Cover not available
Article published In:
English World-Wide
Vol. 44:2 (2023) ► pp.276–302

Necessity modal development in Singapore English

An investigation of substratist and contact-grammaticalisation approaches

 | Université Paris Cité
Spoken in a multilingual environment characterised by continuous contacts with other languages, Singapore English (SgE) is a singular object of study. Its modal system has also been developing in independent ways compared to inner-circle varieties, e.g. British English, its historical ancestor. Different approaches have attempted to explain such developments, including the substratist and the grammaticalisation approaches. The present paper explores both these approaches with the aim of examining the role that they may have in the development of the (semi-)modal verbs of necessity in SgE. Using some corpus analysis conducted on informal data, it will be shown why the substratist approach does not seem sufficient to explain the relatively frequent non-epistemic uses of must in SgE. It will be discussed how SgE must could be instead replicating older dynamic uses, typical of Middle English times (1100–1500 CE), according to a process known as replica grammaticalisation as recapitulation (Ziegeler 2014).
Keywords: modality, necessity, modal must , substratum theories, contact-grammaticalisation, Singapore English, variation, corpus analysis, dynamic modality
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background
  • 3.Previous accounts on modality in CSE
    • 3.1 Bao’s (2010) “convergence-to-substratum”
    • 3.2Contact-grammaticalisation theories
  • 4.Data, methods, and terminology
  • 5.Results
    • 5.1RQ1: Does the modal system of necessity in SgE replicate that of Mandarin Chinese?
    • 5.2RQ2: Can Ziegeler’s (2014) theory explain the relatively frequent non-epistemic use of must in SgE today?
    • 5.3RQ3: What is the role and use of the other necessity modals in SgE compared to BrE?
  • 6.Discussion
  • 7.Summary and conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Sources
  • References
Published online: 13 February 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.22019.bas
References (74)
Sources
HardwareZone. 2006. Singapore Press Holdings. <[URL]> (accessed February 10, 2022).
ICE Great Britain. The International Corpus of English. Compiled at University College London <[URL]> (accessed November 25, 2021).
Nihilani, Paroo, Ni Yibin, Anne Pakir, and Vincent Ooi. 2006. The ICE Corpus: The International Corpus of English, Singapore. Release 1. <[URL]> (accessed January 20, 2022)
Salary. 2000. The Rocket Studio, Singapore. <[URL]> (accessed February 15, 2022).
Survey of English Usage. 1998. The ICE Corpus: The International Corpus of English, Great Britain. Release 1. London: University College London. <[URL]> (accessed February 15, 2022).
Ziegeler, Debra, and Amelyn Thompson. 2007–2009. The Flowerpod Corpus.Google Scholar
References
Alsagoff, Lubna. 2010. “English in Singapore: Culture, Capital and Identity in Linguistic Variation”. World Englishes 291: 336–348. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bao, Zhiming. 2005. “The Aspectual System of Singapore English and the Systemic Substratist Explanation”. Journal of Linguistics 411: 237–267. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. “ Must in Singapore English”. Lingua 1201: 1727–1737. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. The Making of Vernacular Singapore English: System, Transfer and Filter. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Byloo, Pieter, and Jan Nuyts. 2014. “Meaning Change in the Dutch Core Modals: (Inter)subjectification in a Grammatical Paradigm”. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 461: 85–116. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burnley, David, and Alison Wiggins, eds. 2005. The Auchinleck Manuscript. Originally published in 1977 by Scolar Press in association with the National Library of Scotland.Google Scholar
“Census of Population 2020 Statistical Release 1”. 2021. Department of Statistics, Ministry of Trade & Industry, Republic of Singapore. <[URL]> (accessed February 2, 2022).
Chambers, Raymond Wilson, and Walter W. Seton, eds. 1914. A Fifteenth-Century Courtesy Book and Two Franciscan Rules. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co.Google Scholar
Chao, Yuen Ren. 1968. A Grammar of Spoken Chinese. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Chen, Weirong. 2020. The Grammar of Southern Min: The Hui’an Dialect. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coates, Jennifer. 1983. The Semantics of Modal Auxiliaries. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Collins, Peter. 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
. 2009. Modals and Quasi-Modals in English. Amsterdam: Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Depraetere, Ilse, and An Verhulst. 2008. “Source of Modality: A Reassessment”. English Language and Linguistics 121: 1–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deterding, David. 2007. Singapore English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Gisborne, Nikolas. 2007. “Dynamic Modality”. SKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics 41: 46–61.Google Scholar
Gregersen, Sune. 2020. Early English Modals: Form, Function and Analogy. LOT, Netherlands Graduate School.Google Scholar
Gupta, Anthea F. 1991. “Almost a Creoloid: Singapore English”. California Linguistic Notes 231: 9–21.Google Scholar
Gupta, Anthea Fraser. 1992. “The Pragmatic Particles of Singapore Colloquial English”. Journal of Pragmatics 181: 31–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K., and Edward McDonald. 2004. “Metafunctional Profile of the Grammar of Chinese”. In Alice Caffarel, James Robert Martin, and Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen, eds. Language Typology: A Functional Perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 305–395. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hansen, Beke. 2018. Corpus Linguistics and Sociolinguistics: A Study of Variation and Change in the Modal System of World Englishes. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd. 1993. Auxiliaries. Cognitive Forces and Grammaticalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd, and Tania Kuteva. 2003. “On Contact-Induced Grammaticalization”. Studies in Language 271: 529–572. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005. Language Contact and Grammatical Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hopper, Paul J., and Elizabeth Closs Traugott. 2003. Grammaticalization (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kachru, Braj B. 1986. The Alchemy of English. University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Kachru, Braj. B., ed. 1992. The Other Tongue: English Across Cultures (2nd ed.). University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Kilgarriff, Adam, Vít Baisa, Jan Bušta, Miloš Jakubíček, Vojtěch Kovář, Jan Michelfeit, Pavel Rychlý, and Vít Suchomel. 2014. “The Sketch Engine: ten years on”. Lexicography 11: 7–36. <[URL]> (accessed February 17, 2022).
Krug, Manfred, and Ole Schützler. 2013. “Recent Change and Grammaticalization”. In Bas Aarts, Geoffrey Leech, Joanne Close, and Jeremy Smith, eds. The Verb Phrase in English: Investigating Recent Language Change with Corpora. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 155–186. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey. 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
. 2014. The Pragmatics of Politeness. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey, Marianne Hundt, Christian Mair, and Nicholas Smith. 2009. Change in Contemporary English: A Grammatical Study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lehmann, Christian. 1985. “Grammaticalization: Synchronic Variation and Diachronic Change”. Lingua e stile 201: 303–318.Google Scholar
Leimgruber, Jakob R. E. 2009. “Modelling Variation in Singapore English”. Ph. D. dissertation, University of Oxford.
Leimgruber, Jakob R. 2013. Singapore English: Structure, Variation, and Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leimgruber, Jakob R. E., Peter Siemund, and Laura Terassa. 2018. “Singaporean Students’ Language Repertoires and Attitudes Revisited”. World Englishes 371: 282–306. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leimgruber, Jakob R., Jun Lie Lim, Wilkinson Gonzales, and Mie Hiramoto. 2020. “Ethnic and Gender Variation in the Use of Colloquial Singapore English Discourse Particles”. English Language and Linguistics 251: 601–620. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lim, Lisa, ed. 2004. Singapore English: A Grammatical Description. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Loureiro-Porto, Lucía. 2019. “Grammaticalization of Semi-Modals of Necessity in Asian Englishes”. English World-Wide 401: 115–142. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matthews, Stephen, and Virginia Yip. 2009. “Contact-Induced Grammaticalization: Evidence from Bilingual Acquisition”. Studies in Language 331: 366–395. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. Cantonese: A Comprehensive Grammar (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Meillet, Antoine. 1915. “Le Renouvellement des Conjonctions”. Annuaire de I’École Pratique des Hautes Études 1915–6. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale. 9–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1958. Linguistique Historique et Linguistique Générale. Paris. Champion.Google Scholar
Narrog, Heiko. 2012. Modality, Subjectivity, and Semantic Change: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nuyts, Jan, Pieter Byloo, and Janneke Diepeveen. 2010. “On Deontic Modality, Directivity, and Mood: The Case of Dutch mogen and moeten ”. Journal of Pragmatics 421: 16–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Palmer, Frank R. 1990. Modality and the English Modals (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Perkins, Michael. 1993. Modal Expressions in English. London: Frances Pinter.Google Scholar
Pietsch, Lukas. 2009. “Hiberno-English Medial-Object Perfects Reconsidered: A Case of Contact-Induced Grammaticalization”. Studies in Language 331: 528–568. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Platt, John T., and Heidi Weber. 1980. English in Singapore and Malaysia: Status, Features, Functions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Platt, John T., Heidi Weber, and Mian Lian Ho. 1984. The New Englishes. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Rissannen, Matti. 1984. The Helsinki Diachronic Corpus of English Texts (HDCET), electronic version. Department of English, University of Helsinki. <[URL]> (accessed February 3, 2022).
Ross, Claudia, and Jin-Heng Sheng Ma. 2006. Modern Mandarin Chinese Grammar: A Practical Guide. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schneider, Edgar W. 2003. “The Dynamics of New Englishes: from Identity Construction to Dialect Birth”. Language 791: 233–281. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007. Postcolonial English: Varieties Around the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siemund, Peter, Monika Edith Schulz, and Martin Schweinberger. 2014. “Studying the Linguistic Ecology of Singapore: A Comparison of College and University Students”. World Englishes 331: 340–362. 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
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1989. “On the Rise of Epistemic Meanings in English: An Example of Subjectification in Semantic Change”. Language 791: 233–281. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van der Auwera, Johan, and Vladimir Plungian. 1998. “Modality’s Semantic Map”. Linguistic Typology 21: 79–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van der Auwera, Johan, Dirk Noël, and Astrid De Wit. 2012. “The Diverging Need (to)’s of Asian Englishes”. In Marianne Hundt, and Ulrike Gut, eds. Mapping Unity and Diversity World-Wide: Corpus-Based Studies of New Englishes. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 54–75. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wee, Lionel. 2011. Language Without rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wiedenhof, Jeroen. 2015. A Grammar of Mandarin. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ziegeler, Debra. 2003a. “On the Zero-Plural in Commercial Singaporean English”. In David Deterding, Adam Brown, and Ee-Ling Low, eds. English in Singapore: Research on Grammar. Singapore: McGraw Hill. 48–57.Google Scholar
. 2003b. “On the Generic Origins of Modality in English”. In David Hart, ed. English Modality in Context. Bern: Peter Lang. 33–69.Google Scholar
. 2012. “On the Interaction of Past Tense and Potentiality in Singaporean Colloquial English”. Language Sciences 341: 229–251. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. “Replica Grammaticalisation as Recapitulation: The Other Side of Contact”. Diachronica 311: 106–141. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. “Converging Grammars: Constructions in Singapore English”. In Yaron Matras, ed. Language Contact and Bilingualism 11 1. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
. 2017. “Historical Replication in Contact grammaticalization”. In Van Olmen Daniël, Hubert Cuyckens, and Lobke Ghesquière, eds. Aspects of Grammaticalization: (Inter)subjectification, Analogy and Unidirectionality. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 311–352.Google Scholar
. 2020. Changes in the Function of Already in Singapore English: A Grammaticalization Approach. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 351: 293–331. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Morin, Cameron & Carmelo Alessandro Basile
2022. Elicitation and experimentation: implications for English sociolinguistics. Anglophonia 34 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 january 2025. 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.