Modality-and-Evidentiality

MODALITY&EVIDENTIALITY1ModalityWhatismodality?Itisanimportantsemanticcategorywhichoperatesatthesentencelevel.Itisacovertermfordeviceswhichallowspeakerstoexpressvaryingdegreesofcommitmentto,orbeliefin,aproposition.Letusunderstanditfromthefollowingexamples:1)Johnhasgonetotheairport.2)Johnhasnotgonetotheairport.Theybothseemtoguarantee“tothebestofmyknowledge”.Asimplestartingdefinitionofmodalityisthatitisthespacebetween“yes”and“no”+SheteachesLatinModalspace^ShemightteachLatin^SheusuallyteachesLatin^SheoughttoteachLatin^ShewillteachLatinifyouwant^ShecanteachLatinifshewants^ShecanteachLatinwell^Perhapsyesperhapsno^Sometimesyessometimesno^Atpresentno,butideallyinthefutureyes^Atpresentno,butinthefutureyesifyouwant^Atpresentno,butinthefutureyesifshewants^Inprincipleyes,atpresentmaybeyesorno_Shedoesn’tteachLatinModalsystemsallowspeakerstomodulatethisguarantee:Tosignalstrongerandweakercommitmenttothefactualityofstatements.ThereareanumberoflinguisticstrategiesThesentencecanbeembeddedunderahigherclausewithanadjectiveoradverbofmodality.E.g.1)ItiscertainthatS.2)ItisprobablethatS.3)ItislikelythatS.4)ItispossiblethatS.Here1)to4）movefromstrongtoweakcommitmenttoS.Toputintothehigherclauseaverbwhichdescribestheextentofthespeaker’sbelief(Propositionalattitudeinphilosophicalliterature)a.IknowthatS.b.IbelievethatS.c.IthinkthatS.d.Idon’tknowthatS.e.IdoubtthatS.f.IknowthatnotS.WehaveagradientfromthecertaintyofthetruthofthestatementexpressedbySthroughtoitsfalsity.Toemployauxiliaryverbs(modalverbs)a.Shemusthaveleftbynow.b.Shemighthaveleftbynow.c.Shecouldhaveleftbynow.d.Sheneedn’thaveleftbynow.e.Shecouldn’thaveleftbynow.Thesemarkthevariationsofcommitmenttowardstheassertion“shehasleftbynow.”Thesemodalverbshaveanotherfunction.Thisconcernsthedifferenttypesofmodality.Manydivisionshavebeenmadetomodality.Suchas:Vonwright(1979):alethicmodality,epistemicmodality,deonticmodalityHalliday(1970):modality,modulationLyons(1977):epistemicmodality,deonticmodalityPalmer(1979):epistemicmodality,deonticmodality,dynamicmodalityCoates(1983):epistemicmodality,rootmodalityHalliday:1)Modalisation(情态）：Ifthecommoditybeingexchangedisinformation,themodalityrelatestohowvalidtheinformationisintermsof“probability(howlikelyitistobetrue)”(可能性阶）or“usuality(howfrequentlyitistrue)”（通常性阶）即说话人对命题的可能性的判断。(proposition,statementsandquestions)Probability(possible,probable,certain,certainly,maybe,etc)E.g.Thechildmightbehers.Usuality(sometimes,often,always,etc)E.g.Sheoftenwentthere.2)Modulation(意态）:Ifthecommodityisgoodsorservices,themodalityrelatestohowconfidentthespeakercanbeintheeventualsuccessoftheexchange.Thisconcernsthedegreeof“obligation(道义阶)”ontheotherpersontocarryoutthecommandand“inclination(倾向性阶)”ofthespeakertofulfiltheoffer.即说话人对命题的可希望性的判断(Proposal,offersandcommands)Obligation(permissible,advisable,obligatory)(definitely,absolutely,possibly,byallmeans)E.g.Youshouldgonow.Inclination(ability,willingness,determination)(willingly,readily,gladly,certainly)E.g.Iwillgiveyouahand.Halliday又区分了情态的两种向度（orientation):subjectiveandobjective(主观和客观）Subjectiveisregardedasrelatedtothespeaker,thespeakerregardstheexistenceofsth(past,present,future)ispossibleinspeaking.Itisanon-confidentevaluationofthespeakertoafactinspeaking,akindof“factualpossibility”.如情态可以被隐喻性地编码在一个显性的主观从句中，突出说话人的主观观点。e.gIthinkthatsheisright.Objectiveisrelatedtothecontent.Itimplieslogical,physical,psychological,politicaloreconomicalpossibility,itisakindof“theoreticalpossibility”说话人也可以用显性的客观形式来淡化他自己的观点，为本来只是一个看法的东西增添客观确定性.e.gItisobviouslythatsheisrightEpistemic,Deontic,andDynamicModality1.EpistemicmodalityConcernedwiththespeaker’sknowledge,belieforattitudetothetruthvalueorfactualstatusoftheproposition(Palmer,1986:9).Itisusedwhenthemodalmeansthatthespeakerguessesorinferswhatheisnotverysureof.Anepistemicmodalreflectsvariousjudgmentsoffactualityandexpressesthepossibility,probabilityorimpossibilityofaparticularproposition.Thiscouldbeourbusnow.Theywouldbeveryhappytomeetyou.Youmustbethebride’sfather.Thebusshouldbeheresoon.Itmightfreezetonight.Hewillbehomebynow.具体的包括：Logicalnecessity,由must,have(got)to,should,oughtto表示，possibility由may,might,could表示，predictability由will/shall,would表示。根据Coates的研究，英语情态助动词除了can以外都有这种用法。根据这些情态动词表达的不同推测性意义又分为两种：一种是指涉及说话人对命题的真实性进行的假定，有关的情态助动词为：must,have(got)to,should,oughtto;另一种是表示说话人对某一命题的真实性的可能性大小进行估量，这类词有may,might,could,will,would.根据肯定程度的不同排列成表进行比较：R.A.Close在AReferenceGrammarforStudentofEnglish(1975)列过下表:不肯定mightmaycouldcanshouldoughttowouldwill肯定mustCoates认为close这样一种单一标尺的模式不能说明情态助动词的“推理性（referential)”与“非推理性(non-referential)”的区别，主张用两个平行标尺来排列：Inferentialconfident(肯定）non-referentialMUSTWILL(=Fromtheevidenceavailable,(=IconfidentlyIconfidentlyinferthat…..)predictthat…)SHOULD,OUGHTMAY,MIGHT,COULD(=fromtheevidenceavailable,(=IthinkItperhapsItentativelyassumethat….)doubtful(不肯定）possiblethat….)特点：1）注重了语用，实际应用的不同。如must表示说话人根据一系列主观已知事实不一定是一般常识，进行逻辑推理，而will（表示推测性时）是根据一般常识或习惯来假定某命题的真实性。e.g.Alionwillattractaman,onlywhenhungry.(常识）Johnwillbeinhisofficeatthistime.(习惯）此时很难说清哪个表示说话人的肯定语气强2）在可比意义间排出了强弱Shoul