Search

The paper examines the means of expressing indirect (inferentive and reportative) evidentiality in Latin narrative prose of I-II A. D. on the material Petron's Satyricon and Apuleius' Meta-morphoses. Morphological forms and syntactic constructions treated as evidential strategies are taken into account, since their main meanings are within the pattern of the grammatical categories (tense, mood etc.), and the information about the source and/or means of access to information is contextually motivated side effect. The result of the research reveals singling out eight strategies to express indirect evidentiality. Inferentive evidentiality is represented by five evidential strategies, while the reportative -- by the three. Different use of evidential strategies in both works relates to context and personal choice of the authors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper examines the means of expressing indirect (inferentive and reportative) evidentiality in Latin narrative prose of I--II A. D. on the material Petron's Satyricon and Apuleius' Metamorphoses. Morphological forms and syntactic constructions treated as evidential strategies are taken into account, since their main meanings are within the pattern of the grammatical categories (tense, mood etc.), and the information about the source and/or means of access to information is contextually motivated side effect. The result of the research reveals singling out eight strategies to express indirect evidentiality. Inferentive evidentiality is represented by five evidential strategies, while the reportative -- by the three. Different use of evidential strategies in both works relates to context and personal choice of the authors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]