In recent years, the category of evidentiality has also come into use for the description of Romance languages and of German. This has been contingent on a change in its interpretation from a typological category to a semantic-pragmatic category, which allows an application to languages lacking specialised morphemes for the expression of evidentiality. We consider evidentiality to be a structural dimension of grammar, the values of which are expressed by types of constructions that code the source of information which a speaker imparts. If we look at the situation in Romance languages and in German, drawing a boundary between epistemic modality and evidentiality presents problems that are difficult to solve. Adding markers of the source of the speaker’s knowledge often limits the degree of responsibility of the speaker for the content of the utterance. Evidential adverbs are a frequently used means of marking the source of the speaker’s knowledge. The evidential meaning is generalised to marking any source of knowledge, what can be regarded as a result of a process of pragmaticalisation. The use of certain means which also carry out evidential markings can even contribute to the blurring of the different kinds of evidentiality. German also has modal verbs which in conjunction with the perfect tense of the verb have a predominantly evidential use (sollen and wollen). But even here the evidential marking is not without influence on the modality of the utterance. The Romance languages, however, do not have such specialised verbs for expressing evidentiality in certain contexts. To do this, they mark evidentiality – often context bound – by verb forms such as the conditional and the imperfect tense. This article shall contrast the different architectures used in expressing evidentiality in German and in the Romance languages.
AbrahamW (1991) Modalverben in der Germania. In: IwasakiE (ed.) Begegnung mit dem ‘Fremden’. Akten des VIII. Internationalen Germanisten-Kongresses in Tokio 1990 Band 4. München: Iudicium, pp. 109–118.
2.
AbrahamW (1998) The aspectual source of the epistemic-root distinction of modal verbs in German. In: BoederWSchroederCWagnerKH. (eds) Sprache in Raum und Zeit. In memoriam Johannes Bechert. Band 2: Beiträge zur empirischen Sprachwissenschaft. Tübingen: G. Narr, pp. 231–249.
3.
AbrahamW (2008) On the logic of generalizations about cross-linguistic aspect-modality links. In: AbrahamWLeissE (eds) Modality-Aspect Interfaces: Implications and Typological Solutions. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 3–13.
4.
AbrahamW (2009) Die Urmasse von Modalität und ihre Ausgliederung. Modalität anhand von Modalverben, Modalpartikel und Modus. Was ist das Gemeinsame, was das Trennende, und was steckt dahinter? In: AbrahamWLeissE (eds) Modalität. Epistemik und Evidentialität beim Modalverb, Adverb, Modalpartikel und Modus. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag, pp. 251–302.
5.
AbrahamWLeissE (eds) (2008) Modality-Aspect Interfaces: Implications and Typological Solutions. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
6.
AbrahamWLeissE (eds) (2009) Modalität. Epistemik und Evidentialität beim Modalverb, Adverb, Modalpartikel und Modus. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag.
7.
AbrahamWLeissE (eds) (2012) Covert Patterns of Modality. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars.
8.
AikhenvaldA (2004) Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
9.
AikhenvaldADixonRMW (eds) (2003) Studies in Evidentiality. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
10.
AlbrechtJ (1977) Wie übersetzt man eigentlich ‚eigentlich’? In: WeydtH (ed.) Aspekte der Modalpartikeln: Studien zur deutschen Abtönung. Tübingen: Niemeyer, pp. 19–37.
11.
BarnesJ (1984) Evidentials in the Tuyuca verb. International Journal of American Linguistics50: 255–271.
12.
BeerboomC (1992) Modalpartikeln als Übersetzungsproblem. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
13.
BiberDEdwardF (1989) Styles of stance in English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect. Text9: 93–124. (Special issue on The pragmatics of affect, edited by OchsE).
14.
BondarkoAV (1984) Teorija grammatičeskogo značenija i aspektologičeskie issledovanija. Leningrad: Nauka.
15.
BorstD (1985) Die affirmativen Modalpartikeln doch, ja und schon. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
BybeeJPerkinsRPagliucaW (1994) The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect, and Modality in the Languages of the World. Chicago, IL and London: University of Chicago Press.
18.
ChafeWNicholsJ (eds) (1986) Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology in Language. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
19.
ComrieB (1976) Aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20.
ConiglioM (2011) Die Syntax der deutschen Modalpartikeln. Ihre Distribution und Lizenzierung in Haupt- und Nebensätzen. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
21.
CornillieB (2007) Evidentiality and Epistemic Modality in Spanish (Semi-)Auxiliaries. A Cognitive-Functional Approach. Berlin and New York: de Gruyter.
CoseriuE (1976) Das romanische Verbalsystem (edBertschH). Tübingen: G. Narr.
25.
DahlÖ (ed.) (2000) Tense and Aspect in the Languages of Europe. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
26.
De HaanF (2001) The relation between modality and evidentiality. In: MüllerRReisM (eds) Modalität und Modalverben im Deutschen. Hamburg: Helmut Buske Verlag, pp. 201–206.
27.
De HaanF (2005) Encoding speaker perspective: Evidentials. In: FrajzyngierZHodgesARoodDS (eds) Linguistic Diversity and Language Theories. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 379–397.
28.
DendalePTasmowskiL (eds) (1994) Les sources du savoir et leurs marques linguistiques. Langue française102: 1–127.
29.
DendalePTasmowskiL (eds) (2001) Evidentialty. Journal of Pragmatics33: 339–464.
30.
Dessì SchmidS (2010) Modal uses of the Italian imperfetto and the Spanish imperfecto: A comparison. In: BeckerMRembergerE-M (eds) Modality and Mood in Romance: Modal Interpretation, Mood Section, and Mood Alternation. Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, pp. 39–66.
31.
DetgesU (2001) Grammatikalisierung. Eine kognitiv-pragmatische Theorie dargestellt am Beispiel romanischer und anderer Sprachen. Habilitationsschrift, Universität Tübingen.
32.
DiewaldGSmirnovaE (2010) Evidentiality in German: Linguistic Realization and Regularities in Grammaticalization (Trends in Linguistics, Studies and Monographs 228). Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
33.
Fernández RamírezS (1986) Gramática española. Vol. 4: El verbo y la oración. Madrid: Arco Libros.
34.
FleischmannS (1982) The Future in Thought and Language: Diachronic Evidence from Romance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
García FernándezL (2004) El pretérito imperfecto: Repaso histórico y bibliográfico. In: García FernándezLCamus BergarecheB (eds) El pretérito imperfect. Madrid: Gredos, pp. 13–15.
37.
González VázquezM (2006) Las fuentes de la información: Tipología, semántica y pragmática de la evidencialidad. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo.
38.
GuentchévaZ (1994) Manifestations de la catégorie du médiatif dans les temps du français. Langue française102: 8–23.
39.
GuentchévaZ (ed.) (1996) L’énonciation médiatisée. Louvain and Paris: Peeters.
40.
HaßlerG (2001) Kontrastive und typologische Überlegungen zur epistemischen Modalität in den romanischen Sprachen und im Deutschen. In: WotjakG (ed.) Studien zum romanisch-deutschen und innerromanischen Sprachvergleich. Akten der IV. Internationalen Tagung zum romanisch-deutschen und innerromanischen Sprachvergleich (Leipzig, 7.10.-9.10.1999). Bern; Berlin; Bruxelles; Frankfurt/M.; New York; Oxford; Wien: Peter Lang; Europäischer Verlag der Wissenschaften, pp. 169–184.
41.
HaßlerG (2002) Evidentiality and reported speech in Romance languages. In: GüldemannTVon RoncadorM (eds) Reported Discourse. A Meeting Ground for Different Linguistic Domains (Typological Studies in Language 52). Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 143–172.
42.
HaßlerG (2003) Epistemic modality revisited: Evidential functions of lexical and grammatical forms in Romance languages. In: HajičováEKotěšovcováAMírovskýJ (eds) Proceedings of the XVII International Congress of Linguists, Prague, July 24–29, CD-Rom. Praha: Maftyzpress.
43.
HaßlerG (2004) El uso evidencial de adverbios modales. In: CuarteroJWotjakG (eds) Algunos problemas específicos de la descripción sintáctico-semántica. Berlin: Frank & Timme, pp. 229–244.
44.
HaßlerG (2010) Epistemic modality and evidentiality and their determination on a deictic basis: The case of Romance languages. In: DiewaldGSmirnovaE (eds) Linguistic Realization of Evidentiality in European Languages (Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 49). Berlin and New York: De Gruyter Mouton, pp. 223–248.
45.
HaßlerG (2012) Indicative verb forms as means of expressing modality in Romance languages. In: AbrahamALeissE (eds) Covert Patterns of Modality. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars, pp. 133–152.
46.
HaßlerGVolkmannG (eds) (2009) Deixis y modalidad en textos narrativos. Münster: Nodus Publikationen.
47.
HennemannA (2013) A Context-Sensitive and Functional Approach to Evidentiality in Spanish or Why Evidentiality Needs a Superordinate Category. (Potsdam Linguistic Investigations. Bd. 10). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
48.
HoffBJ (1986) Evidentiality in the Carib: Particles, affixes and a variant of Wackernagel’s Law. Lingua69: 49–103.
49.
IfantidouE (2001) Evidentials and Relevance. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
50.
JaffeA (2009) Introduction. The sociolinguistics of stance. In: JaffeA (ed.) Stance: Sociolinguistic Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 3–28.
51.
JohnstoneB (2009) Stance, style, and the linguistic individual. In: JaffeA (ed.) Stance: Sociolinguistic Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 29–52.
52.
KärkkäinenE (2003) Epistemic Stance in English Conversation: A Description of its Interactional Functions, with the Focus on I Think. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
53.
KatelhönP (2008) Kleine Wörter: Abtönung und Modalpartikeln. In: NiedM (ed.) Ausgewählte Phänomene zur kontrastiven Linguistik italienisch – deutsch. Milano: Franco Angeli, pp. 212–232.
54.
LabeauÉLarrivéeP (eds) (2005) Nouveaux développements de l’imparfait. Amsterdam and New York: Rodopi.
55.
LazardG (2001) On the grammaticalization of evidentality. Journal of Pragmatics33: 359–367.
56.
LeissE (2008) The silent and aspect-driven patterns of deonticity an epistemicity (A chapter in diachronic typology). In: AbrahamWLeissE (eds) Modality-Aspect Interfaces: Implications and Typological Solutions. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 15–41.
57.
LeissE (2009) Drei Spielarten der Epistemizität, drei Spielarten der Evidentialität und drei Spielarten des Wissens. In: AbrahamWLeissE (eds) Modalität. Epistemik und Evidentialität beim Modalverb, Adverb, Modalpartikel und Modus. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag, pp. 3–24.
58.
MasiS (1996) Deutsche Modalpartikeln und ihre Entsprechungen im Italienischen: Äquivalente für doch, ja, denn, schon und wohl. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
59.
MeibauerJ (1994) Modaler Kontrast und konzeptuelle Verschiebung. Studien zur Syntax und Semantik deutscher Modalpartikeln. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
60.
MolnárA (2002) Die Grammatikalisierung deutscher Modalpartikeln. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
61.
MushinI (2001) Evidentiality and Epistemological Stance: Narrative Retelling. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
62.
NuytsJ (2001) Subjectivity as an evidential dimension in epistemic modal expressions. Journal of Pragmatics33: 383–400.
63.
PalmerFR (1986) Mood and Modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
64.
PlungianVA (2001) The place of evidentiality within the universal grammatical space. Journal of Pragmatics33: 349–357.
65.
RaibleW (1983) Knowing and believing – and syntax. In: ParretH (ed.) De la croyance. Approches épistémologiques et sémiotiques [On Believing. Epistemological and Semiotic Approaches]. Berlin: de Gruyter, pp. 275–291.
66.
RauniomaaM (2007) Stance markers in spoken Finnish: Minun mielestä and minusta in assessments. In: EnglebretsonR (ed.) Stancetaking in Discourse: Subjectivity, Evaluation, Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 221–252.
67.
RegenerS (2010) Der kleine Bruder. Taschenbuchausgabe. München: Goldmann.
68.
ReyesG (1990) Tiempo, modo, aspecto e intertextualidad. Revista Española de Lingüística20: 17–53.
69.
Simon-VandenbergenA-MAijmerK (2007) The Semantic Field of Modal Certainty. A Corpus-Based Study of English Adverbs. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
70.
SmithCS (1997) The Parameter of Aspect. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
71.
SquartiniM (2001) The internal structure of evidentiality in Romance. Studies in Language25(2): 297–334.
72.
SquartiniM (2004) Disentangling evidentiality and epistemic modality in Romance. Lingua114: 873–895.
73.
ThurmairM (1989) Modalpartikeln und ihre Kombinationen. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
74.
VolkmannG (2005) Weltsicht und Sprache. Epistemische Relativierung am Beispiel des Spanischen (Tübinger Beiträge zur Linguistik. 481). Tübingen: G. Narr.
75.
Wachtmeister BermúdezF (2006) Evidencialidad: La codificación lingúistica del punto de vista. Dissertation, Institutionen för Spanska, Portugisiska och Latinamerikastudier, Stockholms Iniversitet, Stockholm.
76.
WeberDJ (1989) A Grammar of Huallaga (Huánuco) Quechua (University of California Publications in Linguistics 112). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
77.
WegenerH (1998) Zur Grammatikalisierung von Modalpartikeln. In: BarzI (ed.) Zwischen Grammatik und Lexikon. Tübingen: Niemeyer, pp. 37–55.
78.
WeydtH (ed.) (1977) Aspekte der Modalpartikeln: Studien zur deutschen Abtönung. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
79.
WeydtH (ed.) (1979) Die Partikeln der deutschen Sprache. Berlin: de Gruyter.
80.
WillettT (1988) A cross-linguistic survey of the grammaticalization of evidentiality. Studies in Language12(1): 51–97.
