Formalizing the Interaction Between Evidentiality and Egophoricity: A Multi-Modal Logic for Tibetan Epistemic Systems

Golog Tibetan grammaticalizes both evidentiality and egophoricity, but the two categories interact in a constrained way: evidential marking neutralizes the binary egophoric versus non-egophoric contrast. This paper develops LEE (Logic of Evidentiality and Egophoricity), a multi-modal logic that formalizes this interaction. LEE employs operators □EGO, □SENS, and □INF for egophoric, sensory-evidential, and inferential-evidential markers, respectively. The blocking effect is captured by axioms □σφ → (□EGOφ ↔ ◇EGOφ) for σ ∈ {SENS, INF}. This paper establishes soundness, completeness, and decidability for LEE. Three empirical puzzles receive unified explanation: (i) blocking of egophoric vs. non-egophoric contrasts under evidential marking, (ii) semantic bleaching of egophoric morphology in evidential contexts, and (iii) the unidirectional nature of the evidential–egophoric interaction.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Logics
Published
2026-01-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/logics4010001
Primary Topic
Language, Metaphor, and Cognition
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Formalizing the Interaction Between Evidentiality and Egophoricity: A Multi-Modal Logic for Tibetan Epistemic Systems

Jiahong Wang
Logics
Language, Metaphor, and Cognition
article

Formalizing the Interaction Between Evidentiality and Egophoricity: A Multi-Modal Logic for Tibetan Epistemic Systems

Jiahong Wang
article en

Abstract

Golog Tibetan grammaticalizes both evidentiality and egophoricity, but the two categories interact in a constrained way: evidential marking neutralizes the binary egophoric versus non-egophoric contrast. This paper develops LEE (Logic of Evidentiality and Egophoricity), a multi-modal logic that formalizes this interaction. LEE employs operators □EGO, □SENS, and □INF for egophoric, sensory-evidential, and inferential-evidential markers, respectively. The blocking effect is captured by axioms □σφ → (□EGOφ ↔ ◇EGOφ) for σ ∈ {SENS, INF}. This paper establishes soundness, completeness, and decidability for LEE. Three empirical puzzles receive unified explanation: (i) blocking of egophoric vs. non-egophoric contrasts under evidential marking, (ii) semantic bleaching of egophoric morphology in evidential contexts, and (iii) the unidirectional nature of the evidential–egophoric interaction.

LogicsVol. 4(1)
Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 88%
Language, Metaphor, and Cognition
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.