Cover not available
Article published In:
English World-Wide
Vol. 41:3 (2020) ► pp.267–294

A socio­linguistic perspective on the (quasi-)modals of obligation and necessity in Australian English

| University of Derby | La Trobe University
| Macquarie University
This article examines the distribution and socio­linguistic patterning of (quasi-)modals which express strong obligation/necessity, namely must, have to, have got to, got to and need to, in Australian English. Variationist studies in other varieties of English have had contrasting findings in terms of distributions of root forms, as well as their conditioning by social and linguistic factors. The corpus analysis suggests real-time increased use of need to and decrease in have got to through comparison to earlier findings. The variationist analysis shows quasi-modals have to, have got to and got to as sensitive to speaker age and sex, and a recent increase of have to via apparent time modelling. Linguistic conditioning relating to the type of obligation and subject form is also found. The study contributes to socio­linguistic understanding of this large-scale change in English and the place of Australian English amongst other varieties.
Keywords: Australian English, root modality, epistemic modality, quasi-modals, language change, age, sex, apparent time
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1Context and focus
    • 1.2The forms
  • 2.Previous research
    • 2.1In Australian English
    • 2.2Sociolinguistic work in other varieties of English
  • 3.This study
    • 3.1Data
    • 3.2Analysis
  • 4.Results and discussion
    • 4.1Corpus analysis of distribution
    • 4.2Variationist analysis
      • 4.2.1Social factors
      • 4.2.2Linguistic factors
      • 4.2.3Multivariate analysis
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 9 November 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.00051.pen
References (40)
References
Baker, Paul. 2011. “Times May Change, but We Will Always Have Money: Diachronic Variation in Recent British English”. Journal of English Linguistics 391: 65–88. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Close, Joanne and Bas Aarts. 2010. “Current Change in the Modal System of English: A Case Study of Must, Have to and Have Got To ”. In Ursula Lenker, Judith Hurber, and Robert Mailhammer, eds. English Historical Linguistics 2008. Vol. 1: The History of English Verbal and Nominal Constructions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 165–182. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coates, Jennifer. 1983. The Semantics of the Modal Auxiliaries. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Collins, Peter C. 1991. “The Modals of Obligation and Necessity in Australian English”. In Karin Aijmer, and Bengt Altenberg, eds. English Corpus Linguistics: Studies in Honour of Jan Svartvik. London: Longman, 145–165.Google Scholar
2005. “The Modals and Quasi-Modals of Obligation and Necessity in Australian English and Other Englishes”. English World-Wide 261: 249–273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007. “Modal Wars: Some Ascendant Semi-Modals in Australian English”. In Jeff Siegel, John Lynch, and Diana Eades, eds. Language Description, History and Development: Linguistic Indulgence in Memory of Terry Crowley. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 197–208. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009a. Modals and Quasi-Modals in English. Amsterdam: Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009b. “Modals and Quasi-Modals”. In Peter C. Collins, Pam Peters, and Adam Smith, eds. Comparative Studies in Australian and New Zealand English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 73–88. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014. “Quasi-Modals and Modals in Australian English Fiction 1800–1999, with Comparisons across British and American English”. Journal of English Linguistics 421: 7–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Denis, Derek and Alexandra D’Arcy. 2019. “Deriving Homogeneity in a Settler Colonial Variety of English”. American Speech 941: 223–258. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Depraetere, Ilse and Susan Reed. 2006. “Mood and Modality in English”. In Bas Aarts, and April McMahon, eds. Handbook of English Linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell, 269–290. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Downes, William. 1998. Language and Society (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fehringer, Carol and Karen P. Corrigan. 2015. “‘You’ve Got to Sort of Eh Hoy the Geordie Out’: Modals of Obligation and Necessity in Fifty Years of Tyneside English”. English Language and Linguistics 191: 355–381. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1981. Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Hansen, Beke. 2018. Corpus Linguistics and Sociolinguistics: A Study of Variation and Change in the Modal Systems of World Englishes. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoffman, Michol F. and James A. Walker. 2014. “‘Toronto Has Everything’, ‘Toronto’s Got It All’: Ethnolinguistic Dimensions of Have in Toronto English”. Paper presented at New Ways of Analyzing Variation 43, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign and University of Illinois at Chicago.
Huddleston, Rodney and Geoffrey K. Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jankowski, Bridget. 2004. “A Transatlantic Perspective of Variation and Change in English Deontic Modality”. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics 231: 85–113.Google Scholar
Johnson, Daniel Ezra. 2017. Rbrul (Version 3.1.1) <[URL]>.
Krug, Manfred G. 2000. Emerging English Modals: A Corpus-Based Study of Grammaticalization. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Labov, William. 1963. “The Social Motivation of a Sound Change”. Word 191: 273–309. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2001. Principles of Linguistic Change: Social Factors. Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey N. 2013. “Where Have All the Modals Gone? An Essay on the Declining Frequency of Core Modal Auxiliaries in Recent Standard English”. In Juana I. Marín-Arrese, Marta Carretero, Jorge Arús Hita, and Johan van der Auwera, eds. English Modality: Core, Periphery and Evidentiality. Berlin: De Gruyter, 95–115. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey N., Marianne Hundt, Christian Mair, and Nicholas Smith. 2009. Change in Contemporary English: A Grammatical Study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lowry, Richard. 2011–2017. Vassar Stats. Vassar College, Poughkeepsie <[URL]>.
Mair, Christian. 2014. “Do We Got a Difference? Divergent Developments of Semi-Auxiliary (Have) Got (to) in British and American English”. In Marianne Hundt, ed. Late Modern English Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 56–76. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nokkonen, Soili. 2010. “‘How Many Taxis There Needs to Be?’ The Sociolinguistic Variation of Need to in Spoken British English”. Corpora 51: 45–74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Palmer, Frank. 1990. Modality and the English Modals (2nd ed.). London: Longman.Google Scholar
Penry Williams, Cara. 2018. “The Analytic Importance of Metapragmatics in Variationist Methodology: Voicings within Australian English”. Paper presented at Sociolinguistics Symposium 22, University of Auckland.
. 2019a. “Appeals to Semiotic Registers in Ethno-Metapragmatic Accounts of Variation”. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 291: 294–313. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2019b. Folklinguistics and Social Meaning in Australian English. Abingdon: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Penry Williams, Cara and Minna Korhonen. 2018. “Variation and Change in Possession and Root Modality in Australian English: The Declining Fortunes of Have Got ”. Paper presented at Sociolinguistics Symposium 22, University of Auckland.
Smith, Nicholas. 2003. “Changes in the Modals and Semi-Modals of Strong Obligation and Epistemic Necessity in Recent British English”. In Roberta Facchinetti, Frank Palmer, and Manfred Krug, eds. Modality in Contemporary English. Berlin: De Gruyter, 241–266. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A. 2004. “ Have to, Gotta, Must?: Grammaticalisation, Variation and Specialization in English Deontic Modality”. In Hans Lindquist, and Christian Mair, eds. Corpus Approaches to Grammaticalization in English. Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 33–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012. Roots of English: Exploring the History of Dialects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A. and Alexandra D’Arcy. 2007. “The Modals of Obligation/Necessity in Canadian Perspective”. English World-Wide 281: 47–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A. and Jennifer Smith. 2006. “Layering, Competition and a Twist of Fate: Deontic Modality in Dialects of English”. Diachronica 231: 341–380. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tannen, Deborah. 1986. “Introducing Constructed Dialogue in Greek and American Conversational and Literary Narrative”. In Florian Coulmas, ed. Direct and Indirect Speech. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, 311–332. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trousdale, Graeme. 2003. “Simplification and Redistribution: An Account of Modal Verb Usage in Tyneside English”. English World-Wide 241: 271–284. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Walker, James A. and Michol F. Hoffman. 2016. “Ethnolinguistic Variation in Toronto English: Possession and Deontic Modality”. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of American Linguistics Society, Marriott Marquis Washington, DC.
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Travis, Catherine E. & Rena Torres Cacoullos
2023. Form and function covariation: Obligation modals in Australian English. Language Variation and Change 35:3 ► pp. 351 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.