English Language & Literature Teaching, Vol. 11, No.

2 Summer 2005

A Study of the Semantic Function of Modality*

Sang-Yoon Lee
(Hannam University)

Lee, Sang-Yoon. (2005). A study of the semantic function of modality. English Language
& Literature Teaching, 11(2), 149-170.

The purpose of this paper is to make a sentence systemic within the category of
structural grammar for the modality in which a speaker expresses his attitude. It is
the priority of a language to communicate meaning. By eliminating the theoretical
description of traditional grammar, this paper also aims to illustrate the concepts of
nine modal verbs through a systemic network. The concept of modality includes
both the epistemic and the deontic characteristics of modality. Epistemic modality is
associated with either knowledge or belief on the part of a speaker who gives his own
judgments about the state of affairs, events, or actions. However, deontic modality is
related to either the possibility or the necessity of acts that a speaker performs to give
permission or fulfill an obligation.
In conclusion, all the subsystems are described within the framework of the systemic
network, with the intention of including all the potential options of the semantic
functions available in a situation.

[modality/function/category]

I. INTRODUCTION

By indicating some tasks and contents, a human being is able to describe a situation
which has occurred and has been brought into existence in his own world, through the
sentences of natural language. At a given moment, a speaker can express his situation
by indicating the time when these things happened. This is called modality. There are
limitations to understanding exactly the situation of the utterances imposed by both

*
This paper was funded through the 2003 Hannam University Research Grant.
150 Sang-Yoon Lee

the abstract structure of the language used to describe the event in a formal sentence
and the traditionally rule oriented grammar. That is why various interpretations can be
made as a result of some external factors, such as the speakers, situations, or objects of
an utterance, even though the human language has the same utterances. In describing
his attitude, it is still difficult for a speaker to express his opinions within a structure
oriented description and the interpretation of traditional aspects of grammar.
For that reason, the purpose of this study is to make a sentence systemic within the
category of the structural grammar of Halliday (1994), in terms of the modality in
which a speaker expresses his attitude, with priority given to communicating the
meaning of the language. Free from the theoretical description of traditional
grammar, which does not include a situation within a context, the purpose is to make
the concepts of modal verbs with “may”, “might”, “can”, “could”, “will”, “would”,
“shall”, “should”, and “must” functional in a systemic network.

Ⅱ. THE SPHERE OF MODALITY

We tend to think about the world around us idealistically, rather than realistically. It
is true or realistic that even idealistic facts lie within a certain realm of possibility
(Lewis, 1969). A speaker is able to make an idealistic decision on things by using a
modal expression. The modal judgement is applied to either the occurrence of an
event or the truth of a proposition (Lyons, 1977). For example, sentence (1) a.
indicates that the utterance in (1) b. can occur within the realm of possibility.

(1) a. James works today.

b. James is able to work today.

Also, the proposition in (2) a. shows that the utterance in (2) b. can be proven to be
a true conclusion in all possible situations.

(2) a. James is at home.

b. James must be at home.
 A Study of the Semantic Function of Modality 151

1. Definition of Modality

Zandvoort and Van Ek (1975) have indicated that modality is described by

grammatical means, based on the mental state of a speaker and its impact on the
contents of the description. With respect to the descriptive contents given by a speaker,
his mental attitude is a mental state pertaining to a certain degree of possibility,
probability, certainty, or necessity.
There is still ambiguity between modality and mood in the use of each of these
concepts. Palmer (1986) states that modality is the same as aspect, tense, number,
gender, etc. in the grammatical category. Later, Palmer (1990) says that modality can
be the same as aspect, tense, number, gender, etc. in a significant term. The recent
discussion of the modal concept on modality and possibility, probability, or necessity
comes from Aristotle and the ancient philosophers in Greece. These concepts are
based on the idea that a human being might have a tendency to categorize both his
attitude and experience about things in terms of an unrealistic point of view, rather
than from realistic aspects. For example, when a speaker gives utterance to sentence
(3) a. below, he is likely to express his opinion as if it were the truth, which is not
appropriate within the context of the utterance. In contrast to sentence (3) a., the
speaker asserts his opinion to be a fact when he gives utterance to sentence (3) b.,
which is not modal.
(3) a. He may already have left.
b. He has left.

A philosopher and a logician analyze and categorize the concepts of modality to

show that insincere things can be described as the truth within the realm of
possibility. Both, whether the world of possibility is as actual as the world of reality is
or not, and whether an abstract substitute to the world of reality is or not, can be
discussed in the field of philosophy and logic, rather than that of linguistics. Most
people consider that there are several methods available for analyzing and
categorizing the existence of things. For example, a speaker imagines that James has
forgotten his appointment in another position of the world when he makes the
utterances in sentences (4) a. and b. below.
(4) a. James evidently must have forgotten the appointment.
b. James might perhaps have forgotten the appointment.
152 Sang-Yoon Lee

Likewise, a speaker wishes the world to be as he wants it to be when he utters

sentence (5) below. In other words, a speaker conceives a world in which James has
not forgotten.

(5) James really should have remembered the appointment.

The fixation on the world of possibility in dealing with situations different from
reality is helpful in explaining the concept of modality. The importance of the world
of possibility is given both in contrast to the world of reality and in abstract
relationships.
The type of classification of modality in the world of possibility varies according to
scholars involved. The contexts of a sentence uttered by a speaker may be divided into
twenty subcategories, according to the mental attitude of a speaker (Jespersen,
1924). They also may be divided into eight subcategories, according to a
philosophical rather than a linguistic basis (Rescher, 1968). Among the eight
subcategories, the epistemic modality associated with knowledge and belief and the
deontic modality associated with obligation are regarded as the most important.
Perkins (1983) says that there are three types of modalities, such as an obligatory
modality associated with an act of moral responsibility, a causal modality associated
with a natural or psychological law, and an epistemic modality associated with the
rational law of a speaker and his belief. Coates (1983) indicates that a root modality
can be divided into both an epistemic modality and an unepistemic modality that
relate to the assumption and assessment of a speaker regarding the truth of a
proposition. Palmer (1986 & 1990) mentions that these can be classified into an
epistemic modality, a deontic modality, and a dynamic modality, as proposed by Von
Wright (1951).

2. Function of Modality

The concepts of modality are signified by both modal verbs such as “can”, “could”,
“may”, “might”, “must”, “ought to”, “will”, “would”, “shall”, “should”, etc. and
quasi-modal verbs such as “have to”, “need to”, “had better”, etc. In addition, Perkins
(1983) says that a modality is signified as a factor of language: an adjective and a
participle of modality such as “be going to” and “be going to”, (duplication here);
modal adjective and adverb such as “necessary”/”necessarily”, “probable”/”probably”,
 A Study of the Semantic Function of Modality 153

“certain”/”certainly”, “advisable”, “perhaps”, “maybe”, etc., and parenthetical

remarks such as “I think” and “I'm sure”, etc.
First all, the expression of modality is examined in both modal verbs and quasi-
modal verbs. Modal verbs are related to various psychological attitudes of a speaker,
far from an action and a state expressed by the main verb. Fries (1940) says that
modal verbs are the same as functional words. These can be divided according to their
types and significance: (a) ability or power, such as “may”, “might”, “can”, and
“could”; (b) possibility or doubt, such as “may”, “might”, “can”, and “could”; (c)
permission, such as “may”, “might”, “can”, and “could”; (d) obligation, such as
“should”, “ought”, and “must”; (e) habitual action, such as “would”, and “used to”; (f)
appropriateness, such as “should” and “ought”; (g) future prediction, such as “should”,
“must”, and “would”; and (h) wish and will, such as “may” and “would”.
According to Turnbull and Saxton (1997), both modal verbs and quasi-modal verbs
are indicative of the probability of an event and a proposition for a problem. “Must”,
“need to”, and “have (got) to” convey an inevitability of the state of things. These
modal verbs have implications on an environment in relation to the state of affairs
related to a question. On the other hand, “will”, “would”, “be going to”, “shall”,
“should”, “ought to”, “had better”, etc. are considered to be somewhere in between a
probability (and what?). Therefore, these modal verbs and quasi-modal verbs indicate
a probability of things in relation to the state of affairs and can be induced to direct the
truth. In particular, “can”, “could”, “be able to”, “may”, “might”, etc. indicate a
possibility of things because they show the lowest degree of the truth and the
occurrence of the state of affairs.
The expression of modality with a modal adjective and an adverb require the
following considerations: Most often, a modal adjective and adverb have a meaning
equivalent to that of the modal verb. For example, “necessary” and “necessarily” are
equivalent to “must”. “Probable” and “probably” are also equivalent to “can” and
“may” (Perkins, 1983). In addition, “advisable” has a meaning similar to “should”,
which is used to mention the actions of performance. “Likely” has a meaning
equivalent to “will”, which is used with reference to the probability of an
occurrence. “Maybe” and “perhaps” are equivalent to “can” and “may”, which are
used with reference to the truth and the possibility of a proposition. “Certain” and
“certainly”, “sure”, and “surely” are equivalent to “must”, which is used with
reference to the authenticity of a true proposition.
Finally, parenthetical remarks indicate concepts of modality to be examined. In the
case where “I know”, “I'm certain”, “I'm sure”, “I think”, “I believe”, “I
154 Sang-Yoon Lee

guess”/”imagine”/”suppose”, etc. are used in parenthetical remarks, they have a modal

meaning when they are separated from the remaining parts of a sentence (Lyons,
1977). “I know”, “I'm certain”, and “I'm sure” mean that a speaker believes in the
inevitability, which definitely happens in a correlated situation due to rational law. “I
think” and “I believe” mean that a speaker believes in the probability that things will
happen, but which may not necessarily happen in all situations.

3. Deontic and Epistemic Modality

Deontic modality relates to the happening of events described in a proposition and

epistemic modality relates to the truth of a proposition. The expressions of deontic
modality are mainly used in the utterances of the judgement of a speaker with regard
to obligation, ability, and will. On the other hand, the expressions of epistemic
modality are generally used in situations in which a speaker expresses his knowledge,
beliefs, or opinions. Obviously, the utterances in sentences (6) a. and b. differ in
meaning from each other.
(6) a. She may have a car.
b. She must be very diligent.

The above sentences can be changed to (7) a. and (7) b. below.

(7) a. Perhaps he has a car.
b. I am confidently forced to conclude that he is quite diligent.

A comparison of the above sentences indicates the different degrees of faith and
assurance of the speaker. Incidentally, sentences (6) a. and b. above can be changed to
sentences (8) a. and (8) b. below, respectively.
(8) a. She is permitted to have a car.
b. She is required to be very diligent.

This is to say, that the permission of or command by a speaker is given through

certain actions and obligations. Sentence (7) may be considered an example of
epistemic modality and sentence (8) may be regarded as demonstrating deontic
modality. Modal verbs can be used in both deontic and epistemic fields. It is not
difficult to separate them from each other. An example of this is shown in sentence (9)
below.
(9) He must be finished.
 A Study of the Semantic Function of Modality 155

In the case of a conversation between a speaker and an official of a junior rank, the
“must” in the sentence indicates a deontic interpretation. On the other hand, the
“must” in the sentence is given an epistemic interpretation if it is said between
friends. Consequently, the interpretations can be different, depending upon the
situation, even if the same modal expressions are used.
Quasi-modal verbs such as “have (got) to” and “be going to” are not clear in terms of
either deontic and epistemic modality. However, “need to” and “be able to” are
described as being of deontic modality and the parenthetical remark “I think” can be
explained simply as being of epistemic modality.

Ⅲ. SYSTEMIC ANALYSIS OF MODALITY

Modality is associated with the message of a speaker. It is related to the judgement

of a speaker with respect to whether the speaker's message is true or not. Not every
clause is included in the system of modality which is being discussed. In the modal
system, it is possible for a clause to be either an indicative or a declarative sentence
depending upon the mood desired. Clauses with questions can be selected in the
system of modality, but such a domain of choice is not always equal to that of a
declarative sentence. As modality is mentioned with priority given to a clause, it is
classified as interrogative, declarative, or of systemic meaning. Clauses can be
divided into interrogative and declarative sentences. Here the declarative and
systemic meanings agree with the system of modality, but the interrogative meaning
does not.
interrogative

clause declarative

systemic meaning

(10) Is it snowing? (interrogative)

(11) It is snowing. (declarative)
(12) It must be snowing. (systemic meaning)
156 Sang-Yoon Lee

A declarative sentence contrasts to a question, and the modal meaning can be

changed according to the attitude of a speaker. Sentence (10) above is an
interrogative sentence which asks if it is snowing, but sentence (11) shows confidence
in the basic message. Sentence (12) is an extrinsic modality involving human
judgement, even though it is not concretely expressed in the sentence.
To begin with, modality is sorted according to its various aspects of declarative
meaning. Declarative sentences can be divided into those of neutral modality and
those of assessed modality. As these options are given semantic features, they
become both modality neutral and modality assessed. These options are available
upon the assumption of a declarative meaning.

interrogative
clause modality
declarative

modality assessed

A declarative sentence can be either modality neutral or modality assessed.

1. Modality Neutral

(13) It is snowing.
(14) That's David.
(15) He will come tomorrow morning.

The clause which is modality neutral does not indicate confidence or a basic
message. In this case, a listener assumes that the speaker is confident in his basic
message.

2. Modality Assessed

(16) It must be snowing. [almost certain]

(17) That may be David. [possible]
(18) He will probably come tomorrow morning. [probable]
 A Study of the Semantic Function of Modality 157

Modality assessed is illustrated in sentences (16) to (18). The clause which shows
modality assessed indicates confidence and a basic message. When sentences (13)
above and (19) below are compared with each other, it is possible to differentiate
between modality neutral and modality assessed. That is, one recognizes that “It is
snowing now.” from sentence (16). In addition, sentence (18) above shows that the
speaker has confidence.
In the case of modality assessed, a speaker deals with the possibility, probability, or
necessity of the truth of each message. According to the circumstances, a speaker can
take one of these three options. Semantic features can be given to the options,
according to the circumstances. They can be given expression in the form of possible,
probable, or almost certain. They can also be described in the semantic system as
follow:

possible : (17)

modality assessed probable : (18)

almost certain : (16)

Each option has its own features in the following example of modality
assessed. Namely, the sentences below from (19) to (21) are possible, the sentences
from (22) to (24) are probable, and the sentences from (25) to (27) are almost certain.

(19) That may be David.

(20) She may possibly be late.
(21) Perhaps the bus has gone.
(22) That's probably David.
(23) He will probably be there by now
(24) The bus has probably gone.
(25) It must be snowing.
(26) He must certainly be there by now.
(27) The bus must have gone.
 158 Sang-Yoon Lee

If the above division illustrates each option, it can be described in terms of the
potential meaning of each option. The systemic model is as follows:

3. Virtually Possible – “can”, “may”, “could”, “might”

interrogative
clause modality neutral possible
declarative
modality assessed probable

almost certain

Basd on the premise of the clause of modality assessed in a declarative sentence,

there are three possible classifications: virtually possible, theoretically possible, and
contingently possible.

1) Virtually Possible

Virtually possible involves that either the given proposition is true or there is a
possibility of its being true.
(28) That may be David.
(29) I may possibly be late.
(30) Perhaps the bus has gone.
(31) I think that actually may be his name.
(32) He may come back.
(33) You may be right.
(34) The roads may be improved.
The above sentences from (28) to (34) are virtually possible. Both the “may” and
“perhaps” selected here assume that the given proposition is true or there is a
possibility of its being true.

2) Theoretically Possible

Theoretically possible has a meaning of lesser possibility than virtually possible, in

theory.
 A Study of the Semantic Function of Modality 159

(35) The road can be blocked.

(36) Anybody can make mistakes.
(37) The road can be improved.
(38) Even expert drivers can make mistakes.
(39) If it's snowing tomorrow, the sports can take place indoors.

“Can”, theoretically possible, has a meaning of lesser possibility than “may”, which
has the indication of being virtually possible. That is, sentences (34) and (38) above
compare virtually possible with theoretically possible. Sentence (38), in theory,
means that the road can be improved. However, sentence (34), in theory, means that
there is a concrete plan to improve the road.

3) Contingently Possible – “could”, “might”

Both “could” and “might”, with assumptive meanings, are often contingently
possible. Namely, they both mean that it is possible, but that there is something
uncertain about them in the future.

(40) She could/might be telling lies.

(41) Could you have left your purse on the bus?

So far, the three options with a possibility have been discussed in the above
sentences. The systemic model is as follows:

virtually possible
interrogative
clause
modality neutral possible
theoretical possible
declarative
modality assessed probable contingent possible

almost certain

4. Ability – “can”, “be able to”

The concept of ability can also be expressed by “can”, which is closely related to
theoretically possible.
(42) She can drive a car.
160 Sang-Yoon Lee

(43) She can speak English fluently.

(44) Will you be able to meet us in New York tomorrow?
(45) She is capable of keeping a secret when she wants to.
(46) Can you remember where they live?
(47) Tom could speak three languages by the age of seven.
(48) They say John can cook better than his wife.

“Can” is used to express ability, but “can't”, “be unable to”, or “incapable of” are
used to express inability.
(49) She can't speak French well.
(50) She can speak English, but she can't write it.

Usually “could” means “know how to”, which indicates both perpetual and habitual
ability. “Be able to" often has a meaning of both ability and achievement.
(51) She could play the piano when she was six.
(52) Will you be able to meet us in New York tomorrow?
(53) By acting quickly, we were able to save her from drowning.

5. Certainty or Logical Necessity – “must”, “have to”

”must” + root verb and “have to” + root verb convey the meaning of either a
certainty or a logical necessity.
(54) There must be some mistake.
(55) You have to be joking.
(56) It must be snowing.
(57) She must certainly be here by now.
(58) The bus must have gone.
(59) You must be feeling tired.
(60) John must have a lot of money.

The sentences from (54) and (60) above indicate varying levels of
necessity. “Must”. a logical necessity, is equivalent to the possibility of ”may”. That
is because a speaker makes a judgement about a proposition which is either inevitably
true or highly likely to be true, to say the least. In this sense, “must” means that a
speaker already knows and he has made a decision based on the objects observed. In
general, “must”, of a logical necessity, is not used in a question or a negative
 A Study of the Semantic Function of Modality 161

sentence. “Can” is generally used instead of “must” in a question. Accordingly, a

question corresponding to “He must be the one you mean.” has the same meaning as
“Can he be the one you mean?”. The concept related to “must” is both a necessity
and an obligation. The following sentences both denote an obligation and a coercion:

(61) You must study hard.

(62) You must be back by nine o'clock.
(63) Now we really must get down to business.
(64) We must all share our skills and knowledge.
(65) Productivity must be improved if the nation is to prosper.

The above sentences convey the idea of an obligation. There is some difference of
degree, but they all imply that a speaker supports a certain kind of behavior. “Must”
typically indicates a speaker who enforces his authority. The feature of almost certain
is classified as both an obligation and a logical necessity. These two options are
shown as both an obligation and a logical necessity. The system of meaning they
illustrate is as follows:

possible

modality assessed probable

obligation
almost certain
logical necessity

6. Probable – “ought to”, “should”

Auxiliaries of both “ought to” and “should” can express probability. They are
almost equivalent to ”must". There are some examples in the following sentences:
(66) Our guests must be home by now. (I am certain.)
(67) Our guests ought to (should be) home by now.
(They probably are, but I'm not certain.)

The feature of probable is also given expression in “probable” and ”likely”.

(68) It is quite probable/likely that he didn't receive the mail.
162 Sang-Yoon Lee

(69) That's probably David.

(70) She will probably be here by now.
(71) The bus has probably gone.
(72) I think that that probably is her name.
(73) He probably has come back.
(74) You are probably right.
(75) The bus probably can or will be repaired.

A speaker is not sure if he speaks the truth. He carefully concludes on the basis of
all the knowledge he has until now. Both “ought to” and “should”, which indicate
probability mean both an obligation and a necessity. They do not express the
conviction of a speaker regarding the described events or the occurrences of the state
of affairs, and are different from both “must” and “have to”.

7. A Systemic Meaning of a Modal Auxiliary

To make good use of a modal auxiliary, one should realize that it can be divided into
both intrinsic modality and extrinsic modality according to the meaning of the modal
auxiliary. These options can be shown to have both intrinsic modality and extrinsic
modality which are meaningful features.

1) An intrinsic modality

Intrinsic modality relates to some internal control of human beings with respect to
both things and contexts. It includes permission, obligation, and will.
(76) You may go out and play. (permission)
(77) You must study hard. (obligation)
(78) I'll see him tomorrow. (will)

2) An extrinsic modality

Extrinsic modality is related to the judgement of human beings with respect to

whether the events can possibly happen or not. It includes possibility, necessity, and
prediction.
(79) That may be David. (possibility)
(80) I'll see him tomorrow. (necessity)
 A Study of the Semantic Function of Modality 163

(81) David will have arrived by now. (prediction)

Semantically, all modal auxiliaries are either of the intrinsic or extrinsic type. In
some cases, they may be both types at the same time. They can also be used as a
model option which conveys the meaning of other potential options. The meaning in
the previous sentence is not clear. The systemic model is as follows:

intrinsic modality (extrinsic modality)

systemic meaning
extrinsic modality (intrinsic modality)

For example, sentence (81) conveys both the meaning of will and prediction.

8. Permission – “may”, “can”

The modal verbs have the concept of modality such as possible, probable, and almost
certain. They are used to express permission, obligation, and volition. The above
three options can convey the meanings of permission, obligation, and volition. These
three features are indicative of the assumption of an intrinsic modality.
(82) Can/May I smoke here?
(83) You may go out and play.
(84) You may borrow my motor cycle, if you wish.
(85) Visitors may reclaim their travel expenses up to a limit of $70.
(86) Might I ask whether you are using the computer?

The concept of “may” involves both a permission and a possibility. In the case
where the meaning is a permission, “can” may be used instead of ”may”. “May” is
less frequently used as an auxiliary of a permission than “can” because “may” is a
formal expression. The above features can be shown in the following systemic
model:
permission

intrinsic modality volition

systemic meaning
extrinsic modality obligation
164 Sang-Yoon Lee

9. Prediction – “will”, “must”, “shall”

(87) You will feel better after taking this medicine.

As mentioned above, it is a well-known fact that “will” is generally used to predict a

future event. The prediction falls into three categories, namely specific prediction,
habitual prediction, and timeless prediction.
(88) That must be my husband. (I know that he is phoning now.)

1) A specific prediction

“Will”, “must”, and “should” are generally used to predict future events.
(89) You will feel better after taking this medicine.
(90) The game will be finished by now.
(91) This shop will be opened in five minutes.

2) A habitual prediction

Even though it is not observed in practice, it is a prediction about the certainty of an

event which one can be fairly certain of, based on evidence.
(92) David will have arrived by now.
(93) David must have arrived by now.
(94) He will have had his dinner by now.
(95) That'll be a mailman. (after a bell was rung)

“Will” is also used in either a prediction or when describing a characteristic behavior

which habitually occurs.
(96) Accidents will happen.
(97) A lion will only attack a human being when it is hungry.
(98) She'll talk for hours if you let her.
(99) He'll sit on the floor quietly all day. He'll just play with his toys, and you won't
hear a murmer from him.
 A Study of the Semantic Function of Modality 165

3) A timeless prediction

A habitual meaning of prediction is often used, either in a conditional clause or when

stating the possibility of a timeless prediction.
(100) Oil will float on water.
(101) If litmus paper is dipped in acid, it will turn red.

“Shall” is not often used in modern American English, but it is used to indicate a
prediction or a volition. These are widely used and related to a subject of the first
person. “Shall” can be used in a formal style to indicate a future event.
(102) According to the opinion polls, he shall (will) win quite easily.
(103) When shall (will) we know the results of the election?

As a predictive characteristic is used with each option, it is described as a model

option for all the other potential options. The three features are based on the
assumption of an extrinsic modality.

intrinsic
possibl
systemic meaning
extrinsic modality almost certain
specific prediction
predictio habitual prediction
timeless prediction

10. The Syntactic Characteristic of a Modal Auxiliary

The modal verb is always finite because a group of finite verbs is necessary for
modality. The finite verb is recognized as an initial element in a group
structure. Therefore, the initial element exists if there is a modal verb. The choice
within a category of modality is between markedness and unmarkedness. The reality
of an element is in contrast to the absence of an element. That is why there is a
difference between modality and unmodality.
166 Sang-Yoon Lee

term initial element

modal : any modal verb

systemic modality

non-modal : any other group

Modal verbs do not have a variety of forms of inflection, in contrast to general

verbs. Yoo (2000) indicates that modal auxiliaries have a finite verb which is similar
to a present or past tense of a verb but without the addition of a particular tense
morpheme. Modal auxiliaries always need to be supplemented by a different group of
verbs. They are defined by a beginning phrase used as a sentence predicate, as
follows:
(1) If a verb is in the present tense, the past tense, or is a modal verb, it is a finite verb.
Otherwise, it is an infinite verb. Accordingly, the phrase which begins with a
verb is either a finite verb or an infinite verb.
(2) An auxiliary typically takes a verb expression as a complement. In itself, it has
the function of showing a grammatical property, such as tense, voice, or modality.
(104) She really does/did say a lot.
(105) She is/was seen regularly by the doctor.
(106) He will/would get upset.

An auxiliary has the characteristic of lacking a verb property, as shown in

the following examples:
a) It is not necessary to add -s in the third person singular.
(107) He may come back.
b) It begins the verb phrase of the sentence.
(108) She must have finished her homework.
c) It is not available to combine with other auxiliaries in a sentence.
(109) He must/can work hard.
→He must be able to work hard.
Consequently, “be able to”, ”have to”, etc. are used in an ersatz form when the
meaning of an auxiliary is overlapped and the transition of a tense is required.
d) A contracted form of the negative “not” can be used.
(110) David could not/couldn't come to the party.
 A Study of the Semantic Function of Modality 167

e) It is not available in the perfect tense.

(111) They could have flown to Europe.
f) It does not have an infinitive, a gerund, a present participle, or a past participle,
etc. It is also used in an ersatz form, if necessary.
(112) They have not done/would not do that.
(113) Has she gone/Must she go to the doctor?
→Has she had to go to the doctor?
g) It has a past tense similar to “could”, “might”, “would”, “should”, etc. however, it
is used either in indirect narration or in the subjunctive mood rather than the
indicative mood.

IV. CONCLUSION

This paper has been focusing on the nine uses of a modal auxiliary. It can be
described in the semantic system as follows:
virtually possible
interrogative
modality neutral possible theoretical possible
declarative
contingent possible
modality assessed probable
obligation
clause almost certain
logical necessity

permission

intrinsic modality volition

systemic meaning
obligation
extrinsic modality
possible

almost certain
specific prediction
prediction habitual prediction
timeless prediction
168 Sang-Yoon Lee

As a clause is systematized, it can be categorized as either imperative or

indicative. If indicative is chosen from the two options, it can be further classified as
either interrogative or declarative. If declarative is selected at this stage, either
modality neutral or modality assessed can be chosen. If modality assessed is selected,
one can then choose from among possible, probable, and almost certain. If possible
is selected from among the three options, one can then choose from among virtually
possible, theoretically possible, and contingently possible. If almost certain is
selected at this point, one can choose either obligation or logical necessity. Also, a
clause can be examined in terms of its systemic meaning. It can be seen as having
either intrinsic modality or extrinsic modality. If intrinsic modality is selected from
these two options, one can then choose from among permission, volition, and
obligation. If extrinsic modality is selected, one can choose among possible, almost
certain, and prediction. If prediction is selected at this time, one can choose from
among specific prediction, habitual prediction, and timeless prediction. The options
mentioned above and the features of their meanings are illustrated in the following
examples:

(114) It must be snowing.

indicative, declarative, modality assessed, almost certain, logical necessity
(115) That may be David.
indicative, declarative, modality assessed, possible, virtually possible
(116) He may go out and play.
indicative, declarative, systemic meaning, intrinsic modality, permission
(117) David will have arrived by now.
indicative, declarative, systemic meaning, extrinsic modality, prediction, habitual
prediction

In addition to the nine modal verbs mentioned above, there are some other
expressions of modality. For example, there are modal phrases such as “had better”,
“would rather”, and “would sooner”, etc. There are modal adjectives and adverbs
such as “advisable”, “certain”, “certainly”, “definite”, “definitely”, “likely”, “maybe”,
“necessary”, “necessarily”, “perhaps”, “possible”, “possibly”, “probable”, “probably”,
“sure”, and “surely”, etc. There are modal nouns such as “possibility”, “likelihood”,
and “certainty”. There are also modal verbs such as “doubt”, “reckon”, and “believe”,
etc. In addition, both intonation and stress have a modal meaning in verbal
expressions. The purpose of modality is to express a speaker's mental attitude
 A Study of the Semantic Function of Modality 169

toward the descriptive contents by means of grammar. It definitely requires thought

to completely convey and understand what a speaker wants to communicate. For
such a grammatical point of view, and from purely morphological aspects, modality
has been broken down into various semantic features.

REFERENCES

Coates, J. (1983). The semantics of the modal auxiliaries, London: Croomhelm.

Fries, C. C. (1940a). American English grammar. New York:: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Fries, C. C. (1940b). On the development of the structural use of word-order in odern English.
Lg 16: 199-208.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1970). Functional diversity in language as seen from a consideration of
modality and mood in English, Foundations of Language , 6, 322-61.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar, 2nd ed, London:
Edward Arnold.
Jeperson, O. (1924). The philosophy of grammar, London: George Allen & Unwin.
Lewis, K. (1969). Counterfactuals, Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. press.
Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics (1 and 2), Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Palmer, F. R. (1986). Mood and modality, Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Palmer, F. R. (1990). Modality and the English modals, 2nd ed, London: Longman.
Perkins, M. R. (1983). Modal expressions in English, London: Fraces Pinter.
Rescher, N. (1968). Topics in philosophical Logic, Dordrecht: Reidel.
Turnbull, W., & K. L. Saxton. (1997). Modal expressions and face work in refusals to
comply with requests, Journal of Pragmatics, 27, 145-181.
Von Wright, E. H. (1951). An essay in modal logic, Amsterdam: North Holland.
Zandvoort, R. W., & J. A. Van Ek. (1975). A handbook of English grammar, London: Longman.

Examples in: English

Applicable Language: English
Applicable Levels: College

Lee, Sang-Yoon
Department of English Language & Literature, Hannam University
306-791, 133 Ojeong-dong Daedeok-gu, Daejeon
170 Sang-Yoon Lee

Telephone: (042) 629-7327

E-mail: [email protected]

Received in April, 2005

Reviewed in May, 2005
Revised version received in June, 2005