Cover not available
Part of
Egophoricity
Edited by Simeon Floyd, Elisabeth Norcliffe and Lila San Roque
[Typological Studies in Language 118] 2018
► pp. 305–345

Chapter 10
Egophoricity and evidentiality in Guambiano (Nam Trik)

| Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics
Egophoric verbal marking is a typological feature common to Barbacoan languages, but otherwise unknown in the Andean sphere. The verbal systems of three out of the four living Barbacoan languages, Cha’palaa, Tsafiki and Awa Pit, have previously been shown to express egophoric contrasts. The status of Guambiano has, however, remained uncertain. In this chapter, I show that there are in fact two layers of egophoric or egophoric-like marking visible in Guambiano’s grammar. Guambiano patterns with certain other (non-Barbacoan) languages in having ego-categories which function within a broader evidential system. It is additionally possible to detect what is possibly a more archaic layer of egophoric marking in Guambiano’s verbal system. This marking may be inherited from a common Barbacoan system, thus pointing to a potential genealogical basis for the egophoric patterning common to these languages. The multiple formal expressions of egophoricity apparent both within and across the four languages reveal how egophoric contrasts are susceptible to structural renewal, suggesting a pan-Barbacoan preoccupation with the linguistic encoding of self-knowledge.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Egophoric marking, person marking and evidentiality
  • 3.Speaker/non-speaker distinctions in Guambiano grammar
  • 4.Evidentiality in Guambiano
    • 4.1The evidential status of -an
  • 5.Ego evidentiality
    • 5.1 -ar as an ego evidential
      • 5.1.1Some points of divergence and resemblance with egophoric markers in other languages
    • 5.2‘Personal affectedness’ evidentiality
  • 6.Interrogative contexts
  • 7.A comparative Barbacoan perspective
    • 7.1Vestigial egophoric contrasts in Guambiano
  • 8.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 25 April 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.118.10nor
References (75)
References
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2004. Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Anand, Pranav & Nevins, Andrew. 2004. Shifty operators in changing contexts. In Proceedings of the 14th Conference on Semantics and Linguistic Theory, Kazuha Watanabe & Robert B. Young (eds), 20–37. Ithaca NY: CLC Publications.Google Scholar
Beuchat, Henri, & Rivet, Paul. (1910). Affinités des langues du sud de la Colombie et du nord de l’Équateur. Le Mouséon, 11, 33–68, 141–198.Google Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar. 2000. Introduction: Person and evidence in Himalayan languages. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 23(2): 1–11.Google Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar & Nichols, Johanna. 2007. Inflectional morphology. In Language Typology and Syntactic Description, 2nd (ed.), Timothy Shopen (ed.), 169–240. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Lyle. (1997). American Indian languages: The historical linguistics of Native America. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chun, Soon Ae, & Zubin, David A. 1990. Experiential vs. agentive constructions in Korean narrative. In Proceedings of the 16th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, Kira Hall, Jean Pierre Koenig, Michael Meacham, Sondra Reinman & Laurel Sutton (eds), 81–93. Berkeley CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
Constenla Umanã, Adolfo. 1991. Las lenguas del área intermedia: Introducción a su estudio areal. San José: Universidad de Costa Rica.Google Scholar
Creissels, Denis. 2008. Remarks on so-called ‘conjunct/disjunct’ systems. Paper presented at the conference Syntax of the World’s Languages III, Berlin.
Curnow, Timothy J. 1997. A grammar of Awa Pit (Cuaiquer): An indigenous language of Southwestern Colombia. Phd dissertation, Australian National University.Google Scholar
Curnow, Timothy Jowan. 2000. Why “first/non-first person” is not grammaticalized mirativity. In Proceedings of ALS2k, the 2000 Conference of the Australian Linguistic Society, Keith Allan & John Henderson (eds). <[URL]>
. 2002. Conjunct/disjunct marking in Awa Pit. Linguistics 40(3): 611–627. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cysouw, Michael. 2003. The Paradigmatic Structure of Person Marking [Oxford Studies in Typology and Linguistic Theory]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
de Haan, Ferdinand. 2001. The place of inference within the evidential system. International Journal of American Linguistics 67: 193–219. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
DeLancey, Scott. 1992. The historical status of the conjunct/disjunct pattern in Tibeto-Burman. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 25: 39–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1997. Mirativity: The grammatical marking of unexpected information. Linguistic Typology 1: 33–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dickinson, Connie. 2000. Mirativity in Tsafiki. Studies in Language 24(3): 379–422. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. Grammaticalizing the knower in Tsafiki. Handout from the Workshop on The Grammar of Knowledge Asymmetries: ‘Conjunct/disjunct’ Alignment from a Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Linguistics Society of America [LSA] Institute, Boulder CO.Google Scholar
Dixon, Robert. M.W. 2010. Basic Linguistic Theory, Vol. 2: Grammatical Topics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Evans, Nicholas. 2009. Grammar and psychosocial cognition. Course handout, LSA Institute 2009, Berkeley CA.Google Scholar
Faller, Martina T. 2002. Semantics and Pragmatics of Evidentials in Cuzco Quechua. PhD dissertation, Stanford University CA.Google Scholar
Gabelentz, Georg von der. 1901. Die Sprachwissenschaft. Ihre Aufgaben, Methoden und bisherigen Ergebnisse. Tübingen: Gunther Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
Garrett, Edward J. 2001. Evidentiality and Assertion in Tibetan. PhD dissertation, University of California Los Angeles.Google Scholar
van Gelderen, Elly. 2009. Feature economy in the linguistic cycle. In Historical Syntax and Linguistic Theory, Paola Crisma & Giuseppe Longobardi (eds), 93–109. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gonzales Castaño, Geny. 2014. Esquisse de description de la langue nam trik. Langue amerindienne parlée dans les Andes Colombiennes. Unpublished Masters thesis. Université Lumière Lyon 2.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1960. General classification of Central and South American languages. In Men and Cultures: Fifth international congress of anthropological and ethnological sciences (1956), Anthony F. C. Wallace (ed.), 791–794. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1987. Language in the Americas. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Hale, Austin. 1980. Person markers: Finite conjunct and disjunct verb forms in Newari. In Papers in Southeast Asian Linguistics 7 [Pacific Linguistics Series A, 53], Ronald L. Trail (ed.), 95–106. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
Hardman, Martha J. 1986. Data-source marking in the Jaqi languages. In Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology [Advances in Discourse Processes 20], Wallace L. Chafe & Johanna Nichols (eds), 113–136. Norwood NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Hargreaves, David. 1991. The conceptual structure of intentional action: Data from Kathmandu Newari. In Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 379–389. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005. Agency and intentional action in Kathmandu Newar. Himalayan Linguistics 5, 1–48.Google Scholar
Hodge, Carleton. 1970. The linguistic cycle. Language Sciences 13: 1–7.Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1917. Negation in English and other Languages. Copenhagen: A.F. Høst.Google Scholar
Kaufman, Terrence. 1990. Language history in South America: What we know and how to know more. In Amazonian linguistics: Studies in lowland South American languages, Doris L. Payne (ed.), 13–67. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
. 1994. The native languages of South America. In Atlas of the world’s languages, Christopher Mosley & R. E. Asher (eds), 46–76. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kim, Stephen S. 2003. Santa. In The Mongolic Languages, Juha Janhunen (ed.), 346–363. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lasersohn, Peter. 2005. Context dependence, disagreement, and predicates of personal taste. Linguistics and Philosophy 28: 643–686. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Loughnane, Robyn. 2009. A Grammar of Oksapmin. PhD dissertation, University of Melbourne.Google Scholar
Malone, Terry. 1988. The origin and development of Tuyuca evidentials. International Journal of American Linguistics 54: 119–140. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maslova, Elena. 2003. Evidentiality in Yukaghir. In Studies in Evidentiality [Typological Studies in Language 54], Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald & Robert M.W. Dixon (eds), 219–235. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matthewson, Lisa. Submitted. Evidence type, evidence location, evidence strength.Google Scholar
Miller, Amy. 2001. A Grammar of Jamul Tiipay [Mouton Grammar Library 23]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mithun, Marianne. 1999. The Languages of Native North America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Murray, Sarah E. 2010. Evidentiality and the Structure of Speech Acts. PhD dissertation, Rutgers University.Google Scholar
Mushin, Ilana. 2001. Evidentiality and Epistemological Stance: Narrative Retelling [Pragmatics and Beyond New Series 87]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nikitina, Tatiana. 2012. Personal deixis and reported discourse: Towards a typology of person alignment. Linguistic Typology 16: 233–263.Google Scholar
Nugteren, Hans. 2003. Shira Yughur. In The Mongolic Languages, Juha Janhunen (ed.), 265–285. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Oswalt, Robert L. 1986. The evidential system of Kashaya. In Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology [Advances in Discourse Processes 20], Wallace L. Chafe & Johanna Nichols (eds), 29–45. Norwood NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Pabón, Marta. 1989. Introducción al estudio de los auxiliares – idioma totoró. Unpublished Masters thesis. Santafé de Bogotá: CCELA.Google Scholar
Plungian, Vladimir A. 2001. The place of evidentiality within the universal grammatical space. Journal of Pragmatics 33: 349–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Post, Mark. 2013. Person-sensitive TAME marking in Galo: Historical origins and functional motivation. In Functional-Historical Approaches to Explanation: In Honor of Scott DeLancey [Typological Studies in Language 103], Tim Thornes, Erik Andvik, Gwendolyn Hyslop & Joana Jansen (eds), 105–130. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rice, Keren D. 1986. Some remarks on direct and indirect speech in Slave (Northern Atapaskan). In Direct and Indirect Speech, Florian Coulmas (ed.), 47–76. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rojas Curieux, Tulio, Roció Nieves Oviedo, y Marcos Yule Yatacue. 1991. Estudios Grammaticales de la Lengua Páez (Nasa Yuwe). Descripciones 7. Colciencias: Universidad de los Andes, Bogotá.Google Scholar
Rule, W. Murray. 1977. A Comparative Study of the Foe, Huli, and Pole languages of Papua New Guinea. Sydney: University of Sydney.Google Scholar
San Roque, Lila. 2008. An Introduction to Duna Grammar. PhD dissertation, Australian National University.Google Scholar
San Roque, Lila, Floyd, Simeon & Norcliffe, Elisabeth. 2017. Evidentiality and interrogativity. Lingua 186–187: 120–143. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Schlenker, Philippe. 2003. A plea for monsters. Linguistics and Philosophy 26: 29–120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seyoum, Mulugeta. 2008. A Grammar of Dime. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
Shoemaker, Sydney. 1968. Self-reference and self-awareness. The Journal of Philosophy 65(19): 555–567. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1970. Persons and their pasts. American Philosophical Quarterly 7(4): 269–285.Google Scholar
Simons, Gary F. & Fennig, Charles D. 2017. Ethnologue: Languages of the World, Twentieth edition. Dallas, Texas: SIL International. Online version: [URL]Google Scholar
Speas, Peggy. 2000. Person and point of view in Navajo. In WCCFL Papers in Honor of Ken Hale, Eloise Jelinek (ed.). Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas. 2008. Against the concept of ‘Conjunct’/’Disjunct’ in Tibetan. In Chomolangma, Demawend und Kasbek: Festschrift für Roland Bielmeier zu seinem 65. Geburtstag, Brigitte Huber, Marianne Volkart, Paul Widmer & Peter Schwieger (eds), 281–308. Bonn: VGH Wissenschaftsverlag.Google Scholar
Triviño Garzón, Lilia. 1991. Sobre la modalidad en la lengua guambiana (Quizgó). In Memorias II. Bogotá: Universidad de los Andes.Google Scholar
. 1994a. Algunas particularidades de los verbs de posición en la lengua guambiana (Quizgó). Amerindia 29–30: 195–206.Google Scholar
. 1994b. Hacia una tipología de la predicacíon de la oración simple en la lengua guambiana. BIFEA 23(3): 601–618.Google Scholar
Vásquez de Ruíz, Beatriz. 1988. La predicación en guambiano [Lenguas Aborígenes de Colombia. Série Descripciones 2]. Santafé de Bogotá: CCELA.Google Scholar
. 1994. La oración compuesta en guambiano. BIFEA 23(3): 619–637.Google Scholar
. 2007. Les opérations de modélisation épistémique en guambiano (Cauca, Colombie). In L’Énonciation médiatiseé II, Zlatka Guentchéva & Jon Landaburu (eds), 87–110. Louvain: Éditions Peeters.Google Scholar
Waldie, Ryan James. 2012. Evidentiality in Nuu-chah-nulth. PhD dissertation, University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
Watters, David E. 2006. The conjunct-disjunct distinction in Kaike. Nepalese Linguistics 22: 300–319.Google Scholar
Widmer, Manuel. 2014. A Descriptive Grammar of Bunan. PhD dissertation, University of Bern.Google Scholar
Willett, Thomas. 1988. A cross-linguistic survey of the grammaticization of evidentiality. Studies in Language 12: 51–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1958. Philosophical Investigations. Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Woodbury, Anthony C. 1986. Interaction of tense and evidentiality: A study of Sherpa and English. In Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology [Advances in Discourse Processes 20], Wallace L. Chafe & Johanna Nichols (eds), 188–202. Norwood NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Sandman, Erika & Karolina Grzech
2022. Egophoricity and evidentiality: Different categories, similar discourse functions. Interactional Linguistics 2:1 ► pp. 79 ff. DOI logo
Pancheva, Roumyana & Maria Luisa Zubizarreta
2019. On the role of person features in the evidential-temporal connection. Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique 64:4 ► pp. 673 ff. DOI logo
San Roque, Lila
2019. Evidentiality. Annual Review of Anthropology 48:1 ► pp. 353 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 26 june 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.