Re: modals (was: cmavo hit-list)

[Chris Bogart <cbogart@quetzal.com>]

Mark Biggar says:
>Speaking of the modals that express how you know something, I got some
>questions.  I noticed that besides Se'o (by inner experience) that there also:
>
>ja'o  I conclude (deductive? or does this also include inductive?)
>su'a  I generlize

"ja'o" is deductive, "su'a" is inductive, and "su'anai" is abductive.

>pe'i  I opine (suppose?)

"da'i" might be closer to "suppose".  It's not strictly an evidential but
pe'i it could be used the same way.

>I ran into the need for at least one more model
>of this type, one that says "I know on authority" or "from a trusted source".
>In some cases ka'u will work (like when talking about religion) and ti'e
>is much too weak.

I would be inclined to use ka'u; science is no less cultural than religion.
The things I "know" about science that I haven't tested myself, aren't
really from a particular authority or trusted source; I "know" electricity
is made of electrons because lots of books say so and everyone believes it.
I have no particular reason to trust Milliken (is he the guy that did the
relevant experiment?), and I couldn't even name any of the people who have
duplicated his experiment, much less think of them as "trusted sources".

In other words, I would argue that science is a cultural pursuit, in that
the whole culture participates in it to some extent and there are no
infallible trusted authorities.  I would also use "ka'u" for well-known
religious "facts" that I accepted as true, "ti'e" for religious things I was
more doubtful of, and "se'o" or "za'a" for religious things revealed to me
personally.

Just my relfepni; this may reflect more my attitude towards science and
religion than any useful semantic advice about the evidentials.

>In addition how do you attribute a supposed modal to someone other then
>yourself?

Good question.  Is there a way to work "za'a" into:
        Newton observed that the apple fell

How about:
        la NUtyn. zo'u za'a se'inai le plise cu farlu

I don't know if that's right; it's kind of forced anyway.  I'd just say:
        la NUtyn. zgana lemu'e le plise cu farlu

Ka'u the evidentials are intended to create a certain style of speech, that
gives a greater clue into one's thinking process, but za'a it's generally
possible to make the same statements more explicitly with gismu.
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 Chris Bogart
 cbogart@quetzal.com
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~