CC BY
717. Шигуров В. В. Два вектора развития русского причастия в контексте предикативации и / или адъективации: семантика и грамматика // Научное обозрение: гуманитарные исследования. - М., 2012. - № 3. - С. 152-157.
18. Шигуров В. В. Индексы предикативации отадъек-тивных гибридов на -о в контекстах типа Это весело - кататься с горки // Вестник гуманитарного научного образования. - М., 2012. - № 9 (23). - С. 4-6.
19. Шигуров В.В., Шигурова Т.А. Гибридные, деепри-частно-модальные структуры в русском языке // Приоритетные научные направления: от теории к практике: сборник материалов XII Международной научно-практической конференции / Под общ. ред. С.С. Чернова. - Новосибирск: Изд-во ЦРНС, 2014. - С. 159-164.
20. Шигуров В. В., Шигурова Т. А. О некоторых принципах описания явлений транспозиции и синкретизма в теории частей речи // Фундаментальные исследования. -М., 2014. - № 9 (часть 2). - С. 463 - 468.
21. Шигуров В. В., Шигурова Т. А. Модаляция деепричастных форм глаголов в русском языке: форма, причина, предпосылки // Фундаментальные исследования. - М., 2015. - № 2 (часть 26). - С. 5972 - 5976.
22. Шигуров В. В., Шигурова Т. А. Вводно-модальное употребление глаголов в форме 3-го лица множественного числа как средство экспликации субъективной модальности высказывания // Международный журнал прикладных и фундаментальных исследований. - 2015. - № 11 - С. 306 - 309.
23. Shigurov V.V., Shigurova T.A. Parenthetical-modal type of using finite verbs in the russian language // 8S-ASS04. Asian Social Science, 91-CCSE / Canadian Center of Science and Education. Vol. 11, No. 8; 2015. - P. 292-298. [Retrieved from www.scopus.com в SCOPUSe].
24. Shigurov V.V., Shigurova Т.А. Modalation of verbal adverbs in the Russian language // European journal of natural history. Фундаментальные исследования. Fundamental research, Израиль (Тель Авив) 16 - 23 октября 2015 г. -2015. - № 4 - С. 57 - 59.
25. Shigurov V. V., Shigurova T. A. Types of use of russian infinitives in syncretical contexts of modalation, predicativation and conjunctionalisation // Wschodnioeuropejskie Czasopismo Naukowe (East European Scientific Journal). - 6. - 2016. - P. 181-185.
MODALITY AND EXPRESSION MEANS IN SPANISH
Padalka Iuliia,
Graduate student of the Institute of Philology Taras Shevchenko
National University of Kiev, (Kyiv, Ukraine)
ABSTRACT
This article analyzes the basic means and ways of expressing the modality category in Spanish. A particular attention is paid to the means of expressing the utterance and message modality. The opinions of renowned linguists, such as G. Gallice, A. Bonnard, F. Bruno, and C. Bally on the modality category are presented.
Keywords: utterance modality, message modality, mood, dictum, modus, modal verb.
The utterance modality can act in two ways; firstly, it relates to the speaker, whose aim is self-presentation and establishment of the addressee's social status; secondly, it relates to the interlocutor in order to get a certain response (positive or negative) to the message, when it is required to encourage the communication partner to perform or not perform a certain action. Thus, there is a process of subjective coding (by the addresser) and decoding (by the addressee) of the proposed expression content [1, 263 c.].
That is to say, utterance is an act of message composing, a complex process of its creation or, in other words, an individual act of language use, compared to the statement and utterance outcome. Thus, in general, the expression analysis implies the study of the actor's reflection in the message. The studies of expression have been quite ambiguous, although they originate from classical antiquity (Aristotle). Still, such linguistic studies have been presented for long periods of time.
For many modern linguists, it is obvious that the message actor cannot be beyond the linguistic field, as opposed to what Saussure advocated. Thus, we are witnessing a new period of interest in the message, another discovery of the actor's place in linguistics.
It should be remembered that the term of expression is
perceived in different meanings and, of course, that is why the concept of message is varied, depending on theoretical schools. The most common message meaning implies the actor's manifestation in the message, in what is the actor's position in relation to the message, and in how the text supports communication between the author and its interlocutor.
According to E. Benveniste, who believes that "The message is entered in the speech by the individual act of utterance. Given this individual approach, the utterance can be defined as a process of appropriation in terms of language, where the author expresses its speaker's position with special indicators" [2, 98-116]. Thus, this school attempts to define and describe the reflection of means in the expression. The linguistic means are studied, by which the speaker reflects its position in a message, a written message (explicitly or implicitly), and its attitude to the message. The speaker is concerned, in particular, about the collocation, modality and speech.
As to modality, it can be interpreted in different ways, because it originates from logic, semantics, psychology, syntax, pragmatics, and theory of utterance. Thus, the term of modality applies to very different realities, namely a logical modality, an estimating modality, a sentence modality, a deontic modality (obligation), an epistemic modality (likelihood) etc.
Three main subjects dealing with modality are logic, linguistics and semiotics.
The concept of modality first appears in Aristotle's work; it was introduced in the grammar vocabulary as derived from the logic. This concept is conventionally used when approaching the language in terms of logic and semantics or psychology.
The modality was mostly considered by the Geneva School linguists, such as G. Gallice, A. Bonnard, F. Bruno, and C. Bally. All of them show a shift of emphasis towards psychology and logic.
For example, G. Gallice wrote a Psychological Grammar, in which he identifying the means and modality. He considers modality to be a verbal category attached to the form, time and state. According to him, the modality expresses the position of the actor, speaker by implementation.
For Bonnard, "each phrase is pronounced to inform or learn, to report any feeling or will." Thus, the modality of a phrase (affirmation, interrogation, exclamation, intention) defines the speaker's attitude.
According to F. Bruno, modality expresses the speaker's position as to what is reported. The notions containing the modality can be classified in three groups, "as those belonging to expression of thought, feeling and will." In terms of linguistics, modality can be implemented in different ways. These ideas were developed by Bruno and formalized by Bally, who studied the modality in greater detail.
Bally treats modality as "a linguistic form of intellectual and emotional judgment or expression of the will and desire, which a thinking actor says for the purpose of perception or expression of its will." Bally refers to the established distinction between dictum (represented content) and modus, "a
psychological activity aimed at dictum", also called animus loquentis or speaker's position [3, 3-13].
Modality (or modus), the phrase foundation, according to Bally, can be:
• explicit: when a modal verb is different from the dictum verb;
• implicit: expressed through the dictum syntax in different forms, using an auxiliary means of state, a modal adverb, can be expressed in a grammatical mood, through an opinion or evaluative adjective.
Generative grammar deals with modality as well, but with its first types only, mainly by the detection of modality through its structure, giving almost no attention to the term of modality and its logical or semantic concepts. Eventually, thanks to the theory of Katz and Postal, modality appears as a mandatory component of the phrase with all replacement rules.
Modality is related to different linguistic realties, namely the grammatical status, tenses, modal verbs, modal adverbs, types of sentences (affirmative, interrogative, imperative) etc. We can note that the combination of factors consolidated under a modern concept of modality, is subdivided into two major classes, according to the phenomenon of communication, i.e. uterrance modality and message modality.
Considering the modality along with speech functions, we need to distinguish between four basic speech functions, to which the other modalities correspond, i.e. evocative, expressional, logical, and aesthetic. We are concerned about the first three ones, since these modalities determine the linguistic
form of the message (affirmative, interrogative, imperative).
As we see, the modality of expression expresses a different attitude of the speaker to the audience, as opposed to the modality of the message, which expresses the attitude of the speaker to the message. It explains the relationship between the speaker and the message.
The message modality is consistent with the concept of modality, proposed by Bally, providing for linguistic expression of the actor's position on the sentence content.
There are authors who confine themselves to modality of the first person singular (I - actor), while the others consider the modality in a broader sense, as an identification of subjectivity of a person, the actor of the message, who does not have to be a speaker. In the first instance, that is when modality is reduced to the subjectivity of I (Bally's school), the modal actor is an actor of utterance. It may be explicit and coincide with the message actor, or it can be implicit.
According to Bally, the utterance actor or the modal actor must coincide with the message actor. This is true for explicit modality, which may have one or two participants, but one modal actor.
Example:
1) Quiero llegar pronto. (One participant).
2) Quiero que Carlos llegue pronto. (Two participants).
In the second instance, when the modality is perceived in a broad sense, as an expression of subjectivity by the message actor, it may or may not coincide with the speaker.
Example:
3) Estoy seguro de que Anna vendrá. (Coincides).
4) Carlos está seguro de que Anna vendrá. (El sujeto modal es Pedro). (Does not coincide. The modal actor is Pedro).
Finally, the speaker may leave its trace in the message, the actor of which may not be I. This occurs, for example, when this mood is used in additional sentences.
The message modality includes both a logical modality and an estimating or subjective one.
Logical modality describes the mood in which the subject represents a sentence predicate as a real, conditional (or required) or probable (possible), that is, within the real, accidental, or unreal mood.
The modality in which the estimate matches the required part is of particular interest. The concept of modality convergence, introduced by E.A. Belik, which provides a set of various means of modalities, transmitting the same motive, mood, sense, forming a modal context, is relevant here.
Estimating modality describes the mood in which the actor positions the message in terms of estimation (helpful, sad, pleasant, etc.), as well as in terms of subjectivity (desire, fear, etc.). It is not opposed to the other modalities, but combined with them; still, there are certain restrictions on co-occurrence and modification of estimating structures.
Determination of the mood of modality was inherent in study of the mood both in classical grammars and in the speaker's attitude. Still, as we said earlier, there is an utterance modality and a message modality; the difference is in attitude towards the listener or the message.
We argued that not all ways are referred to the same type of modality, e.g. an imperative mood, recognized by some authors as an independent mood of conjunctive mood, is related to the
utterance modality only, while the real and conjunctive mood are related to the message modality.
To better understand the differences between the mood and modality, we proceed from the mood concept. It is known that this concept does nit have a single and universal definition; there is a variety of opinions and criteria. They range from definition of the verb inflexion as characteristic basis and, accordingly, the conjunctive mood is considered to be a means subordination to the criterion of the speaker's conscious attitude to the message and the listener. The proponents of the latter criterion are Gili Gaya, Alarcos Llorach, Pottiyer, S. Hernandez et al. Still. Within our declarative approach, we rather highlight the concept of a mood in order to differentiate it from modality.
For this, we refer to the authors such as Agustin Garcia Calvo, Sebastian Mariner, Lisardo Rubio, and Cesar Hernandez, who try to highlight the only criterion of a common understanding of mood. Thus, A. Garcia Calvo supports a triple general definition of the modal category and defines the following three characteristic criteria of the mood:
• mood as a linguistic form, capable of conveying the modality;
• mood as expression of the speaker's position on the message;
• mood as an indicator of subordination.
Let us consider the first two criteria for two reasons, since they directly indicate the modality and that the latter criterion, as shown by S. Mariner and S. Hernandez, is not the characteristic and the main criterion of the verb modality in Spanish.
Mood as a linguistic form is capable of conveying the modality.
It corresponds to the previously explained modality of a phrase or utterance. In this case, the mood conveys the type of communication, a speech method between the speaker and the listener (the speaker-listener relationship). This is due to three main functions ofspeech, i.e. evocative, expressional, and logical. Each of these functions has its modality. Thus, the expressional modality provides for an imperative, promise or desire, and the logical one is related to the narrative, interrogative and other sentences. An evocative function is present in exclamation sentences; this is an expressive exaggeration of three main modalities, i.e. affirmation, interrogation and imperative.
As regards the Spanish verb mood, the key modalities complement three main functions of the speech, i.e. representation, expression and appeal or, as we said earlier, logical, evocative and expressional.
Let's consider the verb forms to determine the modality. Imperative appeal is the only form of the verb with a strong expressional modality performing the function of the order or appeal. While the other forms of verbs do not have a single modality, still, note that some forms are more suitable to have a certain modality than others. Thus, the affirmation or negation and interrogation are expressed in real mood.
Thus, the real mood is the main mood, the key function of which is to represent. This is a mood of actual expression (the concept was proposed by P. Kiparski and S. Kiparski in 1971, which points to the authenticity of expression) and direct affirmation. Thus, the typical modality of this method is declarative (or logical), although no form of the verb represents
just one modality, and a true mood appears in modality of negative and interrogative phrases. An example of the fact that verb forms do not express a single modality is the fact that the actual mood may take an imperative modality. It is important to emphasize that this modality of utterance or modality of a phrase reflect the speaker's position on the listener.
Some authors, without distinction between the utterance modality (the speaker's position relative to the listener) and the message modality (speaker's attitude to the message), prefer "the speaker's position" over other modalities. They also distinguish between dictum and modus, since dictum corresponds to the verb forms in real, subjunctive mood, expressing the concept of "real", "possible" and "unreal", while modus (a conscious attitude of the speaker) is expressed through the affirmative, interrogative and expressional modality of a phrase affecting the verb.
Thus, according to L. Rubio, the speaker's attitude is expressed through the phrase modality only. The attitude of the speaker is not perceived at the level of the verb form.
Vice versa, according to S. Hernandez, the attitude of the speaker is manifested at the form level, i.e. it is the second of the above criteria, a mood of expressing the speaker's position on the message. Thus, although it is believed that the mood determines the modality, i.e. modality of the phrase, however, as a characteristic factor of moods, this criterion is a secondary component and is inferior to the "speaker's position" (or the message modality, as we determined).
The mood helps to establish the speaker-message link. Therefore, the mood expresses the subjectivity or a "mental representation" and even "unrealistic nature." It covers the logical and estimating modality.
Conjunctive mood is a mood projecting the speaker's presence in the message, since this mood expresses the subjectivity of the speaker or a communication actor towards the message. Doubt, possibility and probability are expressed with conjunctive or real mood, depending on the situation, as an affirmation, absolute negation, or absolute doubt. Hence, conjunctive mood expresses an absolute doubt, while the possibility and probability can be expressed in real mood, depending on the degree.
We share Hernandez's opinion that the mood and modality "are the two main criteria of the mood category in Spanish", i.e. 1) modality (of a phrase); 2) speaker's attitude [5, 291-296]. The speaker's position is present in both cases, on the listener, showing what we called, the phrase modality or the utterance modality, or on the message (message modality), as Hernandez determines the speaker's position.
Bibliography:
1. Теория функциональной грамматики: Темпораль-ность. Модальность. / Бондаренко А.В., Беляева Е.И., Бирюлин Л.А. и др. / Под ред. Бондаренко А.В. и др. - Л.: Наука, 1990. - 263 с.
2. Benveniste E. Problemas de lingüistica general II, México, Siglo ХХ1, 1987, 8.a ed. Р. 98-116.
3. Bally C. «Syntaxe de la modalité explicite». En Cahiers de Ferdinand de Saussure, 1942. P. 3-13.
4. Bolinger D., "Modes of Modality in Spanish and English". Op. cit. Fteldman D.M., "Some Structural Characteristics of the
Spanish modal verb phrase". Boletín de Filología. Tomo XVI-1964, págs. 241-255.
5. Hernández Alonso, C.: Gramática funcional del español, Madrid, Gredos. - 1984. P. 291-296.
