Abstract
Given the importance of epistemic modal use in academic writing, this study aims to investigate how well Chinese PhD students use English epistemic modals and whether their achievement in using English epistemic modals is correlated with their degree of Tolerance of Ambiguity (TOA) as a learning style. Fill-in-the-blank exercises were designed to test the participants’ use of epistemic modal verbs in English. Based on theories about matching, embedding and form-function mapping in second language learning, this study analyzed the errors that participants made when they chose modal forms in English to express epistemic functions/meanings conveyed by Chinese modal verb “会” (hui) in different syntactic contexts. A questionnaire survey was conducted to measure the participants’ degree of TOA and IBM SPSS 26.0 was used for statistical calculation of the correlation coefficient between the participants’ scores of TOA and their scores in using epistemic modal verbs. It was found that the degree of TOA is significantly correlated with epistemic modal use, i.e., the less tolerant of ambiguity a participant was, the less successfully he/she did in using epistemic modal verbs. The results of this study carry implications for language teaching and indicate the necessity of enhancing acquisition of epistemic modality and raising students’ tolerance of ambiguity.
Highlights
IntroductionVolition, permission and obligation, while epistemic modality indicates “the speaker’s confidence (or lack of confidence) in the truth of the proposition expressed” [1], or in other words, “epistemic modality speakers express their judgments about the factual status of the proposition” [2]
The present study has shown the correlation between Tolerance of Ambiguity (TOA) and a particular aspect of language learning: the acquisition of English modals, especially epistemic modals
As very high tolerance of ambiguity can lead to language learning problems [4], the present study suggests that students be given pedagogical help to move from intolerance of ambiguity to higher tolerance but not the highest
Summary
Volition, permission and obligation, while epistemic modality indicates “the speaker’s confidence (or lack of confidence) in the truth of the proposition expressed” [1], or in other words, “epistemic modality speakers express their judgments about the factual status of the proposition” [2]. Both types of modality are frequently used in daily conversations, and epistemic modality is often used in academic writing too to indicate the researcher’s epistemic judgment about the truth value of scientific data or research results. Seven English modal verbs (including “can, could, may, might, will, would, and must” ) were put within the scope of investigation to see how they are chosen by Chinese EFL learners to express epistemic meanings that are correspondent to the Chinese modal verb “ 会 ” (hui) in different syntactic contexts, i.e., in negative, double negative or interrogative sentences
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
