Modality and Subordinators
| Lund University
This book connects two linguistic phenomena, modality and subordinators, so that both are seen in a new light, each adding to the understanding of the other. It argues that general subordinators (or complementizers) denote propositional modality (otherwise expressed by moods such as the indicative-subjunctive and epistemic-evidential modal markers). The book explores the hypothesis both on a cross-linguistic and on a language-branch specific level (the Germanic languages). One obvious connection between the indicative-subjunctive distinction and subordinators is that the former is typically manifested in subordinate clauses. Furthermore, both the indicative-subjunctive and subordinators determine clause types. More importantly, however, it is shown, through data from various languages, that subordinators themselves often denote the indicative-subjunctive distinction. In the Germanic languages, there is variation in many clause types between both the indicative and the subjunctive and that and if depending on the speaker’s and/or the subject’s certainty of the truth of the proposition.
[Studies in Language Companion Series, 116] 2010. xvii, 341 pp.
Publishing status: Available
© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Table of Contents
|
Preface and acknowledgements
|
xiii–xiv
|
|
Abbreviations
|
xv–xvii
|
|
Chapter 1. Introduction
|
1–12
|
|
Part I. Modality and subordinators in the language of the world
|
|
|
Chapter 2. Modality
|
15–54
|
|
Chapter 3. The morphosyntactic status of modality
|
55–90
|
|
Chapter 4. Subordinators and modality
|
91–110
|
|
Chapter 5. Investigation of semantic, functional, and notational similarities between propositional modality and subordinators in the languages of the world
|
111–124
|
|
Part II. Modality and subordinators in the Germanic languages
|
|
|
Chapter 6. The Germanic indicative and subjunctive as propositional modality markers
|
127–148
|
|
Chapter 7. Modal markers and word order in the Germanic languages
|
149–172
|
|
Chapter 8. General subordinators and propositional modality in the Germanic languages
|
173–224
|
|
Chapter 9. Speech-act modality
|
225–238
|
|
Chapter 10. Relative and adverbial subordinators
|
239–266
|
|
Chapter 11. Conclusion and final remarks
|
267–284
|
|
Appendix A. Two typological surveys of the morphosyntactic status of propositional modality
|
285–306
|
|
Appendix B. Sources for the typological surveys
|
307–322
|
|
References
|
323–336
|
|
Language index
|
337–338
|
|
Subject index
|
339–342
|
“The author of this book fearlessly approaches the seemingly chaotic mess of complementizers in Germanic languages. The study focuses in particular on Scandinavian, English and German, but provides examples from Dutch, Icelandic, Frisian, Romance and a number of other languages. Armed with data from a range of typological studies and also carrying out a couple of her own, the author defends the idea that Germanic complementizers come in three different varieties, where one of the types (consisting in complementizers like THAT and WHETHER) denotes propositional modality. This type of modality therefore bears crucial resemblance to propositional mood like subjunctive and indicative, according to the author, and is akin to verbal mood inflections as well as verb placement (verb-first and verb-second) in signifying the values Realis and Irrealis. The book contains a plethora of new data, providing a platform for the reader to entertain the quite innovative and fresh ideas put forth by the author. I would recommend this book to anyone working with mood, or modality, or complementizers; or anyone ready to take a fresh look at the semantics of verb placement.”
Kristin Melum Eide, The department of Scandinavian studies and comparative literature, NTNU, Trondheim
Cited by
Cited by 23 other publications
No author info given
2011. Publications received in 2010.
Nordic Journal of Linguistics 34:1 ► pp. 73 ff. 
Abraham, Werner
2020.
In Brazilian Portuguese, Syntax and Semantics [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 260],
► pp. 34 ff.
Abraham, Werner
2020.
In Modality in Syntax, Semantics and Pragmatics,
Aigro, Mari
2020.
POLAR QUESTION PARTICLES AND THEIR SOURCES: A SEMANTIC APPROACH TO GRAMMATICALISATION
1
.
Transactions of the Philological Society 118:2 ► pp. 237 ff.
Akihiro, Hisae, F. Neveu, G. Bergounioux, M.-H. Côté, J.-M. Fournier, L. Hriba & S. Prévost
2016. Parce que et kara, Étude contrastive entre français et japonais basée sur des corpus oraux.
SHS Web of Conferences 27 ► pp. 14002 ff.
Bartley, Leanne & Encarnación Hidalgo-Tenorio
2016. “Well, I think that my argument is…,” or modality in a learner corpus of English.
Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics 29:1 ► pp. 1 ff.
Eide, Kristin Melum
2020.
In The Cambridge Handbook of Germanic Linguistics,
► pp. 567 ff.
Guerrero, Lilián
2019.
In Diverse Scenarios of Syntactic Complexity [Typological Studies in Language, 126],
► pp. 109 ff.
Hopp, Holger & Michael T. Putnam
2015.
Syntactic restructuring in heritage grammars.
Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 5:2 ► pp. 180 ff.
Jesus, Alice, Rui Marques & Ana Lúcia Santos
2019. Semantic features in the acquisition of mood in European Portuguese.
Language Acquisition 26:3 ► pp. 302 ff.
Jones, Howard & Morgan Macleod
2018. The Status of Passive Constructions in Old English.
Transactions of the Philological Society 116:1 ► pp. 59 ff.
Jones, Howard & Morgan Macleod
2020. Semantics and syntax in Old English mood selection.
Transactions of the Philological Society 118:2 ► pp. 304 ff.
Kohlberger, Martin
2018. A cline between nouns and verbs: Nominalizations in Shiwiar (Chicham).
STUF - Language Typology and Universals 71:1 ► pp. 151 ff.
KUNDAKÇI, Emre
2021. SÖZ EDİMLERİ, KİP(LİK) VE ZARF: ORHAN KEMAL'İN “KÜÇÜCÜK”ÜNDE NİYET, TUTUM VE VARSAYIM.
International Journal of Filologia
Lichtenberk, Frantisek
2016. Complementation in Oceanic: Focus on Complementizers*.
Australian Journal of Linguistics 36:3 ► pp. 451 ff.
Lokmane, Ilze & Andra Kalnača
2014.
In Modes of Modality [Studies in Language Companion Series, 149],
► pp. 167 ff.
MA, Tai
2021. Türkçede Kip ve Kiplik.
IBAD Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi
Mitkovska, Liljana, Eleni Bužarovska & Elena Ju. Ivanova
2017. Apprehensive-epistemic Da-Constructions in Balkan Slavic.
Slovene 6:2 ► pp. 57 ff.
Mugari, Victor
2013. Object marking restrictions on Shona causative and applicative constructions.
Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 31:2 ► pp. 151 ff.
Orszulak, Marcin
2016. What does żeby introduce? Old and new research questions about the Polish żeby complementizer.
Questions and Answers in Linguistics 3:1 ► pp. 1 ff.
Ringstad, Tina Louise
2019. Distribution and function of embedded V–Neg in Norwegian: A corpus study.
Nordic Journal of Linguistics 42:3 ► pp. 329 ff.
Schifano, Norma
2015.
In Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2013 [Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory, 8],
► pp. 85 ff.
Vydrina, Alexandra
2014.
In Modes of Modality [Studies in Language Companion Series, 149],
► pp. 379 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 september 2021. 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.
Subjects & Metadata
BIC Subject: CFK – Grammar, syntax
BISAC Subject: LAN009000 – LANGUAGE ARTS & DISCIPLINES / Linguistics / General