If in a language there is an opposition of the metapersons ‘speaker + hearer(s)’ and ‘speaker + non-participant(s)’ (i.e. inclusive vs. exclusive) in the trial, then there is such an opposition in the dual and plural.
Standardized
IF there is an opposition of the metapersons ‘speaker + hearer(s)’ and ‘speaker + non-participant(s)’ (i.e. inclusive vs. exclusive) in the trial, THEN there is such an opposition in the dual and plural too.
1. Sokolovskaja recognizes the following metapersons:’speaker’, ‘hearer’, ‘non-participant’, ‘speaker + hearer(s)’, ‘speaker + non-participant(s)’, ‘hearer(s) + non-participant(s)’, and ‘speaker + hearer(s) + non-participant(s).2. Universals ##1489 and 1490 follow from the more general statements suggested by B. Uspensky (##276, 716) (however, he does not point out any counterexamples).
1. Sokolovskaja recognizes the following metapersons:’speaker’, ‘hearer’, ‘non-participant’, ‘speaker + hearer(s)’, ‘speaker + non-participant(s)’, ‘hearer(s) + non-participant(s)’, and ‘speaker + hearer(s) + non-participant(s).2. Universals ##1489 and 1490 follow from the more general statements suggested by B. Uspensky (##276, 716) (however, he does not point out any counterexamples).