Cover not available

Article published In: Journal of Uralic Linguistics
Vol. 3:1 (2024) ► pp.87–117

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

The modal analysis of the Hungarian future auxiliary fog ‘will, be going to’

ORCiD logo with link | University of Debrecen, Hungary
Published online: 14 May 2024
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/jul.00027.vir
Abstract
In this paper it is argued that the Hungarian future auxiliary fog is a modal rather than a temporal operator. As opposed to previous findings in the literature, the paper claims that it can be used when the proposition is inferred, therefore it can have an epistemic modal base. The results of a questionnaire study and introspective data are presented to support this claim. Based on these data, it is argued that the distributional difference between fog and the non-past cannot be explained by the presence or absence of temporal ambiguity only, the choice also depends on the context. Namely, the use of the non-past is marginal if the speaker infers the truth of the proposition from contextually known facts, while fog is natural and acceptable in such cases. The Hungarian data presented further strengthen the hypothesis that there is a strong connection between future-referring morphemes and epistemic modality.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Previous studies
    • 2.1Is the English auxiliary will a modal operator?
    • 2.2The literature on the Hungarian auxiliary fog
    • 2.3Fog and the non-past
  • 3.The modal analysis of fog
    • 3.1On the properties of fog that classify it as a modal
    • 3.2On the modal base of fog
    • 3.3The semantic analysis of fog
    • 3.4The distribution of the non-past and fog
  • 4.A pilot questionnaire study
    • 4.1Type 1 situations
    • 4.2Type 2 situations
    • 4.3Type 3 situations
    • 4.4Overall results and consequences
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (28)
References
Abush, Dorit. 1988. Sequences of tense, intensionality and scope. In Hagit Borer (ed.), Proceedings of the Second West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, 1–14. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Abusch, Dorit. 1997. Sequence of tense and temporal de re. Linguistics and Philosophy 201. 1–50. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1998. Generalizing tense semantics for future contexts. In Susan Rothstein ed., Events and Grammar, 13–33. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Condoravdi, Cleo. 2002. Temporal interpretations of modals: modals for the present and the past. In David Beaver, Stefan Kaufmann, Brady Clark & Casillas Martinez (eds.), Construction of meaning, 59881. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2003. Moods and modalities for will and would. Workshop on Mood and Modality Amsterdam Colloquium. December 21, 2003.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Copley, Bridget. 2009. The semantics of the future. New York: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Csató, Éva Ágnes. 1994. Tense and actionality in Hungarian. In Rolf Theiroff & Joachim Ballweg (eds.), Tense systems in European languages, 231–246. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen. 2000. The grammar of future time reference in European languages. In Östen Dahl (ed.), Tense and aspect in the languages of Europe, 309–328. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Winter, Joost & Dodou, Dimitra. 2010. Five-point likert items: T test vs Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, Vol. 15, article 111, 1–16.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Enç, Müvet. 1996. Tense and modality. In Shalom Lappin (ed.), The handbook of contemporary semantic theory, 345–158. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grice, Paul. 1975. Logic and conversation. In Peter Cole & Jerry Morgan (eds.), Speech acts (Syntax and Semantics 3), 41–58. New York: Academic Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1989. Studies in the way of words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gugán, Katain & Mónika Varga. 2018. Fogos kérdések [Questions with fog]. Nyelv és Tudomány, 2018. július 25. [URL]
Karttunen, Lauri. 1972. Possible and must. In John P. Kimball (ed.), Syntax and semantics, vol. 1, 1–20. New York: Academic Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaufmann, Stefan. 2005. Conditional truth and future reference. Journal of Semantics 221. 231–80. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kiefer, Ferenc. 2012. Some observations on the Hungarian adverbial particle majd. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 591. 427–438. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kissine, Mikhail. 2008. Why will is not a modal. Natural Language Semantics 161. 129–155. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Klecha, Peter. 2014. Diagnosing modality in predictive expressions. Journal of Semantics 311. 443–455. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lotz, John. 1962. Semantic analysis of the tenses in Hungarian. Lingua 111. 256–262. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Novák, Attila, Katalin Gugán, Mónika Varga & Adrienne Dömötör. 2018. Creation of an annotated corpus of Old and Middle Hungarian court records and private correspondence. Language Resources and Evaluation 521. 1–28. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ogihara, Toshiyuki. 1996. Tense, attitudes, and scope. Dordrecht and Boston: Reidel. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Palffy-Muhoray, Nicole. 2013. Future reference in Hungarian with and without future marking. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics: Vol. 19. Issue 1, Article 17.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2016. Hungarian temporal and aspectual references in the absence of dedicated markers. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University dissertation.
Portner, Paul. 2009. Modality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Prior, Norman Arthur. 1967. Past, present, and future. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sherwood, Peter. 2006. Hungarian has no future. Hungarológiai Évkönyv Vol. 7. Issue 1, 39–43.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thomas, Guillaume. 2014. Circumstantial modality and the diversity condition. In Urtzi Etxeberria, Anamaria Fălăus, Aritz Irurtzun & Bryan Leferman (eds.), Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 181, 433–450. Bayonne and Vitoria-Gasteiz.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Werner, Thomas. 2006. Future and non-future modal sentences. Natural Language Semantics 141. 235–255. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue