Anyael: Evidentiality

[nyxelestia]

Evidentiality

Evidentiality is, in short, justifying or demonstrating the amount of truth in your statement, or giving the nature of evidence you have for your statement. One conlang well known for this was Láadan.

In Anyael, these terms are called 'Diven', and there are four main levels of evidence you can provide, with the last one have three sublevels below it as well.

1. Witness - you experienced it directly (you saw it yourself)


2. Inferential - inferred it from surrounding evidence (there was evidence there that it happened, but you didn't see it yourself)


3. Assumative - you assume it happened, with good reason, but have no evidence for it


4. Reportative - you heard about it from someone else (you had nothing to do with it directly, but someone else did)


•      1st Hand      - you're getting it from someone who was there directly


•      2nd Hand      - from someone who wasn't there directly


•      3rd Hand      - from no clear or very 'distant' source

Some notes on the evidentiality statements:

• For reportative, the implication of adding 1st/2nd/3rd hand is that the source is claiming to have been there, not that the source has been there. You do not know the source, so you do not trust them.


• Reportative, 3rd Hand, is often just 'gossip', even if you can justify your statement with a higher level of validity.


• Using a higher statement of validity than is the reality for your statement is considered lying.


• Depending on the context, assumative often comes across as bigotry.


• The trustworthiness or validity of your statement decreases as you go down the list.


• This is somewhat optional - if the context makes it clear how you know, then you don't use it. If context doesn't make it clear, usually you don't use it unless you have a reason or need to clarify how you know.


• If you do use one, it goes directly after the clause or statement it applies to, no matter where that puts it in the sentence.

Diven

• The term for evidentiality particles.


• The particle suffix (see table below) is added to 'diven' to create the particle, itself.


• If you don't use it, and someone wants to know the validity of your statement, they will ask, "Kae diven...?", which is your cue to fill it in.


• Sometimes, they'll just say "Diven...?" in a questioning tone. (Informal).


• In these situations, it's not uncommon to just answer with the suffix, rather than the whole particle - you are finishing the particle of for them. Again, informal, very informal.
• But, in normal situations, you'll answer with the whole particle when they ask, Diven + [suffix].
• Just asking, "Kae diven?" or "Diven?" in a context outside of evidentiality is an informal/slang-ish way of asking, "How do you know?"

The Particles:

Diven + ...

Witness	Inferential	Assumative	Reportative
-ae	-ouwe	-aiyee	-eya

Expanded Reportative Particles:

Diveneya + 1st/2nd/3rd

1st	2nd	3rd
-k	-t	-m

So the full list of evideniality particles would be:

1. Witness - divenae


2. Inferential - divenouwe


3. Assumative - divenaiyee


4. Reportative - diveneya


• 1st Hand - diveneyak


• 2nd Hand - diveneyat


• 3rd Hand - diveneyam

Some examples:

Wae teyamahseh - I ate.

Wae teyamahseh divenae - I ate [and I know this because I saw it for myself].

• You ate it yourself, so you know it yourself.

Yau teyamahseh divenouwe - You ate [because there was evidence there to suggest it].

• Like, say, food wrappers all over the place

Sheila teyamahseh divenaiyee - She ate [because I have reason to assume as much].

• She eats at the same time a day, every day.

Sheilo teyamahseh diveneya - He ate [because I was told this happened].

Again, these things are actually rare, but they can be used, and are used mostly in cases where the validity of the statement is important.

~*~