A More Explicit Framework for Evaluating Objectivity and (Inter)Subjectivity in Modality Domain

Authors

  • Gholamreza Medadian University of Isfahan
  • Dariush Nejadansari Mahabadi University of Isfahan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.2478/rela-2018-0003

Keywords:

modality, objectivity, (inter)subjectivity, performativity

Abstract

In this paper we propose a more explicit framework for definition and evaluation of objectivity and (inter)subjectivity in the modality domain. In the proposed operational framework, we make a basic distinction between the modality notions that serve an ideational function (i.e., dynamic modal notions) and those with an interpersonal function (i.e., deontic and epistemic evaluations). The modality notions with ideational and interpersonal functions are content and person-oriented, respectively. While all dynamic modal notions are characterized by objectivity, deontic and epistemic modal notions may display a degree of (inter)subjectivity depending on their embedding context. Our main claim is that (inter)subjectivity can hardly be argued to be the inherent property of certain modality forms and types, but rather it is essentially a contextual effect. We functionally-operationally define (inter)subjectivity as the degree of sharedness an evaluator attributes to an epistemic/deontic evaluation and its related evidence/deontic source. (Inter)subjectivity is realized by (at least) one or a combination of three contextual factors, viz. the embedding syntactic pattern, the linguistic context and the extralinguistic context of a modality marker. Since both descriptive and performative modal evaluations involve a degree of (inter)subjectivity, performativity, which refers to speaker’s current commitment to his evaluation, is viewed as an independent dimension within modal evaluations and plays no part in the expression of (inter)subjectivity.

 

References

Bally, Charles. 1965. Linguistique generale et linguistique francaise. 4e éd, revue et corrigee. Berne.

Benveniste, Emile. 1971. Problems in General Linguistics. Coral Gables, Florida: University of Miami Press.

Bréal, Michel. 1897. Essai de sémantique. Paris: Hachette.

Bybee, Joan L., Revere Dale Perkins, and William Pagliuca. 1994. The evolution of grammar: Tense, aspect, and modality in the languages of the world. University of Chicago Press.

Coates, Jennifer. 1983. The semantics of the modal auxiliaries. London: Groom Helm.

Collins, Peter. 2007. Can/could and may/might in British, American and Australian English: a corpus‐based account. World Englishes 26(4). 474-491.

Collins, Peter. 2009. Modals and Quasi-modals in English. Amsterdam and New York: Rodopi.

Cornillie, Bert. 2009. Evidentiality and epistemic modality: on the close relationship between the two. Functions of language 16(1). 44-62.

De Smet, Hendrik, and Jean-Christophe Verstraete. 2006. Coming to terms with subjectivity. Cognitive Linguistics 17(3). 365-92.

Depraetere, Isle. 2014. Modals and lexically saturated saturation. Journal of Pragmatics 71. 160-177.

Depraetere, Isle. 2016. Modality. In Nick Riemer (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Semantics, 370-386. Routledge.

Foley, William A., and Robert D. Van Valin. 1984. Functional syntax and universal grammar. Cambridge: CUP.

Halliday, Michael. 1970. Functional diversity in language as seen from a consideration of modality and mood in English. Foundations of language 6. 322-361.

Halliday, Michael. 2004. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. 3rd edn. London: Arnold.

Hengeveld, Kees. 1987. Clause structure and modality in Functional Grammar. In Johan van der Auwera and Louis Goossens (eds.), Ins and outs of the predication, 53-66. Dordrecht: Foris.

Hengeveld, Kees. 1988. Illocution, mood and modality in a functional grammar of Spanish. Journal of Semantics 6. 227-69.

Hengeveld, Kees. 1989. Layers and operators in Functional Grammar. Journal of linguistics 25(1). 127-157.

House, Juliane. 2012. Subjectivity in English Lingua Franca Interactions. In Nicole Baumgarten, Inke Du Bois and Juliane House (eds.), Subjectivity in language and in discourse, 139-155. Emerald.

Huddleston, Rodney, and Geoffrey K. Pullum. et al. 2002. The Cambridge grammar of English Language. Cambridge: CUP.

Kratzer, Angelika. 1977. What ‘must’ and ‘can’ must and can mean. Linguistics and philosophy 1(3). 337-355.

Kratzer, Angelika. 2012. Modals and conditionals: New and revised perspectives. vol. 36. Oxford: OUP.

Langacker, Ronald W. 1991. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar: Descriptive Application. vol. 2. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.

Langacker, Ronald W. 2002. Deixis and subjectivity. In Frank Brisard (ed.), Grounding: The Epistemic Footing of Deixis and Reference, 1-28. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Larreya, Paul, and Claude Rivière. 1999. Grammaire explicative de l'anglais. Nouvelle édn. London: Longman.

Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics. Cambridge: CUP.

Lyons, John. 1995. Linguistic Semantics: An Introduction. Cambridge: CUP.

Narrog, Heiko. 2005. On defining modality again. Language Sciences 27. 165-192.

Narrog, Heiko. 2012. Modality, subjectivity, and semantic change: a cross-linguistic perspective. OUP.

Nuyts, Jan. 1992. Aspects of a Cognitive-Pragmatic Theory of Language. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Nuyts, Jan. 1993. Epistemic modal adverbs and adjectives and the layered representation of conceptual and linguistic structure. Linguistics 31. 933-969.

Nuyts, Jan. 2001a. Epistemic modality, language, and conceptualization: A cognitive-pragmatic perspective. vol. 5. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.

Nuyts, Jan. 2001b. Subjectivity as an evidential dimension in epistemic modal expressions. Journal of pragmatics 33(3). 383-400.

Nuyts, Jan. 2005. The modal confusion: On terminology and the concepts behind it. In Klinge, Alex, and Henrik Høeg Müller (eds.), Modality: Studies in form and function, 5-38. London: Equinox.

Nuyts, Jan. 2006. Modality: Overview and linguistic issues. In William Frawley (ed.), The expression of modality, 1-26. Walter de Gruyter.

Nuyts, Jan. 2012. Notions of (inter) subjectivity. English Text Construction 5(1). 53-76.

Nuyts, Jan. 2014. Subjectivity in modality, and beyond. In Andrzej Zuczkowski, Ramona Bongelli, Ilaria Riccioni and Carla Canestrari (eds.), Communicating Certainty and Uncertainty in Medical, Supportive and Scientific Contexts, 13-30. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Palmer, Frank R. 1986. Mood and modality. Cambridge CUP.

Palmer, Frank R. 2001. Mood and modality, 2nd edn. Cambridge: CUP.

Palmer, Frank R. 1990. Modality and the English modals. 2nd edn. London: Longman.

Papafragou, Anna. 2000. Modality: Issues in the semantics-pragmatics interface. Elsevier.

Papafragou, Anna. 2006. Epistemic modality and truth conditions. Lingua 116. 1688-1702.

Perkins, Michael R. 1983. Modal Expressions in English. London: Frances Pinter.

Portner, Paul. 2009. Modality. Oxford: OUP.

Recanati, François. 2004. Literal meaning. CUP.

Salkie, Raphael. 2009. Degrees of modality. In Salkie, Raphael, Pierre Busuttil, and Johan van der Auwera (eds.), Modality in English: Theory and description, vol. 58, 79-103. Walter de Gruyter.

Timotijevic, Jelena. 2009. Another look at modals and subjectivity. In Salkie, Raphael, Pierre Busuttil, and Johan van der Auwera (eds.), Modality in English: Theory and description, vol. 58, 105-22. Walter de Gruyter.

Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1989. On the rise of epistemic meaning: An example of subjectification in semantic change. Language 65. 31-55.

Traugott, Elizabeth Closs, and Ekkehard König. 1991. The semantics pragmatics of grammaticalization revisited. In Traugott, Elizabeth Closs, and Bernd Heine (eds.), Approaches to Grammaticalization, vol. 2, 189-218. John Benjamins Publishing.

Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1995. Subjectification in grammaticalisation. In Stein, Dieter, and Susan Wright (eds.), Subjectivity and Subjectivisation: Linguistic Perspectives, 31-54. Cambridge: CUP.

Traugott, Elizabeth Closs, and Richard B. Dasher. 2002. Regularity in semantic change. Cambridge: CUP.

Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2010. (Inter)subjectivity and (inter)subjectification: a reassessment. In avidse, Kristin, Lieven Vandelanotte, and Hubert Cuyckens (eds.), Subjectification, Intersubjectification and Grammaticalization, 29-71. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Van der Auwera, Johan, and Vladimir A. Plungian. 1998. Modality’s semantic map. Linguistic Typology 2. 79-124.

Verstraete, Jean-Christophe. 2001. Subjective and objective modality: interpersonal and ideational functions in the English modal auxiliary system. Journal of Pragmatics 33. 1505-28.

Downloads

Published

2018-03-30

How to Cite

Medadian, G., & Mahabadi, D. N. (2018). A More Explicit Framework for Evaluating Objectivity and (Inter)Subjectivity in Modality Domain . Research in Language, 16(1), 65-98. https://doi.org/10.2478/rela-2018-0003

Issue

Section

Articles