CAN과 MAY의 양상성에 대한 문제들
Issues on the Modality of Can and May
1
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
In English sentences, the subtle semantic differences that the sentences used modal auxiliaries connote are not easy to distinguish. This is likely to be true when the participants of conversation imply the speaker’s attitude as a pragmatic concept for a proposition in context. Of modal auxiliaries, it is obvious that can and may have similar meanings, but they have been separately treated in grammar. Though can and may are treated to be discrete modal auxiliaries, diverse articles remark that the overlapping phenomena of them appear in meaning. It may be due to the fact that there is no relationship theory established until now. I think that the semantic relationship between can and may is not only a partially matched sharing but also a theoretical possibility. To discuss these issues, I will scrutinize the overlapping phenomena and the inclusion relationships of can and may through the concept of ‘the possible world’. On the view that can has broader scopes than may as a modal expression, I will prove and explain the modality of can and may, respectively.
Abstract
In English sentences, the subtle semantic differences that the sentences used modal auxiliaries connote are not easy to distinguish. This is likely to be true when the participants of conversation imply the speaker’s attitude as a pragmatic concept for a proposition in context. Of modal auxiliaries, it is obvious that can and may have similar meanings, but they have been separately treated in grammar. Though can and may are treated to be discrete modal auxiliaries, diverse articles remark that the overlapping phenomena of them appear in meaning. It may be due to the fact that there is no relationship theory established until now. I think that the semantic relationship between can and may is not only a partially matched sharing but also a theoretical possibility. To discuss these issues, I will scrutinize the overlapping phenomena and the inclusion relationships of can and may through the concept of ‘the possible world’. On the view that can has broader scopes than may as a modal expression, I will prove and explain the modality of can and may, respectively.
참고문헌 (19)
- Coates, Jennifer, "The Semantics of the Modal Auxiliaris" (1983), Croom Helm
- Greenbaum, Sidney, "The Oxford English Grammar" (1996), Oxford University Press
- Huddleston, Rodney and Pullum Geoffrey Keith, "The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language" (2002), Cambridge University Press
- Kratzer, Angelika, "What ‘Must’ and ‘Can’ Must and Can Mean", Linguistics and Philosophy (1977)
- Kratzer, Angelika, "The Notional Category of Modality" (1981), De Gruyter
- Lee, Ik-hwan, "modern semantics" (1989), minumsa
- Lee, Hong-Bae, "Standard Practical English Grammar" (2008), Hankook Munwhasa
- Lee, Hong-Bae, "A Dictionary of Modern English Useage" (2018), Hankook Munwhasa
- Palmer, Frank Robert, "The English Verb" (1974), Longman
- Palmer, Frank Robert, "Modality and the English Modals" (1979), Longman
- Park, Kee-Tae, "Meanings on Modal Expressions in Conversational Information", Language Information Research Institute, linguistics essay, (7), pp.171~186 (1996)
- Sweetser, Eve, "Form Etymology to Pragmatics" (1988), Cambridge University Press
- Talmy, Leonard, "The Force Dynamics", Paper Presented at a Conference on Language and Mental Imagery (1981)
- Talmy, Leonard, "Force Dynamics in Language and Cognition" (1988), John Wiley & Sons
- Von, Wright, "Logical Studies" (1957), Routledge
- White, Alan Richard, "Modal Thinking" (1975), Cornell University Press
- "Longman Exams Dictionary" (2007), Person Education Ltd
- "The New Oxford American Dictionary" (2001), Oxford University Press
- "The Firefly Visual Dictionary" (2002), Firefly Books Inc