English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The Ladakhi inferential markers /-suk/ ~ /-sok/ and /-tok/ ~ /-tuk/ can be shown to be related to the Old and Classical Tibetan verb  ḥdug , originally a lexical verb with the meaning ‘stay, live, sit’. The development of  ḥdug  into auxiliaries for the opposite evidential values of external direct knowledge (or immediate sense perception) and of indirect knowledge (or inferences) in various modern Tibetic dialects has a parallel in the development of the Classical Tibetan verb  snaŋ , originally ‘shine, appear’ into auxiliaries for both direct and indirect knowledge in some Balti and Ladakhi varieties. This parallel development indicates that the dominant factor underlying the choice of the auxiliaries is not a question of sources of knowledge and access channels (evidentiality) but a speaker’s attitude of commitment or non-commitment (admirativity)

The emergence of the Ladakhi inferential and experiential markers from a marker for admirativity (non-commitment): the case of ḥdug and snaŋ