Cover not available
Part of
Modes of Modality: Modality, typology, and universal grammar
Edited by Elisabeth Leiss and Werner Abraham
[Studies in Language Companion Series 149] 2014
► pp. 457–484

(C)Overt epistemic modality and its perspectival effects on the textual surface

 | LMU Munich
With an eye on the universal status of modality, the paper focuses on covert and overt grammatical coding of epistemic modality and its perspectival effects on the textual surface. Based on a theoretical discussion concerning the core principle of root vs. epistemic modality, it is argued that the grammatical structure of epistemic modality is reflected on the sentence level, on the textual surface, and within narrative discourse, and thus is manifested in a recursive manner on different levels of linguistic structure. In consequence, it is claimed that the universal status of modality can be pinned down not only cross-linguistically, but also within the language itself. En passant, the alignment of linguistic micro- and macro-structure sheds light on the basic question what modality is about in its core meaning.
Published online: 24 January 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.149.15zem
References (115)
References
Abraham, Werner. 1989. Syntaktische Korrelate zum Lesartwechsel zwischen epistemischen und deontisch/volitiven Modalverben. Groninger Arbeiten zur germanistischen Linguistik/GAGL 30: 145–166.Google Scholar
. 2002. Modal verbs: epistemics in German and English. In Modality and its Interaction with the Verbal System [Linguistik Aktuell / Linguistics Today 47], Sjef Barbiers, Frits Beukema & Wim van der Wurff (eds), 19–50. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2008. Tempus- und Aspektkodierung als Textverketter: Vorder- und Hintergrundierung. Deutsche Sprache 4: 287–304.Google Scholar
. 2009. Die Urmasse von Modalität und ihre Ausgliederung. Modalität anhand von Modalverben, Modalpartikel und Modus. Was ist das Gemeinsame, was das Trennende, und was steckt dahinter? In Abraham & Leiss (eds), 251–302.Google Scholar
. 2010. Modalitäts-Aspekt-Generalisierungen: Interaktion und deren Brüche. Woi kommen die epistemischen Lesarten ti-her? In Modalität. Temporalität in kontrastiver und typologischer Sicht, Andrzej Kątny & Anna Socka (eds), 13–27. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
. 2012a. (Inter)subjectification or foreign consciousness/other’s mind alignment as synchronic and diachronic concepts of change? Conceptualization and data fidelity. In Abraham & Leiss (eds), 24–78.Google Scholar
. 2012b. Covert modality in typology. In Abraham & Leiss (eds), 386–439.Google Scholar
. 2012c. Illocutive force is speaker and information source concern. What type of syntax does the representation of speaker deixis require? Templates vs. derivational structure? In Abraham & Leiss (eds), 67–108.Google Scholar
. 2012d. Sprecherdeixis und Merkmaldistributionsdifferential deutscher Modalitätselemente. Deutsche Sprache 40: 200–231.Google Scholar
Abraham, Werner & Leiss, Elisabeth (eds). 2008. Modality-aspect Interfaces. Implications and Typological Solutions [Typological Studies in Language 79]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(eds). 2009. Modalität. Epistemik und Evidentialität bei Modalverb, Adverb, Modalpartikel und Modus [Studien zur deutschen Grammatik 77]. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
. 2012. Introduction. In Abraham & Leiss (eds), 1202a, 1–21.Google Scholar
(eds), 2012a. Covert Patterns of Modality. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
(eds). 2012b. Modality and Theory of Mind Elements across Languages [Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs 243]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Abusch, Dorit. 1997. Sequence of tense and temporal de re. Linguistics and Philosophy 20(1): 1–50. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2004. Evidentiality. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Asher, Nicholas & Lascarides, Alex. 2003. Logics of Conversation. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Bal, Mieke. 2008. Phantom sentences. In Phantom Sentences. Essays in Linguistics and Literature Presented to Ann Banfield, Robert S. Kawashima, Gilles Philippe & Thelma Sowley (eds), 17–41. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Bally, Charles. 1950. Linguistique generale et linguistique francaise. Bern: Francke.Google Scholar
Banfield, Anne. 1982. Unspeakable Sentences: Narration and Representation in the Language of Fiction. Boston MA: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Bhatt, Rajesh. 2000. Covert Modality in Non-finite Contexts. PhD dissertation, University of Pennsylvania. <[URL]> (18 October 2012).Google Scholar
. 2006. Covert Modality in Non-finite Contexts. Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Binnick, Robert I. 1991. Time and the Verb. A Guide to Tense & Aspect. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Boogart, Ronny & Trnavac, Radoslava. 2011. Imperfective aspect and epistemic modality. In Brisard & Patard (eds), 217–247. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boye, Kasper. 2012. Epistemic Meaning. A Crosslinguistic and Functional-cognitive Study [Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 43]. Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bühler, Karl. [1934]1999. Sprachtheorie. Die Darstellungsfunktion der Sprache. Reprint, Jena: Fischer 1934. Stuttgart: Lucius & Lucius.Google Scholar
Brisard, Frank. 2002. The English present. In Brisard (ed.), 251–297.Google Scholar
(ed.). 2002. Grounding: The Epistemic Footing of Deixis and Reference [Cognitive Linguistics Research 21]. Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brisard, Frank & Adeline Patard (eds.) 2011. Cognitive Approaches to Tense, Aspect, and Epistemic Modality [Human Cognitive Processing 29]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L., Pagliuca, William & Perkins, Revere D. 1994. The Evolution of Grammar. Tense, Aspect and Modality in the Languages of the World. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Caenepeel, Mimo & Moens, Marc. 1994. Temporal structure and discourse structure. In Tense and Aspect in Discourse [Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs 75], Co Vet & Carl Vetters (eds), 5–20. Berlin: de Gruyter DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chatman, Seymour B. 1980. Story and Discourse: Narrative Structure in Fiction and Film. Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1999. Adverbs and Functional Heads: A Cross-linguistic Perspective. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen. 1985. Tense and Aspect Systems. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Dancygier, Barbara & Sweetser, Eve. 2005. Mental Spaces in Grammar: Conditional Constructions. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Depraetere, Ilse. 2012. Time in sentences with modal verbs. In The Oxford Handbook of Tense and Aspect, Robert I. Binnick (ed.), 989–1019. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Diewald, Gabriele. 2009. Die Interdependenzen von Kontexttypen bei Grammatikalisierungsprozessen illustriert am Beispiel der deutschen Modalverben. In Werner Abraham & Elisabeth Leiss (eds), 101–122.Google Scholar
Diewald, Gabriele & Smirnova, Elena. 2010. Abgrenzung von Modalität und Evidentialität im heutigen Deutsch. In Modalität. Temporalität in kontrastiver und typologischer Sicht, Andrzej Kątny & Anna Socka (eds), 113–131. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
(eds). 2011. Modalität und Evidentialität. Modality and Evidentiality. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag.Google Scholar
Dik, Simon. 1997. The Theory of Functional Grammar, Part 1: The Structure of the Clause, edited by Kees Hengeveld, 2nd edn. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Duden. 2009. Die Grammatik, 8th edn. Mannheim: Duden Verlag.Google Scholar
Eckardt, Regine. 2012. Particles as speaker indexicals in free indirect discourse. <[URL]> (19 November 2012).Google Scholar
Ehrlich, Susan. 1990. Point of View. A Linguistic Analysis of Literary Style. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Fleischman, Suzanne. 1991. Toward a theory of tense-aspect in narrative discourse. In The Function of Tense in Texts, Jadranka Gvozdanović & Theo A.J.M. Janssen (eds), 75–97. Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences.Google Scholar
Fludernik, Monika. 1993. The Fictions of Language and the Languages of Fiction: The Linguistic Representation of Speech and Consciousness. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Fritz, Gerd. 1997. Historische Semantik der Modalverben. Problemskizze – exemplarische Analysen – Forschungsübersicht. In Untersuchungen zur semantischen Entwicklungsgeschichte der Modalverben im Deutschen [Reihe germanistische Linguistik 187], Gerd Fritz & Thomas Gloning (eds), 1–157. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fritz, Thoma. 2000. Wahr-Sagen. Futur, Modalität und Sprecherbezug im Deutschen [Beiträge zur Germanistischen Sprachwissenschaft 16]. Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
Glas, Reinhold. 1984. ‘Sollen’ im heutigen Deutsch. Bedeutung und Gebrauch in der Schriftsprache. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Gloning, Thomas. 1991. Bedeutung und zusammenhängendes sprachliches Handeln: sollen und das Vorausdeutungsspiel. In Dialoganalyse III. Referate der 3. Arbeitstagung, Bologna 1990. Teil 1, Sorin Stati, Edda Weigand & Franz Hundsnurscher (eds), 123–134. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
. 2001. Gebrauchsweisen von Modalverben und Texttraditionen. In Reimar Müller & Marga Reis (eds), Modalität und Modalverben im Deutschen [Linguistische Berichte, special issue 9], 177–200. Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
Graumann, Carl Friedrich & Kallmeyer, Werner. 2002. Introduction. In Perspective and Perspectivation in Discourse [Human Cognitive Processing 9], Carl Frierich Graumann & Werner Kallmeyer (eds) 1–11. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Haan, Ferdinand. 2001. The relation between modality and evidentiality. Linguistische Berichte 9: 201–216.Google Scholar
Hacquard, Valentine. 2010. On the event relativity of modal auxiliaries. Natural Language Semantics 18: 79–114. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hacquard, Valentine & Wellwood, Alexis. 2012. Embedding epistemic modals in English: A corpus-based study. Semantics and Pragmatics 5: 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haßler, Gerda. 2012. Indicative verb forms as means of expressing modality in Romance languages. In Werner Abraham & Elisabeth Leiss (eds) 2012a, 133–152.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael. 1970. Functional diversity in language as seen from a consideration of modality and mood in English. Foundations of Language 6: 322–361.Google Scholar
Hegarty, Michael. 2006. Information update and covert modality in the semantics of propositional attitude verbs. In of KONVENS 2006 Proceedings, Miriam Butt (ed.), 174–180. <[URL]> (8 December 2012).Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd. 1995. Agent-oriented vs. epistemic modality: Some observations on German modals. In Modality in Grammar and Discourse, Joan Bybee & Susanne Fleischman (eds), 17–53. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hintikka, Jaakko. 1962. Knowledge and Belief: An Introduction to the Logic of the Two Notions. Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul. 1979. Some observations on the typology of focus and aspect in narrative language. Studies in Language 3(1): 37–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jaszczolt, Katarzyna. 2009. Representing Time. An Essay on Temporality as Modality. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Jäntti, Ahti. 1989. Zum Begriff der Modalität in der Sprachforschung. In Probleme der Modalität in der Sprachforschung, Ahti Jäntti (ed.), 11–36. Jyväskylä: Universität Jyväskylä.Google Scholar
Katz, Graham. 2003. A Modal Account of the English Present Perfect Puzzle. Proceedings of SALT 13: 145–161.Google Scholar
Kratzer, Angelika 1991. Modality. In Semantics: An International Handbook of Contemporary Research. / Semantik: Ein internationales Handbuch der zeitgenössischen Forschung [Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft 6], Arnim von Stechow & Dieter Wunderlich (eds), 639–650. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kiefer, Ferenc. 1987. On defining modality. Folia Linguistica 21(1): 67–94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klein, Wolfgang 1994. Time in Language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 2002. Remarks on the English grounding systems. In Grounding: The Epistemic Footing of Deixis and Reference, Frank Brisard (ed.), 29–38. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. The English present. Temporal coincidence vs. epistemic immediacy. In Brisard & Patard (eds), 45–86.Google Scholar
Leiss, Elisabeth. 2000. Artikel und Aspekt. Die grammatischen Muster von Definitheit [Studia Linguistica Germanica 31]. Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009a. Sprachphilosophie. Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009b. Drei Spielarten der Epistemizität, drei Spielarten der Evidentialität und drei Spielarten des Wissens. In Abraham & Leiss (eds), 3–24.Google Scholar
. 2011. Lexikalische versus grammatische Epistemizität und Evidentialität: Plädoyer für eine klare Trennung von Lexikon und Grammatik. In Diewald & Smirnova (eds), 149–169.Google Scholar
. 2012a. Epistemicity, evidentiality, and theory of mind. In Abraham & Leiss (eds),2012b, 39–65.Google Scholar
. 2012b. Aspectual patterns of covert coding of modality in Gothic and Old High German. In Abraham & Leiss (eds), 2012a, 175–200.Google Scholar
Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Maché, Jakob. 2008. The autopsy of a modal – insights from the historical development of German. In Abraham & Leiss (eds), 385–415.Google Scholar
. 2009. Das Wesen epistemischer Modalität. In Abraham & Leiss (eds), 25–55.Google Scholar
. 2012. Exploring the theory of mind interface. In Abraham & Leiss (eds), 109–146.Google Scholar
Maier, Emar. 2012. Quotation and unquotation in free indirect discourse. Ms, Groningen. <[URL]> (16 November 2012).Google Scholar
Narrog, Heiko. 2005. Modality, mood, and change of modal meanings: A new perspective. Cognitive Linguistics 16(4): 677–731. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. Modality, Subjectivity, and Semantic Change: A Cross-linguistic Perspective. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nikiforidou, Kiki. 2012. The constructional underpinnings of viewpoint blends. The Past + now in language and literature. In Viewpoint in Language. A Multimodal Perspective, Barbara Dancygier & Eve Sweetser (eds), 177–197. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nerbonne, John. 1986. Reference time and time in narration. Linguistics and Philosophy 9(2): 83–95.Google Scholar
Öhlschläger, Günther. 1989. Zur Syntax und Semantik der Modalverben des Deutschen [Linguistische Arbeiten 144]. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Palmer, Frank. 2001. Mood and Modality. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2003. Modality in English: Theoretical, descriptive, and typological issues. In Modality in Contemporary English [Topics in English Linguistics 44], Roberta Facchinetti, Manfred G. Krug & Frank Robert Palmer (eds), 1–17 . Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Papafragou, Anna. 2006. Epistemic modality and truth conditions. Lingua 116: 1688–1702. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Patard, Adeline. 2011. The epistemic uses of the English simple past and the French Imparfait: When temporality conveys modality. In Patard & Brisard (eds), 279–310.Google Scholar
Patron, Sylvie. 2009. Le Narrateur: Introduction à la théorie narrative. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar
. 2010. The death of the narrator and the interpretation of the novel. The example of Pedro Páramo by Juan Rulfo. Journal of Literary Theory 4(2): 253–272. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pietrandrea, Paola. 2005. Epistemic Modality: Functional Properties and the Italian System [Studies in Language Companion Series 74]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Portner, Paul. 2003. The (temporal) semantics and (modal) pragmatics of the perfect. Linguistics and Philosophy 26(4): 459–510. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. Imperatives and modals. Natural Language Semantics 15(4): 351–383. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. Modality. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Propp, Vladimir. [1928]1968. Morphology of the Folktale, 2nd edn. Austin TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Rauh, Gisa. 1978. Linguistische Beschreibung deiktischer Komplexität in narrativen Texten [Tübinger Beiträge zur Linguistik 106]. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Reichenbach, Hans. 1947. Elements of Symbolic Logic. New York NY: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Roberts, Ian & Roussou, Anna 2003. Syntactic Change: A Minimalist Approach to Grammaticalization. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sanders, José & Redeker, Gisela. 1996. Perspective and the representation of speech and thought in narrative discourse. In Spaces, Worlds, and Grammar, Gilles Fauconnier & Eve Sweetser (eds), 290–317. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Schlenker, Philippe. 2004. Context of thought and context of utterance. (A note on free indirect discourse and the historical present). Mind and Language 19(3): 279–304. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sharvit, Yael. 2008. The puzzle of Free Indirect Discourse. Linguistics and Philosophy 31(3): 353–395. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Simone, Raffaele & Amacker, René. 1977. Verb ‘modali’ in italiano. Italian Linguistics 3: 7–102.Google Scholar
Šklovskij, Viktor B. [1929 2 ]1991. Theory of Prose, Benjamin Sher (ed.). Champaign: Dalkey Archive Press.Google Scholar
Smith, Carlota. 2003. Modes of Discourse. The Local Structure of Texts. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Smirnova, Elena. 2011. The organization of the German clausal grounding system. In Brisard & Patard (eds), 87–107.Google Scholar
Smirnova, Elena & Mortelman, Tanja. 2011. Some remarks on the role of the reference point in the construal configuration of “more” and “less” grounding predications. In Brisard & Patard (eds), 137–158.Google Scholar
Stowell, Tim. 2004. Tense and modals. In The Syntax of Time, Jacqueline Guéron & Jacqueline Lecarme (eds), 621–636. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Sweetser, Eve. 1990. From Etymology to Pragmatics: Metaphorical and Cultural Aspects of Semantic Structure. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tanaka, Shin. 2008. The aspect-modality link in Japanese. The case of the evaluating sentence. In Abraham & Leiss (eds), 309–327.Google Scholar
Temürcü, Ceyhan. 2011. Grounding in terms of anchoring relations. Epistemic associations of ‘present continuous’ marking in Turkish. In Brisard & Patard (eds), 109–133.Google Scholar
Tomaševsky, Boris. [1925]1965. Thematics. In Russian Formalist Criticism. Four Essays, Lee T. Lemon & Marion J. Reis (eds), 61–89. Lincoln NB: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1989. On the rise of epistemic meaning in English: An example of subjectification in semantic change. Language 65: 31–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van der Auwera, Johan & Plungian, Vladimir A. 1998. Modality’s semantic map. Linguistic Typology 2(1): 79–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
von Wright, Georg Henrik. 1951. An Essay in Modal Logic. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Zeman, Sonja. To appear. Zur Diachronie der Modalverben: sollen zwischen Temporalität, Modalität und Evidentialität. In Funktion(en) von Modalität, Werner Abraham & Elisabeth Leiss (eds). Berlin: de Gruyter.
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Zeman, Sonja
2018. What is a Narration – and why does it matter?. In Linguistic Foundations of Narration in Spoken and Sign Languages [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 247], ► pp. 173 ff. DOI logo
Zeman, Sonja
2019. The emergence of viewpoints in multiple perspective constructions. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) ► pp. 226 ff. DOI logo
Zeman, Sonja, Wiebke Blanck, Christine Ott, Michael Rödel & Sven Staffeldt
2017. Was bedeutet eigentlich erzählen? Linguistische und didaktische Annäherungen an einen schwierigen Begriff. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Germanistenverbandes 64:3 ► pp. 307 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 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.