A Brief Glossary of Modality

12/6/2016
ABRIEFGLOSSARYOFMODALITY
byRichardDury
adverbs:adverbscanbe'harmonic'(reinforcethemodalityoftheauxiliary),orcanmodifythemodalityina
differentdirection(perhapswecould).Thesameistrueofadjectivalandnominalexpressions.Verbphrases
(matrixverbsinmainclauses(Ithinkthat)canalsohaveasimilarordifferentmodalityfromamodalverbin
thesubordinateclause.Parentheticalverbs(Ithink)areperhapsbesttreatedassimilartoadverbs.
agentorientedmodality:asupercategoryproposedbyBybee(1985)andusedbyusedbyBybee&Fleischman
(1995:5)applyingtoallmodalitiesinwhichconditionsarepredicatedonanagent(obligation,desire,ability,
permission and root possibility). It is opposed to speakeroriented modality (speech acts that aim at getting
something done: imperatives, optatives, permissives) and to epistemic modality which applies to a whole
propositionandcommunicatesthespeaker'sstanceconcerningitstruth.Itseemstoboildowntothesamething
as'rootmodality'(i.e.acombinationofdeonticanddynamicmodalities).
alethic(orlogical)modality:(Gkaletheiatruth)concernedwiththedegreeofcertaintyofaproposition.For
example,themustofWemusthaveavisitorexpressesa.m.whenitmeans"Thisfollowsfromwhatwealready
know"(Trask).ThisisacategoryofmodallogicandClearcasesof"alethicallymodal"sentencesdonotoccur
frequently in everyday discourse (Keifer 2518a). This modality ranges from logical impossibility through
possibilitytologicalnecessity(vonWright1951:12).
ambiguityvsmerger:adistinctionmadebyCoates(1983):(i)hemustmeanbusinessisambiguous(itcouldbe
eitherepistemic('Iinferthat')ordeontic('itisnecessarythat..))andthiswillbedeterminedbyinspectinga
largercontext(ii)atthatprice,itoughttobegood is a merger (where the modal interpretation is inevitably
indeterminate between epistemic ('I infer that') and deontic ('the producer has a moral obligation to offer a
good product')). Palmer (1990: 212) questions this. Other terms used in this semantic area are: blending,
indeterminacy.
background:Thecontextwhichdeterminesthemodalreadingcanbeconstruedasasetofpropositions(the
background)fromwhichcertainconclusionscanbedrawn(Keifer2517a).Ineverydaylanguagethedeontic
backgroundmayjustconsistofwhatarecognisedauthority...wishes(Keifer2518a).
basic event schema: basic concrete representations from which languages make the shift towards abstract
concepts like tense, aspect and modality (cf Heine 1993), e.g. motion scheme > future in going to volition
scheme>futureinwilletc.
Biber's three categories of modal verbs: (i) permission/possibility/ability (can, could, may, might), (ii)
obligation/necessity (must, should, (had) better, have (got) to, need to, ought to, be supposed to), (iii)
volition/prediction(will,would,shall,begoingto)(Biberetal.1999:485).
http://dinamico2.unibg.it/anglistica/slin/modgloss.htm
1/14
12/6/2016
bleaching:modalauxiliariescanundergosemanticbleaching,e.g.canbeforeprivateverbs(Icanseetheship).
Whethertheyundergosemanticbleaching(andhaveamerelysyntacticfunction)insomeargumentclausesis
notclear(Iamsurprisedthatyoushouldaskmethat,We ask that he should be told / may be told / be told).
[RD'snote]
boulomaic modality: can be paraphrased as it is hoped/desired/feared/regretted thatRescher (1968: 246)

includeswantunderboulomaicmodality(seealsoSimpson1993:478).Perkins(1983:11)classesboulomaic
modality as a type of dynamic modality because of the 'disposition' meaning. It could also be said that the
dispositioncomesfromthedesireofahumansourcesoissimilartodeonticvolitivemodalitieswhereasubject
aspirestoinfluencetheworld.Itrangesfromnotwantingthroughnotopposingtowanting.(Palmer(1986:12)
suggeststhat'bouletic'wouldbeetymologicallypreferable.)
circumstantialmodality:dynamicmodalitywhenwhatispossibleornecessaryisdictatedbycircumstances:
Bill can only relax in his summer house (= the circumstances are such that...), In the mountains pitched
roofsmustbebuilt(=thecircumstancesaresuchthat...).Thebasisforoursuppositionisnoteverythingwe
knowalready(thebackgroundforepistemicmodality),butcircumstancesofacertainkind.
Coates' 12 modalities: (i) obligation (strong), (ii) obligation (weak), (iii) permission, (iv) volition, (v)
prediction,(vi)ability,(vii)possibility(dy),(viii)possibility(ep),(ix)inference(strong),(x)inference(weak),
(xi)hypothesis,(xii)quasisubjunctive(Coates1983).
(i)(v)aredeontic,(vi)(vii)dynamic,and(viii)(xii)epistemic.
coremeaningvsperiphery:adistinctionmadebyCoates(1983)peripherymeaningisdependentoncontext.
This might be correlated with Leech's distinction (1987: 71) between 'logical element of meaning' and the
'practical(orpragmatic)elementofmeaning'ofthemodalauxiliaries.
diachronicdevelopmentofEnglishmodals:(i)desemanticization(semanticbleaching),(ii)decategorization
(shiftingrammaticalcategoryandinwordclass),(iii)cliticization(changesinmorphosyntacticproperties),(v)
phoneticerosion(changesinphoneticform).Theformerfullverbhasbecomea'grammaticalconcept'always
followedbythemainverb('theverbtoTAMchain',Heine1993:47).
Keifer (1998: 596) says that although 'ability' seems historically to develop into 'root modality' and then into
'epistemic modality', 'much of the detail remains unclear'. Problems include (i) why did root modality split
into circumstantial/dispositional and deontic/boulomaic modality? (ii) is there crosslinguistic support for the
development of ability into circumstantial/dispositional modality? (iii) does modality evolve more from
'practical inference' or from 'conversational implicatures'? (iv) the development of ability into onjective
epistemic modality is clear, but how does subjective erpistemic modality (probability) develop? (v) how are
pragmaticnotions('willingness','intention',insistence'etc.)expressedindifferentlanguagesanddifferentstages
ofthelanguage?
2/14
12/6/2016
discourseorientedmodality:Palmerseesdeonticmodalityasdiscourseoriented(?sinceitrefersmoretothe
speechact).
deontic modality, deontics: (from Gk deon duty) concerned with the necessity or possibility of acts
performed by morally responsible agents (Keifer 2516b, Lyons 1977: 823) concerned with obligation and
permission(Trask),relatingtodutiesintermsofsocialorinstitutionallaws(Krkkinen:150),involvesthe
issuingofdirectivesandisassociatedwithnotionsofsuchaspermissionorobligation(Lew1997:146).Itis
discourseorientednonepistemicmodality.Unlikeepistemicmodality,itreferstoactsnotpropositions.
Deonticmodalitycanbesubdividedinto(i)directives(deonticpossibility:youmayleavedeonticnecessity:you
must leave), (ii) commissives (promises, undertakings: you shall be rewarded), (iii) imperatives, (iv) others:
volitives,evaluatives.
Another subdivision of deontic modality is: (i) possibility (permission) (you may leave) (ii) necessity
(obligation)(youmustgo)(iii)volition(Hewon'tgo).
Deonticmodalityexcludesability(physicalandmental)anddesirethesearecategorizedasdynamic,though
they typically have expression similar to that of permission and obligation. Diachronically, deontic meanings
cometoacquireepistemicmeanings.
Biber(1999:485)pointsouttwotypicalstructuralcorrelatesofdeonticmodals:(i)thesubjectishuman,(ii)the
mainverbisdynamic(describinganactivitythatcanbecontrolled).
dispositionalmodality:whenpossibilitydependsontheagentsdisposition:Janecannotsingtoday(=(i)it
isnotpossibleforJane...,(ii)Janeisnotallowed...,(iii)Janedoesntfeellike...(dispositionalmodality)),
Johnmustsneeze(=Jsdispositionsaresuchthat...).
dynamic modality: (from Gk dynamis 'strength, power') refers to physical necessity or possibility
(Krkkinen: 150) 'is concerned with the disposition of certain empirical circumstances with regard to the
occurrence of some event' (Perkins1983: 34), 'concerning ability and volition' (Jacobsson 1994: 167 though
here'volition'seemstocontradicttheideaofnonsubjectivity,seebelow).Thetermwasfirstsuggestedbyvon
Wrightin1951.Unlikeepistemicanddeonticmodalityitisnotsubjective(JohncanspeakFrench,TomorrowI
willbethirty,Hellcome,ifyouaskhim,Hehastocometomorrow,Youcan[=itispossibleto]smokeinhere).
Bybee&Fleischman(1995:13n3)donotusethistermclaimingitcomesfrommodallogicand'islessgermane
totheanalysisofmodalityinnaturallanguage'.NordoesBiber(1999:485),whosubsumesitunder"epistemic".
Palmer(1990:36)pointsoutthatdynamicmodalityisconcernedwiththeabilityorvolitionofthesubjectofthe
sentenceandsoisnotsubjectivelikeothermodalities,henceislesscentrallymodal.
Dynamicmodalityseemslessofaunifiedcategorythanepistemicanddeonticmodalityithasbeensubdivided
into:(i)ability(Icanplaytennis)(ii)power(Oilwillfloatonwater)(iii)futurity(Iwill/shallbe20tomorrow)
(iv)prediction(Youwillfeelbetterafterthismedicine),(v)habit(Whenhehasaproblem,hewillworkatituntil
hefindsananswer).
epistemic modality, epistemics: (fromGkepisteme knowledge) concerned with matters of knowledge and
belief (Keifer 2516b, Lyons 1977: 793). related to the speakers belief or opinion about the validity of the
proposition(Krkkinen:150),modifiesthetruthofasemanticproposition(Lew1997:146),'truthoriented,
3/14
12/6/2016
"attitude"'(Jacobsson(1994:167),'concernedwiththespeaker'sassumptionsorassessmentofpossibilitiesand,
inmostcases,indicatesthespeaker'sconfidence(orlackofconfidence)inthetruthoftheproposition'(Coates
1983:18)involvedinthemakingofarepresentationthatmatchestheworld(throughtheuseofthesensesor
the intellect) (the 'theoretical manner of representation' or 'theoretical modality', James 1986: 13) epistemic
uses are "logical" uses of modals (Bailey 1981: 182). It is extrinsic or extrapropositional, expressing the
speaker's attitude towards the content of a proposition. We may talk of (i) epistemic necessity (logically
entailedbywhatisknown,orrather(innaturallanguage)practicallyinferredfromwhatisknown,deduction
(Keifer2518a)and(ii)epistemicpossibility(compatiblewithwhatisknown,ib.),speculation.[Our2also
adds epistemic prediction.] For Biber (1999: 485) epistemic also includes dynamic modality. Another
subdivisionisbetweensubjectiveandobjectiveepistemicmodality.Epistemicmodalitymayalsobesubdivided
accordingto(i)thespeakersjudgmentsofnecessityandpossibility(includingthetwoabovecategories),and
(ii)evidentiality(expressedexplicitlybyevidentials),theevidentialbasisforwhatissaid(Keifer2517b).See
nonepistemicmodality.
An epistemiccomment may be supplied by a matrix verb (Ithinkthat), or aparentheticverb ( I think ),
sentenceadverbial(apparently).
evidential (evidential particle/affix): a (usually obligatory) grammatical marker found in some languages
whichexpresstheevidencewhichthespeakerhasformakingastatement(Trask)evidentialsaremarkersthat
indicatesomethingaboutthesourceoftheinformationintheproposition(Bybee1985:184,qu.Keifer2517b).
Theprimaryevidentialparameteris(i)direct(orattested)evidencevs(ii)indirectevidence(reportedevidence,
inferring evidence) (cf Willet 1988: 57). Evidentiality is apparently not shown by grammatical features in
English.
existentialmodality:oneofthefourtypesofmodalitylistedbyvonWright(1951:2)Palmersaysthatalethic
andexistentialmodalityaremoretheconcernoflogiciansthanlinguists,howeverhediscussesexamplessuchas
Lions can be dangerous (1990: 67, 1079) as examples of existential modality whose explanatory glosses
typicallyincludetheword'some'.Hisgloss'Somelionsaredangerous'hasbeenchallenged,however.
extrinsic modality: extrapropositional modality, expressing the speaker's attitude towards the content of a
proposition. It covers the area of epistemic modality. For Biber (1999: 485) it "refers to the logical status of
events or states, usually relating to assessments of likelihood: possibility, necessity, or prediction" and is
synonymouswithepistemicmodality(whichforhim,however,alsoincludesdynamicmodality).
Biber(1999:485)pointsouttwotypicalstructuralcorrelatesofextrinsicmodalverbs:thesubjectisusuallynon
human,andthemainverbusuallyhasastativemeaning.
formulaicuseofmodals:formulassuchasMayI?orCouldyou?'carrybyconventionacertainillocutionary
force'(Kiefer1998:597).
future: 'Future time reference is subtly bound up with modality, and is an essential component of personal
directives,includingcommands,requests,warnings,recommendationsandexhortations'(Coates1983:61).
harmonicphrase,harmoniccombination,modallyharmonic:modallyharmonic describes combinations of

modal auxiliary and another modal word expressing the same degree of modality (Lyons 1977: 807, Coates
4/14
12/6/2016
1983: 45). Harmonic phrase an element in the context of the modal verb that reinforces, echoes or
disambiguates(e.g.I'msurein:Theremust be a lot more to it than that. I'm sure it wasn't just that) (Coates
1983: 41). Harmonic combination two forms with the same modal meaning that are mutually reinforcing
(Halliday1970:331,Coates1983:45).Modallyharmonicadverbswouldseemtomakeaparticularlyimportant
contributiontomodalmeaning.
hedge:'epistemicmodalityisalwaysahedge'(Coates1983:49)
hypothetical/conditional/remote/secondaryforms:could,might,wouldandshouldareusedinhypothetical
propositions.Coates(1983:1089)referstocouldas'theRemoteofCAN'(onaparallelwith'thePastofCAN')
(a label that derives from Joos 1964: 121), and also as 'a hypothetical form' and 'a conditional'. These
hypothetical forms' are often used without any explicit conditional clause: to indicate that the proposition is
hypothetical,asamarkofpoliteness,tomakeatactfulsuggestion.Bybee(1995)preferstheterm'hypothetical'.
Perkins(1982:506)prefersconditional,whileBailey(1981)refersto'secondaryforms'.Palmer(1990:45)
referstotentativeorunrealmeaningsoftheseforms.Seepasttensemodals.
illocutionaryforce:'thecommunicativepurposewithwhichasentenceisusedtoperformaspeechact'(James
1986:14)claimedtobesimilartomodalitybyKrkkinen(1987:151)sincebothcommunicatethespeakers
attitudeoropinion.
intrinsicmodality:formspartofthesemanticcontentofthepropositionitcoverstheareaofrootmodality.For
Biber(1999:485)"Intrinsicmodalityreferstoactionsandeventsthathumans(orotheragents)directlycontrol:
meaningsrelatingtopermission,obligation,orvolition(orintention)"andissynonymouswithdeonticmodality.
irrealismode:e.g.Ifheshould,Ishouldntthink,ItsstrangethatheshouldCalledirrealismodalityby
Bybee&Fleischman(1995:9).Coversnonassertivemodalmeanings.Thesubjunctivecoversasimilararea.
logicalpossibility:atermusedbyBiber(1999)torefertoepistemicanddynamicpossibility.
Leechs11modalmeanings:(i)possibility(theoretical,factual),(ii)ability,(iii)permission,(iv)exclamatory
wish,(v)obligation/requirement,(vi)rulesandregulations,(vii)logicalnecessity,(viii)prediction/predictability,
(ix) willingness (weak volition), (x) intention (intermediate volition), (xi) insistence (strong volition) (Leech
1971/1987:73104).
marginal modals: dare, need, ought to, used to, had better, would rather, be to, have (got) to. See modals,
modalauxiliaries,modalverbs.
5/14
12/6/2016
Mindt's 17 modalities: (i) possibility/high probability, (ii) certainty/prediction, (iii) ability, (iv) hypothetical
event/result, (v) habit, (vi) inference/deduction, (vii) obligation, (viii) advisability/desirability, (ix)
volition/intention, (x) intention, (xi) politeness/downtoning, (xii) consent, (xiii) state in the past, (xiv)
permission,(xv)courage,(xvi)regulation/prescription,(xvii)disrespect/insolence(Mindt1995:45).
modality:theessenceof"modality"consistsintherelativizationofthevalidityofsentencemeaningstoaset
of possible worlds (Keifer 1994: 2515a) from a speakersevaluation approach, modality is the speakers
cognitive, emotive, or volitive attitude toward a state of affairs (Keifer 1994: 2516a), his commitment or
detachment (Stubbs), his envisaging several possible courses of events or his considering of things being
otherwise(Keifer1994:2516b).Modalityisanothernameformood,butoneappliedmorespeciallytocertain
distinctionsconcernedwiththespeakersestimateoftherelationbetweentheactorandtheaccomplishmentof
someevent(Trask).Moodisaformalverbalcategorywhile'modalitieshavebeentreatedprimarilyinterms
ofmodalmeaning'(Koktov1998:600).Modalitymaybeexpressedthroughverbs,adjectives,nouns,adverbs,
particles,intonation.See:typeofmodality,background,subjunctive.notmodality: excluded from the domain
ofmodality(byKeifer1994):(i)factiveevaluativepredicates(e.g.itisgood,itisamazingthatBillpassed
theexam,i.e.nodiscussionofpossibleworlds),(ii)negation,(iii)illocutionaryverbs(Iassertthat...)(iv)
perlocution(theeffectsofthespeechact).
Ruthrof (1991) sees modality as the structurable field of the manners of speaking underlying all utterances
(this he also calls covert or inferential modality). This might be linked with ideas of perspective or style (cf.
Saukkonen1991).
ForBybee&Fleischman(1995:2),'Modalityisthesemanticdomainpertainingtoelementsofmeaningthat
languagesexpress.Itcoversabroadrangeofsemanticnuancesjussive,desiderative,intentive,hypothetical,
potential,obligative,dubitative,hortatory,exclamative,etc.whosecommondenominatoristheadditionofa
supplementoroverlayofmeaningtothemostneutralsemanticvalueofthepropositionofanutterance,namely
factual and declarative' Modality can be expressed in various ways, 'morphological, lexical, syntactic, or via
intonation'(ib.).
For Schneider (1999: 13) and Bybee (1985), modality (more clearly revealed in main clauses) consists of (i)
speech acts (orders and wishes, i.e. deontic modality), and (ii) attitudes to truthcontent of the sentence (i.e.
epistemic modality). Modality is indicated by various means (subjunctive, modal verbs, parenthetical verbs,
sentence adverbials, matrix verbs), but some of these (subjunctive, modal verbs) can also be found in object
clauseswithamerelysyntacticfunction(cfSchneider1999ch.1).
modal logic: has to do with the notions of possibility and necessity epistemic modality has to do with
possibility/necessityofthetruthofaproposition(involvedwithknowledgeandbelief)deonticmodalityhasto
dowithpossibility/necessityofactsperformedbymorallyresponsibleagents(involvedwiththesocialfunctions
ofpermissionandobligation).
modals, modal auxiliaries, modal verbs: a morphosyntactic approach to modality starts from the formal
categoryofmodalauxiliaries(cf.Palmer1979:45).However,modalsaredifficulttodefineanddonotallshare
the same properties. See: speakers evaluation. English modals can be divided into (i) central modals (can,
may, will, shall, must could, might, would, should), (ii) marginal modals or semimodals: (a) dare, need,
oughtto,usedto(b)hadbetter,wouldrather,beto,have(got)to(iii)beaboutto,beboundto,begoingto,be
obliged to, be supposed to, be willing to, be able to. See non auxiliary modal expressions and marginal
modals.
6/14
12/6/2016
Modalauxiliarieshaveunverblikepropertiesthatdistinguishthemfromfullverbs: (i) no dosupport,(ii)no

SVinversioninquestions,(iii)encliticnot(cannot),(iv)donotoccurtogether(StandardEnglishonly),(v)no
S:V number agreement, (vi) no participles or infinitives. (See NICEproperties). These formal distinctions do
notholdinotherlanguages.Thesemanticdistinctionbetweenm.a.andfullverbsisdifficult(auxiliaryverbsor
otherverbsusedinEnglish,wheremodalsareusedinotherlanguages.e.g.thehouseistobesold).Warner1995
claimsthatmodalverbsarenowlexicalitems,awordclassoftheirown,notasubsetofverbs.Asymptomof
thisisthewaythatmighthave>mightof.SoEnglishhasadistinctivewordclassthatrealizesmoodlexically
i.e.modalverbs.
Modalauxiliaries(i)attributepropertiestothesubjectofasentence,(ii)determinetheillocutionarypotentialof
asentence(therangeofilloc.forcesthatasentencecanhavewhenuttered)(James1986:14).
modalmeaning:(Holmes1984)thedegreeofcertaintyoruncertaintythespeakerfeelsasregardsthevalidity
ofthepropositionsimilartoepistemicmodality.
monosemanticapproachtomodality:anapproachtomodality(found,forexample,inPerkins1983)thatsees
a'basic'or'core'meaningforeachmodalauxiliary.Anotherapproachwouldsee'aconglomerationofvaguely
meanings, each linked in some way to at least one of the others in the set, but not necessarily sharing any
commonfeaturewith,ordirectlylinkedto,allofthem'(Palmer1990:15).
mood: grammatical category which expresses the degree or kind of reality assigned to a sentence... mood
shades off imperceptibly into modality, and also into evidential systems (Trask). 'A system of inflections on
verbs': indicativesubjunctiveimperative (James 1986: 1). 'Formal verbal categories' (Koktov 1998: 599). (i)
sentencemood,asemanticcategory:themodalvalueofsentencetypes(Keifer1994:2516a),severalsentence
typesmayexpressthesames.m.(e.g.variousquestiontypesmayexpressthes.m.ofinterrogativity).Perhaps
three basic types of s.m.: declarative/exclamative, interrogative, imperative/optative (the optative mood the
speakerdesiressomethingtobethecase).Declarativemoodisunmarkedbutcanbegiventhemeaningtotake
for granted to consider to be true (ii) verbalmood, a morphosyntactic category. DavidsenNielsen (1990)
distinguishes between symthetic mood (subjunctive and imperative) and analytic mood (modal verbs). For
Bybee & Fleischman (1995: 2) the term mood is used for a category of meanings that are 'expressed
inflectionally, generally in distinct sets of verbal paradigms, e.g. indicative, subjunctive, optative, imperative,
conditional,etc.
negation,negationofmodality,negationoftheproposition:affectstheproposition(thestatementonwhich
the modal statement comments) in epistemic modality affects the modality (the statement of possibility,
necessityetc.)inrootmodality(hemaynotbeathome='itispossiblethatheisnotathome'wecan'thearyou
='wearenotabletohearyou').Thedistinctionisespeciallyclearinepistemicvsdynamicmay:youmaynotgo
= 'I do not permit you to go' vs. You may not understand = 'it is possible that you do not understand'). The
exceptionisdeonticmustwhereitisthepropositionthatisnegated(youmustn'tbelate=itisnecessarythatyou
arenotlate).Theterms'auxiliarynegation'and'mainverbnegation'areusedbyQuirketal.(1972:3841985.
794)Palmer(1990:34)saysthiscouldbemisleadingbecause'formallyitisthemodalthatisnegatedinboth',
andprefers'negationofmodality'and'negationoftheproposition'(eventhough'proposition'isnotaccuratefor
nonepistemicmodality).
7/14
12/6/2016
neutralmodality:Palmer'ssubcategoryofDynamicmodality(1990:37opposedtosubjectorienteddynamic
modality)meaning'itispossible/necessaryfor',e.g.YoucangetallsortsofthingshereandI must have an
immigrant'svisa.Heacceptsthat'thereissomeindeterminacybetweenneutralanddynamicCanandbetween
neutralanddeonticMUST'(1990:37).
NICEproperties:syntacticpropertiessharedbyModEauxiliarieshave,beanddoaswellasmodalauxiliares:
(i)Negationwithoutdo(isnt,mustntvsdoesntgo)(ii)Inversionwithoutdo(ishe?,musthe?vsdoeshego?),
(iii)Clitics(isnt,mustntvsdoesntgo),(iv)Ellipsiswithoutdo(oftencalled'code':but I dontthinkPeter is
/canvsbutIdontthinkPeterdid).EllipsisisalsofoundinOE.Huddlestone(1976:333)andPalmer(1990:4)
form the acronym from Negation, Inversion, Code and Emphatic affirmation (contrastive emphasis on the
auxiliary,notondo).Modalsaredistinguishedfromthethree'primaryauxiliaries'by(i)nosform of the 3rd
psnpres.sing.,(ii)nononfiniteforms(being,tohaveetc.),(iii)nocooccurrence(*maywill)
nonauxiliarymodalexpressions:(i)expressionsincorporatingbeto(begoingto,beableto,beboundto
) (ii) modal lexical verbs: instruct, authorise, believe, insinuate, allow, compel etc. (frequently met in the
passive) (iii) modal adjectives: sure, certain, likely, possible, necessary, probable etc. (iv) modal adverbs:
apparently,perhaps,possibly,evidentlyetc.(v)modalnouns:invitation,supplication,demand,thought,ability,
will,prohibitionetc.
nonepistemicmodality:epistemicmodalityreferstopropositions,nonepistemicmodalitytofactsorevents.
Halliday(1970,1976)callsitmodulation,Coates(1983)callsitrootmodality.Itisoftendividedintodeontic
anddynamicmodality(thoughBiber1999putsdynamicwithepistemic).
Palmer's 8 modal meanings: (i) Epistemic Possibility (may), (ii) Epistemic Necessity (must), (iii) Epistemic
W/S (will) (iv) Deontic Possibility (may, can), (v) Deontic Necessity (must), (vi) Deontic W/S (shall) (vii)
DynamicPossibility(can),(viii)DynamicW/S(will).(Palmer1990:367)
(N.B.hereW/SisusedinsteadofPalmer's"?"tomarkadegreeofmodality(asyetunnamed)involvingwilland
shall).
pasttensemodals:would,should,mightandcould(and,tosomeextent,must).Theiruseisdividedinto(i)past
tenseuses,(ii)hypothetical(orremote,orconditional)uses,and(iii)presenttenseuses.Examples:(i)Icould
swimwhenIwasonlyfive,(ii)IfyouhelpedmeIcouldfinishthisinanhour,(iii)IsupposeIcoulddoitnow.
The hypothetical uses (the most common) of pasttense modals may involve the retention of some lexical
meaning(asintheaboveexample)ormayonlyhaveahypotheticalconditionalmeaning(asinIfwewereall
millionaires,moneywouldn'tbeworthanything)(thisalsoappliestoshould,wouldand might). Bybee (1995)
explains that (a) a combination of past + modal sense (other authors say just past sense alone) produces the
hypotheticaluses,that(b)thehypotheticalusehasreplacedthepastuseovertimeandthat(c)hypotheticaluses
with an implicit ifclause produce presenttense uses. When used as true pasts, they do not express punctual
action,but'pasthabitualorpastposteriormodality'(Bailey1981:183).
performativenatureofmodals:modalverbscanbeseenasessentiallyperformative(involvedinactsthatare
performedbytheactofspeaking):'Ijudgethat','Ilayanobligationonyouto','Ipermit'.Thisexplains
8/14
12/6/2016
whythemodalshavenopasttense:theactmusttakeplaceinthepresent.(Palmer1990:1011,223).
perceptionalmodality:seearticleonadverbsbyAnneliMS
possibility: can be (i) epistemic (the road may be blocked) or (ii) deontic (the road can be blocked). The
differenceiscapturedintheparaphrases(i)itispossiblethat,xand(ii)itispossibleforytox.
possibleworlds:waysinwhichpeoplecouldconceivetheworldtobedifferent(Keifer1994:2515a).These
arethe'frameworks','contexts','worldviews','statesofaffairs','conceptualdomains'or'modalities'withinwhich
aneventorpropositionhasasignificanceortruthvalue(Perkins:8)
practicalmodality:themeaningoftheimperativeandsubjunctivemoods(concernedwith'doing'and'forward
looking', suiting the world to words). See theoretical modality. Practical modality is also concerned with the
meaningoftherootmeaningsofmodalverbs,withthelexicalsemanticsofcertainverbs(e.g.wish, request),
andwiththeinfinitive(theyrequestedustogo).
pragmatics: "deontic necessity" and "deontic possibility" are semantic notions whereas obligation and
permissionbelongtopragmatics(Keifer2518a),i.e.imposinganobligationorgrantingpermissionarespeech
acts. You may park your car here expresses deontic possibility, but can only be a speech act if certain
conditions are met (e.g. the speaker must have the authority to grant such a permission) (ib.). Extensions of
meaning to modals may also be pragmatically motivated, e.g. We can meet tomorrow (possibility >
suggestion),canIhelpyou?(ability>offer),Canyoucomehereaminuteplease?(possibility>order).
quasimodals:haveto,begoingto,beableto,beboundto
Quirk's3modalmeanings:(i)permissionpossibility/ability,(ii)obligationnecessity,(iii)volitionprediction
thefirstofeachpairisintrinsic(showsomehumancontrol),thesecondisextrinsic(nottheresultofhuman
controlbutofhumanjudgment'ability'inGroup1doesn'tfitthisschemeverywell,however).Thepairingof
meaningsisjustifiedbythefactthatthesamemodalverbsareusedforboth(willandshallbeingusedforboth
volitionandprediction,forinstance)(Quirketal.1985:219).Thiscategorizationignorestheepistemicdeontic
dynamicscheme(epistemicbeingdividedbetweenextrinsicpossibilityandextrinsicnecessity),thoughPalmer
(1990:38)thinksthatthetwoarecompatible.
rationalmodality:coverstheindicationofwhatisrationalorreasonableinagivensituationThecausesmaybe
dividedintotwocategories)(Palmer1990:1056).
Rescher's 8 modalities: (i) alethic, (ii) epistemic, (iii) temporal, (iv) boulomaic, (v) deontic, (vi) evaluative,
(vii)causal,(viii)likelihood(Rescher1968,qu.inPerkins1983:9).
9/14
12/6/2016
rootmodality,rootsense:thenonepistemicsenseofmodals,whichdeals'withobligation,permission,ability
etc.'(Incharralde1998:1),'agentoriented,"influence"modality'(Jacobsson1994:167),thatreferto'powersof
volition' and make a representation that the world has to match (the 'practical manner of representation', or
'practical modality', James 1986: 13) e.g. the sociophysical domain of John must leave now. (For the
developmentofepistemicmodalityfromrootmodality,seeSweetser1982,1990thisisopposedby****who
arguesthat****).Rootnecessitycoversbothdeonticanddynamicvalues(Facchinetti1998:61).Ithasbeen
called'intrinsicmodality'sinceitformspartofthesemanticcontentoftheproposition(incontrast,epistemic
or extrinsic modality is extrapropositional and just shows the speaker's attitude towards the truth of the
proposition). The unity of 'root' modality is shown by the syntactic patterns in which it appears: usually an
animatesubject,anagentiveverbsandoftenapassiveinfinitive.
ThetermseemstohavebeencoinedbyHofmann1976(seenoteinPalmer1990:37).
semimodals(quasimodals,periphrasticmodals):needanddareinModE,alsohaveto,isto,oughtto,used
to.TheseallhavesomeNICEproperties,butareanomalousinvariousways(e.g.takingtoinfinitives,marked
fortenseandperson,canoccurinnonfiniteforms).HavetoevolvesinME(Fischer1994)istoexistsinOE(to
translateLatingerundives)butreallyevolvesinMEoughttosplitsofffromthemainverboweinME(Denison
1993:315)forusedtoseeDenison1993(323)andVisser(1969:1425).
speakerorientedmodality: epistemic modality, which applies to a whole proposition and communicates the
speaker'sstanceconcerningitstruth.Opposedtoagentorientedmodalityandsubjectorientedmodality.Palmer
(1990:7)saysepistemicanddeonticmodalityrelatetothespeaker(i.e.theyareconcernedwiththespeakers
orreportedspeakersandtheirjudgmentsanddesires).
However, in an earlier work (1974: 1003) he talks of discourseoriented modality (deontic modality in
questionsandrequests,whichinvolvebothinterlocutors)andspeakerorientedmodality(deonticstatements,
wherethespeakeristhedeonticsouce).
Bybee (1995) seems to use speakeroriented modality in a different way to refer to speech acts that aim at
gettingsomethingdone:imperatives,optatives,permissives.
speakersattitude:modalityequalsthoselinguisticmeansbywhichaspeakercanexpresshisattitudetowards
theproposition.Modalityisthustheattitudeofthespeakertowardsthecontentofwhathesays(Krkkinen:
150,Stubbs1986:15)
speakersevaluationofastateofaffairs(modus):thedictum(whatissaid)andthemodus(howitissaid).
The modus (= modality) can be expressed in a full verb (I think it is raining, I hope it will be raining), and
adverbial(itisprobablyraining),amodalverb(itmustberaining),amarkontheverb(mood,tense:hewould
neverhaveleftus).Themodusisclearestwhenexpressedinahigherpredicate(thematrix)(Iamastonished
that...),whichcontainsanattitudinal,noncausativeandtransitiveverb.Thisviewofmodalityisconsistentwith
the definition of modality as envisaging several possible courses of events (Keifer 1994: 2516b), a
qualificationofthecategoricalandtheabsolute(Perkins1983:18)
10/14
12/6/2016
subjectorientedmodality: ascribes a certain property to the subject of a clause one of the three types of
modality for Huddleston (1988: 789). SEE: type of modality. Palmer defines dynamic modality at subject
oriented (1990: 36, since it refers to the ability of will of the subject, rather than the opinions (epistemic) or
attitudes (deontic) of the speaker (and addressee)). later, however, he divides dynamic modality into subject
orientated(Icanswim)andneutral(='itispossible/necessaryfor')
subjectivevs.objectiveepistemicmodality:Alfredmaybeunmarried(=(subjectively)perhapsAlfred...,
or = (objectively) I know that there is a possibility that Alfred...) (Lyons 1977: 7978). S.m. refers to the
speakers beliefs, o.m. refers to reality (and can be denied, questioned, can be included in ifclauses and
embeddedunderfactivepredicates:Iknowthat...). Subjective epistemic modality seems to be in many ways
morebasicinnaturallanguagethanobjectiveepistemicmodality(Keifer2518b)andCoatesconfirmsthat'in
themajorityofcasesEpistemicmodalsaresubjectiveandRootmodalsareobjective'(1983:33).
subjunctive:In OE modality (speakers attitudes towards the factual content of the utterance: (un)certainty,
(im)possibilityetc.)wasexpressedbymeansofthesubjunctive,whichhaslargelydisappearedwiththelossof
inflectionsandhasbeenreplacedinthisfunctionbymodalauxiliaryverbs(plusawholerangeofothermeans:
adverbs,phrases,intonationetc.).
syntacticpatterns:Theunityof'root'modalityisshownbythesyntacticpatternsinwhichitappears:usually
an animate subject, an agentive verbs and often a passive infinitive. Epistemic modality, on the other hand,
typicallycooccurswithperfectorprogressiveinfinitivewithexistential(there/it)subjectorinanimatesubject,
andwithastativeverb.ThecommonsyntacticpatternsassociatedwitheachmodalauxiliaryarelistedbyMindt
(1998)andBiber(1999).
TAM:timeaspectmodalitythesearerelatedgrammaticalconcepts(cf.Givn1984:269318)thataremainly
expressedbyauxiliariesinEnglish(especiallytimeandmodality).
temporalmodality:oneofRescher'smodalities(1968:25)rangesfrom'never'through'sometimes'to'always'.
Likeexistentialmodalitythisreferstothetargetofdescription.
tentativeforms:might,would,oughtto,should(Palmer)
teststodisambiguatemodalmeaning:(i)hemaydoit(a)itispossibleforhimtodoit(dynamicmodality),
(b)itispossiblethathewilldoit(epistemicmodality)(ii)hemustdothat(a)itisnecesaryforhimtodo
that(deonticordynamicmodality),(b)hewillnecessarilydothat(epistemicmodality)
theoreticalmodality: the meaning of the indicative mood (connected with 'viewing' and 'backward looking',
suiting words to the world). It is also concerned with the epistemic meaning of modal verbs (possibility,
certainty,etc.).Seepracticalmodality.
11/14
12/6/2016
typeofmodality:Theinterpretationofthetypeofmodalityissometimesclear(hemayknowtheansweris
epistemic),butgenerallyitdependsonthecontext(hemaycometomorrowcanbeepistemic(perhapshewill
come)ordeontic(heispermittedtocome)).Professor:Youcant[=arenotallowedtodeonticmodality]
sleep in my class Student: If you didnt talk so loud I could [= might succeed in doing so epistemic
modality]. Librarian: Quiet! The people near you cant [= find it difficult to epistemic modality] read
Johnny: They ought to be ashamed of themselves Ive been able [=have possessed the skill to subject
orientedmodality]readsinceIwassix.Thislackofformaldistinctionoffunctionderivesfromthefactthat
In most languages, the expressions of certainty, necessity, and possibility are also used for obligations and
permissions (Keifer 2518a) and that 'A characteristic feature of the modals is their semantic vagueness or
evendeterminacy'(Jacobsson1994:168).Asaresulttherehavebeenagreatnumberof'meanings'assignedto
theminagreatvarietyoftaxonomies(someofthesearepresentedinthisglossary).
vonWrights4modes:(i)alethic,(ii)epistemic,(iii)deontic,(iv)existential(vonWrigjht1951:12).
REFERENCES
Bailey,Ch.J.N.(1981).EnglishVerbModalities.ZeitschriftfrDialektologieundLinguistik2:161188.
Biber,Douglasetal.(1999).LongmangrammarofspokenandwrittenEnglish.London:Longman.[6.6Modalsandsemimodals,
pp.483502]
Bybee,Joan(1985).Morphology:AStudyoftheRelationbetweenMeaningandForm.Amsterdam:Benjamins.
Bybee,Joan(1995).'TheSemanticDevelopmentofPastTenseModalsinEnglish'.Bybee,Joan&SuzanneFleischman(eds.)(1995):
503517.
Bybee,Joan&SuzanneFleischman(eds.)(1995).ModalityinGrammarandDiscourse. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins

PublishingCompany.
Bybee,Joan&SuzanneFleischman(1995).'AnIntroductoryEssay'.Bybee,Joan&SuzanneFleischman(eds.)(1995):114
Denison,David(1993).EnglishHistoricalSyntax.Longman.
Facchinetti,Roberta(1998).Doesithavetobemust?.ThemodalsofnecessityinBritishCaribbeanEnglish.LinguisticaeFilologia
7:5976.
Fischer,Olga(1994).ThedevelopmentofquasiauxiliariesinEnglishandchangesofwordorder.Neophilologus78:137164.
12/14
12/6/2016
Givn,T.(1984).Syntax.Afunctionaltypologicalintroduction.Amsterdam:Benjamins.
Heine,B.(1993).Auxiliaries,cognitiveforcesandgrammaticalization.OUP.
Huddleston,Rodney(1988).EnglishGrammar:anOutline.CUP
InchaurraldeBesga,Carlos(1998).'ModalsandModalityinEnglish'.Miscelnea[Univ.Zaragoza]19.
Jacobsson,Bengl(1994).RecessiveandemergentusesofmodalauxiliariesinEnglish.EnglishStudies72ii:166182.
James,Francis(1986).SemanticsoftheEnglishSubjunctive.Vancouver:UniversityofBritishColumbiaPress.
[ExaminessubjunctiveandmodalityinadiachronicandsynchronicperspectiveusesBoyd'stheoryofmodality]
UB:Ing.3.3681
Leech,G.N.(19712 nded.1987).MeaningandtheEnglishVerb.London:Longman.
Lew,Robert(1997).TowardsaTaxonomyofLinguisticJokes.StidiaAnglicaPosnaniensia31:132152.
Lindblad,Ishrat&MagnusLjung(eds.)(1987).ProceedingsfromtheThirdNordicConferenceforEnglishStudies[Hsselby1986].
Stockholm:Almqvist&Wicksell.[amixedbagofaregionalAnglistikassociation,invol1thereareafewdiachroniclanguage
studies]
INGL.3.3186/12
Mindt,Dieter(1998).AnempiricalgrammaroftheEnglishverb:modalverbs.Berlin:Cornelson.
Palmer,FrankR.(1979,2 nded.1990).ModalityandtheEnglishModals.London/NewYork:Longman.
Perkins,M.R.(1983).ModalExpressionsinEnglish.London:Pinter.
UB:INGL.3.2859
Quirk,R.,S.Greenbaum,G.Leech&J.Svartvik(1985).AComprehensiveGrammaroftheEnglishLanguage.London:Longman.
Rescher,N.(1968).TopicsinPhilosophicalLogic.Dortrecht:Reidel.
Ruthrof,Horst(1991).LanguageandtheDominanceofModality.LanguageandStyle21:315326.
UB:no
Saukkonen,Pauli(1991).PerspectiveasaSourceofStyle.LanguageandStyle21:5371,119137.
UB:no
Schneider,Stefan(1999).Ilcongiuntivotramodalityesubordinazione.Roma:Caroccieditore.
UB:A.3.***
Simpson,P.(1993).Language,IdeologyandPointofView.London:Routledge.
Stubbs,M.(1986).AMatterofprolongedfieldwork:notestowardsamodalgrammarofEnglish.AppliedLinguistics7i:125.
UB:PER.INGL.99
Sweetser,E.E.(1982).'Rootandepistemicmodals:causalityintwoworlds'.ProceedingsoftheAnnualMeetingoftheBerkeley
LinguisticsSociety8:484507.
13/14
12/6/2016
Trask,R.L.(1997).AStudentsDictionaryofLanguageandLinguistics.London:Arnold.
INGL.3.4404butshouldbemovedtoCONS.INGL.
Visser,F.Th.(1969).AnhistoricalsyntaxoftheEnglishlanguage.Part3.Leiden:Brill.
VonWright,H.G.(1951).AnEssayinModalLogic.Amsterdam:NorthHolland.
14/14

A Brief Glossary of Modality

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

A Brief Glossary of Modality

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

12/6/2016

boulomaic modality: can be paraphrased as it is hoped/desired/feared/regretted thatRescher (1968: 246)

harmonicphrase,harmoniccombination,modallyharmonic:modallyharmonic describes combinations of

Modalauxiliarieshaveunverblikepropertiesthatdistinguishthemfromfullverbs: (i) no dosupport,(ii)no

Bybee,Joan&SuzanneFleischman(eds.)(1995).ModalityinGrammarandDiscourse. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi