CHAPTER 7 MODALITY, SCOPE, AND QUANTIFICATION
A. Modality
In syntax semantics and pragmatic, there is a modality in a sentence.
Modality is the term of a cluster of meanings centered on the notions of necessity and possibility. for example :
1. This has to be a breakfast. (necessity)
2. The announcement showed the students might study face to face in the school. (possibility)
The modality is the label given to the meanings signaled by the italicized expressions in the fist sentence. Besides that, the second sentence shows that includes the obligation to make a situation comes about, indications of whether or not it is permissible or feasible.
The main carriers of modality are about auxiliary verbs or as known as modals like the table below.
Modal Verb Expressing Example
Must Strong obligation You must have the
dictionary to learn English
Logical
conclusion/certainty
Celvin must be very tired. He’s been doing something all day long.
Must not Prohibition You must not smoke in
the mall
Can Ability I can climb the tree.
Permission Can I use your pen?
Possibility Smoking can cause
cancer.
Could Ability in the past When I was younger, I
could climb a tree Polite permission Pardon me, could you
repeat your sentence?
Possibility It could be rain
tomorrow.
125
May Permission May I borrow your
pencil please?
Possibility, probability It may be very hot tomorrow.
Might Polite permission Might I suggest an
idea?
Possibility, probability I might go on holiday to America next year.
Need not Lack of
necessity/absence of obligation
I need not buy that book because I have it.
Should/ought to 50% obligation I should/ought to see a doctor because I have a terrible headache.
Advice You should/ought to
revise your lessons.
Logical conclusion (deduction)
He should/ought to very tired after such enormous work.
Had better Advice You’d better move to a
new apartment.
1. Deontic and Epistemic Modality
Expression of modality exhibit an intriguing spectrum of partially similar meanings. The modal auxiliaries are also among the most frequently used verbs in English. The modality is classified into two broad types. The first one is deontic modality.
Deontic modality is the necessity of a person to do or not to do in a certain way. It shows the speaker’s desire for the proposition expressed by the utterance. Deontic modals convey two kinds social knowledge like the table below.
126 Obligation Permission Concerned with what
a person must do.
For example : 1. I must call him 2. I have to call him.
3. I need to call him.
4. I ought to call him 5. I should call him
Deals with someone’s authority to permit somebody else to do something.
For example :
1. You can have these postcards for free.
2. You could have these postcards for free.
3. You may have these postcards for free 4. You might have these postcards for free.
The second type is epistemic modality. Epistemic modality deals with possibility, probability or impossibility of a certain proposition. For examples :
1. He may be in his friend’s office. → possibility or probability (It is possible that he is in his friend’s office).
2. Ask your friends. They might know. → possibility or probability (It is possible that your friends know.)
3. They have only just had dinner. They can’t be hungry already. → impossibility or improbability (It is impossible that you’re hungry).
4. Is she serious? No, she can’t be that serious.→ Impossibility or improbability (It is impossible that she is serious).
2. Core Modal Meaning
1. Celvin expected the waffle to be delicious, he’d tasted that blend before.
2. Celvin told the seller that he expected the waffle to be delicious and would not accept it otherwise.
Those sentences influence the interpretation of modality. This is illustrated by the first sentence, which is epistemic, a moderately strong expression of conviction about how reality would turn out, and the second sentence is deontic, which is a moderately strong demand about how he wanted to be. The italicized clause is the same, but coupled with mention of experience from which evidence could have been gained (in the first sentence)
127
interpretation concerns degree of certainty of knowledge, while mention of a seller and a sanction (in the second sentence) makes people take the clauses as reported demand. The markers of modality in the earlier example of this chapter were. Auxiliary verbs or similar and the adverb probably, but the point that the epistemic and deontic ambiguity is fairly general.
Modality is often used for communicating about matters that, unlike arithmetic, have not been systematized. In such cases, necessity is relative to the context as it is understood by the speaker and hearers involved in a communication. In ordinary communications, speakers and writers present a proposition as necessarily true-something that must be-if it is the unavoidable consequence of everything that they, at the moment of speaking, assume to be both true and relevant to the case in hand. And a proposition is regarded as possibly true if some information currently salient in the attention of the communicator and assumed to be true and relevant is compatible with the proposition.
Not only that, epistemic modality gets used when the contextually relevant presuppositions are not sufficient to establish the truth of the preposition being communicated. If there was enough information to decide the truth of the matter, then it would be expressed baldly without recourse to modality. Epistemic marking signals that the speaker or writer is going beyond the available evidence and making inferences regarding what the actual situation was, currently is, or will be.
Proposes core meanings for some important markers of modality in English. To make it easier to focus on semantic similarities and differences between the markers, think of each of them in the same sentence frame and consider only epistemic interpretations like the table below.
Marker of modality in
the frame P__ be true Meaning Type of propositions presupposed
Must Has to Will
P is true in all plausible scenarios based on the presupposition.
Factual prepositions
Should Ought to
P is true in all plausible scenarios based on the presupposition.
Norms
128 May
Might
P is true in all plausible scenarios based on the presupposition does not rule out P.
Factual propositions
Can
No plausible scenarios
based on the
presuppositions rule out P.
Factual propositions
For deontic interpretations, the third column of the table would have presuppositions relating to preferences and requirements instead of factual propositions. In the case of should, the label norms covers schedules and averages for epistemics and coventions of conduct for deontics.
Should is necessity modal, like must, but not as strong: exceptions to claims with should are coherent. But attempting to do the same with must is problematic and probably only acceptable is must is understood ironically.
The meaning purposed in the table make must, have to, and will synonymous, likewise the pair should and ought to and may and might. The table does not show various restrictions on use, notably:
1. Must us hardly used for epistemic claims about the future; will is used instead.
2. Might is generally weaker than may, past tense somehow distancing the possibility.
3. Although can’t clearly has both epistemic modality; for example, epistemic can is peculiar un the suggested frame.