Modal Verbs and Modality in Literary and Non-Literary Texts [1 ed.] 1527594130, 9781527594135

Citation preview

Modal Verbs and Modality in Literary and Non-Literary Texts

Modal Verbs and Modality in Literary and Non-Literary Texts Edited by

Monika Skorasiŷska

Modal Verbs and Modality in Literary and Non-Literary Texts Edited by Monika Skorasiŷska This book first published 2023 Cambridge Scholars Publishing Lady Stephenson Library, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2PA, UK British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Copyright © 2023 by Monika Skorasiŷska and contributors All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. ISBN (10): 1-5275-9413-0 ISBN (13): 978-1-5275-9413-5

CONTENTS Preface ....................................................................................................... vii Modality in selected speeches of Winston Churchill .................................. 1 Bartosz %DWDOLĔVNL Would in academic research article. Abstracts across three disciplines..... 29 2OHNVDQGU Kapranov Modality of can in the comedies of William 6KDNHVSHDUH ....................... 59 0RQLND 6NRUDVLĔVND Modality in The House at Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne.......... 71 Anna :DONRZVND The use of the modal verb can in the language of computer science ..... 125 0DULND =DJyUVND Modal verbs can and could in Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland by /HZLV Caroll ...................................................................................... 145 1LNROD =DJyUVND

PREFACE

This volume is a collection of papers presenting a range of research on modality in the English language. It aims to VKRZ that this concept, although extensively studied, is still undervalued in terms of its versatile and ubiquitous presence and its functions in all types of genre, from Elizabethan plays and children’s literature, to speeches, academic and functional texts. The collected studies present the outcomes of research on modality in various research materials and ZLWK various research objects in focus. Bartosz %DWDOLĔVNL discusses the modality of the modal verb must in the speeches of Winston Churchill. 2OHNVDQGU Kapranov investigates the frequency and use of the modal verb would in research article abstracts in three disciplines, that is in applied linguistics, applied psycholinguistics, and in English literature. The modality of the modal verb can from a historical perspective, as employed in the comedies of William 6KDNHVSHDUH, is explored by 0RQLND 6NRUDVLĔVND The study of Anna :DONRZVND involves the analysis of WZR modal verbs can and must in The House at Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne. Observations on the modality of can and could in the nineteenth-century British children’s literature are presented by 1LNROD =DJyUVND ZKRVH research material covers Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland by /HZLV Caroll. Modality in IT literature is in the centre of interest of 0DULND =DJyUVND ZKR ORRNV into the modal verb can in a computer science guide Android UI Design by Francesco Azzola. The editor ZRXOG OLNH to express her gratitude to the contributors to this volume for their patience, involvement, and support in carrying out this project. —0RQLND 6NRUDVLĔVND

MODALITY IN SELECTED SPEECHES OF WINSTON CHURCHILL BARTOSZ BATALIēSKI*

Abstract The subject of the chapter is the analysis of modality in selected speeches by Sir Winston Churchill from different periods of his oratory career. The choice of the research material is due to the niche in research on modality in political speeches. The subject of the analysis is the modal verb must. The choice of this verb is mainly due to the period from which the speeches come, i.e. the time of war, which certainly required leaders to be firm in deeds and words. The first part focuses on presenting the theoretical issues of modal verbs and modality based on various authors specializing in these issues. The main source of knowledge to conduct the research is the work of Palmer (2013). In the second part, the verb must is analyzed in terms of the type of modality in which it occurs in the research material, its collocations with various personal pronouns, occurrence in active and passive voice, the number of occurrences in negative and affirmative sentences, and in different tenses. The main purpose of the study is to examine whether the type of modality expressed by the modal verb must depends on the addressee, and, secondly, to examine whether there is a relationship between personal pronouns and the modality expressed by this verb.

* Bartosz BataliĔski MA is a graduate of BA studies at the University of Szczecin, Poland, and of MA studies at the Adam Mickiewicz University in PoznaĔ, Poland, in English Philology. His academic interests include linguistic modality and communication theory, which he researched in his diploma papers. Currently, he teaches English in several language schools and is a football coach. E-mail: [email protected].

2

Modality in selected speeches of Winston Churchill

Introduction Concepts of English linguistics are continually being reinterpreted by scholars who do not cease in attempts to explain them as coherently as possible. Despite these efforts, many concepts still lack a final form, and the debate on them preoccupies successive generations of linguists. Modality is one of such concepts. The confirmation of this standpoint is the fact that despite countless scientific publications and books devoted to this concept, it still divides linguists because of its vagueness. This fact, combined with a narrow spectrum of research on modality in political speeches, is the driving force behind this study. The object of the research is the modal verb must appearing in the collection of speeches by Winston Churchill, which constitute the research material. The choice of the former British Prime Minister’s speeches as the research material and the modal verb must is not accidental. Firstly, the research on modality in political discourse is a huge niche, which gives a lot of potential for surprising conclusions. Due to this, the speeches of Winston Churchill ௅ considered by many to be a representative of the pantheon of political orators ௅ seem to be a natural choice. Secondly, the modal verb must has a powerful meaning which perfectly matches the massive charisma of Churchill and the fact that most of the speeches were delivered during the Second World War, when only forceful words, such as must, were appropriate to conduct messages and ideas. The primary question thus is whether the use of the modal verb must in the speeches of Winston Churchill varies depending on the addressee of a given speech. It is assumed that when addressing different recipients, Churchill might have wanted to achieve different goals, which could have affected the modal meaning and the use of the verb in his utterances. The secondary question is whether the modal meaning of the verb must varies depending on the personal pronoun used as the subject of a sentence. Using various personal pronouns, Churchill might have been able to manipulate recipients efficiently, making them engage in the issue under discussion or approach it from a distance. This manipulation might have been also effected by means of modal meanings expressed in a given utterance. It is expected that in Winston Churchill’s statements there is a strong correlation between the addressee of the speeches and the kind of modality expressed, as well as between the personal pronouns used as the subject of a sentence and the kind of modality conveyed.

Bartosz Batalinski

3

The concept of modality Frank Robert Palmer is a well-known British linguist who has had a significant impact on the development of the field of linguistics through his publications and research concerning English modal verbs and modality. Thus his second edition of Modality and the English Modals (2013) has been taken as the theoretical background for the analysis of the research material. According to Palmer (2013, 11), modality belongs to one of the most difficult to precisely define aspects of English grammar, and only an indepth and comprehensive analysis of this concept gives hope for its clarification. Palmer (2013, 14) agrees with Lyons (1977, 452) in that the concept of modality expresses the opinion and attitude of the speaker. He also notes that modality is “one of a number of semantic-grammatical features” (Palmer 2013, 14). A modal meaning can only be attributed to those of the grammatical categories that express at least partially a central set of modal meanings (Palmer 2013, 15). One of these categories are modal verbs, the main group of which are: will, shall, may, can, must, and ought to (Palmer 2013, 15). Also, the verbs dare and need are linked to the main group of modals, but their meaning is more marginal (Palmer 2013, 15). Palmer (2013) also mentions verbs such as used to, which formally belongs to the modals but semantically is completely distinct, and have to, which, on the other hand, is very similar semantically, but does not belong to the central modal group. A turning point in the study of modality is the work of Lyons (1977), in which the author states that modal verbs can be subjective or objective regardless of the type of modality they represent. This statement attracted the attention of many linguists, such as Timotijevic (2009), who, in her work (Timotijevic 2009, as cited in Salkie, Busuttil, and Auwera 2009, 105) juxtaposes subjective and objective interpretations of modal verbs. An interesting standpoint regarding modality is also taken by Larreya (2009), who interprets modality “as a mental system – or sub-system – based on the mutually related concepts possibility and necessity” (Larreya 2009 as cited in Salkie, Busuttil, and Auwera 2009, 9). Quite clear, though still very general on the subject is also Mitchell (2009) saying that “modal utterances are speech acts in which the speaker decides what states of affairs are to obtain or occur, and the speaker expresses his conclusions about what might be true or not” (Mitchell 2009, as cited in Salkie, Busuttil, and Auwera 2009, 55). Following this lead, Berk’s (1999, 130) statement that modality embraces making wishes and hedging in its spectrum seems to be justified as well.

4

Modality in selected speeches of Winston Churchill

The range of ways to express modality is vast. However, it is not infinite, and the common denominator of the whole spectrum is linguistic devices called modalizers. According to Declerk (2011, 30௅35), in English, we can distinguish such modalizers as modal auxiliaries (e.g., can, must), modal adverbs (e.g., perhaps, possibly), intentional verbs (e.g. believe, suppose), attitudinal verbs (e.g., want, hope), the subjunctive mood, modal backshifting, etc. The division of modality into types and the attempt to group them is as complicated as the concept itself. As in the case of modality, the typology differs depending on the scholars and the criteria they adopt. Palmer (2013, 11) clearly states that the only way to achieve a satisfactory result is a detailed analysis of a broad spectrum of written and spoken texts. The degree of inconsistency of the issue perfectly reflects the approach of Papafragou (2000, 6), who, in attempts to classify modality, is searching for its regular features in different languages to make the division as consistent as possible. Nevertheless, she also states that “there are various constraints on the distribution of modal interpretations” (Papafragou 2000, 6) which may prevent scholars from reaching an agreement on this matter.

Classification of modality Palmer (2013) indicates epistemic modality as the easiest to identify because of its “internal regularity and completeness” (Palmer 2013, 54). He states that “the function of epistemic modals is to make judgments about the possibility, etc., that something is or is not the case. Epistemic modality is, that is to say, the modality of propositions, in the strict sense of the term, rather than of actions, states, events, etc.” (Palmer 2013, 54). He also claims that epistemic modals have subjective nature because they are based on the speaker’s experience and knowledge. Also, the important thing about epistemic modality is that it has a performative character because “the judgment and the act of speaking are simultaneous and so can only be present” (Palmer 2013, 54). According to Berk (1999), “epistemic modality encompasses all the ways in which speakers indicate their degree of commitment to the truth of a given proposition. It allows speakers to indicate that they are certain about something, unsure about it, or deem it impossible” (Berk 1999, 130). In her opinion, verbs can, could, should, will, may, might, must, ought to and occasionally would express epistemic meanings. She also explains that “epistemic modals express meanings that range from slight possibility to absolute certainty” (Berk, 1999, p. 133).

Bartosz Batalinski

5

Rocq-Migette (2009) demonstrates that epistemic modality can also be expressed by means of adjectives surprised or surprising. She states that “these predicates basically refer to a feeling, the reaction of a speaker to an event or situation, and so the modality they convey is attitudinal. But where if-clauses complement It would be surprising / I would be surprised, the interpretation is mostly epistemic" (Rocq-Migette 2009, as cited in Salkie, Busuttil, and Auwera 2009, 223). In turn, Larreya (2009) explains that epistemic meaning “consists in the attribution of a truth-value to a proposition (or to the situation that constitutes the referent of that proposition)” (Larreya 2009, as cited in Salkie, Busuttil, and Auwera 2009, 13௅14). He divides epistemic modality into implicative, where the truth-value is either ‘true’ or ‘false,’ and problematic, with intermediate or weak values such as ‘probable’ or ‘possible’ (Larreya 2009, as cited in Salkie, Busuttil, and Auwera 2009, 13௅14). Palmer (2013) takes the criterion of being performative as a starting point for defining deontic modal verbs and lists their main functions: giving (or refusing) permission, laying an obligation, or making a promise (Palmer (2013, 70). He also notes that deontic modality sometimes permeates dynamic modality, and the difference between the two types is that deontic modality is performative or discourse-oriented, whereas dynamic modality is not” (Palmer 2013, 70). According to Berk (1999), this type of modality “involves language and potential action; when speakers order, promise, or place an obligation on someone, they usually exploit linguistic forms that express deontic modality” (Berk 1999, 131). She lists directives, volition, and commitment as the main meanings expressed by deontic modality. “A directive is any utterance in which a speaker tries to get someone else to behave in a particular way” whereas “volition includes wanting, willingness, intention, and wishing” (Berk 1999, 131௅132). Although Berk’s (1999) vision of modality is different from Palmer’s (2013) vision, in the same way does she emphasize the substantial role of modal verbs, especially in the sense of directives. She argues that “modal auxiliaries are especially important in this regard; they can be used to order, insist, reprimand, lay an obligation, make a suggestion, and give permission” (Berk 1999, 134) According to Berk (1999), verbs expressing a deontic meaning include will, must, should, ought to, shall, might, could, can, and may. Mitchell (2009) states that “in deontic modality the speaker uses his volition, his authority or his reason to seek to bring about the occurrence (or non-occurrence) of potential situations (events, acts, processes, states, etc)” (Mitchell 2009, as cited in Salkie, Busuttil, and Auwera 2009, 55).

6

Modality in selected speeches of Winston Churchill

For him, deontic modality is expressed through the speaker’s decisions, and its function is “directive/conative” (Mitchell 2009, as cited in Salkie, Busuttil, and Auwera 2009, 59). A third type of modality distinguished by Palmer (2013, 41) is dynamic modality, which by many linguists is not considered a type of modality. According to Palmer (2013, 41) “dynamic modality is subjectoriented in the sense that it is concerned with the ability or volition of the subject of the sentence, rather than the opinions (epistemic) or attitudes (deontic) of the speaker (and addressee).” Palmer (2013, 42) states that arguably there is also “neutral or circumstantial” modality, but he treats it as a sub-class of dynamic modality with subject-oriented being the other. On the other hand, Portner (2009, 193) divides dynamic modality into two sub-modalities, namely volitional and quantificational. Volitional modality mainly expresses ability and opportunity, whereas quantificational modality is expressed by modals “incorporating the semantics of an adverb of quantification together with some sort of additional, more properly ‘modal’ meaning” (Portner 2009, 210) although the distinction between the two sub-modalities may be a problem due to the still relatively small knowledge of quantificational sub-modality.

English modal verbs English modal verbs constitute an important part of English grammar. Despite some disputes regarding their classification, they are distinct by a set of traits that separate them from other groups of verbs. These are socalled ‘NICE properties’ (Palmer 2013, 15). There are four traits behind this acronym that are common to this group of verbs. According to Palmer (2013, 16), they are in turn: negation with the suffix -n't, inversion with the subject, code, and emphatic affirmation. Hansen (2014) shares Palmer’s (2013) view and explains that modal verbs “allow negation contraction” and “inversion without do-periphrasis” (Hansen 2014, 93). Further, he explains that “code” stands for anaphorical contexts in which modal verbs allow the following verb phrase to be deleted, and that “emphatic affirmation” is used when the speaker wants to make the statement more firm (Hansen 2014, 93). Palmer (2013, 16) also indicates that apart from NICE properties, there are three further traits that make modal verbs a unique class of verbs. The first of these is the lack of the ending -s in the 3rd person singular so the forms musts and shalls are incorrect; the second trait is the lack of nonfinite forms; and the third ௅ the impossibility of co-occurrence.

Bartosz Batalinski

7

Modal verbs can be divided into those that meet all the criteria listed above and those that only meet them to a certain extent. These include will, shall, may, can, must, and ought to with a few deviations from the rules. Namely, may does not have -n't suffix in the present tense, must and ought to do not have past tense forms, and additionally ought to is the only one that needs to particle (Palmer 2013, 16). There is also a group of verbs that share a part of the characteristics assigned by Palmer (2013, 15) exclusively to modal verbs. This group includes dare and need, which conform to the first two NICE properties, that is negation and inversion. Then, when the verb be does not occur as an auxiliary verb, it possesses all the NICE properties. Another verb is is to which is closest to modal verbs because it meets all the criteria listed by Palmer (2013, 15) except for lacking the suffix -s in the third person singular. Had better also counts in this group of verbs because it meets all three additional traits given by Palmer (2013, 17), viz lack of the ending -s in the 3rd person singular, lack of non-finite forms, and the impossibility of co-occurrence. Interestingly, “it has been noted by a number of scholars that these characteristics of the modals are essentially formal features of English. They are not, for instance, to be found with the modals of German, which are otherwise very like those of English and historically related to them” (Palmer 2013, 17).

The modal verb must The modal verb must dates back to Old English. As some other modal verbs, it is a descendant of Old English verbs called preterite-present (Millward and Hayes 2011, 109), which are “so called because the original present had fallen into disuse and the original strong (ablaut) preterite had taken on present meaning. A new weak (dental) preterite then developed to replace the earlier one that was now a present” (Millward and Hayes 2011, 109). From the time of Old English to Present Day English, the verb must has undergone a transformation from the past to present tense form. It settled in the present tense to such an extent that it needs to appear with the perfect construction to gain the past reference. However, the verb must has a common feature with Old English verbs, which is the expression of the future. In Old English, all verbs “were inflected for only two tenses, present and preterite” (Millward and Hayes 2011, 110), and in order to refer to the future they were used with adverbs to avoid ambiguity in meaning. Although, as already mentioned, in some cases the verb must occurs in a progressive form to express the future, it is also used in its basic form with adverbs added to indicate the future tense.

8

Modality in selected speeches of Winston Churchill

The verb must occurs in all three modalities, most often expressing necessity. Yet, it can also be used to express prohibition, certainty, very strong recommendation, obligation, and logical conclusion. Because its use gives a very severe tone to an utterance, it is often replaced by the verb have to, which is more flexible concerning grammar and is not as strong in meaning as must. Moreover, have to tends to be more common in speech. The verb must in turn is very often used in an official context and written texts, especially in ordinances and regulations. In the negative, the verb must is often confused with the verb have to because must not expresses a strong prohibition from acting while do not have to expresses the lack of requirement to act. The modal verb must shows a variety of meanings, as Palmer (2013) proves in his work. The first possible interpretation of this verb that he indicates is epistemic necessity. In this meaning, it is paraphrased as “the only possible conclusion is that” (Palmer 2013, 54). In this modality, must refers mainly to states and activities in the present, but Palmer (2013) also states that it can be used to express a habitual activity, and emphasizes that “must seldom occurs with the future time reference because it would usually be open to dynamic interpretation” (Palmer 2013, 57). Nevertheless, he demonstrates that the future epistemic interpretation of the verb must is possible when the verb occurs in the progressive form. Another possible interpretation of this verb that Palmer (2013) offers is deontic necessity, stressing, however, that it has a deontic meaning only where “the speaker (or writer) clearly takes responsibility for the imposing of the necessity” (Palmer 2013, 73), otherwise the meaning of the utterance may be interpreted also as dynamic. The key meaning also has the fact that “deontic necessity usually implies that the speaker is in a position to lay the obligation, and is thus in a position of some authority” (Palmer 2013, 73). Therefore, a deontic meaning might be conveyed in a command given by both a boss to their employees and by a mother to her child due to the superior position of the commanding subjects. Palmer (2013, 73) also draws attention to the peculiar phenomenon of using the verb must in invitations. He claims that “it is, in fact, polite to be insistent in matters in which the person addressed is the beneficiary from the action” (Palmer 2013, 73), and that the usage of must in this context is not so odd from the perspective of a social convention. The last possible interpretation of this verb that Palmer (2013, 107) proposes is dynamic necessity. As already mentioned, must takes on a dynamic meaning if the subject does not take responsibility for imposing necessity or is not in a position enabling him to impose an obligation on

Bartosz Batalinski

9

another interlocutor or the audience. In such circumstances, must may be paraphrased as “it is necessary for…” with “little or no indication of the involvement of the speaker” (Palmer 2013, 107). Nevertheless, Palmer (2013) also notes that in this sense the verb must can be replaced by verbs have to and have got to with almost “complete overlap in the area of neutral necessity” (Palmer 2013, 109). To clarify, Palmer (2013) mentions features that differentiate these verbs from must. Firstly, “since must, like the other modals, has no non-finite forms, only have to can be used where a non-finite form is required, e.g., after another modal or similar form” (Palmer 2013, 109), and, secondly, “in the present tense, have to and have got to imply actuality, while must does not” (Palmer 2013, 109). These two arguments seem to be sufficient to treat those verbs as independent of each other. However, it is worth asking whether if have got to differs from must, is have to different in any way from have got to? Palmer (2013) explains that “have to is more formal; have got to belongs to a more colloquial style and generally appears only in the spoken texts” (Palmer 2013, 108), and that “have got to is much rarer in the past tense, and may differ in meaning from have to, in that only the latter usually implies actuality” (Palmer 2013, 108).

The research methodology The study is based on the analysis of the modal verb must in selected speeches by Sir Winston Churchill. The speeches constituting the research material have been selected in order to reflect a variety in terms of recipients and the time of delivery. This diversity creates greater potential for drawing reliable conclusions. The analysis consists of a few steps. The first step is to find all the occurrences of the verb must in the research material, which are distinguished using Microsoft Word’s search engine. Next, each token is investigated in terms of the type of modality, type of the sentence, tense, its collocation with different personal pronouns, and voice. The modal meaning of the verb is analyzed in accordance with the criteria adopted by Palmer (2013). These criteria include the circumstances of the speaker’s utterances, his position in relation to the recipients, the issue under discussion, and political events that could significantly influence the speaker’s intentions.

10

Modality in selected speeches of Winston Churchill

The power of speech Already in ancient times, people were aware of the power of words. First great orators, such as Aristotle or Cicero, enrolled in the pages of history with their extraordinary oratory abilities, which allowed them to have a measurable influence on the culture and politics of their time. To this day, the works of these geniuses regarding the art of oratory are widely quoted and respected by the majority of orators who know the profession. As a confirmation of these words, it is worth quoting one of the most exceptional speakers who walked on the Earth, Winston Churchill: “Of all the talents bestowed upon men, none is so precious as the gift of oratory. He who enjoys it wields a power more durable than that of a great king. He is an independent force in the world” (Churchill 1897, 1). What does it mean to make a public speech? According to Webster (2012), “every time you greet a friend or make a telephone call, give a short introduction to the paper you’re presenting in class or share with your teenage child some sage advice, you are making a speech” (Webster 2012, 2). Hence, it seems reasonable to conclude that public speaking is roughly a verbal message in the presence of at least two recipients. According to Webster (2012, 97), speeches can be divided into two categories. The first category is ‘Limited Preparation Speeches’ (Webster 2012, 97). The name of the group derives from the fact that in these speeches a speaker has limited time to prepare a speech, or does not have any at all. This category consists of ‘Impromptu’ and ‘Extemporaneous’ types of speeches (Webster 2012, 97). The former type requires the speaker to speak immediately on the topic without any preparation. Speaking under the canons of the latter type allows the speaker to conduct research and preparation, but forbids having any notes when speaking, so the speaker must be well prepared since they can rely only on their memory (Webster 2012, 97). The second category is ‘Unlimited Preparation Speeches’ which includes informative, convincing, and persuasive types of speeches (Webster 2012, 98௅104). The name of the category derives from the fact that a speaker has unlimited time for preparing the speech. “Speeches to inform are intended to share new ideas and build perceptions” (Webster 2012, 98). Their purpose is to provide information in an objective manner without drawing conclusions. In this kind of speech, the speaker neither takes any side nor proposes any solution to the problem under discussion (Webster 2012, 98). According to Webster (2012, 98௅99), the informative kind of speech consists of three subcategories, namely description, demonstration, and

Bartosz Batalinski

11

explanation. A speech of description is based on narrative and language choices to create clear images in the minds of the audience. Demonstration is a process that is explained step by step in order to build a coherent image in the minds of the audience at the end of the speech, whereas explanation is mainly used to describe abstract and difficult topics which need to be explained in the possibly clearest manner. However, Webster (2012, 99) also says that in informative speeches these three subcategories rarely occur alone and mainly permeate each other. A convincing type of speech might be tricky since it oscillates between informative and persuasive types of speech (Webster 2012, 100). As the name suggests, its purpose is to convince the audience to a certain point of view and move its members into an agreement with the speaker. A key aspect of this kind of speaking is that the speaker refrains from expressing their own opinion and uses professional opinions of credible individuals to support the standpoint. As Webster (2012, 100) says, all the speaker does is providing the means for the audience to agree with him or her without being irrelevant. While informative speaking is objective, and convincing speaking transfers mild emotions, persuasive speaking engages the speaker emotionally to a very large extent. According to Webster (2012), “persuasive speaking takes a less objective view on some topics and asks the audience to take action in support of that view” (Webster 2012, 101). To be effective in persuasion, a speaker ought to follow the three principles developed by Aristotle, that is ethos, logos, and pathos (Webster 2012, 11). Ethos refers to the credibility of the speaker; it must be irrefutable. Logos deals with the logic of the conclusions drawn by the speaker during the speech; they should be valid and clear, whereas pathos is responsible for the emotional connection of the speaker with the audience, which is more likely to succumb to the influence of the speaker if it is engaged in his words emotionally (Webster 2012, 11). Webster (2012, 105) also emphasizes how important it is to choose the right type of speech for the audience’s needs and for what the speaker wants to achieve with their speech. A great example is the former British Prime Minister, Winston Churchill, who had great intuition in this area and whose speeches usually achieved the set goal.

The analysis In the thirteen analyzed speeches, Winston Churchill used the modal verb must one hundred and thirteen times. Table 1 presents a numerical division of must into three types of modality.

Modality in selected speeches of Winston Churchill

12

Table 1. Number of cases of the verb must in the research material number of cases of the verb must

dynamic modality

deontic modality

epistemic modality

113

71 (63%)

30 (26%)

12 (11%)

Epistemic modality is the easiest to identify due to the fact that it occurs everywhere where the speaker draws conclusions based on their subjective feelings and possessed knowledge. This modality occurs in speeches directed both to people subordinate to Churchill and those equal to him. In these cases the recipients do not play the most important role, but rather the discussed issue is at the centre of attention. Examples include quotes (1௅2). (1) “I will say that he must indeed have a blind soul who cannot see that some great purpose and design is being worked out here.” (Churchill, 1941) (2) “We must all of us have been asking ourselves...” (Churchill, 1941) Quote (1) comes from a speech addressed to the American Congress less than a month after the Japanese Empire attacks on Pearl Harbour, in which Winston Churchill raises the issue of mutual cooperation between the American nation and the British people in the struggle against the Nazis and their allies, who are prevailing at that time. Winston Churchill having regard to the circumstances and relying on his subjective assessment draws the only possible conclusion that only a man with a blind soul may not see that a great purpose and design is being worked out. Quote (2) comes from a speech addressed to the entire British nation. These words are spoken at a time when Hitler is already ruling almost all of Europe and is considering an attack on the British Isles. Churchill expresses the conviction that the only possible conclusion stemming from the situation is that every citizen of the United Kingdom is wondering what moves Hitler plans for the upcoming months of the war. Deontic modality appears mainly in the speeches directed by Winston Churchill at the entire British nation. All these speeches come from his period of office as the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, and hence from the period when he is the leader of the British nation. Considering this circumstance, he is able to oblige the British as their commander and a

Bartosz Batalinski

13

leading figure. It is also worth mentioning that the speeches addressed at the whole nation mainly concern matters directly related to Great Britain, which seems to strengthen Churchill’s position as an authority who obliges his countrymen to act. Examples include quotes (3௅4). (3) “We must all be prepared to meet gas attacks.” (Churchill, 1941) (4) “I must say that I find in these facts a sure basis upon which practical and reassuring thoughts may rest.” (Churchill, 1940) Quote (3) comes from a speech addressed to all his countrymen, in which Winston Churchill comments on the forthcoming German invasion on the British Isles. Speaking of the horrors which the British kingdom must be expecting from the Nazis, he mentions, among others, gas attacks. Using the verb must, Churchill obliges his countrymen to be ready, leaving them no choice due to his higher position and the essence of the issue on which the survival of the entire state may depend. In quote (4), Churchill raises the question of defending the coast of the island against Nazi raids. With his words, he seems to impose an obligation on himself to state the facts and immediately performs the action. All these factors contribute to the interpretation of these cases in terms of deontic modality. However, it has to be noted that Palmer (2013), when using must with the personal pronoun I, also allows a dynamic interpretation meaning only “It is necessary for ...” (Palmer 2013, 107). Dynamic modality occurs wherever Winston Churchill informs neutrally about the necessity to do some action or achieve a given goal. In all cases of this kind of modality, Winston Churchill speaks to people on whom he cannot impose an obligation because he is not of a higher rank than them. At the same time, most of these cases are Churchill’s neutral statements of facts, which he himself has no influence on, and which are conditioned by external factors. As examples, quotes (5௅6) can be considered. (5) “I regret that we must refuse these requests.” (Churchill, 1940) (6) “(…) we must put our defences in this Island into such a high state of organisation that the fewest possible numbers will be required to give effective security (…)” (Churchill, 1940) In quotation (5), Winston Churchill speaks about the idea of providing food for the civilian population on the Nazi-occupied territories. The first

14

Modality in selected speeches of Winston Churchill

factor determining the occurrence of dynamic modality is that it comes from a speech addressed at the respectable members of the House of Commons, on which Winston Churchill, despite his power, cannot impose direct obligations. Another factor is that Winston Churchill states that Great Britain must abandon this idea because the food can be taken over by the Germans and strengthen their armies on the front, which is an external factor independent of the speaker. In quotation (6), Winston Churchill insists on the need to improve the organization of defence forces of the United Kingdom so that the smallest possible number of soldiers constitutes an effective barrier in the fight against the enemy. Considering the fact that in this case the recipients are also the representatives of the House of Commons, the dynamic modality of the statement is the most probable interpretation. The choice of the personal pronouns accompanying the modal verb must in Winston Churchill’s speeches is a phenomenon worth mentioning. Table 2 presents numerical and percentage breakdown of the use of particular pronouns with the verb must. Table 2. Numerical breakdown of the use of pronouns with the modal verb must. personal pronoun I You He It We They

number of cases 10 4 6 4 49 5

percentage 13% 5% 8% 5% 63% 6%

Winston Churchill uses the first person personal pronoun in collocation with the verb must ten times (13%), and all recorded cases occur in deontic modality. Some examples include (7௅8). (7) “But now I must dwell upon the more serious, darker and more dangerous aspects of the vast scene of the war.” (Churchill, 1941) (8) “But I must drop one word of caution; for, next to cowardice and treachery, overconfidence, leading to neglect or slothfulness, is the worst of martial crimes.” (Churchill, 1941) In both cases, (7) and (8), Winston Churchill imposes an obligation on himself and is performing the action at the same time. The verb must in

Bartosz Batalinski

15

conjunction with this pronoun and in this context explicitly declares that the need to act comes from the speaker. The pronoun you is used in combination with the verb must only four times (5%), two of which are deontic and two epistemic interpretations, as in examples (9௅10). (9) “If you look around you, you must feel not only the sense of duty done but also you must feel anxiety lest you fall below the level of achievement.” (Churchill, 1946) (10) “You must not add to his pain; you must work for his recovery.” (Churchill, 1940) Quotation (9) comes from a speech addressed to the student community of one of the American universities not long after the Allies won the Second World War. Considering the above factors, it is clear that Winston Churchill in his words is drawing a conclusion from the circumstances. His judgement is based on his knowledge and experience, which indicates the epistemic meaning of the verb must used by him. Quotation (10) comes from a speech given in a radio station whose recipients were all British and at the time when the war flared up for good. Considering the steep time and the position of Winston Churchill as the leader of the British nation, it can be concluded that in his words he imposes an obligation on his countrymen. He addresses them directly by the use of the pronoun and distinctly expresses what he expects from them in these difficult times, thus giving his words the deontic meaning. The pronoun he in combination with the verb must is used by Churchill twice in the epistemic sense and four times in the dynamic sense (8%). It is worth taking a closer look at some examples (11௅12). (11) “(...) he must now carry his work of butchery and desolation among the vast multitudes of Russia and of Asia.” (Churchill, 1941) (12) “(...) he must steal from them their daily bread. He must devour their harvests. He must rob them of the oil (...).” (Churchill, 1941) Quotation (11) comes from a speech to the Londoners that is a commentary on Hitler’s attack on the Soviet Union. This speech is delivered at a time when Hitler has already managed to take over the territory of almost all of Europe. Knowing his mad desire to conquer subsequent territories, Churchill states that taking these facts into account,

16

Modality in selected speeches of Winston Churchill

the only possible conclusion is that Hitler will continue the escalation of hostilities and turn his war machine against Asia and the Soviet Union. Since Churchill makes the only possible conclusion, the epistemic meaning is justified. Although quote (12) comes from the same speech, it has a different modal meaning. Churchill expresses his opinion from the observer’s position, only indicating what is necessary for Hitler to do to weaken the resistance of the Soviet Union. The lack of the speaker’s involvement in connection with the situation determining Hitler’s deeds explicitly indicates dynamic modality. In the research material, the pronoun it occurs in combination with the verb must only four times (5%), but despite this small number, it combines with all kinds of modality. It is used twice in the epistemic meaning and once in the dynamic and deontic meanings, as in (13௅15). (13) “It must be remembered that in the last war we suffered very grievous losses from mines (...).” (Churchill, 1940) (14) “It must be in continual motion (…). Moreover, it must be fed not only with flesh but with oil.” (Churchill, 1941) (15) “It must also be remembered that all the enemy machines and pilots (...).” (Churchill, 1940). The verb must in quotation (13) occurs in the deontic sense. This is indicated by the fact that the speech from which this passage originates is addressed to the entire British nation whom Churchill leads at that time holding the position of the Prime Minister. In his speech, he defines what he expects from his countrymen by imposing an obligation on them. Quotation (14) contains double-occurring epistemic modality. Here, Churchill draws the only possible conclusion resulting from the situation. As the speaker himself indicates, Hitler’s war machine cannot stand still because it would be destroyed. It is logical that maintaining such a large army and fighting on several fronts requires a massive amount of supplies and oil that are obtained mainly from the conquered areas. Consequently, the only possible conclusion is that warfare must be continued so that the Third Reich can prosper. In the second case, Churchill once again draws the only possible conclusion that the Nazis’ army, apart from the enormous human capital, also needs oil. However, it is well-known that even nowadays no army can conduct war operations without a supply of oil.

Bartosz Batalinski

17

Although passage (15) resembles (13) in its structure, there is a fundamental difference between them. It is the audience to whom the speech is addressed. In this case, the recipients are representatives of the House of Commons whom Churchill has no right to oblige to do anything. Since many of Churchill’s actions as the head of the British nation require the permission of the House of Commons, he cannot order them, but only suggest what should or should not be done. All this indicates dynamic modality. The pronoun we is the most numerous of all pronouns used by Winston Churchill in collocation with the verb must. It occurs as many as forty nine times (63%), and this is because in all his speeches Churchill strongly identifies himself with the audience by engaging himself in the conclusions he draws and the requirements he demands. Dynamic modality occurs here in thirty six cases, deontic modality in eleven, and epistemic modality in only two cases. It is worth looking closely at examples (16௅18). (16) “We are a deliberative Assembly, and we must have full freedom of discussion on all questions except defense. We must assert our right to this freedom, and we must have our own Parliamentary officers (...).” (Churchill, 1949) (17) “We must remember that. We must always be expecting some bad thing from Germany(...).” (Churchill, 1940) (18) “These facts are, of course, all well known to the enemy, and we must, therefore, expect (...).” (Churchill, 1941) In quote (16), we deal with the threefold dynamic modality. This is evidenced by the fact that the recipients of the address given by Churchill are the members of the Council of Europe. In his words, the speaker signals only what he considers necessary and is far from drawing conclusions or imposing obligations on this respectable assembly. What is equally important, this speech is delivered after the end of the Second World War at the time when the community of European nations is tied together in the spirit of equality and democracy, which significantly reduces the likelihood of its members imposing on each other any obligations. Quotation (17) comes from a speech addressed to the entire British nation and contains the deontic modality, as evidenced by the character in which Churchill’s words are uttered. As the head of the British nation, he clearly states what he expects from the British people, so in other words, he imposes an obligation on the entire nation. Using the pronoun we,

18

Modality in selected speeches of Winston Churchill

Churchill proves that he does not run away and shares this responsibility with his people. Quote (18) concerns the US supply ships which support Great Britain at a time when the Nazis are trying to destroy it. Here, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom states that it is logical to expect attempts to cut supply routes by the Germans because it will significantly weaken the United Kingdom. Therefore, the only possible conclusion is drawn, which most probably indicates the epistemic modality. The last but not least is the pronoun they which collocates three times with dynamic modality and once with epistemic and deontic modalities (6%). Examples include (19௅21). (19) “Fourteen men in the Kremlin, holding down hundreds of millions of people and aiming at the rule of the world feel that at all costs they must keep up the barriers.” (Churchill, 1949) (20) “(...) they must now know that the stakes for which they have decided to play are mortal.” (Churchill, 1941) (21) “(...) power of the British nation and Empire are brought, as they must be, and as they will be, fully into line with the magnificent efforts of the French Republic (...).” (Churchill, 1940) In quotation (19), Churchill turns to the auditorium consisting of American citizens in the early stages of the Cold War. He explains that the Soviets know that in order to control their nation and exercise absolute power effectively they must maintain the barriers separating their communist system from American capitalism. Thus, he gives expression to what is necessary to do for the Soviets to maintain power, which indicates the dynamic modality. Quote (20) concerns the attacks of the Japanese Empire on the Allies. Churchill states in his words to the US Congress that the only possible conclusion of the brutality of the Japanese is that they know what rate the game is taking. The recognition of this fragment as an example of the epistemic modality seems to be the only possible choice. In quotation (21), once again, it is relevant to whom Churchill speaks, and they are all British. Since he is the superior of the British people at that time, he insists that the efforts of the United Kingdom should cooperate with French efforts. All British people, including himself, are obliged by him to do their utmost to make these words turn into deeds.

Bartosz Batalinski

19

The authority and position of Churchill determine in this case the occurrence of deontic modality. Winston Churchill tends to be cautious in using negation with the verb must. This caution manifests itself in a small number of cases of this verb occurring in negative statements. Only fifteen of them can be noted, seven (47%) are deontic, and eight (53%) are dynamic. Some examples include (22௅23). (22) “I must not conceal from you the truth as I see it.” (Churchill, 1949) (23) “We must not attempt to prophesy its result, but I have good confidence.” (Churchill, 1941) In passage (22), Churchill lays an obligation on himself not to conceal the truth and thus reveals it to the audience giving his expression a deontic meaning. The use of negation with the verb must highlights the amount of respect Churchill had for the recipients of his words. He could convey the same message employing negation with the modal verb can which would, however, weaken the weight of the words spoken by him. Apparently, Churchill wanted to suggest to his audience that he would not dare to hide the truth as he sees it. The fact that his words are addressed to the prominent group of scientists from Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Boston seems to confirm this assumption. In quote (23), Winston Churchill addresses his words to the Canadian parliament while the Jedabia battle is being fought. He is not in the superior position in relation to the recipients, and he does not draw the only possible conclusion, but only states what is necessary to do, thus revealing the dynamic modality. Through negation with the verb must, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom wants to convince his listeners that prophesying the outcome of the ongoing battle would be utterly unreasonable for the Allies. The number of cases of the verb must appearing in declarative sentences is as much as ninety eight, which is a large number in relation to the negatives mentioned above. The majority of this number is the dynamic modality (sixty three cases ௅ 64%), followed by the deontic modality (twenty three cases ௅ 24%), and the epistemic modality (twelve cases ௅ 12%). Examples include (24௅26). (24) “(...) we must put our defenses in this island into such a high state of organization that the fewest possible numbers will be required to give effective security (...).” (Churchill, 1940)

20

Modality in selected speeches of Winston Churchill

(25) “(...) we must prepare not only for the summer but for the winter; not only for 1941 but for 1942 (...).” (Churchill, 1940) (26) “The whole fury and might of the enemy must very soon be turned on us.” (Churchill, 1940) Quote (24) is a fragment of a speech addressed at the House of Lords at a time when the Nazis are quickly conquering the territory of the old continent. Winston Churchill realizes that the German war machine would finally turn to the shores of the United Kingdom and informs his listeners about what is necessary to do to survive, which motivates dynamic interpretation of the modal verb. The importance of the matters raised by Churchill demand strong words, which undoubtedly influences the use of the verb must in this situation. Quote (25) comes from a radio speech addressed to all Britons. As a leader and elite strategist, Churchill realizes that shortly the war will take a different route. In connection with this, he obliges his countrymen to prepare for this change to take place at the turn of 1941 and 1942. The position of the leader and the auditorium put Winston Churchill in the privilege of imposing an obligation on the listeners, which indicates the deontic modality. The use of the verb must by Churchill makes it clear to all listeners that it is not a joke, but a matter of life and death. In quote (26), Winston Churchill once again turns to The House of Commons shortly after Hitler defeats the French. Considering this fact and the imperial inclinations of the Third Reich, the Prime Minister draws the only possible conclusion on the imminent directing of the war machine by the Nazis towards the United Kingdom, which points, in this case, to the epistemic modality. The verb must is used by Winston Churchill twelve times in the passive voice ௅ nine times (75%) in the dynamic modality, twice (17%) in the epistemic modality, and once (8%) in the deontic modality. Examples include (27௅29). (27) “To give security to these countless homes, they must be shielded from the two giant marauders, war and tyranny.” (Churchill, 1946) (28) “And I believe that history will pronounce that upon the whole, and it is upon the whole that these matters must be judged, that the choice made was right.” (Churchill, 1941)

Bartosz Batalinski

21

(29) “It must be remembered that in the last war we suffered very grievous losses from mines (...).” (Churchill, 1940) In quote (27), Winston Churchill speaks to the people gathered at Westminster College, Fulton, Missouri in the early stages of the Cold War. In his words, he expresses the conviction that in order to protect all households in the world it is necessary to provide them with security against tyranny and war that probably communists would bring. Although he is an influential person as a former Prime Minister and a well-deserved citizen of the United Kingdom, he cannot impose any obligation on his audience. In his words, he does not draw the only possible conclusion from the existing situation either, but only indicates what is necessary to do to ensure the security of the households, which means the dynamic modality in this case. In quotation (28), Winston Churchill turns to the Congress of the United States just after the Battle of Britain. He talks about the decisions taken by the Allies during the current war struggles that will undoubtedly be judged by history as right. The context of the words uttered by the Prime Minister, motivate to classify them as the epistemic modality because it seems that he draws the only possible conclusion here. Using the passive voice, Churchill gives his speech a very formal overtone, which is understandable given the prominent audience and the importance of the issue raised. In quote (29), Winston Churchill once again turns to the whole British nation as its leader and chief commander. He draws attention to the need to keep in mind the fact that in the previous war Great Britain suffered massive losses from sea mines. Considering the fact that the United Kingdom is an island and that its main supply routes lead through the sea full of German U-boats, it is not difficult to guess that the solution to the issue of sea mines appears to Churchill as superior. It is for this reason, and because of Churchill’s position that he obliged his citizens and generals to keep the issue in mind, which indicates the deontic modality. The verb must in the active voice is used by Winston Churchill one hundred and one times, of which sixty two cases are the dynamic modality, twenty nine are the deontic modality, and ten are the epistemic modality. Examples include (30௅32). (30) “We must never forget the solid assurances of sea power and those which belong to air power if it can be locally exercised.” (Churchill, 1940)

22

Modality in selected speeches of Winston Churchill

(31) “We must show ourselves equally capable of meeting a sudden violent shock or - what is perhaps a harder test - a prolonged vigil.” (Churchill, 1940) (32) “(...) he must now carry his work of butchery and desolation among the vast multitudes of Russia and of Asia.” (Churchill, 1941) In quote (30), Winston Churchill speaks to the House of Commons about the great importance of the naval fleet and aviation for their insular state. He suggests to his listeners that it would be profoundly unwise to forget about the significance of these branches of the British army, being at the same time far from drawing any conclusions and making the honorable auditorium obliged to anything. Taking the above-mentioned facts into consideration, the Prime Minister's words should be classified as the dynamic modality. The use of the active voice eliminates the ambiguity of the agent and shows that Winston Churchill takes responsibility for his own words, which certainly reduces the distance between him and the audience, and makes it easier for him to convince his listeners to his views. In quote (31), Winston Churchill once again addresses all countrymen at a time when a series of Nazi victories have undermined the Allied morale. Winston Churchill, by his words, authoritatively obliges all Britons to be ready for a sudden shock or an extended period of vigil caused by the speeding war machine of Hitler. The use of the active voice is probably aimed at encouraging and showing the countrymen that their Prime Minister is with them in these difficult times and shares with them the hardships of this war. In quote (32), Winston Churchill speaks to the Londoners about the heating up Nazi war with the Soviet Union. Bearing in mind Hitler’s crazed thirst for conquering new territories, Churchill draws the only possible conclusion on the imminent targeting of Germany’s war machine against Russia and Asia. Such a tone of expression allows undoubtedly to classify this statement as the epistemic modality. The use of the active voice puts Hitler in the guilty role of the vices mentioned by Churchill and certainly builds the unfavorable mood of the audience in relation to the German dictator. In the research material, the verb must occurs one hundred and thirteen times. Of all cases, up to one hundred and eleven express the present tense, one future tense, and one past tense. Such a large disproportion in the occurrence of tenses can be caused by context of Winston Churchill’s speeches, in which he usually comments on the latest events or the nearest

Bartosz Batalinski

23

plans using the present tense. The choice of the present tense could be a psychological trick aimed at making the listeners feel that the discussed issue is still or already valid depending on whether the speaker discusses past or future events. It could cause that the listeners do not distance themselves from the past, which, after all, cannot be changed, and the future, which often seems to be very distant, and perceive the issues discussed as current and directly related to them. This makes them believe that they can and want to act. The two examples of past and future reference include (33) and (34). (33) “We must always be expecting some bad thing from Germany (...).” (Churchill, 1940) (34) “(...) any plan for invading Britain which Hitler made two months ago must have had to be entirely recast (...).” (Churchill, 1940) Quote (33) has already been analyzed in terms of modality earlier in the chapter. Despite the fact that the speaker has given no period of duration of the discussed activity, the use of the progressive form of the verb must indicates the future tense. Winston Churchill, in his words, indicates that the Allies must remain vigilant in the future and continuously expect hostile actions from Germany. Quote (34) comes from a speech given to all Britons a few days after the battle of Britain began. In his words, Winston Churchill makes a judgment about past events, that is, about changing Hitler’s plans for an invasion of Britain, which gives his words an epistemic meaning. The use of the verb have to between verbs must and had carries the words of the Prime Minister into the past tense and makes it possible to paraphrase his statement as: The only possible conclusion arising from the situation is that Hitler changed plans for the invasion of Great Britain.

Conclusions The primary aim of this research was to check whether the kind of modality conveyed by the modal verb must in selected speeches of Winston Churchill depends on the addressee to whom they are addressed. The data obtained from the conducted research indicate that the recipients of the speeches have a key impact on the type of modality. In most cases, speaking to lower-ranking audiences determines deontic modality, whereas speaking to recipients of a higher rank than the speaker eliminates the expression of this kind of modality, because lower-ranking subjects

24

Modality in selected speeches of Winston Churchill

cannot impose obligations on those who are superior. In the speeches addressed to the British nation, Winston Churchill as its superior can express any intentions, and thus his words can express any kind of modality. However, in the speeches directed to the House of Commons, his equal position prevents him from imposing obligations or prohibitions, which eliminates the possibility of deontic interpretation. The secondary aim was to verify whether there is a correlation between the personal pronouns used as the subject of a sentence and the type of modality denoted. The study has confirmed that personal pronouns are also directly related to the type of modality of a given statement. The use of different personal pronouns as the subject of the same sentence may completely change its meaning and hence also the kind of modality. For instance, Winston Churchill often refers to The House of Commons starting with the pronoun we. Given the equal position of the addressee, this pronoun in combination with must suggests an epistemic or dynamic interpretation. Replacing the subject we with the personal pronoun I, in turn, inclines to interpret the modality of a given statement as deontic. Another conclusion arising from the work is the domination of the present tense in the political speeches subjected to the analysis. Out of one hundred and thirteen cases of the verb must, as many as one hundred and eleven occur in the present tense. This is probably due to the fact that Churchill in his speeches mainly gives a comment about the current events. The domination of the present tense may also be caused by the desire of the speaker to present the discussed events as current and directly related to the recipients. The use of past tense in reference to the matters requiring immediate response could cause the recipients to be negligent by perceiving them as past and outdated. Churchill’s caution in using must in negative sentences is also evident in the examined research material. Of all the cases of must, only fifteen appear in negation. Firstly, it may be influenced by the fact that the negative form of must, that is, mustn’t, expresses very strong prohibition, so it could not be used in the speeches addressed to the recipients of equal or higher status, upon whom Churchill could not exert any influence, but only could try to persuade them. Secondly, times of war require leaders to motivate nations to act, instead of telling them what they should not do. The last conclusion is the strong dominance of the active voice in the speeches of the former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. The Author believes that this is caused by the fact that Churchill mostly tries to captivate his audience and warm them to act by identifying himself with them. Achieving this goal by means of the passive voice would be much

Bartosz Batalinski

25

more difficult since the issues discussed in the passive voice seem remote and not involving the agent, who in this case are most often all the British. In spite of some limitations caused by the restricted amount of the research material subjected to the analysis, and hence the limited number of the analysed occurrences of the modal verb must, the research fills a niche in the studies on modality in political speeches, and the conclusions drawn from it can be taken as a prelude to further discussion.

Primary sources Churchill, Winston. Be Ye Men of Valour. National Churchill Museum. 1940. https://www.nationalchurchillmuseum.org/be-ye-men-of-valour. html. Churchill, Winston. We Shall Fight on the Beaches. National Churchill Museum. 1940. https://www.nationalchurchillmuseum.org/we-shallfight-on-the-beaches.html. Churchill, Winston. Their Finest Hour. National Churchill Museum. 1940. https://www.nationalchurchillmuseum.org/their-finest-hour.html. Churchill, Winston. War of the Unknown Warriors. National Churchill Museum. 1940. https://www.nationalchurchillmuseum.org/war-of-theunknown-warriors-speech.html. Churchill, Winston. The Few. National Churchill Museum. 1940. https://www.nationalchurchillmuseum.org/the-few.html. Churchill, Winston. Give us the tools. National Churchill Museum. 1941. https://www.nationalchurchillmuseum.org/give-us-the-tools.html. Churchill, Winston. The Fourth Climacteric. National Churchill Museum. 1941. https://www.nationalchurchillmuseum.org/the-fourth-climacteric. html. Churchill, Winston. Some Chicken; Some Neck. National Churchill Museum. 1941. https://www.nationalchurchillmuseum.org/some-chicken-someneck.html. Churchill, Winston. Address to Joint Session of US Congress. National Churchill Museum. 1941. https://www.nationalchurchillmuseum.org/churchill-address-tocongress.html. Churchill, Winston. Sinews of Peace. National Churchill Museum. 1946. https://www.nationalchurchillmuseum.org/sinews-of-peace-ironcurtain-speech.html.

26

Modality in selected speeches of Winston Churchill

Churchill, Winston. Mit-Mid-Century Convocation. National Churchill Museum. 1949. https://www.nationalchurchillmuseum.org/mit-mid-centuryconvocation.html. Churchill, Winston. The Council of Europe. National Churchill Museum. 1949. https://www.nationalchurchillmuseum.org/the-council-of-europe.html.

References Berk, Lynn M. English syntax. From word to discourse. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999. Churchill, Winston. The Scaffolding of Rhetoric. 1897. Declerk, Renaat. “The definition of modality.” In Cognitive Approaches to Tense, Aspect, and Epistemic Modality, edited by Adeline Patard and Frank Brisard, 21௅44. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2011. Hansen, Bjorn. “The syntax of modal polyfunctionality revisited.” In Modes of Modality edited by Elisabeth Leiss. and Werner Abraham, 89௅126. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2014. Larreya, Paul. “Towards a typology of modality in language.” In Modality in English: Theory and Description, edited by Raphael Salkie, Pierre Busuttil, and Johan van der Auwera, 9௅29. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2009. Lyons, John. Semantics. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1977. Mitchell, Keith. “Semantic ascent, deixis, intersubjectivity and modality.” In Modality in English: Theory and Description edited by Raphael Salkie, Pierre Busuttil, and Johan van der Auwera, 54௅77. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2009. Millward, C.M., and Mary Hayes. A Biography of the English Language. 3rd ed. Cengage Learning, 2011. Palmer, Frank Robert. Modality and the English Modals. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge, 2013. Papafragou, Anna. Modality: Issues in the Semantics-Pragmatics Interface. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2000. Portner, Paul. Modality. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009. Rocq-Migette, Christiane. “Using the adjectives surprised/surprising to express epistemic modality.” In Modality in English: Theory and Description edited by Raphael Salkie, Pierre Busuttil, and Johan van der Auwera, 223௅235. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2009.

Bartosz Batalinski

27

Timotijevic, Jelena. “Another look at modals and subjectivity.” In Modality in English: Theory and Description edited by Raphael Salkie, Pierre Busuttil, and Johan van der Auwera, 105௅122. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2009. Webster, Linda. Introduction to Public Speaking. 2nd ed. Southlake: Fountainhead Press, 2012.

WOULD IN ACADEMIC RESEARCH ARTICLE. ABSTRACTS ACROSS THREE DISCIPLINES OLEKSANDR KAPRANOV*

Abstract This chapter presents a computer-assisted study that seeks to investigate the frequency and use of the modal verb would in research article (further – RA) abstracts in three cognate disciplines, namely i) applied linguistics, ii) applied psycholinguistics, and iii) English literature. The exclusive focus on would in the study was explained by its important role as a hedging device in the genre of academic writing in English (Fløttum, Kinn, and Dahl 2006; Hyland 1994; Jiang and Hyland 2020; Russell 2014). In concord with Hyland (2005), hedging was operationalised as an academic writer’s presentation of the argument and/or research findings in a cautious and tentative manner. Grounded in Hyland’s (2005) approach to hedging in academic writing, the study set out to examine the frequency of would in a corpus of RA abstracts in applied linguistics, applied psycholinguistics, and English literature that were published by the prestigious peer-reviewed outlets in the United Kingdom from 2011 to 2021. To that end, the computer program AntConc version 4.0.11 (Anthony 2022) was applied to the corpus. The results of the quantitative investigation indicated that the frequency of would was low in the RA abstracts in all disciplines, i.e. applied linguistics, applied psycholinguistics, *

Dr Oleksandr Kapranov is an associate professor in English linguistics at NLA University College in Oslo (Norway). His research interests involve academic writing, cognitive linguistics, and psycholinguistics. After the completion of his PhD at the University of Western Australia in Perth (WA), he was a post-doctoral researcher at Lund University (Sweden) and at the University of Bergen (Norway). Dr Kapranov has taught English linguistics at a number of universities in Norway and Sweden. His recent articles have been published in American, British, and Canadian Studies, British and American Studies, Complutense Journal of English Studies, Prague Journal of English Studies, etc. Currently, he is co-editing with Dr Monika SkorasiĔska the forthcoming volume Modality in Academic Writing in English, German, and Norwegian. E-mail: [email protected].

30

Would in academic research article. Abstracts across three disciplines

and English literature. The quantitative computer-assisted analysis was followed by a qualitative investigation that aimed to discover the pragmacommunicative roles associated with would in the corpus. As far as the qualitative findings were concerned, it was established that would was associated, predominantly, with hedging in the RA abstracts in applied linguistics and English literature, whilst in applied psychology would was involved in the reference to the future planned procedure in the past (e.g., the formulation and/or validation of the hypothesis). The findings and their implications were further discussed in the chapter.

Introduction As noted by SkorasiĔska (2019), whilst modal verbs have been widely studied, their use in various genres of discourse is still not completely explored and accounted for. One of the genres that keeps attracting scholars’ attention in conjunction with the distribution, frequency and use of modal verbs is academic writing in English (Lingard and Watling 2021). Given that “English has become the principal medium for the transmission and exchange of academic knowledge” (Mauranen, PerezLlantada, and Swales 2010, 634), the pragma-communicative properties of the genre of academic writing in English are characterised by a variety of macro- and micro-linguistic means that are found in the English language, inclusive of modal verbs (Fløttum, Kinn, and Dahl 2006; Hinkel 2009; Kapranov 2021). Multiple studies indicate that modal verbs appear to constitute a substantial feature of the genre of academic writing in English (Bellés-Fortuño and Querol-Julián 2010; Carrió Pastor 2014; Hyland 1996; Whitty, Parkinson, and Pham 2022). In this regard, the literature in discourse studies and applied linguistics demonstrates that modal verbs contribute to positioning a text written in academic English within the genre-appropriate conventions (Hyland 1995; Thompson 2002), which are associated with the use of modals in a range of pragma-communicative roles (Hyland 1994). It should be noted that the genre of academic writing in English is often associated with research articles (Jiang and Hyland 2020). In this genre, it has become a well-established and, perhaps, standard practice to start research articles (further – RA) with an abstract (Martín and Burgess 2004; Swales and Najjar 1987). RA abstracts are typically operationalised as a stand-alone text (Gillaerts and Van de Velde 2010) which represents a summary of the research study. In this regard, Norris (2016, 18) observes that the RA abstract as a stand-alone text is, quite possibly, the only part of the article that readers closely read. Hence, one of the critical roles of an

Oleksandr Kapranov

31

RA abstract is to draw the readers’ attention to the full text of the article (Khany and Malmir 2020, 382). It should be emphasised that in the current trend of writing and publishing shorter and less wordy RAs (Norris 2016), RA abstracts appear to be conceived of as a constrained discursive space that is characterised by tightly worded sentences (Khany and Malmir 2020). The succinct manner of academic writing in RAs (Khany and Malmir 2020; Norris 2016) is, presumably, concomitant with a frugal deployment of modal verbs in RA abstracts which is associated with their peculiar frequency and distribution due to the genre-specific constraints. If this contention is true, then we could expect, arguably, a low frequency of modal verbs, inclusive of would, in RA abstracts. Surprisingly, however, there are not so many studies that examine the frequency, as well as the use of would in RA abstracts. Furthermore, little is currently known about the frequency of would in academic RA abstracts that pertain to cognate disciplines from a diachronic perspective (Lingard and Watling 2021). Seeking to address this gap, the present study aims to discover new findings that concern the frequency and use of would by means of analysing a corpus of RA abstracts in applied linguistics, applied psycholinguistics, and English literature in the period of time 2011 – 2021. Two specific research questions (RQs) are formulated and further discussed in the study, namely RQ1: What is the frequency of the occurrence of would in RA abstracts in applied linguistics, applied psycholinguistics, and English literature within the period of time 2011 – 2021? RQ2: What pragma-communicative roles does would play in RA abstracts across the aforementioned scientific disciplines? This chapter is organised as follows. Firstly, an outline of discourse of RA abstracts is provided. Secondly, a literature review on modal verbs in RA abstracts is given. Thereafter, the present study is introduced and discussed. Finally, the article concludes with the summary of the major findings and their relevance to the field of academic writing in English.

Discourse of RA abstracts There is a substantial body of literature associated with RA abstracts (Bellés-Fortuño and Querol-Julián 2010; Carrió Pastor 2014; Doró 2013; Gillaerts and Van de Velde 2010; Graf-Vlachy 2022; Khany and Malmir 2020; Lorés 2004; Martín and Burgess 2004; Norris 2016; Plastina 2017;

32

Would in academic research article. Abstracts across three disciplines

Zibalas and Šinknjnienơ 2019). Given that the discursive space of RA abstracts is a sufficiently researched area, it seems pertinent to provide a brief outline of its most salient characteristics. Judging from the published research, discourse of RA abstracts could be described in terms of the four main discursive characteristics: i) rhetorical structure, ii) functions, iii) variability, and iv) genre. First, let us examine the rhetorical structure of RA abstracts. Prior research posits that the rhetorical structure of an RA abstract involves several rhetorical moves, which are broadly defined as text units that occur in typical sequences (Mauranen 1993). More specifically, moves are operationalised as a “discoursal or rhetorical unit that performs a coherent communicative function in a written or spoken discourse” (Swales 2004, 228). There are several models that provide accounts of sequencing of rhetorical moves in RA abstract. For instance, Bhatia (1993) suggests that the sequence of moves in an RA abstract is comprised of the following elements: i) “Introducing the Purpose”, ii) “Describing the Method”, iii) “Summarising the Results”, and iv) “Presenting the Conclusions”. Another widely cited, and more recent, model of rhetorical moves in the RA abstracts is proposed by Hyland (2000). It involves the following five moves that are argued to be prototypically found in an RA abstract: i) “Introduction” that establishes the context and motivates the research described in the article, ii) “Purpose” that indicates the article’s aim, iii) “Method” that outlines the methodological approach and study design, procedure, and data analysis, iv) “Product” which states the major findings and their discussion, and, finally, v) “Conclusion” that describes potential implications of the results beyond scope of the article (Hyland 2000, 67). Arguably, the sequencing of rhetorical moves in RA abstracts is reflective of the author’s/authors’ strategies to persuade the readers of the relevance of their work and to encourage them to read the entire article (Khany and Malmir 2020; Lorés 2004; Ren and Li 2011; Tankó 2017). Second, another salient characteristic of discourse of RA abstracts involves their function that is associated with the author’s/authors’ persuasiveness (Hyland 2000). In contrast to the contention that the function of RA abstracts is to share the research findings (Tankó 2017, 42), persuasion is deemed to be of critical importance as one of the main functions of an RA abstract (Hyland 2000). This function has already been indirectly referred to in the introductory part of the chapter by means of quoting Norris (2016, 18), who posits that an RA abstract is the only part of the article that readers might read. Consequently, it is the authors’ aim to persuade their readership to proceed beyond the abstract to the main text of the article in its entirety. If, metaphorically speaking, an RA abstract

Oleksandr Kapranov

33

constitutes the gateway to the whole article (Lorés 2004, 280), then it is in the authors’ best interest to promote the further reading of the article (Sanz 2006, 23). The persuasive function of an RA abstract consists in serving as an indicator that signals to the readers whether or not the full text of the article should be read in full (Gillaerts and Van de Velde 2010; Khany and Malmir 2020; Martín and Burgess 2004; Norris 2016; Swales and Najjar 1987; Zibalas and Šinknjnienơ 2019). Third, one more salient characteristic of RA abstracts is related to variability (Doró 2013; Hyland 2000). Assuming that different abstracts that serve different purposes are expected by the current scientific community and the global readership (Swales and Feak 2009), variability in RA abstracts in bound to occur (Martín and Burgess 2004). Judging from the literature, variability is associated with the following variables. Firstly, it is conditioned by the fact that the present-day scientific community is truly global, which means that academic writing in English is produced by English native and non-native academic writers (Ghasempour and Farnia 2017). Subsequently, there would be variability in RA abstracts that is caused by the different levels of the English language proficiency and mastery (Escudero and Swales 2011; Russell 2014). This type of variability would be manifested, for instance, by a varied array of lexicogrammatical means that are used in RA abstracts by English native and non-native academic writers (Doró 2013). Secondly, the prior literature indicates that another variable that gives rise to variability in RA abstracts is associated with a plethora of cultural differences (Kafes 2012; Mauranen 1993; Whitty, Parkinson, and Pham 2022; Yoon and Casal 2020). Presumably, variability in RA abstracts due to the authors’ cultural differences would be manifested by a culture-specific sequencing of the rhetorical moves that deviates from the accepted Anglo-Saxon tradition of academic writing (Kafes 2012; Whitty, Parkinson, and Pham 2022), or by foregrounding the culture-bound elements that otherwise would not be included in a “typical” Anglo-Saxon RA abstract (Martín 2003). Thirdly, variability in an RA abstract could stem from the disciplinary differences (Doró 2013; Zibalas and Šinknjnienơ 2019). Specifically, whereas in the so-called “hard” sciences it is common to write a structured RA abstract, it is less common in, for example, “soft” disciplines, such as literature (Samraj 2005; Tankó 2017). Notably, however, variability in RA abstracts may occur within the field of “hard” sciences as well (Huckin 2001). The final salient characteristic of RA abstracts involves its positioning in respect to genre. From the standpoint of genre, there is a view of RA abstracts as a part-genre (Swales 2004, 239; Swales and Feak 2009; Yoon and Casal 2020). As such, RA abstracts are regarded as an intrinsic part of

34

Would in academic research article. Abstracts across three disciplines

RAs under the broad aegis of academic writing. However, a number of scholars argue that RA abstracts form a genre in their own right (Bhatia 1993; Gillaerts and Van de Velde 2010; Lorés 2004). Their argument is based upon the following considerations. To begin with, RA abstracts are characterised by specific functions that, quite often, are associated with the authors’ persuasiveness (Hyland 2000). Furthermore, RA abstracts involve a set of pragma-communicative means that are deemed appropriate in a research community and rhetoric structures (i.e., rhetorical moves) that are indicative of RA abstracts as stand-alone and self-sufficient texts (Gillaerts and Van de Velde 2010; Hyland 2000; Lorés 2004; Plastina 2017). Coincidentally, such line of reasoning is supported by the Swalesian (2004) definition of genre, which is formulated in the following way: A genre comprises a class of communicative events, the members of which share some set of communicative purposes. These purposes are recognised by the expert members of the parent discourse community, and thereby constitute the rationale for the genre. This rationale shapes the schematic structure of the discourse and influences and constrains choice of content and style (Swales 2004, 58)

Assuming that RA abstracts are indicative of the shared communicative purposes (Swales 2004) and are characterised by “a well-defined and mutually understood communicative purpose that most abstracts fulfill, irrespective of the subject discipline they serve” (Bhatia 1993, 77), it seems feasible to support the contention that RA abstracts are a separate genre. It should be observed that in the present study, which is further introduced and discussed in the chapter, RA abstracts are treated as a distinct genre.

Modal verbs in RAs As indicated by Wilson (2005, 151), whilst the central modal verbs, i.e. can, could, may, might, must, shall, should, will, and would are common both in oral and written discourse, they are considered to be the most complex words in the English language. The literature demonstrates that their complexity permeates the discourses of RAs and RA abstracts, where the aforementioned central modal verbs are involved in an intricate web of textual and pragmatic functions (Hinkel 2009; Jie 2010; Karahan 2022; Ngula 2017; Samaie, Khosravian, and Boghayeri 2014). In this regard, Hinkel (2009) suggests that the pragma-communicative uses of such central modal verbs, as, for instance, can, may, might, and could in academic writing in English are applied to convey the academic writer’s

Oleksandr Kapranov

35

stance. As far as modal verbs and stance are concerned, Orta (2010) posits that Modal verbs are used to express a writer’s stance, expressing either the degree of certainty of the proposition (epistemic modality), or meanings such as permission, obligation or necessity (deontic modality). Without a modal verb, most verb phrases include only a marking of time orientation and not an overt expression of stance. (Orta 2010, 79)

The construal of stance has been extensively elucidated in the literature (Chang and Schleppegrell 2011). In terms of its applicability to academic writing in English, Hyland (2005) argues that modal verbs as the surface (i.e., linguistic) realisations of stance are deemed to be associated with the academic writer’s strategies of hedging and boosting, respectively (Hyland 2005). Following Hyland (2005), hedging can be manifested by such modal verbs as might, would, should, etc. that are used by academic writers to impart their indecision, and/or a lack of commitment to the proposition (Hyland 2005, 178). Hedging is considered a typical strategy in RAs, as well as RA abstracts, that allows the writers to present their results and/or claims in a less assertive and more tentative manner (Crompton 1997). In particular, Hinkel (2009) notes that modal verbs as hedges are closely associated with vagueness, as well as with the writer’s strategy of being imprecise yet polite in their academic writing. A similar contention is expressed by Mauranen (1993), who suggests that the use of modal verbs as hedging devices is considered a requisite in RAs, especially it is even expected by the research community in the so-called “soft” disciplines (e.g., humanities). Judging from the literature (Bellés-Fortuño and Querol-Julián 2010; Carrió Pastor 2014; Escudero and Swales 2011; Hinkel 2009; Hyland 1996; Jie 2010; Karahan 2022; Ngula 2017; Samaie, Khosravian, and Boghayeri 2014), one of the main roles of the central modal verbs in RAs and RA abstracts is attributed to hedging. Obviously, the surface manifestations of hedging are not comprised exclusively of modal verbs (Hyland 1996), since there are multiple linguistic means to manifest it lexically, syntactically, and supra-sententially (Crompton 1997). However, the use of modal verbs as hedging devices is one of the most assessable strategies available to the academic writer (Hyland 1994). Whilst the use of modal verbs as hedges is, perhaps, expected in RAs and RA abstracts, modal verbs are also reported to be used as boosting devices (Hyland 1996; Orta 2010). Boosters, such as, for example, must, allow the academic writer to demonstrate their certainty and mark their positive involvement with the topic (Hyland 2005, 179). With respect to

36

Would in academic research article. Abstracts across three disciplines

boosters, Hyland (2005) and Orta (2010), respectively, have found that the modal verb will is one the common boosters in RAs. More specifically, Orta (2010) has established that The use of modal “will” in the statement of hypotheses is very common in RAs in English. The modal verb is also frequently included in the subsequent confirmation or refutation of those hypotheses. (Orta 2010, 90)

Having outlined the use of modal verbs as hedging and boosting devices, it should be noted that modal verbs partake in a range of other pragma-communicative functions whose use is necessitated by the RA at hand. In the wake of Orta (2010), it seems possible to assume that there are uses of modal verbs that do not carry any specific pragmatic meaning in the given stretch of discourse in an RA. Summarising the pragma-communicative uses of modal verbs in RA and RA abstracts, it appears possible to conclude that the current research literature (Hinkel 2009; Hyland 2005; Jie 2010; Karahan 2022; Ngula 2017; Orta 2010; Samaie, Khosravian, and Boghayeri 2014) regards modal verbs, at least the central modal verbs, as the surface manifestations of the academic writer’s hedging and/or boosting strategy. It does not follow from the literature, however, whether or not the use of the modal verb would could be associated with such strategy as hedging in RA abstracts across several cognate disciplines, such as applied linguistics, applied psycholinguistics, and English literature. The study that is further discussed in the chapter aims to provide new insights into this problem.

The present study As mentioned in the introductory part of the chapter, the present study aims to i) compute the frequencies of the occurrence of would in RA abstracts in applied linguistics, applied psycholinguistics, and English literature and ii) establish how would is used in terms of the academic writer’s pragma-communicative strategies. Based upon the prior literature, the study is grounded in the view of modal verbs as pertaining to hedging and/or boosting devices (Hyland 2005; Kapranov forthcoming). In addition, the study is informed by the literature (Jie 2010; Khany and Malmir 2020; Norris 2016), which indicates that the discursive space of an RA abstract is constrained and, consequently, is characterised by low frequencies of modal verbs. Also, the study takes into consideration the findings from the previous research that point to would as a frequent modal verb, especially in the oral mode of communication in English (Condoravdi 2003; Farr and

Oleksandr Kapranov

37

O'Keeffe 2002; Leech 2014, 73; Moon 2011; Rizviü-Eminoviü and Šukaliü 2019, 357; Vine 2004, 205). Hence, it is assumed in the study that it remains to be elucidated whether or not would is characterised by a low or high frequency in the corpus of RA abstracts in three related disciplines, namely applied linguistics, psycholinguistics, and English literature. Prior to proceeding to the description of the corpus of the study, it seems reasonable to outline possible meanings of would in academic, colloquial, and neutral registers of the English language. Further, in Table 1, its uses are summarised in concord with Salkie (2010, 192). Table 1. Salkie’s (2010) Classification of the meanings of would. N 1

Uses Future time in the past

2 3

Future perfect in the past Intention in the past

4

Volition in the past

5

Characteristic properties/activities in the past

6

In questions – (even more) polite requests and invitations Persistent habits in the past

7 8

Inference/probability

Examples She said that it would rain in the morning, but that the sun would shine later. John would soon realise what an idiot he’d been. John left his arid farm in July. It would have rained heavily by December. He said that they would do the job as soon as they could He asked Louisa if she would please be quiet. He said that he wouldn’t answer our questions, so we shouldn’t try to make him do so. Under the Tsars, crippling taxation would prevent rural development. He would sit in his room all day staring at the TV Would you help me look for my purse? Would you come to supper on Friday? John would keep fighting, though I asked him not to. Well, you would keep doing it. I warned you. I saw a girl at the window. Who would that be? Oh, that would be his elder sister!

38

Would in academic research article. Abstracts across three disciplines

9

Apodosis of remote conditionals

10

Conditional protasis

If you asked me to have some more, I wouldn’t refuse. Brian would have phoned the police if his car had been damaged. The board did not have to disclose the source of its information if it would be contrary to the public interest.

Corpus The corpus of the present study involved RA abstracts published online by the following reputable peer-reviewed scientific journals, associated with the prestigious universities in the United Kingdom, namely the University of Oxford and the University of Cambridge: i) Applied Linguistics published by Oxford University Press, https://academic.oup.com/applij?login=false; ii) Applied Psycholinguistics published by the University of Cambridge, https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/applied-psycholinguistics; iii) English: Journal of the English Association published by Oxford University Press, https://academic.oup.com/english?login=false. The aforementioned journals were deemed comparable for the purposes of the present investigation, given that they were associated with prestigious and reputable scientific outlets that published RA abstracts online at the respective websites on a regular basis. Following Kapranov (2017), the corpus cut-off of ten years was considered to be reflective of the temporal variables that might be involved in the frequency and distribution of would in the corpus. The descriptive statistics of the corpus within the period of time from 2011 to 2021 were summarised in Table 2 below.

Oleksandr Kapranov

39

Table 2. The descriptive statistics of the corpus.

N 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Descriptive Statistics Total N of abstracts M abstracts SD abstracts Minimum abstracts Maximum abstracts Total N words Mean words SD words Minimum words Maximum words

Applied Linguistics

Applied Psycholinguistics

English: Journal of the English Association

375

534

180

34.1 6.7

48.5 9.1

16.4 3.02

23

34

13

43

59

24

59 452 5 404.7 1 275.2

87 591 7 962.8 2 048.2

30 303 2 754.8 513.28

3 685

4 834

1 916

6 974

10 686

3 892

Explanation of the abbreviations: N = number, M = mean, SD = standard deviation

Procedure and method The procedure in the study was as followed. The RA abstracts were accessed and downloaded from the respective websites of the journals Applied Linguistics, Applied Psycholinguistics, and English: Journal of the English Association. Afterwards, the RA abstracts were analysed individually in the computer program AntConc version 4.0.11 (Anthony 2022). The individual RA abstracts were opened in AntConc (Anthony 2022) in order to calculate the frequency of the occurrence of would as raw values, i.e. as the non-normalised data that were computed in per journal per year. Then, the occurrences of would were manually examined in the corpus in order to establish their pragma-communicative roles in accordance with the methodological approach developed by Hyland (2005), who argued that modal verbs, inclusive of would, could be involved in such stance-related strategies as hedging and boosting. To reiterate, hedging was thought to “indicate the writer’s decision to withhold complete commitment to a proposition, allowing information to be presented as an opinion rather than accredited fact” (Hyland 2005,

40

Would in academic research article. Abstracts across three disciplines

178), whereas boosting was assumed “to allow writers to express their certainty in what they say and mark involvement with the topic and solidarity with their audience” (Hyland 2005, 179).

Results and discussion The results of the quantitative computer assisted analysis have yielded the following findings in raw values that are presented in Table 3 below. Table 3 provides the frequency of the occurrence of would in the whole corpus within the total period of time within 2011௅2021. Table 3. The frequency of the occurrence of would in 2011௅2021. N 1 2 3 4 5

Descriptive Statistics Total number Mean Standard deviation Minimum Maximum

Applied Linguistics

Applied Psycholinguistics

13 1.4

12 1.7

English: Journal of the English Association 12 1.5

0.7

0.9

0.7

1 3

1 3

1 3

The frequency of the occurrence of would in raw values per year is summarised in Table 4. Identically to the values given in Table 3 above, the statistics presented in Table 4 have been computed in AntConc version 4.0.11 (Anthony 2022). However, whereas the statistics in Table 3 originate from merging all the abstracts per journal and computing them in AntConc (Anthony 2022) as one file that contains RA abstracts from 2011 to 2021 per respective journal, the frequency of the occurrence of would in Table 4 is given per year. In other words, the RA abstracts from the whole year per journal, e.g. the entire issues of Applied Linguistics in 2011, 2012, 2013, etc., have been merged and processed as one file in the program.

Oleksandr Kapranov

41

Table 4. The Frequency of the occurrence of would per year.

N

Year

The total number of would per year in Applied Linguistics

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

1 0 1 1 1 3 1 0 2 1 2

The total number of would per year in Applied Psycholinguistics 0 0 0 2 1 3 1 1 0 3 1

The total number of would per year in English: Journal of the English Association 0 3 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 0 0

Let us discuss the results summarised in Tables 3–4 through the lens of the first research question (i.e., RQ1) in the study. To reiterate, the aim of RQ1 is to establish the frequency of the occurrence of would in RA abstracts in applied linguistics, applied psycholinguistics, and English literature within the period of time 2011–2021.

Discussing RQ1 in conjunction with the findings As far as RQ1 in the study is concerned, it follows from Table 3 that the frequency of the occurrence of would is low across all three disciplines. The reason that the findings summarised in Table 3 are interpreted as low could be discussed against the backdrop of the entire number of types and tokens in the corpus and the frequency of would. This contention is illustrated by Table 5 below, which contrasts would with the total number of types and tokens per journal within the period of time 2011௅2021.

42

Would in academic research article. Abstracts across three disciplines

Table 5. Would and the total number of types and tokens in the corpus. N 1 2 3

Corpus per journal within the period of 2011௅2021 Applied Linguistics Applied Psycholinguistics English: Journal of the English Association

would/type

would/token

1/6281 1/5909 1/6013

13/59 452 12/87 591 12/30 303

The contention that would is a low frequency word in the corpus is further supported by the computer-assisted analysis of the frequency of the central modal verbs in the corpus. The results of the analysis are given in Table 6, which summarises the frequency of the occurrence of the central modal verbs, inclusive of would, in the period of time 2011௅2021 in raw values. Table 6. The Frequency of the central modal verbs in the corpus in raw values. N

The Central Modal Verbs

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Can Could May Might Must Shall Should Will Would

Applied Linguistics

Applied Psycholinguistics

109 12 72 20 8 0 20 24 13

127 36 112 17 6 0 14 10 12

English: Journal of the English Association 38 6 20 9 10 2 8 21 12

It follows from Table 6 that in comparison to the high frequency of can, may, might, and should, the frequency of would can be described as low in the corpus. These findings seem to support the initial assumption concerning the low frequencies of would. Indirectly, the findings lend support to the scholars (Jie 2010; Khany and Malmir 2020; Norris 2016), who posit that the discursive space of an RA abstract is constrained and, as such, is, arguably, not conducive to the high frequencies of such modal verbs as would.

Oleksandr Kapranov

43

In addition, the low frequency of would is evident from its means that are given in Table 3, which are not high indeed relative to the size of the corpus. Whilst the sample size described in Table 3 is small to allow a reliable calculation of the t statistic, it is possible to assume that the distribution of would in the corpus is relatively similar across three disciplines (i.e., applied linguistics, applied psycholinguistics, and English literature). The similarity is evident from the respective means and standard deviations calculated per journal within the period of time 2011௅2021. The assumption concerning the similarity is exemplified by Figure 1 below.

Would in Three Disciplines Standard Deviation Mean Total Number 0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

English: Journal of the English Association Applied Psycholinguistics Applied Linguistics Figure 1. The similar distribution of would in the corpus.

It is seen in Figure 1 that would is similarly distributed among the three disciplines. Judging from the data summarised in Tables 5–6, it could be concluded that in terms of the frequency, would enjoys an epiphenomenal status in the RA abstracts in applied linguistics, applied psychology, and English literature published within the period of time 2011௅2021. From the point of diachrony, it seems possible to draw a conclusion that the distribution of would in RA abstracts in the aforementioned cognate disciplines varies insignificantly within the range between 0 and 3 per journal per 10 years (see Table 4).

44

Would in academic research article. Abstracts across three disciplines

Discussing RQ2 in conjunction with the findings As mentioned in the introduction, the second research question (i.e., RQ2) in the study addresses the pragma-communicative roles that would plays in the RA abstracts. The manual examination of the corpus has indicated that the aforementioned roles exhibit discipline-specific variation. Let us examine the roles of would in relation to each individual journal, starting with Applied Linguistics, which represents the discipline of applied linguistics. In the sub-corpus of the RA abstracts in applied linguistics, would appears to play the role of a hedging device. This finding is not surprising, given that the prior literature reports the typical use of would as a hedge (Hyland 2005; Jiang and Hyland 2020; Russell 2014). The pragmacommunicative role of would as a hedge in the RA abstracts in Applied Linguistics is exemplified by Excerpts (1) and (2), respectively: (1) [...] Using data collected in the working-class setting of the professional kitchen, the current study presents interactions between newcomer trainee cooks and the cooks they worked under. It focuses on the use of directives, which was a prevalent feature of their interactions. As individual utterances, the directives would seem to be designed to elicit specific, ad-hoc actions from trainees. However, closer analysis reveals that series of directives may serve important instructional purposes. Findings from the study are useful in raising the awareness of those assigned to mentor trainees in work settings and should enhance on-the-job workplace training as well as support newcomers as they adjust to their new workplaces. (Pang 2019, 754) (2) [...] This article takes a first step in this direction by documenting the specific lexicogrammatical constructions deployed by one learner of French, Leon, over the course of a 6-week stylistic variation intervention. The findings show that his sociolinguistic repertoire emerged from a single multiword expression, which in combination with Leon’s application of new metalinguistic knowledge and mediation from a teacher expanded to become a more productive schematic template. The research suggests that future work on L2 sociolinguistic development would do well to focus on qualitative accounts of individual developmental trajectories, emphasizing the specific lexicogrammatical constructions learners appropriate, to understand how L2 sociolinguistic repertoires are constructed across time. (Van Compernolle 2019, 871)

Oleksandr Kapranov

45

In (1), the pragma-communicative role of would as a hedge seems to be supported by the collocation of would with seem, whereas in (2) would is used with suggests, both of which are indicative of tentativeness (Hyland 2005) and a certain degree of vagueness (Hinkel 2009). It is observed in the data that the majority of the instances in the RA abstracts published by Applied Linguistics follow a similar pattern of would + verb that is indicative of the academic writers’ strategy of hedging. The clustering analysis of would in AntConc (Anthony 2022) provides indirect support to this observation, as seen in Table 7. Table 7. The clustering analysis of would in RA abstracts in Applied Linguistics. N 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Clusters with would Would like Would act Would be Would do Would encourage Would limit Would mean Would need Would restrict Would seem Would take

Frequency 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

However, there is one case of the use of would in the sub-corpus of the RA abstracts in applied linguistics that renders its interpretation as a nonhedge, as seen in Excerpt (3) below. (3) This article examines the issue of using authentic speech data in an experimental research paradigm. We report exploratory studies to replicate a seminal investigation of listeners’ abilities to predict sentence completion in constructed read-aloud data. Our initial intention was to see whether the same gating instrument used on authentic talk from interactive settings would produce similar results. (Hughes and Szczepek Reed 2011, 197) Arguably, the pragma-communicative role of would in (3) is not that of a hedge, rather it could be regarded as a manifestation of one of the

46

Would in academic research article. Abstracts across three disciplines

meanings that are associated with the future intention and/or procedure in the past (see Salkie 2010). As far as the use of would in the sub-corpus of the RA abstracts in Applied Psycholinguistics is concerned, it is related, primarily, to the future-in-the-past planned activity and/or procedure, as seen in Excerpts (4)–(6): (4) The present study investigated whether word-boundary information, provided by alternating colors (consistent or inconsistent with wordboundary information) in a Chinese sentence would facilitate the reading of second-language (L2) learners. Thirty-three Korean students were recruited in the eye-movement experiment. Relative to a baseline (i.e., mono-colors) condition, incorrect word segmentation produced closer fixation location toward the beginning of words, longer fixation duration, higher refixation rate, and slower reading speed. [...] (Zhou, Ye, and Yan 2020, 685) (5) Processing speech can be slow and effortful for children, especially in adverse listening conditions, such as the classroom. This can have detrimental effects on children’s academic achievement. We therefore asked whether primary school children’s speech processing could be made faster and less effortful via the presentation of visual speech cues (speaker’s facial movements), and whether any audiovisual benefit would be modulated by the presence of noise or by characteristics of individual participants. A phoneme monitoring task with concurrent pupillometry was used to measure 7- to 11-year-old children’s speech processing speed and effort, with and without visual cues, in both quiet and noise. [...] (Holt, Bruggeman, and Demuth 2020, 933) (6) [...] Our primary hypothesis was that the inhibitory effect would be found on both school grade groups. We did not predict significant differences in magnitude of effect between second- and fourth-grade participants. A general inhibitory effect was found, and separate analyses by school grade groups also indicated significant inhibitory effects. Furthermore, second- and fourth-grade children showed small sizes of the inhibitory effect, resembling the sizes found in adult normal readers. Our results suggest that Spanish readers reach a functional connection between syllables and words at an early stage. (Luque et al. 2021, 1)

Oleksandr Kapranov

47

It is observed in (4)–(6) that whilst would as a hedge is indicative of an element of tentativeness associated with the formulation of the hypotheses and/or assumptions, it is also reflective of a planned procedure that is used in order to formulate the hypothesis. This contention is supported by the clusters of would in the sub-corpus of RA abstracts in applied psycholinguistics, as illustrated by Table 8. Table 8. The clustering analysis of would in RA abstracts in Applied Psycholinguistics within the period of time 2011௅2021. N 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Clusters with would Would be a challenge for children Would be advantageous for the teaching Would be found on both school grade groups Would be modulated by the presence of noise Would be more sensitive to phonotactics Would actually produce in spontaneous utterances Would endanger more nativelike processing Would facilitate the reading of second-language (L2) learners Would form a coherent story Would interact with effects of local-rate normalization Would predict development in word reading Would still be activated when processing language entirely

Frequency 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Presumably, the use of would as a hedge, nevertheless, appears to be related to the future-in-the-past series of actions that seek to formulate, support, and/or verify the hypotheses (see Table 8). If this line of reasoning is correct, it could be assumed that would in (4)–(6), as well as in other cases of would in the sub-corpus of the RA abstracts in Applied Psychology (see, for instance, Kuppen, Huss, and Goswami 2014, 1109; Wolter and Yamashita 2015, 1193) combine the so-called “weak” hedge with one of would’s prototypical meanings, namely the future-in-the-past reference (Salkie 2010). Obviously, a more representative corpus is needed to validate this assumption. The aforementioned “weak” hedging associated with would is also present in the sub-corpus of RA abstracts in English literature published by English: Journal of the English Association. It follows from the qualitative analysis that would in this sub-corpus often combines hedging

48

Would in academic research article. Abstracts across three disciplines

with its reference to the irreal probability in future-perfect-in-the-past, as exemplified by Excerpts (7)–(9). (7) Amidst the critically well-trodden layers of understanding Bleak House and the city, a little-considered avenue includes how the text’s original publication format influences the construction of urban space. Often, each serial opening and closing of the novel features one of two perspectives on urban space: cartographic and what I am calling extra-cartographic – beyond or outside of the map. In the serial text, theorizing space is overwhelmingly the job of the male omniscient narrator; for Esther, space is only ever a map. Using Henri Lefebvre's theories of space as well as the context of Victorian cartography, this essay explores how the serial reader would have been confronted with two distinct, gendered and gendered understandings of urban space. (Griffith 2012, 248) (8) This essay explores the significance for Defoe and his contemporaries of a brief episode near the beginning of Robinson Crusoe (1719) where Crusoe's ship is captured by pirates and he is held as a slave in Morocco for two years before escaping with a Morisco boy named Xury. At the time the novel was published, thousands of Christian slaves were being held in Muslim North Africa, and public campaigns to ransom them were organized on a large scale. Defoe's readers would have had access to many accounts describing how the ‘Barbary pirates’ operated, and the conditions in which their captives were held. Defoe himself regarded the activities of the pirates as a serious threat to the development of international trade and commerce, and frequently called for the creation of a pan-European military force to suppress them. (Owens 2013, 51) (9) Thornton Wilder’s tragic and elegiac historical novel The Bridge of San Luis Rey (1927) focuses throughout on the universal themes of death, transience, and love; the historical past serves mainly to enhance its concern with time and what if anything will survive it. The resemblances of Philip Larkin’s ‘An Arundel Tomb’ to this neglected American masterpiece are striking and justify a claim for what Harold Bloom would have termed an anxious influence. (McAlindon 2014, 115).

Oleksandr Kapranov

49

The combination of hedging and an irreal probability in future-perfectin-the-past demonstrated by Excerpts (7)–(9) is further supported by the results of the clustering analysis that is summarised in Table 9. Table 9. The clustering analysis of would in RA abstracts in English literature within the period of time 2011௅2021. N 1 2 3 4 5

Clusters with would Would have been confronted with two distinct Would have been significantly different Would have had access to many accounts Would have involved complex social relationships Would have termed an anxious influence

Frequency 1 1 1 1 1

Whereas a noteworthy combination of hedging with the irreal probability is seen in Excerpts (7)–(9), as well as in Table 9, there are instances of would in the sub-corpus of English: Journal of the English Association that do not seem to involve hedging. Instead, would in these instances manifests a habitual, persistent habit or action in the past, e.g. (10) In early poetry T. S. Eliot would counter his compulsion to repeat the Decadent aesthetic forms by his disapproval of the Decadent amoral ethos. His taunting ambivalence on the subject of British Aestheticism is best crystallized in his attitude to Oscar Wilde. The aim of this essay is to look at Wilde’s presence implicit in Eliot’s writings. First, this study focuses on the allusions to Wilde as they appear in Eliot’s letters. Then, it examines Wilde’s presence in Eliot in terms of literary borrowings and of poetry theft, two famously Eliotean concepts, which are related, in fact equivalent, to Nietzsche’s ideas of accumulation and creative transformation of cultural inheritance. (Budziak 2016, 140)

Conclusions The chapter introduced and discussed a computer-assisted study that aimed to investigate the frequency of the occurrence and the use of would in RA abstracts in such related disciplines as applied linguistics, applied psycholinguistics, and English literature. To that end, the study involved the corpus of RA abstracts that were published by the prestigious peerreviewed journals Applied Linguistics, Applied Psycholinguistics, and

50

Would in academic research article. Abstracts across three disciplines

English: Journal of the English Association within the period of time 2011–2021. The study was based upon the assumption that would was critically involved in the academic writer’s strategy of hedging (Hyland 1994; Jiang and Hyland 2020; Russell 2014). The study employed the definition of hedging by Hyland (2005), who regarded it as a tentative and vague manner of presenting the academic writer’s argument, hypothesis and/or results. In the wake of Hyland (2005), the study explored the frequency of the occurrence of would in the corpus via the application of the computer program AntConc version 4.0.11 (Anthony 2022) in combination with the subsequent qualitative analysis, which sought to establish the pragmacommunicative roles of would. The results of the quantitative investigation indicated that the frequency of would was low in RA abstracts in all three disciplines. The finding could be interpreted as novel, since the literature did not describe would as a low frequency modal verb in academic writing in English (Bellés-Fortuño and Querol-Julián 2010; Carrió Pastor 2014; Condoravdi 2003; Farr and O'Keeffe 2002; Hinkel 2009; Hyland 2005; Jie 2010; Moon 2011; Ngula 2017; Orta 2010). The results of the present study, however, demonstrated that would was infrequent not only from the point of diachrony, but also infrequent in relation to other central modal verbs in the corpus. The findings could be indicative of the differences in the use of would in various domains of academic writing. In particular, whilst would was reported to be frequent in business communication (Jie 2010), in humanities, especially in applied linguistics, applied psycholinguistics, and English literature it appeared not to be the case. The qualitative analysis of the corpus suggested that would was related to hedging, as reported by the prior literature (Hyland 2005; Orta 2010). However, whereas would was found to be extensively employed as a hedging device in the RA abstracts in applied linguistics and, to an extent, in English literature, it did not play the role of a hedge in applied psycholinguistics. Specifically, it was discovered that would in the RA abstracts in applied psycholinguistics was associated, predominantly, with the description, formulation, and validation of the hypothesis. The finding could be taken to suggest possible discipline-specific uses of would that should be considered when producing academic writing in applied psycholinguistics. Obviously, the results of the present investigation should be treated with caution, since the study could be described as exploratory. Whilst the corpus of the investigation could be considered modest, it would be, nevertheless, possible to suggest that the present findings could offer a novel avenue of examining the modal verb would, as well as other modal

Oleksandr Kapranov

51

verbs as hedges and as the lexical items not associated with a particular pragma-communicative role in academic writing in English.

Acknowledgments The author wishes to acknowledge their appreciation of the editor of this volume, Dr Monika SkorasiĔska, whose research in modality and modal verbs served as an impetus for the present chapter.

Primary Sources Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011௅2021. https://academic.oup.com/applij?login=false. Applied Psycholinguistics. Cambridge: The University of Cambridge Press, 2011௅2021. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/appliedpsycholinguistics. English: Journal of the English Association. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011௅2021. https://academic.oup.com/english?login=false.

References Anthony, Laurence. AntConc (Version 4.0.11) [Computer Software]. Tokyo, Japan: Waseda University, 2022. Accessed 1.07.2022. https://www.laurenceanthony.net/software. Bellés-Fortuño, Begoña, and Mercedes Querol-Julián. “Evaluation in research article abstracts: A cross-cultural study between Spanish and English medical discourse.” In Constructing Interpersonality: Multiple Perspectives on Written Academic Genres, edited by Enrique Lafuente-Millán, Rosa Lorés-Sanz, and Pilar Mur-Dueñas, 83௅98. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2010. Bhatia, Vijay K. Analyzing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings. Harlow: Longman, 1993. Budziak, Anna. “From TS Eliot to Oscar Wilde: Aesthetic borrowings, ethical theft, and redemption.” English: Journal of the English Association 65, no. 249 (2016): 140௅157. https://doi.org/10.1093/english/efw013. Carrió Pastor, Maria. “Cross-cultural variation in the use of modal verbs in academic English.” SKY Journal of Linguistics 27, no. 1 (2014): 153௅166. Chang, Peichin, and Mary Schleppegrell. “Taking an effective authorial stance in academic writing: Making the linguistic resources explicit for

52

Would in academic research article. Abstracts across three disciplines

L2 writers in the social sciences.” Journal of English for Academic Purposes 10, no. 3 (2011): 140௅151. Condoravdi, Cleo. “Moods and modalities for will and would.” Invited Communication at Amsterdam Colloquium. 2003. https://web.stanford.edu/~cleoc/ac-han.pdf. Crompton, Peter. “Hedging in academic writing: Some theoretical problems.” English for Specific Purposes 16, no. 4 (1997): 271௅287. Doró, Katalin. “The rhetoric structure of research article abstracts in English studies journals.” Prague Journal of English Studies 2, no. 1 (2013): 119௅139. Escudero, Moisés Perales, and John M. Swales. “Tracing convergence and divergence in pairs of Spanish and English research article abstracts.” Ibérica 21 (2011): 49௅70. Farr, Fiona, and Anne O'Keeffe. “Would as a hedging device in an Irish context. An intra-varietal comparison of institutionalised spoken interaction.” In Using Corpora to Explore Linguistic Variation, edited by Randi Reppen, Susan M. Fitzmaurice, and Douglas Biber, 25௅48. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 2002. Fløttum, Kjersti, Torodd Kinn, and Trine Dahl. ““We now report on...” versus “Let us now see how...”: Author Roles and Interaction with the Readers in Research Articles. In Academic Discourse Across Disciplines, edited by Ken Hyland and Marina Bondi, 203௅224. Bern: Peter Lang, 2006. Ghasempour, Bahareh, and Maryam Farnia. “Contrastive move analysis: Persian and English research articles abstracts in law.” Journal of Teaching English for Specific and Academic Purposes 5, no. 4 (2017): 739௅753. https://doi.org/10.22190/JTESAP1704739G. Gillaerts, Paul, and Freek Van de Velde. 2010. “Interactional metadiscourse in research article abstracts.” Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9, no. 2 (2010): 128௅139. Graf-Vlachy, Lorenz. “Is the readability of abstracts decreasing in management research?.” Review of Managerial Science 16, no. 4 (2022): 1063௅1084. Griffith, Jane. “Such a labyrinth of streets: Serialization and the gendered view of urban Space in Bleak House.” English: Journal of the English Association 61, no. 234 (2012): 248௅266. https://doi.org/10.1093/english/efs033. Hinkel, Eli. “The effects of essay topics on modal verb uses in L1 and L2 academic writing.” Journal of Pragmatics 41, no. 4 (2009): 667௅683. Holt, Rebecca, Laurence Bruggeman, and Katherine Demuth. “Visual speech cues speed processing and reduce effort for children listening in

Oleksandr Kapranov

53

quiet and noise.” Applied Psycholinguistics 41, no. 4 (2020): 933௅961. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716420000302. Huckin, Thomas. “Abstracting from abstracts.” In Academic Writing in Context: Implications and Applications, edited by Martin Hewings, 93௅103. London: Continuum, 2001. Hughes, Rebecca, and Beatrice Szczepek Reed. “Learning about speech by experiment: Issues in the investigation of spontaneous talk within the experimental research paradigm.” Applied Linguistics 32, no. 2 (2011):197–214. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amq044. Hyland, Ken. “Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse.” Discourse Studies 7, no. 2 (2005): 173௅192. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605050365. Hyland, Ken. Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interactions in Academic Writing. London: Longman, 2000. Hyland, Ken. “Talking to the academy: Forms of hedging in science research articles.” Written Communication 13, no. 2 (1996): 251௅281. Hyland, Ken. “The author in the text: Hedging scientific writing.” Hong Kong Papers in Linguistics and Language Teaching 18 (1995): 33௅42. Hyland, Ken. “Hedging in academic writing and EAF textbooks.” English for Specific Purposes 13, no. 3 (1994): 239௅256. Jie, Chen. “A generic analysis of English research article abstracts and the use of modal verbs for financial economics.” Sino-US English Teaching 7, no. 12 (2010): 33௅37. Jiang, Feng Kevin, and Ken Hyland. “Prescription and reality in advanced academic writing.” Ibérica: Revista de la Asociación Europea de Lenguas para Fines Específicos (AELFE) 39 (2020): 14௅42. Kafes, Hüseyin. “Cultural traces on the rhetorical organization of research article abstracts.” International Journal on New Trends in Education and Their Implications 3, no. 3 (2012): 207௅220. Kapranov, Oleksandr. Forthcoming. “Modal verbs in sustainability reports by the University of Cambridge and the University of Oxford: Comparing discursive practices.” [Manuscript submitted for publication]. Kapranov, Oleksandr. “Self-mention in research sections of university websites in Estonia and the United Kingdom.” B.A.S. British and American Studies 27 (2021): 57௅69. Kapranov, Oleksandr. “A diachronic corpus-assisted study of climate change discourse in annual reports by British Petroleum.” In Discourse Studies – Ways and Crossroads. Insights into Cultural, Diachronic and Genre Issues in the Discipline, edited by Karolina BroĞ and Grzegorz Kowalski, 191௅205. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2017.

54

Would in academic research article. Abstracts across three disciplines

Karahan, PÕnar. “Comparative analysis of epistemic modal verbs in the three sub-corpora of humanities & social sciences.” International Journal of Educational Spectrum 4, no. 1 (2022): 43௅63. https://doi.org/10.47806/ijesacademic.1070806. Khany, Reza, and Bahareh Malmir. “A move-marker list: A study of rhetorical move-lexis linguistic realizations of research article abstracts in social and behavioural sciences.” RELC Journal 51, no. 3 (2020): 381௅396. Kuppen, Sarah, Martina Huss, and Usha Goswami. “A longitudinal study of basic auditory processing and phonological skills in children with low IQ.” Applied Psycholinguistics 35, no. 6 (2014): 1109௅1141. Leech, Geoffrey N. Meaning and the English Verb. London/New York: Routledge, 2014. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315835464. Lingard, Lorelei, and Christopher Watling. Story, Not Study: 30 Brief Lessons to Inspire Health Researchers as Writers. Cham: Springer, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71363-8. Lorés, Rosa. “On RA abstracts: from rhetorical structure to thematic organisation.” English for Specific Purposes 23, no. 3 (2004): 280௅302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2003.06.001. Luque, Juan L., Carlos Javier Álvarez, Soraya Bordoy, Almudena Giménez, P. Javier López-Pérez and Miguel López-Zamora. “Inhibitory effect of positional syllable frequency in Spanish 2nd and 4th grade readers”. Applied Psycholinguistics 42, no. 1 (2021): 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716420000508. Martín, Pedro Angel. A genre-analysis study of English and Spanish research article abstracts in the experimental social sciences: Estudio textual contrastivo (español-inglés) de los resúmenes de los artículos de investigación de las ciencias sociales experimentales. Unpublished PhD Diss. Universidad de La Laguna, 2003. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/tesis?codigo=1138. Martín, Pedro M., and Sally Burgess. “The rhetorical management of academic criticism in research article abstracts.” Text & Talk 24, no. 2 (2004): 171௅195. Mauranen, Anna. Cultural Differences in Academic Rhetoric. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1993. Mauranen, Anna, Carmen Perez-Llantada, and John Swales. “Academic Englishes ௅ A standardized knowledge?” In The Routledge Encyclopaedia of World Englishes, edited by Andy Kirpatrik, 634௅652. London/New York: Routledge, 2010.

Oleksandr Kapranov

55

McAlindon, Tom. “Cathedral musings: Larkin, Wilder, and the mutability tradition.” English: Journal of the English Association 63, no. 241 (2014): 115–131. https://doi.org/10.1093/english/eft042. Moon, Lori. 2011. “Modal verbs in the common ground: Discriminating among actual and nonactual uses of could and would for improved text interpretation.” 2011 AAAI Fall Symposium Series. Accessed 1.07.2022, https://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/FSS/FSS11/paper/viewPaper/4152. Ngula, Richmond Sadick. “Epistemic modal verbs in research articles written by Ghanaian and international scholars: A corpus-based study of three disciplines.” Brno Studies in English 43, no. 2 (2017): 5௅27. https://doi.org/10.5817/BSE2017-2-1. Norris, Carolyn Brimley. Academic Writing in English. Helsinki: University of Helsinki, 2016. Orta, Ignacio Vázquez. “A contrastive analysis of the use of modal verbs in the expression of epistemic stance in Business Management research articles in English and Spanish.” Ibérica, Revista de la Asociación Europea de Lenguas para Fines Específicos 19 (2010): 77௅95. Owens, W. Robert. “Defoe, Robinson Crusoe, and the Barbary Pirates.” English: Journal of the English Association 62, no. 236 (2013): 51–66. https://doi.org/10.1093/english/efs061. Pang, Priscilla. “Directives in Professional Kitchens and Potential Learning Opportunities.” Applied Linguistics 40, no. 5 (2019): 754–772. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amy017. Plastina, Anna Franca. “Professional discourse in video abstracts: Rearticulating the meaning of written research article abstracts.” In Specialised and Professional Discourse across Media and Genres, edited by Giuliana Garzone, Paola Catenaccio, Kim Grego, and Roxanne Doerr, 57௅73. Milano: Ledizioni, 2017. Ren, Hongwei, and Yuying Li. “A comparison study on the rhetorical moves of abstracts in published research articles and master’s foreignlanguage theses.” English Language Teaching 4, no. 1 (2011): 162௅166. Rizviü-Eminoviü, Edina, and Ĉelaludina Šukaliü. “Corpus-based study of the modal verbs in the spoken and academic genres of the corpus of contemporary American English.” Zbornik Radova Islamskog Pedagoškog Fakulteta u Zenici 17 (2019): 351௅375. Russell, Margo K. A Comparison of Linguistic Features in the Academic Writing of Advanced English Language Learner and English First Language University Students (Doctoral dissertation, Portland State University), 2014.

56

Would in academic research article. Abstracts across three disciplines

https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3023&c ontext=open_access_etds. Salkie, Raphael. “Will: Tense or modal or both?” English Language & Linguistics 14, no. 2 (2010): 187௅215. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674310000055. Samaie, Mahmoud, Fereshteh Khosravian, and Mahnaz Boghayeri. “The frequency and types of hedges in research article introductions by Persian and English native authors.” Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 98 (2014): 1678௅1685. Samraj, Betty. “An exploration of a genre set: Research article abstracts and introductions in two disciplines.” English for Specific Purposes 24, no. 2 (2005): 141௅156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2002.10.001. Sanz, Rosa L. “I will argue that’: first person pronouns as metadiscoursal devices in research article abstracts in English and Spanish.” ESP across Cultures 3 (2006): 23௅40. SkorasiĔska, Monika. Modal Verbs in Marlowe and Shakespeare: A Semantic-Pragmatic Approach. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2019. Swales, John M. Research Genres: Explorations and Applications. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Swales, John M. Genre Analysis. English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. Swales, John M. and Christine B. Feak. Abstracts and the Writing of Abstracts. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 2009. https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.309332. Swales, John M., and Hazem Najjar. “The writing of research article introductions.” Written Communication 4, no. 2 (1987): 175௅191. Tankó, Gyula. “Literary research article abstracts: An analysis of rhetorical moves and their linguistic realizations.” Journal of English for Academic Purposes 27 (2017): 42௅55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2017.04.003. Thompson, Paul. “Modal verbs in academic writing.” In Teaching and Learning by Doing Corpus Analysis, edited by Bernhard Kettemann and Georg Marko, 305௅325. Leiden: Brill, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004334236. Van Compernolle, Rémi A. “Constructing a Second Language Sociolinguistic Repertoire: A Sociocultural Usage-based Perspective.” Applied Linguistics 40, no. 6 (2019): 871–893. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amy033. Vine, Bernadette. “Modal verbs in New Zealand English directives.” Nordic Journal of English Studies 3, no. 3 (2004): 205௅220.

Oleksandr Kapranov

57

Wolter, Brent, and Junko Yamashita. “Processing collocations in a second language: A case of first language activation?” Applied Psycholinguistics 36, no. 5 (2015): 1193௅1221. http://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716414000113. Whitty, Lauren, Jean Parkinson, and Ha Thi Phuong Pham. “Can and could in academic writing: A corpus-driven comparison of English L1 and Vietnamese EFL students.” The Journal of Asia TEFL 19, no. 1 (2022): 93௅108. http://dx.doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2022.19.1.6.93. Wilson, Andrew. “Modal verbs in written Indian English: A quantitative and comparative analysis of the Kolhapur corpus using correspondence analysis.” ICAME Journal 29 (2005): 151௅170. Yoon, Jungwan, and J. Elliott Casal. “Rhetorical structure, sequence, and variation: A stepဨdriven move analysis of applied linguistics conference abstracts.” International Journal of Applied Linguistics 30, no. 3 (2020): 462௅478. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12300. Zhou, Wei, Wanwen Ye, and Ming Yan. “Alternating-color words facilitate reading and eye movements among second-language learners of Chinese.” Applied Psycholinguistics 41, no. 3 (2020): 685–699. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716420000211. Zibalas, Deividas, and Jolanta Šinknjnienơ. “Rhetorical structure of promotional genres: The case of research article and conference abstracts.” Discourse and Interaction 12, no. 2 (2019): 95௅113.

MODALITY OF CAN IN THE COMEDIES OF WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE MONIKA SKORASIēSKA*

Abstract This study concerns the use of the modal verb can, its meanings and usage, in the comedies of the greatest Early Modern English playwright, William Shakespeare. The research seeks to shed more light on the development and expression of modality by means of modal verbs in Renaissance plays. In particular, the study is an attempt to provide a semantic-pragmatic analysis of the modal verb can. The analysed research material includes the earliest comedies by William Shakespeare, written and published around the last decade of the sixteenth century, including The Comedy of Errors (1589), The Taming of the Shrew (1593), Two Gentlemen of Verona (1594), and Love’s Labour Lost (1594). The selection of the plays has been made based on the date of their first publication, which allows to compare the results of the analysis with those of the research conducted on Shakespeare’s tragedies and history plays by SkorasiĔska (2019) and dated back at the same period of time. This study is based on a semantic-pragmatic analysis of the corpus and provides quantitative as well as qualitative data complemented by numerous examples and quotations. The analysis takes into consideration several factors, among others: time reference, a wider context of the speech, the presence of non-modal verbs, forms of modal expression, and the status of the participants. *

Monika SkorasiĔska PhD graduated from Adam Mickiewicz University in PoznaĔ, Poland (PhD in Linguistics) and from University of Szczecin (MA in English Philology; MA in Special Needs Education). She is currently working as a didactic adjunct at the Institute of Linguistics, University of Szczecin, Poland. She is an English language teacher with 25 years experience in teaching general as well as professional English to children and adults. She has professional experience as a translator and a proof-reader. Her research interests include historical linguistics, semantics, pragmatics, modality, modal verbs, history of the English language, the Early Modern English period, Shakespearian language, and Marlovian language. E-mail: [email protected].

60

Modality of can in the comedies of William Shakespeare

Introduction This research is a follow-up of an earlier bigger project (SkorasiĔska, 2019), which aimed at a contrastive analysis of nine central modal verbs, including can, could, will, would, may, might, shall, should, and must, in Christopher Marlowe’s tragedies and William Shakespeare’s tragedies and history plays. Since the previous research did not confirm the correlation between the use of the modal verbs and the genre in which they occur, the need has arisen to further investigate this relation by extending the research material in terms of the genre ௅ comedies ௅ and to answer the question of how and to what extent, if any, the expression of modality by means of modal verbs in Early Modern English period is determined by the type of text in which they are employed. The aim of this study thus is to investigate the universality of the modal verb can employed in the comedies of William Shakespeare and its diversity in terms of the denoted modal meanings. The secondary aim is to compare the outcomes with those revealed by SkorasiĔska (2014) concerning the same modal verb employed in Shakespearian tragedies and history play. In linguistics, modality is a complex and widely studied phenomenon which, broadly speaking, allows the speaker to express their attitude towards the notion of an utterance without stating it in a direct or open way. By means of modal markers ௅ such as modal verbs (e.g., can, may, or must), adverbs (e.g., perhaps or probably), and other modal phrases (e.g., I presume or I expect) ௅ the speaker hints on their conviction (or its lack) as to the current state of events, affects the behaviour of the interlocutor by, for instance, granting (or refusing) permission, banning, threatening, promising, requesting, etc., or simply admits the existence of some neutral circumstances enabling (or disabling) an event to take place. The up-to-date subject literature, although thoroughly investigated by many linguists for over half a century (e.g., Ehrman 1966; Kakietek 1972; Coates 1983; Aijmer 1985; Palmer 1973, 1990, 2001; Facchinetti 1993; Bybee 1995; Krug 2000; Papafragou 2000; Grzegorczykowa 2001; Kiefer 2009, Nakayasu 2009; Warner 2009; Portner 2009; Kiefer 2009; SkorasiĔska 2014, 2019; Yong-Beom 2017; Zhang 2019), fails to provide one homogenous and generally accepted definition, let alone the classification, of modality. One observes the lack of consensus among linguists as for what constitutes modality and what are its different types. Most attempts at defining modality are inept in that they delineate the area of linguistic modality rather than explain its essence. The most controversial matter concerns the inclusion (or perhaps exclusion) of dynamic modal meanings, such as ability or volition, into the area of

Monika SkorasiĔska

61

linguistic modality. Grzegorczykowa (2001), for instance excludes ability or dynamic (modal) meanings from the domain of modality. This is in line with her understanding of modality which she defines as the information about the attitude of the speaker towards the conveyed content of the utterance, and very often also towards the interlocutor. Thus, according to Grzegorczykowa (2001), dynamic modality should be rather left beyond the broad area of modality. This attitude contradicts Palmer’s (2001) classification of modality, which distinguishes between: ௅ dynamic modality ௅ denoting ability or willingness coming from an internal source; ௅ deontic modality ௅ in which obligation or permission comes from an external source; ௅ epistemic modality ௅ which is used to express the speaker’s judgement about the truth of the proposition; and ௅ evidential modality ௅ indicating the evidence that the speaker has for the factual status of the proposition (Palmer 2001). This study follows Palmer’s (2001) classification of modality assuming that the concepts of ability and willingness should be considered within the domain of dynamic modality and constitute its integrated part within the modal system of the English language.

Evolution of the modal verb can1 The modal verb can has been in the spotlight of linguists (Ehrman 1966; Kakietek 1972; Coates 1983; Kytö 1987; Bybee et al. 1994; Palmer 2001; SkorasiĔska 2014) for many decades and, based on the experience of the author of this chapter, it is one of the nine central modal verbs most eagerly undertaken by students writing their diploma papers on modality. Its development, from the Old English preterite-present verb cunnan, meaning “to know,” “to know how,” and “be mentally or intellectually able” (Oxford English Dictionary) or “to have learned” and “to have carnal knowledge” (Online Etymology Dictionary) shows a gradual development of its meaning from mental to physical capacity. This development of abilitive can is shortlisted by Bybee (1988, as quoted in Bybee et al. 1994: 192) to three stages of what she calls a gradual loss of the semantic components of the verb and generalization of its meanings. Thus according to Bybee (1988, as quoted in Bybee et al. 1994: 192), the modal 1

Aspects of it were earlier discussed in SkorasiĔska (2019).

62

Modality of can in the comedies of William Shakespeare

verb can predicates that for the completion of the main predicate situation mental enabling conditions exist in the agent (1st stage); enabling conditions exist in the agent (2nd stage); and enabling conditions exist for the completion of the main predicate situation (3rd stage). It is easy to observe the semantic transition of the verb from (mental) ability to general (dynamic) capacity. This observation is supported by Facchinetti’s (1993, 213) studies of EModE texts revealing the majority of dynamic capability meanings of the modal verb can. With can taking on the capability sense, the modal verb enters into a competition with the modal verb may, which is in progress already in Middle English, and is finally settled in Early Modern English with can overtaking the meaning “be able to” (Traugott 1972, 172). Frequent collocations of the modal verb can with sensual verbs and the increased tendency to take on new meanings is observed by Facchinetti (1993, 212) as early as in Early Modern English texts. Coates (1983, 93) also reports on the emergence in this period of two new meanings of can, that is, of possibility enabled by external circumstances (dynamic), and of permission granted by human authority, rules and regulations (deontic), with the latter meaning being firmly established as late as in the nineteenth century (Traugott 1972, 172).

Corpus The research material of this study includes the earliest comedies of William Shakespeare, dated back to the end of the sixteenth century, namely The Comedy of Errors (1589), The Taming of the Shrew (1593), Two Gentlemen of Verona (1594), and Love’s Labour’s Lost (1594). In total, the corpus consists of 80,031 words. The number of words in each comedy is given in Table 1. Table 1. Number of words in the comedies of Shakespeare. The Comedy of Errors (1589) The Taming of the Shrew (1593) Two Gentlemen of Verona (1594) Love’s Labour Lost (1594) Total

total number of words 16,083 22,394 18,609 22,947 80,033

Source: Author’s own calculation.

In total, 178 instances of the modal verb can have been attested in the analysed research material. The analysis shows that the verb is most

Monika SkorasiĔska

63

frequent in Two Gentlemen of Verona, where it constitutes nearly 40.00 RF (39.22 RF), and least common in The Comedy of Errors with only one third of this rate, namely 13.05 RF. The other two plays reveal the distribution of the verb with merely a half of the highest rate, that is at or below 20.00 RF ௅ The Taming of the Shrew with 16.96 RF and Love’s Labour Lost with 20.04 RF (see Table 2). Table 2. Distribution of can in the comedies of Shakespeare. The Comedy of Errors The Taming of the Shrew Two Gentlemen of Verona Love’s Labour Lost Total

can (F)2 21 38 73 46 178

can (RF)3 13.05 16.96 39.22 20.04 22.24

Source: Author’s own research.

The most frequent form of the analysed modal verb is can, calculated together with its negative form cannot. Other attested forms include the second person singular (thou) canst, with 10 occurrences in the research material. Table 3. Distribution of different variants of can. can The Comedy of Errors The Taming of the Shrew Two Gentlemen of Verona Love’s Labour Lost Total

canst (F) 1 1 5 3 10

Source: Author’s own research.

Dynamic possibility As already mentioned, dynamic modality is the most controversial of all modal types. There is a general consensus among linguists concerning epistemic and deontic modalities, however, the nature of dynamic modality evokes a dispute over the status and classification of dynamic 2 3

Frequency Relative frequency

64

Modality of can in the comedies of William Shakespeare

modal utterances. The disagreement stems from the fact that the umbrella of dynamic modality theoretically covers also the notion of ability (Palmer 1990), which is neither the expression of the speaker’s attitude nor affects the behaviour of the interlocutor. Besides ability, the notion of dynamic modality includes the utterances which are neutral in that they simply state the existence of objective circumstances allowing for an event to take place. This type of modality is analysed in terms of dynamic possibility. Table 4. Distribution of can indicating dynamic possibility in the comedies of Shakespeare. The Comedy of Errors The Taming of the Shrew Two Gentlemen of Verona Love’s Labour Lost Total

F 18 36 71 42 167

RF 11.19 16.07 38.15 18.30 20.86

Source: Author’s own research.

As for the modal verb can indicating dynamic modality, the verb is necessarily and exclusively related to the internal possibility of a subject to perform certain action. This involves not only the skills and abilities of the subject, but also the knowledge and mental capacities which enable them to act. Palmer (1990: 85) differentiates between two different notions of subject oriented can, ability and power, depending on the animacy of the subject. Ability is assigned exclusively to animate entities such as people or animals, as in examples (1௅3). The verb in this sense may refer either to their natural or acquired skills, or simply to their physical capacity to perform. (1) A horse cannot fetch, but only carry; (W. Sh., Two Gentlemen of Verona, 3.1.) (2) O, 'tis the curse in love, and still approved, When women cannot love where they’re beloved! (W. Sh., Two Gentlemen of Verona, 5.4.) (3) Youngling, thou canst not love so dear as I. (W. Sh., The Taming of the Shrew, 2.1.)

Monika SkorasiĔska

65

Power denotes the ‘abilities’ of inanimate entities, as in examples (4௅6). In general, lifeless matter itself possesses no control over events, neither can perform nor pursue the course of action, however, it may reveal certain characteristics which in some way may affect the vicinity and enhance the neighbouring community to act. (4) Ay, gentle Thurio: for you know that love Will creep in service where it cannot go. (W. Sh., Two Gentlemen of Verona, 4.2.) (5) Though the chameleon Love can feed on the air, I am one that am nourished by my victuals, and would fain have meat. (W. Sh., Two Gentlemen of Verona, 2.1.) (6) And I am one that love Bianca more Than words can witness, or your thoughts can guess. (W. Sh., The Taming of the Shrew, 2.1.) In the analysed research material, the modal verb can has been found to denote the power of: love (5 tokens), words (2 tokens), praise (1 token), slander (1 token), tongue (1 token), thoughts (2 tokens), world (2 tokens), din (1 token), wind (1 token), time (1 token), brass (1 token), mirth (1 token), and beauty (1 token). Several other subtypes of dynamic possibility indicated by the modal verb can have been attested in the research material, including rational, neutral, and circumstantial modality. Rational possibility indicates the events which are unacceptable in the opinion of the speaker. This type of modality is mostly found in negative sentences. The modal verb denoting rational possibility is typically used with a subject either in the first person, the impersonal you, or something with which the speaker indentifies themselves. Only 4 instances of the modal verb can indicating rational possibility have been detested in the analysed comedies of William Shakespeare, for example in (7) and (8). (7) She is a virtuous and a reverend lady: It cannot be that she hath done thee wrong. (W. Sh., The Comedy of Errors, 5.1.) (8) For it can never be They will digest this harsh indignity. (W. Sh., Love’s Labor’s Lost, 5.2.)

66

Modality of can in the comedies of William Shakespeare

Neutral possibility indicates the existence of possibility for an event to happen. A plausible paraphrase of the meaning of can denoting neutral possibility is ‘It is possible for...’ (Palmer, 1990). In this type of modality, the possibility is conditioned by some external factors or circumstances. When these factors are clearly defined by the context of the utterance, this type of modality is classified as circumstantial possibility (Palmer 1990), as in (9௅11). (9) What ruins are in me that can be found (W. Sh., The Comedy of Errors, 2.1.) (10) Talk not to me: I will go sit and weep Till I can find occasion of revenge. (W. Sh., The Taming of the Shrew, 2.1.) (11) I'll see the church o'your back; then come back to my master's as soon as I can. (W. Sh., The Taming of the Shrew, 5.1.) Circumstantial possibility is a subtype of neutral possibility indicating clearly defined circumstances which condition the occurrence of an event or phenomena. This kind of modality is easy to define when employed in conditional clauses, otherwise it can be confusing and ambiguous in terms of the type of modality denoted. (12) Knowing that tender youth is soon suggested, I nightly lodge her in an upper tower, The key whereof myself have ever kept; And thence she cannot be convey'd away. (W. Sh., Two Gentlemen of Verona, 3.1.) (13) I am my master’s true-confirmed love; But cannot be true servant to my master, Unless I prove false traitor to myself. (W. Sh., Two Gentlemen of Verona, 4.4.)

Monika SkorasiĔska

67

Table 3. Distribution of can indicating deontic modality in the comedies of Shakespeare. The Comedy of Errors The Taming of the Shrew Two Gentlemen of Verona Love’s Labour Lost Total

F 3 2 2 3 10

RF 1.86 0.89 1.07 1.30 1.25

Source: Author’s own research.

Deontic modality is performative or ‘discourse-oriented.’ By means of deontic can, the speaker may either give permission ௅ permissive can (no tokens in the research material); refuse permission or forbid to act ௅ forbidding can(not) used to reject the request of the interlocutor or to forbid them to act (14); or ask for something ௅ in polite requests. (14) Tranio: Let us entreat you stay till after dinner. Petruchio: It may not be. Gremio: Let me entreat you. Petruchio: It cannot be. (W. Sh., The Taming of the Shrew, 3.2.) (15) Have at you with another; that's௅When? can you tell? (W. Sh., The Comedy of Errors, 3.1.) (16) Can you tell for whose sake? (W. Sh., The Comedy of Errors, 3.1.) In terms of epistemic can, only 1 instance of the modal verb can indicating epistemicity has been attested (17). It is used in a negative form to indicate the negative judgement of the speaker towards the suggested state of affairs. (17) Boyet: But is this Hector? King: I think Hector was not so clean-timbered. Longaville: His leg is too big for Hector's. Dumain: More calf, certain. Boyet: No; he is best indued in the small. Biron: This cannot be Hector. (W. Sh., Love’s Labor’s Lost, 5.2.) The modal verb can has been observed to collocate readily with different groups of verbs, namely with communicative verbs, verbs of sensation, and private verbs. In terms of communicative verbs, the

68

Modality of can in the comedies of William Shakespeare

collocations include the verbs: tell (8 tokens), as in (18), say (1 token), speak (1 token), and deny (1 token). (18) What I should think of this, I cannot tell; (W. Sh., The Comedy of Errors, 3.2.) Verbs of sensation collocating with the modal verb can include see (3 tokens), hear (1 token), and witness (1 token) (examples (19௅21)). (19) Here if thou stay, thou canst not see thy love; (W. Sh., Two Gentlemen of Verona, 3.1.) (20) My ears are stopt and cannot hear good news, So much of bad already hath possess'd them. (W. Sh., Two Gentlemen of Verona, 3.1.) (21) Nay, he's at two hands with me, and that my two ears can witness. (W. Sh., The Comedy of Errors, 3.2.) As for private verbs, two verbs, think and assure, have been found to collocate with the modal verb can (22௅23). (22) And now you are metamorphosed with a mistress, that, when I look on you, I can hardly think you my master; (W. Sh., Two Gentlemen of Verona, 2.1.) (23) You cannot beg us, sir, I can assure you, sir; we know what we know; (W. Sh., Love’s Labor’s Lost, 5.2.)

Conclusions The most common type of modality of the modal verb can observed in the research material is dynamic possibility, whereas the most common type of dynamic modality is neutral possibility. A correlation has been observed between the frequency of the modalities of can and the main themes of the comedies. For instance, an outstandingly high distribution of abilitive can has been attested in The Taming of the Shrew, the play which touches upon human nature, the

Monika SkorasiĔska

69

institution of marriage, and prescribed social roles of individuals. This kind of correspondence between the frequency of modalities and the main theme of the researched text was earlier observed by SkorasiĔska (2019) in her study of modal verbs in Christopher Marlowe’s and William Shakespeare’s plays. For instance, in Doctor Faustus, it is the possession of supernatural power that motivates the frequent appearance of neutral dynamic can, whereas in Dido, Queen of Carthage, it is the obsessive and unhappy love of Dido for Aeneas. This explanation, however, becomes only partially plausible in the light of the fact that Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet does not exhibit the same tendency, although the leading theme of unhappy love is prevailing in both tragedies. On the other hand, the relative frequency of can indicating a polite request is minor, limited to merely few cases, in comparison to other meanings, such as neutral possibility. Thus the exclusive analysis of the modal verb can may seem insufficient to arrive at undisputed conclusions, and further qualitative and quantitative studies of other modal verbs in Shakespeare’s comedies are needed.

Primary sources The Works of William Shakespeare Perseus Collection. Perseus Digital Library Project. edited by Gregory R. Crane. Tufts University, 1947. www.perseus.tufts.edu.

References Aijmer, Karin. “The semantic development of will.” In Historical semantics, historical word-formation, edited by Jacek Fisiak, 11௅21. New York: Mouton, 1985. Bybee, Joan. “The semantic development of past tense modals in English.” In Modality in grammar and discourse, edited by Joan Bybee and Suzanne Fleischman, 503௅517. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 1995. Bybee, Joan, and Suzanne Fleischman, ed. Modality in grammar and discourse. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 1995. Coates, Jennifer. The semantics of the modal auxiliaries. London: Croom Helm, 1983. Ehrman, Madeline. The meanings of the modals in present-day American English. The Hague: Mouton, 1966. Facchinetti, Roberta. “Can vs. may in Early Modern English.” In English Diachronic Syntax, edited by Maurizio Gotti, 209௅221. Milano: Guerini, 1993.

70

Modality of can in the comedies of William Shakespeare

Fisiak, Jacek, ed. Historical semantics. Historical word-formation. Trends in Linguisitics, Studies and Monographs 29. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1985. Gotti, Maurizio, ed. English diachronic syntax. Milan: Guerini Studio, 1993. Grzegorczykowa, Renata. Wprowadzenie do semantyki jĊzykoznawczej. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, 2001. Kakietek, Piotr. Modal verbs in Shakespeare’s English. PoznaĔ: Wydawnictwo naukowe Uniwersytetu im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu, 1972. Kiefer, Ferenc. “Modality and Pragmatics.” Folia Linguistica 31, no. 3௅4 (2009): 241௅254. Krug, Manfred. Emerging English modals. A Corpus-based study of grammaticalization. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2000. Nakayasu, Minako. The pragmatics of modals in Shakespeare. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2009. Palmer, Robert. A Linguistic Study of the English Verb. London: Longman, [1965] 1973. Palmer, Robert. Modality and the English modals. (2nd edition.) New York: Longman, 1990. Palmer, Frank Robert. Mood and modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. Papafragou, Anna. Modality: Issues in the semantics࣓pragmatics interface. Oxford: Elsevier, 2000. Portner, Paul. Modality. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009. SkorasiĔska, Monika. “Can in Shakespeare and Marlowe.” Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 49, no. 1 (2014): 31௅55. SkorasiĔska, Monika. Modal Verbs in Marlowe and Shakespeare ࣓ a Semantic-Pragmatic Approach. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2019. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. A history of English syntax. A transformational approach to the history of English sentence structure. USA: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, INC, 1972. Warner, Anthony R. English auxiliaries. Structure and history. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, [1993] 2009. Yong-Beom, Kim. “Modal Categories and Dynamic Modality in English.” Korean Journal of English Language and Linguistics 17, no. 4 (2017): 701௅727. Zhang, Jinghua. “A semantic approach to the English modality.” Journal of Language Teaching and Research 10, no. 4 (2019): 879௅885.

MODALITY IN THE HOUSE AT POOH CORNER BY ALAN ALEXANDER MILNE ANNA WALKOWSKA*

Abstract This chapter concerns the use of modality in a children’s novel entitled The House at Pooh Corner by the British writer Alan Alexander Milne. The main elements analyzed are two modal verbs, can and must. The emphasis is on the presentation of theoretical aspects, as well as on the analysis of individual types of the modalities expressed by the analyzed modal verbs in the research material in accordance with the classification of modalities proposed by Palmer (1990). The aim of this work is to verify to what extent the types of modalities used in the selected children’s novel are adapted to its target audience in terms of modality acquisition (or psycho-linguistic development) at a young age.

*

Anna Walkowska MA is a certified secondary school teacher in Stargard, a matura examiner (German) with almost 20-year experience in teaching foreign languages in Poland and Germany, a graduate of the Institute of German Studies as well as of the Institute of English Studies, the University of Szczecin, Poland. In 2004, she passed the International Economic German Language exam in Warsaw and received Diplom Wirtschaftsdeutsch International certificate. Worked as a Polish-German interpreter and translator. One of her German translations was published in Siekierki by B.T. Dominiczak. She is also the author of publications: Deutsch ist einfacher als du vermutest, Ein Unterrichtsvorschlag für eine weiterführende Schule published in the Journal of the Polish Association of German Teachers Hallo Deutschlehrer! (33)/2011, and JĊzyk niemiecki – áatwiejszy niĪ przypuszczasz (2012). Her diploma paper in English concerned the concept of modality in the children’s novel The House at Pooh Corner by A.A. Milne. E-mail: [email protected].

72

Modality in The House at Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne

Introduction Modality as one of linguistic concepts has been investigated for many decades, but it still does not remain unanimously defined. The theory on this subject still becomes a source of disagreement among world-class linguists, which makes the topic even more interesting and significant. Therefore, this chapter is devoted to the concept of modality in a popular children’s novel The House at Pooh Corner by A.A. Milne. The subject of the research are two modal verbs, namely can and must, used in the children’s story, which constitutes the research material. These two modal verbs are chosen due to the fact that, on the one hand, can, referring to possibility, is the most frequent modal verb occurring in the research material, and, on the other hand, must is a significant modal verb referring to necessity, and may indicate all the main categories of modality suggested by Palmer (1990). For that reason, the choice of these modals makes it possible to consider modality in terms of possibility and necessity, which opens potential for a comparative analysis. The aim of the study is to determine modal meanings denoted by can and must, as well as the use of the verbs and their distribution in Milne’s novel. In order to achieve this aim, the actual occurrences of can and must found in the research material are analysed and classified according to the criteria provided by Palmer (1990). The choice of the research material for the analysis is motivated by the lack of studies concerning modality in children’s literature. The popular novel The House at Pooh Corner by A. A. Milne is an example of this kind of literary text. It is worth adding here that children’s literature is helpful in exposing the adult-child relationship as a relationship of power (Knowles and Malmkjସr 1996, 43௅44). Interestingly, ideologies are encoded in linguistic expressions. “Language, such as the lexical and syntactic choices made by a writer to describe events, character and their relationships, can help create and maintain beliefs, values and relations of power. Syntactic structures can reflect a world-view; nominalisation, passivisation and theme-rheme structure create a particular perspective on the events and processes portrayed, which need not to be the conscious intention of the writer” (Tiina Puurtinen 1998, 3). Taking linguistic expressions in this type of literature into consideration, the functions of the modal verbs seem to deserve particular attention. The chapter consists of two main parts. Part 1 is aimed to provide a description of the notion of modality. Although a variety of definitions of modality are suggested, this study will primarily use the definition offered by Palmer (1990). Like many other linguistic concepts, modality can be

Anna Walkowska

73

approached from different perspectives. Therefore, a part of this chapter is also devoted to various types of modality distinguished by researchers specialising in this area of study. A considerable part focuses on several types of modality indicated by can and must as classified by Palmer (1990), which further constitutes a basis for the research. The remaining part introduces a review of studies on the acquisition of modality by children, which were conducted by many scholars. Part 2 is dedicated to the analysis of the selected modal verbs and presents its results. Given that young children are believed to be the target audience of the book chosen as the research material, the basic calculations of the distribution of the verbs might shed some light as to which types of modality emerge early in the process of language acquisition, and which ones are mastered later. It further implies that the most frequent types could be regarded as the basic and early emerging modalities in a language acquisition process. It is hypothesised that the types of modality indicated by can and must reflect the linguistic development of the target audience in terms of the acquisition of modality. Thus, the primary objective of this thesis is to verify whether the frequency of occurrence of the particular kinds of modality, indicated by the selected modal verbs in the investigated text, is well adopted to the very young age of the addressees (of this book) in which some meanings of the modals are still acquired.

Definitions of modality As Barker and Kennedy claim in General Preface (2009: xi) published in Portner’s (2009) book, modality is a central topic in the study of meaning, underlying one of the most important features of language. Modality can be defined as one of semantic-grammatical features (Palmer 1990, 1). The author uses the term modality to refer to a grammatical, or semantic-grammatical, category which is expressed in English language by modal verbs conveying particular meanings. Palmer (1990, 1) mentions that modality is also discussed in Palmer (1986) “as a more general, world-wide, typological, category.” Moreover, as the author argues, “something like Lyons’ (1977, 452) suggestion that modality is concerned with the ‘opinion and attitude’ of the speaker seems a fairly helpful preliminary definition” (Palmer 1990, 2). Additionally, Lyons (1977, 63) writes that “modality is best reserved, in linguistics as it is in logic, for distinctions of possibility, necessity, obligation, etc..” According to a definition provided by Palmer (2001, 1), modality is an important “cross-language grammatical category that can be the subject of a

74

Modality in The House at Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne

typological study,” and deals with “the status of the proposition that describes the event.” For Palmer (1981), the term modality refers to function. He considers this term as a domain in the semantic dimension. English expresses “degrees and kinds of commitment by the speaker” (Palmer 1981, 152) mostly by means of modal verbs such as will, shall, can, may, must, and ought to. Their use determines several kinds of modality (Palmer 1981, 152). However, the notion of modality can be also approached from a different perspective. Narrog (2012, 5) maintains that, in contemporary linguistics, modality can be analysed from the point of view of speaker attitudes or subjectivity as well as in terms of factuality, actuality, or reality. However, the author suggests that the concept is best defined in terms of factuality and, consequently, defines modality as “a linguistic category referring to the factual status of a proposition. A proposition is modalized if it is marked for being undetermined with respect to its factual status, i.e. is neither positively nor negatively factual” (Narrog 2012, 6). Importantly, other scholars who share this approach have used different notions, for example, ‘factivity’ (Lyons 1977, 795), ‘factuality’ (Palmer 1986, 17௅18), and ‘reality’ (Portner 2009). What all the definitions have in common is that modality pertains to “non-factual (i.e. non-realized or nonactualized) states-of-affairs” (Narrog 2012, 6). According to Narrog (2012), the term factuality is adequate with respect to several issues. “First, if the object of definition is a category identified with exponents of traditional core modal meaning such as necessity, obligation, possibility, or probability at the center of it, this is what is actually obtained by making use of this notion. Also, in contrast to ‘speaker attitudes’, the notion of factuality is suitable to actually delimit a category, the result being a semantically defined grammatical category” (Narrog 2012, 6).

The term factual refers to human judgment, and, with respect to modality, statements that are either true or false. Narrog (2012, 7) regards the notion of factuality as most appropriate and justifies his choice as follows: “When dealing with modality, we are dealing with speaker’s judgments expressing their world view, and not a reality outside language” (Narrog 2012, 7). The author also points out that “the study of language deals with things depicted as factual in language, not necessarily things factual in the real world” (Narrog 2012, 7). Non-modalized propositions are termed by the author as factual, in opposition to modalized propositions which are identified as non-factual. Modally marked sentences are indeterminate regarding their factuality (Narrog 2012, 7). However,

Anna Walkowska

75

modality may also be defined in terms of a grammatical category, yet this is a relatively recent phenomenon (Narrog 2012, 12). Another definition of modality is offered by Jackson (1990, 103) who defines modality as a system which contains meanings of possibility and necessity expressed grammatically. Modality is indicated principally by modal auxiliary verbs (e.g., can, could, may, will, shall, should, must, ought to) which constitute part of the verb phrase in English. Modality can also be realised lexically by semi-modal verbs (have (got) to, need), modal adverbs (e.g. possibly, probably, surely), some adjectives (e.g. certain, possible, necessary), and some nouns (e.g. likelihood, necessity, possibility, obligation, ability, permission) (Jackson 1990, 103௅104). Portner (2009, 1), on the other hand, understands modality as “the linguistic phenomenon” according to which “grammar allows one to say things about, or on basis of, situations which need not be real.” However, this definition has a serious drawback, namely, it does not make it clear which features of language are related to modality. The author emphasizes that “modality is not something that one simply observes, but rather something that one discovers, (…)” (Portner 2009, 1). Portner (2009) suggests that the right manner to discover modality is firstly to understand the features of language which most evidently indicate modality, and then to consider whether that understanding is also useful when it concerns new features of language. In semantics, this strategy is first reflected in studying the meanings of certain auxiliary verbs (e.g., must), certain adverbs (e.g., maybe), and certain adjectives (e.g., possible), dealing with situations that are not real. Then, theories of words expressing modality and the constructions in which they occur are developed by semanticists, and eventually it is considered whether these theories are appropriable (or appropriate) in understanding the meanings of other words, phrases, and constructions. The author argues convincingly that the so-called semantic theories of modality “also contribute to a better understanding of new phenomena, we learn that those phenomena involve modality as well” (Portner 2009, 1௅2). Thus, it can be concluded that Portner (2009) provides a description of modality as a semantic phenomenon.

Classification of modality “In the traditional categorisation of the domain of modality, the concepts of deontic and epistemic modality belong to the basic semantic dimensions of modality” (Sokóá 2018, 135). Palmer (1981, 152௅153) distinguishes between these two kinds of modality (referred to function) expressed by modal verbs. Deontic modality can be conceptualised in terms of giving

76

Modality in The House at Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne

permission, laying obligation, or giving an undertaking by the speaker, in relation to possible future events. Thus, it has much in common with the imperative and is concerned with the speaker’s active relation to events (Palmer 1981, 153). In contrast, epistemic modality “expresses the degree of commitment of the speaker to the truth” of the proposition, that is “to the truth of what is being said” (Palmer 1981, 153). This type of modality is, then, concerned with the speaker’s relation to propositions. In his later works, Palmer (1990, 2001) discusses the classification of modal categories within epistemic, deontic, and dynamic modality. One dimension of this classification concerns the modals in terms of possibility, which is the meaning of the modal verb can, and necessity, which constitutes the meaning of the modal verb must (Palmer 1990). With other words, Palmer (1990: 36) makes a distinction between “kinds” of modality (epistemic, deontic, and dynamic) and “degrees” of modality (possibility and necessity). The division of modality according to Palmer (1990) will be discussed in the following sections referring to the modal verbs mentioned above. As this study is based on the classification of modality by Palmer (1990), it deserves particular attention, and this part deals with Palmer’s (1990) division in more detail. Within dynamic modality, Palmer (1990) distinguishes between dynamic possibility (indicated by can or semi-modal be able to) and dynamic necessity (denoted by must or have (got) to). Palmer (1990, 83) considers two subkinds of dynamic modality, namely neutral (in some cases also called circumstantial) and subject oriented. The author suggests the term subject-oriented for dynamic modality as either the ability or volition of the agent are involved (Palmer 1990, 36). Deontic modality is concerned with “influencing actions, states or events” (Palmer 1990, 6), and with “attitudes of the speaker (and addressee)” (Palmer 1990, 36). Palmer terms this kind of modality as speaker-oriented “because the speaker appears to be the deontic source” (Palmer 1990, 36). In questions and requests, however, the addressee is the deontic source, and thus the term discourse-oriented, to include both speaker and addressee, is preferred (Palmer 1990, 36). As the author further argues, “deontic modality is essentially performative” (Palmer 1990, 69), in that there is an involvement of the speaker. The criterion of being “performative” (or “speaker-oriented”) means that “the act takes place at the moment of speaking” (Palmer 1990, 70). A speaker uses a deontic modal in order to give (or refuse) permission (may, can), to impose an obligation (must), or to make a promise or threat (shall). In contrast to dynamic modality, deontic modality is “performative” or “discourseoriented” (where some uses are not strictly performative, but they relate to

Anna Walkowska

77

uses of this kind) (Palmer 1990, 69௅70). The author offers the distinction between three degrees of deontic modality: possibility (marked by may and can), necessity (indicated by must) and a third degree of modality provided by shall (Palmer 1990, 69). Epistemic modality is concerned with the opinions of the speaker “making a judgment about the truth of the proposition” (Palmer 1990, 36). Palmer (1990, 50௅61) considers epistemic modals in terms of two “degrees” (1990, 36), namely possibility (may) and necessity (e.g., must). Epistemic modals are used “to make judgments about the possibility, etc., that something is or is not the case” (Palmer 1990, 50). Their function is to judge about the probability of the truth of the assertions that are being said. Thus, epistemic modality is the modality of propositions rather than of events, actions, or states (Palmer 1990, 5, 50). Furthermore, this kind of modality is performative (i.e., subjective). It means that the epistemic judgment relies on the speaker; with other words, it is the responsibility of the speaker. Because of the subjective interpretation, the accurate paraphrase, for instance, for epistemic must is: “The only conclusion that I can draw is that… .” However, it is also possible that the epistemic proposition does not rest with the speaker, or that the speaker disclaims his own responsibility for the judgment (Palmer 1990, 51). While discussing epistemic necessity, Palmer (1990) mentions that the term certainty, used by Hallidays (1970, 329) as contrast to possibility, is misleading. “It is concerned with the strength of speaker’s belief, but the modals always indicate some kind of judgments by the speaker” (Palmer 1990, 53). Joos (1964, 81, 169) claims that certainty is expressed by factual assertion; whereas Palmer (1986, 83௅4, 86௅8) argues that a factual assertion expresses neither certainty nor knowledge of the speaker. It expresses only that what the speaker believes. Epistemic modality does not indicate a factual assertion, but makes judgments (Palmer 1990, 53). Palmer (2001, 22) also offers the distinction between propositional and event modality. Within propositional modality, the author lists epistemic and evidential modality (2001, 22). These “are concerned with the speaker’s attitude to the truth-value or factual status of the proposition” (Palmer 2001, 24). “With epistemic modality speakers express their judgments about the factual status of the proposition” (Palmer 2001, 8). Three topological categories of epistemic judgments can be distinguished, namely speculative, deductive, and assumptive. As for evidential modality, speakers “indicate the evidence they have for its factual status” (Palmer 2001, 8). This type of modality is further divided into reported and sensory (Palmer 2001, 22). Within event modality, Palmer (2001, 22) differentiates between deontic and dynamic, as they “refer to events that

78

Modality in The House at Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne

are not actualized, events that have not taken place but are merely potential” (Palmer 2001, 70). Deontic modality includes permissive, obligative, and commissive, whereas abilitive and volitive are classified by Palmer (2001, 22) as subcategories of dynamic modality. Another classification of modality is proposed by Narrog (2012). Although the division of types, as well as categories and the subcategories of modality presented by Narrog (2012) differs from those depicted by Palmer (1990), there is also some similarity in that the former author refers to the distinction of possibility and necessity, which is also used by the latter scholar. Before the beginning of a discussion on his categorization of modality, Narrog (2012) briefly refers to the tradition in philosophy: “[A]ll propositions that are not factual can be classified as either possible or necessary (cf. Kant 1818, 194௅5). Thus factuality, possibility, and necessity are the three basic categories of modality” (Narrog 2012, 7). As the author further claims, “Work on modality in formal semantics has demonstrated that the concepts of necessity and possibility are flexible enough to deal with a wide range of types of modality beyond the original core in modal logic” (Narrog 2012, 7). Narrog divides modality into the following types (or subcategories): epistemic; deontic (teleological, preferential, boulomaic); dynamic, which includes participant-internal (ability, physical necessity), circumstantial, existential (quantificational); and, finally, evidential modality (Narrog 2012, 8௅12). Epistemic modality is referred to someone’s world knowledge, usually that of the speaker. If the proposition requires this person’s knowledge of the world it is necessarily true; “if it is compatible his or her knowledge it is possibly true” (Narrog 2012, 8). With epistemic modality, a proposition is termed “non-factual” (Narrog 2012, 8) considering any future marking or prediction. Alternatively, it could be indeterminate in regard to its factuality as concerns the world of knowledge and beliefs of the speaker (Narrog 2012, 11). Deontic modality designates “a proposition as necessary or possible within the framework of a particular system of social rules” (Narrog 2012, 8). Within this type, Narrog (2012, 8௅9) mentions three subcategories which, as he claims, often occur in grammatical descriptions or theoretical work. One of these subcategories is ‘teleological’ modality which marks a proposition as a necessity or possibility as to someone’s goals. The second subcategory of deontic modality is termed as ‘preferential,’ and indicates a proposition as a necessity or possibility with respect to someone’s preferences. The third subcategory within deontic modality is called ‘boulomaic’ modality. This kind denotes that a proposition is marked as a necessity or possibility with regard to someone’s volition or intentions

Anna Walkowska

79

(Narrog 2012, 8௅9). Narrog argues that teleological and preferential modality are pragmatically similar in being used in directives in performative use, and, probably for that reason, they “commonly share their expression with deontic modality (e.g., E. must, should)” (Narrog 2012, 11), while boulomaic modality “has its own expression (e.g. E. shall, want to), corresponding to its typical performative use in commissives” (Narrog 2012, 11). Another type of modality suggested by Narrog is participant-internal which marks a proposition “as a necessity or possibility with respect to someone’s dispositions” (2012, 9). However, this category is commonly associated with possibility and not with necessity. As Narrog maintains, some languages “differentiate kinds of participant-internal possibility (ability)” (2012, 9). Modal expressions indicating participant-internal necessity are rare. They have, typically, a double function, namely they express either deontic or other modalities (Narrog 2012, 10). For instance, “[D]ynamic must may not be sharply distinct, especially with a human subject, from deontic must” (Collins 2009, 41 as quoted by Narrog 2012, 10). The author also mentions circumstantial modality which marks a proposition as necessity or possibility in regard to certain circumstances. “Circumstantial modality together with participant-internal modality forms the core part of what has traditionally called ‘dynamic’ or ‘neutral’ modality” (Narrog 2012, 10). Circumstantial modality is more widely connected with possibility (e.g., with can). In terms of necessity, it can also be interpreted in regard to some obligation or to goals. “While the expression of circumstantial necessity appears to be closely related to the expression of deontic necessity, the expression of circumstantial possibility is more closely related to participal-internal possibility” (Narrog 2012, 10). Circumstantial modality seems to be “split, siding with dynamic modal markers in the domain of possibility (e.g., can) and deontic modal markers in the domain of necessity (e.g., have to)” (Narrog 2012, 11). The classification of modality presented by Narrog (2012) also includes existential (or quantificational) modality. “With this type of modality, a state-of-affairs (or situation) is quantified in the sense that the situation either possibly or necessarily holds (cf. von Wright 1951, 2)” (Narrog 2012, 10). The author points out that participant-internal and existential modalities have a common way of expression that has traditionally been called “dynamic modal markers” (Narrog 2012, 11). The last category given by Narrog (2012, 11) is evidential modality. As the author claims, currently, there are different views on evidentiality and its relationship to modality, mentioning, inter alia, Palmer (1986; 2001) who “have viewed evidentiality as part of modality” (Narrog 2012,

80

Modality in The House at Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne

11). Narrog (2012) considers adverbs such as apparently and allegedly, and depending on the point of view, semi-modals like seem, as the best examples of this kind of modality. With evidentiality a proposition is undetermined with respect to its factuality as concerns sources of information other than the speaker. “Thus, evidentiality in the domain of indirect evidence is clearly part of modality” (Narrog 2012, 11௅12). The semantic subcategories of modality, and their classification according to the model offered by Narrog (2012) are discussed by him in more detail in one of the further sections of his work (entitled A new model of modality and mood), where the presented model of modality essentially rests on two dimensions, namely: “one of volitivity, and a second one of speech act orientation” (Narrog 2012, 46), and “a distinction between possibility and necessity is taken as given” (Narrog 2012, 46). Jackson (1990, 104௅105) briefly considers forms and meanings within modality. The author lists them as follows: the speaker’s assessment of possibility (expressed, for example, by may, maybe, perhaps, possibly), the speaker’s assessment of necessity (indicated, for instance, by should, must, will, certainly, probably, necessary), ability of the agentive participant (denoted, for example, by can, able, capability), permission (expressed, for example, by can, may, allowed, permission), willingness (e.g., will, willing), circumstantial possibility (indicated by could, possible), and obligation (by must, shall, should, ought to, need, have (got) to, obliged, and necessary). In the introduction to his work, Portner (2009) first highlights the importance of the division of modality into the traditional categories of epistemic and deontic, and claims that the former deals with knowledge, whereas the latter is concerned with “right and wrong according to some system of rules” (Portner 2009, 2). On example of must, the author points out that the same word may indicate either epistemic modality or deontic modality. Nevertheless, Portner (2009) also notices some weakness of this categorisation of modals, namely: when the modal (e.g., must), expresses neither knowledge nor rules. For this reason, the author further improves the classifications based on the epistemic and deontic distinction (Portner 2009, 2). He divides the modal forms into the following three categories: sentential, sub-sentential, and discourse modality. Portner (2009), however, primarily focuses on sentential modality (Portner 2009, 3௅4). Sentential modality expresses “modal meaning at the level of the whole sentence” (Portner 2009, 2). This involves the traditional ‘core’ modal expressions such as modal auxiliaries (e.g., must, can, should) as well as modal adverbs (e.g., maybe, probably, possibly) (Portner 2009, 2). The author further proposes the semantic division of sentential modality into three

Anna Walkowska

81

primary categories: epistemic, priority, and dynamic (Portner 2009, 135, 140). As Portner (2009, 135) argues, epistemic modals are connected with speaker’s knowledge. Priority modals involve the deontic, bouletic, and teleological (goal-oriented) modals. The term “priority” is used by Portner (2009) to indicate rules, desires, and goals which “serve to indentify some possibility as better than, or as having higher priority than, others. Priority modals have a circumstantial modal base and fairly easy-to-perceive ordering sources which provide the priority ranking” (Portner 2009, 135). Dynamic modals also include circumstantial modal bases, and are divided into two primary sub-groups: volitional and quantificational. The volitional modals have various meanings (such as: ability, opportunity, disposition) which refer to “the ways in which circumstances affect the actions available to a volitional individual, while quantificational modals seem to produce existential or universal quantification over individuals” (Portner 2009, 135). Analysing quantificational modals in detail, Portner (2009, 136) states that some modals of this kind function similarly to the adverbs of quantification. The author further adds: “quantificational modals and adverbs of quantification quantify over situations – not worlds (as other modals do) or individuals (as Carlson, Heim and Brennan thought)” (Portner 2009, 137). In addition to the classification mentioned above, Portner (2009, 137) points out that there are two other distinctions which are significant for the better understanding of various categories of modality, namely: subjectivity and performativity (Portner 2009, 137).

Acquisition of modality by young children “Modality is an intriguing topic in child language research because it is a domain that can give us important information about children’s semantic development as well as about their social and cognitive development” (Choi 2006, 141). The following section provides a review of some studies (Choi 2006; Modyanova, Agoos, Kenney et al. 2010; and Papafragou 1997) concerning the acquisition of modality by children. Referring to Nuyts’ theory, Choi writes: “[M]odality refers to some kind of qualification of state of affairs. This means that by using modal expressions, speakers state more than just what they see: with modal forms speakers can add their own or other people’s psychological or mental states regarding the proposition. Accordingly, when children acquire a set of modal expressions, they have grasped at some level the notion that a proposition can be qualified to include their own or other people’s assessment about it” (Choi 2006, 141).

82

Modality in The House at Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne

A question that arises in the context is when different elements of modality are acquired in early childhood in different languages. As Choi argues: “For the last two decades, acquisition of modality in children’s language has been approached from several perspectives both in linguistics and developmental psychology” (Choi 2006, 141). The research shows that children begin to learn modality toward the end of the second year. Another finding is that the acquisition of agentoriented modalities occurs before epistemic modalities, particularly in the case of those languages where modality is expressed by auxiliary verbs (e.g., English, German) (Choi 2006, 165). It is worth mentioning here that particularly in studying child language, dynamic and deontic modalities are grouped together into one category as agent-oriented modalities (Choi 2006, 142). In contrast, epistemic modality is concerned with a degree of speaker’s certainty about the truth of the proposition. “The speaker may estimate that the events or states expressed in the proposition are possible, probable or certain” (Choi 2006, 142). In terms of agent-oriented modalities, studies have also indicated that children use them first to express what they want or need before they talk about what others want or need. In the case of epistemic modals, children indicate certainty (of the truth of proposition) before uncertainty and conclusions. Moreover, “these early modal forms and meanings are more semantically and pragmatically motivated than syntactically driven” (Choi 2006, 165௅166). Taking into account topologically different languages, it is claimed that children are able to understand a special kind of modal system from early on (Choi 2006, 166). In her review of studies, Choi (2006) points out that “[u]nderstanding epistemic notions is related to the development of theory of mind in children (Gopnik and Astington 1988). Theory of mind refers to children’s ability to assess their own as well as other people’s beliefs (i.e., mental states) about a state of affairs. Beliefs and reality are often not the same” (Choi 2006, 151௅152). Cognitivist studies of Wells (1979) as well as Shatz and Wilcox (1991) have shown that maternal speech has important influence on modal forms and meanings which children learn and use frequently at an early stage. In English, the modals can and will are acquired first by many children when their English-speaking mothers use them often while talking to their children (Choi 2006, 163). Furthermore, it was observed that Englishlearning children learn agent-oriented modals earlier than epistemic modals because of the infrequent use of epistemic modals in mother’s speech. Children’s cognitive understanding of modal verbs is increased by their meaningful conversations with their caregiver (Choi 2006, 166).

Anna Walkowska

83

However, according to the research of Shatz and Wilcox (1991), it is also suggested that a high frequency (i.e., mother’s input) does not solely determines children’s early modal development (Choi 2006, 164). Modyanova, Agoos, Kenney et al. (2010, 301) consider young children’s interpretations of modal verbs indicating deontic and epistemic modalities in several languages. Many acquisition studies have revealed that the deontic use of modals is acquired earlier than the epistemic. Deontic meanings are the first which are used in the spontaneous production, by 2௅3 years. Epistemic meanings appear later, and a full mastery of these meanings is achieved by 8 years (Modyanova et al. 2010, 302). The research has also shown that “children can be aware of the epistemic-deontic distinctions as set by the context as early as 6 years with can, and by age 8 with may and will” (Modyanova et al. 2010, 310) [emphasis mine A.W.]. The authors claim that the general results of their study reflect previous findings published in the literature. For example, can is the first modal which is fluently used in language production by 30 month olds (e.g., Wells, 1979). Their research shows that “children are sensitive to its deontic vs. epistemic meanings before other verbs” (Modyanova et al. 2010, 310). According to Perkins (1983), however, can is still used in deontic modality by six year-olds, whereas only children aged eight use can “with ‘circumstantial possibility’ reading, i.e. an epistemic reading that included a given situation and not the world laws” (Modyanova et al. 2010, 310). Studies performed by Bascelli and Barbieri (2002), concerned with modal verbs must and may in Italian, have revealed that the fully correct understanding of these modals is not achieved until around age of eight. With five year-olds, may is usually still interpreted like must. Thus, the researchers point out that clear awareness of modality and its interpretation relating to a situation takes time for children to acquire. The delay in the acquisition correspond to the idea that children’s deficit with the epistemic modality is caused by their deficit in raising syntax. However, this fact does not provide explanations for the difference between a relatively earlier acquisition of the epistemic comprehension of can and a relatively later acquisition of the epistemic understanding of may and will in the data (Modyanova et al. 2010, 310). As the researchers conclude, a final clarification for why epistemic modals are acquired by children after deontic modals may only be given “by studies of theory of mind, raising syntax, and development of modal verbs within individual children” (Modyanova et al. 2010, 310). Papafragou (1997, 1) points out that English modal verbs are widely recognised to convey epistemic and root modal meanings. The author adopts a root-epistemic distinction in her discussion, and maintains that

84

Modality in The House at Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne

many researchers have argued that root meanings are acquired earlier than epistemic ones. Thus, her paper mainly focuses on the later emergence of epistemic interpretations. Instead of the term agent-oriented modalities (denoting a deontic and dynamic meaning), Papafragou uses the notion of root for deontic and dynamic modality, “unless the arguments bear directly and solely on deontic modality” (Papafragou 1997, 2). She also mentions that most of the psycholinguistic literature reviewed by her, uses the term deontic loosely to cover dynamic uses as well (1997, 2). Papafragou’s examination of psycholinguistic evidence is based, among others, on naturalistic longitudinal studies (1997, 5). As noted by Papafragou (1997, 5), a number of psycholinguistic research based on syntactic aspects of modality (Brown 1973; Kuczaj and Maratsos 1983; Shatz, Billman and Yaniv 1986 among others, reviewed in Shatz and Wilcox 1991) has revealed that children aged between 1;10 (i.e., 1 year; 10 months) and 2;6 (i.e., 2 years; 6 months) gradually begin to use English modals, often with a single negative modal form (such as can’t) occurring in limited syntactic environments (mainly declaratives) (Papafragou 1997, 5). However, Shatz and Wilcox (1991, 331) claim that “modal vocabulary growth proceeds fairly rapidly during this early period, while the range of syntactic constructions in which the modals appear changes somewhat more slowly” (Papafragou 1997, 5). Other studies aim “to provide evidence for the early semantic properties of the modals” (Papafragou 1997, 6). In the Bristol Language Development Study, Wells (1979) found that epistemic modality is acquired later than root modality (Papafragou 1997, 6). One of the results of his study indicates that more than 50% of the sampled children (by 2;6) used can to convey both ability and permission. Wells’ (1985) survey, performed among children between the age of 3;3 and 5;0, shows that children between 2;9 and 3;0 used must, have (got) to, and should to communicate obligation or necessity. In contrast to can, however, these uses did not reach stable frequencies until later in development. “Use of modals to convey certainty was not achieved till much later, since by 5 only around 25% of the sample gave evidence of it” (Papafragou 1997, 6). Wells concludes that the acquisition of modality is not only dependent on syntactic criteria, but also that “semantic properties such as the (root) indication of modulation of action or social regulations facilitate the acquisition of modality” (Papafragou 1997, 6). Papafragou (1997, 6) further refers to the studies of Kuczaj’s (1977) which have also revealed that children acquire epistemic modality later than root modality. According to the research, children between 2;6 and 3;6 use in conversation more root modals than epistemic modals when

Anna Walkowska

85

compared to children between the ages of 4;0 and 5;9. As noted above, similar findings are suggested by Perkins (1983) in his research based on a spontaneous conversation among 6௅12-year-old children. He points out that children fully acquire the adult modal system, especially as far as the epistemic meanings of modals are concerned, only later in development. Another point of Papafragou’s review of naturalistic data is the result of Clark’s (1993) study. It has shown that children avoid using parts of a linguistic system which they have already understood until they feel quite confident with the system they have formed. In the research, in which imitation was elicited with respect to the syntactic properties of the modals can and will, Kuczaj and Maratsos (1975) confirm this very fact that the comprehension of language precedes its production. Inversely, the scholars have proved that very young children sometimes use some elements of a complicated grammatical system correctly “by simply memorising isolated items” Papafragou (1997, 9). However, language production there does not ensure successful acquisition of the whole system. Therefore, it can be assumed that children comprehend epistemic aspects of modality even before they start producing independent forms (Papafragou 1997, 9). Despite these doubts, most of the naturalistic studies have shown that the beginning of epistemic modality comes after that of root modality, and typically appears around or after the third year of age. The following later onset of epistemic modality is explained by the assumption that most modal expressions produced by parents to children are concerned with “permission, obligation, ability and other related notions, rather than with inference and evaluation of necessity and possibility of a conclusion” (Papafragou 1997, 9). Another explanation, based on by Piaget’s (1936) framework, relates to factors in a cognitive development. Thus, Perkins (1983) ascribes the early development of can and will in the preoperational stage to the child’s egocentrism, which could also “explain the absence of the more ‘abstract’ must and may” (Papafragou 1997, 9). In the concrete operational stage (after 7), children begin “the negotiation of social roles and tasks” (Papafragou 1997, 9), and profusely develop the expressions of root modality. Finally, the productive use of epistemic modality occurs from about 11 years, in the formal operational stage. This is the period when “the abstract representation of alternative hypotheses and of their deductive implications” (Papafragou 1997, 9) starts. However, it can be noted that this data is different from the results of most naturalistic studies which estimate the children’s age attributed to the first instances of epistemic modality for much earlier. Papafragou (1997) further draws attention to the auxiliary hypothesis. Similarly to Choi (2006), she also reviews the studies’ results of Shatz et

86

Modality in The House at Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne

al. (1989; 1990), Shatz and Wilcox (1991), and Wells (1979). As Shatz et al. (1990) remarks, fewer than 10% of the modals used by the sampled children (aged around 3 years) had epistemic interpretations. As noted above, Wells (1979) found that will and can are the most frequent modals used by all mothers in his sample, which causes that these two verbs are the first to be acquired by the sampled children. The correlation between the input received from mothers and the type of modals produced by children, was also observed in the semantic-pragmatic studies of Shatz et al. (1989), Shatz and Wilcox (1991), focusing on aspects of modal acquisition. It is assumed that (at least some) root interpretations are linked to the cognitive comprehension (i.e., grasp) of young preschoolers, since the terms are used to express ability (can), desire (cf. volition in will), and later on, permission and obligation (at the beginning understood as classic descriptive statements about what is the case in the actual world, for instance, the common use of root must and can in the first person). Children’s acquisition of modality is facilitated through the increased frequency of such modals in their input (Papafragou 1997, 19௅20). Hence, root modals become more familiar than their epistemic equivalents, and it is observed that epistemic modals are unlikely to appear in children’s spontaneous conversations. The topic of their dialogues is often concerned with permission, ability, obligation, or intention. Therefore, even after the age of 3;0 children do not produce as many utterances with epistemic interpretations as they do with root ones (Papafragou 1997, 20). Nevertheless, in order to be able to use root modals to lay an obligation or to give permission, and not solely state them, the infant must possess some conception of intention (or word’s meaning) with some assumptions concerning authority, social relations, moral or social rules and regulations (Papafragou 1997, 20௅21). According to the theory of mind hypothesis depicted by Premark and Premark (1994), the basic notion of words’ meaning is not sufficient before the age of 3, and develops even up to 6 years. The acquisition of moral beliefs takes place even later. Therefore, some deontic interpretations emerge later than others (Papafragou 1997, 21). Papafragou (1997, 21) further outlines the development of modal concepts. She points out that the first uses of English modals occur before the third year. The first modal verbs, which are used by children to a significant degree, are can indicating ability, and will indicating desire. Other root modals, such as must and may, appear increasingly frequent at this period, conveying the meaning of obligation and permission, respectively. However, deontic meanings, which are not identical to

Anna Walkowska

87

reality, cannot be communicated yet. When a child produces a statement using root must (or may) at this stage, she or he rather understands it as a description of standard regularity occurring in the actual, and not ideal, world. This fact can explain a predominance of occurrences of modals in the first person singular at this age (cf. Perkins 1983). The input, which a child receives from its caretakers, plays an important role in the acquisition. Moreover, around or after the third year, “the use of epistemic modals and mental terms, initially without full understanding of their meaning” (Papafragou 1997, 21) begins. To sum up, taking the surveys discussed above into consideration, it can be observed that there is a lack of studies concerning the acquisition of dynamic modality as a distinct (or separate) category. This type of modality is only discussed in general, overlapping in the distinction with the deontic interpretation. In all the studies reviewed above, there is no precise or exact division in terms of dynamic modality. This category is included either in agent-oriented modalities (as in Choi 2006) or in root modal meanings (as in Papafragou 1997). Modyanova, Agoos, Kenney et al. (2010) loosely use the term deontic also to cover dynamic modality. In all the cases, the distinctions group together deontic and dynamic modality as well, which are discussed in opposition to epistemic modality. Therefore, according to these divisions, the results of the studies seem to be relatively general, or not precise enough in terms of dynamic modality. Taking this into account, the question may arise which meanings, referring to Palmer’s (1990) distinction of modality, are earlier acquired or used more frequently: deontic or dynamic. Nevertheless, looking more closely at the studies’ results discussed above, it might be assumed that dynamic modality indicated by can is one of the first types of modality acquired by young children. This assumption is based on the following findings detected in the studies: (1) Can is the first modal which is fluently used in language production at the earliest age by 30 month olds (Wells 1979), and, therefore, can is also the first acquired modal verb. (2) According to the development of modal concepts sketched by Papafragou (1997), can is initially used by children to express ability. Later on, young preschoolers acquire the root interpretations indicating permission and obligation (Papafragou 1997), which, according to Palmer’s (1990) distinction, have deontic meanings. Moreover, children aged between 1;10 and 2;6 gradually begin to use English modals, often with a single negative modal form such as can’t, which

88

Modality in The House at Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne

occurs in limited syntactic environments. Modal verbs such as must and may are used increasingly frequently at this early period to convey the meaning of obligation and permission, respectively. However, deontic interpretations, which are not identical to reality, cannot be communicated yet. When a child uses must (or may) at this stage, she or he rather understands it as a description of standard regularity occurring in the actual, and not ideal, world. This fact can explain a predominance of the occurrences of modals in the first person singular at this age (cf. Perkins 1983). In accordance with the theory of mind hypothesis (Premark and Premark 1994), in order to be able to use deontic modals to lay an obligation or to give permission, and not merely state them in the first person, a child must first possess a concept of word’s meaning with some assumptions relative to authority, social relations, moral or social rules and regulations. These are not sufficient before the age of 3 and develop up to 6 or later (Papafragou 1997). Interestingly, linguistic expressions in children’s literature can help create and maintain beliefs, values and relations of power (Tiina Puurtinen 1998), for example, the adult-child relationship is a relationship of power (Knowles and Malmkjସr 1996). (3) It is also worth noting here that Perkins (1983) ascribes the early development of can and will in the preoperational stage to the child’s egocentrism, which could be explained by the fact that must and may are more “abstract,” and, therefore, absent at the earliest age. However, the most significant and most general conclusion (or result), validated by all the reviewed studies, is that the epistemic use of modals is acquired later than the dynamic and deontic ones, as Choi (2006) argues, particularly in the case of languages where modality is expressed by auxiliary verbs, as in English. It is interesting to note that English-learning children acquire dynamic and deontic modals earlier than epistemic modals because of the infrequent use of epistemic modals in maternal speech. Children’s cognitive comprehension of modal verbs is increased by their meaningful conversations with their caregiver (Choi 2006). The correlation between the input received from mothers (or other carers) and the type of modals produced by the youngest was observed by many scholars (among others: Wells 1979, Shatz et al. 1989, Shatz and Wilcox 1991). Dynamic and deontic modals become more familiar than epistemic ones, and are likely to appear in the kid’s spontaneous language production

Anna Walkowska

89

(by 2௅3 years). The topic of children’s dialogues as well as most modal expressions, produced by their parents talking to them, are often concerned with permission, ability, obligation, or intention, rather than with inference and evaluation of necessity and possibility of a conclusion. Thus, even after the age of 3, children do not communicate as many epistemic meanings as they do with root interpretations (Papafragou 1997). Another explanation for the later use of epistemic modals may be attributed to the theory of mind which refers to children’s ability to calculate their own and others people’s beliefs (i.e., mental states) about a state of affairs. This kind of judgement (i.e., degree of speaker’s certainty about the truth of the proposition) causes difficulties at early age because beliefs and reality are often not the same (Choi 2006, Modyanova et al. 2010). Children’s development of the skills to draw inferences lasts longer, and, therefore, the full understanding and the conscious use of epistemic meanings appear later than those of other modal meanings.

Characteristics of can and must in Palmer (1990) The choice of can for the further discussion is motivated by the fact that this modal verb, referring to possibility, plays an important role in Palmer’s (1990) categorisation of modality. There is a variety of qualities of this modal verb in reference to the classification mentioned earlier. Palmer (1990) points out that can and can’t may express dynamic, deontic, and epistemic modality, which will be discussed below. The modal verb can indicates dynamic modality relating to possibility. Palmer (1990, 83௅88, 92) offers a categorization in terms of functions of dynamic can. He divides the functions of this modal verb into the following categories: neutral/circumstantial, ability, power, implication, co-occurrence of can with private verbs, and an interrogative use of can to request an action. Moreover, the author (Palmer 1990, 103௅109) devotes some attention to the use of dynamic can in rules and regulations, where the interpretation may be either dynamic or deontic, and further draws our attention to rational possibility indicated by the negative form of dynamic can, and existential modality expressed by dynamic can (or may). Additionally, Palmer (1990, 91௅92) briefly discusses the negation of dynamic possibility (indicated by i.a. can’t or cannot) in a separate subsection. All these categories of dynamic possibility indicated by can, as well as the negation of can, are discussed below. Dynamic can in a sense of neutral possibility is used to designate that an event (or an action) is possible (Palmer 1990, 83௅84). Palmer (1990, 84) proposes a paraphrase of the modal meaning as “It is possible for …”.

90

Modality in The House at Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne

“The possibility is not conditioned by the individual abilities or features of the speaker, but by some external factors and circumstances. When these factors are clearly defined in the utterance, the modality may be termed according to Palmer (1990, 84) as circumstantial possibility” (SkorasiĔska 2014, 43). In his survey, Palmer (1990) argues that “the description ‘circumstantial possibility’ is more appropriate if there is a clear indication of the circumstances in which an event is possible.” Thus, circumstantial possibility constitutes a subkind of neutral possibility. As Palmer (1990, 84) claims, “there is a very common association of can with adjectives and adverbs in comparative or superlative forms or modified by e.g. how” [emphasis mine A.W.]. In this way, “judgments about the degree or extent that an action is possible” are represented. Furthermore, the author states that the neutral meaning of can is clearer when the subject of the sentence is the impersonal you or when the sentence is in the passive (Palmer 1990, 84). Additionally, dynamic can may be modified by always to suggest that the possibility is timeless and not merely current (Palmer 1990, 85). Dynamic can may also refer to the ability of the subject (expressing what one can do). In this case, dynamic possibility indicated by can is therefore subject-oriented. Only animate entities such as people and animals may possess ability (Palmer 1990, 85; SkorasiĔska 2014, 40). Ability designates either the natural or acquired skills, or just the physical capacity to perform (SkorasiĔska 2014, 40). The meaning of can used in this function is: “… has the ability to …” (Palmer 1990, 84). By introducing the term “power,” Palmer (1990, 85) makes a distinction between the skills assigned to animates and inanimates (SkorasiĔska 2014, 41). This term is further used interchangeably with “inanimate ability” (Palmer 1990, 136). As Palmer (1990, 85) claims: subject orientation is also possible with inanimate entities, “where it indicates that they have the necessary qualities or ‘power’ (…) to cause the event to take place.” The use of can expressing power or inanimate ability illustrates example (1). (1) Religion can summate, epitomize, relate, and conserve all highest ideals and values. (Ehrman 1966, 13) Dynamic can is often used “to suggest, by implication, that what is possible, will, or should, be implemented” (Palmer 1990, 86). Four types of this use are distinguished by Palmer (1990):

Anna Walkowska

91

1) “It is regularly used with I or with exclusive we (‘I and he’, ‘I and they’, etc.) to make an offer by the speaker or speakers (...); 2) It may also be used with the third person pronouns where the speaker speaks on behalf of someone else, but leaves it vague whether the initiative comes from him or not (...); 3) With a second person pronoun it suggests that action be taken by the person addressed (...); 4) If we is used inclusively (‘you and I’, ‘you and we’) it combines offer and suggestion” (Palmer 1990, 86). The third type of implication may also express a request (Palmer 1990, 86). Palmer (1990, 86) points out that dynamic can frequently collocates with so-called private verbs. The author distinguishes between two types of this co-occurrence: i.

ii.

Can occurs with verbs of sensation (for instance, with see, hear, look) “where there is little indication of ability” (Palmer 1990, 86). In this case, can occurring with see, diverges from both its subject oriented use (expressing ability) and its neutral use (indicating possibility). Can generally co-occurs “with many other verbs (most of them private verbs) such as understand, remember, think, afford, stand, bear, face, be bothered, etc” [emphasis mine A.W.] (Palmer 1990, 87). It is worth adding here that the verb see collocates with the modal verb can not only as a verb of sensation (i.e. with the meaning observe), as mentioned in the first type, but also with the meaning imagine or understand, and, therefore, see might also be classified as a private verb occurring in the second type. In addition, Palmer concludes that “[m]any examples of this type occur in interrogative or negative forms” (Palmer 1990, 88). Apart from the occurrences of can in interrogative forms in order to ask questions about dynamic possibility, dynamic can is commonly used in interrogation to request an action. Rational possibility expresses situations or events that are unacceptable and unreasonable in the opinion of the speaker, and that are, in that sense, impossible. This kind of modality is usually indicated by dynamic can in a negative form. The negation of can in this use occurs with the subject either in the first person, the impersonal you or something (for instance Britain) with which the speaker identifies himself (Palmer 1990, 105).

92

Modality in The House at Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne

Can’t with I may often suggest in this function that the speaker is unwilling to accept the states of affairs and refuses to act. Existential modality relates to quantification and often involves the quantifier some or the adverb of frequency sometimes. Thus, the meaning conveyed by can may be paraphrased as “It is possible for some …” or “It is sometimes possible that …” (SkorasiĔska 2014, 45; Palmer 1990, 107); see example (2). (2) Lions can be dangerous. (Leech 1969, 223) Palmer (1990, 107) paraphrases this sentence as “It is possible for lions to be dangerous,” in the sense “Some lions are dangerous,” and here excludes the epistemic meaning as “It is possible that lions are dangerous.” Furthermore, the author points out that the above-mentioned example sentence might also mean: “Lions are sometimes dangerous” or even “Some lions are sometimes dangerous.” Having analyzed other examples, Palmer (1990, 107) concludes, however, that sometimes may be interpreted as some, but the interpretation vice versa is not possible. According to Palmer (1990, 70௅72; 2001) the modal verb can may be categorised in terms of deontic possibility indicating the giving of permission or, “in extremely intensive cases” (SkorasiĔska 2014, 33) expressing a command, “often of a brusque or somewhat impolite kind” (Palmer 1990, 71). However, Palmer (1990, 72) further suggests: “Although a separate section has been devoted to this ‘command’ use of can and may, it is best seen not as an independent meaning of the verbs, but as an extended or implied meaning from the permission use.” [emphasis mine A.W.] Palmer (1990, 72) also claims that the occurrence of deontic can indicating a command is more likely in colloquial speech. Can in this meaning makes very confident and sarcastic suggestions. Permissive can occurs in informal language. Palmer (1990, 71) supports Ehrman’s (1966, 12) view that can expressing permission mainly occurs in conversational speech, as in (3). (3) Even though this is my rock you can use it sometimes. (Ehrman 1966, 12) Although deontic can occurs in interrogation in the function of asking permission in a quite literal sense, it may simultaneously be used as a polite request. In such a case, asking for permission is “a matter of courtesy” (Palmer 1990, 78). Furthermore, can used to ask permission

Anna Walkowska

93

may suggest that the person addressed should act, in order that the event, related to the modal verb, may take place. Can may also be used for rules and regulations in order to give permission in an informal style. However, rules can be regarded “either as reports of deontic modality or as saying what is dynamically possible or necessary” (Palmer 1990, 104). In that respect, deontic can might be seen “as derived by implication from dynamic can” (Palmer 1990, 104) Thus, it is possible to interpret the meaning of can used for rules and regulations in both ways, that is either as deontic (when the speaker has made the rule and performatively imposes it) or as dynamic (when the speaker says what is dynamically possible). Palmer (1990) claims that the use of can is more likely to be interpreted that the speaker only reports a rule and does not themselves impose it. The author questions the deontic meaning of can: “It would even be possible to suggest that can is, in fact, never deontic in its basic meaning, that the only deontic possibility modal is may. On this view, can always expresses dynamic possibility, but to say what is possible is often to imply that the speaker will not object, i.e. that he gives permission” [emphasis mine A.W.] (Palmer 1990, 72). Then he marks: “(…) The fact that can seems to be used in rules and regulations with, possibly, a different meaning from that of may, might support this view, but is far from conclusive. Yet it is clear that can is frequently used to give permission and in that use differs from may only in formality” [emphasis mine A.W.] (Palmer 1990, 72). Palmer (1990, 50௅52, 60௅61) primarily identifies epistemic may with the modal verb indicating possibility which conveys the meaning “possible that,” while can is considered as indication (or marker) of epistemic possibility in term of its negative form that negates the modality and not the proposition. The modal verb can seldom occurs in interrogation in order to question epistemic modality. With regard to the modal can, the following negative forms can be distinguished: cannot, the contraction can’t, as well as could not, and the contraction couldn’t. The negative form of dynamic can (can’t or cannot/couldn’t or could not), mostly negates modality (i.e. dynamic possibility). Can’t (or cannot) may be either subject oriented or neutral. Moreover, as discussed above, rational modality is usually indicated by can in the negative form. In addition, Palmer (1990, 75) also discusses the negation of deontic modals. Deontic cannot (or can’t) negates modality, that is it refuses permission. Deontic modals may not and cannot (can’t) might be used for the same function, namely they negate modality refusing permission.

94

Modality in The House at Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne

However, in Palmer’s survey (1990) no examples of this use were noted, but the author claims that it is absolutely possible to say so. As noted above, can is considered as indication (or marker) of epistemic possibility in term of its negative form that negates the modality and not the proposition. Epistemic can’t is paraphrased by Palmer as “It is not possible that ….” However, can’t would be interpreted as dynamic rather than epistemic if the main verb is a verb of action and refers to the future. To express the epistemic sense, it is possible to use the progressive form, even though there is no duration. In “verbal crossing out” (Halliday 1970, 333), can may be used to declare possibility, if it denies a previous can’t. The choice of must for the further discussion is motivated by the fact that this modal, referring to necessity, plays an important role in Palmer’s (1990) categorisation of modality. There is a variety of features of this modal verb with respect to this classification. Palmer (1990) points out that must and mustn’t may express dynamic, deontic, or epistemic modality, which will be discussed below. The modal verb must can be used to indicate dynamic necessity. In this respect, dynamic must is often neutral conveying the meaning “It is necessary for …” (Palmer 1990, 113). It occurs in an utterance by little or no indication of the involvement of the speaker. Neutral dynamic necessity denoted by the modal verb must is called circumstantial when it indicates clearly defined circumstances which condition the necessity. As Palmer (1990: 113) states: “Generally speaking we do not lay obligations upon ourselves.” He gives some examples in which the subject is either I or we where the meaning of dynamic must is paraphrased as “It is necessary for me/us to ….” The modal verb must may indicate deontic necessity. However, as Palmer (1990, 69) suggests, “there is no clear line between its uses for deontic and neutral dynamic necessity.” Deontic necessity usually implies that the speaker is in a position to lay an obligation. Hence, he or she is in the position of some authority. As Palmer (1990, 72) points out, “must has some implication of authority on which the speaker relies, or at least the implication that he can impose his authority.” Palmer (1990, 73) considers some possible aspects of the use and meaning of deontic must. For instance, it can be seen from context that “the speaker (or writer) takes responsibility for imposing of the necessity,” and “reports what he is doing with urge” (Palmer 1990, 73). By using must, the speaker may also report what someone else deontically requires

Anna Walkowska

95

or insists. However, the context is not always helpful. Deontic must may also indicate a very firm piece of advice, almost an imperative. In some cases, deontic necessity does not imply the authority of the speaker, and he or she does not appear to be giving orders or making demands. For example, deontic must may be used for invitations, that is when the subject of the sentence is you, and in order to be polite, the speaker is insistent in matters in which the person addressed benefits from the action. Another instance of must, often without any indication of the authority of the speaker, involves verbs related to the act of conversation such as: say, admit, confess, ask, remember, mention, realize, etc. As Palmer (1990, 74) states: “With these there is still an element of discourse orientation; the speaker either imposes the obligation on himself and by so doing actually performs the act (I must admit = I do admit), or else asks his hearer to behave in a similar fashion.” However, there is an inconsistency with the explanation of Palmer (1990) that the speaker might lay the obligation upon himself, because Palmer (1990) also claims in his survey: “Generally speaking we do not lay obligations upon ourselves” (Palmer 1990, 113). Therefore, in this case, must is “used in a rather weaker sense” (Palmer 1990, 73). Deontic must may be used non-performatively in interrogation to ask whether the person addressed lays an obligation. Furthermore, the person addressed has the power to impose the obligation. Epistemic meaning of must, indicating epistemic necessity, may be paraphrased as “The only possible conclusion is that …” (Palmer 1990, 53). An alternative paraphrase could be: “It is not possible that … not ….” (Palmer 1990, 53). As Palmer (1990, 53) points out, most of the examples of must used epistemically in his Survey refer to the present. Epistemic must seldom occurs with future time reference, because it would usually be interpreted as a necessity in a dynamic or a deontic sense. Nevertheless, the occurrence of epistemic must is also possible in future time when it indicates what the speaker thinks will happen, and when the context makes an epistemic sense more likely. Structures involving must of this type contain a certain amount of ambiguity (Palmer 1990, 54), which can be avoided by the use of the progressive form of the verb. Due to the lack of the past form of must, it is impossible to judge in the past. However, it is possible to make a present judgment about a past assertion (Palmer 1990, 10; SkorasiĔska 2014, 93). “The proposition can be in the past, for we can make judgments about past events. This is achieved by the use of have before the main verb” (Palmer 1990, 64).

96

Modality in The House at Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne

By means of epistemic necessity the speaker indicates their strong belief in the truth of what is being said. Palmer (1990, 53; 2001, 8௅9) draws our attention to the comment by Coates (1983): “In its most normal usage, epistemic must conveys the speaker’s confidence in the truth of what he is saying, based on a deduction from facts known to him (which may or may not be specified)” Coates (1983, 41). Palmer (1990, 53; 2001, 8) suggests that the term ‘confidence’ is inappropriate because of a too close reference to certainty; however, he supports the view of Coates (1983) that the conclusion that is drawn (i.e. the judgment) is often based on evidence. There are three negative forms of must, namely: must not, the contraction mustn’t, and must in combination with any negative word. Palmer (1990, 114) points out that neutral mustn’t may be introduced by I think. In such cases, the speaker does not impose the obligation, but merely expresses an opinion on what is necessary. Moreover, Palmer (1990, 117) claims that the functions of the negative forms of must indicating neutral dynamic modality are the same as for deontic modality, that is they negate the proposition and express an obligation not to act. According to Palmer (1990, 75௅77), deontic must not (or mustn’t) negates the proposition (the event), that is lays an obligation not to (act). Moreover, mustn’t occurs also in “verbal crossing out” (Halliday 1970, 333), where a previous must is denied. In such a case, the whole proposition is denied, and the modality seems to be negated. The negation mustn’t is “not usually used epistemically, since the forms used for the negation of epistemic necessity are supplied by those for epistemic possibility, can’t and may not” (Palmer 1990, 61). However, mustn’t “may be used where it is important to make the judgment in terms of necessity rather than possibility” (Palmer 1990, 61). Palmer (1990, 61) provides an example where mustn’t is used epistemically instead of can’t: “He mustn’t be there after all” = “The only possible conclusion is that he is not there” ௅ (“necessary-not”), in place of “It is not a possible conclusion that he is there” ௅ (“not-possible”). Furthermore, mustn’t may also occur in verbal crossing out, where a previous must is denied.

Can and must in The House of Pooh Corner by A.A. Milne This study provides the quantitative as well as qualitative description of the modal verbs can and must found in the children’s novel of A.A. Milne’s The House at Pooh Corner.

Anna Walkowska

97

The length of the investigated work is comprised of the total amount of 26,251 words. The number of the examined instances amounts to 100. The modal verbs mentioned above are used in affirmatives, interrogatives, and negatives in this text. The analyzed occurrences of can and must refer to the present or to the future time. However, 3 representatives of must refer to the past. Table 1. Occurrences of can and must and their negative forms in Milne’s The House at Pooh Corner. words in total 26,251

can

can’t

must

mustn’t

54

22

20

4

As Table 1 presents, the analysis of the text revealed 54 instances of can and 20 instances of must. Additionally, 22 instances of the negative form of can (i.e., can’t), and only 4 instances of the negative form of must (i.e., mustn’t) have been found. As can be seen from Table 5, can constitutes by far the most frequent modal in the research material. According to the classification of modality by Palmer (1990), three kinds of modality occur in the investigated text: dynamic, deontic, and epistemic modality. The functions of the modal verbs can and must are divided into particular categories. The following parts of this chapter deal with can and must used in affirmatives or in interrogatives. The negative form of these modals is discussed in two separate parts.

The research methodology The analysis is based on the qualitative descriptions of the use of two modal verbs. The first step of the analysis is the selection of all actual instances of can and must in the research material, and finding their application in affirmative, interrogative, and negative sentences. For technical reasons, an electronic version of the book was initially used in order to make it easier to conduct the research in terms of the search for the modal verbs, their selection, and calculation. Then, the selected modal verbs were searched for and traced in the paper version of the book. Each instance of the examined modal verb was analysed and is described in terms of the denoted type, or, if possible, also subcategory, of modality. The type of the sentence in which the modal occurs, and the information obtained from the context of the utterance (for example, the background of the conversation including the state of affairs mentioned in the dialogue,

98

Modality in The House at Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne

who the speaker and interlocutor are, what relations between them are, what their knowledge, believes are, or whether some circumstances influencing the situation are given) are also taken into consideration since it is relevant for defining the type of modality. The collected data are discussed in the light of Palmer’s (1990) studies. For a better illustration of the distribution of the analysed verbs and their modal meanings, the aggregated data are also presented in tabular forms. Finally, in order to make the results comparable with the previously reviewed research on the acquisition of modality by young children, the most significant results are calculated as percentages, and illustrated in pie charts.

The modal verb can As Table 2 illustrates, the most numerous occurrences of can indicate dynamic modality. This type of modality is related to possibility. The analysis of the text revealed 50 instances of can indicating dynamic possibility. Deontic modality is represented by 3 instances of can. Only one modal verb can indicates epistemic modality in the text. In general, the meaning conveyed by can expresses possibility. Interestingly, in the whole text, there are only 3 sentences in the passive voice involving can: 2 instances indicating dynamic circumstantial possibility and 1 instance indicating dynamic possibility in the category private verb. The sentences in the active voice contain most occurrences of can (51 instances). Table 2. Occurrences of modality indicated by can in Milne’s The House at Pooh Corner. dynamic possibility 50

deontic possibility 3

epistemic possibility 1

As noted earlier, dynamic modality expressed by the modal verb can is related to possibility. Following Palmer’s (1990) survey and theory, the functions of the modal verb can in the sentences occurring in Milne’s work have been divided into categories of dynamic modality. Table 3 represents the division and the number of instances found in the text.

Anna Walkowska

99

Table 3. Division of dynamic possibility into categories and the number of their occurrences in the text. ability 17

neutral/ implication circumstantial 14/6

7

private verbs 11

interrogative use of can to request an action 1

total 50

As Table 3 shows, 5 categories (or subkinds) of dynamic possibility indicated by can have been identified in the research material: ability, neutral or neutral/circumstantial, implication, private verbs, and interrogative use of can to request an action. All these categories of dynamic possibility are discussed further in the text. The category ability constitutes the most numerous group of dynamic possibility in the whole text. Subject-oriented can displays the possibility of a subject to perform certain action. There are 17 instances of can referring to the ability of the subject as in examples (4௅6). (4) And as they went, Tigger told Roo (who wanted to know) all about the things that Tiggers could do. “Can they fly?” asked Roo. “Yes” said Tigger, “they’re very good flyers, Tiggers are. Strornry good flyers.” “Oo!” said Roo. “Can they fly as well as Owl?” “Yes,” said Tigger. “Only they don’t want to.” (Milne 2016, 80) (5) “Well”, said Roo, “can they jump as far as far as Kangas?” “Yes,” said Tigger. “When they want to.” “I love jumping,” said Roo. “Let’s see who can jump farthest, you or me.” “I can,” said Tigger. “But we mustn’t stop now, or we shall be late.” (Milne 2016, 80) (6) “I can swim,” said Roo. “I fell into the river and I swimmed. Can Tiggers swim?” “Of course they can. Tiggers can do everything.” “Can they climb trees better than Pooh?” asked Roo, stopping under the tallest Pine Tree, and looking up at it. “Climbing trees is what they do best,” said Tigger. “Much better than Poohs.” (Milne 2016, 82)

100

Modality in The House at Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne

In examples (4–6) (conversation between the little Roo and Tigger), the modal verb can indicating ability occurs 10 times. It can be observed that the usage frequency of can is relatively high in this dialogue, or, in other words, it can be noticed that the modal verb can is often used in the category ability in this dialogue. The speakers, namely Tigger and Roo, use can in order to ask about the ability of the subject (such as in the interrogative sentences spoken by Roo) or to express what the subject is able to do (such as in the affirmative sentences spoken mostly by Tigger). The examples of affirmatives with can mentioned above can be paraphrased as: “…. has the ability to …” (Palmer 1990, 84), for instance: the appropriate paraphrase for the sentence “I can swim” (Milne 2016, 82) is: I have the ability to swim. Another example is “Tiggers have the ability to do everything.” – paraphrasing the sentence: “Tiggers can do everything.” (Milne 2016, 82). In the interrogative sentences presented in (4–6) the suitable paraphrase could analogically be: Do they (or Tiggers) have the ability to …? For example: Do they have the ability to fly? – as the appropriate paraphrase for the question of Roo: “Can they fly?” (Milne 2016, 80). The paraphrasing of sentences with the modal verb can is helpful to indentify the proper kind of modality and the function of the modal verb which determines the category of modality (similarly to identifying the next category discussed below). Additionally, it can be seen from examples (4௅6) that all the 10 instances of can refer to the ability of animate subjects (such as: they/Tiggers, who, I). Although only animates (such as people or animals) may have ability, “subject orientation is possible with inanimates, where it indicates that they have the necessary qualities or ’power’ to cause the event to take place” (Palmer 1990, 85). In the work of Milne, however, the modal can denoting ability refers in all cases to animate subjects, for example: we, Tiggers, anybody who, I. In the text, there are no occurrences of can referring to power of an inanimate subject to designate abilities. The second main group constitutes the use of can in a sense of neutral possibility (14 instances). This category of dynamic possibility indicates “that an event is possible” (Palmer 1990, 83) as in the following examples. (7) “That’s right, Eeyore. Drop in on any of us at any time, when you feel like it.” “Thank you, Rabbit. And if anybody says in a Loud Voice ‘Brother, it’s Eeyore,’ I can drop out again.” (Milne 2016, 190)

Anna Walkowska

101

In quotation (4), the modal verb can denotes that the event “to drop out again” is possible for Eeyore. (8) “I just like to know,” said Pooh humbly, “So as I can say to myself: ‘I’ve got fourteen pots of honey left.’ Or fifteen, as the case may be. It’s sort of comforting.” (Milne 2016, 52) In instances (7) and (8), the appropriate paraphrase for the affirmative sentence containing can is “It is possible for…” (Palmer 1990, 84). Therefore, the sentence with the occurrence of can in the example numbered (7) may be paraphrased as: It is possible for me to drop out again, and in the case of the instance numbered (8): So as it is possible for me to say to myself. It is also noticeable that the modal verb in the sentence: “So as I can say to myself” occurs in the collocation with the verb of communication say. However, it does not evidence that the modal verb can, occurring in this collocation, always denotes neutral possibility. Can used in the collocation with say is also found to denote another category of dynamic possibility, namely implication (Palmer 1990, 86) which is elaborated further in this chapter. Example (9) illustrates two functions of can in the collocation with the verb of communication say depending on the subject: (9) “Well,” said Rabbit, “all I can say is – well, here’s Christopher Robin, so he can say it.” (Milne 2016, 134) The first occurrence of can in example (9) indicates neutral possibility and the sentence contains the first person singular subject which expresses what is possible for the subject as a speaker. The second occurrence of can in this example denotes implication. Can is here used with the third person pronoun where the speaker (i.e., Rabbit) speaks on behalf of someone else (i.e., Christopher Robin). The speaker suggests, “by implication, that what is possible will, or should, be implemented” (Palmer 1990: 86). Another illustration of neutral possibility is the interrogative sentence (10). (10) “But how else can you go out?” asked Piglet anxiously. “That is the Problem, Piglet, to which I am asking Pooh to give his mind.” (Milne 2016, 176) In example (10), the question involving the modal verb can may be paraphrased as follows: But how else is it possible for you to go out?

102

Modality in The House at Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne

Moreover, “a very common association of can” (Palmer 1990, 84) with the question mark “how” and an adverb (here: else) occurs in this interrogative sentence. This marks the neutral sense of the instance of can, too. The analysis of the research material also shows that in the case of 6 occurrences of neutral possibility indicated by can, some circumstances are given in which an action can be taken or something is possible to happen. Thus, 6 cases of circumstantial possibility have been found in the text. As Palmer claims “The description ‘circumstantial possibility’ is more appropriate if there is a clear indication of the circumstances in which an event is possible” (Palmer 1990, 84). The instance includes sentence (11). (11) “It just shows what can be done by taking a little trouble,” said Eeyore. (Milne 2016, 28) In example (11), the sentence is in the passive. This causes that the neutral sense of can is clearer because of impersonality (i.e., in this case: the lack of the subject in this sentence). The words “by taking a little trouble” indicate the circumstances in which something is possible to do. The clear indication of the circumstances, in which an action is possible, is also found in quotation (12). (12) “I’ll take off my tunic and we’ll each hold a corner, and then Roo and Tigger can jump into it, and it will be all soft and bouncy for them, and they won’t hurt themselves.” (Milne 2016, 90) The speaker gives clues and presents circumstances in which it is possible for Roo and Tigger (i.e., for the plural subject) to jump. Can occurs in the text 11 times with the private verbs. Two types belonging to the category of dynamic possibility have been found. There are 10 occurrences of can collocating with the verbs of sensation see and hear (by little indication of ability). They belong to the first type of private verbs (Palmer 1990, 86) and constitute the most frequent group of this category; see examples (13–17). (13) “(…) Tigger and I are living in a tree, like Owl, and we’re going to stay here for ever and ever. I can see Piglet’s house. Piglet, I can see your house from here.” (Milne 2016, 86௅88)

Anna Walkowska

103

(14) “(…) Can you see yours, Piglet? I thought I could see mine, but I couldn’t. There it is! No it isn’t. Can you see yours, Pooh?” “No,” said Pooh. “I expect my stick’s stuck,” said Roo. “Rabbit, my stick’s stuck. Is your stick stuck, Piglet?” (Milne 2016, 122) (15) “I can see yours, Piglet,” said Pooh suddenly. “Mine’s a sort of grayish one,” said Piglet, not daring to lean too far over in case he fell in. “Yes, that’s what I can see. It’s coming over on to my side.” (Milne 2016, 122) (16) (…) You can see a skylark singing, And the blue-bells, which are ringing, Can be heard. (Milne 2016, 106) (17) But Christopher Robin wasn't listening to Eeyore, he was listening to something else. “Can you hear it?” he asked. “What is it? Somebody laughing?” “Listen.” (Milne 2016, 22) Another type of private verbs occurs in example (18). (18) “What are we going to do, Pooh? Can you think of anything?” asked Piglet. (Milne 2016, 174) There is only 1 occurrence of this type in the text. In example (18), can appears with the mental verb think that expresses an intellectual state. It is worth adding here that this sentence consisting of can occurs in an interrogative form which is, according to Palmer (1990, 88), frequent in this category in general. In the research material, however, there are more instances of can with private verbs in affirmative sentences (7 instances) than in interrogatives (4 instances). The modal verb can is also found to denote implication (7 or 8 occurrences). It is used “to suggest, by implication, that what is possible, will, or should be implemented” (Palmer 1990, 86). Different types of this use appear in the research material. The first type is used (either with I or with we) in the text to make an offer by the speaker, as in (19).

104

Modality in The House at Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne

(19) Eeyore looked round slowly at him, and then turned back to Christopher Robin. “We have been joined by something,” he said in a loud whisper. “But no matter. We can leave it behind. If you will come with me, Christopher Robin, I will show you the house.” (Milne 2016, 198) In example (19), can is used with we. The speaker ௅ Eeyore ௅ makes an offer to Christopher Robin to leave it behind. The next instance, that is (20), presents the use of can with I (here, Piglet is the speaker). (20) “(…), I mean it’s dangerous but I can do it all right, and Christopher Robin and I will be back in about half an hour. Good-bye, Pooh!” (Milne 2016, 182) The instance of the second type of implication, “used with the third person pronouns where the speaker speaks on behalf of someone else” (Palmer 1990, 86), has been already mentioned: “(…) well, here’s Christopher Robin, so he can say it” (Milne 2016, 134). The third type of this category occurs with the second person pronoun and “suggests that action be taken by the person addressed” (Palmer 1990, 86), as in example (21). (21) “Because Poetry and Hums aren’t things which you get, They’re things which get you. And all you can do is to go where (…)” (Milne 2016, 186) Taking all the examples above into consideration, personal pronouns seem to be of great importance by determining the type of implication. Additionally, the instance of can which have occurred with the private verb think, mentioned previously, can also be considered both in the category implication [third type] (because of use with the second person pronoun) and as request which is indicated by the interrogative sentence with can. (22) “What are we going to do, Pooh? Can you think of anything?” asked Piglet. (Milne 2016, 174) The interrogative use of can to request an action is not frequent in the text. The instance includes (23).

Anna Walkowska

105

(23) “Well, can you tell me anything you’ve seen him do in the morning? This last few days.” “Yes,” said Pooh. “We had breakfast together yesterday.” (Milne 2016, 108) Here, the speaker (Rabbit) by means of can is asking the interlocutor (Pooh), making a polite request. Deontic possibility indicated by can in the text of A.A. Milne’s The House at Pooh Corner can be divided into two categories: permission (1 occurrence) and command (2 occurrences). The following instance of can, (24), indicates giving permission. (24) For a little longer they waited, until the Forest had become so still that it almost frightened them and then Rabbit got up and stretched himself. “Well?” he whispered proudly. “There we are! Just as I said.“ “I’ve been thinking, “said Pooh, “and I think –“ “No,” said Rabbit. “Don’t. Run. Come on.” And they all hurried off, Rabbit leading the way. “Now,” said Rabbit, after they had gone a little way, “we can talk. What were you going to say, Pooh?” (Milne 2016, 152) Can expresses a command (of somewhat impolite kind) in example (25). (25) Rabbit began to feel that it was time he took command. “Now, Pooh,” he said, “when I say ‘Now!’ you can drop it. Eeyore, when I say ‘Now!’ Pooh will drop his stone.” (Milne 2016, 128) The only example of can indicating epistemic possibility includes (26). (26) “What can it be?” he thought. “There are lots of noises in the Forest, but this is a different one.” (Milne 2016, 32) In example (26), the speaker does not express what he knows, but he asks himself what it, that is, the noise, can possibly be, creating believes in his thoughts and concluding possibilities from the situation in the surroundings at the same time. As for the negative form of can, 22 occurrences of can’t have been found in the work of Milne. The negation occurs only as a contraction, and the form cannot has not been encountered. There are no representatives of

106

Modality in The House at Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne

can’t indicating deontic modality. It means that the negation of this type of modality denoting refusal of permission is not present in the material. Furthermore, only 2 instances expressing epistemic modality have been found. Examples (27௅28) display this type of modality designated by the negative form of can. (27) “Oh, Eeyore!” “And I said to myself: The others will be sorry if I’m getting myself all cold. They haven’t got Brains, any of them, only grey fluff that’s blown into their heads by mistake, and they don’t Think, but if it goes on snowing for another six weeks or so, one of them will begin to say to himself: ‘Eeyore can’t be so very much too Hot about three o’clock in the morning.’ And then it will Get About. And they’ll be Sorry.” (Milne 2016, 22) (28) So, in a little while, they came to the house which Eeyore had found, and just before they came to it, Piglet was nudging Pooh, and Pooh was nudging Piglet, and they were saying, “It is!” and “It can’t be!” and “It’s really!” to each other. And when they got there, it really was. (Milne 2016, 200) Can’t negates modality. The epistemic meaning conveyed by can’t may be paraphrased as: “It is not possible that …” (Palmer 1990, 60–61). Thus, the accurate paraphrase for the negation in example (24) is: It is not possible that Eeyore is so very much too Hot about three o’clock in the morning; whereas in example (28): It is not possible that it is! Dynamic possibility is here the most frequent modality negated by can’t (with 20 instances). Four subkinds of the negation of dynamic modality have been detected, namely: private verbs (6 instances), ability (5 instances), neutral (5 instances) – in 3 cases also called circumstantial possibility, and rational possibility (4 instances). It is noticeable here that the highest number of occurrences comprises private verbs. This category constitutes verbs of sensation: hear (3 occurrences), see (2 occurrences), and look (1 occurrence) collocating with can’t where there is a little sign of ability; see examples (29–31). (29) (…) and then they went on to Kanga’s house, holding on to each other, and shouting “Isn’t it?” and “What?” and “I can’t hear.” (Milne 2016, 164)

Anna Walkowska

107

(30) “(…) Can’t you see that Christopher Robin wants to be alone? I’m going.” And he humped off. (Milne 2016, 214) (31) “Oh!” said Piglet. “Well, did Owl always have a letter-box in his ceiling?” “Has he?” “Yes, look.” I can’t,” said Pooh. “I’m face downwards under something, and that, Piglet, is a very bad position for looking at ceilings.” (Milne 2016, 172) Can’t indicating ability is represented in examples (32) and (33). The meaning conveyed by can’t may be paraphrased as “… do not have the ability to …”. Thus, the accurate paraphrase for instance (32) is: We do not have the ability to get down, while for (33): Tiggers do not have the ability to climb downwards. (32) “Hallo, Roo!” called Piglet.”What are you doing?” “We can’t get down, we can’t get down!” cried Roo. “Isn’t fun? Pooh, isn’t fun, Tigger and I are living in a tree, like Owl, and we’re going to stay here for ever and ever. (…)” (Milne 2016, 86௅88) (33) “How did you get there, Roo?” asked Piglet. “On Tigger’s back! And Tiggers can’t climb downwards, because their tails get in the way, only upwards, and Tigger forgot about that when he started, and he’s only just remembered. So, we’ve got to stay here for ever and ever unless we go higher.” (Milne 2016, 88) Neutral can’t negates dynamic possibility and indicates that an event is not possible. An instance of can’t expressing neutral possibility includes (34). (34) “I’ve been finding things in the Forest,” said Tigger importantly. “I’ve found a pooh a piglet and an eeyore, but I can’t find any breakfast.” (Milne 2016, 48) The meaning of can’t may be paraphrased as “It is not possible for …” (Palmer 1990, 61). So, in example (34) the suitable paraphrase is: … it is not possible for me to find any breakfast. Neutral can in the negative form also denotes circumstantial possibility. There is a certain indication of circumstances in which an event is not possible; see examples (35–36).

108

Modality in The House at Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne

(35) “Lucky we know the Forest so well, or we might get lost,” said Rabbit half an hour later, and he gave the careless laugh which you give when you know the Forest so well that you can’t get lost. (Milne 2016, 154) (36) “Because,” said Owl, “we can’t go out by what used to be the front door. Something’s fallen on it.” (Milne 2016, 176) In example (35), a clear condition is given, (i.e., when you know the Forest so well that), under which it is not possible for you to get lost. Similarly, instance (36) indicates the circumstance something’s fallen on the front door, therefore, it is not possible for us to go out by what used to be the front door. Interestingly, can’t is sometimes used to express rational possibility. This subtype of dynamic possibility occurs in the research material only in a negative form of can. Referring to the survey of Palmer (1990, 105), rational possibility indicates situations or events that are unacceptable and unreasonable in the opinion of the speaker, and that are, in that sense, impossible. It may indicate that the speaker is unwilling to accept states of affairs and refuses to act. All instances of can’t denoting rational possibility include (37௅39). (37) POOH (who wasn’t going to be there, but we find we can’t do without him): “Oh, Piglet, how brave and clever you are!” (Milne 2016, 64) (38) “(…) And he respects Owl, because you can’t help respecting anybody who can spell TUESDAY, even if he doesn’t spell it right” (Milne 2016, 96) (39) “I’m not throwing it, I’m dropping it, Eeyore,” he explained. “And then I can’t miss – I mean I can’t hit you. Could you stop turning round for a moment, because it muddles me rather?” (Milne 2016, 128) It is noticeable that can’t in this function occurs with the subject either in the first person as in examples (37) and (39), or the impersonal you as in example (38). It can also be seen in example (37) that the narrator, who speaks in the parenthesis, indentifies himself with the subject we.

Anna Walkowska

109

The modal verb must The data in Table 4 shows that the highest number of occurrences of the modal verb must indicates dynamic modality. This type of modality is related to necessity. The analysis of the text revealed 12 instances of must expressing dynamic modality. Deontic modality, which is also related to necessity, is represented by 4 instances of must. Similarly, 4 instances of the modal verb must indicate epistemic modality. In general, the meaning conveyed by must expresses necessity. Interestingly, there are no sentences in the passive voice involving must in the whole text. All sentences containing occurrences of must are exclusively in the active voice. Table 4. Occurrences of modality indicated by must in Milne’s The House at Pooh Corner. dynamic necessity 12

deontic necessity 4

epistemic necessity 4

The modal verb must is mostly used in the research material where there is dynamic necessity. It is “neutral, with just the meaning ‘It is necessary for …’” (Palmer 1990, 113); see example (40). (40) “Ha!” said Rabbit again, and looked very important. “This is Serious. He is Lost. We must begin the Search at once.” (Milne 2016, 66) In order to identify the neutral dynamic necessity, the instance of must in (40) may be replaced by the paraphrase: It is necessary for us to begin the Search at once. According to Palmer (1990, 113), we do not generally impose obligations upon ourselves. Therefore, neither example (40) nor example (41) may be a representative of deontic modality. (41) “So there it is,” said Pooh, when he had sung this to himself three times. “It’s come different from what I thought it would, but it’s come. Now I must go and sing it to Piglet.” (Milne 2016, 188) Similarly to the previous one, the meaning conveyed by must in instance (41) may be paraphrased as It is necessary for…. In this case, the whole sentence sounds: It is necessary for me to go and sing it to Piglet.

110

Modality in The House at Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne

In the analyzed material, there is also 1 occurrence of neutral must which is called ‘circumstantial’; see example (42). (42) “Well,” he said at last, “it’s a very nice house, and if your own house is blown down, you must go somewhere else” (Milne 2016, 202) In this case, the words “if your own house is blown down” (Milne 2016, 202) present the circumstances in which it is necessary for the interlocutor to “go somewhere else” (Milne 2016, 202). Only four occurrences of must indicating deontic modality have been found in the research material as in an interrogative sentence in (43). (43) But Kanga and Christopher Robin and Piglet were all standing round Roo, watching him have his Extract of Malt. And Roo was saying, “Must I?” and Kanga was saying “Now, Roo dear, you remember what you promised.” (Milne 2016, 48) It is worth adding here that human traits and qualities were attributed to all animal characters in the children’s novel of Milne. The author used personification in his literary work. Consequently, the animal characters are personified. In example (43), “the person addressed”, namely Kanga, has the power to lay the obligation upon Roo, who asks the question Must I? (cf. Palmer 1990, 78). Kanga has the authority as the mother of Roo and an adult, and thus she can impose duties. From this utterance results that Kanga wants him to drink “his Extract of Malt” (Milne 2016, 48). Another instance of deontic necessity indicated by must is (44). (44) “Good-bye,” said Eeyore. “What? Oh, good-bye. And if you happen to come across a good house for Owl, you must let us know.” “I will give my mind to it,” said Eeyore. Rabbit went. (Milne 2016, 190) Example (44) shows that the speaker ௅ Rabbit ௅ lays obligation upon his interlocutor ௅ Eeyore. Although both of them are in a friendly relationship, Rabbit ௅ as an adult character who is willing to rule and to make decisions ௅ seems to be in a position to impose his will. A similarly small group of the modal verb must (4 instances) represents epistemic modality in the text. One occurrence of epistemic must is expressed in the present tense, whereas three representatives of this type of

Anna Walkowska

111

modality refer to the past tense of the propositions, as in examples (45) and (46). (45) Eeyore went inside… and came out again. “It’s a remarkable thing,” he said. “It is my house, and I built it where I said I did, so the wind must have blown it here. And the wind blew it right over the wood, and blew it down here, and here it is as good as ever. In fact, better in places.” (Milne 2016, 28) (46) And then, just as Pooh was beginning to think that he must have chosen the wrong stone or the wrong river or the wrong day for his Idea, something grey showed for a moment by the river bank… (Milne 2016, 128) Epistemic meaning conveyed by must may be paraphrased as “The only possible conclusion is that …” (Palmer 1990, 50). Hence, in example (45) the accurate paraphrase may be: The only possible conclusion is that the wind have blown it here. There is a deduction of the speaker (i.e., Eeyore), and the reasons for it are stated as “It is my house, and I built it where I said I did, (…)” (Milne 2016, 28). The modal verb must expresses what the speaker believes (Palmer 1990, 53௅54), as in this instance “so the wind must have blown it here” (Milne 2016, 28). The epistemic must communicates Eeyore’s belief in the truth of what he is saying, based on a conclusion drawn from the facts that he knows (cf. Coates 1983, 41). It can also be noticed that the modal indicates “some kind of judgment by the speaker” (Palmer 1990, 53). Likewise, in example (46) epistemic must indicates the thought and the belief of Pooh. Must does not express that what he knows but that what he believes at a certain moment. The instance of epistemic must expressed in the present tense includes (47). (47) “There you are! I say things when I’m not trying. So it must be a very bad Accident.” And then he thought that perhaps when he did try to say things he wouldn’t be able to; so, to make sure, he said loudly: “A Very Bad Accident to Pooh Bear.” (Milne 2016, 58) Similarly, in example (47) must “conveys the speaker’s confidence in the truth of what he is saying, based on a deduction from facts known to him” (Coates 1983, 41). The speaker, namely Pooh, concludes and articulates what he believes at the given moment. He makes a judgment in the utterance: “So it must be a very bad Accident” (Milne 2016, 58).

112

Modality in The House at Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne

As for the negative form of must, only four occurrences of mustn’t have been encountered in the research material. Two of them represent deontic modality and the other two indicate dynamic modality. Mustn’t is not used epistemically in the text. Examples (48) and (49) depict the negation mustn’t denoting deontic modality. (48) (…) and in a very little time they got to the corner of the field by the side of the pine-wood , where Eeyore’s house wasn’t any longer. “There!” said Eeyore. “Not a stick of it left! Of course, I’ve still got all this snow to do what I like with. One mustn’t complain.” (Milne 2016, 22) (49) “But we mustn’t stop now, or we shall be late.” (Milne 2016, 80) According to Palmer (1990, 75௅76), it can be seen in examples (48) and (49) that mustn’t negates the statement and not modality, imposing an obligation not to take the specified action as complain in instance (48) and stop in instance (49). The semantic meaning conveyed by mustn’t in both cases is prohibition. Example (50) illustrates neutral dynamic modality indicated by negation mustn’t. (50) Pooh explained to Eeyore that Tigger was a great friend of Christopher Robin’s, who had come to stay in the Forest, and Piglet explained to Tigger that he mustn’t mind what Eeyore said because he was always gloomy; (Milne 2016, 40) As Palmer points out, for neutral dynamic modality, the function of negation is the same as its function of deontic modality, that is, it negates the proposition and expresses an obligation not to act (Palmer 1990, 117). Example (50) confirms and supports Palmer’s view. 1 occurrence of neutral mustn’t indicates circumstantial necessity. This meaning results from the reference of the negation to the occurrence of circumstantial must in the clause before it; see example (51). (51) “(…) and if your own house is blown down, you must go somewhere else, mustn’t you Piglet? What would you do, if your house was blown down?” (Milne 2016, 202)

Anna Walkowska

113

Analysis The analysis of can and must in the research material has revealed that dynamic modality is the most common type of modality denoted by both investigated modal verbs (84% of all findings) in general. Table 5. Occurrences of particular modalities indicated by can and must and their negative forms in The House at Pooh Corner. modal verb can can’t must mustn’t total

dynamic modality 50 20 12 2 84

deontic modality 3 0 4 2 9

epistemic modality 1 2 4 0 7

total 54 22 20 4 100

As Table 5 shows, 84 instances of can and must as well as their negative forms indicate dynamic modality. Thus, both dynamic modal verbs and their negations constitute the most frequent group with the highest amount of occurrences. In the case of the modal verb can, this type of modality denotes dynamic possibility whereas must designates dynamic necessity. Interestingly, it is also noticeable that deontic modality and epistemic modality indicated by both modal verbs are very infrequent in comparison to dynamic modality. There are in total only 9 instances of deontic meaning expressed by can, must, and mustn’t. However, the smallest group constitutes occurrences of epistemic modality indicated by can, can’t, and must (only 7 instances in total). Instances of deontic can’t and epistemic mustn’t have not been found. Further analyses of can and must in the research material have specified that the most common type of modality in the text is dynamic possibility denoted by can. This result is linked, among others, to the significant discrepancy which can be observed between the number of occurrences of can and must.

114

Modality in The House at Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne

Table 6. Occurrences of modalities indicated by can and can’t in The House at Pooh Corner. modal verb can can’t total

dynamic possibility 50 20 70

deontic possibility 3 0 3

epistemic possibility 1 2 3

total 54 22 76

Table 7. Occurrences of modalities indicated by must and mustn’t in The House at Pooh Corner. modal verb must mustn’t total

dynamic necessity 12 2 14

deontic necessity 4 2 6

epistemic necessity 4 0 4

total 20 4 24

As can be observed in Tables 6௅7, the modal verb can and its negation occur much more frequently (with the total number of instances 76) than the modal must and its negation (constituting the total value of 24 instances). By comparing the data in these two tables, it is noticeable that dynamic possibility includes the highest amount of occurrences indicated by can and can’t (70 instances) and simultaneously the highest number of all representatives indicating a type of modality on the whole: dynamic possibility is represented by 70% of all findings. Nevertheless, dynamic necessity is the most numerous modality designated by must and by its negation (14 instances) with regard to necessity. 2 occurrences of mustn’t indicating neutral dynamic necessity, however, have the same function as deontic necessity. Moreover, the most frequent dynamic possibility, designated by can and by can’t, is remarkable for the huge disparity in the amount of occurrences in comparison to other modalities, indicated by this modal, that are very unusual. In total, only 3 instances of deontic possibility and only 3 instances of epistemic possibility, indicated by this modal, have been found. This tendency raises questions about the function of can within the research material. Therefore, it would be worthwhile to look at the analysis of categories (or subkinds) of dynamic possibility. The categories referring to the functions of dynamic can and can’t are presented in Table 8.

Anna Walkowska

115

Table 8. Occurrences of different categories of dynamic possibility indicated by can and can’t in The House at Pooh Corner. subkinds of dynamic possibility can can’t total ability 17 5 22 neutral/circumstantial possibility 14/6 5/3 19/9 implication 7 0 7 private verbs 11 6 17 interrogative use to request an action 1 0 1 rational possibility 0 4 4 total 50 20 70 As Table 8 illustrates, 6 categories of dynamic possibility have been identified. However, only can indicates implication (7 instances), and is also used in an interrogation to request an action (1 instance). The occurrences of can’t do not fulfill these two functions, whereas only the negation of can expresses rational possibility (4 instances), and can does not occur in this meaning in the research material. The most numerous subtype of dynamic possibility is ability (22 instances in total). The very frequent abilitive use of can has been observed, for instance, in the conversation between Roo and Tigger (in interrogative and affirmative sentences) describing Tigger’s abilities, whereas abilitive can’t often occurs in the utterances presenting the lack of the ability to get down from the tree. The occurrence of neutral possibility, in 9 cases ௅ circumstantial, is also numerous (19 examples in total) and constitutes the second most common category of dynamic possibility. Private verbs, co-occurring both with can and with can’t, are also frequent in the text (17 instances). In this case, the modal collocates mostly with the verb of sensation see, and there is a little indication of ability. Numerous occurrences of this subkind have been found in the conversation when the speakers (or characters) are playing a game observing their sticks in the river and “waiting to see whose stick come out first” (Milne 2016, 122). Two categories of dynamic possibility are very unusual in the text. Rational possibility denoted by can’t is limited to merely 4 cases, and the interrogative use of can to request an action (with only 1 instance) indicates the lowest number of occurrences.

116

Modality in The House at Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne

Basing on the data and the above-demonstrated analysis, some summarising remarks on the use of modality in the research material can be made. First of all, the occurrences of the modal verb can (54%) and its negative form can’t (22%) are much more frequent than must (20%) and mustn’t (4%), which is shown in Figure 1. Occurences of the investigated modals mustn't 4%

must 20% can't 22%

can 54% (54 occurences) can't 22% (22 occurences)

can 54%

must 20% (20 occurences) mustn't 4% (4 occurences)

Figure 1. Occurrences of the investigated modal verbs.

Comparing these two modal verbs, the large discrepancy in their quantity determines the predominance of modalities (denoted by can and can’t) considered by Palmer (1990) in terms of possibility. The general result of this study shows that dynamic modality (with 84% of all the findings) is the most common category indicated by both investigated modal verbs, namely by 92% of all the examples of can and its negative form (which constitute together 70 instances), and by 58% of all the instances of must and its negative form (together 14 instances).

Anna Walkowska

117

Types of modality indicated by can and must in the research material

deontic modality 9%

epistemic modality 7%

dynamic modality 84%

Figure 2. Types of modality indicated by can and must in the research material.

Due to the fact that in the investigated text, dynamic modality is indicated by can and can’t to the greatest extent (i.e., 70% of all the findings), the most frequent is dynamic possibility. Another important result is concerned with modal meanings in terms of dynamic possibility, and thus also with the function of can and can’t occurring in the research material. The most numerous meaning is ability (31.43% within dynamic possibility). Can is then used to express ability, whereas can’t ௅ to indicate the lack of it. The very frequent abilitive use of this modal in the investigated text has been mostly observed in the conversation between friends (Roo and Tigger). Moreover, can and can’t collocate frequently with private verbs (in most cases with the verb of sensation see), and there is also a little indication of ability (24.29% within dynamic possibility). Numerous occurrences of this type have been found in the conversation when the speakers (who are friends) are playing a game by observing. The second most frequent subtype is neutral possibility, in 9 cases ࡳ circumstantial possibility (about 27% within dynamic possibility). The meanings and types of dynamic possibility such as implication (10%), rational possibility (5.7%), and interrogative use of can to request an action (1.42%) occur less frequently or rarely in the text.

118

Modality in The House at Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne

Other meanings and types of modality suggested by Palmer (1990) such as power (i.e., inanimate ability), or existential modality have not been found in the research material. interrogative use of can to request an rational action possibility 1% 6% implication 10%

neutral/circu mstantial possibility 27%

ability 32%

private verbs 24%

Figure 3. Meanings and types of dynamic possibility indicated by can and can’t in the research material.

In contrast to dynamic modality denoted by can and must, deontic modality (9% of all the findings) and epistemic modality (7% of all the findings), indicated by these two modal verbs, occur very infrequently (see also Figure 2). Merely 3 uses of deontic can (to express permission or command), and 4 uses of deontic must (to lay obligation or ask for deontic necessity) have been found. Interestingly, the previously discussed examples of deontic meanings have shown that the adult-child relationship is a relationship of power (e.g., Kanga as mother of Roo, and Rabbit as an adult character are in a position either to impose obligation or to give permission). The animal characters appearing in the research text are personified ࡳ they can talk like humans, and it could be assumed that most of them reflect children’s figures.

Anna Walkowska

119

Finally, one of the most significant findings to emerge from this study is that the smallest group constitutes the instances of epistemic modality. There is only one occurrence of can used to indicate the epistemic meaning. Thus, this interpretation of can constitutes only 1% of all the results, whereas epistemic use of can’t comprises 2% of all the findings. As for must, slightly more instances of epistemic interpretation indicated by this modal have been found. However, their total amount of 4% is also very low, and, furthermore, no negative form of must in epistemic meaning has been detected.

Conclusions The purpose of this research was to examine the use of can and must in the children’s novel The House at Pooh Corner by A. A. Milne, in order to verify their meanings, as well as the distribution of their uses, and then, to prove to what degree these study’s results correlate with the previous research of many scholars. The analysis of the two modal verbs tracked in the research material, shows that the frequency of occurrence of particular kinds of modality bears some similarities to the general results of the reviewed studies about the acquisition of modality by young children. Taking modality indicated by can and must into consideration, it can be concluded that most conversations of animal characters depicted by Milne (2016) masterly reflect the conversations between young children, as well as between children and adults. The lowest number of epistemic modals in the research material supports the findings of the reviewed studies (Papafragou 1997; Choi 2006; Modyanova et al. 2010), showing that the epistemic use of modals is acquired later than dynamic and deontic ones. Thus, the author of the investigated text uses epistemic expressions very infrequently (which need not be his conscious intention). This makes the content more understandable for the target audience, who has probably not yet fully developed this type of interpretations. As discussed in the reviews of studies (Papafragou 1997; Choi 2006), in children’s dialogues and in their conversations with caregivers, epistemic modals occur rarely at the early age because of the later acquisition of epistemic modality. In contrast, dynamic possibility indicated by can and can’t is the most frequent type of modality in the research material. Also, in most cases, dynamic can and its negative form indicate ability. The collocations of can and can’t with private verbs constitute the second most numerous group which, to a small extent, also indicates ability. Similar results were

120

Modality in The House at Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne

obtained in the reviewed research (Wells 1979) on the acquisition of modality, where can was designated as the first modal fluently and mostly used in language production by 30-month-olds, and generally the first acquired modal verb, initially used by children to express ability (Papafragou 1997). Therefore, the high frequency of dynamic can and its relatively common use to express ability in the research material correspond to these previously discussed studies. The evidence from the current research suggests that the most frequent type of modality employed in the investigated text matches the psycholinguistic development of the target audience of this text at the earliest age. This suggestion can be justified by the fact that even the youngest children are usually able to understand the most frequently used kind of modal meanings such as ability, and in general, dynamic possibility. However, the occurrence of other types of modality in the research material implicates that Milne’s (2016) novel is not aimed at audience younger than 3 years old, and that this work could support a further development of the acquisition of these modalities by young children. The infrequent use of both examined modals in the deontic meanings (i.e., can expressing permission, and must expressing obligation) could further suggest that the book is appropriate for young children who gradually acquire the deontic interpretations after dynamic ones. This result also confirms the idea of Papafragou (1997) that the full understanding of modal interpretations, indicating permission and obligation, appear by young preschoolers later than expressing ability, and they are used increasingly frequently at the early period. Similar views were presented by Perkins (1983), who explained the early development of can with child egocentrism at the preoperational stage, and pointed out that the absence of must at the earliest age is caused by its more abstract interpretation. Nevertheless, in the present research, it can also be observed that the frequency of occurrence of deontic modality indicated by the examined modals is only slightly higher than that of epistemic modality. This finding does not exactly correspond to the results of previous studies which emphasise the latest acquisition of epistemic modality, and thus its infrequent use by young children. This minor difference in the distribution could suggest that the target audience of the investigated text may be children who have just started to develop the understanding of these two types of modality. In conclusion, the findings of this study support the hypothesis that the use of can and must in The House at Pooh Corner by A. A. Milne is generally well adopted to the very young (or the youngest) audience of this book (aged approximately above 3 years) in terms of denoted modal

Anna Walkowska

121

meanings. The types of modal expressions used by the writer can also be helpful in the further development of acquisition of modality by young children because even the less understandable meanings can be comprehended (i.e., picked up or grasped) from the context, and thereby acquired. On the other hand, the frequent occurrence of more comprehensible modal interpretations develops a further comprehension of their usages. The majority of dynamic meanings in the children’s novel may be explained by the early acquisition of them, and thus better understanding or interpretation of these uses in the context, whereas the minority of epistemic uses indicates that the epistemic modality is acquired later, and thus not fully understood and rarely used at the early age. Although this investigation does not exhaust the subject of modality, the results can, to some extent, complement the level of knowledge on the concept.

Primary Sources Milne, Alan A. Chatka Puchatka. The House at Pooh Corner. Warszawa: PrószyĔski Media Sp. z o.o., 2016.

References Palmer, Frank R. Modality and the English Modals. 2nd edn. London and New York: Longman, 1990. Choi, Soonja. “Aquisition of modality.” In The expression of modality, edited by William Frawley, 141௅171. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2006. Coates, Jennifer. The semantics of the modal auxiliaries. London and Canberra: Croom Helm, 1983. Collins, Peter. Modals and quasi-modals in English. New York: Editions Rodopi B.V., 2009. Ehrman, Madeline E. The meanings of the modals in present-day English. The Hague: Mouton, 1966. Halliday, Michael A.K. 1970. “Functional diversity in language as seen from a consideration of modality and mood in English.” Foundations of Language 6: 322௅361. Jackson, Howard. Grammar and meaning: A semantic approach to English grammar. New York: Longman, 1990. Joos, Martin. The English verb: Form and meanings. Madison and Milwaukee: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1964.

122

Modality in The House at Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne

Knowles, Murray, Kirsten Malmkjær. Language and Control in Children's Literature. London and New York: Routledge, 1996. Leech, Geoffrey N. Towards a semantic description of English. London: Longman, 1969. Lyons, John. Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977. Modyanova, Nadya, Charles Agoos, Avril Kenney, Margaret Echelbarger, Anna Holt, and Ken Wexler. “Young Children’s Interpretations of Modal Verbs”. In Language Acquisition and Development: Proceeding of GALA 2009 edited by João Costa, Ana Castro, Maria Lobo, and Fernanda Pratas, 301௅312. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2010. Narrog, Heiko. Modality, Subjectivity, and Semantic Change. A CrossLinguistic Perspective. New York: Oxford University Press, 2012. Palmer, Frank Robert. Semantics. 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981. Palmer, Frank Robert. Mood and modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986. Palmer, Frank Robert. Mood and modality. 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. Papafragou, Anna. “Modality in language development: a reconsideration of the evidence.” In UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 9 (1997): 1௅31. Perkins, Michael R. Modal expressions in English. Open linguistics series. Ablex Pub.Cop. Norwood, N. J., 1983. Portner, Paul. Modality. Oxford surveys in semantics and pragmatics. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009. Puurtinen, Tiina. “Syntax, Readability and Ideology in Children’s Literature.” Meta 43, no. 4 (1998): 524–533. SkorasiĔska, Monika. “Can in Shakespeare and Marlowe.” Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 49 no. 1 (2014): 31௅55. SkorasiĔska, Monika. “Epistemic modal verbs in Shakespeare and Marlowe.” In Subjectivity and Epistemicity. Corpus, discourse, and literary approaches to stance, edited by Dylan Glynn and Mette Sjölin, 91௅105. Lund: Lund University, 2014. SkorasiĔska, Monika. “Deontic modality indicated by shall in the works of Christopher Marlowe.” In Komunikacja MiĊdzyludzka: Leksyka. Semantyka. Pragmatyka, edited by Ewa Komorowska, Katarzyna Kondzioáa-Pich, and Ewa Panter, 227௅234. Szczecin: Uniwersytet SzczeciĔski, 2010.

Anna Walkowska

123

Sokóá, Maágorzata. “Modality and the construction of academic voices in the blogosphere.” In Linguistics Across Culture 4 edited by Maria Brenda, 133௅148. Hamburg: Verlag Dr. Kovaþ, 2018. Wells, Gordon. “Learning and using the auxiliary verb in English.” In Language Development edited by V. Lee. New York: John Wiley, 1979.

THE USE OF THE MODAL VERB CAN IN THE LANGUAGE OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

MARIKA ZAGÓRSKA*

Abstract The subject of this chapter is the use of modality in Android UI Design by Francesco Azzola, which is a guidebook for people who intend to learn programming. The analyzed verb is the modal verb can. In the initial part of the chapter, the Author places a particular emphasis on presenting theoretical issues, whereas the second part is devoted to the analysis of particular types of modalities revealed in the research material, expressed by the analyzed modal verb. The aim of this chapter is to check whether Palmer’s (1990) classification of modality is valid in applied literature of the 21st century, more specifically, in the language of information technology. The Author seeks to confirm the timelessness and universality of Palmer’s (1990) findings in texts within the field of computer science.

Introduction Modality has always been ambiguously defined. Despite many studies conducted, the topic of modality remains a puzzle for many researchers and linguists especially within the domain of computer science. For this reason, this chapter is devoted to the topic of modality in the programming guide written in technical language, Android UI Design by Francesco Azzola. This type of research material has been chosen for the analysis due to the lack of studies concerning modality in IT literature. Android UI *

Marika Zagórska MA graduated from the Maritime University of Szczecin, and the University of Szczecin, Poland, where she completed extramural studies in English Philology. Her research interests included modality in semantics and pragmatics, and her diploma paper was based on a thorough investigation of modality expressed by means of modal verbs, in particular a modal verb can, in the language of computer science. She currently works as an UI Designer in the IT industry and fosters her skills in graphic design. E-mail: [email protected].

126

The use of the modal verb can in the language of computer science

Design by Francesco Azzola is a computer science guide and as such it has the potential to fill a niche in the current studies on modality. The aim of the study is to determine the modal meanings denoted by can and its expression of modality in Azzola’s (2014) work. The modal verb can has been chosen for the analysis due to the fact that it is not only the most common modal verb occurring in the text, but also one of the most important verbs relating to necessity in the classification proposed by Palmer (1990). It is hypothesized that modality indicated by the modal verb can is similar to that described in the classification proposed by Palmer (1990). It will affirm the timelessness and universality of this division, not only in linguistic works, but also in texts belonging under the field of computer science. The chapter is divided into two parts; the first ௅ containing theoretical elaboration, and the second ௅ empirical one. In the first part, the concept of modality by Palmer (1990) is presented. In addition, there are also described various types of modality distinguished by other researchers who, like Palmer, studied the modal verb can in their work. The second part contains the analysis of the selected modal verb and its results.

Definition of modality As Declerck (2011, 27) claims in The definition of modality, modality can be defined as the phenomenon that a situation is located in a nonfactual world. As the author explains, “it means that the residue situation is represented as actualising in a nonfactual world which can be related to the factual world in one of several ways.” For instance, in “For all we know, John may be dead.” (Declerck 2011, 27) ௅ may is a modalizer that refers to a present state. What is more, in English, “any linguistic device creating a modal world is a modalizer” (Declerck 2011, 28). The modal auxiliary can belongs to this group. However, the notion of modality can be also approached from a different perspective. Nordquist (2018) in his article Modality (Grammar and Semantics) claims that modality in linguistics refers to the language devices that indicate the degree to which an observation is probable, permitted, prohibited, or likely to happen. In English, these concepts are expressed, among others, by means of modal auxiliary units, such as can, might, should, and will. Moreover, the author invokes Endley (2010), who writes that “the simplest way to explain modality is to say that it has to do with the stance the speaker adopts toward some situation expressed in an

Marika Zagórska

127

utterance (...) [M]odality reflects the speaker’s attitude toward the situation being described” (Endley 2010). Subsequently, modality can be defined as one of semantic-grammatical features (Palmer 1990, 1). According to the author’s definition, modality is valuable “cross-language grammatical category that can be the subject of a typological study” (Palmer 1990, 1) and deals with “the status of the proposition that describes the event” (Palmer 1990, 1). What is more, according to Palmer (1981), modality relates to function. English indicates “degrees and kinds of commitment by the speaker” (Palmer 1981, 152) by modal verbs such as: will, may, shall, must, can, and ought to. These modals determine a few kinds of modality (Palmer 1981, 152). In other words, modality is a semantic issue because it presents the attitude of the speaker or the theory about the fact of the status of a proposition. Nevertheless, the concept of modality can be presented also from a different point of view, as Portner (2009, 1) did, who claims that modality is “the linguistic phenomenon” thanks to which “grammar allows one to say things about, or on basis of, situations which need not be real” (Portner 2009, 1) Nonetheless, this definition has a major disadvantage due to the lack of explanation which features of language apparently indicate modality. Portner (2009) also claims that “modality is not something that one simply observes, but rather something that one discovers” (Portner 2009, 1). On top of that, according to his theory, the best way to perceive modality is to understand the features of language which most evidently indicate modality, and then to consider whether that comprehension also works well when it concerns new features of language. In semantics, firstly, this scheme is reflected in studying the meanings of proper auxiliary verbs (e.g., must), adverbs (e.g., maybe), and adjectives (e.g., possible) which are used to represent situations that are not real. Secondly, theories of words expressing modality and their constructions are developed by semanticists, and at the very end it is considered whether these theories are appropriate in understanding (Portner 2009). Another definition of modality is offered by Narrog (2012, 5), who defines modality as a system that may be analysed from the point of view of the speaker’s attitudes or subjectivity as well as in terms of factuality, actuality, or reality. The author also implies that the best defining of the terms mentioned above is factuality. It defines modality as “a linguistic category referring to the factual status of a proposition. A proposition is modalized if it is marked for being undetermined with respect to its factual status, that is, is neither positively nor negatively factual” (Narrog 2012, 6). Interestingly, despite the different names used by authors such as Portner (2009) (“reality”) or Palmer (1990) (“factuality”), all definitions

128

The use of the modal verb can in the language of computer science

are linked by the fact that modality relates to “non-factual (i.e., nonrealized or non-actualized) states-of-affairs” (Narrog 2012, 6). What is more, he also claims that “the study of language deals with things depicted as factual in language, not necessarily things factual in the real world” (Narrog 2012, 7). For instance, modalized propositions are identified as non-factual, opposed to non-modalized which are factual. Nonetheless, a grammatical definition of modality is also possible, but it is a relatively new apparition. A different definition of the concept of modality is offered by Jackson (1990, 103). He elucidates modality as a system which contains meanings of possibility and necessity expressed grammatically. Importantly, according to the Jackson’s (1990) theory, modal auxiliary verbs such as can, will, should, ought to, etc. indicate modality. Nevertheless, modality may be also realized in terms of lexicality by semi-modal verbs (have (got) to, need), modal adverbs (e.g., possibly, surely), some adjectives (e.g., certain, possible, necessary), and nouns (e.g., necessity, ability, permission) (Jackson 1990, 103௅104). Palmer (1981, 152௅153), in his early works, classifies modality into two categories expressed by modal verbs: epistemic and deontic. The former one is concerned with the speaker’s attitude to proposition. On top of that, epistemic modality “expresses the degree of commitment of the speaker to the truth” of the proposition, that is, “to the truth of what is being said” (Palmer 1981, 153). Nevertheless, deontic modality is related to the terms such as laying obligation, undertaking obligations (future events), or giving permission by the speaker. Palmer in his later work, in 1990, classifies modal categories in the context of not only epistemic and deontic, but also dynamic modality. The author differentiates the aforementioned modalities in terms of possibility (modal verb can) and necessity (modal verb must). The former will be described further in the chapter. Epistemic modality deals with the opinions of the speaker “making a judgment about the truth of the proposition” (Palmer 1990, 36). According to the author’s theory, there are two “degrees” (Palmer 1990, 36) of epistemic modals, in particular necessity (for instance must) and possibility (may). These kinds of modals are used to “make judgments about the possibility, etc., that something is or is not the case” (Palmer 1990, 50) and are intended for judgement relating to probability of the truth of utterances that have been said. In that case, epistemic modality is related to propositions rather than actions or states (Palmer 1990, 5, 50). What is more, this type of modality has more subjective character – the speaker is in charge of the opinion.

Marika Zagórska

129

Deontic modality involves “influencing actions, states or events” (Palmer 1990, 6), and “attitudes of the speaker (and addressee)” (Palmer 1990, 36). The author claims that this modality is speaker-oriented because “the speaker appears to be the deontic source” (Palmer 1990, 36). Furthermore, deontic modality is primarily performative which implies that “the act takes place at the moment of speaking” (Palmer 1990, 70). Deontic modals can be used by speakers in order to give or refuse permission (for example can or may), make a promise or threat (shall), or impose an obligation (must). In terms of dynamic modality, Palmer (1990) describes two types: dynamic possibility (can or be able to) and dynamic necessity (must or have (got) to). According to the author, there are two subkinds of dynamic modality – neutral/circumstantial and subject oriented. On top of that, Palmer (1990) also depicts the distinction between event and propositional modality. According to him, event modality is divided into dynamic and deontic because they “refer to events that are not actualized, events that have not taken place but are merely potential” (Palmer 2001, 70). Dynamic modality comprises abilitive and volitive, whereas commissive, obligative, and permissive belong to deontic modality. On the other hand, propositional modality involves two types: evidential and epistemic modality. Within evidential modality, speakers “indicate the evidence they have for its factual status” (Palmer 2001, 8). This modality is further distributed into two subtypes: sensory and reported (Palmer 2001, 22). In terms of epistemic modality, it concerns the speaker’s judgement about the actual status of the proposition. Three typological categories of these judgements can be characterized, namely assumptive, speculative, and deductive. Subsequent categorisation of modality is proposed by Jackson (1990). The author examines forms and meanings within modality and lists categories such as: permission (e.g., may, can), willingness (e.g., willing, will), the speaker’s assessment of possibility (e.g., maybe, may, perhaps), the speaker’s assessment of necessity (e.g., will, should, must), the ability of the agentive participant (e.g., able, can), an obligation (e.g., should, shall, must, need, ought to), and circumstantial possibility (e.g., could). Another classification of modality is presented by Portner (2009). According to the author’s definition, modality is “the linguistic phenomenon” according to which “grammar allows one to say things about, or on basis of, situations which need not be real.” However, Portner (2009) does not designate which features of language are related to modality. He claims that the right way to discover modality is, firstly, to understand the features of language, and, secondly, to consider whether that understanding is also

130

The use of the modal verb can in the language of computer science

useful when it concerns new features of language. The author contends that the semantic theories of modality “also contribute to a better understanding of new phenomena, we learn that those phenomena involve modality as well” (Portner 2009, 1௅2). Consequently, it can be concluded that Portner (2009) provides a description of modality as a semantic phenomenon. Nevertheless, the classification of modality can be presented from a different point of view, as Narrog (2012) did, whose division of types, categories and subcategories of modality differs from those depicted by Palmer (1990), but there are some similarities. At the beginning of his work, the author briefly mentions the tradition in philosophy by saying that “[A]ll propositions that are not factual can be classified as either possible or necessary (cf. Kant 1818, 194௅5). Thus factuality, possibility, and necessity are the three basic categories of modality” (Narrog 2012, 7). What is more, he also claims that “Work on modality in formal semantics has demonstrated that the concepts of necessity and possibility are flexible enough to deal with a wide range of types of modality beyond the original core in modal logic” (Narrog 2012, 7). In his work, Narrog (2012) identifies 4 types of modality, namely: deontic (teleological, preferential, boulomaic); dynamic which includes participant-internal (ability, physical necessity), existential (quantificational), circumstantial; epistemic; and the last one, evidential modality (Narrog 2012, 8௅12). Deontic modality is described by Narrog (2012) as “necessary or possible within the framework of a particular system of social rules” (Narrog 2012, 8). The author has included in this type of modality three subcategories which, due to his experience, occur in theoretical works. The first subcategory is teleological modality which implies a proposal as a necessity or possibility for someone’s goals. The second subcategory is determined as preferential, and indicates a proposition as a necessity or possibility with respect to someone’s preferences. The third subcategory of deontic modality is termed boulomaic modality, and it denotes that a proposition is marked as a necessity or possibility with regard to someone’s volition or intentions (Narrog 2012, 8௅9). A subsequent type of modality described by Narrog (2012) is participant-internal which marks a proposition “as a necessity or possibility with respect to someone’s dispositions” (Narrog 2012, 9). Nonetheless, this type of modality is often associated with possibility instead of necessity and some languages “differentiate kinds of participantinternal possibility (ability)” (Narrog 2012, 9). Modal expressions indicating participant-internal necessity have a double function, they express deontic

Marika Zagórska

131

or other modalities (Narrog 2012, 10). The subsequent group, within the participant-internal modality, is called existential (quantificational) modality. “With this type of modality, a state-of-affairs (or situation) is quantified in the sense that the situation either possibly or necessarily holds (cf. von Wright 1951, 2)” (Narrog 2012, 10). On top of that, there is also another type of modality which is mentioned by the author ௅ circumstantial modality. It is used to mark a proposition as necessity or possibility with regard to certain circumstances. What is more, this group is more associated with possibility (for instance, can). “Circumstantial modality together with participant-internal modality forms the core part of what has traditionally called ‘dynamic’ or ‘neutral’ modality” (Narrog 2012, 10). As Narrog (2012) claims, circumstantial modality seems to be “split, siding with dynamic modal markers in the domain of possibility (e.g. can) and deontic modal markers in the domain of necessity (e.g. have to)” (Narrog 2012, 11). Epistemic modality refers to someone’s world knowledge, usually that of the speaker. “If it is compatible with his or her knowledge it is possibly true” (Narrog 2012, 8). Within this type of modality, a proposition is called “non-factual” (Narrog 2012, 8) and future marking or prediction is also taken into consideration. The last type described by Narrog (2012, 11) is evidential modality. With evidentiality, a proposition is indefinite with respect to its factuality as concerns sources of information other than the speaker. “Thus, evidentiality in the domain of indirect evidence is clearly part of modality” (Narrog 2012, 11௅12). The author contemplates adverbs such as apparently and allegedly, and depending on the point of view, semi-modals like seem, as the best instances of this category.

Can in Android UI Design by Francesco Azzola This part of the chapter is dedicated to the analysis of the verb can in the book Android UI Design by Francesco Azzola. This publication is an example of a guide for people who want to broaden their knowledge in the field of programming based on the Android operating system. The research material consists of 34,128 words, whereas the number of the examined instances of can amounts to 331. The analysed modal verb can refers to the present time only. The functions of the modal verb can has been divided into certain categories. The analysis of the research material ௅ Android UI Design ௅ is based on the qualitative and quantitative descriptions of the use of the modal verb can. The first step of the analysis is the selection of all instances of

132

The use of the modal verb can in the language of computer science

can in the research material. An electronic version of the book has been used for the easier and faster selection and calculation of the examined verbs. Each instance of the examined modal verb has been analysed and described in terms of the denoted type, or, if possible, also subcategory, of modality. The type of the sentence in which the modal occurs has also been taken into consideration since it is relevant for defining the type of modality. Subsequently, the collected data are discussed in the light of Palmer’s (1990) studies. For a better illustration, the aggregated data are also presented in charting forms. Finally, after all the research results have been collected, the conclusions are drawn, described, and illustrated in a pie chart in the final part of the chapter. As the research has shown, all the studied instances of the modal verb can indicate dynamic modality. This type of modality is associated with the ability or requirement of the subject to do something. The analysis of the material has revealed 331 of such instances of the verb can. What is more, in the whole text there are only 32 sentences in the passive voice that indicate dynamic possibility. Sentences in the active voice constitute the vast majority of the examined cases, that is 299 instances. Following Palmer’s (1990) classification of modality, dynamic modality of the verb can, occurring in the research material, has been divided into 4 essential categories. Figure 1 comprises the distribution and the number of instances, expressed as a percentage, found in the research material.

circumstantial possibility

implication 2%

15% possibility 45%

ability 38%

Figure 1. Types of dynamic modal meanings indicated by can.

Marika Zagórska

133

As Figure 1 shows, 4 subkinds of dynamic modal meanings have been distinguished in the research material: implication, ability, possibility, and circumstantial possibility. All the listed categories are deliberated further in the chapter. The modal verb can expressing implication constitutes the minority in the research material, that is only 2% of all the usages of the examined verb, as in example (1). (1) Thus, having a well-defined UI pattern catalog and knowing when and where to apply them, we can create appealing apps that are not only full of interesting features, but they are enjoyable by users and easy to use. (Azzola 2014, 2) In the affirmative sentence presented in (1), the speaker uses can in order to emphasize the subject’s possibilities for using the tool. The modal verb can has also been found to indicate ability. This type of dynamic meaning constitutes over 38% of the examined instances. It indicates that the subject has the necessary features to cause the event to take place. In the research material, ability has been identified in different types of sentences. It can be observed that the first type is created by using an active voice, whereas the second – by passive voice, as in examples (2) and (3): (2) We can combine ViewGroup with ViewGroup to have more control on how views are located. (Azzola 2014, 4) (3) This is a sliding menu, usually at the left side of the smartphone screen, that can be opened and closed by the user. (Azzola 2014, 3) The occurrence of can in example (2) indicates active voice. The sentence contains the first person plural subject which expresses what abilities are available for the speaker and the reader. However, example (3), written in passive voice, emphasizes what happens with the subject. It can also be noted that in the examined text the modal verb can occurs with the communication verb display. (4) This drawable object can display several drawables depending on the object state. (Azzola 2014, 88)

134

The use of the modal verb can in the language of computer science

In example (4), the affirmative sentence containing the modal verb can may be paraphrased as: It is possible for this drawable object to display several drawables depending on the object state. The first main category constitutes the use of can in a sense of possibility – 45% of all instances. This meaning indicates “that an event is possible” (Palmer 1990, 83) as in example (5). (5) We now know that we can reference external resources using the @ symbol, but sometimes we want to reference a single style element not the whole style. (Azzola 2014, 7) In example (5), the modal verb can indicates that the event of referencing “external resources using the @ symbol” is possible for the reader. (6) To provide a great user experience, we have to take under account that our app can run on a variety of devices with different screen resolutions and physical screen sizes. (Azzola 2014, 7) The proper paraphrase of the sentence in quotation (6) could be “It is possible for…” (Palmer 1990, 84). Hence, this sentence including the modal verb can may be paraphrased as: It is possible for this app to be run on a variety of devices (...). Another illustration of dynamic possibility is the affirmative sentence (7). (7) To provide a great user experience, we have to take under account that our app can run on a variety of devices with different screen resolutions and physical screen sizes. (Azzola 2014, 7) In instance (7), the author of the text uses the pronoun our in the reference to the application created together with the reader. Nevertheless, the use of this personal pronoun does not always denote dynamic possibility. In the research material, as many as 68 occurrences of this kind of pronoun have been found indicating also other dynamic meanings, such as ability or circumstantial possibility. Can denoting circumstantial possibility occurs in the research material 61 times. Five types of sentence structures in which the modal verb can indicates dynamic modality have been found; see Figure 2.

Marika Zagórska

so 11% once 8%

135

when 31%

if 24%

so that 26% Figure 2. Occurrences of connectives.

The first two groups of the examined occurrences of can include conjunctions in conditional sentences ௅ once (8% of all the examined instances) and if (about 24% of all the examined instances), as in examples (8) and (9). (8) Once we know the fragment lifecycle, we need to know how we can create a fragment and how we attach it to the Activity. (Azzola 2014, 61) (9) If we want to “attach” this layout to our fragment we can do it in the onCreateView method, because according to the fragment lifecycle, this method is called when the fragment creates its view hierarchy. (Azzola 2014, 61) The subsequent groups include a conjunction phrase or conjunction – so that / so and constitute the second most frequent group of dynamic can – 26% and 11% respectively, as in quotation (10) and (11).

136

The use of the modal verb can in the language of computer science

(10) In this case, the best practice suggests using dp unit measure so that our view can be adapted to different screen density. (Azzola 2014, 11) (11) We used a listener to be notified when the MediaPlayer is in the prepared state so we can start playing. (Azzola 2014, 73) The vast majority of the examined occurrences – as many as 35% ௅ indicate the relative adverb when, as in example (12). (12) EditText is the classic input field while AutoCompleteTextView is a component we can use when we have a pre-defined list of result and we want the system to complete some words inserted by user. (Azzola 2014, 16) The modal verb can is also found to collocate in the research material with other verbs. According to the Cambridge Dictionary,4 a collocation refers to how words form relationships with other parts of speech. In the research material, five different verbs collocate with can. Figure 3 depicts the percentage share of the specified verbs. 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0

Figure 3. Collocations of can with other verbs.

4

https://dictionary.cambridge.org

Marika Zagórska

137

The data in Figure 3 shows that the highest percentage indicates collocation with the verb use. This denotes that the recipient at whom these words are directed is informed that they can use the given tool to achieve the set goal, as in (13). (13) In Android, layouts can be nested so we can use different layouts for different areas of our interface. (Azzola 2014, 38) What is more, in the research material, the passive form of the previously described verb ௅ the phrase be used to (11 examples) ௅ has also been found; see (14). (14) Android gives some key components that can be used to create user interface that follows the pattern we talked about before. (Azzola 2014, 3) The analysis of the research material also shows that the modal verb can collocates with the verb create, with the amount of 30 occurrences. By definition, it means: “to bring into existence something new”, as in (15). (15) Using these four components and following the standard UI patterns we can create amazing apps that are easy-to-use. (Azzola 2014, 3) Furthermore, two more verbs have been found to collocate with the verb can, namely: implement (8 examples) and suppose (10 examples). Although the verb implement is not the most commonly used verb, it is equally important for the IT language. It has a special value because of the word implementation which means “a specific task using specific technical or programming solutions,” as in (16). (16) Depending on the type of component we use to show detail information to the user, we can implement some low level patterns that simplify the user interaction with our app. (Azzola 2014, 3) The group of communication verbs constitutes the least numerous group of dynamic possibility in the whole text. These special types of verbs describe how a subject communicates. Two communication verbs have been identified: say (1 instance) and display (4 instances). What is more, they always appear in the active voice as in examples (17) and (18).

138

The use of the modal verb can in the language of computer science

(17) Now we have to create the Adapter so that we can display items. (Azzola 2014, 27) (18) In general, we can say an Android app is made by a top-level view and detail/level view. (Azzola 2014, 1) It can be assumed that the number of instances is not numerous due to the fact that the aim of the author of the text is not to show but to teach specific skills. Sensation verbs indicate one of the five senses: sight, hearing, smell, touch, and taste. In the research material, particular emphasis is placed on the use of the verbs describing the sense of sight. In the analysed text, three sensation verbs and phrases have been found: see, look, and have a look. The analysis of the collected material shows that the vast majority of sensation verbs occur with the personal pronoun you, and secondly with the pronoun we, as presented in instances (19௅21). (19) As you can see, these two themes have the same name but inherit from different parents. (Azzola 2014, 108) (20) You can look here to have more information about this correspondence. In XML, a view property is called attribute. (Azzola 2014, 11) (21) You can have a look here if you want to have more information. (Azzola 2014, 83) Interestingly, in the case of the sensation verb see, a grammar structure “As you/we can see,…” (6 out of 7 instances) has been used. Thus, this meaning may be paraphrased as “in the way that is visible to your understanding.” In the research material, can occurs with mental verbs 22 times. Two verbs, belonging to this category and indicating dynamic possibility, have been found. Literally, ‘mental’ refers to anything related to mind or intellectual process and ‘verbs’ are words which show actions. Mental verbs provide meanings which are connected with sensory capabilities, deciding, understanding, and planning. There are 3 instances of the modal verb can collocating with the mental verb imagine and 19 instances of the verb notice. The analysis of the text has revealed that the verb notice appears only with two types of personal pronouns – me and you; see examples (22) and (23).

Marika Zagórska

139

(22) If we analyze in more detail an Android user interface, we can notice that it has an hierarchical structure where at the root there’s a ViewGroup. (Azzola 2014, 4) (23) As you can notice, we defined an id called textView1, some other properties that have a string values and another property called android: text that reference a value written somewhere else. (Azzola 2014, 11) The research material has been also analysed in terms of the voice, that is the form of a verb indicating when a grammatical person performing an action is a recipient of an action. When a sentence is written in the active voice, the subject performs the action, whereas, in the passive voice, the subject receives the action. The results of the analysis of sentences in terms of voice are presented in Figure 4. voice neutral 10%

active voice 90% Figure 4. Types of sentence voice.

As Figure 4 depicts, the vast majority of instances are used in the active voice. Therefore, it can be assumed that the most important for the author of the text is the subject of the activity and not the activity itself; see examples (24) and (25). (24) Furthermore, we can extend them and create a custom control with a custom layout and behaviour. (Azzola 2014, 3)

140

The use of the modal verb can in the language of computer science

(25) There are some specific patterns that can be applied when designing this view depending on the type of information we want to show: fixed tabs, spinner, navigation drawer. (Azzola 2014, 2) The modal verb can has also been examined in terms of the subject of the sentence. By definition, this is a person or thing that is a performer of an activity or is in a certain state. Sometimes the subject of the sentence may appear in a plural form. Figure 5 depicts the percentage number of the instances found in the text.

3rd person 18% you 8%

we 74%

Figure 5. Types of the subject of the modal verb can.

In the analysed material, three types of subjects have been revealed: you, we, and the 3rd person. The most numerous group constitutes the use of the modal verb can with the personal pronoun we, with the result of 74%; see example (26). (26) EditText is the classic input field while AutoCompleteTextView is a component we can use when we have a pre-defined list of result and we want the system to complete some words inserted by user. (Azzola 2014, 16) The second most frequent subject of the modal verb can occurring in the research material is the third personal pronoun – he, she, or it. As the data in the Figure 8 show, almost every fifth sentence including the modal

Marika Zagórska

141

verb can involves this type of subject. What is more, these are mainly sentences in the passive voice, as in (27). (27) This pattern can be used when we have a multiple top level view and we want to give to the user a fast access to one of them, or we want to give to the user the freedom to move to one low level view directly. (Azzola 2014, 3) The last but not least is the personal pronoun you that occurs in the text only 26 times, as in example (28). (28) As you can notice, we defined an id called textView1, some other properties that have a string values and another property called android: text that reference a value written somewhere else. (Azzola 2014, 11) Basing on the collected data, some summarising remarks on the use of the modal verb can in the research material can be made. First of all, the general observation of the study is that dynamic modality is the most common and the only type of modality denoted by the modal verb can in the text. The occurrences of can indicating possibility (45%) and ability (38%) are much more frequent than those denoting implication (2%) or circumstantial possibility (15%). Another valuable observation is that can collocates with other verbs, in most cases with the mental verb notice, and secondly with the sensation verb see. What is more, the sentences with the modal verb can are written mainly in active voice (90%) and the most commonly used subject is we (74%). Other types of modality and modal meanings discussed by Palmer (1990), such as epistemic or deontic modality, have not been found in the research material.

Conclusions The aim of this chapter was to examine the use of the verb can in the IT guide Android UI Design by Francesco Azzola (2014), in order to verify their meanings, the distribution of their uses, and to prove to what degree these study’s results correlate with the research described by Palmer (1990). The study of the modal verb found in the research material shows that dynamic modality indicated by can is the most frequent type of modality in the research material. This type constitutes almost 100% of the

142

The use of the modal verb can in the language of computer science

examined cases, which is 331 examples. What is more, the majority of the analysed cases of the modal verbs are subject oriented, expressing ability, will or willingness of the subject. Due to this fact, it is possible to determine the type of modality marked with can occurring in the analysed material. It has been deduced that the received division of modality is compatible with the Palmer’s classification (1990). Based on the conducted research, it is noted that the speaker mainly focuses on teaching the recipient certain skills. To achieve this goal, he uses dynamic modality, which expresses the ability to perform a given action. It can be also assumed that the author has knowledge of the subject’s qualities. He seems to be positively oriented towards the recipient’s capacities rather than neutral or negative. The modal verb can has also been used in the research material to describe the recipient’s possibilities. The modal verb can has also been used to describe the recipient’s capabilities. In this case, a characteristic feature of this category is the fact that the speaker does not impose his will but behaves like an objective adviser. In the research material, verbs of sensation have also been attested, in particular verbs defining a sense of sight. It can be assumed that the author deliberately focuses mainly on this type of verbs, given the purpose and the character of the text constituting the research material. Interestingly, the predominant subject used by the speaker is the personal pronoun we. However, the pronoun you is a definite minority. Such a low frequency of occurrence of this type of subject may suggest that the author’s goal is not only to issue commands to be performed. It may signify that he wants to play not only the role of a preceptor or a master, but also to encourage the reader to identify with him. The purpose of the analysis, which was to determine the modal meanings and analysis of the usage of modal verb can in the selected literary work, has been achieved.

Primary sources Francesco Azzola. Android UI Design (electronic version). 2014.

References Endley, Martin J. Linguistic Perspectives on English Grammar. Information Age Publishing, 2010. Jackson, Howard. Grammar and meaning: A semantic approach to English grammar. New York: Longman, 1990.

Marika Zagórska

143

Narrog, Heiko. Modality, Subjectivity, and Semantic Change. A CrossLinguistic Perspective. New York: Oxford University Press, 2012. Palmer, Frank Robert. Modality and the English Modals. 2nd edition. London and New York: Longman, 1990. Portner, Paul. Modality. Oxford surveys in semantics and pragmatics. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009. SkorasiĔska, Monika. “Can in Shakespeare and Marlowe.” Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 49 no. 1 (2014): 31௅55. SkorasiĔska, Monika. “Epistemic modal verbs in Shakespeare and Marlowe.” In Subjectivity and Epistemicity. Corpus, discourse, and literary approaches to stance, edited by Dylan Glynn and Mette Sjölin, 91௅105. Lund: Lund University, 2014. SkorasiĔska, Monika. “Deontic modality indicated by shall in the works of Christopher Marlowe.” In Komunikacja MiĊdzyludzka: Leksyka. Semantyka. Pragmatyka, edited by Ewa Komorowska, Katarzyna Kondzioáa-Pich, and Ewa Panter, 227௅234. Szczecin: Uniwersytet SzczeciĔski, 2010.

MODAL VERBS CAN AND COULD IN ALICE’S ADVENTURES IN WONDERLAND BY LEWIS CAROLL NIKOLA ZAGÓRSKA*

Abstract The subject of this chapter is modality expressed by means of two modal verbs can and could in the children’s and adult fantasy novel Alice in Wonderland by the British writer Lewis Carroll. The Author of the chapter addresses both a theoretical background of modality as well as the analysis of the verbs employed in the research material. The aim of this study is to observe what modal meanings are conveyed by the two verbs in the fantasy novel from the second half of the nineteenth century, and to check whether they are parallel to those described by Palmer (1990) in his study from more than a hundred years later.

Introduction Despite many studies and analyses of linguistic modality conducted by high-class linguists from around the world, one universal definition of the concept is still not established. For this reason, this subject is still interesting and remains a kind of mystery. This chapter is devoted to the concept of modality in a well-known novel written by Lewis Carroll – Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland (1865). The Author of the chapter has chosen this research material because of the

*

Nikola Zagórska MA graduated from the Maritime University of Szczecin and the University of Szczecin, Poland, where she completed extramural studies in English Philology. Her research interests included the expression of modality in the 19th-century British children’s literature, which was reflected in her diploma paper investigating modal verbs in Alice's Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll. She currently works as a Team Leader on an IT project management path. E-mail: [email protected].

146

Modal verbs can and could in Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Caroll

lack of studies on modality conducted on the novels for children and adults. Two modal verbs, can and could, and their negations constitute the subject of the study. They have been chosen because of their largest frequency of occurrence among all modal verbs occurring in the research material. In addition, they are significant due to the fact that they relate to possibilities and indicate most of the modal meanings indicated by Palmer (1990). For these reasons, the research of the selected modals has a great potential for a detailed linguistic analysis. The aim of the research is to determine the modal meanings and the use of two modal verbs, can and could, and their negations in Carroll’s (1865) novel. In order to achieve the intended aim, all cases of occurrences of the modal verbs can and could were searched for, then they were analyzed and classified according to Palmer’s (1990) criteria. It is hypothesized that the modalities indicated by the modal verbs can and could reflect the same classification in the chosen research material as the division offered by Palmer (1990), which would prove the validity of the classification and its universality in different types of texts. Therefore, the main purpose of this work is to verify whether the classification proposed by Palmer (1990) works also in the literary text from earlier years. The chapter consists of two main parts. The first one describes the characteristic features of the analyzed concept of modality, due to the fact that it can be considered from different points of view. As a result, a significant part is devoted to the analysis of the division of modalities proposed by linguists from around the world. Subsequently, the following sections of the work are related to the characteristics of types of modalities indicated by chosen modal verbs, in accordance with Palmer’s (1990) classification of modality. The second part contains the analysis of the selected modal verbs and presents the conclusions. In addition, the conclusions are presented in relation to the classification proposed by Palmer (1990), based on which it is established whether the selected classification is equally valid in other literary works.

Definition of modality Modality in linguistics refers to the language devices that indicate the degree to which an observation is probable, permitted, prohibited, or likely to happen. In English, these concepts are expressed, among others, by means of modal auxiliary units, such as can, might, should, and will. In addition, sometimes they are combined with the negative particle not.

Nikola Zagórska

147

Modality is one of the most intricate language categories that have different forms of expression in English. In addition, modality does not have one universal definition and interpretation. Categories of modality are defined, for example, by the following terms: possibility or necessity, impossibility or unnecessariness, probability or improbability, etc. Nevertheless, the concept of modality can be presented also from a different point of view, as Narrog (2012) did, who claims that nowadays modality may be considered in terms of two categories ௅ the speaker’s attitudes or subjectivity ௅ as well as in the categories of three features ௅ factuality, actuality or reality (Narrog 2012, 5). According to the scientist, modality is a “language category that refers to the actual status of the proposal” (Narrog 2012, 6). According to Narrog (2012, 6), the category of reality testifies to human judgment, whereas in the context of modality it refers to true or false statements. However, the most suitable feature is reality, because modality is related to the speaker’s judgments that express their worldview (Narrog 2012, 7). According to Endley (2010), the simplest explanation of modality is the assumption that modality is related to the adopted position of the speaker on the situation expressed in the statement. In other words, the modality informs the recipient about the speaker’s attitude to the given situation (Endley, 2010). Nevertheless, considering Lyons’s (1977, 452) view that modality is related to the opinion and attitude of the speaker, it can be concluded that the definition may be helpful in understanding the meaning of the mentioned term. What is more, the author emphasizes that “modality is best reserved, in linguistics, as in logic, to distinguish between possibilities, necessity, duty, etc.” (Lyons 1977, 63). A different definition of the concept of modality is proposed by Jackson (1990, 103), who defines modality as a system containing meanings of possibilities and grammatically formulated necessity. The author draws attention to the fact that modality is expressed mainly by means of the following words, for example, by may, maybe, perhaps, possibly. It should also be emphasized that they are a part of a verb expression in English. In addition, modality can be implemented lexically using, for example: semimodal verbs ௅ have (got) to, need; modal adverbs – e.g., possibly, surely; some adjectives ௅ e.g., possible, necessary; and some nouns ௅ e.g., necessity, obligation, ability, and permission (Jackson 1990, 103௅104). Another definition of modality is offered by Palmer (1990, 1), who includes modality in the group of semantic-grammatical features expressed

148

Modal verbs can and could in Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Caroll

by modal verbs. In addition, the author describes modality as a “more general, global, typological category” (Palmer 1986). Moreover, on the basis of the definition given by Palmer (2001, 1) in his other work, the concept of modality is a significant “cross-language grammatical category that can be the subject of a typological study” and refers to “the status of the proposition that describes the event.” However, in the case of his work from 1981, the concept of modality concerns function and is considered a domain in semantics. According to Palmer (1981), modality specifies “grades and types of speaker engagement.” This is done by using modal verbs, such as will, shall, can, may, must, and ought to, and their use is conditioned by several types of modality (Palmer 1981, 152). On the other hand, Portner (2009, 1) characterizes the concept of modality as a “linguistic phenomenon” according to which “grammar allows one to say things about, or on basis of, situations which need not be real.” Nevertheless, this definition is not perfect since it does not explain which features of language are related to modality. In his reflections, the author argues that the appropriate method of learning modality is firstly to understand the features of the language, and then define whether this understanding is helpful in the case of the new features of language (Portner 2009, 1). Summing up, modality belongs to the standard linguistic nomenclature and in linguistic works, having a scope broader than the term mode (modus) means a long time “subjective attitude of the speaker to what is the content of his statements (such as uncertainty, doubt, assumption” (Bolecki 2001, 34). In the linguistic perspective, modality is, therefore, a part of the communication process, which consists of expressing the feelings and attitudes of speakers. Although linguists formulate different definitions of modality and criteria for its isolation, it can be schematically assumed that research on modality concerns the relation of the content of speech to reality and the relationship of the subject to the subject of speech. In the semantic perspective, the statement is treated not as a representation of reality, but as its presentation, whose cognitive frames are narrative forms, or discursive language constructions of the character of a story (Bolecki 2001). Modalities ௅ just like personal pronouns ௅ do not only inform about the way the world is presented from the perspective of the speaker, but they can also perform semantic functions contrary to their grammatical functions. Therefore, questions can be orders, orders ௅ questions, a guessing mode ௅ a masked form of expressing certainty, certainty ௅ a hidden doubt, and directness of expression ௅ a routine convention (Bolecki 2001, 35௅36).

Nikola Zagórska

149

Classification of modality In his work, Palmer (1981, 152௅153) classifies modality into two basic categories: deontic and epistemic modality, which are expressed by modal verbs. The first one, deontic modality, can be recognized in terms of granting consent, imposing an obligation, or undertaking future obligations by the speaker. For this reason, it is related to the imperative and refers to the active connection of the speaker with events (Palmer 1981, 153). The second one, epistemic modality, “expresses the degree of commitment of the speaker to the truth” (Palmer 1981, 153), therefore, this type of modality defines the speaker’s relation to the proposition. Taking into account Palmer’s later works from 1990 and 2001, he presents classifications of modal categories in the context of epistemic, deontic, and dynamic modality. The author (Palmer 1990, 36) distinguishes the mentioned modalities and their grades, such as possibility and necessity, which will be discussed in the following subsections. In the case of dynamic modality, Palmer (1990) distinguishes between dynamic possibility and dynamic necessity. Consequently, he considers two subgroups belonging to dynamic modality, i.e., neutral (circumstantial) and subject-oriented (Palmer 1990, 83). What is more, for the dynamic modality, the author proposes the term subject-oriented because it refers to the agent’s ability or will (Palmer 1990, 36). Based on Palmer’s (1990, 36) work, epistemic modality can be characterized as the speaker’s opinion. The author analyzes epistemic meanings in two variants: possibility and necessity. They serve to judge the possibility that something does or does not exist (Palmer 1990, 50) hence they have to determine the probability of truthfulness of assertions. Therefore, epistemic modality is subsidized by the modality of subjective sentences, not by actions, states, or events (Palmer 1990, 5, 50). In other words, epistemic judgment is based on the speaker’s assessment. In addition, Palmer (2001, 22) makes another distinction. He suggests a division into sentence modulation and event modality, which includes epistemic and evidentiary modality (Palmer 2001, 22). They relate to the speaker’s attitude to the true value or actual state of the sentence (Palmer 2001, 24). In addition, the author distinguishes the following epistemic judgments: speculative, deductive, and asssumptive. In the first case, the speaker “indicates the evidence they have for its factual status” (Palmer 2001, 8). In the event of evidentiary modality, Palmer confronts deonticity and dynamism because both “refer to events that are not actualized, events that have not taken place but are merely potential” (Palmer 2001, 70).

150

Modal verbs can and could in Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Caroll

According to Palmer (1990, 6), deontic modality affects, among others, the attitude of the speaker and the addressee, as well as their actions or states. In addition, he characterizes it as a speaker-oriented, in other words, describes it as performative – “the act takes place at the time of speaking” (Palmer 1990, 70). The use of deontic modality is primarily used for: consent or refusal (can, may), to impose an obligation (must), or to make a promise or threat (shall). Based on Palmer’s opinion, the speaker uses epistemic modality to express their opinion on the actual status of the proposition (Palmer 2001, 8). In terms of event modality, the author compares deonticity and dynamics based on that they “refer to events that are not actualized, events that have not taken place but are merely potential” (Palmer 2001, 70). Nevertheless, there is another classification of modality, despite differences in the author’s reasoning in comparison to Palmer (1990; 2001). The mentioned author is Narrog (2012), who, just like Palmer (1990; 2001), distinguishes modality between possibilities and necessities. However, Narrog (2012) proposes three categories of modality in its considerations: factuality, possibility, and necessity (Narrog 2012, 7). Additionally, the author proposes the following subcategories of modality: epistemic, deontic, and dynamic including participant-internal, circumstantial, and existential; and evidential modality (Narrog 2012, 8௅ 12). According to Narrog’s (2012) theory, epistemic modality indicates that if the offer “is compatible his or her knowledge it is possibly true” (Narrog 2012, 8). In addition, in epistemic modality, the conclusion is described as “non-factual” considering future forecasts (Narrog 2012, 8). The second kind of modality according to Narrog (2012, 8) is deontic modality and it defines “a proposition as necessary or possible within the framework of a particular system of social rules.” In this category, he analyzes three sub-categories, which, according to him, are often present, for instance in grammatical descriptions. The subcategories include telelogical modality, meaning the proposal as a necessity or the possibility of one’s goals. Another is the subcategory called preferential, which indicates the proposition as a necessity or an option with regard to preferences. The third one is the boulomial modality, which means that the claim is defined as a necessity or possibility based on someone’s will or intention (Narrog 2012, 8௅9). Another author who analyzes forms and meanings of modal verbs in the field of modality is Jackson (1990, 104௅105). He describes them as follows:

Nikola Zagórska

151

௅ speaker’s assessment of possibility (expressed, for example, by may, maybe, perhaps, possibly); ௅ the speaker’s assessment of necessity (indicated, for instance, by should, must, will, certainly, probably, necessary); ௅ ability of the agentive participant (denoted, for instance, by can, able, capability); ௅ permission (expressed, for instance, by can, may, allowed, permission); ௅ willingness (e.g., will, willing); ௅ circumstantial possibility (indicated by could, possible); and ௅ obligation (denoted by must, shall, should, ought to, need, have (got) to, obliged, necessary) (Jackson 1990, 104௅105). Portner (2009, 2), in his work, divides modality into epistemic and deontic type. In addition, in epistemic modality, according to Portner (2009), epistemic refers to knowledge, while deontic modality is associated with “good and evil according to some rule system.” The author notes that there are situations when a word can mean both epistemic and deontic modality. For this reason, Portner (2009, 2) changes the classification based on epistemic and deontic distinction, so the author uses these modal forms in three categories: sentential, sub-sentential, and discourse modality. In addition, Portner (2009) presents a semantic division of sentential modality, which includes three categories: epistemic, priority, and dynamic (Portner 2009, 135, 140). Epistemic modality depends on the knowledge of the speaker, while the category of priority contains deontic, sports, and teleological modalities that are goal oriented (Portner 2009, 135). By means of the term priority, Portner (2009, 135) indicates the principles, desires, and goals that “serve to identify some possibility as better than, or as having higher priority than, others. Priority modals have a circumstantial modal base and fairly easy-to-perceive ordering sources which provide the priority ranking” (Portner 2009, 135). It should be noted that dynamic modals also contain modal bases and consist of two subcategories: volitional and quantificational (Portner 2009). Examples of volitional meanings are ability, chance, or disposition. They refer to “the ways in which circumstances affect the actions available to a volitional individual, while quantificational modals seem to produce existential or universal quantification over individuals” (Portner 2009, 135). In addition to this division, the author declares that there are other distinctions, key to a better understanding of other categories of modality ௅ subjectivity and performativity (Portner 2009, 137).

152

Modal verbs can and could in Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Caroll

The research The chosen research material ௅ Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll ௅ is not only a fairy tale for children, but a story depicting the diversity of the human behaviour and the ubiquitous symbolism of the objects shown in the tale. Furthermore, the language used in the story is an example of the one characteristic of fairy tales, which is the subject of this work. The conducted research analysis consists of qualitative and quantitative descriptions of the use of two modal verbs, can and must, and their negations. Firstly, in the research material, all affirmative, interrogative, and negative sentences containing the discussed modal verbs have been found. In order to facilitate the research in terms of searching for the modal verbs and their calculations, an electronic version of the text has been used. Each appearance of the modal verbs under study has been analyzed and described in terms of the type of modality and modal meanings. It should be emphasized that the information obtained from the context of the statements of the examined text, including relations between the speaker and the interlocutor, their knowledge or beliefs, experiences, feelings, intentions and opinions have been taken into account due to their importance in determining the type of modality. The collected data have been analyzed following Palmer’s (1990) study of modality, and, for their more comprehensible presentation, they have been illustrated by means of bar graphs and percentages in pie charts.

Modality of the verb can The first significant feature that has been examined is the modality of the verb can. Considering its frequency of occurrence in the research material, it is used 35 times, which gives less than 24% in the percentage ratio. Based on the obtained results, the division into three types of modality, that is into dynamic, deontic, and epistemic, has been noted. The most frequent modality of the verb can turns out to be dynamic modality. This category of modality appears in 83% of all occurrences of the modal verb can, all of which turn out to be subject-oriented. The speaker usually refers directly to the subject to express their ability or willingness. It is non-subjective because it refers to the fact rather than to the likelihood or obligation, as it is expressed by epistemic and deontic modality, respectively. On the basis of the obtained results, the division of the dynamic modality has been specified (see Figure 1).

Nikola Zagórska

153

Figure 1. Types of dynamic modality of the modal verb can.

In the first category, namely in dynamic modality indicating ability, the largest number of cases has been recorded, that is 21 (51%). This testifies to the speaker’s desire to present the real situation and its focus on the characters’ abilities, as in examples (1௅3). (1) Do you think I can listen all day to such stuff? (Carroll 1865, 40) (2) That’s right! shouted the Queen. Can you play croquet? (Carroll 1865, 69) (3) The lobsters! shouted the Gryphon, with a bound into the air ௅ as far out to sea as you can (Carroll 1865, 87) The second category, dynamic modality indicating possibility, have been used more than twice less often as compared to the first category ௅ dynamic ability. It means that another motivation for using the modal verb can by the speaker is the intention to express the possibility of doing something (4௅5). The least frequently used kind of modality is dynamic modality indicating willingness (6). (4) How can I have done that?’ she thought (Carroll 1865, 15) (5) …and in that case, I can go back by railway,’ she said to herself (Carroll 1865, 16) (6) …you must manage the best way you can, but I must be kind to them, thought Alice (Carroll 1865, 12)

154

Modal verbs can and could in Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Caroll

The frequency distribution of the types of dynamic modality indicated by can is shown in Figure 2.

4% 24% dynamic ability 72%

dynamic possibility dynamic willingness

Figure 2. Percentage distribution of different types of dynamic modality.

Another significant modality in the research material is deontic modality of the verb can, which expresses the speaker’s desire contained in the speech. This category of modality occurs in 14% of all cases, and is used in five sentences. According to Palmer’s (1990, 2001) division, deontic modality is divided into expressing necessity and the other one ௅ expressing permission. The division of deontic modality is shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3. Diagram illustrating types of deontic modality.

In the analyzed research material, there was only deontic modality focused on permission. It reveals that the speaker has an authority or desire to allow the addressee to do something or let them perform the action, as in example (7).

Nikola Zagórska

155

(7) ‘You can draw water out of a water-well,’ said the Hatter (Carroll 1865, 63) Epistemic modality is based on the speaker’s judgement by which the speaker can communicate their doubts, confidence, and guesses. Epistemic modality of the verb can has the lowest distribution in the research material ௅ only about 1%. In example (8), the speaker by means of the modal verb can, expresses the inability of the recipient to do something and shows his conviction about it. (8) You can really have no notion how delightful it will be when they take us up and throw us, with the lobsters, out to sea! (Carroll 1865, 88) Most often, the verb can is used with the first person singular. This shows that the speaker usually speaks about their abilities and wishes. On the other hand, the speaker seems to be less likely to express permission and the possibility of doing something (Figure 4).

5

1

2 15

2 10

I

you

he

it

we

they

Figure 4. Subjects of the verb can.

In the research material, the use of the verb can with sensual verbs has been observed, including verbs: talk, listen, see, say, tell, and a mental verb remember. The relationship of both types of verbs strengthens the tone of sensual verbs and emphasizes the importance of the activity being performed, as in examples (9௅12). (9) I can tell you more than that, if you like,’ said the Gryphon (Carroll 1865, 89)

156

Modal verbs can and could in Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Caroll

(10) …why then they’re a kind of serpent, that’s all I can say (Carroll 1865, 44) (11) Do you think I can listen all day to such stuff? (Carroll 1865, 40) (12) I almost think I can remember feeling a little different (Carroll 1865, 14) Based on the analyzed data, the use of a modal verb can in the construction have + past participle was noticed. The modal verb is then used to express possibilities or to question possibilities. Additionally, can followed by have + -ed form expresses strong possibility. (13) I do wonder what can have happened to me! (Carroll 1865, 30)

Modality of the verb can’t Analyzing the modality of the modal verb can’t, there is only one modality attested in the research material, namely dynamic. In the conducted research, only the division into dynamic modality was distinguished. The modal verb can’t is the negation of the modal verb can, which has already been discussed. It is created by adding a particle not; it occurs also in the non-abbreviated form cannot. In the case of negation, can’t informs the speaker about the inability of the occurrence of an action or situation. In the analysed material, the most common modality indicated by the verb can’t is dynamic modality expressing ability (64%). The second most common modality is dynamic modality denoting possibility (36%). This indicates that the speaker usually wants to express the ability to do something, but less often, it is aimed at expressing possibilities as in examples (14௅16). (14) I’m afraid I can’t put it more clearly, Alice replied very politely (Carroll 1865, 37) (expressing ability) (15) Alice replied in an offended tone, so I can’t take more (Carroll 1865, 62) (expressing possibility) (16) As it is, I can’t get out at the door—I do wish I hadn’t drunk quite so much! (Carroll 1865, 30) (expressing ability)

Nikola Zagórska

157

By using a modal verb can’t in dynamic modality, the speaker expresses their confidence and conviction or opinion about the inability to perform a given activity. In the case of the modal verb can’t, the most common subject is the first person singular I (16 instances), whereas the second place is taken by the second person singular you (7 instances). Sensual verbs refer to the experience through senses, that is through sight, hearing, taste, touch, and smell. However, mental verbs have meanings that are related to concepts such as discovering, understanding, thinking, or planning. In general, a mental verb refers to a cognitive state, as in examples (17௅20). (17) And oh, my poor hands, how is it I can’t see you? (Carroll 1865, 42) (sensual verb) (18) …and they all quarrel so dreadfully one can’t hear oneself speak… (Carroll 1865, 72) (sensual verb) (19) And she’s such a capital one for catching mice you can’t think! (Carroll 1865, 26) (mental verb) (20) for I can’t understand it myself to begin with (Carroll 1865, 37) (mental verb) In the research material, the speaker uses mental verbs in collocations with the modal verb can’t in 26% of all cases of the discussed modal verb, while in other cases sensual verbs are used (sensual – 3 instances, mental – 7 instances).

Modality of the verb could The analysis of the research material in terms of the modal verb could has revealed examples of dynamic modality exclusively. Additionally, this category has been divided into subcategories expressing ability and possibility. Ability is expressed in 71% (39 instances) of all cases, while possibility ௅ in 29% (16 instances). (21) For the Mouse was swimming away from her as hard as it could go (Carroll 1865, 18) (expressing ability)

158

Modal verbs can and could in Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Caroll

(22) Oh, how I wish I could shut up like a telescope! (Carroll 1865, 8) (expressing possibility) (23) …and scurried away into the darkness as hard as he could go. (Carroll 1865, 13) (expressing ability) (24) And yet I wish I could show you our cat Dinah (Carroll 1865, 17) (expressing possibility) In the case of the modal verb could, the most frequent subjects of the modal verb are: the third person singular she (44%), Alice (16%), and the first person singular I (13%). This bears testimony to a large focus on the main character of the selected text, that is on a girl named Alice. It can be asserted that most of the speaker’s attention is focused exclusively on her. Figure 8 shows the distribution of the most frequently occurring subjects of the modal verb could.

17%

23%

60%

I

she

Alice

Figure 5. Quantitative division of the subjects of the modal verb could.

In the analyzed research material, there are characteristic cases of the use of the modal verb together with sensual and mental verbs. As in the case of the previously discussed modal verbs, the analysis of the modal verb could often shows the occurrence of sensual verbs. Sensual verbs occurred in 11% (16 instances) of all cases of the studied modal verbs, mental verbs occurred four times less often ௅ 3% (4 instances). Sensual verbs that have been recorded are: see, hear, say, and tell, while the mental verbs are: remember and think. Based on the collected data, it has been observed that the discussed verb often collocated with the verb wish. This grammatical structure is used to express wishes regarding current or future situations, as in

Nikola Zagórska

159

examples (24௅25), where the speaker expresses their desire for himself (24) and addresses the message directly to the recipient (25). (25) Oh, how I wish I could shut up like a telescope! (Carroll 1865, 8) (26) And oh, I wish you could see her after the birds! (Carroll 1865, 27) Another notable grammatical structure including the modal verb could is the comparative construction as ... as. This construction is used to make a comparison that something is like something else. English sentences in which various things are compared under some chosen aspect most often contain one of two main grammatical constructions, in this case the structure as ... as (when the comparison units turn out to be the same). In the research material, the discussed construction appears so often only in the connection with the modal verb could (19 times). Instances of such constructions include examples (27) and (28). (27) Is that all? said Alice, swallowing down her anger as well as she could. (Carroll 1865, 38) (28) Poor Alice! It was as much as she could do, lying down on one side, to look through into the garden with one eye. (Carroll 1865, 13) The most common adverbs in the discussed structure are: well, much and hard. In addition, in almost every case the subject is the third person singular she.

Modality of the verb couldn’t Couldn’t is the negation of the modal verb could, which had previously been discussed. Couldn't, or its full form could not, indicates that someone is not able to do something. In the analysed research material, the use of the modal verb couldn’t accounts for 20% of the use of all modal verbs. Only dynamic type of modality has been observed. The scrutinized research material, in terms of dynamic modality, demonstrated the division into two subcategories expressing either ability or possibility. The former group appears in 69% (20 instances) of cases, while the latter is more than twice as rare – in 31% (9 instances). Examples include (29௅32).

160

Modal verbs can and could in Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Caroll

(29) But said I could not swim. (Carroll 1865, 106) (expressing ability) (30) I couldn’t help it, said Five, in a sulky tone (Carroll 1865, 66) (expressing ability) (31) So they couldn’t get them out again. That’s all. (Carroll 1865, 89) (expressing possibility) (32) if people had all to lie down upon their faces, so that they couldn’t see it (Carroll 1865, 68) (expressing possibility) The rare occurrence of the modal verb couldn't is related to the genre of the analysed text and may indicate that there are few things impossible to happen in the plot of the novel. The analysis of the research material shows that most often the personal pronoun she occurs as the subject of the modal verb couldn’t. Almost 40% (10 instances) of the use of the modal verb occurs together with the subject she, which indicates that the speaker is primarily focused on the main character of the novel. The second and third most frequently used subjects are the third person plural they (5 instances), and the first person singular I (4 instances), which appears with a frequency of 21%. In the case of the modal verb couldn’t, the same number of sensual and mental verbs has been attested – 50% each. When it comes to sensual verbs, these are see (3 instances) and tell (1 instance), whereas mental verbs include think (2 instances) and remember (2 instances). The reference of could to the past is could have (done). This form is used to express that one was able to do something or had the opportunity to do something, but it was not possible to achieve it. This type of structure in the text appeared twice (33௅34). (33) You couldn’t have wanted it much, said Alice (Carroll 1865, 83) (34) They couldn’t have done that, you know, Alice gently remarked (Carroll 1865, 62)

Comparison of modal verbs can and could In the research material, the modal verbs can and could express the ability of a person to do something. However, they differ in terms of use in that can is used in the present situation, while could is used to talk about the abilities of the past. Nevertheless, both modal verbs are followed by a verb

Nikola Zagórska

161

in its basic form, as in sentences: My dad could only walk slowly before surgery, but he can even run now or When I went to school, I could only sing classic songs, but now I can sing pop songs. In both cases, can is used to represent the present state, but it can also be used to reflect past capacity by using a past form. The key differences are shown in the Table 1. Table 1. Comparison of the modal verbs can and could.

meaning ability and possibility request and permission

can be able to or permitted to do sth present one informal

could possibility or ability to do sth in the past polite

In the research material, can means to be able or indicates the capability of someone or something. This type of the modal verb has several uses including defining ability (I can play volleyball), giving and seeking permission (You can go to the match), and expressing possibility (Smoking cigarettes can damage your health). Could on the other hand is a past form of the verb can which defines the past ability of someone or something. Additionally, it is used when someone is permitted to do something. Its uses on the basis of the research material are denoting that someone has the ability to do something (She could tell when she needs money) and expressing a slight possibility (You could have passed the test). Considering the frequency of both analyzed modal verbs based on the analysis of the research material, the polite form is used more often than the informal version of the modal verb can. In the effective communication between the speaker and the recipient, courtesy language forms play a huge role. Thanks to them it is possible to express a request, gratitude, apology and conviction to the recipient, gain their acceptance and favour. Some examples of the polite use of the modal verb could include (35௅36). (35) And oh, I wish you could see her after the birds! (Carroll 1865, 26௅27) (36) For instance, if you were inside, you might knock, and I could let you out, you know (Carroll 1865, 47)

162

Modal verbs can and could in Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Caroll

In the research material, the use of polite forms by the speaker is a characteristic of fables for children, because the vocabulary and phrases used in this type of literature must be properly selected. In addition, the main character is a young girl Alice, who comes from a wealthy and affluent family, where she was taught good manners and politeness, as evidenced by quote (37). (37) This piece of rudeness was more than Alice could bear: she got up in great disgust (Carroll 1865, 64) Therefore, on the basis of these conclusions, it is possible to explain the use of the modal verb could in a polite form. A comparison of selected aspects of the modal verbs can and could are presented in Table 2. Table 2. Comparison of selected aspects of modal verbs can and could. quantity modalities most frequent subjects quantity of sensual and mental verbs

can 35 dynamic, deontic, epistemic I

could 55 dynamic she

6

20

Considering the division of modality of the analyzed modal verbs, each of them most often appears in dynamic modality. The modal verb can has an additional division into two other types of modality, that is deontic and epistemic. In contrast, the modal verb could is used only in dynamic modality. To sum up, based on the collected data and the conducted analysis, several observations can be made regarding the use of the modal verbs in the selected research material. First of all, it should be noted that the modal verb could (38%) occurs much more frequently than its present form can (24%). However, in the case of their negative forms, the negative couldn’t/could not and can’t/cannot appear with the same frequency ௅ each appears in 26% of all cases of the discussed modal verb, as shown in Figure 12.

Nikola Zagórska

163

Occurrences of the investigated modals (actual)

can't couldn't can could 0

10

20

30

40

Figure 6: Occurrences of the investigated modal verbs (actual).

Summing up the collected data of the conducted research, the most frequent modality is dynamic modality. It constitutes as much as 96% of all cases.

Types of modality of all described modal verbs 3% 1%

96%

dynamic

deontic

epistemic

Figure 7: Types of modality of all described modal verbs

Another observation regarding modal meanings in dynamic can or can’t is the fact that the most common meaning in the research material is ability. It appears in 66% of all cases. The modal verb can is primarily used to express ability, while can’t ௅ to indicate its absence. Additionally, can and can’t often collocate with private verbs, in most cases ௅ sensational verbs (see).

164

Modal verbs can and could in Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Caroll

In contrast, deontic modality, whose incidence account for 3% of all cases, and epistemic (1%) appear very rarely. Only five cases of the deontic modal verb can have been found ௅ to express permission exclusively. Additionally, the animal characters appearing in the research text have been personified, that is, they can communicate like humans. One of the more important observations of the conducted study is that epistemic modality appears the least of all modalities. Only one use of the modal verb can has been found that indicates epistemic meaning, which accounts for 1% of all examined cases. In the case of the second modal verb, could, and the negative forms of both modal verbs, no examples of epistemic modality have been found.

Conclusions The aim of this study was to examine the use and meanings of two modal verbs, can and could, in the novel Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll (1865), and to verify whether and to what extent the research results are similar to those of Palmer (1990). The most frequent modality indicated by the modal verbs can and could is dynamic modality. It appears most frequently, namely in 139 of 145 cases, which is 96%. In addition, it has turned out that all the analyzed cases of the modal verbs are subject oriented in that they express the will, ability, or willingness of the subject. On the basis of the obtained data, it is possible to determine the type of modality denoted by can and could occurring in the analysed research material. It has been concluded that the resulting division of modality is compatible with the classification given by Palmer (1990). In the research material, the speaker most often wants to present the real situation and is focused on the abilities of the characters. Usually, using dynamic modality, the speaker expresses the ability to do something. In addition, it has been noted that possibility-oriented dynamic modality is used less frequently than ability-oriented dynamic modality. In the case of deontic modality denoted by the modal verb can, the occurrence of this type of modality is much smaller as opposed to dynamic modality indicated by the same modal verb. In the examined material, it occurs in 3% of all the cases. Based on the collected data, the aforementioned modality has been divided into two types, permissions and necessity, which is in accordance with the division proposed by Palmer (1990).

Nikola Zagórska

165

In the analyzed material, the modal verb can is used in deontic sense to show the authority or desire of the speaker and their permission for the addressee to do something. In terms of epistemic modality, it is the least frequent as compared to other modalities, namely it constitutes 1% of all the cases. The example expresses epistemic improbability. During the analysis of the research material, it has been noticed that the modal verb can usually occurs with the first person singular. This shows that the speaker usually talks about their skills or wishes. A very characteristic feature of the analyzed modal verbs in the research material is a frequent co-occurrence with sensory and mental verbs. It has been concluded that modal verbs collocating with sensory and mental verbs underline the importance of the performed activity. Taking into account the negation of the modal verb can, the verb can’t, it has been observed that it occurs only in a dynamic sense. Dynamic modality has been divided into two types, abilities and possibilities, with the former occurring twice as often as the latter. On the basis of this, it has been concluded that the speaker tends to employ the verb can’t most often to express their disability to do something. The verb can’t most often appears with the first person singular. Another subject with which it appears is the second person singular. On the basis of the data obtained, it can be concluded that the selected work has a first-person narrative. Further, this may mean that the person speaking in the novel is one of the characters. As a result of the analysis of collocations of the modal verb can’t with sensual and mental verbs, it has been concluded that the speaker uses mental verbs much more often than sensual verbs. In terms of the other selected modal verb, could, quantitatively, the modal verb appears most often. The analysis has allowed for the division of this type of modality into abilities and possibilities. The former occurs almost three times more often than the latter. In terms of the occurrence of the analyzed verb with subjects, the most frequently appearing subject is the third person singular, namely she and Alice, which testifies to the fact that the speaker in particular focuses their attention on the main character of the novel, Alice. In the case of the modal verb could, the occurrence of sensual verbs constituted the vast majority of the analyzed cases ௅ they appear together with the verb could 4 times more often than mental verbs. It has been also observed that several characteristic grammatical structures often appear along with the modal verb could. These structures

166

Modal verbs can and could in Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Caroll

include “I wish…”, which is used to strengthen the speaker’s message, and a comparative structure “as ... as”. The frequent use of the comparative grammar structure together with the adverbs described in the previous parts of the chapter may indicate the willingness to present to the reader the effort which the main character puts in the activities performed. Based on the analyzed research material, a division has been made of dynamic modality into ability and possibility, with the former appearing more than twice less often than the latter. On this basis, it has been concluded that the rare appearance of the modal verb may be due to the fact that there are few things impossible to do in fairy tales. For this reason, this negation, which means being unable to do something, is very rare in the analysed text. Based on the collected data, it has been noted that 40% of the instances of the modal verb can't occur with the subject pronoun she. This indicates that the speaker is focused principally on the main character of the novel, who is not able to perform some actions. Considering the sensual and mental verbs occurring along with the discussed modal verb couldn’t, the same number of both types of verbs has been observed. The aim of the study, which was to determine the modal meanings and analysis the usage of modal verbs can and could in the selected literary work, has been achieved. In addition, the adopted hypothesis whether the indicated modal verbs reflect the same classification in the selected research material as in the division proposed by Palmer (1990) has been verified, which has proved the hypothesis true. The Author of this chapter is aware of the limitations of the study. The research conducted does not exhaust the subject of modality, but the results may, to some extent, complement the level of the knowledge about this concept.

Primary sources Carroll, Lewis. Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland. Planet eBook.com, 1865.

Nikola Zagórska

167

References Bolecki, Wáodzimierz. “ModalnoĞü: literaturoznawstwo i kognitywizm.” Teksty Drugie: teoria literatury, krytyka, interpretacja 70 no. 5 (2001): 31௅49. Ehrman, Madeline E. The meanings of the modals in present-day English. The Hague: Mouton, 1966. Endley, Martin J. Linguistic Perspectives on English Grammar. Information Age Publishing, 2010. Jackson, Howard. Grammar and meaning: A semantic approach to English grammar. New York: Longman, 1990. Lyons, John. Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977. Narrog, Heiko. Modality, Subjectivity, and Semantic Change. A CrossLinguistic Perspective. New York: Oxford University Press, 2012. Palmer, Frank R. Mood and modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986. Palmer, Frank R. Semantics. 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981. Palmer, Frank R. Modality and the English Modals. 2nd edn. London and New York: Longman, 1990. Palmer, Frank R. Mood and modality. 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. Portner, Paul. Modality. Oxford surveys in semantics and pragmatics. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009. Walkowska, Anna. Modality in The House At Pooh Corner by Alan Alexander Milne, unpublished graduation work, 2018.