Cover not available

In:Relevance Theory: Recent developments, current challenges and future directions
Edited by Manuel Padilla Cruz
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 268] 2016
► pp. 239–258

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
authorization required

Evidentials, genre and epistemic vigilance

 | Norwegian University of Science and Technology
Published online: 20 October 2016
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.268.09ung
In many languages with a grammaticalised evidential system, there are conventional associations between certain genres and evidentials so that evidentials may be used as genre indicators. Aikhenvald (2004) shows that that cross-­linguistically there is a particularly strong connection between reported evidentials (as opposed to indicators of other evidentiality types) and the traditional narrative genre (as opposed to other genres). I argue that this connection between reported evidentials and the traditional narrative genre can be explained on the basis that true reported evidentials on the one hand, and traditional narratives on the other, activate procedures dedicated to epistemic vigilance and argumentation in ways that other evidentials and other genres do not.
References (32)
References
Aikhenvald, Alexandra. 2004. Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Alas, Reet, and Anu Treikelder. 2010. “Some Remarks on Reported Evidentiality in French and in Estonian: A Contrastive Approach.” Eesti Rakenduslingvistika Ühingu Aastaraamat [Yearbook of the Estonian Association for Applied Linguistics] 6: 7–23. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blass, Regina. 1989. “Grammaticalisation of Interpretive Use: the Case of ré in Sissala.” Lingua 79 : 299–326.
. 1990. Relevance Relations in Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boas, Franz (ed.). 1911. Handbook of American Indian Languages. Part 1. Smithsonian Institution. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulleting 40. Washington: Government Print Office.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace L., and Johanna Nichols (eds). 1986. Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davis, Christopher, Christopher Potts, and Margaret Speas. 2007. “The Pragmatic Values of Evidential Sentences.” In Proceedings of SALT 17: 71–88.
Erelt, Mati, Reet Kasik, Helle Metslang, Henno Rajandi, Kristiina Ross, Henn Saari, Kaja Tael, and Silvi Vare. 1993. Eesti Keele Grammatika. [Grammar of Estonian.], Vol. 2. Tallinn: Eesti Teaduste Akadeemia Keele ja Kirjanduse Instituut.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Faller, Martina 2002. Semantics and Pragmatics of Evidentials in Cuzco Quechua. PhD diss., Stanford University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grice, H. Paul. 1989. Studies in the Ways of Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Itani, Reiko. 1998. “A Relevance-based Analysis of Hearsay Particles: With Special Reference to Japanese Sentence-final Particle tte .” In Relevance Theory: Applications and Implications, ed. by Robyn Carston and S. Uchida, 47–68. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Klaas, Birute. 1997. “The Quotative Mood in the Baltic Sea Areal.” In Estonian Typological Studies II, ed. by M. Erelt, 73–97. Tartu: Tartu University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mascaro, Olivier, and Dan Sperber. 2009. “The Moral, Epistemic, and Mindreading Components of Children’s Vigilance towards Deception.” Cognition 112: 367–380. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mercier, Hugo, and Dan Sperber. 2009. “Intuitive and Reflective Inferences.” In In Two Minds: Dual Processes and Beyond, ed. by J. Evans and K. Frankish, 149–170. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Palmer, Frank. 1986. Mood and Modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Papafragou, Anna. 2000. Modality: Issues in the Semantics-Pragmatics Interface. Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Papafragou, Anna, Peggy Li, Youngon Choi, and Chung-hye Han. 2007. “Evidentiality in Language and Cognition.” Cognition 103 (2): 253–299. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan. 1996. Explaining Culture. A Naturalistic Approach. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2000. “Metarepresentations in an Evolutionary Perspective.” In Metarepresentations, ed. by D. Sperber, 117–137. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2001. “An Evolutionary Perspective on Testimony and Argumentation.” Philosophical Topics 29: 401–413. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson. 1995. Relevance. Communication and Cognition, 2nd edition. [1st edition 1986.] Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan, Fabrice Clément, Christophe Heintz, Olivier Mascaro, Hugo Mercier, Gloria Origgi, and Deirdre Wilson. 2010. “Epistemic Vigilance.” Mind & Language 25: 359–393. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Unger, Christoph. 2006. Genre, Relevance and Global Coherence. Basingstoke: Palgrave. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010. “The Argumentation Module and the Cognitive Role of Genre.” Paper presented at the Intercultural Pragmatics Conference , Madrid.
. 2011. “Exploring the Borderline between Procedural Encoding and Pragmatic Inference.” In Procedural Meaning: Problems and Perspectives, ed. by M. Victoria Escandell-Vidal, Manuel Leonetti, and Aoife Ahern, 103–127. Bingley: Emerald.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. “Epistemic Vigilance and the Function of Procedural Indicators in Communication and Comprehension.” In Relevance Theory: More than Understanding, ed. by A. Piskorska and E. Wałaszewska, 45–73. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre. 2000. “Metarepresentation in Linguistic Communication.” In Metarepresentation, ed. by Dan Sperber, 411–448. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2011. “The Conceptual-Procedural Distinction: Past, Present and Future.” In Procedural Meaning: Problems and Perspectives, ed. by Victoria Escandell-Vidal, Manuel Leonetti, and Aoife Ahern, 3–31. Bingley: Emerald. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre, and Dan Sperber. 1988. “Mood and the Analysis of Non-declarative Sentences.” In Human agency: Language, Duty and Value, ed. by J. Dancy, J. Moravcsik and C. Taylor, 77–101. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004. “Relevance Theory.” In The Handbook of Pragmatics, ed. by Laurence R. Horn and Gregory Ward, 607–632. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Lubberger, Beate
2020. Metarepresentation markers in Indus Kohistani. In Relevance Theory, Figuration and Continuity in Pragmatics [Figurative Thought and Language, 8], ► pp. 121 ff. DOI logo
Padilla Cruz, Manuel
2020. Evidential participles and epistemic vigilance. In Relevance Theory, Figuration and Continuity in Pragmatics [Figurative Thought and Language, 8], ► pp. 69 ff. DOI logo
Figueras Bates, Carolina
2019. Razonamiento y Vigilancia Epistémica: Una Explicación Relevantista de los Evidencialespor lo vistoyse ve que. Pragmática Sociocultural / Sociocultural Pragmatics 7:1 ► pp. 71 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 november 2025. 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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue