In linguistics, egophoricity refers to a grammatical category that marks one's personal involvement in an event.[1] In languages with this category, an egophoric form is used for expressing information to which the self has "privileged access"[2] as opposed to an allophoric (or non-egophoric) form.[1][3]
Egophoric forms are typically associated with first-person subject declarative sentences and second-person subject interrogative sentences (egophoric distribution).[4]
Before "egophoricity" came into use in the literature, linguists often referred to the same phenomenon by the term conjunct and disjunct forms.[10][11] The distinction between conjunct/disjunct was first made in Austin Hale's work on Kathmandu Newar.[12][13]
Overview
The egophoric distribution
Usually, the marking of egophoricity is correlated with grammatical person and sentence types: egophoric forms typically occur with the first-person subject in declarative sentences and the second-person subject in questions. By contrast, non-egophoric forms will appear in the other contexts. This pattern is called egophoric distribution.[4][14][15]
Typical distribution of (non-)egophoric markers.
Declarative
Interrogative
1st person
ego
non-ego
2nd person
non-ego
ego
3rd person
non-ego
non-ego
Unlike person agreement, however, the use of (non-)egophoric forms may not follow it under certain semantic or pragmatic situations.
The case of Kathmandu Newar
Kathmandu Newar, a Tibeto-Burman language spoken in the capital of Nepal, has two past tense makers for verbs: the egophoric -ā and the non-egophoric -a. The former is normally used in first-person declaratives and second-person questions whereas the latter is applied to the other sentences:[16][17]
EGO:egophoric
Ji
1.SG.ABS
ana
there
wanā.
go.PST.EGO
Ji ana wanā.
1.SG.ABS there go.PST.EGO
"I went there."
Cha
2.SG.ABS
ana
there
wana.
go.PST.NEGO
Cha ana wana.
2.SG.ABS there go.PST.NEGO
"You went there."
Wa
3.SG.ABS
ana
there
wana.
go.PST.NEGO
Wa ana wana.
3.SG.ABS there go.PST.NEGO
"He went there."
Cha
2.SG.ABS
ana
there
wanā
go.PST.EGO
lā?
Q
Cha ana wanā lā?
2.SG.ABS there go.PST.EGO Q
"Did you go there?"
If the verb describes an unintentional action, however, the non-egophoric past tense marker will appear in first-person declaratives and second-person questions as well:[18]
Jįį
1.SG.ERG
lā
meat
palā.
cut.PST.EGO
Jįį lā palā.
1.SG.ERG meat cut.PST.EGO
"I cut the meat (intentionally)."
Cha
2.SG.ABS
danā
get-up.PST.EGO
lā?
Q
Cha danā lā?
2.SG.ABS get-up.PST.EGO Q
"Did you get up (voluntarily)?"
Jįį
1.SG.ERG
lā
meat
pala.
cut.PST.NEGO
Jįį lā pala.
1.SG.ERG meat cut.PST.NEGO
"I cut the meat (quite by accident)."
Cha
2.SG.ABS
dana
get-up.PST.NEGO
lā?
Q
Cha dana lā?
2.SG.ABS get-up.PST.NEGO Q
"Did you get up (involuntarily)?"
While the third person subject usually takes the non-egophoric marker both in declaratives and interrogatives, the egophoric counterpart will be used in indirect speech if the main and subordinate clauses share the same subject:[19]
Wа̨а̨
3.SG.ERG
wa
3.SG.ABS
ana
there
wanā
go.PST.EGO
dhakāā
QUOT
dhāla.
say.PST.NEGO
Wа̨а̨ wa ana wanā dhakāā dhāla.
3.SG.ERG 3.SG.ABS there go.PST.EGO QUOT say.PST.NEGO
"He said that he went there (himself)."
Wа̨а̨
3.SG.ERG
wa
3.SG.ABS
ana
there
wana
go.PST.NEGO
dhakāā
QUOT
dhāla.
say.PST.NEGO
Wа̨а̨ wa ana wana dhakāā dhāla.
3.SG.ERG 3.SG.ABS there go.PST.NEGO QUOT say.PST.NEGO
In a nominal construction, the egophoric copulae (e.g. yin) and the non-egophoric ones (e.g. red) are used in accordance with the egophoric distribution:[10][21]
nga
1.SG
bod=pa
Tibetan
yin
COP.EGO
nga bod=pa yin
1.SG Tibetan COP.EGO
"I am Tibetan."
kho
3.SG
bod=pa
Tibetan
red
COP.NEGO
kho bod=pa red
3.SG Tibetan COP.NEGO
"He is Tibetan."
khyed=rang
2.SG.HON
bod=pa
Tibetan
yin
COP.EGO
pas
Q
khyed=rang bod=pa yin pas
2.SG.HON Tibetan COP.EGO Q
"Are you Tibetan?"
nga
1.SG
rgya=mi
Chinese
red
COP.NEGO
pas
Q
nga rgya=mi red pas
1.SG Chinese COP.NEGO Q
"Am I Chinese?"
However, the distinction between yin and red may also be made according to voluntariness of an action as in Kathmandu Newar.[22][23] Likewise, the third-person subject in indirect speech is marked by an egophoric marker if it is co-referential with the subject of the main clause.[23][24]
Also, the third-person subject takes an egophoric marker when the speaker emphasizes their personal involvement in the information conveyed in the statement.
"He is my son." (e.g. answering "whose son is he?")
Interaction with other categories
Evidentiality
In a language like Lhasa Tibetan, egophoricity is part of its evidential system as the egophoric copula occupies the same slot as the allophoric and the evidential. This is not the case for languages such as Kathmandu Newar, where the two categories are
expressed separately.[26]
Mirativity
Languages like Akha have paradigmatic structure of mirative and egophoric marking, which suggests both categories can interact with each other.[27]
Tournadre and LaPolla (2014) compare the Japanesedesiderative suffix -tai to an egophoric marker in languages like Tibetan, as they follow the egophoric distribution.[36] In Japanese, -tai as well as adjectives describing one's inner experience (such as "glad", "itchy") cannot be used for the third-person without the support of the suffix -garu or some evidential markers.[37]
Hagège, Claude (1982). La structure des langues, Que sais-je?. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. pp. 95–106.
Hale, Austin (1980). "Person markers: Finite conjunct and disjunct verb forms in Newari". Papers in South-East Asian linguistics, Vol. 7. Canberra: Australian National University. pp. 95–106.
San Roque, Lila; Floyd, Simeon; Norcliffe, Elisabeth (2018). "Egophoricity: An introduction". In Simeon Floyd; Elisabeth Norcliffe; Lila San Roque (eds.). Egophoricity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. pp. 1–78. doi:10.1075/tsl.118.01san. ISBN978-90-272-0699-2. ISSN0167-7373.
Sandman, Erika (2018). "Egophoricity in Wutun". Egophoricity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. pp. 173–196. doi:10.1075/tsl.118.06san. ISSN0167-7373.
Shimotori, Misuzu (2008). "Emotion, perceptions and desires of a third person: An ethnogrammatical study of the –garu structure in Japanese". Bulletin of the Transilvania University of Brasov, Series IV. 1 (50): 139–144.
Tournadre, Nicolas (1991). "The rhetorical use of the Tibetan ergative". Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area. 14 (1): 93–108. doi:10.32655/LTBA.14.1.04.
Tournadre, Nicolas (2017). "A typological sketch of evidential/epistemic categories in the Tibetic languages". In Lauren Gawne and Nathan W. Hill (ed.). Evidential Systems of Tibetan Languages. De Gruyter. pp. 95–130. doi:10.1515/9783110473742-004. ISBN978-3-11-047374-2.
Widmer, Manuel (2020). "Same same but different: On the relationship between ego- phoricity and evidentiality". In Henrik Bergqvist & Seppo Kittilä (ed.). Evidentiality, egophoricity, and engagement. Berlin: Language Science Press. pp. 263–287. doi:10.5281/zenodo.3975811.
This article needs additional or more specific categories. Please help out by adding categories to it so that it can be listed with similar articles.(November 2023)