Investigation of Three Japanese Evidentials --Rashii, --Sooda, and --Yooda:

How Do These Three Evidentials Work?

Abstract

Languages allow us to indicate the source of information by using various expressions. In English, for example, speakers are able to indicate that they have acquired some information through hearsay by using the expression such as I heard that ... (e.g. I heard that it is raining outside.) Besides, they are able to indicate that they have directly experienced things by using expressions such as I see that ... (e.g. I see that it is raining outside.)
According to previous studies, some languages require that the information source be expressed grammatically, by means of a dedicated class of morphemes or an inflectional system (e.g. Cheyenne (Murray 2010), Tucano (Aikhenvald 2004), Tuyuca (Barnes 1984), and Wintu (Aikhenvald 2004). Other languages (e.g. Cuzco Cuechua (Faller 2002), Japanese (Aoki 1986), Matsubara 2017), and St’át’imcets (Matthewson et al. 2007) do not have grammatical requirements but do have morphosyntactic markers that are used to express evidentiality. Some researchers (e.g. Aikhenvald 2004) claim that the term ‘evidentiality’ is fully grammaticalized, systematic, and obligatory linguistics markers that encode the information source. In this research, however, I will follow Matsubara’s (2017) position that the evidential is a linguistic form whose primary function is to encode information sources. Faller (2002), Matthewson et al. (2007), and Murray (2010) take this position.
By observing evidentiality systems of Japanese and other languages, it is expected that characteristics of English would be understood more clearly.