Asymmetries between finiteness categories in the Tuparí language (Tupí family): clause type, tense, evidentiality
This paper examines the three grammatical categories which jointly mark finite clauses in Tuparí: clause type, tense, and evidentiality. I discuss the asymmetries which obtain between these three categories, focusing especially on the ways that evidentiality interacts with the other two. I show that...
| Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | article |
| Status: | Published version |
| Publication Date: | 2025 |
| Country: | Brasil |
| Institution: | Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) |
| Repository: | Cadernos de Estudos Linguísticos |
| Language: | English |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ojs.periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br:article/8677446 |
| Online Access: | https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/cel/article/view/8677446 |
| Access Level: | Open access |
| Keyword: | Tupi Evidentialiy Clause type Tense Evidência Tipo de cláusula Tenso Tupí Evidencialmente |
| Summary: | This paper examines the three grammatical categories which jointly mark finite clauses in Tuparí: clause type, tense, and evidentiality. I discuss the asymmetries which obtain between these three categories, focusing especially on the ways that evidentiality interacts with the other two. I show that the selection of clause type (syntactically, the highest of the three categories within the Tuparí clause) asymmetrically impacts the specification of the evidential contrast as [+WITNESSED] or [–WITNESSED]. I further show that tense and evidentiality impact one another: only past tense clauses can mark the witnessed/non-witnessed evidential contrast, and [–WITNESSED] clauses cannot use the full range of past tense morphology that is available in [+WITNESSED] ones. The paper concludes with a pair of figures which visualize these complex dependencies. |
|---|