibeto-Burman languages. Himalayan Linguistics 20(1). 80–115. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gawne, Lauren & Kristine A. Hildebrandt
Gawne, Lauren & Nathan W. Hill
(eds.) 2017Evidential systems in Tibetan languages. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Haan, Ferdinand
2008Typological approaches to modality. In William Frawley (ed.), The expression of modality, 27–70. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haller, Felix
2004Dialekt und Erzählungen von Themchen: Sprachwissenschaftliche Beschreibung eines Nomadendialektes aus Nord-Amdo. Bonn: Vereinigung für Geschichtswissenschaft Hochasiens Wissenschaftsverlag.Google Scholar
Häsler, Katrin Louise
1999A grammar of the Tibetan Dege (Sde dge) dialect. Zürich: Selbstverlag.Google Scholar
Hill, Nathan W.
2012 “Mirativity” does not exist: ḥdug in “Lhasa” Tibetan and other suspects. Linguistic Typology 161. 389–433. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013ḥdug as a testimonial marker in Classical and Old Tibetan. Himalayan Linguistics 12(1). 1–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hill, Nathan W. & Lauren Gawne
2017The contribution of Tibetan languages to the study of evidentiality. In Lauren Gawne & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Evidential systems in Tibetan languages, 1–38. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hongladarom, Krisadawan
1993Evidentials in Tibetan: A dialogic study of the interplay between form and meaning. Bloomington: Indiana University PhD dissertation.
Hoshi, Izumi
2003 Gendai Tibettogo doosi ziten (Rasa hoogen) [Verb dictionary of Modern Tibetan (Lhasa dialect)]. Fuchu: Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016 Koten Tibettogo bunpoo: Ootoomeikyooki (14 seiki) ni motoduite [A grammar of Classical Tibetan based on the Clear Mirror of Royal Genealogies (the 14th century)]. Fuchu: Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huang, Chenglong
2013Zangmianyu cunzailei dongci de gainian jiegou [Conceptual structure of existential verbs in Tibeto-Burman]. Minzu Yuwen 21. 31–48.Google Scholar
Huber, Brigitte
2005The Tibetan dialect of Lende (Kyirong): A grammatical description with historical annotations. Bonn: Vereinigung für Geschichtswissenschaft Hochasiens Wissenschaftsverlag.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume
2019Egophoric marking and person indexation in Japhug. Language and Linguistics 20(4). 515–534. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kalsang, Jay Garfield, Margaret Speas & Jill de Villiers
2013Direct evidentials, case, tense and aspect in Tibetan: evidence for a general theory of the semantics of evidential. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 31(2). 517–561. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
sKal-bzang ’Gyur-med & sKal-bzang dByangs-can
2002Zangyu fangyan gailun [An introduction to Tibetan dialects]. Beijing: Minzu Chubanshe.Google Scholar
Matsubara, Julie
2017The semantics and pragmatics of the Japanese evidentials -rashii, -sooda, and -yooda: An experimental investigation. Evanston: Northwestern University doctoral dissertation.
Mélac, Éric
2014L’évidentialité en anglais – approche contrastive à partir d’un corpus anglais-tibétain. Paris: Université de la Sorbonne nouvelle – Paris 3 PhD dissertation. URI: [URL]
2023The pragmatic differences between grammatical and lexical evidentiality: A corpus-based study of Tibetan and English. Journal of Pragmatics 2101. 143–156. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mélac, Éric & Joanna Bialek
Forthcoming. Evidentiality as a grammaticalization passenger: An investigation of evidential developments in Tibetic languages and beyond. Studies in Language.
de Nebesky-Wojkowitz, René
1956Oracles and demons of Tibet: The cult and iconography of the Tibetan protective deities. ’s-Gravenhage: Mouton.Google Scholar
Oisel, Guillaume
2013Morphosyntaxe et sémantique des auxiliaires et des connecteurs du tibétain littéraire : étude diachronique et synchronique. Paris: Université de la Sorbonne nouvelle – Paris 3 PhD dissertation. URI: [URL]
2017Re-evaluation of the evidential system of Lhasa Tibetan and its atypical functions. Himalayan Linguistics 16(2). 90–128. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roche, Gerald & Hiroyuki Suzuki
2018Tibet’s minority languages: Diversity and endangerment. Modern Asian Studies 52(4). 1227–1278. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rodríguez-Somolinos, Amalia
Shao, Mingyuan
2014Anduo Zangyu Arouhua de shizheng fanchou [Evidential system of the Arig dialect of Amdo Tibetan]. Tianjin: Nankai University PhD dissertation.
2016aCong quxiang dongci dao shizheng biaoji: Zangyuzu yuyan shizheng biaoji thal de yufahua [From a direction verb to an evidential marker: Grammaticalisation of thal, an evidential marker in Tibetic languages]. Zangxue Xuekan 141. 226–249.Google Scholar
2016bZangyuzu xidongci red de yufahua [The grammaticalisation of the copula verb red in Tibetic languages]. Language and Linguistics 17(5). 679–715. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018Hexi Zoulang binwei Zangyu Dongnahua yanjiu [Study on the mDungnag dialect, an endangered Tibetan language in Hexi Corridor]. Guangzhou: Zhongshan Daxue Chubanshe.Google Scholar
2019Guzangwen de xidongci [The copula verbs in Old Tibetan]. Language and Linguistics 20(3). 417–450. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sun, Jackson T.-S.
1993Evidentials in Amdo Tibetan. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica 631. 944–1001.Google Scholar
Sun, Kai
2019Yushu Zangyu fangyan (Labuhua) yanjiu [Study on Yulshul Tibetan (Lab variety)]. Tianjin: Nankai Daxue Doctoral dissertation.
Suzuki, Hiroyuki
2011Dialectal particularities of Sogpho Tibetan: An introduction to the “Twenty-four villages’ patois”. In Mark Turin & Bettina Zeisler (eds.), Himalayan languages and linguistics: Studies in phonology, semantics, morphology and syntax, 55–73. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012Multiple usages of the verb snang in Gagatang Tibetan (Weixi, Yunnan). Himalayan Linguistics 11(1). 1–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017The evidential system of Zhollam Tibetan. In Lauren Gawne & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Evidential systems in Tibetan languages, 423–444. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2022Geolinguistics in the eastern Tibetosphere: An introduction. Tokyo: Geolinguistic Society of Japan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
forthcoming. Functional transition from ‘hear’ to nonvisual sensory and hearsay evidential categories: A case study of rGyalthang Tibetan.
Suzuki, Hiroyuki & Lozong Lhamo
2021/ka-/ negative prefix in Choswateng Tibetan (Shangri-La, Yunnan). Language and Linguistics 22(4). 593–629. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Suzuki, Hiroyuki & Sonam Wangmo
2017aLanguage evolution and vitality of Lhagang Tibetan: A Tibetic language as a minority in Minyag Rabgang. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 2451. 63–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017bKing’s pig: A story in Lhagang Tibetan with a grammatical analysis in a narrative mode. Himalayan Linguistics 16(2). 129–163. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018Kamutibettogo Tagong [Lhagang] hoogen no zyutubu ni hyoozi sareru syookosei [Evidentiality marked in predicates of the Lhagang dialect of Khams Tibetan]. Journal of Kijutsuken 101. 13–42. URI: [URL]
2021Hearsay evidential marking strategy in Lhagang Tibetan: A case study on folktales and legends. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 44(2). 141–167. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Suzuki, Hiroyuki, Sonam Wangmo & Tsering Samdrup
2021A contrastive approach to the evidential system in Tibetic languages: Examining five varieties from Khams and Amdo. Gengo Kenkyu 1591. 69–101. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Suzuki, Hiroyuki & Tashi Nyima
2021Evidential system of copulative and existential verbs in Lamo. In Yasuhiko Nagano & Takumi Ikeda (eds.), Grammatical phenomena of Sino-Tibetan languages 4: Link languages and their archetypes in Tibeto-Burman, 259–287. Kyoto: Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University. URI: [URL]
Takeuchi, Tsuguhito
2015The function of auxiliary verbs in Tibetan predicates and their historical development. Revue d’études tibétaines 311. 401–415. Available at: [URL] (last access 27 October 2023)
2021History of the Tibetan language. In Yasuhiko Nagano & Takumi Ikeda (eds.), Grammatical phenomena of Sino-Tibetan languages 4: Link languages and archetypes in Tibeto-Burman, 303–323. Kyoto: Research Institute for Humanities, Kyoto University. URI: [URL]
Tournadre, Nicolas
2008Arguments against the concept of ‘conjunct/disjunct’ in Tibetan. In Brigitte Huber, Marianne Volkart, & Paul Widmer (eds.), Chomolangma, Demawend und Kasbek: Festschrift für Roland Bielmeier zu seinem 65. Geburtstag, 281–308. Bonn: Wissenschaftsverlag.Google Scholar
2014The Tibetic languages and their classification. In Thomas Owen-Smith & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Trans-Himalayan linguistics: Historical and descriptive linguistics of the Himalayan area, 105–129. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017A typological sketch of evidential/epistemic categories in the Tibetic languages. In Lauren Gawne & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Evidential systems in Tibetan languages, 95–129. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas & Konchok Jiatso
2001Final auxiliary verbs in Literary Tibetan and Tibetan dialects. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 24(1). 49–111. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas & Randy J. LaPolla
2014Towards a new approach to evidentiality: Issues and directions for research. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 37(2). 240–263. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas, Françoise Robin, Camille Simon, Chabdra Lhamo Kyab, Nyima Dorjee, Bora Sherab, Sonam Gyaltsen & Thubten Rigzin
2018EESTAC questionnaire (rGyab-ljongs-dang gnas-stangs-kyi brda-sprod/ Bho-Ti’i skad-rigs nang gnas-tshul-gyi khungs-dang go-ba len-thabs/ The-tshom bcas ston-pa’i tshig-grogs). Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas & Sangda Dorje
2003Manuel de tibétain standard: langue et civilisation. 2nd edn. Paris: L’Asiathèque.Google Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas & Hiroyuki Suzuki
2023The Tibetic languages: An introduction to the family of languages derived from Old Tibetan. Villejuif: LACITO Publications. DOI logo
Tshe-ring gYang-sgron (Cilinyangzhen)
2021Dongwang Zangyu cankao yufa [A reference grammar of gTorwarong Tibetan]. Beijing: Zhongyang Minzu Daxue PhD dissertation.
Tshe-skyid dBang-mo (Caijiwenmao)
2020Zangyu Kangfangyan Chengduohua de shizheng fanchou [Evidential category in Chengduo variety of Khams Tibetan]. Minzu Yuwen 11. 27–37. Available at: [URL] (last access 27 October 2023)
Vokurková, Zuzana
2008Epistemic modalities in Spoken Standard Tibetan. Praha / Paris: Filozofická Fakulta Univerzity Karlovy – Université Paris 8 PhD dissertation. URI: [URL]
Yliniemi, Juha
2019A descriptive grammar of Denjongke (Sikkimese Bhutia). Helsinki: Helsingin Yliopisto PhD thesis. URI: [URL]
Zeisler, Bettina
2004Relative tense and aspectual values in Tibetan languages: A comparative study. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018aDon’t believe in a paradigm that you haven’t manipulated yourself! Evidentiality, speaker attitude, and admirativity in Ladakhi (extended version). Himalayan Linguistics 17(1). 67–130. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018bEvidence for the development of ‘evidentiality’ as a grammatical category in the Tibetic languages. In Ad Foolen, Helen de Hoop & Gijs Mulder (eds.). Evidence for evidentiality, 227–256. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zemp, Marius
2018A grammar of Purik Tibetan. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhou, Yang & Hiroyuki Suzuki
2022Evidentiality in Selibu: A contact-induced emergence. Diachronica 39(2). 268–309. With an online appendix, 46 pp. DOI logoGoogle Scholar