Expressions of evidentiality in two Semitic

languages - Hebrew and Arabic

Bo Isaksson
1. General remarks
The topic I am about to discuss is a new one in Semitology. As far as
I know there are no special studies on evidentiality in Semitic languages. I proceed on virgin soil, and what I suggest here are the first
steps in a basic research. As my linguistic tool I have adopted the
scalar concept of focality,1 which represents a refinement and elaboration of previous aspectual terminology. This concept enhances our understanding of the mechanisms behind the general linguistic phenomenon of renewal of the verbal aspect, not the least in the Semitic languages, and constitutes a pertinent example of the importance of introducing new definitions in scientific analysis.
Unlike some other language families presented in this volume I
have found few traces of a grammaticalization of the category or categories of evidentiality in Semitic languages. When such are found,
they occur in border areas in the periphery of the main linguistic area
where contact phenomena are prominent. For the present paper I have
confined myself to showing how readings of inferential, reportive or
direct evidentiality are expressed in Arabic and Classical Hebrew,2
leaving out for the moment the other branches of the Semitic language
family.
The Semitic languages basically possess two main verbal conjugations, with the exception of Akkadian, which exhibits a third tense/aspect form. The functions of the two conjugations in Hebrew and Arabic are much disputed, of course, and even more in Classical Hebrew
than in Arabic. A reasonable account of the Arabic system is found in
Comrie 1976. In both the mentioned languages the two conjugations
are traditionally called "perfect" and "imperfect". For good reasons it
is commonly held that the Semitic perfect qatal(a) has, or at least had
in Proto-Semitic, a more nominal character, sometimes being equiva-

384

Bo Isaksson

lent to an adjective in a nominal clause. For most semanthemes, however, this nominal perfect in Classical Hebrew developed into a perfect
in the European sense, a post-terminal in the present with at least some
focality. In later Hebrew and already in Classical Arabic the perfect
went further in the process to a straightforward non-focal non-post-terminal historical verb form in narrative texts, just as the perfect in
southern German.
The imperfect in Hebrew and Arabic is the verbal conjugation used
for the focal intra-terminal so-called "progressive" reading. However,
the focality of the imperfect is often neutralized to express future or
modal shades of meaning.
The big problem in Classical Hebrew is the functional analysis of
the so-called "consecutive tenses" or "converted tenses", in which the
two basic conjugations mentioned above miraculously seem to take on
the opposite functions just by the prefixation of the conjunction wa-l
we- (< Proto-Semitic *wa-) 'and'. Prefixation of wa- to the imperfect
yiq-ol results in the "imperfect consecutive" wayyiq-ol, which constitutes the historical narrative verb form par prfrence. In numerous
textbooks3 the imperfect consecutive is said to "continue" a perfect,
adopting its temporal or aspectual value.
Prefixation of we- to the perf. q#-al results in the "perfect consecutive" weq#-al, capable of continuing an imperfect with apparently no
change of meaning.
I shall not further elaborate on the Semitic verbal aspects. What has
been stated above is intended only to serve as a background for the following examples from Classical Hebrew.
2. Classical Hebrew
In the narrative from the opening of the Book of Job, a dubitative indirective is expressed by two post-terminal Hebrew perfects, Job 1:5:
(1)

kl 'amar
lyyb 'lay
hf'-
b#n-ay
for PRF-said-he Job: perhaps PRF-have-sinned-they sons-my,
'For Job said: Maybe my sons have sinned

Expressions of evidentiality in Hebrew and Arabic

385

-befk-
'Hhlm bi-lb#b-#m
and-PRF-have-offended-they God
in-heart-their
and offended God in their hearts.'

The perfects hf- and be'ku are connected by the conjunction

'and' (being a complementary allomorph of we- 'and', used before labials). In this function of the perfect there is no trace of the much spoken of so-called "perfect consecutive". The two verbal items hf
and be'ku carry the same non-focal indirect meaning of doubt. The
transition from basic post-terminal focality of the Hebrew "perfect" to
a value of non-focality in both cases is determined by the dubitative
particle lay 'perhaps'. A further example is found in Genesis 43:12
(2)

'lay
mi!g h'
perhaps mistake it
'Maybe it was a mistake.'

A doubt about a historical event is expressed by a stative simple nominal clause introduced by the dubitative particle lay. h' is the 3 pers.
mase. sing, personal pronoun. In Joshua 9:7 (3) and Lamentations 3:29
(4) a nominal clause receives a nuance of doubt by being prefixed by
lay:
(3)

'lay
be-qirb-
'att# ysb
perhaps in-vicinity-my MS-you PART-live
'Perhaps you live near me [and not, as you allege, far away].'

A state expressed by a pronoun and the active participle yosb gets a

dubitative nuance of suspicion by means of the particle lay.
(4)

'lay
ys tiqw#
perhaps EXT hope
'Perhaps there is still hope.'

In (4) doubt about the present state is expressed by a verbless nominal

clause consisting of the dubitative particle, an existential particle ys
'there is', and a noun tiqw# 'hope'.
To sum up so far, in Classical Hebrew a dubitative reading can be
achieved by means of the particle 'lay followed by 1) the perfect of

386

Bo lsaksson

the verb, or 2) a simple nominal clause. And the two constructions are
not exhaustive, of course. The dubitative particle "lay is capable of
attaching a nuance of doubt to every Hebrew proposition. However, an
evidential reading may be expressed without special particles, as the
inferential meaning in Genesis 28:6 shows:
(5)

wa-y-yaf
'sw kl
brak
and-iPFC-he-saw Esau that PRF-has-blessed-he
'Then Esau realized that: Isaac has blessed
'et
YcCqb we-!illah
't Paden-(
ACC Jacob
and-PRF-has-sent-he him Padan-LOC
Jacob and sent him to Padan Aram

Yi"h#q
Isaac

Ar#m
Aram

l#-qahat
l-
mi!-!am
'i!!a
for-iNF-taking to-him from-there wife
to take a wife from there'.

This example could easily be taken as a simple statement of fact,

"Isaac has blessed Jacob", but such is not the case. Esau's conclusion
that Jacob has received the blessing results from the fact that Jacob is
suddenly absent. And his inference is introduced by ki, which like its
English counterpart "that" is a demonstrative in origin: "Then Esau
realized this: Isaac has thus blessed Jacob and sent him ...". The inferential is expressed by the post-terminal in the present brak (perfect)
which is then continued by the proclitic conjunction we- and the
post-terminal in the present (+POST (-PAST)) !illah (perfect). Also in
this example we may observe that there is no trace of a perfect consecutive equalling an imperfect. The two perfects brak and !illah bear
the same post-terminal low-focal if not high-focal reading.
In Hebrew the presentative particle hinn has the nuance of vivid
immediacy, the here-and-now-ness, of the situation, as Lambdin
(1971: 168) says. It functions as a bridge in narrative contexts for the
introduction of a perception, prima facie evidence with nuances of astonishment, indignation or shock (WaltkeO'Connor 1990: 676).
Such a function naturally is capable of expressing an immediate inference from the perception of a situation, as in 1 Kings 10:7:

Expressions of evidentiality in Hebrew and Arabic

(6)

387

we-l' he'emant
la-d-d'b#rim
'ad '"!er b't
but-not pRF-believed-I for-DET-words until that PRF-had-come-I
'But I did not believe the reports until I had come
wa-t-ti'na
'n-ay
w'-hinn l' huggad
l-i
and-iPFC-saw-they eyes-my and-behold not PRF-had-been-told to-me
and my own eyes saw: Behold, not even half had been told to me!'
ha-hs
DET-half

The queen of Sheba visited king Solomon, and when she saw his splendour with her own eyes she realized with astonishment that she had
been misinformed. The particle hinn is followed by the Hebrew perfect in the passive, huggad 'has/had been reported'. We may infer that
after hinn a post-terminal easily takes on an inferential meaning as in
many other languages. This is illustrated by a few more examples below. 1 Samuel 30:3:
(7)

wa-y-y#bo'
D#widwa-"n#s-#w
'el-h#-r
and-iPFC-came-he David and-men-his to-DET-city
'David and his men came to the city, and behold,

w1-hinn
and-behold

s'mf#
b#-es u-n'i-hem
u-b'n-hem
FS-PASS-PART-burned in-fire and-wives-their and-sons-their
it (is/was) burned down, and their wives and sons
-b'nt-hem
ni!bu
wa-y-yi!!(
D#wd
and-daughters-their PRF-has-been-taken-captive and-iPFC-lifted-he David
and daughters were taken captive! Then David
w'-h#-'#m
'"!er 'itt-
'et-ql-m
and-DET-people which with-him Acc-voice-their
and his men lifted up their voice and wept.'

wa-y-yibk
and-iPFC-wept-they

In this example hinn introduces a moment of shock and indignation.

David and his men arrive at Ziklag and realize with consternation that
it has been burned down by the Amalekites. The sight of the burned
city makes them realize that their wives, sons and daughters, including
David's two wives, have been taken captive. The Amalekites are not

388

Bo Isaksson

there. The fire is probably not even burning anymore. Yet, what has
happened is immediately clear to the men of David. The wives and the
children are not present before their eyes, yet their state of being captive is inferred from the sight of the burned city. In this example the
inferential marker hinn is followed first by a nominal clause consisting of the adjective serf 'burned' (passive participle) + the adverbial
phrase b#-es 'in fire', then secondly by a further inference expressed
by the Hebrew perfect nisb '(they) have been taken captive'.
The particle hinn together with its short form hen occurs 1,157
times in the Old Testament, and I would propose that it must be regarded as the foremost inferential marker in the Hebrew language, although it does not introduce inferential readings in every occurrence.
It should be pointed out that hinn is not a marker of the primary
orientation point (Os), that is, of the orientation point of the speech
act. Instead, it is a macro-syntactic4 sign used in a narrative to emphatically create a deictic centre of its own, somewhere in the text world,
that is, in the localization point (0 L or O2). The effect of the particle
hinn is that the chain of events in the main narrative thread is interrupted, a dissociation is introduced, and the following text is marked
as an impression of some kind, not necessarily visual.5 In this example
the narrative chain is represented by the non-focal or, at most, lowfocal so-called "imperfect conscutives", wa-y-y#bo\ wa-y-yiss#\
wa-y-yibk, being non-post-terminal past verbal items. The narrative
chain is interrupted by the macro-syntactic marker hinn that in fact
has two functions: firstly, it marks the following post-terminal clauses
as a description of an impression; secondly, by emphatically pointing
to the localization point in the text world, it marks the same clauses as
a whole to be part of the larger narrative web, which is continued
by the non-post-terminal items wa-y-yi!!( 'and lifted up' and wa-yyibk 'and wept'. We could say that hinn as a macro-syntactic marker
tells the reader or listener, "Be watchful now, the narrative chain is
being interrupted by an impression, but only temporarily, it will soon
be continued!". In this function hinn is similar to another frequent
macro-syntactic marker in Classical Hebrew, namely wayhi with a
temporal clause, which is used to mark a circumstantial temporal
clause as part of a larger narrative unit. However, wayhi does not seem

Expressions of evidentiality in Hebrew and Arabic

389

capable of determining evidential nuances and so has no bearing for

the topic of the present volume.
Naturally, the deictic character of hinn, drawing the attention to the
orientation point 0 L of the text, makes it suitable to readings of direct
evidentiality. The first example is taken from the well-known story
about the two women quarrelling about a child before King Solomon.
One of the mothersin fact the real mothersays (1 Kings 3:21):
(8)

w#-'#qum
ba-b-boqer
lr-hnq
and-iPFC-I-went-up in-DET-morning for-iNF-nursing
'I got up in the morning to nurse my son,

'et-ben
ACC-son-my

w'-hinne met
and-behold dead
and behold: he was dead.'

In this example, and the one to follow, hinn functions as a marker of

direct evidentiality. It directs the attention to what is directly perceived, namely, her son lying dead (Heb. met) before her eyes. The
verb following hinn in the example is a Hebrew perfect that is a focal
post-terminal nearly equivalent to a stative or an adjective: "dead" or
"is having died" or "is being dead". We may note that the presentative
particle hinn is never followed by the historical verb form "imperfect
consecutive". Whether the clause to follow expresses inferentiality or
direct evidentiality, hinn always introduces a nominal clause or one
with a post-terminal perfect. A case with hinn and a nominal clause
expressing direct evidentiality is found in 1 Samuel 10:10:
(9)

wa-y-yb'
Mm ha-g-Gib'#t-#,
we-hinn
and-iPFC-arrived-they there DET-Gibeah-LOC, and-behold
'They arrived there at Gibeah, and behold:
hebel
n"bT-Im liqr't-
procession-csTR(of)
prophets against-him
a procession of prophets (was coming) against him.'

The example exhibits a rather common construction, hinn directs the

attention of the reader to the sight of Saul and his companion, which is
expressed simply by a nominal clause with a noun phrase hebel rfbm

390

Bo Isaksson

^ ^ *'<

'a procession of prophets' and a prepositional phrase liqr't- 'against

him'. In the next verse a case of inferential reading follows in a famous
biblical passage. It takes the form of a question, which is not so much a
question to someone as an inference in astonishment, 1 Samuel 10:11:
(10) wa-y-yi'u
we-hinn$' im n'bf-m nibb#'.
and-iPFC-saw-they and-behold with prophets PARTf'-prophesied-he.
'They saw: he prophesied with the prophets.
wa-y-y'mer h#-'#m
's
'el rt-hu:
Ma-z-z
and-iPFC-said-it DET-people (each)man to friend-his: What-this
And they asked each other: "What is this
h#y#
l'-ben
Qsl H"-gam S'l
PRF-has-happened to-son-csTR(of) Qish? QUE-also Saul
that has happened to the son of Qish? Is Saul also
ba-n-n'bl'-Tm?
among-DET-prophets?
among the prophets?'

..;;.

The proclitic interrogative particle ha- and the adverb gam 'also' express astonishment and a portion of doubt in spite of the direct evidence of seeing Saul prophesy together with the other already known
prophets. With hesitation, the people around have to infer from what
they see that Saul is also a prophet.
The particle hinn followed by a nominal clause is also capable of
expressing an inferential reading if the context signalizes that possibility, Genesis 41:7:
(11) way-y-qas
Para w'-hinn fflm
and-iPFC-he-woke up Pharao and-behold dream
'Then Pharaoh woke up (and realized): (It was) a dream.'

Pharaoh wakes up and opens his eyes and from what he sees he draws
the reasonable conclusion that what he had experienced was only a
dream, and this is expressed by only one word, the noun Iflm
'dream', after the presentative particle.
The ability of this powerful particle to mark a situation as being

Expressions ofevidentiality

in Hebrew and Arabic

391

present before the eyes of the observer, also makes it capable of expressing an imagined situation, be it a condition or supposition, as in
Genesis 50:5 (Brockelmann 1956: 4):
(12) hinn
'nkl met...
tiqb'r-n
Behold I
dead... iPF-you-shall-bury-me
'When I am dead, bury me ... '

The condition is vividly displayed to the listener, as if already a fact to

be observed. And yet the speaker is obviously not yet dead. In this case
there is a conflict between the vividness of the expression and the fact
that the verbal content is unreal. I would nevertheless propose that the
expression 'nkl met T (am) dead' possesses a certain degree of focality because of the preceding particle.7
To sum up, there is no clear-cut and stable indirective in Classical
Hebrew, and to express such readings, usually a particle such as hinn
is required together with a post-terminal perfect or a nominal clause.
3. Arabic
Traditional Arabic grammars have little to say about indirective readings. In this first survey I shall begin with some examples of indirective expressions from modern Arabic dialects, then proceed with two
examples from modern literary Arabic (Taha Husain), and conclude
with some instances from Classical Arabic.
3.1. Colloquial Arabic
Al-)afr, Bedouin in northern Arabia (Ingham 1986: text 7).
(13) ibn'r'ir yarn rna'at
hl-u
'al-h
Ibn 'Urai'ir day PRF-returned force-his to-him
'When Ibn 'Urai'ir's horsemen came back
m#gdubaw
al-Freid
not PRF-have-caught-they al-Furaid
he saw that they had not caught al-Furaid.'

392

Bo Isaksson

The translation of this piece of text is by the field worker and editor
Bruce Ingham. Taken literally, the sentence says "Ibn 'Ura%ir, the day
his force came back to him, they had not caught al-Furaid". However,
the editor adds "he saw", because to achieve a topicalization the main
perceptive subject "Ibn TJrai'ir" has been put at the beginning of the
sentence (so-called absolute nominative). By this construction, the fact
that they had not caught al-Furaid becomes a matter of inference, seeing that his men are returning alone. For the inferential reading the Arabic perfect gdubaw 'they had caught' is used, in this case with postterminal meaning.
A case of reportive evidentiality is found in another text from the
same tribe (Ingham 1986: text 13).
(14) u
b(ad ga
hal-habar ba!!iro-h
g#law
inn
and then PRF-came DET-news good-news-his PRF-told-they that
'And then the news came to him and they brought him good news that

'.:

1l Dufir c#sb-n
u
l# 'al$-ham
I-DafTr PART-winners and not by-them
the Al-afr had won the battle and that there was nothing wrong with them.'

The reportive is expressed by an active participle c#sb-n, literally

'winners', in a nominal clause, giving the news a stative nuance: 1l
Dufir c#sb-n '(that) l-Dafir (are) winners'.
To make the evidential reading clear, Arabic, like Hebrew, makes
use of particles, as kdanna 'as, like' in Classical Arabic, here with a
nuance of both inferentiality and uncertainty (Wright [1975], II: 80A):
(15) ka-'annafi 'udnay-hi waqran
like-that in ears-his hardness
'It seems that in his ears (was) hardness (of hearing).'

In the modern Najdi Arabic dialect (Saudi Arabia), Classical Arabic

k(anna corresponds to cinn. The following example is taken from another field report by Bruce Ingham (Ingham 1994: 128):
(16) cinn-ih maytfham
w#gid
like-he not iPF-he-understands much
'He does not seem to understand much.'

Expressions ofevidentiality in Hebrew and Arabic

393

Najdi Arabic exhibits another particle to express nuances of doubt and

inference, tigil, corresponding to Classical Arabic imperfect taqlu
'you say':
(17) tigil
gayy-hum
iPF-you-say PART-having-come-them
'It seems they received a warning

ilm
nidir
tigil
knowledge warning you-say

gayy-hum
!ayy
having-come-them something
or something.'

A speculative nuance is achieved here by repeating tigil 'you say' (Ingham 1994: 129). The construction with an active participle (gayyhum < active, part, g#yy + object suff. -hum) expressing inference is in
some respects similar to the examples of grammaticalized evidential
categories found in border area Arabic dialects in close contact with
Turkic languages. In Najdi Arabic an active participle of a verb with a
telic-action type of Aktionsart conveys the meaning of a state following the completion of an action (Ingham 1994: 90, 95). In the Adana
district of Turkey this internal capability of the Arabic participle has
developed to a full-fledged expression for reportive/inferential nuances due to the influence of surrounding Turkic vernaculars:8
(18) $hid-ha (= Turkish Onu almi")
PART-he-took-it(FS)

'(As I heard,) he took it.'

(19) tlatt marrt dqir
qalb-o, 4rb-n-o
ba-!-!ok
three times
PART-stood-still heart-his, PART-they-hit-him by-shocks
'(I have heard that) Three times his heart stood still. Then they hit him with
3#wayye, g#y
la-h#l-o,
he---n-o
a-little,
PART-he-came to-situation-his PART-they-put-him
(electric) shocks and he recovered his senses. Then they put him
bi-qslgn %adars
iri-oxygen tent
in an oxygen tent.'

-, 394

Bo Isaksson

The Arabic counterpart of the Turkish -mi" construction in these two

examples is an active participle that has developed into a reportive/inferential about something that has recently occurred. This development may be observed also in the Arabic dialects of Uzbekistananother peripheral language area. In the Arabic Qa(qa-Darja dialect of
Uzbekistan the old active participle is rarely used as adjective-attribute
or nomen agentis. Instead, it has been re-utilized to create a new finite
verbal conjugation expressingaccording to I. N. Vinnikovthe "unlngst vergangene Zeit" (Vinnikov 1965: 262; Fischer 1961: 253).
This is in fact an evidential category, which has been confirmed by one
of the recent field workers in the area, Guram Chikovani (forthcoming). It is not used as a narrative tense form, for which the old perfect
is still used. Like in the old perfect (Qa(qa-Darja 3ms zarab 'he
struck', 3fs zarab-it, 3mp zarab-, 3fp zarab-in) the third person forms
of the new conjugation are unmarked as to person: 3ms q#id 'he (reportedly or seemingly) sat down', 3fs q(da < q(id-a, 3mp q(dln <
q(id-in, 3fp q(dat < q(id-at. The first and second person forms of the
new conjugation are rarely used.
3.2. Modern literary Arabic: Taha IJusain
From Modern Standard Arabic I have chosen an example of an evidential reading in the famous autobiography of the father of the Arabic
novel, Taha Husain. In his Al-Ayy#m 'The days' it is told of a teacher
(Husain 1942: 18):
(20) 'akala
data yawmin dibsan,
fa-saqata
bddu-hu
PRF-ate-he certain day
ACC-treacle and-PRF-fell-it
some-of-it
'One day he was eating treacle, some of which, unbeknown to him, fell
'al# "adri-hi wa-huwa la yadr,
fa-lamm# haraga
on chest-his and-he
not iPF-he-knew and-when PRF-went-out-he
down on his chest. When he went out
'il#d-darsi
q#la
la-hu ba'du
tal#mldi-hi:
to DET-lesson pRF-said-he to-him someone(of) students-his
to lecture, one of his students said to him:

Expressions of evidentiality in Hebrew and Arabic

395

y# sayyid- 'akalta
dibsan
oh Sir-my PRF-have-eaten-you treacle
"Sir, you have been eating treacle!" 9

One of the students (b(du tal#mdi) notices traces of treacle (ace: dibsan) on the breast of his teacher (on his breast: 'aid sadri-hi) and from
that infers that he has previously eaten treacle. This past eating is not
presented per se, but is inferred from the result of the action, namely
the prima facie evidence of treacle on the chest. In this case the inferential is expressed by the Arabic perfect (you have been eating:
'akalta) without additional particle, which illustrates the semantic similarity between the perfect and the inferential, both categories presenting an event not in itself but via its results (Comrie 1976: 110).
3.3. Classical Arabic
Inference of indirect evidence can be expressed without any particle in
Arabic as well as Hebrew. Such an instance is found in a classical text
rendered by $akir al-Batlun in Kit#b Tasliya al-Haw#tir.10
(21) 'Id-i
'ntabaha
s-$#hibu Badru d-dini. Fa-lam yagid
suddenly PRF-woke-he Sahib Badr al-Dn.
And-not lPF-he-found
'Suddenly Sahib Badr al-Dn woke up and could not find
'ah-h,
fa-qma
faztan
wa-wagada
Acc-brother-his and-got-up-he fearful
and-PRF-found-he
his brother, so he got up fearful and found
'l-b#ba
'l-lad 'statraqa
min-hu mafthan
DET-ACC-door which PRF-escaped-he from-it Acc-open.
the doorthrough which he had escapedopen.
fa-q#la:
min hun# g#'a
!-!arrul
and-PRF-said-he: From here PRF-has-come-it DET-evil.
And he said: From here came the evil!'

By the sight of the open door, Sahib Badr al-Dn draws the conclusion
that something evil has happened to his brother. And this inference is

396

Bo Isaksson

expressed by the Arabic perfect g(a 'it has come', without additional
evidential particle.
The next example from Classical Arabic is taken from Abu 1-Farag
al-Isfahnfs Kit#b al-ag#ni, from the section about the pre-Islamic
poet Ta'abba!a $arran:11
(22) Q#la
la-hu qawmu-hu:
M# kun-ta
PRF-said-it to-him NOM-tribespeople-his: What PRF-were-you
'His fellow tribesmen said to him: What did you
mut(abbitan,
y# .#bitu? Q#la:
PART-wearing-under-arm oh 0'bit? PRF-Said-he:
wear under your arm, 0'bit? He said:
Al-Gla.
Qal:
La-qad ta'abba-ta
DET-desert-demon. PRF-Said-they: EMF
PRF-have-worn-under-arm-you
The desert demon. They said: You have really worn something evil under
!arran!
ACC-evil.

the arm!'

In this instance the astonished inference is emphasized by two emphatic particles, la- and qad, forming laqad, which particle is required
for the perfect to express an affirmative proposition. The emphatic proclitic particle la- alone is not permitted in this case (Wright [1975], II:
176 A).
Another example exhibiting a reportive reading is from the section about the Umayyad poet Qays ibn Darh (died 690) in Kit#b
al-'ag#n:12
(23) Dakara
'Brut 'A'isata 'anna-hu 'aq#ma
'al#
PRF-has-reported-he Ibn ''isa
that-he
PRF-remained-he on
'Ibn '3'isa has reported that he (Qays ibn Darlh) continued with
d#lika 'arba'Jna yawman. .umma -allaqa-h#.
Wa-h#d#
that
forty
day.
Then
PRF-has-he-divorced-her. But-this
this in 40 days. Then he (reportedly) divorced her. But this

Expressions of evidentiality in Hebrew cm'Arabic

397

laysa bi-"ahhin.
is-not in-(what is)true
is not true.'

In this example a tradition about the poet is referred to and evaluated.

The obvious reportive nuance is expressed by a perfect -allaqa-h# 'he
(reportedly) divorced her' with the pronominal feminine suffix -h#
'her'. No auxiliary particles are needed in this case.
4. Conclusions
In this tentative survey, which has included only classical Hebrew and
a few varieties of Arabic, I have concluded that there are no internal
tendencies towards a grammaticalization of the evidential categories.
Such readings are instead frequently determined by auxiliary particles.
If a finite verbal form is used to express inferential or reportive nuances, it is exclusively a perfect, never an imperfect. Only due to external
linguistic influence, in locations at the periphery of a language region,
is an Arabic dialect likely to develop grammaticalized evidential categories.
Notes
1. For the concept of focality and some symbols used in that connection, see Johanson 2000.
2. I exclude from this concept the latest varieties of the Biblical Hebrew canon,
such as Chronicles and Ezra/Nehemiah.
3. For example the widespread Lambdin (1971), 107 and 163.
4. For this text-linguistic concept, see Isaksson (1998).
5. Pointed out by WaltkeO'Connor (1990: 675).
6. Or perfect.
7. It should be observed that hinn like its Arabic conterpart 'inna (Wright II, 78D)
take a following substantive or pronoun in the accusative, as the example hinn
n 'here I am' (Genesis 22:1) shows.
8. The two examples that follow are quoted with kind permission from Stephan
Prochzka, "The Influence of Turkish on the Lexicon, Phraseology and Syntax
of Arabic Dialects Spoken in Turkey", paper read at the Workshop on Investigating Languages in Contact: Semitic, Turkic and Iranian Vernaculars in Eastern Anatolia and Iran, held in Uppsala, 24-26 August, 1998.

398

Bo Isaksson

9. This is told about 'Abu l-'Al' al-Ma'arr, a famous Arabic poet and philosopher
who lived 973-1057.
10. !kir al-Batln (1882: 138). The author-editor lived in Egypt and died 1477.
11. Abu 1-Farag al-Isfah'n (1957-62, vol. 21: 144). The author died 967.
12. Abu 1-Farag al-Isfah'n (1957-62, vol. 9: 178).

References
Abu 1-Farag al-Isfah'n
1957-62 Kit#b al-agn. 25 vols. Beirut: D'r al-0aq'fa.
Brockelmann, Carl
) !
1956
Hebrische Syntax. Neukirchen: Neukirchen Verlag.
Chikovani, Guram
forthcoming "The morphological system of the Qashqadaryan Arabic Dialect of
Central Asia", in Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference of
L'Association Internationale pour la Dialectologie Arabe, held on
Malta, 28 March - 2 April 1998. Malta.
Comrie, Bernard
1976
Aspect. An introduction to the study of verbal aspect and related problems. 1976. Reprinted with corrections. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1978.
Fischer, Wolfdietrich
1961
"Die Sprache der arabischen Sprachinsel in Uzbekistan", Der Islam
36: 233-263.
Husain, Taha
1942
Al-Ayym. Cairo: Al-Maaref.
Ingham, Bruce
1986
Bedouin of Northern Arabia. Traditions of the Al-Dhar. London:
KPI.
1994
Najdi Arabic: Central Arabian. London Oriental and African Language Library, 1. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Isaksson, Bo
1998
" 'Aberrant' usages of introductory w'h#y# in the light of text linguistics", in: K.-D. SchunckM. Augustin (eds.), "Lasset uns Brcken
bauen...". Collected Communications to the XVth Congress of the International Organization for the Study of the Old Testament, Cambridge 1995. (Beitrge zur Erforschung des Alten Testaments und des
antiken Judentums, 42.) Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Johanson, Lars
1992
Strukturelle Faktoren in trkischen Sprachkontakten. Sitzungsberichte der Wissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft an der Johann Wolfgang
Goethe-Universitt Frankfurt am Main, 29:5. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner.

Expressions of evidentiality in Hebrew and Arabic

399

1996a

"Kopierte Satzjunktoren im Trkischen", Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 49: 1-11.

1996b
"On Bulgarian and Turkic indirectives", in: N. BoretzkyW. EnningerTh. Stolz (eds.), Areale, Kontakte, Dialekte. Sprache und ihre
Dynamik in mehrsprachigen Situationen. (Bochum-Essener Beitrge
zur Sprachwandelforschung 24.) Bochum: Brockmeyer, 84-94.
2000
"Viewpoint operators in European languages," in: Osten Dahl (ed.),
Tense and aspect in the languages of Europe. Berlin-New York:
Mouton de Gruyter.
Lambdin, Thomas O.
1971
Introduction to Biblical Hebrew. Reprint (as paperback). London:
Darton, Longman and Todd, 1976.
Niccacci, Alviero
1990
The syntax of the verb in Classical Hebrew prose. Translated from the
Italian by Wilfred G. E. Watson. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Supplement Series, 86. Sheffield.
!akir al-Batln
1882
Kit#bu tasliyati l-haw#-iri fi muntahab#ti l-mulahi wa-n-naw#diri.
Beirut: Al-Ma!ba'a al-Adabiyya.
Vinnikov, Isaak Natanovich
1965
"Materialien zur Grammatik des Dialektes der Ka(ka-Darjiner Araber.
Paradigmen der Verbalformen," in: S. Segert (ed.), Studia Semitica
Philologica Necnon Philosophica loanni Bakos Dicata. Bratislava,
261-276.
Waltke, Bruce K.Michael Patrick O'Connor
1990
An introduction to Biblical Hebrew syntax. Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns.
Wright, William
[1975]
A grammar of the Arabic language. Translated from the German of
Caspari and edited with numerous additions and corrections. Revised
by W. R. Smith and M. J. d. Goeje, 2 vols, in 1. 3d ed. 1896-98. Reprint. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Abbreviations
Mmasculine, Ffeminine, ssingular, pplural, 3MSthird person masculine
singular, etc., ACCaccusative, CSTRconstruct state, DETdeterminative (definite) particle, EMFemphatic particle, EXTexistential particle, INFinfinitive,
IPF
imperfect, IPFCimperfect consecutive, LOClocative particle, PARTparticiple, PRFperfect, QUEquestion particle.