Abstract

In Systemic Functional Grammar, modality is treated as a semantic domain that extends across more than one grammatical environment. The basic distinction that determines various realizations of modality is modeled as the system of ORIENTATION. This paper aims to compare the explicit/implicit manifestations of modality in English and Chinese, a relatively less discussed issue in previous literature. After introducing the system network of modality in SFG, the paper, based on the rank theory, posits that the explicit/implicit orientation could be mapped clearly onto the choices of three ranks: clause, phrase/group and word. A meaning-oriented criterion is set up as follows: (i) Explicit modality is construed as Figure/Proposition; (ii) Quasi-explicit modality is construed as projecting Circumstance; (iii) Implicit modality is construed as modal Adjunct, part of Process/Predicator or mood element. Provided this criterion, various realizations of modality are examined along the rank scale both in English and Chinese. It is found that the two languages share similar lexicogrammatical strategies in this respect. Some major differences are: (i) Verbal groups (e.g. shuō bú dìng ‘say NEG firm’) can be used to construe implicit modality in Chinese. This phenomenon is not found in English. (ii) In English, the choice of explicit and implicit modality parallels the choice of subjective and objective modality. In Chinese, however, the choice of subjective and objective modality is available only when explicit modality is opted. A small-scale analysis of how modality is translated in a parallel corpus shows preliminary evidence for the above observations.

Highlights

  • Modality has long been an important issue in linguistics (e.g. Lyons 1977; Quirk et al 1985; Bybee et al 1994; Palmer 2014)

  • Quasi-explicit modality is construed as projecting Circumstance

  • Implicit modality is construed as modal Adjunct, part of Process/Predicator or mood element

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Modality has long been an important issue in linguistics (e.g. Lyons 1977; Quirk et al 1985; Bybee et al 1994; Palmer 2014). Though phrase and group are both considered to be the constituencies of a clause below, they differ in terms of their resemblance to the structure of a clause (as stated earlier) This is the major feature that separates explicit and implicit variants of modality because only the former pattern could bring out the meaning potential of projecting circumstance (e.g. in my opinion). In example 3.1b, modality is construed as a figure entailing a participant What I believe, in which a mental clause is rankshifted to serve as if it were a nominal group, and a relational process is. Zài wǒ kànlái 在我看来 kěnéng可能/yǒukěnéng有可能 yěxǔ也许 kǒngpà 恐怕 shuōbúdìng说不定 méizhǔn没准 yīnggāi应该 ba 吧

Objective clause explicit
Findings
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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 call