Anaïd Donabédian-Demopoulos, (INALCO-Paris /CNRS FRE2454) – Bielefeld, 24/02/2006 - page 1

Evidentiality : a challenge for both descriptive and typological linguistics (the example of modern western armenian) 1. MEDIATIVE IN WESTERN MODERN ARMENIAN 1.1. A grammatically marked category (-er participle) ~ eastern modern armenian (cf. Kozintseva) : a contextual meaning of the perfect. 1.2. Typical « evidential » values (cf. Balkan-Anatolia-Caucase area). •

Hearsay :

(1) - Maron amusnac er ! [Maro-ARTDÉF marry-EVID AUX3SG] ‘ Maro has got married (so I heard) !’ •

Inference [going out from home, seing that the asphalt is weaken]

(2) - Anjrew eker [Rain come-EVID AUX3SG] ‘ (Look), it has rained ! (rain has come)’ •

Surprise, unexpected information (mirativity) [Two old friends come across one another in the street. One of them is with his daughter, whom the other has not seen for some years.] (3) - Aγjik-d ? Mecc er ! [Daughter-POSS2SG be? Grow-EVID AUX3SG] ‘Is that your daughter? (How) she has grown!’

•

Gerc er , ‘How much weight she’s put on!’ A continuum of meanings :

(4) Petros anmijap s zayn lrec uc , ew katakov lec un xstut yamb më ësaw : - Do, Hra , ës nayim, as k u ëracd kë vayl ?, nor n? ocux më unec -er es [again? child-ARTINDEF have-EVID AUX2SG] ‘Petros silences him and says with feigned serenity : So, Hratch, tell me, is this the kind of thing one does? You’ve had (EVID) yet another child ? (Chahnour) •

Argumentative value [A mother-in-law and her daughter-in-law live in the same house. One afternoon the mother-in-law passes by her daughter-in-law’s room and sees her sleeping. A friend comes over for a cup of coffee and asks where the daughter-in-law is.] (5) a. – Parker [lie down-EVID be-3SG] ‘She’s lying down’ (understood : it’s shocking how lazy she is) b. – Parkac [lie down-PFT be-3SG] ‘She’s lying down’ (understood that this is normal, e.g. she usually rests at this time of day, she’s pregnant, she’s ill, etc.)

Anaïd Donabédian-Demopoulos, (INALCO-Paris /CNRS FRE2454) – Bielefeld, 24/02/2006 - page 2

1.3. Less known meanings (see also Duchet&Pernazska, Danon-Boileau&Bashturk, Mihaylovsky in Guentcheva 1996) [Three students are fixing a bicycle. After having worked some time in silence, A, who conducts the repairs, is getting slightly irritated and says to B, who is trying to hold the bicycle still] (S.K. 1/209) (6) 1/209 - Okay, es brne r e m, jg , jg , du n, kec ir nayink … , [I take-EVID AUX1SG] ‘Okay, I’ve got (EVID) it, (you) let go, let go, wait, let’s see…’ [Bicycle repair scene: they are looking for the right wrench but cannot seem to find it. Without much conviction, B comes forward with a wrench that obviously will not do] (7) (S.K. 1/431)B. - Celle-là ? A. - Gt r i r k i araj vis më [find-EVID AUX-PAST2SG] -‘But you (had) found (EVID) one, just a second ago.’ B. - Va!!y, va!!y, jγers, jγers -‘Oh, my nerves, my nerves !’ A. - K i araj vis më gt r i r [find-EVID AUX-PAST2SG] -‘Just a second ago, you (had) found (EVID) one.’ [Same situation; A jerks back a part that had already been fixed] (S.K. 1/718) (8) 1/718 B. -B. – What are you doing? Don’t break it again! A - Art n awrue r nor n [already break-EVID AUX3SG again] - ‘It is already broken (EVID) again !’ [A young couple is lazing in bed one morning. They are a bit edgy. He is reading a magazine that she has already read. Knowing that she normally likes to keep the numerology pages, he asks] (9) 9/51 He: - You want to keep the numerology pages? She: - If you can, and if you will, go ahead, keep them! He : - Et kardac er es n , em paher, et es kardac ac ëëë, k ez t oγ ëllay nu r [if read-EVID AUX2SG ] ‘If you have read (EVID) them, I won’t keep them ; if you haven’t (PFT), ehm, okay, I’ll give them to you as a present.’ (10) K i er miayn nšec in, or geγi eres n inkac 18 tarekan lakotë , sewta kaper Srapenc pztik harsin ew yacax aγbiwri camban nazanin anc nelun kë spas r. ‘Few people noticed that this 18-year-old scamp, scorned by the village had (EVID) fallen in love with daugher-in-law Srapian, and that he would often wait for his beauty on the way to the well.’ (Hamastegh, First Love) [Looking for tools to fix the bicycle, S is going through some of her friend’s stuff. She finds a small purse and says] (11) 1/348 - Hmm, as anušik , morc e r i ays payusakd - ‘Hm, that’s cute, I’d forgotten (EVID) you had a purse like that !’

Anaïd Donabédian-Demopoulos, (INALCO-Paris /CNRS FRE2454) – Bielefeld, 24/02/2006 - page 3

[S. is looking for some tools in a box, and comments on the objects she finds]. (12) 1/119 Asika in i? hamar , in u ? pah her em as, em giter in k' ënen hetë… [why keep-EVID AUX1SG DEICT1] ‘– What’s this for? Why have I kept (EVID) this, I don’t even know what it’s for…’ [Chatting over a drink] (13) A. – We’ve hired a boat with the P’s and we’ll spend ten days on the Breton isles. B. – That’s nice ! I?n p s tasë or, i n bateau varjer k [what boat hire-EVID AUX2PL] C. ‘Ten days? What kind of boat have you hired?’ [Checking the bicycle lamps] (14) 1/556-558 - As i varir kor hima al ‘This one, it’s no longer on (PROGR.).’ - As in u, amen in teγn , in u? i varir ‘Why? Everything’s okay ; why won’t it work ?’ - Lampë ov git awrue?r [bulb-ARTDEF perhaps blow-EVID AUX3SG] ‘Perhaps the bulb has blown.’ (*- Lampë // ov git awrue?r ) [S is going to cut A’s hair. A shows he has recently given it a short trim himself, as it had grown a lot.] (15) 1/745 - k ani šabat eγaw ktrec ir, šut n k' erknnay kor, ha?, asteγ an ap erknc er r, tesar i?n ëri, i tesar hos? [there much grow-EVID AUX-PAST3SG] (*asteγ // an ap erknc er r) - ‘How many weeks has it been since you last cut it; it grows so fast, doesn’t it? It had grown so much, didn’t you see what I did there, didn’t you see?’ [Chatting over a drink. B tells A he’s going to Italy and invites him to go with him.] (16) 5b/14 A. – ‘Me, me, until I get my papers, in my situation, I don’t leave the country to run about trying to get a visa at the last minute !’ B. - Amen frontière-nerë haner en, douane-in, drami hamar ewrobayi [all borders remove-EVID AUX3PL.] (*Amen frontière-nerë // haner en) - ‘The have removed all customs borders, because of the European currency…’ A. - I? n ha ner en ‘What have they removed (EVID)?’ [S is telling how, one day, she was very tired when she returned home by bike. Yet, out of pride, she forced herself to pedal all the way, without getting off the bike. But when she got to a steep rise very near her home] (17) Odk ers em zgar kor, velo-n minakë kë k al kor, quoi, au ralenti, 1 km/h, ov git asank, ouin, kamac kamac asank, merer i, verj n Parc Montsouris hasay n ësi uzacnin ësen, k' ijnam. - ‘I can’t feel-PROGR my feet anymore, the bike moves- PROGR all by itself… so… very slow, 1 km/h, like that… I was dead [had die-EVID]; finally I got to Parc Montsouris; I said let them say whatever they want, I’m getting off.’

Anaïd Donabédian-Demopoulos, (INALCO-Paris /CNRS FRE2454) – Bielefeld, 24/02/2006 - page 4

[Inspection of the bicycle’s lamps: A turns the wheels, while B and C inspect the front and back lamps] (18) B. - Voilà, voilà atika varec aw ‘Look, look, this one is on [shine-AOR].’ A. - Vari kor? ‘It’s on [shine-PROGR.]?’ B. - Ha!, ha!, varer ‘Yeah, yeah, it’s on [shine-EVID]!’ C. - Etewinë varer ’Celle de l’arrière s’est allumée-MED !’ [Trying to fasten the brake shoes] (19) No, that’s the problem, this black thing, because it’s over here, it can’t go there. - This one’s fallen too. - Watch what you’re doing. - Damned! - In p s eγer hos eker asi [how be-EVID AUX3SG here come-EVID AUX3SG DEICT1] ‘How did this end up [become-EVID] over here [come-EVID]?’ [On the phone, planning where and when to meet to go out that evening; A is on the phone, while B is asking him questions in order to follow what’s being said] (20) 2b/5 A. - Hello, yes … B. Is it P? A. Yeah, yeah. B. What’s he saying? A. em giter kor, R-in enk krnar kor gtnel, amen aten occupé , kam al débranché ërer en ‘‘I don’t know-PROGR, we can’t-PROGR get hold of R, it’s always busy or disconnected [made-EVID disconnected].’ [A couple lazing away in bed. She is thinking out loud (isolated utterance)] (21) 9/42 She : As fatalité-n mezi erkuk nis iraru kaper xnday kor vranis ‘This fate, it has brought-EVID the two of us together, (and) it’s mocking-PROGR us.’ 2. SOME INEXPECTED CONVERGENCES 2.1.

PROGRESSIVE IN WESTERN MODERN ARMENIAN

(22) - I?n k’ ënes - K’ašxatim kor ‘- What do you do ?- I am working’ (23) Hog mi ëner, ku gam [présent] ! Don’t worry, I’ll come ! (23a) Hog mi ëner, ku gam kor Don’t worry, I am coming !

Anaïd Donabédian-Demopoulos, (INALCO-Paris /CNRS FRE2454) – Bielefeld, 24/02/2006 - page 5

[A youg domestic explains to the go-between that the son of the house is hasteling her] (24) Oγul, ësaw anor, efendiit tγan kë sir kor k ezi, a!l i?n k’uze?s. ‘My girl, she said, [that’s because] your effendi’s sin loves-PROGR you, what do you want more? ’ (Zohrab, Postal) (25) Bayc dun aγek ajusteur ir, in u gorc ënes? es p ntrer kor. in u? in u ink zink d jger es ? (Chahnour) But you were a good adjuster, why don’t you have a job? Why don’t you look-PROGR for that ? why did you abandon-EVID yourself? (26) em yišer kor, Kostan, meγk c ir inci, es im Hayr Merë em yišer kor. I don’t [= i can’t] remember-PROGR, Kostan, take pity on me, I don’t [= i can’t] remember-PROGR my Pater Noster, (Chahnour) (27) O , unim, k’ësem kor, anpayman k’uzes ëllay, unim ! (Kasparian 1/57) No, I don’t have any, I say-PROGR, you absolutely want me to have some, but I don’t ! [a visitor was said the person he wants to see is absent, but he insists] (28) Ohoo!!!, irar chenk hasknar kor… bayc sireli parons, jezi k’ësem or an hima meknec aw pandog n… Ohoo, but [it seems] we don’t understand-PROGR each other... but my dear sir, i told you he just went out from the hotel … (Chahnour) [C. is speaking about summer holidays on Istanbul Islands, using narrative present, and :] (29) As amar, amen amaruan p s Knalë gac ink . Amen ban law k’anc n r kor. Artunerë uš k’ellayink kor. Amboγj orë awazanë k’anc ën ink kor. Gišernerë k i më ënkernerov durs k’ellayink kor, šat aγuor r payc … amen mard git or erkrašaržë eγaw… (followed by narrative aorists) This summer, like every summer, we went to K nal . Everything was going-PROGR well, we were standing-PROGR late in the morning, we were spending-PROGR days at the swimming pool, during the evenings, we were going-PROGR out a little bit with our friends, everything were nice, but... every body knows that the earthquake happened… 2. 3. NON FINAL STRESS SENTENCES IN RUSSIAN (cf. Bonnot-Donabedian 1999) a) argumentative meaning : (30) R. - Tolja, pojdi v bank. U nas vse den' gi koncilis' . [Tolia, go to the bank. our money finished] A. - Sak o, dramatun gna. Dramnis bolorowin hater e. [Sako, go to the bank, our money totally finished] « Tolia/Sak’o, go to the bank, we have no more money » (31a) R. - U nas koncilis’ vse den’gi. Tebe nado pojti v sberkassu. A. - Mer dram bolorowin hataw (aorist) Dramatun petk e ert as. « We have no more money (unmarked). You have to go to the bank» (31b) R. - A gde Masa? - Ona posla v bank, u nee koncilis'den' gi A. - Marin ur e? - Dramatun gnac , dram hatac er. « Where is Mary ? - She went to the bank, she had no more money. »

Anaïd Donabédian-Demopoulos, (INALCO-Paris /CNRS FRE2454) – Bielefeld, 24/02/2006 - page 6

b) irony (vs empathy) : (33) (During a party, a boy remains alone with a girl and try to violate her. She calls the friend accompanying her, thinking he is in the neighbouring room) R. - Paša ! - Ušël tvoj Paša ! (dialogue from the movie Dorogaja Elena Sergeevna) - Paul ! - He has gone, your Paul ! c) surprise : (34) R. Smotri, okna zapoteli, navernoe, na ulice xolodno. A. Tes, patuhanner sogi lec uer en, durs c urt e erewi. « Look, there is stram on the windows, it should be cald outside » d) remembering something sad : (35) R. Da, znaes' , slomalsja moj komp' juter. A ja-to byla tak rada, kogda ego kupila! A. Ax, gites, hamakargic s kotrer e. Es al aynk an urax ei gnac llalus! « Oh, you know, my computer has broken ! I was so happy to buy it... » 3. HOW TO DEAL WITH THIS FACTS ? TYPOLOGY vs DESCRIPTION vs GENERAL LINGUISTICS Aikhenvald 2004 : 1- A linguistic category whose primary meaning is source of information (the way in which the information was acquired)(p.3) 2- Cross linguistically, evidentiality, modality and mood are fully distinct categories. In each case, it is important to determine primary meaning for each of these on language internal grounds. The way in which semantic extensions of evidentials overlap with modalities and such meanings as probability or possibility depend on the individual system and on the semantics of each individual evidential term (p. 7) (against Van der Auwera&Plungian 1998) -> how to deal with evidential/progressive convergence ? 3- Evidentiality and mirativity – a category whose primary meaning is related to imprepared mind, information and speaker’s surprise – are conceptually related, albeit distinct. (p.7) “Mirativity” is a category manifesting ‘unexpected information’ with overtones of surprise and admiration. Its independance as a category in its own right rather than a semantic extension of evidentiality is now beyond doubt (since the seminal article by DeLancey) (p. 20) -> how to deal with the fact that we have a common marker ? 4 -Omitting an evidential results in an ungrammatical and highly unnatural sentence (p.2) Evidentials can have teir own truth value : using a wrong evidential is one way of telling a lie (p. 19) but : The truth value of an utterance is not affected by an evidential (Donabedian 2001) (p.4) -> how to deal with the speaker’s choice parameter ? 5- A significant number of languages distinguish evidentiality in the past, a few do so in the future (p.8) -> how to explain the fact that in many languages evidentials come from a perfect, or even is a contextual value of the perfect (cf. eastern armenian – Kozintseva; cf. persian, cf. bulgarian evidential has is own value only for 3d person; cf. hindi Montaut : special meaning of aorist)

Anaïd Donabédian-Demopoulos, (INALCO-Paris /CNRS FRE2454) – Bielefeld, 24/02/2006 - page 7

To conclude : The tension between typology and description partly comes from the tension between semasiological point of view (description) and onomasiological (mainly used in typology). Some general questions •

What is primary meaning ?

•

Evidentiality, mirativity ... How long can we split categories in order to let them feet with the diversity of languages?

•

Is the purpose of speech to convey information? or even information source? Is it possible to understand such a category like evidentiality like a purely cognitive category (encoding of some extralinguistic fact ?) Remark : evidential sentences have very often no informative content.

•

What can we heuristically gain by disconnecting evidentiality from tense-aspect-mode questions ? A proposal •

Semasiology : a single marker expresses a single core operation. In order to catch it, we have to consider the enunciative parameters of speech (marker appears in utterances)

• Parameters for meanings variation, taking into account : histoire /discours person context (modelisable) • Connecting with general/theoretical questions: - assertion theory (truth value; speaker as a warrant; preconstruction) - focalisation and saliency theory (cf. Bonnot 2004) - tense/mode/aspect theories - semantic scales (cf. Van der Auwera and Plungian) The approach make possible to account for similarities (and differences) of armenian evidential with - armenian progressive and generally armenian TAM system - russian marked sentence stress - other evidentiality-marking languages and strategies The “exotic” vision of evidentiality as a very specific category does not allows to account for such connections. However, this connections exist, and we have to account for them. Moreover, they are maybe the most interessant point for general linguistics, since they alow to understand better some very general categories.

Anaïd Donabédian-Demopoulos, (INALCO-Paris /CNRS FRE2454) – Bielefeld, 24/02/2006 - page 8

REFERENCES : Aikhenvald, A. Y., 2004, Evidentiality, New York, Oxford University Press. Bonnot, C., 1997, « Pour une définition formelle et fonctionnelle de la notion de thème (sur l’exemple du russe moderne », Guimier, C., (éd.), La thématisation dans les langues, Peter Lang, Berne, 1999. Bonnot, C., Donabédian, A., Seliverstova, O., 1997, «Enoncés à accent initial en russe et énoncés au médiatif en arménien occidental: une convergence fortuite?», Proceedings of the 16th International Congress of Linguists, Pergamon, Oxford, 1997, paper n°0323. Bonnot, C., Donabédian, A., 1999, « Lorsque la morphosyntaxe rencontre la prosodie: accent non final en russe et médiatif en arménien », Faits de Langue, 10/1999 Bonnot, C., 2004, « Relation préconstruite et focalisation : pour une analyse unitaire des énoncés à accent non final en russe moderne », Slovo, 30/31, Etudes linguistiques et sémiotiques, Paris, Inalco, pp. 211-270. Chafe, W., Nichols, J., ed., 1986, Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology, Norwood, N.J.,1986 Basturk, M., Danon-Boileau, L., Morel, M.-A., 1996, Valeur de –mı en turc contemporain, analyse sur corpus, in Guentchéva, Z., ed., 1996. p. 145-154. DeLancey, S., 1997. Mirativity: The grammatical marking of unexpected information, Linguistic Typology, 1:33-52. Donabédian, A., 1996b, «Pour une interprétation des différentes valeurs du médiatif en arménien occidental», in Z. Guentchéva, ed., 1996, p. 87-108 Donabédian, A., 1998, « Mode d’expression de l’accompli et aspectualité en arménien occidental », Actances 9, Guentchéva, Z. (ed.), Paris, RIVALDI, p. 13-32. Donabédian, A., 1999, «Négation analytique et médiatif en arménien occidental: homonymie ou lien systémique?», Cahiers de Linguistique de l’INALCO, 1/1999, Paris, à paraître. Donabédian, A., 2001, “Toward a Semasiological account of Evidentials : an Enounciative Approach of –er in Modern Western Armenian”, Journal of Pragmatics, 33/3 (2001) 421442. Donabédian, A., 2002, « Médiatif et progressif en arménien occidental : convergences discursives », in Donabédian, A., Ouzounian, A. (éds.) Actes du VIème Colloque International de Linguistique arménienne, Paris, INALCO , Slovo 24-25/2001-2002, p. 343-357 Duchet, J.-L., Përnaska, R., 1996, « L’admiratif albanais, recherche d’un invariant sémantique », in Guentchéva, 1996, p. 31-46. Guentchéva, Z., ed., 1996, L’énonciation médiatisée, Paris, l’Information grammaticale, Louvain, Peeters. Jakobson, R., 1957, Les embrayeurs, les catégories verbales et le verbe russe, in Essais de linguistique générale, 1963, Les Editions de Minuit, Paris. Kasparian, S., 1992, Analyse descriptive du parler multilingue d’Arméniens vivant à Paris, Thèse de doctorat, Dir. David Cohen, Paris III. Kozintseva, N., 1994, Kategoriya evidencial’nosti (problemy tipologi eskogo analiza), Voprosy Yazykoznaniya, 1994, 3, pp. 92-104. Meydan, M., 1996, « Les emplois médiatifs de –mi en turc », in Guentchéva, 1996, p. 125143. Van der Auwera J, Plungian V.A., 1998, « On modality’s semantic map », Linguistic Typology 2:79-124