Paul Bennett wrote:
> I'm thinking about bringing optional evidentials into Br'ga, which is
> also going to go through a massive vowel-simplification[*].
>
> I want a lot of them, preferably aranged in some kind of byzantine,
> roccoco structure that defies a simple grid.
>
> I don't yet know the semantic roles I'm going to have. This is a result
> of the comingling of cases and verbs in the language. However I think I
> want to start with something like:
>
> I know because I was the Agent
> I know because I was the Patient
> I know because I was the Benefactor
> (likewise for other roles)
> I know because I was a witness
> I know because I was told by the Agent/Patient/witness/etc, maybe with
> strength of trust in what was told
> I know from examining the Agent/Patient/etc, maybe with strength of
> inference
I know from process of elimination
I'm assuming from my knowledge of the relevant parties
This is my best guess