scholarly journals EPISTEMIC MODALITY AND DEONTIC MODALITY: TWO SIDES OF A COIN

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jumino Suhadi
Keyword(s):  
Epistemic Modality ◽  
Degree Of Confidence ◽  
Deontic Modality ◽  
Two Sides

Epistemic modality refers to the use of modality which is based on the speaker's evaluation and judgment in relation to the degree of confidence of the knowledge on the proposition. It functions to comment on and evaluate an interpretation of reality in carrying out speech functions. Deontic modality indicates whether the proposition expressed by a command is obligatory, advisable or permissible according to some normative background such as law, morality, convention, etc. In many instances, the meanings of both types of modality are relative and complements to each other. The evidence of some extrinsic modalities such as must, should, may, and can indicates that they may fall under both types; thus, they are like two sides of a coin which carry its value from the meaning conveyed by each side.

Morphological variability at the morphosyntactic/semantic interface

2014 ◽  
Vol 165 (1) ◽  
pp. 46-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurie A. Massery ◽  
Claudio Fuentes
Keyword(s):  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Morphological Variability ◽  
Epistemic Modality ◽  
Target Language ◽  
Modal Interpretation ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Advanced Stages ◽  
Deontic Modality ◽  
Discourse Interface ◽  
Pragmatic Knowledge

Recent literature in second language acquisition shows that syntax-driven structures give way to successful modal interpretation and morphological production, while discourse-dependent environments do not (Sorace, 2005; Tsimpli & Sorace, 2006, Borganovo, Bruhn de Garavito, & Prévost, 2008; Iverson, Kempchinsky, & Rothman, 2008). It has also been suggested that discourse-dependent environments involve both structural and pragmatic knowledge of L2, which intersect at the syntax-discourse interface (Sorace, 2005; Iverson, Kempchinsky, & Rothman, 2008), thereby requiring a multi-layered understanding of the target language. The present study contributes to this line of research by further examining morphological variability (Prévost & White, 2000; Sorace, 2000; Sorace, 2005; Iverson, Kempchinsky, & Rothman, 2008; Slabakova, 2009) in L2 acquisition at the morphosyntactic-semantic interface, following the work of Borganovo, Bruhn de Garavito, & Prévost (2008). The results of our study reveal that learners, even at advanced stages of acquisition, perform poorly in epistemic environments where syntax and discourse intersect. In such environments, there appears to be an interaction with pragmatics (cf. Iverson, Kempchinsky, & Rothman, 2008) that causes learners to opt for the indicative mood, even when the subjunctive is prescriptively required. Unlike deontic modality, which is essentially syntax-driven, epistemic modality requires structural knowledge, as well as knowledge from other domains (Sorace, 2005). Our study reveals that learners at all levels of instruction performed better in “purely syntactic” environments of deontic modality than in pragmatically challenging epistemic environments.

scholarly journals (Non)epistemic modality: English must, have to and have got to and their correspondences in Lithuanian

Kalbotyra ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 69 (69) ◽  
pp. 223
Author(s):  
Audronė Šolienė
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Methods ◽  
Epistemic Modality ◽  
The Other ◽  
Modal Verbs ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Deontic Modality ◽  
Quantitative And Qualitative Methods

This paper deals with the three types of modality – epistemic, deontic and dynamic. It examines the relation between the synchronic uses of the modal auxiliary must and the semi-modals have to and have got to as well as their Lithuanian translation correspondences (TCs) found in a bidirectional translation corpus. The study exploits quantitative and qualitative methods of research. The purpose is to find out which type of modality is most common in the use of must, have to and have got to; to establish their equivalents in Lithuanian in terms of congruent or non-congruent correspondence (Johansson 2007); and to determine how Lithuanian TCs (verbs or adverbials) correlate with different types of modality expressed. The analysis has shown that must is mostly used to convey epistemic nuances, while have to and have got to feature in non-epistemic environments. The findings show that must can boast of a great diversity of TCs. Some of them may serve as epistemic markers; others appear in deontic domains only. Have (got) to, on the other hand, is usually rendered by the modal verbs reikėti ‘need’ and turėti ‘must/have to’, which usually encode deontic modality.

scholarly journals Investigating the Semantic Development of Modal Markers: The Role of Context

Clotho ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 35-53
Author(s):  
Tomaž Potočnik ◽  
Matej Hriberšek
Keyword(s):  
Language Change ◽  
Epistemic Modality ◽  
Semantic Change ◽  
Semantic Development ◽  
Modal Verb ◽  
Deontic Modality ◽  
Do So

The article tackles the problem of studying diachronic semantic changes of modal markers in Latin. It proposes to do so by using context as a proxy for tracing the development of otherwise unchanging forms. In the first part, the main theoretical positions in modality studies are presented, especially the notions of deontic modality, epistemic modality, and pathways of modality. In the second part, Heine’s model for studying the role of context in language change is presented and applied to the modal verb licet. In the case study of licet, an attempt is made to identify the so-called switch context which co-creates the conditions necessary for the semantic change.

scholarly journals The Difference Between Modal Verbs in Deontic and Epistemic Modality

Humaniora ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 532 ◽  
Author(s):  
Menik Winiharti
Keyword(s):  
Language Teachers ◽  
Epistemic Modality ◽  
Modal Verbs ◽  
Clear Cut ◽  
Modal Verb ◽  
Deontic Modality ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Single Proposition

Modality is always interesting to discuss. Understanding it is crucial for both language teachers and learners. This essay discusses the concept of modality, its types and uses. It has a goal to find the difference between deontic and epistemic modality that is indicated by their modal verbs. It also provides the readers a better understanding of modality, particularly of its types and uses. The result of the analysis shows that in general, deontic modality indicates obligation and permission, while epistemic modality expresses possibility and prediction. However, the difference between deontic and epistemic modality is not a clear cut, since one single modal verb can express both types, and one single proposition can be expressed by more than one modal verb.  

scholarly journals Intersubjective strategies in deontic modality: evidential functions of Spanish deber ‘must’

Kalbotyra ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 69 (69) ◽  
pp. 246 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miriam Thegel
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Epistemic Modality ◽  
Special Focus ◽  
Modal Verb ◽  
Shared Information ◽  
Deontic Modality ◽  
New Perspective ◽  
Qualitative Analyses

The principal aim of this study is to examine the Spanish modal verb deber ‘must’ in its deontic readings, relating it to the notions of evidentiality and intersubjectivity. Deber has often been compared to the modal verb tener que ‘have to’ and described in rather vague terms, for example as an expression of weak, internal obligation, but this paper proposes that it is better understood as an intersubjective verb. Both quantitative and qualitative analyses have been carried out, with a special focus on the in-depth qualitative study. It will be shown that deontic deber can convey evidential meanings when used in the conditional form. First, it can refer to a norm shared between the speaker and the hearer, and, second, it can convey an inferential process, a conclusion presented by the speaker, which is based on shared information, available to a larger group (or all) of the interlocutors. Evidentiality is regarded here as an intersubjective strategy, used when the speaker wants to reach consensus, arguing for the most reasonable, morally defensible way to act. Thus, this study also offers a new perspective of evidentiality, looking at this notion in interaction with deontic modality instead of epistemic modality, which is usually the case.

Sentential complements

2020 ◽  
pp. 651-676
Author(s):  
Gerjan van Schaaik
Keyword(s):  
Epistemic Modality ◽  
The Third ◽  
Existential Constructions ◽  
Transitive Verbs ◽  
Deontic Modality

Not only transitive verbs can take a sentential complement. The lexical category of adjectives contains a limited number of items that can take a sentential complement. Also certain nouns, such as kinship terms, make sense only with some other notion in the background, and there are two ways in which this is expressed: by a genitive-possessive construction or by a nominal compound with a sentential complement. The third section shows that adjectives, nouns, and adverbs expressing an epistemic modality take their sentential complements in a similar way. An alternative is found in existential constructions with an infinitival complement in the dative. This pattern is common to predicates expressing a deontic modality as well. Postpositional sentential complements are treated in the final sections.

Italian children's understanding of the epistemic and deontic modal verbs dovere (must) and potere (may)

2002 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
ELISABETTA BASCELLI ◽  
MARIA SILVIA BARBIERI
Keyword(s):  
Epistemic Modality ◽  
The Other ◽  
Dual Function ◽  
Full Understanding ◽  
Modal Verbs ◽  
Epistemic Modal ◽  
Single Sentence ◽  
Modal Verb ◽  
Deontic Modality

This study assesses children's understanding of the Italian modal verbs dovere (must) and potere (may) in their dual function of qualification of the speaker's beliefs (epistemic modality) and behaviour regulation (deontic modality). 192 children and 60 adults participated in the experiment. Children aged 3;0 to 9;2 were presented with two tasks: one assessed their understanding of modal expressions in the epistemic domain – looking for an object by following the information contained in a sentence; the other assessed their understanding of modal expressions in the deontic domain – acting according to obligations, permissions and prohibitions in the context of a game. Half of the subjects carried out the tasks in a single-sentence format and half carried out the tasks in a double-sentence format. In the single-sentence format the subjects had to follow the directions supplied by a modalized sentence; in the double-sentence format they had to follow the directions supplied by the sentence containing the stronger modal verb. Our results show that the understanding of deontic modal forms precedes the understanding of epistemic modal forms and that a full understanding of the strength of different modal forms is achieved only at eight years.

scholarly journals A Semantic Approach to the English Modality

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 879
Author(s):  
Jinghua Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Epistemic Modality ◽  
Basic Knowledge ◽  
Semantic Concept ◽  
Semantic Approach ◽  
Modal Verbs ◽  
Grammatical Categories ◽  
The World ◽  
Important Means ◽  
Deontic Modality

Modality is a semantic concept dealing with necessity and possibility of the knowledge of the world. It is basically divided into two types, viz. epistemic modality and deontic modality. Various grammatical categories are possibly used to show modality. However, modal verbs are one of the most important means related to the modality. Modal verbs are flexible in showing modality. This article discusses basic knowledge of modality including definition, classification (epistemic and deontic) and relationship between modality and modal verbs etc.

Metonymy and Metaphor in the Evolution of Modal Verbs

2000 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
Delia Bentley
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Epistemic Modality ◽  
The Other ◽  
A Posteriori ◽  
Modal Verbs ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Semantic Development ◽  
Deontic Modality

Abstract. The semantic development of the Italo-Romance outcomes of habeo (plus particle) and infinitive does not involve any dramatic changes. The earliest attestations of Sardinian áere a already express prototypical futurity (alongside deontic modality). On the other hand, a number of minimal changes are observed in other varieties. Sicilian aviri a comes to denote subjective epistemic modality and a few postmodal meanings, whilst the periphrasis with da has only extended to epistemic contexts in modern Tuscan. The evolution of the Sicilian structure involves the obliteration of prominent aspects of meaning (metonymy), whereas the development of Tuscan avere da is characterized by a change of domain (metaphor). Metonymy and metaphor, however, might be side-effects of independently motivated changes, which are observed a posteriori. The diachronic findings presented in this work combine easily with the view of unidirectionality proposed by van der Auwera and Plungian (1998).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document