This study examines how evidentiality and temporal distance work together in Uzbek and English. It looks at how witnessed and non-witnessed events change the way time is expressed in two very different types of languages. This comparison study shows that there are consistent patterns in evidential-temporal encoding by looking at corpus data from Straughn's (2011) in-depth study of Uzbek evidential markers (-mish, ekan) and new research on English evidential strategies (Riddle, 2024). Uzbek shows grammaticalized evidential-temporal integration through morphological markers that naturally encode temporal-epistemic relationships. English, on the other hand, uses compositional lexical and syntactic strategies. The results support theoretical frameworks that say evidentiality is more than just marking the source of information; it's also a complex system that includes epistemic stance, temporal distance, and discourse organisation (Koev, 2017; Plungian, 2010). These results help us understand universal rules for how evidence and time interact, while also showing how different types of languages use them.

Evidentiality, temporal distance, comparative linguistics

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

Aikhenvald, A. Y. (Ed.). (2018). The Oxford handbook of evidentiality. Oxford University Press.

Abidova, R. K. (2023). A cross-cultural study of the speech act of gratitude in english and uzbek. In Актуальные вопросы современной науки и образования (pp. 122-124).

Boye, K. (2024). Evidentiality, discourse prominence and grammaticalization. Studies in Language, 48(3), 575-607. https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.23001.boy

Chafe, W. (1986). Evidentiality in English conversation and academic writing. In W. Chafe & J. Nichols (Eds.), Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology (pp. 261-272). Ablex.

de Haan, F. (1999). Evidentiality and epistemic modality: Setting boundaries. Southwest Journal of Linguistics, 18(1), 83-101.

DeLancey, S. (1997). Mirativity: The grammatical marking of unexpected information. Linguistic Typology, 1(1), 33-52. https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.1997.1.1.33

DeLancey, S. (2001). The mirative and evidentiality. Journal of Pragmatics, 33(3), 369-382. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(01)80001-1

Diewald, G., & Smirnova, E. (2010). Evidentiality in German: Linguistic realization and regularities in grammaticalization. De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110241037

Koev, T. (2017). Evidentiality, learning events and spatiotemporal distance: The view from Bulgarian. Journal of Semantics, 34(1), 1-41. https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/ffv014

Matthewson, L., & Hirayama, Y. (2019). Evidentials cannot be reduced to temporal information. Linguistics and Philosophy, 42(3), 287-323.

Mélac, E. (2022). The grammaticalization of evidentiality in English. English Language & Linguistics, 26(2), 331-359. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674322000089

Mélac, E. (2024). The links between evidentiality, modality, and grammaticalization. Studies in Language, 48(3), 513-542. https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.24011.mel

Murray, S. E. (2021). Evidentiality, modality, and speech acts. Annual Review of Linguistics, 7, 213-233. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-011718-012634

Pancheva, R., & Zubizarreta, M. L. (2023). No tense: Temporality in the grammar of Paraguayan Guarani. Linguistics and Philosophy, 46(6), 1329-1391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-023-09387-0

Plungian, V. A. (2010). Types of verbal evidentiality marking: An overview. In G. Diewald & E. Smirnova (Eds.), Linguistic realization of evidentiality in European languages (pp. 15-58). De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110223972.15

Riddle, E. M. (2024). Evidential strategies in English: not just lexical. Folia Linguistica, 58(s45-s1), 99-128. https://doi.org/10.1515/flin-2023-2054

Straughn, C. A. (2011). Evidentiality in Uzbek and Kazakh [Doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

Willett, T. (1988). A cross-linguistic survey of the grammaticalization of evidentiality. Studies in Language, 12(1), 51-97. https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.12.1.04wil