Abstract
This article re-presents the case, first presented in DeLancey (1997), for the mirative as a crosslinguistic category, and responds to critiques of that work by Gilbert Lazard and Nathan Hill. The nature of the mirative, a category which marks a statement as representing information which is new or unexpected, is exemplified with data from Kham (Tibeto-Burman) and Hare (Athabaskan). The mirative category is shown to be distinct from the well-known mediative or indirective evidential category. Finally, the role of mirativity in the complex verbal systems of Tibetan languages is briefly outlined.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 529-564 |
| Journal | Linguistic Typology |
| Volume | 16 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2012 |
Keywords
- Linguistic Structures (incl Grammar, Phonology, Lexicon, Semantics)
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Still mirative after all these years'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver