Abusch, D. (1994). Sequence of tense revisited: Two semantic accounts of tense in intensional contexts. In Kamp, H. (Ed.), Ellipsis, Tense and Questions (pp. 87–139). Dyana-2 Esprit Basic research Project 6852, Deliverable R2.2.B.Google Scholar

Abusch, D. (1997). Sequence of tense and temporal de re. Linguistics and Philosophy, 20, 1–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Altshuler, D., Hacquard, V., Roberts, T., & White, A.. (2015). On double access, cessation and parentheticality. In D’Antonio, S., Moroney, M., & Little, C. R. (Eds.), Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT), Vol. 25 (pp. 18–37).Google Scholar

Anand, P., & Toosarvandani, M. (2016). Unifying the canonical, historical, and play-by-play present. Sinn und Bedeutung, 21, 19–34.Google Scholar

Anand, P., & Toosarvandani, M. (2018a). No explanation for the historical present: Temporal sequencing and discourse. Sinn und Bedeutung, 22, 73–90.Google Scholar

Anand, P., & Toosarvandani, M. (2018b). Unifying the canonical, historical and play-by-play present. Sinn und Bedeutung 21, 19–34.Google Scholar

Banfield, A. (1982). Unspeakable Sentences: Narration and Representation in the Language of Fiction. London: Routledge & Kegan Pau.Google Scholar

Bary, C. (2012). Tense in Ancient Greek reports. Journal of Greek Linguistics, 12, 29–50.Google Scholar

Bary, C. (2016). Why the Historical Present Is Not the Mirror Image of Free Indirect Discourse. Talk at the Perspectivization Workshop at the 39th GLOW.Google Scholar

Bary, C., Altshuler, D., Syrett, K., & de Swart, P. (2018). Factors licensing embedded present in speech reports. Sinn und Bedeutung, 22, 127–142.Google Scholar

Bühler, K. (1934/1990). The Presentational Function of Language. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Translation of Sprachtheorie: Die Darstellungsfunktion der Sprache. Jena: Gustav Fischer.Google Scholar

Caenepeel, M. (1989). Aspect, Temporal Ordering and Perspective in Fiction. Dissertation, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar

Costa, R. (1972). Sequence of tenses in that-clauses. In Peranteau, P., Levi, J., & Phares, G. (Eds.), Papers from the Eighth Regional Meeting (pp. 41–51). Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar

Cresswell, M. J., & von Stechow, A. (1982). De re belief generalized. Linguistics and Philosophy, 5, 503–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Doron, E. (1991). Point of view as a factor of content. In Moore, S. & Wyner, A. Z. (Eds.), Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT), Vol. 1 (pp. 51–64).Google Scholar

Dowty, D. R. (1986). The effects of aspectual class on the temporal structure of discourse: semantics or pragmatics? Linguistics and Philosophy, 9, 37–62.Google Scholar

Eckardt, R. (2015). The Semantics of Free Indirect Discourse: How Texts Allow Us to Mind-Read and Eavesdrop. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar

Enç, M. (1987). Anchoring conditions for tense. Linguistic Inquiry, 18, 633–657.Google Scholar

Heim, I. (1994). Comments on Abusch’s theory of tense. In Kamp, H. (Ed.), Ellipsis, Tense and Questions (pp. 143–170). Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar

Kamp, H. (1971). Formal properties of ‘now’. Theoria, 37, 227–273.Google Scholar

Kamp, H. (2012). Double Access Readings and Conversation (Speaking about the Present and Temporal Perspective Shift). Talk at LENLS 9.Google Scholar

Kaplan, D. (1989). Demonstratives: An essay on the semantics, logic, metaphysics and epistemology of demonstratives and other indexicals. In Almog, J., Perry, , & Wettstein, H. (Eds.), Themes from Kaplan (pp. 481–563). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Klecha, P. (2015). Double Access. Unpublished manuscript, University of Connecticut.Google Scholar

Klecha, P. (2018). A formal pragmatic account of double access. Sinn und Bedeutung, 22, 19–36.Google Scholar

Lewis, D. (1979a). Attitudes de dicto and de se. The Philosophical Review, 88, 513–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lewis, D. (1979b). Attitudes de dicto and de se. The Philosophical Review, 88, 513–543.Google Scholar

MacFarlane, J. (2003). Future contingents and relative truth. The Philosophical Quarterly, 53, 321–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maier, E. (2015). Quotation and unquotation in Free Indirect Discourse. Mind & Language, 30, 345–373.Google Scholar

McGilvray, J. A. (1974). A proposal for the semantics of tenses in English. Montreal Working Papers in Linguistics, 1, 29–44.Google Scholar

Nijk, A. A. (2019). Tense Switching in Classical Greek: A Cognitive Approach. Dissertation, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.Google Scholar

Ogihara, T. (1995). Double-access sentences and reference to states. Natural Language Semantics, 3, 177–210.Google Scholar

Ogihara, T., & Sharvit, Y. (2012). Embedded tenses. In Binnick, R. I. (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Tense and Aspect (pp. 638–668). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Partee, B. H. (2011). Formal semantics: Origins, issues, early impact. In Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication Vol. 6 (pp. 1–52). Manhattan, Kansas New Prairie Press.Google Scholar

Perry, J. (1977). Frege on demonstratives. The Philosophical Review, 86(4), 474–497.Google Scholar

Prior, A. N. (1955). Diodoran modalities. Philosophical Quarterly, 5, 205–213.Google Scholar

Quine, W.V. O. (1956). Quantifiers and propositional attitudes. The Journal of Philosophy, 53, 177–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schaden, G. (2013). Formalizing current relevance. Sinn und Bedeutung, 17, 491–508.Google Scholar

Schlenker, P. (2004). Context of thought and context of utterance: A note on Free Indirect Discourse and the historical present. Mind & Language, 19, 279–304.Google Scholar

Sharvit, Y. (2008). The puzzle of free indirect discourse. Linguistics and Philosophy, 31, 353–395.Google Scholar

Smith, C. (1978). The syntax and interpretation of temporal expressions in English. Linguistics and Philosophy, 2, 43–99.Google Scholar

Sweetser, E., & Fauconnier, G. (1996). Cognitive links and domains: Basic aspects of Mental Space Theory. In Fauconnier, G. & Sweetser, E. (Eds.), Spaces, Worlds and Grammar (pp. 1–28). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

van Krieken, K., Sanders, J., & Hoeken, H. (2016). Blended viewpoints, mediated witnesses: A cognitive linguistic approach to news narratives. In Dancygier, B., Lu, W.-L., & Verhagen, A. (Eds.), Viewpoint and the Fabric of Meaning: Form and Use of Viewpoint Tools across Languages and Modalities (pp. 145–168). Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar

von Stechow, A. (1995). On the proper treatment of tense. In Simons, M. & Galloway, T. (Eds.), Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT), Vol. 5 (pp. 362–386).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Aikhenvald, A. Y. (2004). Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Aikhenvald, A. Y. (2018). The Oxford Handbook of Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

AnderBois, S. (2014). On the exceptional status of reportative evidentials. In Snider, T., D’Antonio, S., & Weigand, M. (Eds.), Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT), Vol. 24 (pp. 234–254).Google Scholar

Armstrong, D. M. (1991). Intentionality, perception, and causality. In Lepore, E. & van Gulick, R. (Eds.), John Searle and His Critics (pp. 149–158). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Bashir, E. (2006). Evidentiality in South Asian languages. In Butt, M., & King, T. H. (Eds.), Proceedings of the LFG06 Conference, Konstanz University. CSLI Publications.Google Scholar

Bhadra, D. (2017). Evidentiality and Questions: Bangla at the Interfaces. PhD thesis, Rutgers University.Google Scholar

Bhadra, D. (2018). Evidentials are syntax-sensitive: The view from Bangla. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 3(1), 1–39.Google Scholar

Bhadra, D. (2020). The semantics of evidentials in questions. Journal of Semantics, 37(3), 367–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Birner, B. J., Kaplan, J. P., & Ward, G. (2007). Functional compositionality and the interaction of discourse constraints. Language, 2007, 317–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brewer, B. (2011). Perception and Its Objects. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Burge, T. (1991). Vision and intentional content. In Lepore, E. & van Gulick, R. (Eds.), John Searle and His Critics (pp. 195–214). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Bybee, J. L., & Dahl, Ö. (1989). The Creation of Tense and Aspect Systems in the Languages of the World. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Chafe, W. L., & Nichols, J. (1986). Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology. Norwood: Ablex.Google Scholar

Chung, K.-S. (2007). Spatial deictic tense and evidentials in Korean. Natural Language Semantics, 15(3), 187–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Comrie, B. (1976). Aspect: An Introduction to the Study of Verbal Aspect and Related Problems, Vol. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Condoravdi, C. (2001). Temporal interpretation of modals: Modals for the present and for the past. In Beaver, D., Kaufmann, S., Clark, B., & Casillas, L. (Eds.), Stanford Papers on Semantics. CSLI Publications.Google Scholar

Cox, J. W. R. (1971). An analysis of perceiving in terms of the causation of beliefs. In Sibley, F. N. (Ed.), Perception: A Philosophical Symposium (pp. 23–64). London: Methuen.Google Scholar

Daguman, J. (2018). The reportative in the languages of the Philippines. In Aikhenvald, A. Y. (Ed.). The Oxford Handbook of Evidentiality (pp. 674–692). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Davies, M. (1992). Perceptual content and local supervenience. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 92, 21–45.Google Scholar

Davis, C., Potts, C., & Speas, M. (2007). The pragmatic values of evidential sentences. In Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT), Vol. 17 (pp. 71–88).Google Scholar

Delancey, S. (2018). Evidentiality in Tibetic. In Aikhenvald, A. Y. (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Evidentiality (pp. 580–594). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Dixon, R. M. W. (2004). The Jarawara Language of Southern Amazonia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dretske, F. (1969). Seeing and Knowing. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Dretske, F. (1981). Knowledge and the Flow of Information. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Dretske, F. (1990). Seeing, believing, and knowing. In Osherson, D. N., Kosslyn, S. M., & Hollerbach, J. M. (Eds.), Visual Cognition and Action: An Invitation to Cognitive Science, Vol. 2 (pp. 129–148). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Fabre, A. (2014). Estudio gramatical de la lengua nivaclé. Helsinki: Kangasala.Google Scholar

Faller, M. (2002). Semantics and Pragmatics of Evidentials in Cuzco Quechua. PhD thesis, Stanford University.Google Scholar

Faller, M. (2004). The deictic core of ‘non-experienced past’ in Cuzco Quechua. Journal of Semantics, 21(1), 45–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fleck, D. W. (2007). Evidentiality and double tense in Matses. Language, 2007, 589–614.Google Scholar

François, A. (2005). A typological overview of Mwotlap, an Oceanic language of Vanuatu. Linguistic Typology, 9, 115–146.Google Scholar

Friedman, V. (2018). Where do evidentials come from? In Aikhenvald, A. Y. (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Evidentiality (pp. 124–147). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Garrett, E. J. (2001). Evidentiality and Assertion in Tibetan. PhD thesis, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar

Grice, H. P., & White, A. R. (1961). Symposium: The causal theory of perception. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volumes, 35, 121–168.Google Scholar

Grice, H. P. (1962). The causal theory of perception. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volume, 35, 143–168.Google Scholar

Gutiérrez, A. (2016). Evidential determiners in Nivaĉle. Anthropological Linguistics, 57(4), 412–443.Google Scholar

Hacquard, V. (2011). Modality. In von Heusinger, K., Maienborn, C., & Portner, P. (Eds.), Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning (pp. 1484–1515). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar

Haude, K. (2004). Nominal tense marking in Movima. Linguistics in the Netherlands, 21, 80–90.Google Scholar

Hughes, G. E., & Cresswell, M. J. (1986). A Companion to Modal Logic. London: Methuen.Google Scholar

Hughes, G. E., & Cresswell, M. J. (1996). A New Introduction to Modal Logic. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar

Huijsmans, M., Reisinger, D. K. E., & Matthewson, L. (2020). Evidentials in the nominal domain: A Speasian analysis of ɁayɁauθəm determiners. Sinn und Bedeutung, 25, 751–768.Google Scholar

Ivan, R.-R., & Özyildiz, D. (2018). The temporal presuppositions of Somali definite determiners. Sinn und Bedeutung, 21, 623–642.Google Scholar

Izvorski, R. (1997). The present perfect as an epistemic modal. In Lawson, A. (Ed.), Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT), Vol. 7 (pp. 222–239).Google Scholar

Jackendoff, R. (1983). Semantics and Cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Jacques, G. (2018). Non-propositional evidentiality. In Aikhenvald, A. Y. (Ed.). The Oxford Handbook of Evidentiality (pp. 109–123). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Kamp, H. (1979). The Logic of Historical Necessity. Unpublished manuscript, University of Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Kaufmann, S., Condoravdi, C., & Harizanov, V. (2006). Formal approaches to modality. In Frawley, W. (Ed.), The Expression of Modality (pp. 71–106). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar

Koev, T. (2016). Evidentiality, learning events and spatiotemporal distance: The view from Bulgarian. Journal of Semantics, 34(1), 1–41.Google Scholar

Kratzer, A. (1991). Modality. In von Stechow, A. & Wunderlich, D. (Eds.), Semantics: An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, 7, 639–650. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar

Kratzer, A. (2002). The notional category of modality. In Portner, P. H. & Partee, B. H. (Eds.), Formal Semantics: The Essential Readings (pp. 289–323). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Krawczyk, E. A. (2012). Inferred Propositions and the Expression of the Evidence Relation in Natural Language: Evidentiality in Central Alaskan Yup’ik Eskimo and English. PhD thesis, Georgetown University.Google Scholar

Lafer-Sousa, R., Hermann, K. L., & Conway, B. R. (2015). Striking individual differences in color perception uncovered by ‘the dress’ photograph. Current Biology, 25(13), R545–R546.Google Scholar

Lecarme, J. (2008). Tense and modality in nominals. In Gueron, J. & Lecarme, J. (Eds.), Time and Modality (pp. 195–225). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lee, J. (2011). The Korean evidential -te: A modal analysis. Empirical Issues in Syntax and Semantics, 8, 287–311.Google Scholar

Lewis, D. (1980). Veridical hallucination and prosthetic vision. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 58(3), 239–249.Google Scholar

Littell, P., Matthewson, L., & Peterson, T. (2010). On the semantics of conjectural questions. Evidence from Evidentials, 28, 89–104.Google Scholar

Lowe, I. (1999). Nambiquara. In Dixon, R. M. & Aikhenvald, A. Y. (Eds.), The Amazonian Languages (pp. 268–291). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Matthewson, L., Davis, H., & Rullmann, H. (2007). Evidentials as epistemic modals: Evidence from St’át’imcets. Linguistic Variation Yearbook, 7(1), 201–254.Google Scholar

McCready, E. (2014). What is evidence in natural language? In McCready, E., Yabushita, K., & Yoshimoto, K. (Eds.), Formal Approaches to Semantics and Pragmatics (pp. 155–180). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar

McDowell, J. (1991). Intentionality “de re.” In Lepore, E. & van Gulick, R. (Eds.), John Searle and His Critics (pp. 215–225). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Milner, A. D., & Goodale, M. A. (1995). The Visual Brain in Action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Murray, S. E. (2010). Evidentiality and the Structure of Speech Acts. PhD thesis, Rutgers University-Graduate School-New Brunswick.Google Scholar

Musto, D., & Konolige, K. (1993). Reasoning about perception. AI Communications, 6(3–4), 207–212.Google Scholar

Nordlinger, R., & Sadler, L. (2004). Nominal tense in crosslinguistic perspective. Language, 2004, 776–806.Google Scholar

Owens, D., Owens, D. J., et al. (1992). Causes and Coincidences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Pancheva, R., & Zubizarreta, M. L. (2018). On the role of person features in the evidential-temporal connection. Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 64, 673–708.Google Scholar

Peterson, T. (2008). The ordering source and graded modality in Gitksan epistemic modals. In Arndt Riester & Torgrim Solstad (Eds.), Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung, 13. Stuttgart (University of Stuttgart).Google Scholar

Peterson, T. (2010). Epistemic Modality and Evidentiality in Gitksan at the Semantics–Pragmatics Interface. PhD thesis, University of British Columbia.Google Scholar

Peterson, T. (2012). An Ordering Semantics for Gitksan Modal Evidentials. Unpublished manuscript, University of British Columbia.Google Scholar

Portner, P. (2009). Modality, Vol. 1. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Prinz, J. (2006). Beyond appearances: The content of sensation and perception. Perceptual Experience, 28, 434–460.Google Scholar

Prior, A. N. (1967). Past, Present and Future. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Sauerland, U., & Schenner, M. (2007). Embedded evidentials in Bulgarian. Sinn und Bedeutung, 11, 525–539.Google Scholar

Schmidt, R. L. (2000). Typology of Shina pronouns. Berliner Indologische Studien, 13(14), 201–213.Google Scholar

Schmidt, R. L., & Kohistani, R. (2001). Nominal inflections in the Shina of Indus Kohistan. Acta Orientalia, 62, 107–143.Google Scholar

Searle, J. (1983). Intentionality: An Essay in the Philosophy of Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Searle, J. (1991). Reference and intentionality. In Lepore, E. & van Gulick, R. (Eds.), John Searle and His Critics (pp. 227–241). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Slobin, D. I., & Aksu, A. A. (1982). Tense, aspect and modality in the use of the Turkish evidential. In Hopper, P. J. (Ed.),Tense-Aspect: Between Semantics and Pragmatics (pp. 185–200). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Smirnova, A. (2012). Evidentiality in Bulgarian: Temporality, epistemic modality, and information source. Journal of Semantics, 30(4), 479–532.Google Scholar

Sohn, H.-M. (2018). Evidentiality in Korean. In Aikhenvald, A. Y. (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Evidentiality (pp. 693–708). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Soteriou, M. (2000). The particularity of visual perception. European Journal of Philosophy, 8(2), 173–189.Google Scholar

Stanley, J. (2005). Knowledge and Practical Interests. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Thomason, R. H. (2002). Combinations of tense and modality. In Gabbay, D. & Guenthner, F. (Eds.), Handbook of Philosophical Logic (pp. 205–234). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar

Tonhauser, J. (2006). The Temporal Semantics of Noun Phrases: Evidence from Guaraní. PhD thesis, Stanford University.Google Scholar

Tonhauser, J. (2007). Nominal tense? The meaning of Guaraní nominal temporal markers. Language, 2007, 831–869.Google Scholar

Tung, T.-H., et al. (1964). A Descriptive Study of the Tsou Language. Nankang: Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica.Google Scholar

Van Eijk, J. (1997). The Lillooet Language: Phonology, Morphology, Syntax. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.Google Scholar

Von Fintel, K., & Gillies, A. S. (2010). Must… stay… strong! Natural Language Semantics, 18(4), 351–383.Google Scholar

Werner, T. (2006). Future and non-future modal sentences. Natural Language Semantics, 14(3), 235–255.Google Scholar

Willett, T. (1988). A cross-linguistic survey of the grammaticization of evidentiality. Studies in Language, 12(1), 51–97.Google Scholar