This paper focuses on the strategies used in Chinese inferential expressions, i.e. utterances which convey a conjecture based on indirect evidence. The latter can be of a sensory type (inference from results), or can be based upon general knowledge (inference from reasoning) (Willet 1988). As underlined by Drubig (2001) following Woisetschlaeger (1977), in English the results vs. reasoning contrast can be marked by resorting to different epistemic modals, namely must and should. Moreover, as underlined by Krawczyk (2012), the occurrence of the evidential adverbs depends on the inferential scenarios. The only Speaker-oriented adverb which has no contextual constraints is probably. The aim is to find out whether the same evidential distinction between must vs. should can be retrieved also in Chinese. It will be shown that: in Chinese the results vs. reasoning contrast tends to be expressed by means of aspectual markers, rather than by implementing a modal strategy. Furthermore, based on the compatibility test devised by Krawczyk (2012), it will be shown that: kanlai/hăoxiang, xiănran/mingming, xăngbi, pattern with their English equivalents (apparently/evidently, obviously/ clearly, presumably, namely) but a significant mismatch is found between dagai (and, to a lesser extent, also kĕneng) and the Speaker-oriented adverb probably. In some context, as reasoning by exclusion, the perfect equivalent of probaby is hĕn kĕneng. Key words: Semantics, Typology, Evidentiality, Speaker-oriented adverbs.

Questo articolo è incentrato sulle strategie utilizzate in cinese per esprimere un’inferenza basata sulla percezione sensoriale (inference from results) o sul ragionamento (inference from reasoning) (Willet 1988). Per quanto riguarda l’inglese, il contrasto fra questi due tipi diinferenze può essere marcato mediante due diversi modali, rispettivamente must e should (Woisetschlaeger 1977, Drubig 2001). Inoltre, come sottolineato da Krawczyk (2012), queste espressioni possono essere marcate da diversi avverbi Speaker-oriented. Fra questi, l’unico avverbio compatibile con tutti gli scenari è probably. L’obiettivo di questo articolo è verificare se anche in cinese questi due tipi di inferenze possano essere marcati mediante diversi modali di necessità, come accade in inglese con must/should. A questo proposito verrà dimostrato che: per esprimere il contrasto fra inferenza basata su percezione e inferenza basata su ragionamento in cinese si ricorre a una strategia basata sulle marche aspettuali, prima ancora che modali. Inoltre, sulla base del test di compatibilità con i diversi scenari evidenziali (Krawczyk 2012), verrà dimostrato che: kanlai/hăoxiang, xiănran/mingming, xăngbi, si comportano in modo analogo a, rispettivamente, apparently/evidently, obviously/clearly, presumably e che in alcuni scenari, quali il ragionamento per esclusione, vi è un significativo scostamento fra l’uso di probably e quello di dagai (e, in misura minore, kĕneng). In tali contesti, il perfetto equivalente di probably è il costrutto hĕn kĕneng. Parole chiave: Semantica, Tipologia, Evidenzialità, Avverbi orientati verso il parlante.

THE ROAST MUST BE DONE!”: INFERRED EVIDENTIALS IN CHINESE

carlotta sparvoli
2015

Abstract

This paper focuses on the strategies used in Chinese inferential expressions, i.e. utterances which convey a conjecture based on indirect evidence. The latter can be of a sensory type (inference from results), or can be based upon general knowledge (inference from reasoning) (Willet 1988). As underlined by Drubig (2001) following Woisetschlaeger (1977), in English the results vs. reasoning contrast can be marked by resorting to different epistemic modals, namely must and should. Moreover, as underlined by Krawczyk (2012), the occurrence of the evidential adverbs depends on the inferential scenarios. The only Speaker-oriented adverb which has no contextual constraints is probably. The aim is to find out whether the same evidential distinction between must vs. should can be retrieved also in Chinese. It will be shown that: in Chinese the results vs. reasoning contrast tends to be expressed by means of aspectual markers, rather than by implementing a modal strategy. Furthermore, based on the compatibility test devised by Krawczyk (2012), it will be shown that: kanlai/hăoxiang, xiănran/mingming, xăngbi, pattern with their English equivalents (apparently/evidently, obviously/ clearly, presumably, namely) but a significant mismatch is found between dagai (and, to a lesser extent, also kĕneng) and the Speaker-oriented adverb probably. In some context, as reasoning by exclusion, the perfect equivalent of probaby is hĕn kĕneng. Key words: Semantics, Typology, Evidentiality, Speaker-oriented adverbs.
2015
Carlotta Sparvoli
File in questo prodotto:
Eventuali allegati, non sono esposti

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11585/782340
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact