Ministry of Higher Education

Al-Qadisiya University
Collage of Education
Department of English

Modality
In
Grammar and Discourse

Set by: Dhuha Amer Fadhil

Supervised by: Lect. Lubna A. Kadhim

Rajab 1438

‫بسم هللا الرمحن الرحمي‬

‫َل َخ ْل ُق ا َّلس َما َو ِات َو ْ َاْل ْر ِض َأ ْك َ ُب ِم ْن َخ ْل ِق النَّ ِاس َولَ َٰ ِك َّن َأ ْك َ ََث النَّ ِاس ََل‬
‫ي َ ْعلَ ُم َ‬
‫ون‬

‫صدق هللا العيل‬

‫العظمي‬
‫غافر‪374 :‬‬

‫‪I‬‬
 Dedication
To the soul of
Imam Hussain
( peace be upon him )

II
 Acknowledgments

I would like to express my appreciation and

thanks to my supervisor , Lect, Lubna A. Kadhim. Iam

grateful to her for her distinguished efforts through

answeringmy queries .

It is worth to mention that she cheerfully supplied me

with the best references related to this study.

III
 Contents

Subjects No
Dedication II
Acknowledgments III
Contents IV
Abstract V
Chapter one : Syntactic Classification of Modality 1
1.1 Definitions 1
1.2 Modality in Grammar 3
Chapter Two: Type of Modality 9
2.1 Dynamic Modality 9
2.2 Deontic Modality 12

2.3 Epistemic Modality 15

Conclusions 18
Bibliography 19

IV
 Abstract

The study is entitled "Modality in Grammar and Discourse " , it

consists of two chapters .

Chapter one sheds light on the most important syntactic features

of model verbs . It gives the syntactic classification of modality

.through which , the researcher seeks the grammatical features of

modal verbs.

Then in chapter two , the researcher focuses on the semantic

characteristic of modal verbs .it displays the main types of

modality with the meaning of each category .

Finally , the researcher sheds light on the main conclusions that

he reached to mentioning them in points.

Chapter One

Syntactic Classification of Modality

1.1 Definitions
 It is considered that modal verbs and other modal

expressions are used so as to express an opinion or attitude

about a possible fact or to control a possible action. All

modal expressions are regarded to be about the speaker's or

the writer's view of the world. (palmer.2001:3)

In Grammar and semantics , modality refers to linguistic

devices that indicate the degree to which an observation is

possible , probable , likely , certain , permitted or prohibited.

In English , these notions are commonly (though not

exclusively) expressed by modal auxiliaries , sometimes

combined with not. It is worth to mention that modality

reflects. The speaker's point of view toward a particular

described situation. (I bid : 4 )

Salkie , et. al(2009:203) point that modality has

traditionally been treated with in the theory in terms of three

planes, thought of as spaces with in which operations apply.

The first is the plane of representation , sometimes called

 the pre-modal plane , where the enunciator does not make a

choice between the interior 'I' and the enterer 'E'. The second

is the plane of Validation where the enunciator chooses

whether the predicative relation is true or false. The third is

the hypothetical plane , sometimes called the plane of

fiction where the enunciator can consider imaginary or

counter factual situations , free from the constraints of

reference to the real world. By using a modal operator such

as a model verb , the enunciator can operate or more than

one plane in single utterance.

1.2 Modality in Grammar

Driven and Radden (1984:233) states that modality is

concerned with the speaker's assessment of , or attitude

towards, the potentiality of a state of affairs. Modality

therefore relates to different worlds. Assessments of

potentiality as in: (1)" you must be right ", Kelate to the

world of knowledge and reasoning. This type of modality is

known as epistemic modality. Modal attitudes apply to the

world of things and social interaction. This type of modality

is known as root modality. Root modality comprises three

subtypes :

Deontic modality , intrinsic modality and disposition

modality .

It is said that tense and mood are categories of grammatical

form in the sense that mood is a grammatical category .

Modality in grammar can be expressed by modal verbs or

modal phrases expressions. A modal is a type of auxiliary

(helping) verb that is used to express ability , possibility ,

permission or obligation.

This is to say that " a modal verb" is a type of a verb that

is used to indicate modality as well as modal verbs are

distinguished as a class based on certain grammatical

properties .(palmer :2001 :33)

Since the first chapter deals with modality in grammar

it's so important to shed light on the grammatical features of

modals and semi-modals. These characteristic features of

modals can be abbreviated as follows :

a) Models are always finite verbs. This indicates that

modals have become restricted to finite use only. A finite

verb form is capable of forming negative – n't and of

expressing questions by inversion. (Chalker and Weiner :

1998 : 26 )

2) He might have been being questioned by the police.

- He space (personal pronoun) He (Personal present )

- Might (verb proper modal auxiliary )
- Have ( bare in finite (of auxiliary of perfectively))
- Been ( past participle (of auxiliary expressing
continuous aspect ) )
- Being present participle (of auxiliary expressing the
passive))
 - Questioned past participle
- By preposition
- The definite article
- Police noun

b) Modal can only be operators from the syntactic point of

view (the first auxiliary of the verb phrase). They occur

as operators in finites clauses but not in non-finites

(Hama and Sabir :2016:35)

In the sentence : He might have been being questioned

by the police.

The first auxiliary is operator .

c) No in flection in the third person singular , no ( - ing

form , no (-ed) participle : this is to say that auxiliary

verbs do not inflect for person , number and tense .

Therefore for such forms *wills.* mays , * cans are not

possible forms. Because of this feature they are

sometimes called detective verbs (Huddleston and

Pullum : 2005:106).

(3) * I'd like to can study .

 but

I'd like to be a teacher .

( I bid)

d) No concord with the subject or no subject – verb

arrangement : Actually modals fail to capture the subject

– verb agreement because of their lack of inflectional

feature .

(4) * He musts stay.

but

He must stay .

( Hama and Sabir : 2016 : 35 )

e) There is no appropriate time reference. When the modals

occur in their present or past forms. They may denote

past, present tenses or even future time. Though there are

historical past forms for them , they are not used to

indicate past time as the case is with lexical verbs .

Thomson and Mortinet (1986:111) state that past

forms like might , would , should and could are just of

past time in certain grammatical context like conditional

 clauses and indirect speech , but generally they occur in

sentences to refer to now or future . e.g.

(5) could you help me ? present time .

f) Fontaine (2013:32) indicates that the "Do" auxiliary

verbs can not occur with other auxiliary verbs , in sense it

replaces all others .

"Do" only supports the main verb to form interrogatives ,

negatives and tag questions.

That is to say that the modal auxiliaries can combine with

all other auxiliary verbs except " do" in expressing the

event as shown in :

(6) I might [mod.] have [perf.] bee [prog] tricked I might [main]

by that guy .

(7) " Do it will work ?

but

will it work .

( I bid)

g) Hama and Sabir (2016:36) mention another grammatical

feature of modals stating that there is no sequence of

modals . In standard English two or more models are

mutuality exclusive , in co-ordination :

 (8) I may must call the police – they are having received

my letter this is say that so as to convey like this notion ,

alternative form can really be used .

(9) I may be necessary to call the police .

(Alexander:

1988:210)

Chapter Two

Type of Modality

Auwera and Nuyts (2016:33) indicate that there is no

unanimity among scholars regarding what the list of

categories to be called "modal " should look like, but one

version of it-one of the most "traditional" ones – it

comprises three basic semantic dimensions or concepts :

dynamic , deontic and epistemic .

2.1 Dynamic Modality

 Actually , dynamic modality does not express the

speaker's opinion , nor does the speaker affect the situation.

Dynamic modality indicates a subject's internal capabilities

or willingness as opposed to external factors such as

permission or orders given (palmer 2001:70) .

Nuyts (2001:25) states that dynamic modality involves

ascription of a capacity or a need to the subject participant

in the state of affairs , or of a situation internal potential or

necessity for him/her / it to do something ( usually this

involves animate entities , but it can also be extended to

inanimate subjects .

Dynamic modality is fully agent oriented (at least if the

notion of an agent is interpreted widely enough) .

It is worth mentioning that dynamic modality is also

referred to as facultative modality or inherent modality in

which the subject is capable of performing the action

expressed by the main verb in the clause e.g.

1. That kid can sing like Fronk Sinatra .

Thin definition is in need at least three modifications. First ,

it is better to define dynamic modality in terms of a property

 of the agreement of the predicate , or of the controlling

participant in the state of affairs (usually the agent). In

passives the implicit controlling participant , carries the

capacity.

2. The door has a key lock now , so that it can be opened and

closed from both sides.

Second, the category is not limited to ability a long , but

also covers the indication of a need or necessity for the first

argument participant , e.g.

3. I must find a solution for this problem soon now or I'll go

crazy.

4. Excuse me for a minute . I have to go to the bathroom urgently.

Third , this category does not covers capacities / abilities and

needs / necessities which are fully inherent to the first argument

participant only , but it also covers abilities / potentials and needs

/ necessities which are determined by the local circumstances of

the participant. This is to mean that the property is conditioned by

external factors, explicitly mention in the utterance or implicit in

the situation that is described in the utterance as indicated in the

following example:-

5. I've unlocked the back door , so you can enter the house there.

6. John will be able to participate in the debates starting next

week.

7. To open that door you must turn the key and lift the latch

simultaneously .

8. I'll be home in half an hour or so but I need to get fuel first.

(Frawley et. Al 2006:2.4)

2.2 Deontic Modality

Faechinetti , Krug and Palmer (2003:153) indicate that one of

the arguments is that deontic modality excludes the notions of

desire and ability , which "have linguistic" expression similar to

that of permission and obligation. This point is a reason to replace

the narrow deontic class with a category of "agent – oriented "

modality , which includes "all modal meanings that predicate

conditions on an agent with regard to the completion of an action

referred to by the main predicate , e.g. Obligation , desire , ability

, permission and root possibility .

It is worth to mention that deontic modality is considered as a

phenomenon that encompasses normative concepts and thought

such as practical reasoning , the normative rules govern

deontically modal thought.

An account of the role deontic modality plays in our cognitive

and social lives. Modern linguistic semantic tries to derive correct

truth conditions for a whole a sentence as a function of the

meaning .

A deontic necessity modal as the modal above "must" says

roughly ,that the relevant possibilities that are the best (according

to the relevant criteria) are all possibilities in which you wash

your hands(Chrisman and Charlow 2016 :3-5)

The category of deontic modality includes the following

subcategories:
 i) Commissure Modality : in such type of deontic modality

, the speaker's commitment to do something just like

promise or threat so as to bring about the proposition

expressed by the utterance. This is to say that

commissure modality used when the speaker commits

himself to an action. The category of commissure

modality is also defined as "where we commit ourselves

to do thins "and exemplified by the English shall.

9. You shall have it tomorrow . (Palmer :2001:10)

ii) Directive Modality: directive means getting things does.

According to that deontic modality is directive in that the

event is controlled by circumstances external to the

subject of the sentence (more strictly the person or

persons identified by the subject).

Respectively ,permission is given with "may" and an

obligation is laid with must (Ibid :7).

Accordingly , directive modality is a deontic modality

that connotes the speakers degree of requirement of

conformity to the proposition expressed by an utterance

e.g.

10. You may go at four o'clock .

11. You can go at four o'clock .
12. Shall I wait here.
13. You must do as I say .
14. She has to leave .
15. You may have another cookie .
iii) Volitive Modality: It is a linguistic modality that

indicates the desires , wishes or fears of the speaks. It

classified as a subcategory of deontic modality . Volitive

moods are a category of grammatical mood that is used to

express volitive modality for instance , optative

derivative and impercative moods, e.g.

16. May he live forever !

Volitive modality does not show a specific preference

for enertine predation nor for statine predicates , e.g.

17. Accidents may happen here (Barbiers,Beukema and Wurff 1984:112)

2.3 Epistemic Modality :

Epistemic Modality can be defined as a sub-type of linguistic

modality that deals with a speakers evaluation / judgment of ,

degree of confidence in ,or belief of the knowledge upon which a

proposition is based. This is to say that epistemic modality refers

to the way speakers communicate their doubts , certainties and

guesses – their "modes of knowing ".

Respectively epistemic modality can be defined as an

evaluation of the chances that a certain hypothetical state of

affairs under consideration will occur , is occurring or has

occurred in a possible world which serves as the universe of

interpretation for the evaluation of process. In other words ,

epistemic modality concerns an estimation of the likelihood that

(some aspect of ) a certain state of affairs is / has been / will be

true (false) in the context of the possible world under

consideration .

This estimation likelihood is situated on a scale going from

certainty that the state of affairs applies , by a neutral or agnostic

stance towards its occurrence to certainty that it does not apply

,with intermediary positions on the positive and the negative

sides of the scale (Nuyts,2001:21-22)

 Denson and Hogg (2008:143) state that epistemic modality is

concerned with the truth of the proposition ,expressing a speakers

belief or opinion concerning a situation .

This is to say that when a model verb is used to express the

speaker's opinion about a statement , then this is epistemic

modality :

A. It might be true .(www.usingenglish.com)

B. I'm sure they'll come.

C. Maybe they'll come.

The example(B) conveys the speaker's confidence in the

proposition "they will come ". but example (C) conveys the

speakear's doubt, but in both cases the speaker chooses to mitigate

the force of the proposition (palmer, krug and

facchinetti,2003:331).

There seem to be few languages that have a system with all

three markers but English is on exception using the three modals

verbs may , must and will:

i. John may be in his office .

ii. John must be in his office.

 iii. John will be in his office.

The first indicates the speaker's uncertain whether John is in his

office or not. with the second the speaker maces a firm judgment

on the bases of evidence e.g that the office lights there are on ,that

he's at home ,etc.

With the third , the judgment is based on what is generally

known about John ,e.g that he always starts at 8 o'clock ,he's a

workaholic(palmer, 2001:25)

Conclusions

Modals are always finite verbs. Modals can only be

operators from the syntactic point of view. No in flection in the

third person singular , no (- ing form , no(-ed) participle. No

concord with the subject o no subject verb arrangement. There

is no appropriate time reference . The "Do" auxiliary verb

cannot occur with other auxiliary verbs. There is no sequence

of models .three basic semantic dimensions of modality :

dynamic , deontic and epistemic .Dynamic modality indicates a

subject's internal capabilities or willingness as opposed to

external factors . Demonic modality is considered as a

phenomenon that encompasses normative concepts and thought

. epistemic Modality deals with a speaker's evaluation ,

judgment of degree of confidence in or belief of the knowledge

upon which apropos ion is based .

Bibliography

Charlow , N. and Matthew C.( 2016). Deontic modality .

Oxford : Oxfprd V press.

Facchinetti , R. and Manfred G. (2003) . Modality in

contemporary English , Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter .

Funtaine , L. (2013) Analysing English grammar asystemic

functional introduction . Cambridge : Cambridge V press .

Frawley , W. , Erin E. , Sara M. , and Thao N.(2016). The

experession of modality : Berlin :mouton De Gruyter.

Hogg R. , and David D. (2008). Ahistory of the English

language. Cambridge : Cambridge V press.

Huddleston , Rodney D. and Geoffrey K. Pullum .(2005) A

student's introduction to English grammar , camtridge , UK:

Cambridge V press.

Nuyts , J , and Johan V, Anwer, (2016) , The oxford hand

book of modality and mood . Oxford : Oxford V press .

Nuyts, Jan , (2001).Epistemic modality. language, and

conceptualization : acognitive-pragmatic perspective.

Amsterdam : J.Benjamins .

Palmer , F. Robert .(2001) Mood and Modality . Cambridge :

Cambridge V press.

Radden , G. , and R. Dirven .(1984). cognitive English

grammar . Amsterdam : John Benjamins .

Sabir , Paiman Hama salih.(2016) . Syntactic and semantic

mastery of English auxiliaries by Kurd Leavers at collage

level. Lanham , MD : V press of America .

Salkie , R. , P. Bussuttil , and J. Van Der Auwera .(2009) .

Madality in English : theory and description . Berlin : Monton

de Grugter.

V
 Bibliography

Charlow , nate, and Matthew chrisman . Deontic modality oxford:

oxford V press , 2016. Print.

Facchinetti , Roberta , Manfred G.krug , and F.R.Plama.Modality

in contemporary English , Berlin : Mouton De Gruyter , 2003 .

print.

Fontaine , lise . Analysing English grammar asystemic functional

introduction . Cambridge : Cambridge V press , 2013. Print.

Frawley , William , erin Eschenroder , Sara Miills, and thao

Nauyen. The experession of modality . Berlin :mouton de Gruyter

, 2006 . print.
Hogg , Richard , and David Denison . Ahistory of the English

language .Cambridge : Cambridge V press 2008 . print.

Nuyts , Jan , and Johan Vander Anwer , The oxford hand book of

modality and mood . oxford : oxford V press , 2016 print

Nuyts, Jan.Epistemic modality . language , and conceptualization

: acognitive-pragmatic perspective. Amsterdam : J.Benjamins ,

2001. Print.

Palmer , Frank Robert , Mood and Modality .

Cambridge : Cambridge V press , 2001. Print .

Radden , Gunter , and Rene Dirven . cognitive English grammar .

Amsterdam : John Benjamins , 1984. Print.

Sabir , Paiman Hama salih . Syntactic and semantic mastery of

English auxiliaries by Kurd Leavers at collage level. Lanham ,

MD : Vpress of America, 2016. Print.

Salkie , Raphael , Pierre Bussuttil , and Johan Van Der Auwera .

Madality in English : theory and description .Berlin : Monton de

Grugter , 2009 . print.

Huddleston , Rodney D. and Geoffrey K. Pullum .

A student's introduction to English grammar , camtridge ,

UK:Cambridge V press , 2005 , print .