YES. Paramonov, Institute of Russian Language named after. A.S. Pushkin
Modality is a multidimensional phenomenon, and therefore different opinions are expressed in the linguistic literature regarding the essence of this phenomenon. As is known, it has already become traditional to divide modality into two types: objective and subjective. The first is understood as the relation of the utterance to extra-linguistic reality, formalized grammatically, the second - as an expression of the attitude of the speaker (writer) to what he communicates. Researchers note that objective modality is mandatory for any statement, while subjective modality is optional.
This is a completely fair statement. Moreover, the two types of modality described are so different that it seems rational to us to separate these two terms. For the range of phenomena that fall under the concept of “objective modality”, one can use the term “modality”, and for what is called subjective modality, one can introduce the term “emotivity”. Then it will be possible to consider two universal quality statements: modality and emotivity. They will be opposed to each other on the basis of obligatory - optional. Having accepted this division, we can define modality as follows: modality is the obligatory quality of an utterance, which consists in the grammatically expressed relationship of this utterance to extra-linguistic reality.
Our remark about modality and emotivity is, of course, terminological in nature, but it should be noted that the nomination of a particular phenomenon of reality is very important, since it depends on the clarity of awareness of those features that are characteristic of this concept.
The article brought to the attention of readers is devoted to the issues of grammatical expression of objective modality.
Linguists have been talking about the fact that objective modality has its own grammatical expression for a long time. The authors of very respectable studies talk about the morphological-syntactic nature of the expression of modality , , . They are certainly right, but we believe that when studying such a complex and multifaceted phenomenon as modality, we must separately and especially consider the syntactic and morphological side of this linguistic phenomenon. This approach is consistent with the description of speech production proposed in psychological studies. Here is a diagram made by Professor R.S. Nemov:
The diagram shows that the formation and linguistic expression of thoughts has a level character.
Based on the theory of speech production, we can characterize the features of the grammatical expression of modality.
As you know, any sentence (statement) has its own denotation. It is an extra-linguistic situation.
Modality, figuratively speaking, “overlays” the denotative content of the utterance, making it communicatively oriented and valuable for communication. The described processes take place at the level of thought formation.
Moving on to the analysis of language facts, we note that we will begin our description from the syntactic level. It corresponds to the level of sentences and phrases in the speech production scheme. In the structure of a sentence (statement) there is a component that is responsible for expressing modality. We will call it the modal component of a sentence (statement). Its task is to embody modality at the syntactic level.
Let us give examples of modal components: Toward sunset the pale sun appeared (I.A. Bunin. Dark Alleys); His coat, tie and vest were always black (M.Yu. Lermontov. Hero of our time).
In the first sentence (statement) the modal component is the predicate “looked through”, in the second it is part of the predicate “were”. Thus, the concept of “member of a sentence” is broader in scope than the concept of “modal component of a sentence.” We need the latter to show the existence of the modality “gene” that is in every sentence (utterance).
The quality of the modal component of a sentence (utterance) is characterized by us as a way of expressing modality. The study of ways of expressing modality is the study of its syntactic aspect.
We know that syntactic components have their own morphological “filling”. In other words, this or that syntactic position is filled with certain parts of speech in certain forms. The modal components of a sentence (statement) in this sense are not exceptions.
So, we go down one level of speech production: to the level of morphemes and words. The forms of modality expression will correspond to it. Forms of expression of modality we call parts of speech in specific morphological forms, which are used to express modality. So, for example, in the sentence (statement): Give me a paw, Jim, for luck... (S.A. Yesenin. Kachalov’s Dog) the form of expression of modality is a finite verb used in the imperative mood.
The study of forms of expression of modality is a study of the morphological aspect of this linguistic phenomenon.
We think that when forming a statement there must be a link that connects the method (syntactic position) and form (morphological expression) of expressing modality. This link is the means of expressing the relationship between the utterance and extra-linguistic reality (modality).
So, the role of means is to connect the ways and forms of expressing modality. But some means also have another function: they help one or another grammatical form adapt to the expression of modality. We will call the first of the described means universal (this includes intonation), the second - non-universal. Let's imagine everything that has been said in the form of diagram 2. The methods and forms of expressing modality are combined into a kind of block. The means of expressing modality seem to connect the forms of expression of modality with the ways of expressing it. This is their role in the formation of statements. We emphasize that non-universal means of expressing modality relate to grammar, and universal means to phonetics. This is reflected in the diagram in the form of different levels of their location.
Grammatical means perform a dual function. On the one hand, they help forms that are deprived of mood or have a mood used in a way that is not in their direct meaning, to become forms of expressing modality, on the other hand, they thereby contribute to the combination of forms and ways of expressing modality. Let's give an example: May you leave here tomorrow!
The form of expressing modality in this case is the verb indicative mood. But it expresses the modal meaning of the impulse. And this meaning is unusual for the indicative mood. Consequently, to express such a meaning, a lexico-grammatical device was needed - the particle “so that”. It contributes to the expression of the meaning of motivation by a verb of the indicative mood and is thereby included in the modal component of a given sentence (statement).
Let us note that intonation as a means of expressing modality turns from a purely phonetic phenomenon into a phonetic-grammatical phenomenon, since it also performs a grammatical function.
So, it seems to us that an adequate description of modality can only be made based on the triad “method - form - means”. With this approach, each side of the grammatical expression of modality is analyzed. The described approach to the study of modality requires a very clear definition of the ways, forms and means of expressing modality, and not the random use of these words when describing modality.
Of course, language synthesizes all this, but the task of the researcher is to use analysis to understand the essence of language and its structure.
In conclusion, we will briefly describe the methods and forms of expressing modality.
Ways of expressing modality.
1. Predicate: The steppe is cheerfully full of flowers... (A.I. Kuprin). I immediately dived into the bathhouse - and the cold went away. Yes, anyone can come here, no one will object.
2. Partitive. If a predicate consists of more than one component, then modality will be expressed by only one of these components. In this case, we are talking about a partitive (lat. pars, partis - part) way of expressing modality. It is divided into several subtypes: a) Futural. This variety occurs when the modal component is expressed by verbs in the form of the future complex tense; b) Collocation (collocations are written in detail in the work): We agreed with the decision made; c) Phraseological. If the predicate is expressed by a phraseological turn of the verb type, then the modal meaning is expressed only by its verb part: The guys were kicking ass; d) Auxiliary verb: The car began to stop; e) Liaison: The engineer was thoughtful.
3. Comprehensive. In modern Russian, the phenomenon of a significant absence of a copula (zero copula) is quite often observed. In this case, the integrity of the sentence (statement) is not violated - it is ideally suited for communication. To prove the presence of a copula in the present tense, linguists use paradigmatic comparisons: The house is new - The house was new - The house will be new - The house would be new. And this is a research technique. The average native speaker does not perceive sentences (statements) like “New house” as constructions with missing components. Due to these circumstances, we believe that in such cases modality is expressed through the significant absence of a copula (zero copula) and the presence of a nominal part. Thus, modality is expressed complexly.
4. Independent subject. Characteristic for nominative and genitive sentences: Central Park. To the people, to the people! Of course, we purely formally consider the main members of the described one-component sentences as independent subjects. In fact, everything is much more complicated here, but the purpose of our description is to consider the grammatical aspect of modality.
"SURGUT STATE UNIVERSITY
Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug - Ugra"
FACULTY OF LINGUISTICS
Department of Linguistics and Intercultural Communication
COURSE WORK
Subject: " Benchmarking modalities in Russian and English (based on the works of K. Mansfield and their translation into Russian)"
Surgut 2012
Introduction
Chapter I. Theoretical aspects of modality
1 General concept of modality
2 Definition of modality
4 Ways to express modality in English
4.1 Mood and modality
4.2 Modals
4.3 Modal verbs
5 Ways to express modality in Russian
5.1 Mood and modality
5.2 Modals
5.3 Modal particles
Chapter II. Practical aspects of modality
1 Comparative method
2.2 Verb Must and Have to
3 Verbs Can and Could
4 Verbs May and Might
5 Verbs Should and Ought to
2.6 Modals
Conclusion
List of used literature
Applications
Introduction
This course work is a comparative study of the category of modality in the Russian and English languages. In linguistics, the problem of modality has received extensive coverage. This problem was paid attention to by such scientists as Sh. Bally, V.V. Vinogradov, A.A. Potebnya, I. D. Arutyunova, A. J. Thomson, I. Heinrich, B.F. Matthies, S.S. Vaulina, N.S. Valgina and others.
Relevance of this workis that modality has been at the center of linguistic searches since the 40s of the 20th century. Its properties are still poorly understood, as evidenced by the increased interest in this phenomenon by modern researchers. Object of studystands for modality in modern English and Russian languages. Subject of researchmodal verbs, words, particles and inflections of the verb are used. The purpose of this workis to identify ways to express modality in Russian and English and systematize existing knowledge about it. During the research process, we set the following questions: tasks:
.Give an interpretation of the concept of modality as a whole; .Analyze various approaches to defining the category of modality that exist in linguistics; .Identify the difference between modality and mood; .Characterize the means of expressing modality in Russian and English; .Consider the expression of modality based on the works of K. Mansfield and their translation into Russian. The following were used when writing the course work: methods: method of analysis, method of observation, method of comparison, method of statistical processing. Practical valueThis work is determined by the possibility of applying the research results in linguodidactics when studying literary text, in teaching elective courses and conducting seminars (on theoretical grammar, functional stylistics and other disciplines), when comparing textbooks and teaching aids. Work structure. The work consists of an introduction, two chapters, a conclusion and a list of references. Chapter I. Theoretical aspects of modality 1 General concept of modality There is perhaps no other category about which so many conflicting points of view have been expressed. Many authors include in the category of modality the most heterogeneous meanings in their essence, functional purpose and belonging to the levels of linguistic structure. Meanwhile, the problem of modality and linguistic means of its expression is widely discussed in linguistics and logic, since this category belongs to the area of linguistic phenomena where their connection with the logical structure and thinking is most direct. Modality is an important characteristic of a sentence, where it plays the role of linguistic unit, and on the other hand, it is considered as an essential feature of judgment as a form of thinking. Therefore, the analysis of the linguistic category of modality can only be carried out in close connection with the analysis of the logical category of modality. 2 Definition of modality Linguistics has come a long and winding path in the study of modality, based on the achievements of logic, semiotics and psychology. However, modality has not yet received a complete explanation due to its versatility, specificity of linguistic expression and functional features. Researchers give different definitions of the category “modality”. Let's look at some concepts. O.S. Akhmanova considers modality as “a conceptual category with the meaning of the speaker’s attitude to the content of the utterance and the relationship of the content of the utterance to reality (the relationship of the communicated to its real implementation), expressed by various lexical and grammatical means, for example, mood forms, modal verbs, etc.” Modality can have the meaning of statement, command, wish, assumption, reliability, unreality, etc. In the definition of O.S. Akhmanova says that modality can have several meanings, one of which is reliability. In a sentence, the speaker or writer expresses the idea that he wants to communicate to the listener or reader. Sentences differ from each other in the purpose of the statement, in their emotional coloring, as well as in the degree of truth or falsity of the information contained in them, that is, in the degree of reliability. Unlike declarative and interrogative sentences, which are differentiated by subjective modality, incentive sentences with a predicate verb in the imperative mood do not differ in the degree of reliability of the conveyed content. In this sentence, the modal word expresses not the degree of certainty, but the intensity of the impulse. Thus, we have three structures of the same type, three levels, each of which has its own truth, its own lie and its own uncertainty. The level of categoricalness of the statement decreases as one moves from knowledge to confidence, and then to the area of uncertainty. Russian dictionary foreign words gives the following definition: modality [fr. Modalite< лат. Modus способ, наклонение] - грамматическая категория, обозначающая отношение содержания предложения к действительности и выражающаяся формами наклонения глагола, интонацией, вводными словами и так далее . The large encyclopedic dictionary “Linguistics” gives the following formulation: modality [from cf. lat. modalis - modal; lat. modus - measure, method] is a functional-semantic category that expresses different types of relation of a statement to reality, as well as different types of subjective qualification of what is being communicated. Modality is a linguistic universal; it belongs to the main categories of natural language. According to M.Ya. Flea, modality is the semantics of the relationship of denotations to reality. Modality is not considered as a specific category of a sentence. This is a broader category that can be identified both in the area of grammatical and structural elements of the language and in the area of its lexical and nominative elements. In this sense, any word that expresses some assessment of the relationship of the named substance with the surrounding reality should be recognized as modal. These include significant words of modal-evaluative semantics, semi-functional words of probability and necessity, modal verbs with their numerous variants of evaluative meanings. The results of the study of language modality obtained in the works of G.A. Zolotova deserve special attention. It defines modality as a subjective-objective relationship between the content of a statement and reality from the point of view of its reliability, reality, correspondence or non-compliance with reality. “The content of the proposal may correspond reality or not match it. The contrast between these two main modal values- real (direct) modality and unreal modality (irreal, indirect, hypothetical, conjectural) and forms the basis of the modal characteristics of the sentence.” V.V. Vinogradov in his work “Studies on Russian Grammar” adhered to the concept that a sentence, reflecting reality in its practical social awareness, expresses a relationship (attitude) to reality, therefore the category of modality is closely connected with the sentence, with the variety of its types. Each sentence includes, as an essential constructive feature, a modal meaning, that is, it contains an indication of the relationship to reality. He believed that the category of modality belongs to the number of basic, central linguistic categories, in different forms, found in the languages of different systems. V.V. Vinogradov also noted that the content of the category of modality and the forms of its detection are historically variable. The semantic category of modality in languages of different systems has a mixed lexical and grammatical character. In the languages of the European system, it covers the entire fabric of speech. If in Soviet linguistics the founder of the concept of modality was V.V. Vinogradov, then in Western European linguistics this role belongs to S. Bally. According to the Swiss scientist, “modality is the soul of the sentence; like thought, it is formed mainly as a result of the active operation of the speaking subject. Consequently, one cannot assign the meaning of a sentence to an utterance if at least some expression of modality is not found in it.” The content of the syntactic category of modality in the light of the theory of S. Bally combines two meanings, which he, following the example of logicians, proposes to call: 1) dictum (the objective content of a sentence) and 2) mode (an expression of the position of the thinking subject in relation to this content). “The speaker gives his thoughts either an objective, rational form, which best corresponds to reality, or most often puts emotional elements into expression in a wide variety of doses; sometimes the latter reflect the purely personal motives of the speaker, and sometimes they are modified under the influence of social conditions, that is, depending on the real or imaginary presence of some other persons (one or more).” If we turn to English-language literature with questions about modality, it turns out that they are covered only in grammar textbooks. British and American grammarians believe that modality is transmitted auxiliary verbs, expressing different types of subjective attitude to an event or action. The meanings of obligation, possibility, probability, doubt, assumptions, requests, permission, wishes and others are recognized as modal. The concept of modality first appeared in Aristotle's Metaphysics (he identified three main modal concepts: necessity, possibility and reality), from where it passed into classical philosophical systems. We find various judgments about modality in Theophrastus and Eudemus of Rhodes, commentators on Aristotle, and later in the medieval scholastics. A.B. Shapiro names two main types of modality with partial identification of some varieties: · real, in which the content of the sentence is considered as coinciding with reality (in this case we are talking about sentences in the affirmative and negative form); · unreal with the following varieties: a) convention; b) motivation; c) desirability; d) obligation and close to it possibility - impossibility. Analyzing the category of modality from the content side, the scientist comes to the following conclusion: “The linguistic means by which the speaker’s emotions are expressed, as well as the expressive coloring of statements, have nothing in common with the means of expressing modality in a sentence. Emotionality can be accompanied by sentences with a variety of modalities: affirmative and negative modalities can be colored with emotions of joy, sympathy, friendliness and, conversely, emotions of sadness, annoyance, regret; The same and many other emotions can be accompanied by the modalities of motivation and obligation.” V.V. Vinogradov in his work “On the category of modality and modal words in the Russian language” classified the means of expressing modality and “outlined their functional hierarchy.” He writes: “Since the proposal, reflecting reality in its practical public consciousness, naturally reflects the relevance (relation) of the content of speech to reality, then the category of modality is closely related to the sentence and the variety of its types.” Thus, this category is included by scientists in the sphere of syntax, where it manifests itself in a modal relation to reality from the position of the speaker. He uses, synonymously, the terms “modal meanings”, “modal shades”, “expressive-modal shades”, which include “everything that is connected with the speaker’s attitude to reality”. The following are considered modal: · the meaning of desire, intention, desire to perform or produce some action; · expression of the will to carry out some action, request, command, order; · emotional attitude, emotional characteristic, moral and ethical assessment, emotional and volitional qualification of action; · meanings of unreality (hypothetical); · quantitative and qualitative assessment of individual thoughts from the message. N.S. Valgina in her book “Text Theory” calls modality “the most important element of text formation and text perception,” which binds all text units into a single semantic and structural whole. She also draws attention to the distinction between subjective modality, which determines the speaker’s attitude to the statement, and objective modality, which expresses the attitude of the statement to reality. The modality of the text as a whole is an expression of the author’s attitude to what is being communicated, his concepts, point of view, and the position of his value orientations. The modality of the text helps to perceive the text not as a sum of individual units, but as a whole work. To determine the modality of the text, according to Valgina, the image of the author (“personal attitude towards the subject of the image embodied in the speech structure of the text”) is very important, which plays a cementing role - it connects all the elements of the text into one whole and is the semantic-stylistic center of any work. According to G.F. Musaeva, the category of modality is differentiated into two types: objective and subjective. Objective modality is a mandatory feature of any utterance, one of the categories that form the predicative unit - a sentence. This type modality expresses the relationship of what is being communicated to reality in terms of reality (realization or feasibility). Objective modality is organically connected with the category of time and is differentiated on the basis of temporal certainty - uncertainty. The meaning of time and reality - unreality - are fused together; the complex of these meanings is called objective-modal meanings. Subjective modality is the attitude of the speaker to what is being communicated. Unlike objective modality, it is an optional feature of an utterance. The semantic scope of subjective modality is much wider than the semantic scope of objective modality. Semantic basis subjective modality forms the concept of evaluation in in a broad sense words, including not only the logical (intellectual, rational) qualification of what is being communicated, but also different types of emotional (irrational) reaction. Evaluative-characterizing meanings include meanings that combine the expression of a subjective attitude towards what is being communicated with such a characteristic of it that can be considered non-subjective, arising from the fact, event itself, from its qualities, properties, from the nature of its passage in time or from its connections and relationships with other facts and events. The scope of modality includes: · contrasting statements according to the nature of their communicative attitude; · gradations of meanings in the range “reality - unreality”; · varying degrees the speaker’s confidence in the reliability of his thoughts about reality; · various modifications of the connection between subject and predicate. G.A. Zolotova distinguishes between three main modal plans: 1) the relationship of the statement to reality from the point of view of the speaker; 2) the speaker’s attitude to the content of the utterance; 3) the attitude of the subject of the action to the action. At the same time, she explains: “In works of recent years devoted to issues of modality, the terms objective modality and subjective modality are found.” Proposing to use these very concepts, G.A. Zolotova defines the relationship in the first formulation as an objective modality, and in the second as a subjective one. At the same time, the third modal aspect (the relationship between the subject and the action) does not matter for the modal characteristics of the sentence. Fair, in our opinion, are her conclusions that: a) the main modal meaning, or objective modality, is a necessary constructive feature of each sentence, subjective modality is an optional, optional feature; b) subjective modality, without changing the main modal meaning of the sentence, presents this meaning in a special light. According to O.S. Akhmanova gives the following types of modality: · hypothetical (suppositional) modality. Presentation of the content of a statement as conjectural; · verbal modality. Modality expressed by a verb; · unreal modality. Presentation of the content of the statement as impossible, unfeasible; · negative modality. Presenting the content of a statement as inconsistent with reality. Russian grammar of 1980 notes that, firstly, modality is expressed by multi-level means of language, secondly, it is indicated that the category of objective modality correlates with the category of predicativity, thirdly, a circle of phenomena related to the phenomena of modality is outlined: .the meaning of reality - unreality: reality is indicated by a syntactic indicative (present, past, future tense); unreality - unreal moods (subjunctive, conditional, desirable, incentive); .subjective-modal meaning - the speaker’s attitude to what is being communicated; .the sphere of modality includes words (verbs, short adjectives, predicates), which with their lexical meanings express possibility, desire, obligation. So, the linguistic material shows that at the present stage of development of linguistics (mainly Russian), modality is considered as a universal functional-semantic category, that is, “as a system of grammatical meanings manifested in different levels language". “Language modality is a vast and complex linguistic phenomenon; its features do not fit within the framework of a one-dimensional division operation as any specific grammatical category, although it is traditionally called a category. Modality is a whole class, a system of systems of grammatical meanings that manifest themselves at different levels of language and speech. The breadth and multidimensional functional essence of modality rightly determine its status as a category...” 4 Ways to express modality in English In modern English there are grammatical and lexical means of expressing modality. The grammatical means are modal verbs and mood forms. Modal verbs convey different shades of modality, ranging from an assumption bordering on certainty to an assumption about which the speaker is not sure. Lexical means are modal words. Some linguists speak of modal words as an independent part of speech. Their syntactic function is that of the introductory member of a sentence. The question of modal words was first raised by Russian linguists in relation to the Russian language. In foreign linguistics, this type was noted, but was not allocated to a special category. Modality can also be expressed by mood forms. However, these categories should not be identified. Mood is a morphological category of a verb, one of the means of expressing modality. Modality is wider than inclination. 4.1 Mood and modality Over the past 30 years, many works have appeared in which modality and mood are considered as grammatical categories. Among them we can see the works of Lyons (1977), Coates (1983), Palmer (1986), Horn (1989), Traugott (1989), Sweetser (1990), Warner (1993), Bybee (1994), etc. The main reason to study modality and mood within grammar, according to Plank (1984), is the category's ability to represent linguistic changes in a diachronic process, such as processes of grammaticalization. Grammaticalization occurs when lexical units or even constructions used in specific speech situations, after some period of time, can turn into a special grammatical category or into a more grammatical category, and then become more general and abstract. ) there is no clear definition of the categorical semantics of mood; ) when identifying moods, various criteria are used (formal, semantic, functional); ) traditional grammars use mood systems similar to Latin, Greek and Old English grammars; ) exist various points views on homonymy and polysemy of verbal forms expressing modal meanings. Despite the apparent simplicity of the definition, views on the number of moods, their semantics and means of expression (synthetic and analytical) are, however, very contradictory. Let's consider the main approaches to determining moods. The generally accepted system in traditional grammar is the system of three moods: indicative, imperative and subjunctive. This system is borrowed from Latin grammar. The indicative mood represents an action as a fact of reality. The imperative mood expresses the urge to action. The subjunctive mood characterizes an action as not a fact, but its semantic range also includes non-modal meanings (an unreal condition, a consequence of an unreal condition, a goal, an unfulfilled desire, etc.). On this basis, the subjunctive mood is divided into subjunctive 1 and 2. Subsystems include up to five moods. Moreover, the means of expressing the subjunctive mood are also heterogeneous: they include, in addition to synthetic forms, analytical ones. Thus, the system of three moods has its disadvantages. According to the interpretation of L.S. Barkhudarov, in the English language two moods should be distinguished: indicative and imperative, and the opposition of these moods takes place within categorical form non-past tense. The imperative form is semantically intense and expresses an impulse to action. The form of the indicative mood is semantically extensive: its specific meanings are realized only in specific contextual conditions through various lexical-syntactic environments. At the same time, it should be noted that the leading modal meaning of this form is the correspondence of the content of the statement with reality established by the speaker. The subjunctive mood in modern English is represented by were and may not be taken into account. L.S. Barkhudarov, based on his well-founded understanding of analytical forms, excludes all combinations of “modal verb + infinitive” from mood forms and considers them in syntax as free phrases. Past tense forms are excluded by L.S. Barkhudarov from among the mood forms on the basis that the features of their meaning are determined by the syntactic conditions of their use, and not by their morphological structure. The meaning of unreality is considered as a derived meaning of the categorical form of the past tense (Appendix 1). Interpretation of the category of mood and combinations modal verbs with an infinitive, set out in the works of L.S. Barkhudarov, seems to us the most substantiated and realistically reflecting the facts of the language at the present stage of its development. modal verb semantics mood 1.4.2 Modals Modal words express the speaker’s subjective attitude to the thought expressed in the sentence. Modal words have the meaning of assumption, doubt, probability, confidence of the speaker in the thought expressed in the sentence. Modal words include words such as: perhaps, may be, of course, surely, no doubt, in fact, in truth, etc., as well as words with the suffix -1у, which coincide in form with the adverbs: possibly, ргOBably , certainly, naturally, evidently, obviously, happily and others. Modal words have a special relationship to the sentence. They are not members of the sentence, since, giving an assessment of the entire situation set out in the sentence, they find themselves outside the sentence. Modals can function as sentence words, similar to the affirmative and negative sentence words Yes and No. However, as B.A. points out. Ilish, the sentence words Yes and No never change their status, while modal words can be sentence words (in dialogue) or be introductory words in a sentence. Performing the function of an introductory member of a sentence, a modal word can occupy a place at the beginning of a sentence, in the middle and sometimes at the end of a sentence Most modal words come from adverbs and coincide in form with adverbs of manner, which have the suffix -1у. Modal words differ from adverbs in meaning and syntactic function. The meaning and syntactic function of an adverb is that it gives an objective characteristic of an action, property, attribute, or indicates the circumstances under which the action is performed, and refers to one member of the sentence. A modal word usually refers to the entire sentence as a whole and expresses the speaker’s subjective attitude to the thought being expressed. 4.3 Modal verbs The group of modal verbs includes a small number of verbs that stand out among all verbs by a number of characteristic features in meaning, use and grammatical forms. These verbs do not have a single verbal grammatical category (type, temporal assignment of voice); they can only have forms of mood and tense, which are indicators of the predicate. Due to this, and also due to their lack of non-predicative forms (infinitive, gerund, participles), modal verbs stand on the periphery of the verbal system of the English language. By their role in a sentence, modal verbs are auxiliary verbs. They denote the possibility, ability, probability, necessity of performing an action expressed by a semantic verb. Since they express only a modal attitude and not an action, they are never used as a separate member of a sentence. Modal verbs are always combined only with the infinitive, forming combinations with it that are complex in a sentence modal predicate. By their etymology, most modal verbs are preterite-presentational. Modal verbs are defective verbs because they do not have all the forms that other verbs have. Their lack of inflection -s in the 3rd person singular of the present indicative mood is explained historically: modern forms of the present tense were once forms of the past tense, and the 3rd person singular of the past tense did not have a personal ending. The modal verbs must, should - ought, will-would, can-could, may-might, need can express various shades of assumption. Scientists suggest that modal verbs express objective reality, while introductory words- subjective. It can be assumed that the verbs can and may specialize in conveying possible, proposed actions, and the verbs must, should, might, in addition to the meaning of obligation, also convey suggested, probable actions, thus closely relating to the meaning of introductory words such as perhaps, possibly, probably, certainly. When modal words and introductory words are used simultaneously, in such cases we are dealing with synonymous constructions. In a sentence, modal verbs are always combined with an infinitive (perfect and non-perfect), forming with it one combination, which is called a compound modal predicate. Modal verbs are not used as individual parts of a sentence. 5 Ways to express modality in Russian The facts of reality and their connections, being the content of a statement, can be thought of by the speaker as reality, as a possibility or desirability, as an obligation or necessity. The speaker's assessment of his statement from the point of view of the relationship of what is being communicated to objective reality is called modality. Modality in the Russian language is expressed by forms of moods, special intonation, as well as lexical means - modal words and particles. Academician A.A. Shakhmatov decisively stated that in language there are, in addition to moods, other means of expressing modality. He wrote that modality, the nature and character of which has as its source only the will of the speaker, his emotional impulses, can receive several different verbal expressions: firstly, in the form of a verbal predicate, by changing its stem and endings; secondly, in special function words accompanying the predicate or the main member of the sentence; thirdly, in a special order of words in a sentence; fourthly, in the special intonation of the predicate or main member of a one-part sentence. In this paper we will consider the opinion of Russian scientists regarding the distinction between modality and mood, as well as modal words and particles. 5.1 Mood and modality In speech, in a specific utterance, the relation of action to reality is established by the speaker. However, a certain type of attitude to reality is already inherent in the grammatical form of the mood itself. This type of relationship is fixed in the system of mood forms as cells of the grammatical system of the language. The speaker only chooses one or another form of mood, using its inherent grammatical meaning to express the relationship of a given action in a given specific utterance to reality. The category of mood is the grammatical (morphological) core of a broader functional-semantic category of modality, covering not only morphological, but also syntactic and lexical means of expressing the relationship of a statement to reality. Shades of modality, similar to the functions of verbal moods, are expressed, together with other elements of the sentence, by the infinitive: Everyone, lower your collars! The forms of participles and gerunds are associated with the “indicative” modality in the context. For example: This ringing - strong, beautiful - flew into the room, causing the solid mirror glass of the large high windows to tremble and the cream curtains, brightly lit by the sun, to sway. Modality, but not the grammatical category of mood, includes forms such as say, get attached, etc., expressing the unexpected onset of an action with a tinge of arbitrariness, lack of motivation, for example: Once upon a time, my deceased parent and I were carrying bread from the field, and I approach him, what, how, and why. These forms cannot be attributed to the imperative mood, with which they outwardly coincide, since they are in no way connected with it semantically. Such forms cannot be attributed to the indicative mood, since they do not possess its morphological features (changeability in tenses, persons and numbers). V.V. Vinogradov considers these forms as “the embryo of a special, voluntary mood,” noting that it is “close to the indicative, but differs from it in its bright modal coloring.” Modal coloring in itself is not a sufficient basis for identifying a special mood. The forms under consideration do not have such a semantic feature that would include them in the system of moods as an equal member, in certain relationships with other members of this system. It is no coincidence that V.V. Vinogradov speaks only of an “embryo” (germ) of a special inclination, i.e. does not place the “voluntative” on a par with the three known moods. Therefore, it seems appropriate to consider forms like say as one of the verbal means of expressing modality (one of the shades of “indicative” modality) outside the grammatical system of moods. 5.2 Modals In the textbook of the modern Russian language, modal words are those highlighted in independent part speech unchangeable words denoting the relationship of the entire statement or its individual part to reality from the point of view of the speaker, grammatically unrelated to other words in the sentence. In a sentence, modal words act as syntactically isolated units - introductory words or phrases, as well as word-sentences that express an assessment of what was previously said in terms of its reliability or unreliability. According to their lexical meaning, modal words are divided into two large groups: )modal words with the meaning of statement: of course, undoubtedly, indisputably, certainly, without any doubt, etc.; 5.3 Modal particles This discharge of particles expresses the speaker’s point of view on reality, on the message about it. In turn, modal particles are divided into the following subgroups: )Affirmative particles: yes, exactly, definitely, yes, yeah, etc.; )Negative particles: no, not, neither, not at all, not at all, etc.; )Interrogative particles: is it really, is it possible, is it possible, is it possible, is it possible, etc.; )Comparative particles: as, as if, as if; )Particles containing an indication of someone else's speech: they say, supposedly; )Modal-volitional particles: yes, would, let, come on. IN modern linguistics There is no clear opinion regarding the nature and content of the category of modality. The end of the twentieth century in linguistics was marked by an increase in interest in language not as a sign, but as an anthropocentric system, the purpose of studying which is human speech and mental activity. In this regard, many different areas of science have emerged, such as cognitive linguistics, linguoculturology, ethnopsycholinguistics, psycholinguistics, intercultural communication and others. Modality is a multidimensional phenomenon, and therefore in linguistic literature there is various set opinions and approaches regarding the essence of this phenomenon. All of the listed linguistic directions pose one task - to identify those mental and psychological processes, the result of which is human speech. These mental processes are inextricably linked to modality. It is important to note that modality is realized either at the grammatical, or at the lexical, or at the intonation level and has different ways of expression. It is expressed by various grammatical and lexical means: modal verbs, words, particles, interjections, moods and other means. Chapter II. Practical aspects of modality 1 Comparative method The comparative method is the study and description of a language through its systematic comparison with another language in order to clarify its specificity. The comparative method is aimed primarily at identifying differences between the two languages being compared and is therefore also called contrastive and forms the basis of contrastive linguistics. Comparison as a type of comparative study of languages differs from other types of linguistic comparison, although in general the comparative method is close to the general principles of typology, being applicable to languages regardless of their genetic relationships. In essence, the comparative method differs from the general typological and characterological approaches not in the specificity of the techniques, but in the objectives of the study. It is especially effective when applied to related languages, since their contrasting features appear most clearly against the background of similar features. In this respect, the comparative method approaches the comparative historical method, being in in a certain sense his reverse side: if the comparative-historical method is based on the establishment of correspondences, then the comparative method is based on the establishment of inconsistencies, and often what is diachronically a correspondence, synchronically appears as an inconsistency. The comparative method is aimed at searching for similarities in languages, for which it is necessary to filter out what is different. Its goal is the reconstruction of the former through overcoming the existing. The comparative method is fundamentally historical and apragmatic. The comparative method must fundamentally deindividuate the languages under study in search of a reconstruction of proto-reality. B. A. Serebrennikov rightly wrote about all this, explaining the difference between comparative and comparative methods: “Comparative grammar has special principles of construction. In them, a comparison of various related languages is made in order to study their history, in order to reconstruct the ancient appearance of existing forms and sounds.” The comparative method, on the contrary, is based only on synchrony, tries to establish the differences inherent in each language separately, and must be wary of any similarity, since it pushes towards leveling the individual and provokes the replacement of someone else’s with one’s own. Only a consistent determination of contrasts and differences between one’s own and someone else’s can and should be a legitimate goal of comparative research of languages. “When learning a foreign language has not yet reached the level of automatic, active mastery of it, the system of the native language exerts strong pressure. Comparison of the facts of one language with the facts of another language is necessary, first of all, to eliminate the possibilities of this pressure of the native language system.” "Such grammars are best called comparative rather than comparative grammars." The historicity of the comparative method is limited only to the recognition of the historical statement of the linguistic given (not language and languages in general, namely given language and these languages as they are historically given in their synchrony). Unlike the comparative method, the comparative method is fundamentally pragmatic; it is aimed at certain applied and practical goals, which does not remove the theoretical aspect of considering its problems. The comparative method is the property of synchronic language research; it establishes a relation of contrast between the languages being compared, which, depending on the level, manifests itself as diaphony (divergences in phonological), diamorphy (grammatical divergence), diataxy (syntactic divergence), diasemia (semantic divergence), dialexia (lexical divergences registered only in those cases when a lexical match is expected). The idea of the comparative method was theoretically substantiated by I. A. Baudouin de Courtenay. Elements of comparison were also found in grammars of the 18th-19th centuries, but as a linguistic method with certain principles it began to take shape in the 30-40s. XX century. In the USSR, important contributions to the theory and practice of the comparative method were made during these years by E. D. Polivanov, L. V. Shcherba, and S. I. Bernshtein. Classic. The comparative method was used in studies in the USSR by Polivanov (1933), III. Bally in Europe (1935). The importance of the comparative method is increasing due to increasing interest in the linguistic foundations of teaching non-native languages.
2 Verb Must and Have to The verb Must has only one present tense form. Very often the modal verb must shows obligation or necessity; actions that must be performed. She seemed to stagger like a child, and the thought came and went through Rosemary s mind, that if people wanted helping them mustrespond a little, just a little, otherwise it became very difficult indeed. The girl staggered like a child still unsteady on her feet, and Rosemary couldn’t help but think that if people want to be helped, they themselves mustshow activity, well, at least a little, otherwise everything becomes terribly complicated. This verb is the most categorical of the verbs of obligation, therefore, when expressing urgent advice or invitation, it can be translated into Russian with the words: absolutely must, absolutely necessary. In the following example, the verb must is used when the speaker decides that something must be done. Moreover, his decision was caused by internal necessity. She loved it; it was a great duck. She must have it.
She likes him very much - he’s such a charmer! She must buy it.
Thus, Must + Indefinite / Continuous Infinitive expresses an assumption related to presenttime Usually with Continuous it expresses the assumption that the action is happening at the moment of speech or during the present period of time. However, if the verb is not used in Continuous forms, then it is used with Indefinite forms. As happened in the example above. Rosemary saw the casket and definitely wanted to buy it. Also, the verb must expresses advice that urgently must be followed. “Oh, please” - Rosemary ran forward - “you mustnt be frightened,you mustnt"Really." Oh please! - Rosemary ran up to her. - There is no need to be afraid, really, there is no need to be afraid. The translator, taking into account the fact that the main character of the story, Rosemary, has just met a stranger on the street, renders the verb must as No need, but at the same time adds an introductory construction really. This was done intentionally, since in Russian culture it is not customary to give strict, urgent advice to strangers. The verb Have to expresses the need to perform an action caused by circumstances - must, must, forced. The meaning of the verb Have to is close to the modal verb must(obligation or necessity from the speaker's point of view). In this meaning it can be used in all forms and tenses, in sentences of any type in combination with a simple, non-perfect infinitive (Indefinite Infinitive) with a particle to. It has time forms: have / has- present tense, had- past tense, shall / will have- Future tense . The waiting-room laughed so loudly at this that he had tohold both hands up. Everyone burst into such loud laughter that he had toraise both hands up. Now I had a call for twenty-eight ladies today, but they had tobe young and able to hop it a bit-see? Today I had an application for twenty-eight girls, but onlyon young ones who know how to kick their legs. And I had another call for sixteen-but they had toknow something about sand-dancing. And one more application for sixteen girls, but onlyto acrobats. Again, the translator performs a conversion, replacing the modal verb with a modal word. You shant have to. I ll look after you. Calm down. I'll take care of you. There is such a translation transformation as logical development here. The translator relies on the context, which comes in the form of dialogue. Negative form of shan t have to expresses the absence of obligation or necessity and is translated into Russian by the words: not necessary, not necessary, no need. However, if the previous sentence said that the stranger could no longer live like this, then it would be a gross stylistic and factual error to translate the verb have to as not necessary. Namely: I can't stand this anymore! Not necessary. I'll take care of you. 2.3 Verbs Can and Could In most cases, the verb can expresses a person's ability to perform an action. "I cantgo on no longer like this. I cantbear it. I cantbear it. I shall do away with myself. I cantbear no more." "I more I can notSo. I can not stand! I can't stand it! I'll do something with myself. I can't stand this! In this expression, the verb can is translated not only as I can not, but also how I can't stand it. After the girl drank tea and forgot about fear, she decided to speak out. It is to convey the internal state of the heroine that the translator uses such verbs. “My darling girl,” said Philip, “you re quite mad, you know. It simply cant be done».
“Baby, you're just crazy. This is absolutely unthinkable"things cantgo on like this, Miss Moss, no indeed they cant.
Keep in mind, Miss Moss, that Socontinue further can not.
In this example, we see the technique of contraction, which was used to give the dialogue laconicism and the indignation of the landlady. Moreover, both a modal verb and a modal word were conveyed. In the following example, the verb can is used in the past tense according to the rules of tense agreement (could) and expresses a state of possibility close to certainty. She could have said: "Now I ve got you", as she gazed at the little captive she had netted. She looked at the little captive who had fallen into her net, and she I wanted to scream: “Now you won’t get away from me!” This type of transformation occurs quite often, so we are dealing with internal monologue. The sentence uses the technique of holistic transformation, that is, not one word, but a whole sentence has undergone transformation. First comes the permutation along with the conversion, and then the construction could have saidreplaced by reverse I wanted to scream, which shows confidence in action. However, if the verb Could is used together with the Perfect Infinitive, then this construction shows that some action or fact could have happened, but did not happen. "You could have letthat room time and time again", says she, "and if people won t look after themselves in times like these, nobody else will”, she says. You I could alreadyten times passthis room,” she said. - These are not the times now. Design could have lettranslated into Russian in the form of the subjunctive mood could.
We also use the verbs Can and Could when we make a sentence. Could is used in formal situations. « CanI have a cup of tea, Miss? "she asked. - Is it possibleShall I have a cup of tea, miss? - she asked, turning to the waitress. Adverb it is forbiddenin Russian it is used to express a request, wish or requirement. CanAnd is it possiblecoincide in function, so such a replacement is quite acceptable. 4 Verb May and Might The verb May/Might is used when we ask for permission. "Rosemary, mayI come in? "It was Philip. "Of course." Rosemary, Can? - It was Philip. - Certainly. I dare youdraw your attention, madam, to these flowers, here, on the little lady's corsage. We use "May/Might I...?" to ask permission from someone we don't know very well. "Madam, mayI speak to you a moment? » "Madam, CanShould I contact you with a request? It is important to remember that the verb May has a very formal connotation and is not used in everyday speech. Well, I ll just wait a moment, if I may.
Well, I'll wait if allow me.
Miss Moss asks permission to wait at the Kig and Kejit office, so the emphasis shifts to another person. What was it-if I mayask? A Canfind out what this place was? The verb May can express consent to a request, that is, permission. It cost twenty-eight guineas. MayDo I have it? You may, little wasteful one. It costs twenty-eight guineas. Can, will I buy it? - Can, small reel. Also, the verb May expresses possibility. The construction May/Might + Present Infinitive indicates a possibility or probability in the present or future tense. I mightjust havea stroke of luck. AND, Maybe be, I'll be lucky. If I get there early Mr. Kadgit may havesomething by the morning s post... If I come early May be, Mr. Kajit will have something for me, something with the morning mail... It gave Miss Moss a queer feeling to watch-a sinking-as you mightsay. Looking at her, Miss Moss felt something strange, as ifEverything inside her was crumpled into a ball. The translator makes a holistic transformation, and the verb mightconveys with a modal word as if.
With the help of May/Might + Perfect Infinitive constructions we show the possibility or probability that took place in the past. "She may have hada College education and sung in West End concerts", says she, "but if your Lizzie says what s true", she says, "and she s washing her own clothes and drying them on the towel rail, it s easy to see where the finger s pointing". « Letthere she graduated from at least twenty music schools and sang at concerts in the West End, but since your Lizzie says that she washes her own laundry and dries it in the room on a towel rack, then everything is clear.” To preserve the form of reproach, the translator uses the word let, which refers to formative particles and which serves to command. The shopman, in some dim cavern of his mind, mayhave dared to think so too. Must be, the antiquarian, in the darkest recess of his consciousness, also boldly had this thought. 5 Verbs Should and Ought to The verbs Should and Ought to are used to express advice, desirability, or recommendation. One oughtnt togive way to them. One ought togo home and have an extra-special tea. It is forbiddengive in to such moments. We need it soongo home and drink some stronger tea. If I m the more fortunate, you ought toexpect... And if my life turned out better than yours, still, maybe someday...
In the above sentence, a logical development is made, and the verb ought toconveyed by introductory word after alland design May be.
After all, why shouldn'ttdo you come back with me? After all, why wouldwon't you come to me? The verb should is expressed through the formative particle would, which forms the subjunctive form. As for herself she didn't t eat; she smoked and looked away tactfully so that the other shoulddon't be shy. She didn't eat anything herself.