scholarly journals Epistemic modals in early Modern English history texts. Analysis of gender variation

2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 13
Author(s):  
Francisco J. Álvarez Gil
Keyword(s):  
Epistemic Modals ◽  
Epistemic Modality ◽  
Negotiation Of Meaning ◽  
English History ◽  
Scientific Texts ◽  
Modal Verbs ◽  
Historical Texts ◽  
Female Authors ◽  
History Texts ◽  
Late Modern

<p>In the present study, samples of late Modern English scientific texts have been analysed to evaluate cases of epistemic modality as realised by modal verbs. The aim of this research was to detect if there exist variances in the way modals are used in historical texts from a gender perspective. For this, I have interrogated the Corpus History English Texts (1700-1900) which is part of The Coruña Corpus of English Scientific Texts, which contains history texts written by male and female authors. I have used the Coruña Corpus Tool for retrieval, although manual analyses have been carried out as well. Each of the occurrences found have been categorised according to their contextual meanings. The results obtained account for a high frequency on the usage of these modal verbs according to gender and the diverse pragmatic functions these modal verbs accomplish in the communicative process, such as mitigation and negative politeness. From a pragmatic perspective, epistemic modals have the potential to allow negotiation of meaning between writers and their audience among other functions.</p>

scholarly journals An analysis of certainly and generally in Late-Modern English English history texts

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 179-195
Author(s):  
Francisco J. Álvarez-Gil
Keyword(s):  
English History ◽  
Manual Inspection ◽  
History Texts ◽  
Late Modern ◽  
Corpus Tools

Abstract This paper analyses the adverbs certainly and generally as stancetaking markers. These adverbial devices are said to show authorial stance and to communicate the author’s commitment or detachment towards the information presented, and so they are classified as epistemic adverbs (Alonso-Almeida 2015). For this study, I have selected a corpus of history texts from the Modern English period (1700-1900), as compiled in The Corpus of History English Texts (Crespo and Moskowich 2015), on the basis of which the two evidential adverbs are examined using computer corpus tools, although manual inspection is also employed to assess the meaning of the items in context. The findings suggest that, in this type of scientific articles, the two adverbs are used with differing pragmatic functions, in the case of certainly it functions mostly as a booster and, in the specific case of generally, its use seems to primarily suggest a hedging purpose (Hyland 2005a).

On modal grounding, reference points, and subjectification

2005 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 56-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bert Cornillie
Keyword(s):  
Reference Point ◽  
Epistemic Modals ◽  
Reference Points ◽  
Epistemic Modality ◽  
Point Function ◽  
Theoretical Underpinning ◽  
Modal Verbs ◽  
Epistemic Modal ◽  
Modal Auxiliaries ◽  
Definition Of

In this paper it is argued that Langacker’s definition of grounding predications is problematic for languages other than English. The idea that in English tense and modal auxiliaries are mutually exclusive grounding elements leads Langacker (1990, 2003) to consider both deontic and epistemic modal auxiliaries as grounding predications, whereas he excludes German modals from being so on the basis of their tense inflection. In this paper I contend that, unlike the deontic modal verbs, and despite their tense marking, Spanish epistemic modals deber ‘must’, poder ‘may’ and tener que ‘have to’ are certainly appropriate for modal grounding due to their reference point function and to the subjectification they undergo. I show that deontic modality is more affected by temporal grounding than epistemic modality. Moreover, the impossibility of inserting an inchoative verb such as ir a ‘to be going to’ corroborates the theoretical underpinning that Spanish epistemic modals effect an epistemic grounding similar to that of the grounding predications in English.

scholarly journals An Analysis of Certainly and Generally in Late-Modern English English History Texts

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 179-195
Author(s):  
Francisco J. Álvarez-Gil
Keyword(s):  
English History ◽  
Manual Inspection ◽  
History Texts ◽  
Late Modern ◽  
Corpus Tools

This paper analyses the adverbs certainly and generally as stancetaking markers. These adverbial devices are said to show authorial stance and to communicate the author’s commitment or detachment towards the information presented, and so they are classified as epistemic adverbs (Alonso-Almeida 2015). For this study, I have selected a corpus of history texts from the Modern English period (1700-1900), as compiled in The Corpus of History English Texts (Crespo and Moskowich 2015), on the basis of which the two evidential adverbs are examined using computer corpus tools, although manual inspection is also employed to assess the meaning of the items in context. The findings suggest that, in this type of scientific articles, the two adverbs are used with differing pragmatic functions, in the case of certainly it functions mostly as a booster and, in the specific case of generally, its use seems to primarily suggest a hedging purpose (Hyland 2005a).

What the Future ‘Might’ Brings

Mind ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 129 (515) ◽  
pp. 809-829
Author(s):  
David Boylan
Keyword(s):  
Information Loss ◽  
Epistemic Modals ◽  
Epistemic Modality ◽  
States Of Mind ◽  
Future Tense ◽  
The Future ◽  
Tight Connection

Abstract This paper concerns a puzzle about the interaction of epistemic modals and future tense. In cases of predictable forgetfulness, speakers cannot describe their future states of mind with epistemic modals under future tense, but promising theories of epistemic modals do not predict this. In §1, I outline the puzzle. In §2, I argue that it undermines a very general approach to epistemic modals that draws a tight connection between epistemic modality and evidence. In §3, I defend the assumption that tense can indeed scope over epistemic modals. In §4, I outline a new way of determining the domain of quantification of epistemic modals: epistemic modals quantify over the worlds compatible with the information accumulated within a certain interval. Information loss can change which interval is relevant for determining the domain. In §5, I defend the view from some objections. In §6, I explore the connections between my view of epistemic modality and circumstantial modality.

Children's epistemic inferences through modal verbs and prosody

2020 ◽  
Vol 47 (6) ◽  
pp. 1132-1169
Author(s):  
Meghan ARMSTRONG
Keyword(s):  
Young Children ◽  
Qualitative Analysis ◽  
Choice Task ◽  
Epistemic Modality ◽  
Metalinguistic Awareness ◽  
Modal Verbs ◽  
Epistemic Modal ◽  
Negative Valence ◽  
Forced Choice Task ◽  
Positive And Negative Valence

AbstractThis study explores how young children infer nuances in epistemic modality through prosody. A forced-choice task was used, testing children's (ages three to seven) comprehension of the might/will distinction (modal condition) as well their ability to modulate the strength of might through two prosodic tunes (prosody condition). Positive and negative valence conditions were included. Younger children were shown to start off performing above chance for the modal condition, and at around chance for the prosody condition, but after age four performance on the prosody condition quickly improved. For both modal verbs and prosody, children performed significantly better when valence was positive. By age seven, children performed at ceiling for all conditions. Qualitative analysis of children's justifications for prosody responses showed metalinguistic awareness of prosodic meaning as early as age four, with the ability to relate prosody to epistemic modal meaning becoming quite common by age seven.

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 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.  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document