a frequent source for reported and quotative evidentials, and the verbs feel , think , hear can give rise to a nonvisual evidential. Closed-word classes – deictics (see deixis) and locatives – may give rise to evidentials, both in small and in large systems. Evidentials vary in their semantic extensions, depending on the system. Reported information often has overtones of probability or unreliability, while visual evidentials may develop meanings of certainty. Th ey can be extended to denote the direct participation, control, and volitionality of the speaker. morphemes marking tense, aspect, mood, modality, and evidentiality may occur in the same slot in the structure of a highly synthetic language. Evidentiality is a property of a signifi cant number of linguistic areas, including the Balkans, the Baltic area, India, and a variety of locations in Amazonia. Evidentials may make their way into contact languages, as they have into Andean Spanish . Th e text’s genre may determine the choice of an evidential. Traditional stories are typically cast in reported evidential. Evidentials can be manipulated in discourse as a stylistic device. Switching from a reported to a direct (or visual) evidential creates the eff ect of the speaker’s participation and confi dence. Switching to a nonfi rsthand evidential often implies a backgrounded “aside.” Evidentiality is interlinked with conventionalized attitudes to information and precision in stating its source .