Hare lõ: the touchstone of mirativity

Hill, Nathan W.

Abstract

DeLancey (2012: 539) draws attention to the morpheme lõ in Hare as the touchstone of a putative 'mirative' grammatical category. An examination of his examples of lõ reveals very weak evidence for establishing 'mirative' as a category in this language let alone promoting Hare lõ as the touchstone for this category cross-linguistically. The case for lõ as a mirative marker has yet to be made convincingly. In the meantime, it is more prudent to understand lõ as either a direct evidential marker or a mediative marker.

Citation

Hill, N. W. (2015). Hare lõ: the touchstone of mirativity. SKASE Journal of theoretical linguistics, 12(2), 24-31

• Journal Article Type: Article
• Publication Date: Jan 1, 2015
• Deposit Date: Jun 28, 2015
• Publicly Available Date: Mar 12, 2025
• Journal: SKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics
• Electronic ISSN: 1336-782X
• Peer Reviewed: Peer Reviewed
• Volume: 12
• Issue: 2
• Pages: 24-31
• Keywords: mirative, mirativity, Hare, Athabaskan, evidentiality, Scott DeLancey, Alexandra Aikhenvald,
• Publisher URL: http://www.skase.sk/Volumes/JTL28/pdf_doc/03.pdf
• Additional Information: References : Aikhenvald, Alexandra (2004). Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bashir, Elena (1988a). “Inferentiality in Kalasha and Khowar.” Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society 24.1: 47-59. Bashir, Elena (1988b). Topics in Kalasha syntax: an areal and typological perspective. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan. Boas, Franz (1911). “Introduction.” Handbook of American Indian languages. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office. 1-83. Breunis, Andries (1998). “l'aspect du verbe et la genèse de la nomenclature grammaticale russe.” Studies in Slavic and General Linguistics 24: 43-92. DeLancey, Scott (1985). “Lhasa Tibetan evidentials and the semantics of causation.” Proceedings of the Eleventh Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society: 65-72. DeLancey, Scott (1986). “Evidentiality and volitionality in Tibetan.” W. Chafe and J. Nichols, eds., Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology. 203-13. DeLancey, Scott (1990). “Notes on Evidentiality in Hare.” International Journal of American Linguistics 56.1: 152-158. DeLancey, Scott (1992). “The historical status of the conjunct/disjunct pattern in Tibeto-Burman.” Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 25: 39-62. DeLancey, Scott (1997). “Mirativity: the grammatical marking of unexpected information". Linguistic Typology. 1: 33-52. DeLancey, Scott (2001). “The mirative and evidentiality.” Journal of Pragmatics 33: 369-382. DeLancey, Scott (2012). “Still mirative after all these years.” Linguistic Typology 16.3: 529–564. Donabédian, Anaïd (2001). “Towards a semasiological account of evidentials: An enunciative approach of -er in Modern Western Armenian.” Journal of Pragmatics 33.3. 421–442. van Driem, George (2001). Languages of the Himalayas. Leiden: Brill. Hill, A. A. ed. (1962). The Third Texas Conference on Problems of Linguistic Analysis in English. Austin: The University of Texas Press. Hill, Nathan W. (2012). "'Mirativity' does not exist: ḥdug in 'Lhasa' Tibetan and other suspects." Linguistic Typology 16.3: 389-433. Hill, Nathan W. (2013). “Contextual semantics of ‘Lhasa’ Tibetan evidentials.” SKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics 10.3: 47-54. Hock, Hans Henrich (2012). “Sanskrit and Pāṇini–Core and Periphery” Saṃskṛtavimarśaḥ 6: 85-102. Jakobson, Roman (1957). Shifters, verbal categories and the Russian verb. Cambridge, Mass.: Russian Language Project, Dept. of Slavic Languages and Literatures, Harvard University. (Reprinted in: Jacobson, Roman, 1971. Selected writings, vol. II, 130-147. The Hague: Mouton.) McEnery, Tony and Andrew Wilson (2001). Corpus linguistics: an introduction. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Nichols, Johanna (1986). “The bottom line: Chinese Pidgin Russian.” Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology. Wallace Chafe and Johanna Nichols, eds. Norwood, N. J.: Ablex. 239-257. Schenkeveld, D. M. (1982-1990). “Studies in the History of Ancient Linguistics.” Mnemosyne (Fourth Series) 35.3-4: 248-268, 37.3-4: 291-353, 43.1-2: 86-108, 43.3-4: 289-306 Speyer, Jacob Samuel (1886). Sanskrit syntax. Leiden: E. J. Brill.