Cover not available

Article published In: English Text Construction
Vol. 12:2 (2019) ► pp.196–234

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

Aspect and modality in English predicative and specificational copular clauses

 | F.R.S.-FNRS | Université de Namur | KU Leuven
Published online: 1 October 2019
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/etc.00027.pra
Abstract
This paper investigates the use of aspect and modality in English predicative and specificational copulars. To examine attractions of aspectual and modal meanings to the VPs in the copular constructions, I carry out collostructional analyses (Stefanowitsch, Anatol & Stefan Th. Gries. 2003. Collostructions: Investigating the interaction of words and constructions. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 8 (2): 209–243. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). These attractions are interpreted with respect to (i) the lexicogrammatically coded meaning of the copular clauses and (ii) the pragmatic mechanisms that they trigger (e.g. (non-)exhaustiveness implicature), and (iii) the discursive functions they serve in specific contexts of use. It is crucial that this study takes into account specificational copulars with indefinite vs definite variable NPs, which carry an implicature of non-exhaustiveness vs exhaustiveness respectively. I will argue that the felicity of specific aspectual construals is related to the meanings coded at level (i), while the attraction of modal verbs is related to all three levels.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background
    • 2.1Aspect
    • 2.2Modality
  • 3.Case study
    • 3.1Hypotheses
    • 3.2Data collection and coding
    • 3.3Results
      • 3.3.1Aspect
      • 3.3.2Modality
  • 4.The construal of the VP
    • 4.1Aspect
    • 4.2Modality
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Primary data
  • References
References (68)
Primary data
Collins Wordbanks Online, <[URL]>
References
Aikhenvald, Alexandra. 2004. Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coates, Jennifer. 1983. The Semantics of the Modal Auxiliaries. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1976. Aspect: An Introduction to the Study of Verbal Aspect and Related Problems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Croft, William. 1991. Syntactic Categories and Grammatical Relations. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davidse, Kristin & Wout Van Praet. 2019. Rethinking predicative clauses with indefinite predicate and specificational clauses with indefinite variable: A cognitive-functional account. Leuven Working Papers in Linguistics 6 (38): 1–36.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davidse, Kristin. 1999. Categories of Experiential Grammar (Monographs in Systemic Linguistics 11). Nottingham: Nottingham Trent University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Declerck, Renaat. 1979. Aspect and the bounded/unbounded (telic/atelic) distinction. Linguistics 17(9–10): 761–794. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1988. Studies on Copular Sentences, Clefts, and Pseudo-Clefts. Leuven: Leuven University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1991. A Comprehensive Descriptive Grammar of English. Tokyo: Kaitakusha.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2006. The Grammar of the English Tense System. In collaboration with Susan Reed & Bert Cappelle. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Firbas, Jan. 1971. On the concept of communicative dynamism in the theory of functional sentence perspective. Sborník Prací Filosofické Fakulty Brněnské University 191: 135–144.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1992. Functional sentence perspective in written and spoken communication. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gisborne, Nikolas. 2007. Dynamic Modality. SKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics 4 (2): 44–61.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1967a. Notes on transitivity and theme in English: Part 1. Journal of Linguistics 3 (1): 37–81. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1967b. Notes on transitivity and theme in English: Part 2. Journal of Linguistics 3 (2): 199–244. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1970a. Functional Diversity in Language as Seen from a Consideration of Modality and Mood in English. Foundations of Language 6 (3): 322–361.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1970b. Language structure and language function. In John Lyons (ed.), New Horizons in Linguistics, 140–165. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1985. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. 1st ed. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1994. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. 2nd ed. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hawkins, John A. 1991. On (in)definite articles: Implicatures and (un)grammaticality prediction. Journal of Linguistics 27(2): 405–442.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1978. Definiteness and Indefiniteness: A study in Reference and Grammaticality Prediction. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hengeveld, Kees. 1988. Illocution, mood and modality in functional grammar. Journal of Semantics 61: 227–269. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1989. Layers and operators in functional grammar. Journal of Linguistics 251: 127–157. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heycock, Caroline B. 2012. Specification, equation, and agreement in copular sentences. The Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La revue canadienne de linguistique 57 (2): 209–240. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heycock, Caroline & Anthony Kroch. 1999. Pseudocleft Connectedness: Implications for the LF Interface Level. Linguistic Inquiry 30 (3): 365–397. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Higgins, Francis R. 1979. The Pseudo-Cleft Construction in English. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hjelmslev, Johannes. 1943. Grundlag for den projektive geometri. Copenhagen: Gyldendal.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney. 1984. Introduction to the Grammar of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney & Geoffrey Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Keizer, Evelien. 1992. Reference, Predication and (In)definiteness in Functional Grammar: A Functional Approach to English Copular Clauses. Utrecht: Drukkerij Elinkwijk Utrecht.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kratzer, Angelika. 1978. Semantik der Rede: Kontexttheorie, Modalwörter, Konditionalsätze. Königstein im Taunus: Scriptor.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud. 2001. A framework for the analysis of cleft constructions. Linguistics 39 (3): 463–516. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 1987a. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar: Theoretical Prerequisites. Vol. 11. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1987b. Nouns and Verbs. Language 63 (1): 53–94. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1991. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar: Descriptive Application. Vol. 21. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2015. How to build an English clause. Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics 2 (2): 1–45. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2017. Grounding, semantic functions, and absolute quantifiers. English Text Construction 10 (2): 233–248. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lyons, Christopher. 1999. Definiteness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McGregor, William B. 1997. Semiotic grammar. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Narrog, Heiko. 2005a. On defining modality again. Language Sciences 271: 165–192. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2005b. Modality, mood, and change of modal meanings: A new perspective. Cognitive Linguistics 16 (4): 677–731. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2005. The modal confusion: On terminology and the concepts behind it. In Alex Klinge & Henrik Høeg Müller (eds), Modality: Studies in Form and Function. Equinox, London, 5–38.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2006. Modality: Overview and linguistic issues. In William Frawley (ed.), The Expression of Modality (The Expression of Cognitive Categories 1). Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, 1–26.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Palmer, Frank. 1986. Mood and Modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Palmer, Frank. 2001. Mood and Modality. 2nd edition. London: Longman. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Palmer, Frank. 2003. Modality in English. In Modality in Contemporary English, Roberta Facchinetti, Manfred Krug & Frank Palmer (eds). Berlin: Mouton, 1–17. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Palmer, Frank Robert. 1990. Modality and the English Modals. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Partee, Barbara H. 1986. Ambiguous pseudoclefts with unambiguous be. In Proceedings of NELS, Vol. 161, Stephen Berman, Jae-Woong Choe & Joyce McDonough (eds). Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Patten, Amanda L. 2012. The English it-Cleft: A Constructional Account and a Diachronic Investigation (Topics in English Linguistics [TiEL] 79). Berlin and New York: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2016. Well-formed lists: Specificational copular sentences as predicative inversion constructions. English Language and Linguistics 22 (1): 77–99. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik. 1972. A Grammar of Contemporary English. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg & Helmut Küchenhoff. 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
Stefanowitsch, Anatol & Stefan Th. Gries. 2003. Collostructions: Investigating the interaction of words and constructions. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 8 (2): 209–243. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2005. Covarying collexemes. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 1 (1): 1–43. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van der Auwera, Johan & Vladimir Plungian. 1998. Modality’s semantic map. Linguistic Typology 2 (1): 79–124. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van linden, An. 2012. Modal Adjectives: English Deontic and Evaluative Constructions in Diachrony and Synchrony. Berlin/Boston: Walter de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Praet, Wout. Accepted. Focus assignment in English specificational and predicative clauses: Intonation as a cue to information structure? Acta Linguistica Hafniensia.
Van Praet, Wout & Gerard O’Grady. 2018. The prosody of specification: Discourse-intonational cues to setting up a variable. Journal of Pragmatics 1351: 87–100. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Praet, Wout & Kristin Davidse. 2015. Revisiting the typology of English copular clauses: ascription and specification in categorizing and identifying clauses. Leuven Working Papers in Linguistics 4 (15): 1–32.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Verplaetse, Heidi. 2003. What you and I want: A functional approach to verb complementation of the modal “want to.” In Modality in Contemporary English, Roberta Facchinetti, Manfred Krug & Frank Palmer (eds). Berlin: Mouton, 151–190. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Verstraete, Jean-Christophe. 2001. Subjective and objective modality: interpersonal and ideational functions in the English modal auxiliary system. Journal of Pragmatics 33 (10): 1505–1528. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2005. Scalar quantity implicatures and the interpretation of modality. Journal of Pragmatics 37 (9): 1401–1418. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Williams, Edwin. 1983. Semantic vs. Syntactic Categories. Linguistics and Philosophy 6 (3): 423–446. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue