Cover not available
Review published In:
Studies in Language
Vol. 36:2 (2012) ► pp.431–439
Book review

Gabriele Diewald & Elena Smirnova (eds.). Linguistic realization of evidentiality in European languages. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, 2010.

Reviewed by
| The Cairns Institute, James Cook University
Published online: 15 October 2012
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.36.2.07aik
References (34)
References
Adelaar, Willem F. H. 2004. (with Pieter Muysken). The languages of the Andes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2004. Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2007. Information source and evidentiality: What can we conclude? Rivista di Linguistica 19: 1, Mario Squartini (ed.), Special issue on evidentiality between lexicon and grammar, 207–227.Google Scholar
2010. Evidentiality. In Patrick Hogan (ed.), Cambridge encyclopedia of language sciences, 294–5. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2011. Oxford bibliography online: Evidentials. General Editor: Mark Aronoff. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. & Randy J. LaPolla. 2007. ‘New perspectives on evidentials: A view from Tibeto-Burman’. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 30(2). 1–12.Google Scholar
Boas, Frans. 1911. Kwakiutl. In Part 1, Franz Boas (ed.), Handbook of American Indian languages, 423–557. Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 401.Google Scholar
. 1938. Language. In Franz Boas (ed.), General anthropology, 124–45. Boston, New York: D. C. Heath and Company.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 2000. Evidentials: Semantics and history. In Johanson & Utas (eds.), 1–12.Google Scholar
. 1985. Tense. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
DeLancey, Scott. 1992. The historical status of the conjunct-disjunct pattern in Tibeto-Burman. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 251: 39–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W. 2010. Basic linguistic theory. Volume 11. Methodology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Epps, Patience. 2006. The Vaupés melting pot: Tucanoan influence on Hup. In Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald and R. M. Dixon (eds.), Grammars in contact, 267–89. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gronemeyer, C. 1997. Evidentiality in Lithuanian. Working Papers 461: 93–112. Lund University, Department of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Haberland, Hartmut. 2011. Ownership and maintenance of a language in transnational use: Should we leave our lingua franca alone? Journal of pragmatics 431: 937–949. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Isaksson, Bo. 2000. Expressions of evidentiality in two semitic languages  – Hebrew and Arabic. In Johanson & Utas (eds.), 383–399.Google Scholar
Jacobsen, W. H., Jr. 1986. The heterogeneity of evidentials in Makah. In Wallace L. Chafe & Johanna Nichols (eds.), Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology, 3–28. Norwood, NJ.: Ablex.Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman. 1957. Shifters, verbal categories, and the Russian verb. Cambridge: Harvard University.Google Scholar
Jochel’son, Vladimir. 1905. Essay on the grammar of the Yukaghir Language. American Anthropologist Supplement 71: 369–424.Google Scholar
Johanson, Lars & Bo Utas. (eds.). 2000. Evidentials. Turkic, Iranian and neighbouring languages. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kracke, Waud H. 1999. A language of dreaming: Dreams of an Amazonian insomniac. The International Journal of Psycho-analysis 801: 257–75. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Metslang, Helle & Karl Pajusalu. 2002. ‘Evidentiality in South Estonian. Linguistica Uralica 21. 98–109.Google Scholar
Michael, Lev. 2008. Nanti evidential practice: Language, knowledge and social action in an Amazonian society. PhD diss, Uuniversity of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
Miller, Cynthia L. & Leoma G. Gilley. 2007. Evidentiality and mirativity in Shilluk, In Mechthild Reh & Doris L. Payne (eds.), Proceedings of the 8th International Nilo-Saharan Linguistics Colloquium, 191–206. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
Mithun, Marianne. 1999. The languages of native North America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Palmer, Frank R. 1986. Mood and modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Plungian, Vladimir A. 2001. The place of evidentiality within the universal grammatical space. Journal of Pragmatics 331. 349–58. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stolz, Thomas. 1991. Sprachbund im Baltikum? Estnisch und Lettisch im Zentrum einer sprachlichen Konvergenzlandschaft. Bochum: Universitätsverlag Dr. N. Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Storch, Anne. 2005. Aspect and evidentiality in Luwo. In A. Abu-Manga, L. Gilley & A. Storch (eds.), Insights into Nilo-Saharan language, history and culture. Proceedings of the IX. Nilo-Saharan linguistics colloquium, Khartoum 2004, 393–402. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
Sun, J. T. S. 1993. Evidentials in Amdo-Tibetan. Bulletin of the institute of history and philology, academia sinica 63–641. 945–1001.Google Scholar
Thurgood, Graham & Randy J. LaPolla (eds.). 2003. The Sino-Tibetan languages. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Timberlake, Alan. 1982. The impersonal passive in Lithuanian. Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 508–23.Google Scholar
Travis, Catherine E. 2005. Discourse markers in Colombian Spanish: A study in polysemy. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Willerslev, Rane. 2007. Soul hunters: hunting, animism, and personhood among the Siberian Yukaghirs. Berkeley: University of California Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Bernárdez, Enrique
2017. Evidentiality—A Cultural Interpretation. In Advances in Cultural Linguistics [Cultural Linguistics, ], ► pp. 433 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.