Markelova
D.M.
Kostanay
State University named after A. Baitursynov, Kazakhstan
POLYFUNCTIONALITY OF
MODAL VERBS AND MODAL WORDS IN ENGLISH
"…
it is necessary to draw a basic accurate distinction
between different emotional forms of
expression of reactions to reality
and a
modal assessment of the attitude of the statement towards reality …" [4]
V. V.
Vinogradov
The linguistics
passed a long and twisting way in research of a modality, based on achievements
of logic, semiotics and psychology. However the modality still didn't receive a
full explanation in connection with its diversity, specificity of language
expression and functional features. Not casually, teachers pay special
attention to the themes: "Polyfunctionality of modal verbs and modal words
in English", "Modal verbs and their equivalents" etc. as the use
of modal verbs in speech cause difficulties for students. Relevance of this
problem is that properties of a modality are poorly studied and are in the
center of linguistic searches. The great difficulty in translation process is
presented by lexical and grammatical category of a modality. Polyfunctionality
of modal verbs and modal words serves as the reason of inexact disclosure of a
modality in the translations.
The scale of a
modality was for the first time established by Kant in "Criticism of pure
reason" [7]. Further for many years researchers give different definitions
to the category "modality". We will consider some concepts.
By Poutsma's
definition, the modality is "non-finite form of the verb, a verbal
combination or a modal adverb by means of which, speaker expresses the point of
view on extent of implementation of the action or a state designated by a
predicate" [12].
In 1960 all linguistic facts
were formulated and given to system in grammar of Russian, concerning all
phrases, parenthesizes, plug-in designs. Despite all researches, definitions of
a modality wasn't yet.
O. S. Akhmanova
gave the first definition to a modality in 1969 in the linguistic dictionary.
She considered a modality as the conceptual category with value of the relation
of the statement speaking to the contents and the attitudes of the contents of
the statement towards reality (the relation reported to its real
implementation) which is expressed various lexical and grammatical means, such
as a form and an inclination, modal verbs, etc. The modality can matter
statements, orders, wishes, assumptions, reliability, the irreality, etc. [1] In the dictionary of linguistic terms (1969)
also division of a modality by types is given:
• a modality hypothetical
(hypothetical(suppositional) modality) which assumes submission of the contents
of the statement as presumable;
• modality verbal (verbal
modality). The modality expressed by a verb;
• modality irreal (unreal
modality) submission of the contents of the statement as impossible,
impracticable;
• a modality negative
(negative modality) – submission of the contents of the statement as
inappropriate to reality.
The linguist V. V.
Vinogradov in the work "Russian" gave broader definition to a
modality. Follows from it that "a modality - not only the characteristic
of reality and unreality, but also the relation speaking to stated". [4]
From definition it is visible that two types of a modality are
allocated: objective and subjective, but in the text it is difficult to
allocate a clear boundary between them. Many researchers consider that the
modality in the text is subjective.
According to F.
Musayeva's theory, the category of a modality is differentiated on two types:
objective and subjective. The objective modality is integrally connected with
category of time and differentiated on the basis of temporary definiteness –
uncertainty. Value of time and reality – irreality are merged together; the
complex of these values is called as objective and modal values. The subjective
modality is the relation speaking to reported. Unlike an objective modality it
is a facultative sign of the statement. [10]
To the sphere of a modality
carry:
• opposition of statements on
nature of their communicative installation;
• gradation of values in the
range "reality - irreality";
• different degree of
confidence of the thought of reality which is formed at him speaking in
reliability;
• various modifications of
communication between a subject and a predicate.
It is important to
note that the modality is realized on grammatical, on lexical, at the
intonational level, and also on statement sites in general and has various ways
of expression. The modality is expressed by various grammatical and lexical means:
special forms of inclinations; modal verbs ( must, can); other modal words (
perhaps, likely); intonational means. Various languages grammatical differently
express different values of a modality. So, English expresses value of an
irreal modality by means of a special inclination of Subjunctive II. For
example: If you had come in time, we should have been able to catch the bus.
The group of modal
verbs includes a small number of the verbs which are distinguished from all
verbs with a number of characteristics in value, the use and grammatical forms.
These verbs have no actually verbal grammatical category; they can have only
forms of an inclination and time which are predicate indicators. Owing to this
fact, and also owing to absence at them non-predicative forms (an infinitive, a
gerund, participles), modal verbs stand on the periphery of verbal system of
English.
On a role in the
offer modal verbs are office. They designate opportunity, ability, probability,
need of commission of the action expressed by a notional verb. As they express
only the modal relation, but not action, they as a separate sentence part are
never used. Modal verbs are always combined only with an infinitive, forming
with it combinations which in the offer is a difficult modal predicate.
Modal verbs are
insufficient verbs (Defective Verbs) since they have no all forms which have
other verbs. Lack of an inflection at them – s in the 3rd person of singular of
the present of an indicative mood speaks historically: modern forms of the present
were once forms of past tense, and the 3rd of singular of past tense had no
personal ending.
In the offer modal verbs are
always combined with an infinitive (perfect and not perfect), forming with it
one combination which is called as a compound modal predicate. As separate sentence parts modal verbs aren't used.
As an example,
let's pay the attention to the verb "must".
The verb "must" expresses the assumption,
usually factual, on knowledge and almost adjoining with confidence. must verb
combination to not perfect infinitive means that alleged action (or a state) is
simultaneous with the made assumption, and the assumption can belong both to
the present, and to past tense.
Your
friend must be nearly ninety now. \ Вашему другу теперь, должно быть, девяносто
лет.
You
must be tired after your evening walk.\ Вы, должно быть, сильно
устали, после вечерней прогулки.
We
must have taken a wrong looking for this thing.
\ Мы,
должно быть, не там искали эту вещь.
The verb "must" is used in value of the
assumption, probability, i.e. big degree of confidence. The speaker considers
the assumption quite plausible. In this value
the verb 'must' corresponds
approximately to modal words: evidently, apparently, certainly, most likely,
probably.
For expression of the assumption
the verb "must" is used:
1. In combination with
Indefinite Infinitive for expression of the assumption relating to the present.
Must in this case is translated into Russian as: has to be probably and an
infinitive – a verb in the present. must combination to an infinitive can be
translated into Russian as: possibly, plus Infinitive:
She must know his address.\Она, должно быть
(вероятно), знает его адрес.
She must be in the swimming pool now.\Она,
должно быть, (вероятно), сейчас в бассейне.
Continuous 'is used
after "must when it is suggested that action is made at the time of the
speech:
Where is she? – She must be
walking in the central park of the town.
Где
она? – Она, должно быть, гуляет в центральном парке города.
"must" is
used in value of probability with a simple form of an infinitive of the verbs
which are usually not used in the form of the continued look (to be, to think,
etc.)
2. In conjunction with
the Perfect Infinitive to express the assumption that belongs to the past. The
combination of a verb must with perfect infinitive means that the proposed
action is preceded by an allegation, while the very assumption can refer to the
present and to the past tense. Must in such cases is translated into Russian as
to be likely, and the infinitive - the verb in the past tense:
The gifts must have been damaged during the loading of the train.\Подарки, должно
быть (вероятно), были
повреждены
во
время
загрузки
поезда.
K. N. Kachalova specifies that
for expression of the assumption relating to the future, must isn't used. Such Russian
offers, as: «Погода,
должно
быть (вероятно), изменится
завтра” - переводится на английский язык: [8] The
weather will probably change (is likely to change) tomorrow.
It is important to note that
within the meaning of the verb “must” assumptions used almost exclusively in
the affirmative sentences. In negative sentences it is not used at all, and in
interrogative sentences is rare, and these questions are rhetorical.
She
probably didn’t see her. \ Она, должно быть, не видела её.
The assumption is expressed in negative offers by means of the modal
word evidently.
Evidently, she did
not know my telephone number.
In modern English
carry the following words to modal words: certainly,
indeed, perhaps, happily, unhappily,
of course , evidently, maybe,
no doubt, naturally, probably,
possibly, obviously, surely, apparently, really,
assuredly, actually, undoubtedly, fortunately, unfortunately, luckily,
unluckily.
On the value modal
words can be subdivided depending on the subjective relation to the reality
facts expressed by them on:
1) the words
expressing the statement;
2) the words
expressing the assumption;
3) the words
expressing value judgement of the contents of the statement from the point of
view of its desirability or undesirability.
Within each group
modal words are close among themselves on value, but at the same time each of
them expresses the shades or differs on the use in the speech from other modal
words of the same semantic group.
Modal words matter
assumptions, doubts, probabilities, confidence speaking in the thought
expressed in the offer. Modal words carry out function of an introduction
sentence part and usually belong to all offer in general. Some modal words (for
example, of course, certainly, no doubt, perhaps, etc.) can carry out function
of the word offer".
We will review examples:
1.
Maybe my sister is ill.\ Может быть, моя сестра
заболела.
2.
No doubt she will come later.\ Она,
без сомнения, придёт позже.
Characteristics of modal words
from syntactic is the following:
1)
the use in value of the word offer, a thicket in the dialogical speech:
Can
I borrow your disk? \ Можно, я одолжу Ваш диск?
2) the use as a parenthesis.
3) the use as affirmative
words in the value close to modal particles and adverbs.
As it is told
above, modal words carry out function of introduction members in the offer. But
it is necessary to notice that if any modal word can act as a parenthesis, not
any parenthesis is modal. Don't treat modal words:
• the parenthesises
expressing an emotional assessment of the message (fortunately, unfortunately,
to surprise, to chagrin);
• the
parenthesises expressing someone else's speech (speak, on hearings);
• the parenthesises
specifying much followings of thoughts (first, at last, therefore, so, etc.).
In modern English
exists grammatical and lexical means of expression of a modality. Grammatical
means are such modal verbs as must, should, ought, will/would, can/could,
may/might, need. Thus these verbs weaken the initial value of desirability,
obligation, need, etc. and transfer only the relation of the assumption
speaking to the contents in general. Modal verbs transfer various shades of a
modality, starting with the assumption adjoining with confidence and finishing
with the assumption in which the speaking isn't confident.
Lexical means are
such modal words as: perhaps, maybe, probably, possibly. Many linguists speak
about modal words as about an independent part of speech. Their syntactic
function – function of an introduction sentence part. There is a question how
to consider these units which syntactic position doesn't give information
concerning their morphological nature. It is represented that here two
decisions are possible: or they are special modal words, or it the adverbs
capable to function along with modal words. Some foreign and Russian linguists
consider that these words are the adverbs involved in the field of modal words
without stopping being adverbs. Other linguists are firmly convinced that such
words as perhaps, maybe, probably, possibly the group of the modal should
carry.
Finishing article,
I remember S. Katsnelson's words which induce each researcher to continuation
of studying of this subject: "The statement attitude towards reality
follows from the contents of the statement without special modal
"index" and "Each communicative unit corresponds to the plan of
reality" [9].
References:
1. Akhmanova O. C. Dictionary
of linguistic terms. 1969, DJVU, RUS
2. Barkhudarov L.S., Shteling
D. A. English grammar. M.1973
3. Blokh M.Ya. Theoretical
English grammar: Textbook. For students ph. faculty — M.: Higher school, 1983
4. Vinogradov V. V. About
category of a modality. "Works Institute of Russian", vol. 2, 1950,
p. 49
5. Gordon E.M. Grammar of
modern English. (A Grammar of Present-day English) M. 1986
6. Ivanova I.P., Burlakov V.
V., Pochetsov G.G. Theoretical grammar of modern English. - M.: Higher school,
1981. - p. 285
7. Kant I., Criticism of pure
reason. 1907, p. 159
8. Kachalova K.N., Izrailevich
E.E. Practical English grammar. M.1998
9. Katsnelson S.D., Typology
of language and verbal thinking. Moscow, "Nauka", 1972 p. 330
10. Musayeva G. F. Role of
category of a modality in the art text. - Baku: Elista, 2001. - p.139
11. Rayevskaya N. N. Modern
English Grammar: Textbook. M.: Higher school, 1976
12. Poutsma H., Grammar of
Late Modern English. part II, p. 161