Cover not available

Article published In: Modal Meaning in Construction Grammar
Edited by Bert Cappelle and Ilse Depraetere
[Constructions and Frames 8:1] 2016
► pp. 7–39

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Short-circuited interpretations of modal verb constructions

Some evidence from The Simpsons

Published online: 29 September 2016
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.8.1.02cap
In this paper we aim to show how distinct semantic and pragmatic layers of modal interpretation can be fruitfully integrated within a constructionist approach. We discuss in detail a number of cases from the Simpsons where a modal verb, as part of a longer expression, has a short-circuited interpretation, that is, where it is conventionally associated with a context-specific modal semantic value and, in some cases, with added pragmatic information. Short-circuitedness is evidenced by the humorous effect that is obtained when a character wilfully or unknowingly ignores standard aspects of interpretation of such a modal verb construction.
References (48)
Aijmer, K. (1996). Conversational routines in English: Convention and creativity. New York, NY: Addison Wesley Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boas, H. (2003). A constructional approach to resultatives. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boogaart, R., & Fortuin, E. (to appear 2016). Modality and mood in cognitive linguistics and construction grammars. In J. Van der Auwera & J. Nuyts (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of modality and mood. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boyd, J.K., & Goldberg, A.E. (2011). Learning what NOT to say: The role of statistical preemption and categorization in a-adjective production. Language, 87(1), 55–83. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brown, P., & Levinson, S.C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bybee, J. (2006). From usage to grammar: The mind’s response to repetition. Language, 82(4), 711–733. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cappelle, B. (2014) Conventional combinations in pockets of productivity: English resultatives and Dutch ditransitives expressing excess. In R. Boogaart, T. Colleman, & G. Rutten (Eds.), Extending the scope of construction grammar (pp. 251–282). Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (to appear). What’s pragmatics doing outside constructions? In I. Depraetere & R. Salkie (Eds.), Semantics and pragmatics. Drawing a line. Amsterdam: Springer.
Carston, R. (2009). The explicit/implicit distinction in pragmatics and the limits of explicit communication. International Review of Pragmatics, 11, 35–62. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chapman, S. (2011). Pragmatics. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davies, M. (2008). The corpus of contemporary American English: 450 million words, 1990-present. [URL]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Declerck, R., & Reed, S. (2001). Conditionals: A comprehensive empirical analysis. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Depraetere, I., & Reed, S. (2008). Towards a more explicit taxonomy of root possibility in English. Paper presented at ISLE 1 , Freiburg, 8-11 October 2008.
. (2011). Towards a more explicit taxonomy of root possibility. English Language and Linguistics, 15(1), 1–29. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Depraetere, I. (2010). Some observations on the meaning of modals. In B. Cappelle & N. Wada (Eds.), Distinctions in English grammar, Offered to Renaat Declerck (pp. 72–91). Tokyo: Kaitakusha.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2014). Modals and lexically-regulated saturation. Journal of Pragmatics, 711, 160–177. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Depraetere, I., & Salkie, R. (to appear). Saturation, free pragmatic enrichment, completion and expansion: A view from linguistics. In I. Depraetere & R. Salkie (Eds.), Semantics and pragmatics. Drawing a line. Amsterdam: Springer.
Fillmore, C.J., Kay, P., & O’Connor, M.C. (1988). Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone . Language, 641, 501–538. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fillmore, C.J., Lee-Goldman, R., & Rhodes, R. (2012). The FrameNet constructicon. In I.A. Sag & H.C. Boas (Eds.), Sign-based construction grammar (pp. 283–299). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldberg, A.E. (1995). Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2006). Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gordon, D., & Lakoff, G. (1971). Conversational postulates. Papers from the Seventh Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society , 63–84. Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistic Society.
Green, G.M. (2012). Pragmatics and natural language understanding (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grice, H.P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J.L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics 31 (pp. 41–58). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gries, S. Th., & Stefanowitsch, A. (2004). Extending collostructional analysis: A corpus-based perspective on ‘alternations’. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 81, 31–61. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Groefsema, M. (1995). Can, may, must and should. A relevance theoretic account. Journal of Linguistics, 311, 53–79. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2014). Construction Grammar and its application to English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jackendoff, R. (1997). Twisting the night away. Language, 73(3), 534–559. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire and dangerous things. What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leech, G. (2014). The pragmatics of politeness. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levinson, S.C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McGregor, B. (2015). Linguistics: An introduction. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Michaelis, L., & Lambrecht, K. (1996). Toward a construction-based model of language function: The case of nominal extraposition. Language, 721, 215–247. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mitchell, K. (2009). Semantic ascent, deixis, intersubjectivty and modality. In R. Salkie, P. Busuttil, & J. Van der Auwera (Eds.), Modality in English: Theory and description (pp. 55–78). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Morgan, J.L. (1977). Two types of convention in indirect speech acts. Technical report No. 52, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. [URL].
Palmer, F.R. (1990). Modality and the English modals (2nd ed.). London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Papafragou, A. (2000). Modality and the semantics-pragmatics interface. Oxford: Elsevier Science.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schmid, H.-J., & Küchenhoff, H. (2013). Collostructional analysis and other ways of measuring lexicogrammatical attraction: Theoretical premises, practical problems and cognitive underpinnings. Cognitive Linguistics, 24(3), 531–577. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Searle, J. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance: Communication and cognition (2nd ed.). Oxford & Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stefanowitsch, A., & Gries, S. Th. (2003). Collostructions: Investigating the interaction between words and constructions. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 8(2), 209–243. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Verstraete, J.-C., D’Hertefelt, S., & Van Linden, A. (2012). A typology of complement insubordination in Dutch. Studies in Language, 361, 123–153. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Watts, R.J. (2003). Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wright, G.H. von. (1951). An essay in modal logic. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zwicky, A.M., & Sadock, J.M. (1975). Ambiguity tests and how to tail them. In J.P. Kimball (Ed.), Syntax and semantics 41 (pp. 1–36). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (20)

Cited by 20 other publications

Leclercq, Benoît & Cameron Morin
2025. The Meaning of Constructions, DOI logo
Sazhumyan, Haykanush & Alice Blumenthal-Dramé
2025. The effects of aspect on meaning interpretation in the online and offline processing of modal constructions. Cognitive Linguistics 36:3 ► pp. 473 ff. DOI logo
Morin, Cameron, Jack Grieve & Toqir Rana
2024. The semantics, sociolinguistics, and origins of double modals in American English: New insights from social media. PLOS ONE 19:1 ► pp. e0295799 ff. DOI logo
Römer-Barron, Ute
2024. How do constructions with modal verbs develop in second language learners of English?. Journal of Second Language Studies 7:2 ► pp. 198 ff. DOI logo
Torres-Martínez, Sergio
2023. Grammaire agentielle cognitive de constructions. Signata 14 DOI logo
Torres-Martínez, Sergio
2023. The semiotics of motion encoding in Early English: a cognitive semiotic analysis of phrasal verbs in Old and Middle English. Semiotica 2023:251 ► pp. 55 ff. DOI logo
Torres-Martínez, Sergio
2024. Embodied human language models vs. Large Language Models, or why Artificial Intelligence cannot explain the modal be able to. Biosemiotics 17:1 ► pp. 185 ff. DOI logo
Torres–Martínez, Sergio
2019. Taming English modals. English Today 35:2 ► pp. 50 ff. DOI logo
Leclercq, Benoît
2022. From modals to modal constructions. Constructions and Frames 14:2 ► pp. 226 ff. DOI logo
LECLERCQ, BENOÎT & ILSE DEPRAETERE
2022. Making meaning withbe able to: modality and actualisation. English Language and Linguistics 26:1 ► pp. 27 ff. DOI logo
Hilpert, Martin & Susanne Flach
2021. Disentangling modal meanings with distributional semantics. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 36:2 ► pp. 307 ff. DOI logo
Kranich, Svenja
2021. Decline and loss in the modal domain in recent English . In Lost in Change [Studies in Language Companion Series, 218], ► pp. 261 ff. DOI logo
Peltola, Rea
2021. Unfolding constructions. In Modality and Diachronic Construction Grammar [Constructional Approaches to Language, 32], ► pp. 149 ff. DOI logo
Daugs, Robert
2020.  Revisiting global and intra-categorial frequency shifts in the English modals. In Re-assessing Modalising Expressions [Studies in Language Companion Series, 216], ► pp. 19 ff. DOI logo
Cappelle, Bert, Ilse Depraetere & Mégane Lesuisse
2019. The necessity modalshave to,must,need to, andshould. Constructions and Frames 11:2 ► pp. 220 ff. DOI logo
Depraetere, Ilse
2019. Meaning in Context and Contextual Meaning: A Perspective on the Semantics-Pragmatics Interface Applied to Modal Verbs. Anglophonia 28 DOI logo
Cappelle, Bert
2017. What’s Pragmatics Doing Outside Constructions?. In Semantics and Pragmatics: Drawing a Line [Logic, Argumentation & Reasoning, 11], ► pp. 115 ff. DOI logo
Cappelle, Bert
2020. Not on my watch and similar not-fragments: stored forms with pragmatic content. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 52:2 ► pp. 217 ff. DOI logo
Cappelle, Bert
2021. Not-fragments and negative expansion. Constructions and Frames 13:1 ► pp. 55 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2021. Decline and loss in the modal domain in recent English 1. In Lost in Change [Studies in Language Companion Series, 218], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue