Re: Marking and Imperatives

At 21:50 13/02/00 -0300, you wrote:
>
>Sorry if this has been already said, but I was wondering about
>a construction like this:
>
>    As for what Bill thinks, John has left.
>
>No need of a verb "think" here, if you have some way to mark
>Bill as the "environment" ("scope"?) for which the evidencial
>level holds, i. e. you say "John EVID has left" but you also
>restrict it to Bill (with a particle, a case ending, a paraphrase,
>whatever -- even an actual verb "think" for which the EVID mark
>on the next clause should be compulsory).
>
"According to"? Anyway, it could be a nice use of the "contextual" case of
Azak :) . Too bad Azak doesn't have evidentials... (but it has particles
not unlike the Japanese 'yo' that could have also an evidential meaning
when combined to the contextual case)

                                                Christophe Grandsire
                                                |Sela Jemufan Atlinan C.G.

"Reality is just another point of view."

homepage : http://rainbow.conlang.org