{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02710843373493976, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.23125, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Evidentiality in Finnish


 Evidentiality conveys information about the nature – and reliability – of the information source. This paper
 investigates the Finnish reportative evidential (hearsay particle) kuulemma and the dubitative particle
 muka (‘supposedly, allegedly, as if’). I propose a unifying analysis of two seemingly divergent uses of
 muka, and show how they contrast with kuulemma. My analysis builds on and extends recent
 work on reportatives regarding the distinction between the Animator (the speaker who utters the sentence) and the Principal (the
 person whose commitments are being expressed). Furthermore, I suggest that the dubitative muka may point to the
 existence of non-assertive discourse moves and has implications for our understanding of the discourse role of ‘Principal.’ This
 work also informs typological work on evidentials and related expressions by providing a systematic investigation of reportative
 and dubitative markers in a non-Indo-European language.