Evidentiality in Uzbek and Kazakh

6.2.1.5 Other Central Asian and Turkic Languages 
There are, of course, a number of other languages that ought to be studied to see whether 
they fit into the pattern described for Uzbek and Kazakh. I have not mentioned Karakalpak, 
spoken in Western Uzbekistan to the south of the Aral Sea, as there exists little data on that 
language, and because the language and culture of the Karakalpaks very closely resembles that 
of the Kazakhs. I have also not mentioned the many so-called “dialects” of Uzbek, which may 
belong to the Southeastern, Kipchak, and Oghuz branches of Turkic, because data on these 
dialects is scarce. 
There is also little data on the other Iranic languages of Central Asia, such as Yaghnobi, 
Bukhori, or even Dari, at least concerning whether they have any grammatical means of 
expressing evidential meaning. Dari, in particular, would be useful in determining the southern 
boundary of the Eurasian evidentiality belt, as well as the Central Asian sub-region of that belt. 
Outside of Central Asia, a number of Turkic languages appear to function like Uzbek and 
Kazakh. Most notably, Nogay, spoken in Daghestan, is known to express rhetorical questions 
with eken, and to exhibit morphosyntactic differences between eken as used in evidential 
question and rhetorical questions (Johanson 2003, Karakoç 2005). 
(237) a.
Ne-ge kel-gen eken-ler?
what-
DAT
come-
PRF EVID
-
PL
‘Why have they (reportedly) come?’ 
b. 
Ne-ge kel-gen-ler eken? 
what-
DAT
come-
PRF
-
PL EMOT
‘I wonder why they have come.’ 

---

172 
In (237a), the plural marker follows eken when the desired interpretation is that of an evidential 
question, and precedes eken in (237b), when a rhetorical question is intended. Further research is 
necessary to determine whether the rest of the Nogay verbal system follows the Uzbek/Kazakh 
pattern, and whether nearby Turkic languages (i.e. Yurt Tatar and Alabugat Tatar, see Yartseva 
et al. 1997 for further details) also follow this pattern. 
To the north of Central Asia, the cluster of Turkic languages in the Altay-Sayan region 
(Northern and Southern Altay, Khakas, Tuvan, Kondoma and Mrass Shor, etc.) merit further 
research (but see Anderson 2000 for further information on Khakas). Southern Altay, in 
particular, appears to be closely related to Kyrgyz, and may resemble the other Central Asian 
Turkic languages. In the broad swath of land to the north of Kazakhstan, Tatar, Bashkir, and 
varieties of Siberian Tatar are also spoken, and they too are understudied in regard to their 
expression of evidential meaning (excepting Mishär Tatar, see Tatevosov 2007). 
Whether or not these languages follow the pattern established for Uzbek and Kazakh, the 
further exploration of how they express evidential and related meanings can provide insight into 
the nature of the Eurasian evidentiality belt and may help define various sub-sections of that belt.