How do ‘rumours’ and reportative evidentiality match? A comparative study of the French conditional, Dutch <i>zou</i> + <scp>inf</scp>, and German <i>sollen</i> + <scp>inf</scp>

Abstract In this paper, I will compare three reportative constructions: the French reportative conditional, Dutch zou + inf , and German sollen + inf . Although these markers share the reportative function as one of their established meanings, they clearly differ in how this reportative meaning actually functions. One of the most important differences pertains to the fact that the French conditional (and to a lesser extent Dutch zou + inf ) often combines reportative meaning with epistemic denial, i.e. the speaker distances him- or herself from the content of what he or she reports. German reportative sollen also allows for such distancing interpretations but to a much smaller extent. Specifically for this paper, I will look at the behaviour of the three markers in the immediate context of the noun ‘rumours’ (French rumeurs , Dutch geruchten , and German Gerüchte ), a context which – at least in theory – is strongly compatible with reportative marking, on the one hand, and with epistemic denial, on the other. On the basis of a self-compiled corpus of recent newspaper language, I will show that the French conditional occurs with a relatively high frequency in this specific context, especially in contrast to German sollen , and that the conditional often combines reportative semantics with epistemic denial, which again especially contrasts with German sollen + inf . Dutch zou + inf takes up an intermediate position in both respects.