Article In:
Linguistic Variation: Online-First Articles

Cross-linguistic dataset of force-flavor combinations in modal elements

ORCID logo | University of Edinburgh
| University of Edinburgh
| University of British Columbia
| University of Edinburgh
| University of Edinburgh

We present a cross-linguistic dataset of force-flavor combinations in modal elements, which currently contains information on modal semantics in 24 languages and is accessible at https://​github​.com​/EdinburghMeaning​Sciences​/modals​_database. We discuss theoretical motivations for constructing the dataset, the data collection methodology, as well as the design and the format of the dataset. We also present four case studies using the data: (i) assessment of cross-linguistic generalizations on force/flavor variability; (ii) exploration of generalizations in the lexicalization of negative modality; (iii) investigation of the typology of the morphological encoding of modal strength; and (iv) examination of how future contributes to modality. These case studies illustrate that the dataset supports in-depth assessment of potential cross-linguistic generalizations as well as theory-informed investigations of cross-linguistic variations in modal semantics.

Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background
    • 2.1Dimensions in the semantics of modals
    • 2.2Existing generalizations and typology
      • 2.2.1Generalizations on force/flavor variability
      • 2.2.2Cross-linguistic generalizations in negative modality
      • 2.2.3Typology of the encoding of modal strength
    • 2.3Motivation for a cross-linguistic database
    • 2.4An existing database: Guo et al. (2022)
  • 3.Methodology of data collection
    • 3.1The modal questionnaire
    • 3.2Language sample and elicitation procedure
  • 4.Structure and format of the database
    • 4.1Content of the questionnaire documents
      • Metadata
      • Translations
      • Table
    • 4.2Accessing and contributing to the dataset
  • 5.Case studies
    • 5.1Generalizations about force/flavor variability
    • 5.2Negative modality
    • 5.3Encoding of modal strength
    • 5.4How future contributes to modality
  • 6.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Glossing Abbreviations
  • References
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
References
Bar-Lev, Moshe E. & Roni Katzir
2023 Communicative stability and the typology of logical operators. Linguistic Inquiry 1–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bochnak, M Ryan
2015 Variable force modality in Washo. In Proceedings of North-East Linguistics Society, vol. 451, 105–114.Google Scholar
Cable, Seth
2017 The expression of modality in Tlingit: A paucity of grammatical devices. International Journal of American Linguistics 83(4). 619–678. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chung, WooJin
2019 Decomposing deontic modality in Korean. Journal of Semantics 36(4). 665–700.Google Scholar
Condoravdi, Cleo
2002 Temporal interpretation of modals: Modals for the present and for the past. In David Beaver, Stefan Kaufmann, Brady Clark & Luis Casillas (eds.), The construction of meaning, 59–88. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Deal, Amy Rose
2011 Modals without scales. Language 87(3). 559–585. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015 Reasoning about equivalence in semantic fieldwork. In M. Ryan Bochnak & Lisa Matthewson (eds.), Methodologies in Semantic Fieldwork, 157–174. Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
von Fintel, Kai & Sabine Iatridou
2008 How to say ought in foreign: The composition of weak necessity modals. In Jacqueline Guéron & Jacqueline Lecarme (eds.), Time and Modality, 115–141. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2023 Prolegomena to a theory of X-marking. Linguistics and Philosophy 46(6). 1467–1510. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Frana, Ilaria & Paula Menéndez-Benito
2023 The evidential future in Italian. Natural Language Semantics 31(2–3). 139–178. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giannakidou, Anastasia & Alda Mari
2018 A unified analysis of the future as epistemic modality: The view from Greek and Italian. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 36(1). 85–129. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gluckman, John & Margit Bowler
2020 The expression of modality in Logoori. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics 41(2). 195–238. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Guo, Qingxia, Nathaniel Imel & Shane Steinert-Threlkeld
2022 A Database for Modal Semantic Typology. In Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on Research in Computational Linguistic Typology and Multilingual NLP, 42–51. Seattle, Washington: Association for Computational Linguistics. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hacquard, Valentine
2011 Modality. In Claudia Maienborn, Klaus von Heusinger & Paul Portner (eds.), Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning, 1484–1515. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Horn, Laurence R.
1989 A Natural History of Negation. Chicago: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Horn, Laurence Robert
1972 On the semantic properties of logical operators in English: University of California, Los Angeles PhD dissertation.
Imel, Nathaniel, Qingxia Guo & Shane Steinert-Threlkeld
2023 An efficient communication analysis of modal typology. Unpublished manuscript, University of California, Irvine and University of Washington.Google Scholar
Ippolito, Michela & Donka F. Farkas
2022 Assessing alternatives: the case of the presumptive future in Italian. Linguistics and Philosophy 45(4). 943–984. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jeretič, Paloma
2021 Neg-Raising Modals and Scaleless Implicatures: New York University PhD dissertation.
Katzir, Roni & Raj Singh
2013 Constraints on the lexicalization of logical operators. Linguistics and Philosophy 361. 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kratzer, Angelika
1977 What “must” and “can” must and can mean. Linguistics and Philosophy 11. 337–355. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1981 The notional category of modality. In H. J. Eikmeyer & H. Rieser (eds.), Words, Worlds and Contexts, Berlin, New York: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1991 Modality. In Arnim von Stechow & Dieter Wunderlich (eds.), Semantik: Ein internationales Handbuch der zeitgenössischen Forschung, 639–650. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuhn, Jeremy & Lena Pasalskaya
2022 Multiple pressures to explain the ‘not all’ gap. Ms., Institut Jean Nicod, ENS, CNRS, EHESS, PSL University.Google Scholar
Lassiter, Daniel
2017 Graded modality: Qualitative and quantitative perspectives. Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matthewson, Lisa
2004 On the methodology of semantic fieldwork. International journal of American linguistics 70(4). 369–415. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 Cross-linguistic variation in modality systems: The role of mood. Semantics and Pragmatics 3(9). 1–74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 Methods in cross-linguistic semantics. In Claudia Maienborn, Klaus von Heusinger & Paul Portner (eds.), Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning, 268–284. Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013 Gitksan modals. International Journal of American Linguistics 79(3). 349–394. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016 Modality. In Maria Aloni & Paul Dekker (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Formal Semantics, 525–559. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mucha, Anne, Mary Amaechi, Fred Whibley & Wataru Uegaki
to appear. Future and the composition of modal meaning: the view from Igbo. Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 28 1. DOI logo
Nauze, Fabrice
2008 Modality in typological perspective. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam PhD dissertation.
Newman, Paul
2000 The Hausa Language. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Nuyts, Jan
2006 Modality: Overview and linguistic issues. The expression of modality 1261. 1–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peterson, Tyler Roy Gösta
2010 Epistemic modality and evidentiality in Gitksan at the semantics-pragmatics interface: University of British Columbia PhD dissertation.
Portner, Paul
2009 Modality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rubinstein, Aynat
2012 Roots of Modality: University of Massachusetts, Amherst PhD dissertation.
2014 On necessity and comparison. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 951. 512–554. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2021 Weak necessity. In Daniel Gutzmann, Lisa Matthewson, Cécile Meier, Hotze Rullmann, Thomas Ede Zimmermann & Dina Voloshina (eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell Companion to Semantics, 107–132. Oxford: Wiley.Google Scholar
Rullmann, Hotze & Lisa Matthewson
2018 Towards a theory of modal-temporal interaction. Language 94(2). 281–331. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rullmann, Hotze, Lisa Matthewson & Henry Davis
2008 Modals as distributive indefinites. Natural Language Semantics 16(4). 317–357. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sardinha, Katie
2022 The perils of combining translation tasks and judgment tasks. Semantic Fieldwork Methods 4(1). Article 6.Google Scholar
Silk, Alex
2022 Weak and strong necessity modals: On linguistic means of expressing ”a primitive concept ought”. In Billy Dunaway & David Plunkett (eds.), Meaning, Decision, and Norms: Themes from the Work of Al lan Gibbard, 203–245.Google Scholar
Steinert-Threlkeld, Shane, Nathaniel Imel & Qingxia Guo
2023 A semantic universal for modality. Semantics and Pragmatics 16(1). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Uegaki, Wataru
2022 The informativeness/complexity trade-off in the domain of boolean connectives. Linguistic Inquiry 1–23.Google Scholar
Uegaki, Wataru, Anne Mucha, Nathaniel Imel & Shane Steinert-Threlkeld
2023 Deontic priority in the lexicalization of impossibility modals.Google Scholar
Vander Klok, Jozina
2013 Restrictions on semantic variation: a case study on modal system types. In Workshop on Semantic Variation, University of Chicago, 25–26.Google Scholar
2021 Revised modal questionnaire for cross-linguistic use. Open access field linguistics tool. [URL]
Vander Klok, Jozina & Vera Hohaus
2020 Weak necessity without weak possibility: The composition of modal strength distinctions in Javanese. Semantics and Pragmatics 13(12). 1–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weingartz, Siena & Vera Hohaus
to appear. Variable modal strength in Afrikaans and Samoan: Deriving strong necessity from weak necessity. Proceedings of TripleA 10 1.