Develops a multi-modal logic to explain the interaction of evidentiality and egophoricity in Tibetan, suggesting significant implications for understanding these systems.
Golog Tibetan grammaticalizes both evidentiality and egophoricity, but the two categories interact in a constrained way: evidential marking neutralizes the binary egophoric versus non-egophoric contrast. This paper develops LEE (Logic of Evidentiality and Egophoricity), a multi-modal logic that formalizes this interaction. LEE employs operators □EGO, □SENS, and □INF for egophoric, sensory-evidential, and inferential-evidential markers, respectively. The blocking effect is captured by axioms □σφ → (□EGOφ ↔ ◇EGOφ) for σ ∈ {SENS, INF}. This paper establishes soundness, completeness, and decidability for LEE. Three empirical puzzles receive unified explanation: (i) blocking of egophoric vs. non-egophoric contrasts under evidential marking, (ii) semantic bleaching of egophoric morphology in evidential contexts, and (iii) the unidirectional nature of the evidential–egophoric interaction.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jiahong Wang (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: