Modal verb: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m →External links: Task 15: language icon template(s) replaced (1×); |
m Reverted edits by 5.46.116.146 (talk): addition of unnecessary/inappropriate external links (HG) (3.4.12) |
||
| (235 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|Type of verb, such as "might", that is used to indicate modality}} |
|||
A '''modal verb''' is a type of [[verb]] that is used to indicate [[linguistic modality|modality]] – that is: likelihood, ability, permission, request, capacity, suggestions, order, obligation, or advice. Modal verbs always accompany the base (infinitive) form of another verb having [[semantics|semantic]] content.<ref>[[Frank R. Palmer|Paler, F. R.]], ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=xKUvDFTARR8C&printsec=frontcover#v=snippet&q=%22modal%20verb%22&f=false Mood and Modality]'', Cambridge University Presents, 2001, p. 33</ref> In [[English modal verbs|English, the modal verbs]] commonly used are ''can'', ''could'', ''may'', ''might'', ''must'', ''will'', ''would'', ''shall'', ''should'', ''ought to'', ''had better'', "have to" and sometimes ''need'' or ''dare''. In English and other [[Germanic languages]], modal verbs are often distinguished as a class based on certain grammatical properties. |
|||
A '''modal verb''' is a type of [[verb]] that contextually indicates a [[Modality (natural language)|modality]] such as a ''likelihood'', ''ability'', ''permission'', ''request'', ''capacity'', ''suggestion'', ''order'', ''obligation'', ''necessity'', ''possibility'' or ''advice''. Modal verbs generally accompany the base (infinitive) form of another verb having [[semantics|semantic]] content.<ref>[[Frank R. Palmer|Palmer, F. R.]], ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=xKUvDFTARR8C&q=%22modal+verb%22 Mood and Modality]'', Cambridge University Presents, 2001, p. 33</ref> In [[English modal verbs|English, the modal verbs]] commonly used are ''can'', ''could'', ''may'', ''might'', ''shall'', ''should'', ''will'', ''would'', and ''ought''. |
|||
==Function== |
==Function== |
||
Modal verbs have a wide variety of communicative functions, but these functions can generally be related to a scale ranging from possibility ("may") to necessity ("must"), in terms of one of the following types of modality: |
|||
*[[epistemic modality]], concerned with the theoretical ''possibility of propositions being true or not true'' (including likelihood and certainty) |
*[[epistemic modality]], concerned with the theoretical ''possibility of propositions being true or not true'' (including likelihood and certainty) |
||
*[[deontic modality]], concerned with ''possibility and necessity in terms of freedom to act'' (including permission and duty) |
*[[deontic modality]], concerned with ''possibility and necessity in terms of freedom to act'' (including permission and duty) |
||
*[[dynamic modality]],<ref name="lel.ed.ac.uk">[http://www.lel.ed.ac.uk/grammar/overview.html A Short Overview of English Syntax (Rodney Huddleston)], section 6.5d</ref> which may be distinguished from deontic modality in that, with dynamic modality, the conditioning factors are ''internal'' – the subject's own ability or willingness to act<ref>Palmer, ''op. cit.'', p. 70. The subsequent text shows that the intended definitions were transposed.</ref> |
*[[dynamic modality]],<ref name="lel.ed.ac.uk">[http://www.lel.ed.ac.uk/grammar/overview.html A Short Overview of English Syntax (Rodney Huddleston)], section 6.5d</ref> which may be distinguished from deontic modality in that, with dynamic modality, the conditioning factors are ''internal'' – the subject's own ability or willingness to act<ref>Palmer, ''op. cit.'', p. 70. The subsequent text shows that the intended definitions were transposed.</ref> |
||
The following sentences illustrate epistemic and deontic uses of the English modal verb ''must'': |
The following sentences illustrate epistemic and deontic uses of the English modal verb ''must'': |
||
*epistemic: ''You '''must''' be starving.'' (" |
*epistemic: ''You '''must''' be starving.'' ("I think it is almost a certainty that you are starving.") |
||
*deontic: ''You '''must''' leave now.'' ("You are required to leave now.") |
*deontic: ''You '''must''' leave now.'' ("You are required to leave now.") |
||
An ambiguous case is ''You must speak Spanish.'' The primary meaning would be the deontic meaning ("You are required to speak Spanish.") but this may be intended epistemically ("It is surely the case that you speak Spanish |
An ambiguous case is ''You must speak Spanish.'' The primary meaning would be the deontic meaning ("You are required to speak Spanish.") but this may be intended epistemically ("It is surely the case that you speak Spanish"). |
||
Epistemic modals can be analyzed as [[raising verb]]s, while deontic modals can be analyzed as [[control verb]]s. |
Epistemic modals can be analyzed as [[raising verb]]s, while deontic modals can be analyzed as [[control verb]]s. |
||
Epistemic usages of modals tend to develop from deontic usages.<ref>Bybee,Joan; Perkins, Revere; and Pagliuca, William. ''The Evolution of Grammar'', Univ. of Chicago Press, 1994, pp.192-199</ref> For example, the inferred certainty sense of English ''must'' developed after the strong obligation sense; the probabilistic sense of ''should'' developed after the weak obligation sense; and the possibility senses of ''may'' and ''can'' developed later than the permission or ability sense. Two typical sequences of evolution of modal meanings are: |
Epistemic usages of modals tend to develop from deontic usages.<ref>Bybee, Joan; Perkins, Revere; and Pagliuca, William. ''The Evolution of Grammar'', Univ. of Chicago Press, 1994, pp.192-199</ref> For example, the inferred certainty sense of English ''must'' developed after the strong obligation sense; the probabilistic sense of ''should'' developed after the weak obligation sense; and the possibility senses of ''may'' and ''can'' developed later than the permission or ability sense. Two typical sequences of evolution of modal meanings are: |
||
*internal mental ability → internal ability → root possibility (internal or external ability) → permission and epistemic possibility |
*internal mental ability → internal ability → root possibility (internal or external ability) → permission and epistemic possibility |
||
*obligation → probability |
*obligation → probability |
||
== |
== English == |
||
===English=== |
|||
{{main|English modal verbs}} |
{{main|English modal verbs}} |
||
The following table lists |
The following table lists English modal verbs and various senses in which they are used: |
||
:{| class="wikitable" |
|||
|- |
|- |
||
! Modal |
! Modal verb !! Epistemic sense || Deontic sense || Dynamic sense |
||
|- |
|- |
||
| can || That '''can''' indeed hinder. || You '''can''' |
| can || That '''can''' indeed hinder. || You '''can''', if you are allowed. || She '''can''' really sing. |
||
|- |
|- |
||
| could || That '''could''' happen soon. || |
| could || That '''could''' happen soon. || – || He '''could''' swim when he was young. |
||
|- |
|- |
||
| may || That '''may''' be a problem. || '''May''' I stay? || |
| may || That '''may''' be a problem. || '''May''' I stay? || – |
||
|- |
|- |
||
| might || The weather '''might''' improve. || |
| might || The weather '''might''' improve. || '''Might''' I help you? || – |
||
|- |
|- |
||
| must || It '''must''' be hot outside. || Sam '''must''' go to school. || |
| must || It '''must''' be hot outside. || Sam '''must''' go to school. || – |
||
|- |
|- |
||
| shall || |
| shall || This '''shall''' not be viewed kindly. || You '''shall''' not pass. || – |
||
|- |
|- |
||
| should || That '''should''' be surprising. || You '''should''' stop that. || |
| should || That '''should''' be surprising. || You '''should''' stop that. || – |
||
|- |
|- |
||
| will || She '''will''' try to lie. || |
| will || She '''will''' try to lie. || – || – |
||
|- |
|- |
||
| would || Nothing '''would''' accomplish that. || |
| would || Nothing '''would''' accomplish that. || – || – |
||
|} |
|||
The verbs in this list all have the following characteristics: |
|||
::#They are [[auxiliary verb]]s, which means they allow [[subject-auxiliary inversion]] and can take the negation ''not'', |
|||
::#They convey functional meaning, |
|||
::#They are defective insofar as they cannot be inflected, nor do they appear in [[non-finite verb|non-finite]] form (i.e. not as infinitives, gerunds, or participles), |
|||
::#They are nevertheless always [[finite verb|finite]] and thus appear as the root verb in their clause, and |
|||
::#They [[subcategorization|subcategorize]] for an infinitive, i.e. they take an infinitive as their complement |
|||
The verbs/expressions ''dare'', ''ought to'', ''had better'', and ''need not'' behave like modal auxiliaries to a large extent, although they are not [[productivity (linguistics)|productive]] (in linguistics, the extent commonly or frequently used) in the role to the same extent as those listed here. Furthermore, there are numerous other verbs that can be viewed as modal verbs insofar as they clearly express modality in the same way that the verbs in this list do, e.g. ''appear'', ''have to'', ''seem'' etc. In the strict sense, though, these other verbs do not qualify as modal verbs in English because they do not allow subject-auxiliary inversion, nor do they allow negation with ''not''. Verbs such as ''be able to'' and ''be about to'' allow subject-auxiliary inversion and do not require do support in negatives but these are rarely classified as modal verbs because they inflect and are a modal construction involving the verb ''to be'' which itself is not a modal verb. If, however, one defines ''modal verb'' entirely in terms of meaning contribution, then these other verbs would also be modals and so the list here would have to be greatly expanded. |
|||
====Defectiveness==== |
|||
In English, modals form a very distinctive class of verbs. They are auxiliary verbs as are ''be'', ''do'', and ''have'', but unlike those three verbs, they are grammatically ''[[Defective verb|defective]]''. For example, ''have'' → ''has'' vs. ''should'' → ''*shoulds'' and ''do'' → ''did'' vs. ''may'' → ''*mayed'', etc. In clauses that contain two or more verbs, any modal that is present always appears leftmost in the verb [[catena (linguistics)|catena]] (chain). Thus, modal verbs are always [[Finite verb|finite]] and, in terms of syntactic structure, the root of their containing clause. The following [[dependency grammar]] trees illustrate this point: |
|||
::[[File:Modal trees 1'.png|Modal trees 1]] |
|||
The verb catenae are in blue. The modal auxiliary in both trees is the root of the entire sentence. The verb that is immediately subordinate to the modal is always an infinitive. The fact that modal auxiliaries in English are necessarily finite means that within the minimal finite clause that contains them, they can never be subordinate to another verb, e.g., |
|||
::a. Sam '''may''' have done his homework. <small>''The modal auxiliary '''may''' is the root of the clause.''</small> |
|||
::b. *Sam has '''may''' done his homework. <small>''Fails because the modal auxiliary '''may''' is not the root of the clause.''</small> |
|||
::a. Jim '''will''' be helped. <small>''The modal auxiliary '''will''' is the root of the clause.''</small> |
|||
::b. *Jim is '''will''' be helped. <small>''Fails because the modal auxiliary '''will''' is not the root of the clause.''</small> |
|||
Such limits in form (tense, etc.) and syntactic distribution of this class of verbs are motivation of the designation ''defective''. Other constructions are frequently used for such a "missing" form in place of a modal, including "be able to" for ''can'', "have to" for ''must'', and "be going to" for ''shall'' and ''will'' (designating the future). It is of note that in this way, English modal auxiliaries are unlike modal verbs in other closely related languages; see below. |
|||
====Do constructions==== |
|||
In English, main verbs but not modal verbs always require the auxiliary verb ''do'' to form negations and questions, and ''do'' can be used with main verbs to form emphatic affirmative statements. (Neither negations nor questions in early modern English used to require ''do''.) Since modal verbs are auxiliary verbs as is ''do'', in questions and negations they appear in the word order the same as ''do''. |
|||
{|class="wikitable" |
|||
! || normal verb || modal verb |
|||
|- |
|||
| ''affirmative'' || he works || he '''can''' work |
|||
|- |
|||
| ''negation'' || he '''does not''' work || he '''cannot''' work |
|||
|- |
|||
| ''emphatic'' || he '''does''' work hard|| he '''can''' work hard |
|||
|- |
|||
| ''question'' || '''does''' he work here? || '''can''' he work at all? |
|||
|- |
|||
| ''negation + question'' || '''does''' he '''not''' work here? || '''can''' he '''not''' work at all? |
|||
|} |
|||
(German, Afrikaans, and West Frisian never use "do" as an auxiliary verb for any function; Low Saxon and Dutch use "do" as an auxiliary, but only in colloquial speech in Dutch, whereas in Low Saxon it is of very common use, sometimes to a point where it is comparable to the way the English makes use of it). |
|||
===Comparison with other Germanic languages=== |
|||
The English modal verbs share many features and often [[etymology]] with modal verbs in other Germanic languages. |
|||
The table below lists some modal verbs with common roots in the West Germanic languages [[English language|English]], [[German language|German]], [[Dutch language|Dutch]], [[Low German|Low Saxon]], [[West Frisian language|West Frisian]] and [[Afrikaans]], the North Germanic languages [[Danish language|Danish]], [[Swedish language|Swedish]] and [[Faroese language|Faroese]], and the extinct East Germanic [[Gothic language]]. This list comprises [[cognate]]s, which evolved from old Germanic modal auxiliaries. It does not attempt to be complete for any one of the modern languages, as some verbs have lost or gained modal character later in separate languages. ([[English modal auxiliary verb]] provides an exhaustive list of modal verbs in English, and [[German verb#Modal verbs]] provides a list for German, with translations. [[Dutch verbs#Irregular verbs]] gives conjugations for some Dutch modals.) |
|||
Words in the same row of the table below share the same [[etymology|etymological]] root. Because of [[semantic drift]], however, words in the same row may no longer be proper translations of each other. For instance, the English and German verbs ''will'' are completely different in meaning, and the German one has nothing to do with constructing the future tense. These words are [[false friend]]s. |
|||
In (modern) English, Afrikaans, Danish, and Swedish, the plural and singular forms are identical. For German, Dutch, Low Saxon, West Frisian, Faroese and Gothic, both a (not ''the'') plural and a singular form of the verb are shown. Forms within parentheses are obsolete, rare, and/or mainly dialectal in the modern languages. |
|||
{|class="wikitable" |
|||
'''Etymological relatives (not translations)''' |
|||
! English || German || Dutch || Low Saxon || West Frisian || Afrikaans || Danish<ref>The forms are given as in §85 and in §84 2 of ''Dansk grammatik'' (in Danish) by Niels Nielsen, [[Gleerups förlag]], 1959, but with modernised orthography.</ref> || Swedish || Faroese<ref>The forms are given as in §77 and in §83 h) of ''An introduction to modern Faroese'' by W. B. Lockwood, Thórshavn, 1977.</ref> || Gothic<ref>These first person forms are given as in §96 and in §101 of ''Germanische Sprachwissenschaft, II. Formenlehre'' (in German) by Hans Krahe, [[Sammlung Göschen]], Band 780, 1942.</ref> |
|||
|- |
|||
| can || ''können, kann'' || ''kunnen, kan'' || ''könen, kann'' || ''kinne, kin'' || ''kan'' || ''kan'' || ''kan'' || ''kunna, kann'' || ''kunnum, kann'' |
|||
|- |
|||
| shall || ''sollen, soll'' || ''zullen, zal'' || ''schölen, schall'' || ''sille, sil'' || ''sal'' || ''skal'' || ''ska(ll)'' || ''skula, skal'' || ''skulum, skal'' |
|||
|- |
|||
| will<!-- Do not change this! 'want' is incorrect: this is a table of cognates, not translations. --> || ''wollen, will''<!-- Do not change this, either! --> || ''willen, wil'' || ''wüllen, will'' || ''wolle, wol'' || ''wil'' || ''vil'' || ''vill'' || ''vilja, vil'' || ''wileima, wiljau''<ref>Krahe (op.cit., §101) treats this verb separately. He notes, that in Gothic the endings are the usual ones for the ''[[optative]]'' preterite, and assumes that this reflects the original situation. Later, he argues, in e.g. [[Anglo-Saxon]], they were replaced by the ordinary indicative preterite forms, under influence of the preterite-present verbs proper.</ref> |
|||
|- |
|||
| (mote), must || ''müssen, muss'' || ''moeten, moet'' || ''möten, mutt'' || ''moatte, moat'' || ''moet'' || ''måste'' || ''måste'' || ''?'' || ''-,gamōt'' |
|||
|- |
|||
| may<!-- please do not change this (they are historically the same modal verb, in spite of semantic shifts; don't worry about the translation) --> || ''mögen, mag'' || ''mogen, mag'' || ''mögen, mag'' || ''meie, mei'' || ''mag'' || ''må'' || ''(må)'' || ''mega, má'' || ''magum, mag'' |
|||
|- |
|||
| (wit) || ''wissen, weiß'' || ''weten, weet'' || ''?'' || ''?'' || weet || ''ved'' || ''vet'' || ''vita, veit'' || ''witum, wait'' |
|||
|- |
|||
| (tharf<ref>Obsolete or dialectal, confused with and replaced by ''dare'' (''[[Oxford English Dictionary|OED]]'', s.v. †tharf, thar, ''v.'' and dare, ''v.''<sup>1</sup>).</ref>)<!-- please do not change this --> || ''dürfen, darf'' || ''durven, durf'' || ''dörven, dörv'' || ''doarre, doar'' || ''durf'' || ''?'' || ''(torv)'' || ''?'' || ''þaúrbum, þarf'' |
|||
|} |
|||
The English ''could'' is the preterite form of ''can''; ''should'' is the preterite of ''shall''; ''might'' is the preterite of ''may''; and ''must'' was originally the preterite form of ''mote''. (This is ignoring the use of "may" as a vestige of the [[subjunctive]] mood in English.) These verbs have acquired an independent, present tense meaning. The German verb ''möchten'' is sometimes taught as a vocabulary word and included in the list of modal verbs, but it is actually the past subjunctive form of ''mögen''. |
|||
The English verbs '''''dare''''' and '''''need''''' have both a modal use (''he dare not do it''), and a non-modal use (''he doesn't dare to do it''). The Dutch, West Frisian, and Afrikaans verbs ''durven'', ''doarre'', and ''durf'' are not considered modals (but they are there, nevertheless) because their modal use has disappeared, but they have a non-modal use analogous with the English ''dare''. Some English modals consist of more than one word, such as "had better" and "would rather".<ref>[http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs/modals.ps Ian Jacobs. English Modal Verbs. August 1995]</ref> |
|||
Owing to their modal characteristics, modal verbs are among a very select group of verbs in Afrikaans that have a [[preterite]] form. Most verbs in Afrikaans only have a present and a perfect form. |
|||
Some other English verbs express modality although they are not modal verbs because they are not auxiliaries, including '''''want''''', '''''wish''''', '''''hope''''', and '''''like'''''. All of these differ from the modals in English (with the disputed exception of '''ought''' (to)) in that the associated main verb takes its long infinitive form with the particle ''to'' rather than its short form without ''to'', and in that they are fully conjugated. |
|||
====Morphology and syntax==== |
|||
Germanic modal verbs are [[preterite-present verb]]s, which means that their present tense has the form of a vocalic preterite. This is the source of the vowel alternation between singular and plural in German, Dutch and Low Saxon. Because of their preterite origins, modal verbs also lack the suffix (-s in modern English, -t in German, Dutch, Low Saxon and West Frisian, -r in the [[North Germanic languages]], -þ in Gothic) that would normally mark the third person singular form. Afrikaans verbs do not conjugate, and thus Afrikaans non-modal verbs do not have a suffix either: |
|||
{|class="wikitable" |
|||
! || normal verb || modal verb |
|||
|- |
|||
| ''English'' || he work'''s''' || he can |
|||
|- |
|||
| ''German'' || er arbeite'''t''' || er kann |
|||
|- |
|||
| ''Dutch'' || hij werk'''t''' || hij kan |
|||
|- |
|||
| ''Low Saxon'' || he wark'''t''' || he kann |
|||
|- |
|||
| ''West Frisian'' || hy wurke'''t''' || hy kin |
|||
|- |
|||
| ''Afrikaans'' || hy werk || hy kan |
|||
|- |
|||
| ''Danish'' || han arbejder || han kan |
|||
|- |
|||
| ''Swedish'' || han arbetar || han kan |
|||
|- |
|||
| ''Faroese'' || hann arbeiðir || hann kann |
|||
|- |
|||
| ''Gothic'' || is waurkei'''þ''' || is kann |
|||
|} |
|||
The main verb that is modified by the modal verb is in the infinitive form and is ''not'' preceded by the word ''to'' (German: ''zu'', Low Saxon ''to'', Dutch and West Frisian ''te'', Afrikaans ''om te'',). There are verbs that may seem somewhat similar in meaning to modal verbs (e.g. ''like'', ''want''), but the construction with such verbs would be different: |
|||
{|class="wikitable" |
|||
! || normal verb || modal verb |
|||
|- |
|||
| ''English'' || he tries '''to''' work || he can work |
|||
|- |
|||
| ''German'' || er versucht '''zu''' arbeiten || er kann arbeiten |
|||
|- |
|||
| ''Dutch'' || hij probeert '''te''' werken || hij kan werken |
|||
|- |
|||
| ''Low Saxon'' || he versöcht '''to''' warken || he kann warken |
|||
|- |
|||
| ''West Frisian'' || hy besiket '''te''' wurkje || hy kin wurkje |
|||
|- |
|||
| ''Afrikaans'' || hy probeer '''om te''' werk || hy kan werk |
|||
|- |
|||
| ''Gothic'' || is sokeiþ '''du''' waurkjan || is kann waurkjan |
|||
|} |
|||
Similarly, in North Germanic languages, the [[Grammatical particle|infinitive marker]] (''at'' in Danish and Faroese, ''att'' in Swedish) is not used for main verbs with modal auxiliaries: ''Han kan arbejde'', ''han kan arbeta'', ''hann kann arbeiða'' (he can work). However, there also are some other constructions where the infinitive marker need not be employed, as in Swedish ''han försöker arbeta'' (he tries to work). |
|||
====Less defective==== |
|||
In English, modal verbs are called [[defective verb]]s because of their incomplete conjugation: they have a narrower range of functions than ordinary verbs. For example, most have no infinitive or gerund. |
|||
In many Germanic languages, the modal verbs may be used in more functions than in English. In German, for instance, modals can occur as non-finite verbs, which means they can be subordinate to other verbs in verb [[catena (linguistics)|catenae]]; they need not appear as the clause root. In Swedish, some (but not all) modal verbs have infinitive forms. This for instance enables catenae containing several modal auxiliaries. The modal verbs are underlined in the following table. |
|||
::::::::{|class="wikitable" |
|||
! Language || Sentence |
|||
|- |
|||
| ''English'' || he <u>must</u> be able to do it |
|||
|- |
|||
| ''German'' || er <u>muss</u> das tun <u>können</u> |
|||
|- |
|- |
||
|ought |
|||
| ''Swedish'' || han <u>måste</u> <u>kunna</u> göra det |
|||
|That '''ought''' to be correct. |
|||
|You '''ought''' to be kind. |
|||
|} |
|} |
||
The Swedish sentence translated word by word would yield the impossible "*he must can do it"; the same goes for the German one, except that German has a different word order in such clauses, yielding "*he must it do can". |
|||
==In other languages== |
==In other languages== |
||
{{expand section|modal verbs are used in several Slavic languages|date=June 2023}} |
|||
===Hawaiian |
===Hawaiian Pidgin=== |
||
[[Hawaiian |
[[Hawaiian Pidgin]] is a [[creole language]] most of whose vocabulary, but not grammar, is drawn from English. As is generally the case with creole languages, it is an [[isolating language]] and modality is typically indicated by the use of invariant pre-verbal auxiliaries.<ref>Sakoda, Kent, and Jeff Siegel, ''Pidgin Grammar'', Bess Press, 2003.</ref> The invariance of the modal auxiliaries to person, number, and tense makes them analogous to modal auxiliaries in English. However, as in most creoles the main verbs are also invariant; the auxiliaries are distinguished by their use in combination with (followed by) a main verb.{{citation needed|date=June 2023}} |
||
There are various preverbal modal auxiliaries: '' |
There are various preverbal modal auxiliaries: ''Kaen'' "can", ''laik'' "want to", ''gata'' "have got to", ''haeftu'' "have to", ''baeta'' "had better", ''sapostu'' "am/is/are supposed to". Unlike in Germanic languages, tense markers are used, albeit infrequently, before modals: ''Gon kaen kam'' "is going to be able to come". ''Waz'' "was" can indicate past tense before the future/volitional marker ''gon'' and the modal ''sapostu'': ''Ai waz gon lift weits'' "I was gonna lift weights"; ''Ai waz sapostu go'' "I was supposed to go".{{citation needed|date=June 2023}} |
||
===Hawaiian=== |
===Hawaiian=== |
||
[[Hawaiian language|Hawaiian]], like the [[Polynesian languages]] generally, is an [[isolating language]], so its verbal grammar exclusively relies on unconjugated verbs. Thus, as with creoles, there is no real distinction between modal auxiliaries and lexically modal main verbs that are followed by another main verb. Hawaiian has an imperative indicated by ''e'' + verb (or in the negative by ''mai'' + verb). Some examples of the treatment of modality are as follows:<ref>Alexander, W. D., ''Introduction to Hawaiian Grammar'', Dover Publ., 2004</ref>{{rp|pp. 38–39}} ''Pono'' conveys obligation/necessity as in ''He pono i |
[[Hawaiian language|Hawaiian]], like the [[Polynesian languages]] generally, is an [[isolating language]], so its verbal grammar exclusively relies on unconjugated verbs. Thus, as with creoles, there is no real distinction between modal auxiliaries and lexically modal main verbs that are followed by another main verb. Hawaiian has an imperative indicated by ''e'' + verb (or in the negative by ''mai'' + verb). Some examples of the treatment of modality are as follows:<ref>Alexander, W. D., ''Introduction to Hawaiian Grammar'', Dover Publ., 2004</ref>{{rp|pp. 38–39}} ''Pono'' conveys obligation/necessity as in ''He pono i nā kamali'i a pau e maka'ala'', "It's right for children all to beware", "All children should/must beware"; ability is conveyed by ''hiki'' as in ''Ua hiki i keia kamali'i ke heluhelu'' "Has enabled to this child to read", "This child can read". |
||
===French=== |
===French=== |
||
[[French language|French]], like some other [[Romance languages]], does not have a grammatically distinct class of modal auxiliary verbs |
[[French language|French]], like some other [[Romance languages]], does not have a grammatically distinct class of modal auxiliary verbs and expresses modality using lexical verbs followed by infinitives: for example, ''pouvoir'' "to be able" (''Je peux aller'', "I can go"), ''devoir'' "to have an obligation" (''Je dois aller'', "I must go"), and ''vouloir'' "to want" (''Je veux aller'' "I want to go"). |
||
===Italian=== |
===Italian=== |
||
Modal verbs in |
Modal verbs in [[Italian language|Italian]] form a distinct class (''verbi modali'' or ''verbi servili'').<ref name="verbi-servili-treccani">[http://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/verbi-servili_%28La-grammatica-italiana%29/ Verbi servili – Treccani]</ref> They can be easily recognized by the fact that they are the only group of verbs that does not have a fixed [[auxiliary verb]] for forming the [[Perfect (grammar)|perfect]], but they can inherit it from the verb they accompany – Italian can have two different auxiliary verbs for forming the perfect, ''avere'' ("to have"), and ''essere'' ("to be"). There are in total four modal verbs in Italian: ''potere'' ("can"), ''volere'' ("want"), ''dovere'' ("must"), ''sapere'' ("to be able to"). Modal verbs in Italian are the only group of verbs allowed to follow this particular behavior. When they do not accompany other verbs, they all use ''avere'' ("to have") as a helping verb for forming the perfect. |
||
For example, the helping verb for the perfect of ''potere'' ("can") is ''avere'' ("have"), as in ''ho potuto'' (lit. "I-have been-able","I could"); nevertheless, when used together with a verb that has as auxiliary ''essere'' ("be"), ''potere'' inherits the auxiliary of the second verb. For example: '''''ho''' visitato il castello'' (lit. "I-have visited the castle") / '''''ho potuto''' visitare il castello'' (lit. "I-have been-able to-visit the castle","I could visit the castle"); but '''''sono''' scappato'' (lit. "I-am escaped", "I have escaped") / '''''sono potuto''' scappare'' (lit. "I-am been-able to-escape", "I could escape"). |
For example, the helping verb for the perfect of ''potere'' ("can") is ''avere'' ("have"), as in ''ho potuto'' (lit. "I-have been-able","I could"); nevertheless, when used together with a verb that has as auxiliary ''essere'' ("be"), ''potere'' inherits the auxiliary of the second verb. For example: '''''ho''' visitato il castello'' (lit. "I-have visited the castle") / '''''ho potuto''' visitare il castello'' (lit. "I-have been-able to-visit the castle","I could visit the castle"); but '''''sono''' scappato'' (lit. "I-am escaped", "I have escaped") / '''''sono potuto''' scappare'' (lit. "I-am been-able to-escape", "I could escape"). |
||
Note that, like in other [[Romance languages]], there is no distinction between an [[ |
Note that, like in other [[Romance languages]], there is no distinction between an [[infinitive]] and a [[Uses of English verb forms#Bare infinitive|bare infinitive]] in Italian, hence modal verbs are not the only group of verbs that accompanies an infinitive (where in English instead there would be the form with "to" – see for example ''Ho preferito '''scappare''''' ("I have preferred ''' to escape'''"). Thus, while in English a modal verb can be easily recognized by the sole presence of a bare infinitive, there is no easy way to distinguish the four traditional Italian modal verbs from other verbs, except the fact that the former are the only verbs that do not have a fixed auxiliary verb for the perfect. For this reason some grammars consider also the verbs ''osare'' ("to dare to"), ''preferire'' ("to prefer to"), ''desiderare'' ("to desire to"), ''solere'' ("to use to") as modal verbs, despite these always use ''avere'' as auxiliary verb for the perfect.<ref name="verbi-servili-treccani" />{{citation needed|date=June 2023}} |
||
===Mandarin Chinese=== |
===Mandarin Chinese=== |
||
| Line 236: | Line 96: | ||
===Spanish=== |
===Spanish=== |
||
[[Spanish language|Spanish]], like French, uses fully conjugated verbs followed by infinitives. For example, ''poder'' "to be able" (''Puedo andar'', "I can walk"), ''deber'' "to have an obligation" (''Debo andar'', "I |
[[Spanish language|Spanish]], like French, uses fully conjugated verbs followed by infinitives. For example, ''poder'' "to be able" (''Puedo andar'', "I can walk"), ''deber'' "to have an obligation" (''Debo andar'', "I must walk"), and ''querer'' "to want" (''Quiero andar'' "I want to walk"). |
||
The correct use of ''andar'' in these examples would be reflexive. "''Puedo andar''" means "I can walk", "''Puedo irme''" means "I can |
The correct use of ''andar'' in these examples would be reflexive. "''Puedo andar''" means "I can walk", "''Puedo irme''" means "I can leave" or "I can take myself off/away". The same applies to the other examples.{{citation needed|date=June 2023}} |
||
==See also== |
==See also== |
||
| Line 245: | Line 105: | ||
* [[Grammatical mood]] |
* [[Grammatical mood]] |
||
* [[Modal logic]] |
* [[Modal logic]] |
||
* [[Modal word]] |
|||
==References== |
==References== |
||
{{reflist}} |
{{reflist}} |
||
[https://almancaogren.club/almanca-modalverben-detayli-konu-anlatimi-ornekler/ Modalverben] |
|||
==Bibliography== |
==Bibliography== |
||
* [http://www.celineromero.com/eng-thesis_html/thesis.html The Syntactic Evolution of Modal Verbs in the History of English] |
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20071021031028/http://www.celineromero.com/eng-thesis_html/thesis.html The Syntactic Evolution of Modal Verbs in the History of English] |
||
* Walter W. Skeat, The Concise Dictionary of English Etymology (1993), Wordsworth Editions Ltd. |
* Walter W. Skeat, The Concise Dictionary of English Etymology (1993), Wordsworth Editions Ltd. |
||
{Expand section|date=May 2008} |
{{Expand section|date=May 2008}} |
||
==External links== |
==External links== |
||
*[http://www.deutsched.com/Grammar/Lessons/0108modalverbs.php German Modal Verbs] A grammar lesson covering the German modal verbs |
* [http://www.deutsched.com/Grammar/Lessons/0108modalverbs.php German Modal Verbs] A grammar lesson covering the German modal verbs |
||
*{{in lang|pt}} [http://www.infoescola.com/ingles/verbos-modais-modal-verbs/ Modal Verbs] |
* {{in lang|pt}} [http://www.infoescola.com/ingles/verbos-modais-modal-verbs/ Modal Verbs] |
||
*[http://www.englishpage.com/modals/modalintro.html Modal Verb Tutorial] |
* [http://www.englishpage.com/modals/modalintro.html Modal Verb Tutorial] |
||
* [[Wikiversity:Explication of modalities]] |
|||
{{lexical categories|state=collapsed}} |
{{lexical categories|state=collapsed}} |
||
{{DEFAULTSORT:Modal Verb}} |
{{DEFAULTSORT:Modal Verb}} |
||
[[Category:Linguistic modality|Verb]] |
|||
[[Category:Verb types]] |
[[Category:Verb types]] |
||
[[Category:Philosophy of language]] |
|||
Latest revision as of 12:08, 29 October 2024
A modal verb is a type of verb that contextually indicates a modality such as a likelihood, ability, permission, request, capacity, suggestion, order, obligation, necessity, possibility or advice. Modal verbs generally accompany the base (infinitive) form of another verb having semantic content.[1] In English, the modal verbs commonly used are can, could, may, might, shall, should, will, would, and ought.
Function
[edit]Modal verbs have a wide variety of communicative functions, but these functions can generally be related to a scale ranging from possibility ("may") to necessity ("must"), in terms of one of the following types of modality:
- epistemic modality, concerned with the theoretical possibility of propositions being true or not true (including likelihood and certainty)
- deontic modality, concerned with possibility and necessity in terms of freedom to act (including permission and duty)
- dynamic modality,[2] which may be distinguished from deontic modality in that, with dynamic modality, the conditioning factors are internal – the subject's own ability or willingness to act[3]
The following sentences illustrate epistemic and deontic uses of the English modal verb must:
- epistemic: You must be starving. ("I think it is almost a certainty that you are starving.")
- deontic: You must leave now. ("You are required to leave now.")
An ambiguous case is You must speak Spanish. The primary meaning would be the deontic meaning ("You are required to speak Spanish.") but this may be intended epistemically ("It is surely the case that you speak Spanish"). Epistemic modals can be analyzed as raising verbs, while deontic modals can be analyzed as control verbs.
Epistemic usages of modals tend to develop from deontic usages.[4] For example, the inferred certainty sense of English must developed after the strong obligation sense; the probabilistic sense of should developed after the weak obligation sense; and the possibility senses of may and can developed later than the permission or ability sense. Two typical sequences of evolution of modal meanings are:
- internal mental ability → internal ability → root possibility (internal or external ability) → permission and epistemic possibility
- obligation → probability
English
[edit]The following table lists English modal verbs and various senses in which they are used:
Modal verb Epistemic sense Deontic sense Dynamic sense can That can indeed hinder. You can, if you are allowed. She can really sing. could That could happen soon. – He could swim when he was young. may That may be a problem. May I stay? – might The weather might improve. Might I help you? – must It must be hot outside. Sam must go to school. – shall This shall not be viewed kindly. You shall not pass. – should That should be surprising. You should stop that. – will She will try to lie. – – would Nothing would accomplish that. – – ought That ought to be correct. You ought to be kind.
In other languages
[edit]![[icon]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1c/Wiki_letter_w_cropped.svg/40px-Wiki_letter_w_cropped.svg.png){kind=small} | This section needs expansion with: modal verbs are used in several Slavic languages. You can help by adding to it. (June 2023) |
Hawaiian Pidgin
[edit]Hawaiian Pidgin is a creole language most of whose vocabulary, but not grammar, is drawn from English. As is generally the case with creole languages, it is an isolating language and modality is typically indicated by the use of invariant pre-verbal auxiliaries.[5] The invariance of the modal auxiliaries to person, number, and tense makes them analogous to modal auxiliaries in English. However, as in most creoles the main verbs are also invariant; the auxiliaries are distinguished by their use in combination with (followed by) a main verb.[citation needed]
There are various preverbal modal auxiliaries: Kaen "can", laik "want to", gata "have got to", haeftu "have to", baeta "had better", sapostu "am/is/are supposed to". Unlike in Germanic languages, tense markers are used, albeit infrequently, before modals: Gon kaen kam "is going to be able to come". Waz "was" can indicate past tense before the future/volitional marker gon and the modal sapostu: Ai waz gon lift weits "I was gonna lift weights"; Ai waz sapostu go "I was supposed to go".[citation needed]
Hawaiian
[edit]Hawaiian, like the Polynesian languages generally, is an isolating language, so its verbal grammar exclusively relies on unconjugated verbs. Thus, as with creoles, there is no real distinction between modal auxiliaries and lexically modal main verbs that are followed by another main verb. Hawaiian has an imperative indicated by e + verb (or in the negative by mai + verb). Some examples of the treatment of modality are as follows:[6]: pp. 38–39 Pono conveys obligation/necessity as in He pono i nā kamali'i a pau e maka'ala, "It's right for children all to beware", "All children should/must beware"; ability is conveyed by hiki as in Ua hiki i keia kamali'i ke heluhelu "Has enabled to this child to read", "This child can read".
French
[edit]French, like some other Romance languages, does not have a grammatically distinct class of modal auxiliary verbs and expresses modality using lexical verbs followed by infinitives: for example, pouvoir "to be able" (Je peux aller, "I can go"), devoir "to have an obligation" (Je dois aller, "I must go"), and vouloir "to want" (Je veux aller "I want to go").
Italian
[edit]Modal verbs in Italian form a distinct class (verbi modali or verbi servili).[7] They can be easily recognized by the fact that they are the only group of verbs that does not have a fixed auxiliary verb for forming the perfect, but they can inherit it from the verb they accompany – Italian can have two different auxiliary verbs for forming the perfect, avere ("to have"), and essere ("to be"). There are in total four modal verbs in Italian: potere ("can"), volere ("want"), dovere ("must"), sapere ("to be able to"). Modal verbs in Italian are the only group of verbs allowed to follow this particular behavior. When they do not accompany other verbs, they all use avere ("to have") as a helping verb for forming the perfect.
For example, the helping verb for the perfect of potere ("can") is avere ("have"), as in ho potuto (lit. "I-have been-able","I could"); nevertheless, when used together with a verb that has as auxiliary essere ("be"), potere inherits the auxiliary of the second verb. For example: ho visitato il castello (lit. "I-have visited the castle") / ho potuto visitare il castello (lit. "I-have been-able to-visit the castle","I could visit the castle"); but sono scappato (lit. "I-am escaped", "I have escaped") / sono potuto scappare (lit. "I-am been-able to-escape", "I could escape").
Note that, like in other Romance languages, there is no distinction between an infinitive and a bare infinitive in Italian, hence modal verbs are not the only group of verbs that accompanies an infinitive (where in English instead there would be the form with "to" – see for example Ho preferito scappare ("I have preferred to escape"). Thus, while in English a modal verb can be easily recognized by the sole presence of a bare infinitive, there is no easy way to distinguish the four traditional Italian modal verbs from other verbs, except the fact that the former are the only verbs that do not have a fixed auxiliary verb for the perfect. For this reason some grammars consider also the verbs osare ("to dare to"), preferire ("to prefer to"), desiderare ("to desire to"), solere ("to use to") as modal verbs, despite these always use avere as auxiliary verb for the perfect.[7][citation needed]
Mandarin Chinese
[edit]Mandarin Chinese is an isolating language without inflections. As in English, modality can be indicated either lexically, with main verbs such as yào "want" followed by another main verb, or with auxiliary verbs. In Mandarin the auxiliary verbs have six properties that distinguish them from main verbs:[8]: pp.173–174
- They must co-occur with a verb (or an understood verb).
- They cannot be accompanied by aspect markers.
- They cannot be modified by intensifiers such as "very".
- They cannot be nominalized (used in phrases meaning, for example, "one who can")
- They cannot occur before the subject.
- They cannot take a direct object.
The complete list of modal auxiliary verbs[8]: pp.182–183 consists of
- three meaning "should",
- four meaning "be able to",
- two meaning "have permission to",
- one meaning "dare",
- one meaning "be willing to",
- four meaning "must" or "ought to", and
- one meaning "will" or "know how to".
Spanish
[edit]Spanish, like French, uses fully conjugated verbs followed by infinitives. For example, poder "to be able" (Puedo andar, "I can walk"), deber "to have an obligation" (Debo andar, "I must walk"), and querer "to want" (Quiero andar "I want to walk").
The correct use of andar in these examples would be reflexive. "Puedo andar" means "I can walk", "Puedo irme" means "I can leave" or "I can take myself off/away". The same applies to the other examples.[citation needed]
See also
[edit]References
[edit]- ^ Palmer, F. R., Mood and Modality, Cambridge University Presents, 2001, p. 33
- ^ A Short Overview of English Syntax (Rodney Huddleston), section 6.5d
- ^ Palmer, op. cit., p. 70. The subsequent text shows that the intended definitions were transposed.
- ^ Bybee, Joan; Perkins, Revere; and Pagliuca, William. The Evolution of Grammar, Univ. of Chicago Press, 1994, pp.192-199
- ^ Sakoda, Kent, and Jeff Siegel, Pidgin Grammar, Bess Press, 2003.
- ^ Alexander, W. D., Introduction to Hawaiian Grammar, Dover Publ., 2004
- ^ a b Verbi servili – Treccani
- ^ a b Li, Charles N., and Sandra A. Thomson, Mandarin Chinese: A Functional Reference Grammar, 1989.
Bibliography
[edit]- The Syntactic Evolution of Modal Verbs in the History of English
- Walter W. Skeat, The Concise Dictionary of English Etymology (1993), Wordsworth Editions Ltd.
| This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (May 2008) |
External links
[edit]- German Modal Verbs A grammar lesson covering the German modal verbs
- (in Portuguese) Modal Verbs
- Modal Verb Tutorial
- Wikiversity:Explication of modalities