Construing inference

An empirical study of grounding predications with the verb gondol ’think’

Abstract

This paper reports on an empirical study of epistential (epistemic-inferential) predicates. In the corpus compiled by the author (Corpus for the study of inferentiality), the marking of the speaker’s vantage point is more frequent, and subjectification is more common in dialogue turns profiling inferences and beliefs than in narrative accounts of observations.

Three constructions of gondol ’think’ are distinguished, each is characterized by the fact that the situation being construed as possible is elaborated in a separate (subordinate) clause. The negative patterns nem gondolom/gondolnám ’I don’t/wouldn’t think’ express 1) a belief that the target situation has a low degree of probability; 2) a discarded possibility as the speaker is providing access to the building up and decay of her inferences; 3) the discarding of what is known or inferred to be the discourse partner’s belief in a polite, indirect way (litotes).