Following a discussion about introductory expressions like “It is not the case that…” , I was found out that these expressions fall into the category of evidential/epistemic/evaluative fragments proposed by Thompson (2002).
Intuitively, I can get that 1 is an evaluative fragment, whereas 2 is either an evidential or epistemic fragment.
- It is interesting that...
- It is possible that...
However, I'm not sure about how linguists understand the evidential/epistemic distinction. (Nor am I 100% sure that I understand their evidential/epistemic vs evaluative distinction.)
I would like to have definitions and examples for each of these three kinds of fragments.
- Thompson, Sandra A. 2002. “Object complements” and conversation: towards a realistic account. Studies in Language 26(1). 125–63.