On Modality in English
1
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This paper argues that modality should be recognized as an independent grammatical category, since it behaves separately from proposition in terms of time and negation. Modality in English is typically expressed by modal verbs, and they are divided into epistemic, deontic, and dynamic in the spirit of Palmer (1986, 1987). These three types of modals exhibit different behaviors in terms of time and negation. First, with epistemic modals only the proposition is marked for time, but either the modality or the proposition is marked for negation. Second, with deontic modals time cannot be marked either on the modality or on the proposition due to their performative disposition. For negation, only the modality is normally negated for possibility, but the proposition is negated for necessity. Finally, with dynamic modals only the modality is marked for time and negation in a straightforward manner. This complicated system of time and negation in English modals leads Korean EFL learners to commit a host of errors in their interpretation, and they should be taught modality and proposition separately in terms of time and negation.
Abstract
This paper argues that modality should be recognized as an independent grammatical category, since it behaves separately from proposition in terms of time and negation. Modality in English is typically expressed by modal verbs, and they are divided into epistemic, deontic, and dynamic in the spirit of Palmer (1986, 1987). These three types of modals exhibit different behaviors in terms of time and negation. First, with epistemic modals only the proposition is marked for time, but either the modality or the proposition is marked for negation. Second, with deontic modals time cannot be marked either on the modality or on the proposition due to their performative disposition. For negation, only the modality is normally negated for possibility, but the proposition is negated for necessity. Finally, with dynamic modals only the modality is marked for time and negation in a straightforward manner. This complicated system of time and negation in English modals leads Korean EFL learners to commit a host of errors in their interpretation, and they should be taught modality and proposition separately in terms of time and negation.
참고문헌 (17)
- Chomsky,N, "Aspects of the Theory of Syntax" (1965), The MIT Press
- Comrie,B, "Aspects" (1976), Cambridge University
- Depraetere, I, "Mood and modality in English, In The Handbook of English Linguistics", pp.269~290 (2006), Blackwell Publishing Ltd
- Firth,J.R, "Selected Papers of J. R. Firth 1952-59" (1968), Longman
- Huddleston,R, "Some theoretical issues in the description of the English verb", Lingua, 40, pp.331~383 (1976)
- Huddleston, R., "Cambridge Grammar of the English Language" (2002), Cambridge University Press
- Jacobs, R, "English Transformation Grammar" (1970), Ginn and Co
- Jespersen,O, "The Philosophy of Grammar" (1924), Allen and Unwin
- Lester,M, "Introductory Transformational Grammar of English" (1976), Holt, Reinhart, and Winston
- Lyons,J, "Semantics" (1977), Cambridge University Press
- Nehls,J, "Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics" (1968), Cambridge University Press
- Palmer,F.R, "Mood and Modality" (1986), Cambridge University Press
- Palmer,F.R, "The English Verb" (1987), Longman
- Quirk, R., "A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language" (1985), Longman
- Quirk, R, "A University Grammar of English" (2000), Longman
- Rescher,N, "Topics in Philosophical Logic" (1968), Reidel
- Tomori,S.H, "The Morphology and Syntax of Present-Day English: An Introduction" (1977), Heinemann