Introduction
I have chosen this to be the subject of my dissertation paper, because I believe that this theme is very interesting and complex. First of all, it is important to mention that according to systemic functional framework, language can have three metafunctions as it follows: experiential, interpersonal and textual.
For a better understanding of the topic, we will describe each of them: The first one it helps us to present our experience of the world and in the same time to describe different events or states and the components that help us express ourselves. The second one it is used for the interaction with other people, so in other words it means that it helps to create relations with other people around us and to express our opinions about events or states. The last, but not the least metafunction has the purpose to show the way in which we organize our messages in order to integrate them in other messages that we say or receive, in larger contexts.
My dissertation paper is divided in two chapters. Although the study of the system of polarity and modality in contemporary English is vast, inside my paper I have tried to concentrate the essence of this subject. On the first hand, in this paper we are concerned with the interpersonal metafunction which as we stated at the beginning, it is used for the interaction with other people, helping to create relations with other people around us and to express our opinions about events or states, so in other words analyses the communicative exchange. We also have to mention that inside this paper we follow Halliday's systemic model, using the meta-language set up by him. In any exchange, giving and demanding represents the most important goals, because these commodities that we have mentioned, will be either information or good and services. The difference between information and goods and services is that information involves the use of language, while goods and services can be exchanged without accompanying language. The traditional speech functional categories of statement, question, offer and command, represent the usual labels for these functions, and while statements and questions implies exchanges of information, being called propositions, offers and commands are exchanges of goods and services being called proposal.
In the first chapter I have tried to define the notion of 'mood' and 'modality' and I also have made a classification of 'modality'.
The second chapter and the last consists in the presentation of modality and polarity in functional terms. In this chapter we focus on what does the notion of 'polarity' involves, on the negative polarity items and their Lecensing negative indefinites, positive polarity items and last but not the least the interaction of modality with polarity. The purpose of this paper is to present a brief overview of various ways in which polarity and modality can be expressed, of types of modality, values and degrees of commitment and responsibility.
CHAPTER I
MOOD AND MODALITY
1.1. Mood ' General Considerations
In the beginning of the first chapter, we would like to make a short presentation regarding the origin of the modern term 'modality', which is a derivation from the postclassical Latin word ' modalitas'. The way in which the term 'modality' entered English is by the French word ' modalit'.
The general meaning of this term refers to those aspects of a thing which relates to its mode, but what it's really interesting is the fact that, whereas in Germanic and Romance, the word ' modality is obviously related to the term 'mood', there are some languages in which the equivalents of these two words are unrelated.
The element mood carries the interpersonal functions of the clause, so in other words makes the clause negotiable and consists of Finite Subject and sometimes Modal Adjuncts. Any Finite can be inherently positive or negative in polarity. In the negative form, there is an additional element (n't or not). Another way to express polarity is through Mood Adjuncts such as 'never' or 'hardly'.
The Subject is formed by a nominal group which offers the speaker responsibility for the validity of the clause, while the Finite is formed by the first of the verbal group and makes the clause negotiable by coding it as positive or negative or by grounding it in terms of modality. The Predicator represents the rest of the verbal group and it form part of the Residue. We can conclude in this way that a clause is formed by Mood and Residue. Mood tags ( pedagogically, question tags) is where the Mood element can be identified.
Emily can speak Spanish.
Subject Finite Predicator Complement
Mood Residue
Emily can speak Spanish, can't she?
Subject Finite Predicator Complement Finite Subject
Mood Residue Mood Tag
It is also used for the short answers, the Finite representing the core that is bandied about in exchanges and the reason is because it carries the validity of the proposition. ( Thompson, 2004)
In the next example, we can observe how the Finite is used in order to argue the validity of the proposition in this exchange:
I) You didn't read my letter!
Subject Finite Predicator Complement
Mood Residue
II) Yes, I did!
Mood Adjunct Subject Finite
Mood
I) No, you didn't!
Mood Adjunct Subject Finite
Mood
Mood Adjunct Subject Finite
Mood
II) Did!
Finite
Mood
I) Didn't!
Finite
Mood
The giving of goods-and-services is considered to be an offer, and it is generally made by Finite Subject indicating an interrogative, but can also be non-linguistic (I present you cookies). A command demanding goods-and-services takes the imperative, where the Mood is non-existent, although the assumed Subject 'you' appears in a marked imperative (see below). Goods-and-services are tangible commodities or activities, and responses to proposals (offers and commands) can be non-linguistic and limited to either accepting or refusing. Language merely facilitates the success of the exchange.
AN OFFER REALISED AS AN INTERROGATIVE
Would you like some cookies?
Finite Subject Predicator Complement
Mood Residue
A COMMAND REALISED AS AN UNMARKED IMPERATIVE
Pass the cookie.
No Subject No Finite Predicator Complement
No Mood Residue
A COMMAND REALISED AS A MARKED IMPERATIVE
You, pass the cookie!
Subject No Finite Predicator Complement
No Mood Residue
A STATEMENT REALISED AS A DECLARATIVE
I made those cookies.
Subject 'past'Finite 'make'Predicator Complement
Mood Residue
A QUESTION REALISED AS AN INTERROGATIVE
Did you make those cookies?
Finite Subject Predicator Complement
Mood Residue
An intangible is implied in the exchange of information, verbal commodity and language being the end itself. The form taken generally by the giving of information is a statement, a declarative denoted by Subject Finite. Using a question realized by an interrogative, the demanding of information is expressed.
Statements and questions (propositions) can be argued with, denied, adjusted, etc., and the response is varied and has to be linguistic, unlike proposals. The purpose of the position and existence of both Subject and Finite reveals if a clause is declarative, interrogative or imperative as in the examples from above.
Declaratives and interrogatives could be also polite requests for goods-and-services since basic commands might be considered Face Threatening Acts, and thus highly impolite (Brown and Levinson, 1987). Modals are also often used to disguise demanding proposals or soften propositions (Bloor and Bloor, 2004), but it is important that EFL students initially learn the most straightforward grammatical realizations of the interpersonal metafunction, before shifting towards increasing interpersonal distance through less straightforward structures (Butt et al, 2000).
In 'I made those cookies', the Finite appears to be missing, but is in fact fused with the Predicator 'make' (made = Finite: 'did' + 'Predicator: 'make'). This could help EFL beginners understand why the so-called 'dummy' auxiliary 'do/does' magically appears in some interrogatives and negatives, while not in others that contain a separate Finite. Through the Finite, the speaker can signal the primary tense, polarity (positive or negative) and modality (the extent of validity) of the clause, seen from his/her standpoint. Teachers can help students anchor such viewpoints within the Mood.
Included in the Mood is the word 'not', attached to the Finite to signal negative polarity. However, according to Halliday and Matthiessen (2004), this is not always the case. Consider the two possible meanings in 'You may not go to the party.'
If we take that sentence to mean 'you are not allowed to go', 'not' would be included as part of Mood. In the second possible meaning 'you are allowed not to go', 'not' is part of the Residue. This is a useful distinction, but interestingly, if we followed the above logic, then the 'not' in 'you must not go' ought to belong to the Residue. Halliday (ibid) lists the above 'not' as part of the Finite because of the existence of the contraction 'mustn't'. Arguably, recognizing 'not' as the Residue in this case might be helpful to EFL students, who are often confounded with the difference between 'You don't have to go' ('not' in Mood, therefore 'don't' negates the validity of the Residue 'have to go') and 'You mustn't go' (in my opinion, the Finite 'must' validating the Residue 'not go').
1.2. Definition of the notion 'modality'
According to Halliday and Matthiessen ( 1999:526), modality represents for the speakers a rich resource to intrude their own view into the discourse: theirs judgments of the rights and wrongs of the situation and of where other people stand in this regard and their evaluations of what is likely or typical. Since it is not easily divided into relatively discrete categories, modality can be a difficult meaning to capture. For example, this range extends from subtle expressions of doubt:' Emily might come today or perhaps I'll go', to explicit indicators of certainty: 'Emily will come today or I will certainly go.' Modality is consequently discussed in terms of degrees ( high, median, low) and is seen as a continuum. We must pay attention to the fact that this scheme doesn't work in all cases. However, they are useful labels which help us understand the speaker's degree of commitment.
Another problem is represented by how far the speaker overtly accepts responsibility for the attitude being expressed. The speakers may express their points of view objectively or subjectively by using separate clauses. Generally, modality can be expressed as two main types: epistemic and deontic modality.
1.3. Types of Modality: Modalization and Modulation
In order to understand the types of modality we have to mention that the exchange of information implies the use of probability or usuality. The exchange of goods-and-services expresses the speaker's confidence in how successful the exchange may be. In commands this confidence is concerned with the degree of obligation the other person has in order to carry out the command. In offers this confidence is concerned with the degree of willingness or inclination of the speaker to fulfill the order. The first type of modality is called modalization, while the second one is called modulation.
' Modalization or epistemic modality, represents a kind of connotative meaning relating to the degree of certainty the speaker decide to express about what is saying or the estimation of probability associated to what is being said ( e.g. : Lucy could read my book or Lucy is probably reading my book.)
' Modulation or deontic modality represents also a kind of connotative meaning, but the difference between epistemic modality and deontic modality, is that the second one relates to obligation or permission, including ability and willingness ( e.g. : Lucy can read my book or Lucy is absolutely reading my book.) As we can notice from the above example, modality is expressed by using modal auxiliary verbs ( e.g. can, must, should) and by various lexical items, generally represented by adverbs, such as ' probably', or groups which function as modal adjuncts, e.g. by all means. Modal verbs are easy to identify, as there are nine of them: can, could, shall, should, will, would, may, might, must.
For a better understanding of the types of modality, we have to identify what modality each type of clause can express. If the commodity being exchanged is information, the modality of these clauses expresses likelihood, how true this information is, and usuality, how frequently the information is true. As we mentioned above, there are some intermediate points for likelihood, such as possible, probable, certain, and for usuality, such as always, sometimes, usually, never. If the commodity exchanged is goods-and-services, the modality of these clauses expresses the speaker's trust in how successful the exchange will be. In commands, the modality of these clauses expresses obligation the other person have to perform the command. In offers, the modality of these clauses expresses the speaker's willingness to fulfill the offer.
Commodity Exchanged Type of Modality Modality related to commodity exchanged
Goods-and-services Command (obligation)
Help me with my homework!
Offer (inclination)
I'll help you with your homework. Modalization
Information Likelihood
She might be late.
Usuality
He never says what he likes about. Modulation
The modality related to information is called modalization, and the modality related to goods-and-services is called modulation.
e.g. Modalization: probability: My student may pass the exam.
usuality: John usually goes to school by car.
Modulation: obligation: You should help him.
inclination: I'll help you with your luggage.
As we can notice from the examples above, modality can be expressed in several ways; of course the most common one is by using modal verbs as Finites. This is why we consider modal verbs as part of the Mood. The Finite expresses modality, the speaker's attitude as well as tense, the moment when the action takes place. In reality these two features are not completely separated since modals expresses speaker's attitude in the present. The difference between present tense and past tense is realized with the second verb after the modal.
e.g. She must take her medicine. (present)
She must have taken her medicine. (past)
In the second example must refers to the speaker's present obligation; have is the mark of the past obligation. 'This neutralization of tense express why forms such as might and could, which historically are past tense forms (of may and can), typically do not function as past tense signals in modern English' (Thompson, 2004: 68).
In the following example may can be replaced with might with little difference in meaning:
e.g. She may / might be gone until you came home.
In reported speech the Finite expresses modality as well as past tense:
e.g. She said she might be gone until you came home.
Modality can be expressed with the help of the Finite, but it can also be expressed by Mood Adjuncts. They generally signal usuality and probability:
e.g. Did she decide to marry perhaps?
My parent usually go to the sea side in the summer.
There are also some special constructions in which probability, as well as modulation, can also be signaled by a combination between a Finite and a Mood Adjunct, both elements having interpersonal meanings:
e.g. He surely must leave tonight.
She really need to do her exercises on time.
' Commitment and responsibility.
As we have previously mentioned, modality involves several degrees and scales. The speaker may express a higher or lower degree of certainty concerning the truth of a statement, e.g. He will/ may/ could be late, or concerning the pressure on the listener to carry out a command, e.g. You must/ need to/ should/ have to go. 'Modalized clauses are thus in principle ambiguous as between proposition and proposal: this is shown up when the experiential meaning of the clause points strongly in one direction or the other' (Halliday and Matthiessen, 2004: 148)
The examples below illustrate the points on the scale: high, median, and low for likelihood and obligation.
e.g. Likelihood: High: He will never accept your conditions.
Median: He should accept your conditions.
Low: He may accept your conditions.
Obligation: High: You must be on time at yoga classes.
Median: You ought to be on time at yoga classes.
Low: You can be on time at yoga classes.
Notice that the use of can as a low-value obligation can be interpreted as the lowest degree of obligation, permitting the hearer to perform the action or not.
Nevertheless, we have to bear in mind that these degrees of modulation and modalization are ideal, and in real language they cannot be identified so easily. However, this system is very useful in investigating the speaker's commitment, namely the degree to which the speaker commits himself to what he is saying.
We have already seen that one type of interpersonal meaning, the polarity, can have different places in a clause, and this is also true for modality which is construed with the help of Finite operator, mood Adjunct or both.
e.g She came early . She may come early. She might come early. She could come early.
Maybe she came early. She came quite possibly early.
There is a possibility she came early.
I expect her to come early.
I suppose she may come early.
It is rather possible that she will come early.
These examples express the speaker's some different degrees of accepting the content of the statement. The speaker expresses a subjective point of view, and this aspect can be observed especially in separate clauses: It is rather possible that she will come early. The second clause represents the speaker's basic proposition. 'This proposition is thus being treated as a definable chunk of meaning, almost as if it were a kind of 'think' in the world that have qualities attributed to it' (Thompson, 2004: 70).
This statement is an objective one. On the other hand, statements such as I expect that she will come early have a subjective meaning which is emphasized also by the second part of the sentence. Although the subjective character of the statement is expressed by the verb expect, in functional terms the main clause is she came early. This can be noticed by adding a question tag: I expect she came early, isn't she? This question tag practically invites the hearer to agree with the main proposition she came early.
Another fact which proves that the main clause does not express the main proposition is represented by the negative counterpart: I don't expect she came early.
Between these two extremes, emphasizing subjectivity and creating objectivity, there are intermediate ways of expressing modality. As we have stated before, modality is expressed with the help of modal verbs (modal verbal operators), and Mood Adjuncts. Modal verbs take the place of Finites, having a strong subjective, explicit meaning:
e.g. You mustn't go on eating junk food.
She might have told me yesterday.
Mood Adjuncts are typically used to express objective features of an event:
e.g. They probably won't go to visit their parents.
The book is supposed to be very interesting.
Halliday and Matthiessen (2004: 147) call Mood Adjuncts 'expansion of the Predicator'. We also have to mention that there are several degrees of responsibility and commitment which can be implicit or explicit. By 'implicit' we mean that the modality is in the same clause as main proposition, while by 'explicit' we mean that the modality is in a separate clause.
e.g. Explicit subjective: I'm sure he will finish his work in time.
Implicit subjective: I mustn't insist.
Explicit objective: It is unlikely that I'll be able to arrive there.
Implicit objective: The President is obliged to pass the law.
II. Modality and Polarity
Functionally, the mood structure is made up of Finite, Residue and, optionally, an Adjunct. The Finite expresses not only tense, but also polarity and modality. Any Finite can be only positive or negative. The negative form can be easily identified due to the negative elements not or n't. We have to notice that, in the same time, polarity is the basic part of meaning. This is the case of yes/no interrogative clauses, which the first and most important function is precisely to enquire about the polarity of the message.
Polarity may be also expressed by mood Adjuncts, such as never, hardly, scarcely; in these cases the Finite must be positive.
e.g. She has never been to America.
Hardly had he arrived home when the phone rang.
In some particular cases, the polarity may be expressed by the Complement:
e.g. He did nothing to solve the problem.
He didn't do anything to solve the problem.
We can notice from the examples above that the interpersonal meanings are not tied to specific constituents, but it influences the whole clause. This observation confirms Halliday's theory that a language shouldn't be analyzed in terms of constituents, i.e. breaking the clause into groups of words and then into words, and assigning an identifiable meaning to each word.
In most cases polarity can be treated as an absolute concept; sometimes this is true: a message is either positive or negative. The Finite can be either positive or negative. But there are some cases in which polarity is not so strong. There are some intermediate stages between positive and negative which are expressed by modality.
e.g. She might be leaving the country. (perhaps)
She usually plays tennis. (sometimes yes, sometimes no)
POLARITY
This term refers to the positive or negative value assigned to the clause by speaker and it is usually presented along with the Finite element but, since it is a kind of meaning that can be expressed in both finite and non-finite clauses, we can say that it deserves a section of its own. Polarity relates most directly to the interpersonal metafunction and the reason is because of the influence of the speaker who is using polarity in order to interact with others.
Polarity captures a dichotomy of the clause in terms of positive and negative polarity and all clauses can be identified as having positive or negative polarity. Positive polarity represents the unmarked polarity because there is no marker of positive polarity in English, while negative polarity is always marked and it is expressed by the morpheme ' not'.
In finite clauses, there is a gravity between the Finite element of the clause and the polarity marker, which results in a fusion or conflation of the negator element and the Finite element : can't, isn't, didn't, haven't. On the other hand, in non-finite clauses, the absence of a Finite element means that only the stressed form of not can be used since there is no finite item with which to conflate the negative marker: Maybe not seeing their mother and father in such pain was having a bad effect on the little girls. However, negative polarity can be complex in certain cases. For example, polarity is sometimes transferred to the main clause from an embedded or subordinate clause: he doesn't think she is coming vs he thinks she isn't coming. It can also be difficult to analyse polarity in cases where the negations is aligned with a non-verbal item in the clause. For example if we compare the following pair of clauses: She doesn't have a brother any brothers vs She has no brothers, the nation in the first instance uses a polarity marker but in the second instance the negation occurs within the nominal group as a determiner. Finally sometimes in the negation in expressed through modality rather than polarity, as shown in the following two examples : he doesn't come here vs he never comes here. In the second instance, negation is expressed by a modal adjunct and technically the clause expresses positive polarity.
…