There are less more lexical means of expressing modality: modal meanings can be expressed by nouns, adjectives, verbs, adverbs and particles.

It is common knowledge that nouns themselves cannot operate on the level of the whole proposition they take part in. But they can denote the abstract concepts behind modality and their different elements. In constructions with verbs with more or less auxiliary function such nouns can even replace modal verbs. As part of a prepositional phrase, they can replace modal adverbs (it is necessary/necessarily). An important feature of such ?modal nouns? is the ability to take infinitive constructions or even embedded clauses as complements. In such a case these nouns usually play two roles: 1) they refer to the proposition as whole (in an anaphoric manner similar to pronouns), and 2) they project modality (the type denoted by their meaning) into the proposition, at the same time. If the proposition is given only in the form of an infinitive construction, the subject of it is also being controlled by the noun.

Modal nouns express likelihood, necessity, chance, likelihood, degree, necessity, possibility, capacity, requirement, request etc.

e.g. There is a chance that you will be expelled from school, if you won?t finish the project on time.

Modal adjectives include able, advisable, anxious, bound, concerned, crucial, desirable, essential, fitting, imperative, important, likely, necessary, possible, supposed, sure, vital, and willing. They breed modal contexts of different degrees, depending on how the speaker or writer understands the situation.

e.g. It would be desirable to reach the conference as soon as it was possible.

They were likely to spend the vacation in French Riviera.

It is however necessary to understand the whole responsibility that falls on you after agreeing their terms and conditions.

It is impossible not to notice that our world is tormented by failure, hate, guilt and fear. (W. Saroyan, quote)

Modal lexical verbs include advice, intend, propose, recommend, require, suggest, and wish verbs. Modal lexical verb have can take inflectional endings and to ? infinitive clause as complement. However, it takes ?do? in interrogative and negative forms.

e.g. You have to accept the past and move on.

Because of its great heterogeneity, the adverb class is the least satisfactory of the traditional parts of speech. Indeed, it is tempting to say simply that the adverb is an item that does not fit the definitions for other parts of speech. The term, ?adverb? is a bit problematic. Traditional grammars use it to label any structure modifying an adjective, any structure modifying an adverb, and any structure modifying a verb. Some contemporary grammarians try to avoid this term ?adverb? by using only semantic terms like intensifier or structure terms like adjunct. As a part of speech category the term, ?adverb? applies to a diverse set of items in English language, including modifiers of verbs, adverbs, adjectives, clauses, and sentences. The label ?adverbial? extends the range to prepositional phrases, noun phrases, and clauses, all of which may have the same modifying functions as adverbs. Adverbs are more difficult to define than nouns, verbs and adjectives because there are so many subclasses and positional variations. Endings in adverbs are involved in two ways.

First, numerous adverbs are derived from the corresponding dynamic adjectives by adding the ending ?ly. This is the case with adverbs of manner (quick-quickly), which tell how something is done. This also includes sentence adverbs or disjuncts (hopeful-hopefully) which modify a whole sentence.

The second type of ending is the inflection involved in connection with the comparatives and superlatives of adverbs of degree (quickly, more quickly, most quickly).

Adverbial expressions derived from adjectives in (?ly) (friendly, generally), (-like) (ladylike), (-style,-fashion) must be constructed periphrastically, e.g. in a friendly way/manner, in general. There is no difference between them, moreover they can substitute each other:

?In general, they attended a mass of thanksgiving in the villa?s chapel?.(Bertrice Small ?Love Wild and Fair? p.591)

As mentioned in Perkins (1983:89) modal adverbs in English are mainly epistemic in nature. Modal adverbs are those lexical devices emphasize and disjunct something (c.f. Greenbaum et al 1990).It is no surprise that such rich sphere/ part of speech as adverb has been so much studied, and many scholars suggested their classifications of English adverbial. Quirk classifies: conjuncts ? sentence connectives (however, nevertheless), disjuncts (probably, fortunately, frankly), subjuncts (willingly, deliberately, etc.) and adjuncts of purpose, time, manner, place, etc. Swan shows that the whole category of sentence adverbs (disjuncts) has undergone a similar development. Sentence adverbs are defined by Swan as adverbs which express the speaker?s evaluation of the content of the clause. In addition to modal adverbs, Swan?s sentence adverb class contains evaluative adverbs (fortunately, regrettably), speech act adverbs (frankly, briefly), and subject disjuncts (wisely, cleverly).All these classes according to Swan, have expanded and diversified enormously through the times especially in the 20^th century (1988:ch 5).

Another interesting sphere in the study of adverbs is the problem of their placement in the sentence. This problem occupied Kruisinga, Poustma, Jespersen and in their works these scholars have made references on it. According to Poustma and Jespersen, there are five positions that adverbs generally can occupy.

a) in front ? before the subject and verb

b) between the subject and verb

c) after subject and auxiliary verb, before verb

d) between verb and object or prepositional object

e) at the end of the sentence

e.g. Perhaps only people who are capable of real togetherness have that look of being alone in the universe. (D. Lawrence, p. 149)

I do not know what makes a writer, but it probably isn?t happiness. (W. Saroyan, quotes)

I could break out, of course but what a waste of time, and frankly, I can think of a whole host of things I would rather be doing. (J.K. Rowling)

?He looked sharply away and said: ?Here!?. (James Gould Cozzens ?By Love Possessed? p.529).

?Actually, you have to remember that you have ten pounds of steel on your legs which will affect balancing?. (James Gould Cozzens ?By Love Possessed? p.558)

Curiosity is not a sin?But we should exercise caution with our curiosity?yes, indeed. (J.K. Rowling, p. 598)

?Why, I merely saw you maid had difficulty with the heather ? I told her about it and started the water. (F.S. Fitzgerald, p. 282)

?She couldn?t help speaking anxiously: her voice was grave and low? (where anxiously ascribes some state of mind to the patient she). (James Gould Cozzens ?By Love Possesed?p.183).

Adverbs like carefully, anxiously, slowly, gladly will be referred to as adverbs of state-of-mind:

Mastering her emotions, he slowly and carefully told his mother what had happened.( Bertrice Small ? Love Wild and Fair?, p. 217).

The modal adverbs probably, possibly, evidently, certainly, etc. cannot be negated, according to Bellert (1977) and they do not occur in the scope of negation as well. Besides, modal adverbs do not occur in questions.

e.g. , the archaeologists will find the ruins of the lost city.

* , the archaeologists will find the ruins of the lost city.

e.g. The archaeologists will not find the ruins of the lost city.

* The archaeologists will not find the ruins of the lost city.

* Will the archaeologists find the ruins of the lost city?

And finally, according to Bellert?s theory, modal adverbs (unlike modal adjectives) do not occur in conditionals.

* If the archaeologists find the ruins of the lost city, the museums will be filled with many precious artifacts.

But they may appear in the apodosis:

If the archaeologists find the ruins of the lost city, the museums will be filled with many precious artifacts.

Bellert suggests that modal adverbs determine the truth of a statement expressed in the utterance. Similarly, Lang argues that adverbs do not belong to the propositional meaning but they express the speaker?s attitude toward it.

In terms of strength, there are three degrees for modal auxiliaries: strong, medium, and weak, these levels deal with the speaker's strong, medium and weak commitment to the truth of the proposition. However, Huddleston and Pullum distinguish 4 degrees of strength of certainty. Swan (1988) gives a list of 'modal adverbs'. His list includes all degrees of likelihood, he distinguishes between:

logical modal adverbs: undoubtedly, possibly, probably

evidential modal adverbs: clearly, manifestly, ostensibly

distancing modal adverbs: supposedly, allegedly

performative modal adverbs: assuredly, admittedly.

Modal adverbs in English are mainly of epistemic character. In epistemic modality, the expression of speaker's confidence is present and it is expressed with such tags as: I think, I guess, I believe. This kind of tags are derived from clauses and they behave more like modal adverbs. They can occur in different places in the sentence and take initial, medial or final positions.

e.g. The only thing I can do now is reaching the highest level of concentration, I guess.

These intensifiers can replace each other and take each other's positions, i.e. they may be interchangeable, though there actually is difference in American English between 'very' expressing more etiquette and 'really' expressing regret. Hence, in order to sound more sincere it's better to say ?I am really sorry? to an American.
When expressing modal apology by lexical means interjection may also have an important role. Furthermore, for instance an interjection like ?OH!? can replace a whole sentence like 'I am very sorry'.

The basic and the most wide-spread means of expression of modality in English is modal verbs. As mentioned above, modal verbs fall under the type of lexico-grammatical means of modality expression. It is common knowledge that modal verbs express various meanings: can (ability, permission, possibility, request), could (ability, permission, possibility, request, suggestion), may (permission, probability, request), might (possibility, probability, suggestion) must (deduction, necessity, obligation, prohibition), shall (decision, future, offer, question, suggestion) should (advice, necessity, prediction, recommendation), will (decision, future, intention, offer, prediction, promise, suggestion), would (conditional, habit, invitation, permission, preference, request, question, suggestion). In Germanic languages, modal verbs have special features and characteristics.

?Can? is one of those modals, which is widely used in English. It is used to express ability, opportunity, permission, possibility or impossibility. We often use ?can? in a question to ask somebody to do something. This is not a real question because we do not really want to know if the person is able to do something, we want them to do it! The use of ?can? in this way is informal (mainly between friends and family): ?can? is invariable it has only one form.

e.g. There can be little communication between men in that position, for their relation is indirect, and consists of how much each of them has possessed or will possess? (F. S. Fitzgerald, p. 259)

?Could? is used to express possibility, suggestions or requests, it is applied in conditional sentences. We use ?could? to talk about what was possible in the past, what we were able to do. It is invariable and has only one form.

?Without me you could get to your work again ? you could work better if you didn?t worry about me.? (F. S. Fitzgerald, p. 260)

We could feel alone when we were together, alone against the others. (E. Hemingway, p. 74)

?May? is commonly used to express possibility, though this usage is becoming rare. It can be used to give or request permission. ?May? is also applied in scientific prose to refer the things that typically happen in certain situations.

e.g. ?Oh, you may not think I?m pretty, but don?t judge on what you see. (possibility) (J. K. Rowling, p. 94)

The passengers may only take a small bag on board. (request/permission)

?Might? is often applied to express possibility, unreal situation. It is also often used in conditional sentences. English speakers can also use ?might? to make suggestions or requests, although this is less common in American English.

e.g. ?I think he might have the delicacy to go.? (F. S. Fitzgerald p. 335)

Even if he were everything a girl dreams of he might not be that one Lora needed.

?Must? is a modal auxiliary verb it is followed by main verb it is used to express obligation, certainty. It can also be used to express necessity or strong recommendation, although native speakers prefer the more flexible form ?have to?. ?Must not? can be used to prohibit actions, but this sounds very severe; speakers prefer to use softer modal verbs such as ?should not? or ?ought not? to dissuade rather than prohibit.

?Must? is often used to say that something is essential or necessary/possibility. ?Must? can be used when talking about present and future, but not for the past tense. In this case we use ?have? (got) to, which also expresses certainty and objective obligation, but it is not a modal verb.

e.g. I had the feeling as in a nightmare of it all being something repeated, something I had been through and that now I must go through again. (E. Hemingway, p. 52)

Then, as the laughter inside of him became so loud that it seemed as if Mary must hear it? (F. S. Fitzgerald p. 337)

Deep in earth my love is lying and I must weep alone? (E. A. Poe, p. 396)

Crying is all right in its way while it lasts. But you have to stop sooner or later, and then you still have to decide what to do. (C. S. Lewis, p. 51)

?Shall? is used to indicate future action. It is most commonly used in sentences with ?I? or ?we?, and is found in suggestions, for instance ?Shall we go??

?Shall? is also frequently used in promises or voluntary actions. In formal English, the use of ?shall? to describe future events often expresses inevitability or predestination. ?Shall? is much more commonly heard in British English than in American English, Americans prefer to use other forms, although they sometimes use ?shall? in suggestions or formalized language.

?Should? is an auxiliary verb - a modal auxiliary verb. ?Should? is invariable, it has only one form.
It is most commonly used to make recommendations or give advice. It can also be used to express obligation, probability, expectation, conditional mood and replace the subjunctive mood:

e.g. And if God had gifted me with some beauty and much wealth, I should have made it as hard for you to leave me as it is now for me to leave you. (Ch. Brontë, p. 223)

?The truth?, - Dumbledore sighed. ?It is a beautiful and terrible thing and should therefore be treated with great caution.? (J. K. Rowling, p. 240)

I insist that you walk your dog. /I insist that you should walk your dog.

?I knew you shouldn?t have tried it,? Nicloe could not help saying. (F. S. Fitzgerald, p. 306)

There?s no reason why because it is dark you should look at things differently from when it?s light. (E. Hemingway, p. 118)

?Will? is used with promises, voluntary actions that are going to take place in the future.

e.g. Some say the world will end in fire,

Some say in ice? (Robert Frost ?Fire and Ice?)

The future time reference use of 'will' is grammatically distinct from modal use of will, because grammatical 'will' refers to the future directly. ?Will? can also be used to make predictions about the future, in conditional forms:

e.g. ?I will not show you the infirmary,? said the Mother Superior in her placid tones. (S. Maugham, p.69)

For things will never be perfect, until human beings are perfect ? which I don?t expect them to be for quite a number of years. (Th. More, p. 42)

?Would? (form of the modal verb will) is used to express conditional forms. It also serves when we talk about the past actions and future in the past:

e.g. If you had felt yourself self-sufficient to be a king, it would have been proof that you were not. (C. S. Lewis, p. 174)

Furthermore, ?would? can indicate repetition in the past. It also expresses desire, polite requests, questions, opinion, hope, regret and wish.

e.g. During the summer holidays I would always get up early and have a walk my dog.

Would is invariable, it has only one form whereas shall and should are treated as two different verbs, will and would are the forms of one and the same verb.

Quasi-Modal verbs: Besides the modal verbs, there is another category of modals that expresses modality. It is the category of quasi-modals and semi-modals. Quasi-modals and semi-modals express subjective attitudes and opinions of the speaker. These semi-auxiliaries behave like modals semantically but they do not share the same grammatical forms. Semi-auxiliaries are lexically complex: they are composed of two or three words and end in to.

The theories on the nature between the modals and quasi-modals differ. It is agreed that there is a close semantic association between quasi-modals and modals, though the difference between them is obvious. According to Lakoff (1972: 240) it is the presence or absence that marks the difference between modal and quasi-modal:

e.g. must - have to,

may - be allowed to,

will - be to,

should - be supposed to.

This theory is confirmed by Larkin, Palmer.
The term ?quasi-modal? covers the categories of marginal modals, modal idioms, and semi auxiliaries.
In the range of quasi-modals there are the ones which have an auxiliary element in the first position had better, be unable to, be about to, would rather, have got to, may/might as well, have to, be going to, be likely to, be obliged to, be meant to, be supposed to, etc.

Quasi-modal verbs are very difficult to define one can meet a wide variety of uses among the native speakers. Among the main definitions are: quasi-modals are a subcategory of modal verbs, they resemble modals, however they differ in form (modals are single words, quasi-modals are verb+ preposition/adverb.

Because the quasi-verbs of English comprise semi-modals and verbs of other categories, it's proper to study the some of them, namely: had better, ought to, would rather, used to, need, dare.
Quasi-modal verbs are defective and neutral, they lack of non-finite forms and the features of present simple, third person, singular.

e.g. I think it?s a suggestion you ought to consider, Dick. (F.S. Fitzgerald, p. 194)

I would always rather be happy than dignified. (Ch. Brontë p. 363)

I could break out, of course but what a waste of time, and frankly, I can think of a whole host of things I would rather be doing. (J.K. Rowling

You had better get up now or you?ll be late.

You used to want to create things ? now you seem to want to smash them up. (F.S. Fitzgerald, p. 287)

Quasi-modals lack tensed (past, present) and non-tensed (infinitive, present participle, past participle) forms:

e.g. to sleep ?slept ? slept, sleeps ? sleeping but 'ought to' remains 'ought to? in all forms, there are no constructions as ought to ? to ought to* ? ought to*, oughts to* ? oughted to* ? oughting to* ? oughten to*: they do not reflect grammatical number.

e.g. Human souls need beauty more than bread. (D. Lawrence, p. 83)

However, quasi-modal verbs do slightly differ grammatically from full modal verbs. ?Dare? and ?need? morphologically resemble full modal verbs within negated verb phrases but not positive verb phrases.

e.g. They need not waste much.

They need to waste much.

Quasi-modal verbs 'dare' and 'need' have many features typical to modal verbs in subject-verb inversion of the verb phrase in interrogative sentences. 'Ought to' bears likeliness to full modal verbs in subject-verb inversion:

e.g. ?You dare use my own spells against me, Potter? (J.K. Rowling, p. 618)

Ought he talk to her like that? and not-inverted phrase: he ought to talk to her like that.

To sum up, quasi-modals 'ought to? and ?used to? bear likeliness to catenative verbs (appear to, happen to, seem to) in grammatical form. Just like modal verbs, quasi-verbs carry out one grammatical function ? modal (the function of modality), they always appear in the initial position of the verb-phrase and have the function of the predicate.

Besides modal and quasi-modal verbs, there are other verbs that express modal meaning. Among those verbs are the ones that express possibility, likelihood: appear, feel, know, reckon, suppose, believe, gather, look, seem, tend, expect, guess, promise, sound, think.

e.g. I am interested in madness. I believe it is the biggest thing I human race and the most constant. (W. Saroyan, quotes)

It seemed impossible that there could be people in the world who still desired food, who laughed, who neither knew nor cared that Sirius Black was gone forever. (J.K. Rowling)

obligation: allow, let, permit, force, make, require, demand, involve, mean, prohibit, want, forbid, oblige.

?Let?, ?allow? and ?permit? have the same content i. e. the content of permitting something to somebody, but ?permit? is much more formal than ?allow? and ?allow? is more formal than let. Of these three verbs only ?allow? and ?permit? are used in passive constructions. ?Let? is used when talking about permission, it is followed by an object and without 'to'.

e.g. I?ll let you watch your program, if you tell me why you want to watch it so much.

?let+ us? has imperative meaning and 'let's' is the short form, it is used to offer or suggest something.

e.g. Let us learn to show our friendship for a man when he is alive and not after he is dead. (F. S. Fitzgerald, p. 183)

Let us be good to one another? (C. S. Lewis, p. 122)

'Make' can be used in many ways: make + object - to tell what is created, produced.

There are many expressions with 'make': make a claim, make a mess, make a speech, make a mistake, make a note, make a statement, make a date, make a wish, make phone call, make a difference, make an appointment, make a fuss, make an effort, make a list, make a sound.

e.g. He has made an appointment for me at the office.

?Make? has the meaning of force.

e.g. He made me confess the fears that I have. (J. Joyce, p.191)
wrong: He made me to* confess. But, in the passive voice, ?to? is applied.

?Mean? is used to explain or to ask what the speaker refers to. When forming questions with 'mean' we use 'do' auxiliary verb.

e.g. What does the word 'criterion' mean?

?Mean? is not used in continuous form when talking about expressing ideas. To express intentions we use mean +infinitive:

e.g. She meant to warn you before leaving the town.

The expression 'keep meaning' is used to express long-run goals:

e.g. I have to go his office. I keep meaning to make an appointment.

'Mean' is used to express the significance and importance of something.

e.g. His actions mean a lot to me.

The construction mean + noun is used when talking about one thing resulting another.

e.g. Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it. (B. Shaw, quote)

?Mean + -ing? is used when talking about obligation or necessity

e.g. I must be there at 9 o?clock, it means getting up at 7 o?clock.

?Meant + passive? construction also expresses obligation.

e.g. Women are meant to be loved, not to be understood. (Oscar Wilde, p. 99)

Expression 'mean by' is used when someone asks what the speaker thinks or wants to say when uttering a specific phrase:

e.g. I have nothing to talk about , I mean, I don't have anything to talk to you.

?Mean+s? is a noun, which means a method, a way of doing something.

The expression 'I mean' is common in spoken English, it is used when someone wants to clarify or correct expressed thought. Besides, the application of 'I mean' gives the speaker an opportunity to think over what he/she is going to say, stylistically it expresses hesitation and reduces the negativity of a statement.

e.g. That gesture means thanks, it means admiration, it means good-bye to someone you love?

The use of 'you know what I mean' in speaking, is applied to get assured if the listener actually knows what is being said and is he/she is of the same opinion.

?Ought to? is a semi-modal verb because it is in some ways like a modal verb and in some ways like a main verb. Unlike modal verbs, it is followed by ?to?, but like modal verbs, it does not change form for person. The negative form is constructed with ?not?, 'ought not to', there is no use of ?don't?, ?doesn't?, ?didn't? with ?ought to? (interrogative and negative forms of ought to are not very popular).

e.g. ?You ought to dream?, - Bill said. ?All our biggest men have been dreamers?. (E. Hemingway, p. 100)

You ought to be more attentive when crossing the street.

I ought not to have demanded so much from him.

'Ought to have + ed' construction is used when talking about things which are desired. If examined carefully, 'ought to' in the following sentences can be replaced with should, and obviously should is more common in speech, but ought to is much more formal.

Probability and likelihood can also be expressed with 'ought to'.

e.g. My vacation ought to last two weeks.

This restaurant ought to serve tasty beef steak.

?Want? is used when expressing wish, desire, need and giving advice.

e.g. The car wants repairing. (need)

What do you want me to do? (wish)

You want to accept that proposal, before it's too late.

?Want? is not used with 'that' clause. In the statements with 'if' we don't have to use infinitive after want, but in negative clauses we do use infinitive. 'Want' used in continuous form expresses politeness/indirectness/need or emphasizes some process. 'Want +-ing' expression is much like the construction 'have something done'.

e.g. ?I?m not sure what I?ll do, but - well, I want to go places and see people. I want my mind to grow. I want to live where things happen on a big scale.? (F.S. Fitzgerald, p. 4)

If you want people to like you, you have to spend a little money? (E. Hemingway, p. 249)

I was wanting to talk to you.

Conclusion

The present research has been aimed at surveying the means of expressing modality, which in fact are diverse. In this investigation we have seen that ?modality?, as a category of linguistic meaning, concentrates on expression of different meanings, attitudes on the part of speaker. We know that when expressing a statement, people always contribute their attitude towards it. Obviously, the classification of the means of expressing modality is very diverse, and theoretical, but especially the second chapter of the paper explains and transforms that theoretical knowledge into practical one, with the help of examples. Modal words (nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs), mood, intonation, these are the most widely used means of modality expression. They all function at different levels and are employed on different purposes, circumstances.

We have seen that besides the traditional means of expressing modality (modal verbs), there are also others which are not less important, and we may use them without even paying attention. These elements (e.g. quasi-modals) have a rather curious set of grammatical properties. Indeed, it appears that modal meanings they express are part of a natural logical vocabulary and thus, elements with modal meanings easily havebecome part of the inventory of grammatical or functional morphemes.

The research shows very many distinct peculiarities of phonetic, lexical, lexico-grammatical, and grammatical means of expressing modality. These four are closely related to each other, they are even interchangeable. They may also be blended with each other and one may comprise the features of the other one. Thus for example, lexical means of modality expression, to some linguists, is not considered a separate type it is submitted into the lexico-grammatical means and discussed along with it.

The classification of the types of modality has come to prove that this sphere of linguistics is complicated but it can also be interesting and instructive. The experience which is gained while studying books of many authors is irreplaceable and instructive. It also shows that though there may be fixed divisions of types in modality, the new ones appear from time to time because the language itself develops and acquires new features, gets rid of the old ones and requires new approaches. Having studied the means of modality expression one may come across the distinctness in American and British Englishes.

After all, it has been concluded that modality is a concept with multiple disciplines, which in linguistics expresses different types of relations in statements that are related to the facts of reality. The use of such means discussed previously is explained by our need to express our behavior, our ?multi-colored? behavior and comprehension towards the content of the statement.

To sum up, it is proper to say that the work on this paper was an enriching experience for me. It has been quite instructive and has opened new horizons for later analysis, much detailed analysis. Not only does it enrich the knowledge about modality, but also gives a better image of modality as a separate science in English, which still has a perspective to develop and be at the center of new investigations. In the scientific linguistic literature there are a lot of works devoted to modality. The authors have different opinions as for the assessment of the essence and limits of modality. Due to the great variety of the means of expressing modality, learners may face some difficulty understanding and translating the sentences with modal verbs, modal words and word combinations. In this work there has been made an attempt to analyze the difficulties students may have, to identify the most common mistakes and to find the ways how to foresee and avoid them.

Date: 2016-06-12; view: 585