ハンドアウト

麗澤大学言語研究センター（LinC）セミナー 2004/6/30
1
Evidentiality
―中国語の場合―
西田
1.
文信
Evidentiality（証拠性・確認性）とは？
・認識的モダリティー1の一種、ある陳述についてその情報の根拠を義務的に標示す
るもので、もっとも普遍的なのは目撃の有無。
・ Jakobson (1957:147) : a verbal category ‘which takes into account three events
― a narrated event, a speech, and a narrated speech event’.
・ Boas (1938:133) : ‘while for us definiteness, number, and time are obligatory
aspects, we find in another language location near the speaker or somewhere
else, source of information ― whether see, heard, or inferred ― as obligatory
aspects’.
・狭義には、多くの場合動詞か助動詞に付随するモダルシステムの一部。
・広義には、すべての認識論に関わる表現。[Chafe and Nichols 1986:IX]
（1a）昔、男ありき。
(1b) 昔、男ありけり。
（2）It's raining.
It's probably raining.
Maybe it's raining.
It must be raining.
It sounds/looks/smells like it's raining.
It's sort of raining.
Actually, it's raining.
(3) I’m sad.
Mary is sad.
I’m hot.
Mary is hot.
I want tea.
Mary wants tea.
(4) 私は悲しい。
私は暑い。
メアリーは悲しがっている。(*メアリーは悲しい。)
メアリーは暑がっている。(*メアリーは暑い。)
私はお茶がほしい。メアリーはお茶をほしがっている。(*メアリーはお茶がほしい。)
Palmer (1986:52)では、認識的モダリティーを次の 4 つに分類している; １）推論：話者
が考えていること、２）演繹：話者が演繹していること、３）引用：話者が聞いたこと、
４）証拠：感覚的な証拠によりそのように見えるようになること。
1
麗澤大学言語研究センター（LinC）セミナー 2004/6/30
2. Evidentiality のタイプ
2.1two-term システム
2.1.1
eyewitness/noneyewitness
2.1.2
non-firsthand/everything else
2.1.3
reported/ everything else
2.2three-term システム
2.2.1
visual/ inferred/reported
2.2.2
visual/nonvisual/inferred
2.2.3
nonvisual/inferred/reported
2.3 four-term システム
2.3.1
visual/nonvisual/inferred/reported
2.3.2
visual/inferred1/inferred2/reported
2.3.3
nonvisual/inferred1/inferred2/reported
2.3.4
visual/inferred/reported(secondhand)/reported(thirdhand)
Tariana 語(北アラワク語族)の例
(5)a. inu
dog
（Aikhenvald 2003）
nihwa-ka
di-na
3sgnf+bite-REC.P.VIS
3sgnf-OBJ
‘犬が彼を咬んだ’(視覚的)
b. inu
dog
nihwa-mahka
di-na
3sgnf+bite-REC.NON.VIS
3sgnf-OBJ
‘犬が彼を咬んだ’ (非視覚的)
c. inu
dog
nihwa-sika
3sgnf+bite-REC.P.INFR
di-na
3sgnf-OBJ
‘犬が彼を咬んだ’ (明白)
d. inu
dog
nihwa-pidaka
3sgnf+bite-REC.P.REPR
‘犬が彼を咬んだ’ (伝聞)
di-na
3sgnf-OBJ
2
麗澤大学言語研究センター（LinC）セミナー 2004/6/30
3
チベット語の evidentiality
確定判断
(6)a. ńga
1sg
¯kohn ki
¯tshamo
3sg
granddaughter
GEN
ýin2
COP
‘私は彼女の孫です’
b. ńgatso ¯trookjoo nää
1pl
Tokyo
ýin
from
COP
‘私は東京出身です’
(7)a.
¯khoran
3pl
¯kohn ki
3sg
¯tshamo
GEN
granddaughter
ˆree
COP
‘彼らは彼女の孫です’
b. ´khon ¯trookjoo
3sg
nää
Tokyo
ˆree
from
COP
‘彼は東京出身です’
3.2 存在動詞
(8)
ńga
la
samo ˆyöö
1sg
LOC hat
exist
‘私は帽子を持っている’
(9) ´dorje
Dorje
la
samo
ˆ duu
LOC
hat
exist
‘ドルジェは帽子を持っている’
(10) ˆbod
la
‵yaa
Tibet LOC yak
ˆyöö
exist
‘チベットにはヤクがいる’
(11) ˆbod
la
‵yaa
ˆ duu
Tibet LOC yak
exist
‘チベットにはヤクがいる’(と聞いている)
(12) gza-spen-ba
Saturday
la
LOC
tsog-‘du
yod
meeting exist
‘土曜日には集会がある’
(13) gza-spen-ba
Saturday
la
LOC
tsog-‘du
‘dug
meeting exist
‘土曜日には集会がある’
チベット語の音素表記は、北村甫・西田龍雄. 1960. 「チベット文字点転写とチベット語
表記」『日本西蔵学会会報』第 7 号に従う。
2
麗澤大学言語研究センター（LinC）セミナー 2004/6/30
4
4. 中国語の evidentiality
4.1 北京語（普通話）
(14)
這
個
Zhe4 ge0
this
CL
漢字
不
對
吧
Han4zi4
bu2
dui4
ba0
character
NEG
correct PRT
(Cheung 1994:166)
‘この漢字は間違っているでしょう’
“The basic function of ba is to indicate uncertainty or supposition...sentence (14)
suggests doubt, hesitation of noncommitment either because the speaker truly lacks the
expertise to make a fair judgment or because the speaker wishes to tone down hi/her
judgment phrasing it in the form of a conjecture.”(Cheung 1994:167)
4.2 広東語 (漢語広東方言)
4.2.1 deontic modality と evidentiality
(15) 佢哋
兩個
應該
食
吓
飯
keui5dei6
leung5 go3 ying1goi1
sik6-haa5-faan6.
3pl
two-CL
eat-demilitative-meal
should
‘彼らはご飯を食べてるに違いない”
(16) 佢哋
keoi5dei6
3pl
兩個
應該
食
loeng5-go3
ying1goi1
sik6-gan2-faan6.
should
eat-PROG-meal
two-CL
緊
飯
“彼らはご飯を食べているんだよ.”
4.2.2 文末語気助詞 (sentence-final particles)
a1
lively statement
je1
that’s all
lo1
seeking agreement
a3
softening statement
je3
only
lo3
emphasis
a4
disapproving
jek1
intimate
lo4
impatient
a5
seeking confirmation
la1
requesting
lok3
definitive
ak3 abrupt agreement
la3
advice
bo3
exclamatory
ge2
affirmative
la4
relevance
a1ma3 obvious
ge3
affirmative
lak/laak3 relevance
a3ma4 as above
香港広東語の sentence-final particles
麗澤大学言語研究センター（LinC）セミナー 2004/6/30
4.2.3 広東語の Evidential particles
(17) 佢
點解
今日
唔
返學?
keui5 dim2gaai2
gam1yat6
m4
faan1hok6
3sg
today
NEG
attend school
why
‘彼はどうして今日は学校に来ないの？’
(18a) 唔
m4
NEG
舒服
丫麻
syu1fuk6
a1maa3
feel well
PRT
‘体調が悪いからだよ’ (self-evident)
(18b) 唔
舒服
哇
m4
syu1fuk6
gwaa3
NEG
feel well
PRT
‘体調が悪いからかな’ (speculative)
(18c) 唔
舒服
喎
m4
syu1fuk6
wo5.
NEG
feel well
PRT
‘体調が悪いからかだそうだよ’ (hearsay)
4.2.4 広東語の程度副詞
(19)聴日＿去富士山個陣、天氣＿好、風景都＿靚、一定＿好。
情報のなわ張り理論[神尾(1990, 2002)]
話し手のなわばり
内
聞き手の
外
なわばり
内
特別・太・真係・
幾・有 D・有少少
噉
外
特別・相當之・最
特別
香港広東語の副詞の分類3
3
上記の副詞のほかに、「好(hou2)」「非常之(fei1seung4ji1)」はすべての環境で現れる。
5
麗澤大学言語研究センター（LinC）セミナー 2004/6/30
4.2.5
6
Evidentiality と mirativity
“[The category mirative] marks both statements based on inference and statements
based on direct experience for which the speaker had no psychological preparation, and
in some languages hearsay data as well. What these apparently disparate data sources
have in common... is that the proposition is one which is new to the speaker, not yet
integrated into his overall picture of the world.” (DeLancey 1997: 36)
トルコ語の“inferential perfect” verb form
(20) Kenmal gel-mIs
Kemal come-INFER
‘ケマルは来た’
evidentiality に関わる意味論的パラメータ (Chafe and Nichols 1986):
(a) source of knowledge: evidence, language, hypothesis, etc.
(b)
mode of knowing: belief, hearsay, induction, deduction, etc.
(-> 推定)
(c)
knowledge matched against: verbal resources, expectations
(-> mirative)
(21) 佢
keui5
唔
鐘意
喎
m4
jong1yi3 wo5
‘彼は好きじゃない（そうだ）’
(22) 飲
yam2
得
喎
dak1
wo5
‘飲めるぞ（明らかに）’
(23)
佢
又
買
keui5
yau6 maai5
屋
喎
uk1
wo5
‘あいつまた家を買うんだって’ (quotative/hearsay)
(24)
佢
keui5
又
買
yau6 maai5
屋
喎
uk1
wo3
‘あいつまた家を買うんだって’ (mirative)
5.
(-> 引用)
今後の課題
・evidential と文化的ステレオタイプとの関連を調査
・evidential と他の文法範疇との相関関係を探る
・evidential システムの文法化の仕組みを分析
・evidential とディスコース・narrative との関係の探求
麗澤大学言語研究センター（LinC）セミナー 2004/6/30
7
参考文献
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2003. A Grammar of Tariana. CUP.
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. and R. M. Dixon. 1998. Dependencies between Grammatical
Systems.
Language 74.56-80.
_____. (eds.), 2003. Studies in Evidentiality. (Typological Studies in Language 54)
Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
International Journal of
Barnes, Janet. 1984. Evidentials in the Tuyuca verb.
American Linguistics 50.255-71.
Bendix, Edward H. 1992. The Grammaticalization of responsibility and evidence:
interactional manipulation of evidential categories in Newari. Jane H. Hill and
Judith T. Irvine (eds.), Responsibility and evidence in oral discourse. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 226-47.
Boas, F. 1938. Language. In General Anthropology. Edited by Franz Boas. Boston/New
Franz Boas. Boston/New York. pp.124-45.
Botne, Robert. 1995. The Pronominal origin of an evidential.
Diachronica 12.201-21.
_____. 1997. Evidentiality and Epistemic Modality in Lega.
Studies in Language
21.509-29.
Bybee, J. L., R. Perkins, and W. Pagliuca. 1994. The Evolution of Grammar: Tense,
aspect and mood in the languages of the world. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Chafe, W. and J. Nichols. (eds.) 1986. Evidentiality: the linguistic coding of
epistemology.N.J: Ablex Norwood.
de Haan, Ferdinand. 1999. Evidentiality and Epistemic Modality: Setting Boundarie.
Southwest Journal of Linguistics 18.83-101.
DeLancey, Scott. 1986. Evidentality and Volitionality in Tibetan.
Wallace Chafe and
Johanna Nichols (eds.), Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology.
Norwood, New Jersey : Ablex, 203-13.
_____. 1986a. Evidentiality and volitionality in Tibetan.
Wallace Chafe and Johanna
Nichols (eds.), Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology. Norwood,
New Jersey : Ablex, 203-13.
_____. 1990. A Note on Evidentiality in Hare.
International Journal of American
Linguistics 56.152-58.
_____. 1992. Sunwar Copulas.
Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 15.31-38.
_____. 1997. Mirativity: The grammatical marking of unexpected information [new vs.
assimilated knowledge as a semantic and grammatical category].
Typology 1.33-52.
Linguistic
麗澤大学言語研究センター（LinC）セミナー 2004/6/30
8
Dixon, R.M.W. 1997. The Rise and Fall of Languages. Cambridge University Press.
Fielder, Grace E. 1999. The Origin of evidentiality in the Balkans: Linguistic
Convergence or Conceptual Convergence?. Mediterranean language review
11.59-89.
Fleischman, Suzanne. 1989. Temporal Distance: A basic linguistic metaphor. Studies
in Language 13.1-50.
Floyd, Rick . 1999. The Structure of Evidential Categories in Wanka Quechua. Dallas:
Summer Institute of Linguistics and The University of Texas at Arlington.
Friedman, Victor A. 1999.
Evidentiality in the Balkan Languages.
Uwe Hinrichs
(ed.), Handbuch der Suudosteuropa-Linguistik. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 519-44.
_____. 1999a. Proverbial Evidentiality: On the Gnomic Uses of the Category of Status in
Languages of the Balkans and the Caucasus.
Mediterranean Language Review
11.135-155.
Givón, Talmy. 1982. Evidentiality and Epistemic Space. Studies in Language 6.23-49.
Hoff, B.J. 1986. Evidentiality in Carib: Particles, Affixes, and a Variant of
Wackernagel's Law.
Lingua 69.49-103.
Hoff, B. J. 1986. Evidentiality in Carib Particles: Affixes, and a Variant of Wackernagel'
s Law. Lingua 69.49-103.
Ifantidou, Elly. 2001. Evidentials and Relevance. (Pragmatics & Beyond New Series,
86.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Jakobson, Roman O. 1957. Shifter, Verbal categories, and the Russian Verb. Selected
Writings. vol.2 The Hague: Mouton. pp.131-47.
神尾昭雄. 1990.『情報のなわ張り理論--言語の機能的分析』大修館書店.
_____. 2002.『続・情報のなわ張り理論-』大修館書店.
Kamio, Akio. 1997. Evidentiality and some discourse characteristics in Japanese.
Akio
Kamio (ed.), Directions in Functional Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins,
145-71.
Kamio, Akio. 1998. Territory of Information. Philadelphia: John Benjamin.
Lazard, Gilbert. 1999. Mirativity, evidentiality, mediativity, or other?
Linguistic
Typology 3.91-109.
Luke, Kang Kwong. 1990. Utterance Particles in Cantonese Conversation. Amsterdam :
John Benjamins.
MacDonald, Lorna. 1990. Evidentiality in Tauya.
Language and Linguistics in
Melanesia 21.31-46.
Malone, Terrell. 1988. The Origin and development of Tuyuca evidentials.
International Journal of American Linguistics 54.119-40.
麗澤大学言語研究センター（LinC）セミナー 2004/6/30
9
Matlock, Teenie. 1989. Metaphor and the Grammaticalization of Evidentials.
Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 15.215-25.
Matras, Yaron. 1995. Verb Evidentials and Their Discourse Function in Vlach Romani
Narratives. Yaron Matras (ed.), Romani in Contact: The History, Structure and
Sociology of a Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 95-123.
Michailovsky, Boyd. 1996. L' Inférentiel du népali.
[The inferential of Nepali.] Zlatka
Guentchéva (ed.), L'énonciation Médiatisée. Louvain and Paris: Peeters, 109-24.
Nuckolls, Janis B. 1993. The Semantics of certainty in Quechua and its implications for
a cultural epistemology.
Language in Society 22.235-55.
Palmer, F. R. 1986. Mood and modality. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University.
Shinzato, Rumiko. 1986. An Epistemological Approach to Past Tense Auxiliaries in
Okinawan. Papers in Linguistics 19.155-72.
_____. 1991. Where Do Temporality, Evidentiality, and Epistemicity Meet?: A
Comparison of Old Japanese -ki and -keri with Turkish -di and -mis . Gengo
Kenkyu 99.25-57.
Slobin, Dan I. and Ayhan A. Aksu. 1982.
Turkish Evidential.
Tense, Aspect and Modality in the Use of the
Paul J. Hopper (ed.), Tense-Aspect: Between Semantics and
Pragmatics. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 185-200. Basis for
Aksu and Slobin (1986).
Sumbatova, Nina. 1999. Evidentiality, transitivity and split ergativity: evidence from
Svan.
Werner Abraham and Leonid Kulikov (eds.), Tense-Aspect, Transitivity
and Causativity: Essays in Honour of Vladimir Nedjalkov. Amsterdam: John
Benjamins, 63-95.
Sun, JT-S 1993. ‘Evidentials in Amdo Tibetan’ Bulletin of the Institute of History and
Philology, Academia Sinica 63: 945-1001.
Szuchewycz, Bohdan. 1994. Evidentiality in ritual discourse: The social construction of
religious meaning. Language in Society 23.389-410.
Tasmowski, Liliane, and Patrick Dendale. 1994. Pouvoir: un Marqueur d'évidentialité.
[Pouvoir 'can': a marker of evidentiality.] Langue Française 102.41-55.
Thurgood, Graham. 1981. The Historical development of the Akha evidentials system.
Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 7.295-302.
Wierzbicka, Anna. 1994. Semantics and epistemology: The meaning of 'evidentials' in a
cross-linguistic perspective. Language Sciences 16.81-137.
Willett, Thomas. 1988. A Cross-linguistic survey of the grammaticalization of
evidentiality.
Studies in Language 12.51-97.

Download Report