Kinds of evidence
Evidential markers indicate how a speaker obtained information for a statement. WALS chapter 77 distinguishes direct sensory evidence from indirect inference or report for its survey, while noting finer distinctions in individual grammars. It counts grammaticalized markers and excludes ordinary lexical phrases such as English “reportedly” under that chapter’s definition. Evidentiality concerns evidence source; epistemic modality concerns a speaker’s degree of confidence. A translation like “must have” can blur them.
In the WALS example from Fasu, a-pe-re “I see it coming” has a visual evidential expressed on both sides of the stem: a-…-re. In Koasati, nipó-k aksóhka-ha is glossed “It sounds like the meat is charring”; the verbal -ha marks auditory evidence. These are different grammatical forms and sensory categories, not universal endings for “sight” and “sound.”
Inference and report
WALS gives Khalkha ter irsen biz, translated “He must have come,” with biz identified as inferential. Its Lezgian example Qe sobranie že-da-lda, “They say that there will be a meeting today,” uses a quotative marker. The first points to reasoning from evidence; the second attributes a report. English translations of both may be expressed with additional words, but that does not settle the source language’s morphology or the exact discourse effect.
The same chapter contrasts Turkish Ahmet gel-di, a witnessed past, with Ahmet gel-miş, an unwitnessed past in its cited analysis. A neat two-column lesson must not imply that every use of either form has only one interpretation in every context or dialect. Check the source grammar and discourse examples before applying a label to a new token.
Historical interpretation
A historical corpus may preserve an evidential form but omit the speaker’s actual information source. Its grammatical distribution can still be studied through contrasting forms, genres, and narrative viewpoint. A translator should indicate when “apparently” supplies an interpretation rather than an overt source word. A claim that a culture “never lies” because its language has evidentials confuses a grammatical distinction with social behavior.
Practice: for one cited form, mark tense, person, information-source marker, and English words supplied by translation. Then give a context that would make a reportative appropriate and one that would require checking the grammar before choosing it.
Modern-language examples on this page clarify a linguistic pattern. They do not establish unattested sounds or forms for an ancient language. Follow the cited sources below and keep editorial readings separate from the surviving trace.