Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A bias-driven modal development of evidentiality: the Korean inferential evidential –po

  • Published:
Journal of East Asian Linguistics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper aims at analyzing the peculiar morphology and semantics of Korean inferential evidential expressions like ca-na-po-ta ‘(he) seems to be sleeping’ in an integrated manner, with a claim that it contains a self-addressed interrogative morpheme. From a diachronic perspective, the paper proposes that the emergence of the inferential marker is bias-driven, arguing that an inherent bias in a self-addressed question constitutes a necessary condition for later development. And the bias, which is undoubtedly of an epistemic nature, is reinterpreted as inferential evidentiality with the addition of the previously perceptual morpheme –po-. On a synchronic side, capitalizing on the fact that –kka is another self-addressed interrogative morpheme alongside with –na and –ka, the present work claims that this morpheme can also make an inferential evidential marker, i.e., -kka-po-, which is always preceded by a prospective morpheme –l-. It is demonstrated that apparent semantic differences between the kka-variant and the other two variants are better understood as sortal contrasts, since the predictive future is the converse of the inferential past (Nichols, in: Chafe, Nichols (eds) Evidentiality: the linguistic coding of epistemology, Ablex, Norwood, 1986).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ahn, Joohoh. 2015. {-nka}, -na}hyeng emiey tayhan malmwungchi kipan yenkwu [A study of the endings {-nka type and -na type based on Spoken Korean Corpus]. The Linguistic Association of Korea Journal 23(2): 133–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aikhenvald, Alexandra. 2003. Evidentiality in typological perspective. In Studies in evidentiality, ed. Alexandra Aikhenvald and R.M.W. Dixon, 1–31. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aikhenvald, Alexandra. 2004. Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aitchison, Jean. 1987. Words in the mind: An introduction to the mental lexicon. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • An, Pyeong-Hie. 1965. Hwukicwungseykwukeuy uymwunpepey tayhaye [On the interrogatives in late Middle Korean]. Hakswulci [Scholarly Journal] 6: 59–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersen, Henning. 1973. Abductive and deductive change. Language 49(4): 765–793.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asher, Nicholas, and Brian Reese. 2005. Negative bias in polar questions. In Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 9, ed. Emar Maier, Corien Bary, and Janneke Huitink, 30–43. Nijmegen: Radbound University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asher, Nicholas, and Brian Reese. 2007. Intonation and discourse: Biased questions. Interdisciplinary Studies on Information Structure 8: 1–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, Laura R. 2013. The syntax of question particles. PhD dissertation, Newcastle University.

  • Bak, Jaeyeon. 2014. Hankwuke congkyelemi ‘-kwuna’uy uymilon [Semantics of the Korean sentence final ending ‘-kwuna’]. Hankwuke uymihak [Korean Semantics] 43: 219–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhat, D.N.S. 2000. The Indefinite-interrogative puzzle. Linguistic Typology 4: 365–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butt, Miriam. 2010. The light verb jungle: Still hacking away. In Complex predicates: Cross-linguistic perspectives on event structure, ed. Mengistu Amberber, Brett Baker, and Mark Harvey, 48–78. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Büring, Daniel, and Christine Gunlogson. 2000. Aren’t positive and negative polar questions the same?. Ms. USCS/UCLA. https://semanticsarchive.net/Archive/mYwOGNhO/polar_questions.pdf. Accessed 23 Mar 2018.

  • Choe, Jae-Woong. 1985. Pitch-accent and q/wh words in Korean. In Harvard studies in Korean linguistics, ed. Susumu Kuno, John Whitman, Ik-Hwan Lee, and Young-Se Kang, 113–123. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Choi, Sung-ho. 2003. Diachronic synchrony in the natural language: The agglutinative suffix ‘jahn’ in Korean. Inmunhakchi [Journal of Humanities] 26: 315–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chung, Hye-Sun. 2010. Congkyelemiwa thonghaphanun ‘pota’ kwumwuney tayhaye – ‘-nka pota’, ‘-lkka pota’lul cwungsimulo [A study on the construction consisting of sentence final ending and ‘pota’ – Focusing on ‘-nka pota’ and ‘-lkka pota’]. Kwukehak [Journal of Korean Linguistics] 59: 45–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chung, Kyung-Sook. 2007. Spatial deictic tense and evidentials in Korean. Natural Language Semantics 15: 187–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chung, Kyung-Sook. 2012. Space in tense: The interaction of tense, aspect, evidentiality and speech acts in Korean. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Haan, Ferdinand. 1999. Evidentiality and epistemic modality: Setting boundaries. Southwest Journal of Linguistics 18: 83–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Haan, Ferdinand. 2001. The cognitive basis of visual evidentials. In Conceptual and discourse factors in linguistic structure, ed. Alan Cienki, Barbara J. Luka, and Miachael B. Smith, 91–105. Stanford: CSLI Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutcher, Guy. 2002. On the misuse of the notion of ‘abduction’ in linguistics. Journal of Linguistics 38: 469–485.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dixon, R.M.W. 2003. Evidentiality in Jarawara. In Studies in evidentiality, ed. Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald and R.M.W. Dixon, 165–187. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, Nicholas. 2007. Insubordination and its uses. In Finiteness: Theoretical and empirical foundations, ed. Irina Nikolaeva, 366–431. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, Victor A. 2003. Evidentiality in the Balkans with special attention to Macedonian and Albanian. In Studies in evidentiality, ed. Alexandra Aikhenvald and R.M.W. Dixon, 189?218. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrett, Edward J. 2001. Evidentiality and assertion in Tibetan. PhD dissertation, University of California at Los Angeles.

  • Gisborne, Nicolas, and Jasper Holmes. 2007. A history of English evidential verbs of appearance. English Language and Linguistics 11(1): 1–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groenendijk, Jeroen. 1999. The logic of interrogation. In Proceedings of semantics and linguistics theory IX, ed. Tanya Matthews and Devon Strolovitch, 109–126. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groenendijk, Jeroen. 2009. Inquisitive semantics: Two possibilities for disjunction. In Logic, language, and computation. TbiLLC 2007. Lecture notes in computer science, vol. 5422, ed. Peter Bosch, David Gabelaia, and Jérôme Lang, 80–94. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamblin, Charles L. 1973. Questions in Montague English. Foundations of Language 10: 41–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hara, Yurie, and Christopher Davis. 2013. Darou as a deictic context shifter. In Proceedings of formal approaches to Japanese linguistics 6 (FAJL 6) [MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 66], ed. Kazuko Yatsushiro and Uli Sauerland, 41–56. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

  • Haspelmath, Martin. 1997. Indefinite pronouns. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hong, Kyoung-Sun, and Young-Sook Sohn. 2001. Syntax and semantics of Korean auxiliary verbs po- in terms of modality. In Harvard studies in Korean linguistics IX, ed. Susumu Kuno, Ik-Hwan Lee, John Whitman, Joan Maling, Young-Se Kang, and Young-joo Kim, 338–348. Cambridge, MA: Department of Linguistics, Harvard University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huddleston, Rodney. 1994. The contrast between interrogatives and questions. Journal of Linguistics 30: 411–439.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huddleston, Rodney, and Geoffrey K. Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isaacs, James, and Kyle Rawlins. 2008. Conditional questions. Journal of Semantics 25: 269–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Izvorski, Roumyana. 1997. The present perfect as an epistemic modal. In Proceedings of semantics and linguistics theory VII, ed. Aaron Lawson and Eun Cho, 222–239. Ithaca: CLC Publications, Cornell University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jakobson, Roman. 1960. Closing statements: Linguistics and poetics. In Style in language, ed. Thomas A. Sebeok, 350–377. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jang, Youngjun, and Il-Kon Kim. 1998. Self-addressed questions and quantifier interpretation. Korean Linguistics 9: 191–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jang, Youngjun. 1999. Two types of question and existential quantification. Linguistics 37(5): 847–867.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jun, Sun-Ah, and M. Oh. 1996. A prosodic analysis of three types of wh-phrases in Korean. Language and Speech 39(1): 37–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jun, Sun-Ah. 2000. K-ToBI (Korean ToBI) Labelling Conventions (version 3.1, October 2000). UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics 99: 149–173.

  • Jung, In-Seung. 1960. Hangul kanghwa [Lectures on Hangul]. Seoul: Sinkwumwunhwasa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jung, Kyeong-Mi. 2017. Congkyelemi {-ci}uy uymi pwunsek [A semantic analysis of the Korean sentence ending form {-ci}]. Hankwukehak [Korean Linguistics] 75: 273–302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karttunen, Lauri. 1977. Syntax and semantics of questions. Linguistics and Philosophy 1: 3–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufmann, Magdalena, and Claudia Poschmann. 2013. Embedded imperatives: Empirical evidence from colloquial German. Language 89(3): 619–637.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Jeong-A. 1985. Siposeykikwukeuy ‘-nka’ey tayhaye [On –nka in the 15th century Korean]. Kwukekwukmwunhak [Journal of Korean Language and Literature] 94: 281–301.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Jihye. 2010. Hankwuke haksupcalul wuyhan yangtay pwusa ‘ama’wa ‘hoksi’uy ehwuy cengpo yenkwu [A study on the lexical information of modality adverbs ‘ama’ and ‘hoksi’ for Korean learners]. Hankwukehak [Korean Linguistics] 47: 163–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Young-Wha. 2006. Q-particles vs. I-particles: Licensors of the question and the indefinite wh-words. Studies in Generative Grammar 16(3): 461–490.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ko, Chang-Un. 1992. Hyentaykwukeuy mwulumssikkut yenkwu [A study of interrogative endings in Modern Korean]. In Hankwukeuy thossiwa ssikkut [Korean particles and endings], ed. Seung Gon Kim, 339–360. Pagijong Press: Seoul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ko, Kwang-Mo. 2015. Chwuchukul nathanaynun ‘-unka po-, -unkapi-, -unkap-’kwa pocohyengyongsa kwumwun ‘-ulkka po-’uy paltal [The developments of –unka po-, -unkapi- and –unkap- expressing conjecture and the auxiliary verb construction –ulkka po- in Korean]. Enehak [Linguistics] 73: 3–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ko, Yong-Kun. 1974. Hyentaykwukeuy congkyelemiey tayhan kwucocek yenkwu [A structural study of conclusive-endings in Modern Korean]. Ehakyenkwu [The Journal of Studies in Language] 10(1): 118–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ko, Yong-Kun. 2010. Phyocwun cwungsey kwukemwunpeplon [The standard grammatical theory of Middle Korean], 3rd ed. Seoul: Cipmwuntang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krifka, Manfred. 1995. The semantics and pragmatics of polarity items. Linguistic Analysis 25: 209–257.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kwon, Iksoo. 2012. Please confirm what I inferred: On the Korean inferential-evidential marker –napo-. Journal of Pragmatics 44: 958–969.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kwon, Kyongjoon. 2008. Between Probability and Evidence: Korean Inferential Evidential Marker –po-. Paper presented at The 16th Meeting of the International Circle of Korean Linguistics, Cornell University, 27 June 2008.

  • Lee, Byeong-Gi. 1997. Milay sicey hyengtayuy thongsicek yenkwu [A diachronic study on the future tense forms] [Kwukeyenkwu 146]. Seoul: Kwukeyenkwuhoy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Chungmin. 1982. Aspects of aspect in Korean. Ene [Language] 7(2): 570–582.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Hyeonhie. 1982a. Kwukeuy uymwunpepey tayhan thongsicek yenkwu [A diachronic study on Korean questions]. Kwukeyenkwu [Korean Studies], vol. 52. Seoul: Kwukeyenkwuhoy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Hyeonhie. 1982b. Kwuke congkyelemiuy palceney tayhan kwankyen [A glimpse into the development of Korean sentence final endings]. Kwuehak [Journal of Korean Linguistics] 11: 143–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Hyosang. 1993. Cognitive constraints on expressing newly perceived information, with reference to epistemic modal suffixes in Korean. Cognitive Linguistics 4: 135–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Jungmee. 2011. The Korean evidential –te: A modal analysis. In Empirical issues in formal syntax and semantics 8. Papers from CSSP 2009, ed. Olivier Bonami and Patricia C. Hofherr, 287–311. http://www.cssp.cnrs.fr/eiss8/lee-eiss8.pdf. Accessed 23 Mar 2018.

  • Lee, Jungmee. 2013. Temporal constraints on the meaning of evidentiality. Natural Language Semantics 21(1): 1–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Youngmyn. 2001. Kuntay kwuke uymwunemiey tayhan yenkwu [A historical study on the interrogative final endings of Korean]. Kwukceyemwun [Korean Language and Literature in International Context] 23: 185–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Yu-Gi. 2002. {ka}kye uymwun congkyel hyengsikuy kwuco. [The structure of interrogative final forms by -ka and {-ko}]. Kwukekwukmwunhak [Journal of Korean Language and Literature] 131: 191–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Yu-Gi. 2005. (u)nka, -(u)lkka’uy taywu tungkup [The speech level of ‘-(u)nka, -(u)lkka’]. Hankwukemwunhakyenkwu [Studies in Korean Culture] 44: 151–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lim, Dongsik. 2011. Evidentials in interrogatives: A case study of Korean. In Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 15, ed. Ingo Reich, Eva Horch, and Dennis Pauly, 419–433. Saarbrücken: Universaar – Saarland University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lim, Dongsik, and Chungmin Lee. 2012. Perspective shifts of Korean evidentials and the effect of contexts. In Proceedings of the 22nd semantics and linguistic theory conference, ed. Anca Chereches, 26–42. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lim, Dong-Hoon. 2008. Hankwukeuy sepepkwa yangtay cheykye [The mood and modal systems in Korean]. Hankwuke uymihak [Korean semantics] 26: 211–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ljublinskaja, Marina D., and Andrej L. Malchukov. 2007. Èvidencial’nost’ v neneckom jazyke [Evidentiality in Nenets]. In Èvidencial’nost’ v jazykax Evropy i Azii [Evidentiality in languages in Europe and Asia], ed. Viktor S. Xrakovskij, 445–468. Saint-Petersburg: Nauka.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malchukov, Andrej L., and Viktor S. Xrakovskij. 2016. The linguistic interaction of mood with modality and other categories. In The Oxford handbook of modality and mood, ed. Jan Nuyts and Johan van der Auwera, 196–221. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maslova, Elena S. 2003. Evidentiality in Yukaghir. In Studies in evidentiality, ed. Alexandra Aikhenvald and R.M.W. Dixon, 219–235. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matlock, Teenie. 1989. Metaphor and the grammaticalization of evidentials. In Proceedings of the fifteenth annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, ed. Kira Hall, Michael Meacham, and Richard Shapiro, 215–225. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moravcsik, Edith A. 1971. Some cross-linguistic generalizations about yes-no questions and their answers. Stanford University Working Papers on Language Universals 7: 45–193.

  • Nichols, Johanna. 1986. The bottom line: Chinese Pidgin Russian. In Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology, ed. Wallace Chafe and Johanna Nichols, 239–257. Norwood: Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, F.R. 1986. Mood and modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, Jin-Ho. 2011a. Sicey, sang, yangtay [Tense, aspect, modality]. Kwukehak [Korean Linguistics] 60: 289–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, Jin-Ho. 2011b. Hankwukeeyse cungkesengina uyoysenguy uymisengpwunul phohamhanun mwunpepyoso [Grammatical elements containing evidential or mirative components in Korean]. Enewa cengpo sahoy [Language and Information Society] 15: 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peirce, Charles S. 1931–1934, 1958. The collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, Vols. 1–6 (ed. Charles Hartshorne and Paul Weiss). Vols. 7–8 (ed. Arthur W. Burks). Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.

  • Plungian, Vladimir A. 2011. Types of verbal evidentiality marking: Overview. In Linguistic realization of evidentiality in European languages, ed. Gabriele Diewald and Elena Smirnova, 15–58. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reese, Brian. 2007. Bias in questions. PhD dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin.

  • Rhee, Seongha, and Hyun Jung Koo. 2015. Analogy-driven inter-categorial grammaticalization and (inter)subjectfication of –na in Korean. Lingua 166: 22–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romero, Maribel. 2005. Two approaches to biased yes/no questions. In Proceedings of the 24th west coast conference on formal linguistics, ed. John Alderete, Chung-hye Han, and Alexei Kochetov, 352–360. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadock, Jerrold M. 1974. Toward a linguistic theory of speech acts. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadock, Jerrold M., and Arnold M. Zwicky. 1985. Speech act distinctions in syntax. In Language typology and syntactic description. Vol. 1: Clause structure, ed. Timothy Shopen, 155–196. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • San Roque, Lila, Simeon Floyd, and Elisabeth Norcliffe. 2017. Evidentiality and interrogativity. Lingua 186–187: 120–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smirnova, Anastasia. 2013. Evidentiality in Bulgarian: Temporality, epistemic modality, and information source. Journal of Semantics 30: 479–532.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sohn, Ho-Min. 1994. Korean. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sohn, Ho-Min. 1999. The Korean language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Sohn, Ho-Min. 2012. A grammar of po- ‘see’ in Korean: A panchronic approach. Enecengpo [Language Information] 14: 83–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Song, Jae-Mog. 2002. A typological analysis of the Korean evidential marker –te. Eoneohag [Linguistics] 32: 147–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Song, Kyung-An. 2010. Various evidential in Korean. In Proceedings of the 24th Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation, PACLIC 24, Tohoku University, Japan, 4–7 November 2010, ed. Ryo Otoguro, Kiyoshi Ishikawa, Hiroshi Umemoto, Kei Yoshimoto, and Yasunari Harada, 895–905. Tokyo: Institute for Digital Enhancement of Cognitive Development, Waseda University.

  • Strauss, Susan. 2005. Cognitive realization markers in Korean: A discourse-pragmatic study of the sentence-ending particles –kwun, –ney and –tela. Language Sciences 27: 437–480.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sudo, Yasutada. 2013. Biased polar questions in English and Japanese. In Beyond expressives: Explorations in use-conditional meaning, ed. Daniel Gutzmann and Hans-Martin Gärtner, 275–295. Leiden: Brill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suh, Chung-Mok. 1987. Kwuke uymwunmwun yenkwu [A study on the Korean interrogative sentences]. Seoul: Thap.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tatevosov, Sergei. 2003. Inferred evidence: Language-specific properties and universal constraints. In Meaning through language contrast, ed. Katarzyna M. Jaszczolt and Ken Turner, 177–192. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tenny, Carol L. 2006. Evidentiality, experiences, and the syntax of sentience in Japanese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 15: 245–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trinh, Tue, and Luka Crinič. 2011. On the rise and fall of declaratives. In Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 15, ed. Ingo Reich, Eva Horch, and Dennis Pauly, 1–16. Saarbrücken: Universaar – Saarland University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Um, Jungho. 2005. Kwukeey pomwunkwa pomwunca [Complementation and complementizers in Korean]. Seoul: Thayhaksa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valenzuela, Pilar M. 2003. Evidentiality in Shipibo-Konibo, with a comparative overview of the category in Panoan. In Studies in evidentiality, ed. Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald and R.M.W. Dixon, 33–61. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Auwera, Johan, and Vladimir A. Plungian. 1998. Modality’s semantic map. Linguistic typology 2: 79–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vendler, Zeno. 1957. Verbs and times. Philosophical Review 56: 143–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willet, Thomas. 1988. A cross-linguistic survey of the grammaticalization of evidentiality. Studies in Language 12(1): 51–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmermann, Thomas Ede. 2000. Free choice disjunction and epistemic possibility. Natural Language Semantics 8: 255–290.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I would like to extend my gratitude to Dong-Ju Choi, Sung-ho Choi, Hui-Chang Jeong, Hakyung Jung, Jung Il Kim, Chungmin Lee, Dong-Hoon Lim, Myung-Hee Noh, and Jin-Ho Park for their valuable comments and suggestions on earlier versions of the present paper. I appreciate the comments of anonymous reviewers, which helped me immensely improve the current work. All remaining errors are, of course, mine alone. This research has been supported financially by the POSCO TJ Park Foundation’s Research Grants for Asian Studies.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Russian Language and Literature, Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul, Korea

    Kyongjoon Kwon

Authors
  1. Kyongjoon Kwon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kyongjoon Kwon.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kwon, K. A bias-driven modal development of evidentiality: the Korean inferential evidential –po. J East Asian Linguist 27, 311–346 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10831-018-9184-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10831-018-9184-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation