Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-tsvsl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-30T03:44:11.771Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The core meanings of the English modals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Michael R. Perkins
Michael R. Perkins
Affiliation:
Speech Therapy Section, School of Health and Applied Sciences, Leeds Polytechnic
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Analyses of word-meaning can usually be divided into those which assign a meaning to a word IN ISOLATION FROM a specific context of use, and those which regard the meaning of a word as being largely, if not entirely, DEPENDENT UPON a specific context of use. The ultimate expression of the latter ‘polysemantic’ approach is probably that of the later Wittgenstein who argued that ‘every difference in a word’s use is a consequence of and evidence for a difference in its meaning’ (Wertheimer, 1972: 49). One recent example of the former ‘monosemantic’ approach is that of Bolinger (1977) whose stated purpose is to ‘reaffirm the old principle that the natural condition of a language is to preserve one form for one meaning, and one meaning for one form’ (p. x); also, the proponents of lexicalism are likewise ‘monosemantic’ in inclination in that they stress the primacy of lexical units over the syntactic relations which exist between them. Both these approaches have their advocates, and it should be stated at the outset that neither is necessarily right or wrong; each can only be judged according to whether the phenomena it is used to interpret are thereby illuminated.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 18 , Issue 2 , September 1982 , pp. 245 - 273
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Anderson, J. (1971). Some proposals concerning the modal verb in English. In Aitken, A. J., McIntosh, A. & Palsson, H. (eds) Edinburgh studies in English and Scots. London: Longman.69–120.Google Scholar
Antinucci, F. & Parisi, D. (1971). On English modal verbs. CLS 7. 28–39.Google Scholar
Bolinger, D. (1977). Meaning and form. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Bouma, L. (1975). On contrasting the semantics of the modal auxiliaries of German and English. Lingua 37. 313–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, J. & Thorne, J. P. (1969). The deep grammar of modal verbs. JL 5. 57–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, P. & Levinson, S. (1978). Universals in language usage: politeness phenomena. In Goody, E. N. (ed.) Questions and politeness: strategies in social interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 56–289.Google Scholar
Butler, C. S. (1972). A contrastive study of modality in English, French, German and Italian. Nottingham Linguistic Circular 2, 26–39.Google Scholar
Calbert, J. (1975). Towards the semantics of modality. In Calbert, J. & Vater, H. (eds) Aspekte der modalität. Tubingen: Verlag Gunter Narr. 1–70.Google Scholar
Close, R.A. (1962). English as a foreign language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Collins, P. (1974). The analysis of the English ‘modal auxiliaries’ as main verbs. Kivung 7. 151–166.Google Scholar
Ehrman, M. (1966). The meanings of the modals in present day English. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Emmerich, P. J. (1969). The psychological correlates of the English modal auxiliary system. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Nebraska–LincolnGoogle Scholar
Fitikides, T. J. (1963). Common mistakes in English. 5th ed., London: Longman.Google Scholar
Fries, C. C. (1927). The expression of the future. Lg 3. 87–95.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. (1970). Functional diversity in language as seen from a consideration of modality and mood in English. FL 6. 322–361.Google Scholar
Harre, R. (1959). Modal expressions in ordinary and technical language. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 37. 41–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofmann, T. R. (1966). Past tense replacement and the modal system. The Computation Laboratory of Harvard University Mathematical Linguistics and Automatic Translation Report No. NSF 17.Google Scholar
Huddleston, R. D. (1971). The sentence in written English: a syntactic study based on an analysis of scientific texts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Huddleston, R. D. (1979). ‘Would have become’: empty or modal WILL? JL 15. 335–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jespersen, O. (1931). A modern English grammar. Vol. 4. London: George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Joos, M. (1964). The English verb. Madison & Milwaukee: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Kenny, A. (1975). Will, freedom and power. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lakoff, R. (1972). The pragmatics of modality. CLS 8. 229–246.Google Scholar
Leech, G. N. (1971) Meaning and tile English verb. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Leech, G. N. & Svartvik, J. (1975). A communicative grammar of English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Lodge, K. R. (1974). Modality and modal verbs in English and German. Ph.D. dissertation. University of East Anglia.Google Scholar
Lyons, J. (1968). Introduction to theoretical linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Marino, M. (1973). A feature analysis of the modal system of English. Lingua 32. 309–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, G. A. (1978). Semantic relations among words. In Halle, M., Bresnan, J. & Miller, G. A. (eds) Linguistic theory and psychological reality. Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press. 60–118.Google Scholar
Mohan, B. A. (1974). Principles, postulates, politeness. CLS 10, 446–459.Google Scholar
Ney, J. W. (1976). The modals in English: a floating semantic feature analysis. Journal of English Linguistics 10. 8–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Donnell, W. R. (1977). Review of Palmer (1977). JL 13. 128–133.Google Scholar
Palmer, F. R. (1974). The English verb. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Palmer, F. R. (1977). Modals and actuality. JL 13. 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palmer, F. R. (1978). Past tense transportation: a reply. JL 14. 77–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palmer, F. R. (1979). Modality and the English modals. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Perkins, M. R. (1980). The expression of modality in English. Ph.D. dissertation, C.N.A.A.Google Scholar
Perkins, M. R. (1981). The development of modal expressions in the spontaneous speech of 6-to 12-year-old children. Work in Progress 14. Edinburgh University.Google Scholar
Perkins, M. R. (1983). Modal expressions in English. London: Frances Pinter.Google Scholar
Pottier, B. (1976). Sur la formulation des modalités en linguistique. Langages 43. 39–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poutsma, H. (1924). A grammar of late modern English. Part 1. Groningen: Noordhoff.Google Scholar
Pullum, G. & Wilson, D. (1977). Autonomous syntax and the analysis of the auxiliaries. Lg 53. 741–788.Google Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G. & Svartvik, J. (1972). A grammar of contemporary English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Rescher, N. (1968). Topics in philosophical logic. Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scheurweghs, G. (1959). Present-day English syntax: a survey of sentence patterns. London: Longmans.Google Scholar
Seiler, H. (1971). Abstract structures for moods in Greek. Lg 47. 79–89.Google Scholar
Simone, R. & Amacker, R. (1977). Verbi ‘modali’ in italiano. Italian Linguistics 3. 7–102.Google Scholar
Sohn, H. M. (1974). Modals and speaker–hearer perspectives in Korean. Papers in Linguistics 7.493–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Standwell, G. J. B. (1979). A contrastive study of the modals in English and German. IRAL 17.251–264.Google Scholar
Steele, S. (1975). Is it possible? Stanford University Working Papers on Language Universals. 18. 35–58.Google Scholar
Strang, B. M. H. (1970). A history of English. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Sweet, H. (1898). A new English grammar, logical and historical. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Traugott, E. C. (1972). The history of English syntax: a transformational approach to the history of English sentence structure. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Ultan, R. (1972). The nature of future tenses. Working Papers on Language Universals 8. 55–100.Google Scholar
Von, Wright G. H. (1951). An essay in modal logic. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
Wekker, H. Chr. (1976). The expression of future lime in contemporary British English. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
Wertheimer, R. (1972). The signficance of sense: meaning, modality and morality. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
West, M. & Kimber, P. F. (1957). Deskbook of correct English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Young, D. J. (1980). The structure of English clauses. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar