Pullum_geoffrey_k_a_student_s_introduction

§8 Mood

53

A salient interpretation of [ia] is that there was just one nod. But a nod is punc­ tual, so [ib] cannot normally involve a single nod: it conveys the idea of a sequence of nods.

The default interpretation of [iia] is as a state: we take it to describe his charac­ ter/personality. The progressive requires a dynamic component of meaning, and we interpret [iib] in terms of behaviour rather than character: "He is behaving very tactfully".

Non-progressive [iiia] again describes a state, while the progressive [iiib] conveys that the situation is a relatively temporary one - it is progressing towards its end. The usual interpretation of [iva] is as a state, with regular, habitual reading of the 'New Scientist' : reading it takes too long to permit an interpretation with a single reading in present time. The most salient interpretation of [ivb] (though not the only one) is then of a single reading in progress at the present moment.

The progressive futurate

There are certain cases where clauses with progressive form do not have the usual "in progress" meaning. The most important involves the futurate construction (see §S. l ):

[50]

a. I see my broker today.

b. I'm seeing my broker today.

In both clauses we are concerned with a future act of seeing someone. Version [ia] is an ordinary futurate use of the present tense, and conveys that an appointment has been set up or is regularly scheduled, whereas [ib] may suggest simply that I intend to go and see my broker today.

8Mood

Mood is a grammatical category associated with the semantic dimen­ sion of modality. Mood is to modality as tense is to time: tense and mood are cate­ gories of grammatical form, while time and modality are the associated categories of meaning.

Modality deals mainly with two related contrasts: factual vs non-factual, and asserted vs non-asserted. The meaning differences seen in [S l i] and [S l ii] are dif­ ferences in modality.

[5 1 ]	NON-MODAL	I		MODAL
a.	She saw him.		b.	She must have seen him.
ii a.	He leaves today.		b.	He must leave today.

c. She may have seen him. c. He can/may leave today.

In [i] the [a] version presents her seeing him as a matter of fact, whereas in [b] it is an inference and in [cl simply a possibility. In [ii] the [a] version has the force of an assertion, whereas [b] can be used as a kind of directive, imposing an obligation, and [cl can be used to give permission.

54 Chapter 3 Verbs, tense, aspect, and mood

Modality can be expressed by a great variety of formal means. The possibility meaning of [5 l ic], for example, could also be expressed by means of an adverb

(Perhaps she saw him), an adjective (It'spossible that she saw him), a noun (There's a possibility that she saw him), and so on. But for English at least the term 'mood' is restricted to grammatical systems associated with the verb.

In §8. 1 we look at the kinds of meaning expressed by the modal auxiliaries. Then in §8.2 we take up the issue of the relation between modality and future time in the context of an examination of the auxiliary willIn. §8.3 we look at the preterite forms of the modals. The final section, §8.4, deals with the use of were in constructions like I wish she were here - a relic of an earlier system of mood marked by inflection, rather than by auxiliaries.

8. 1	Uses of the modal auxiliaries

There are three main families of meanings that the modal auxiliaries express: epistemic, deontic and dynamic. The first two, illustrated in [5 1 i-ii] respectively, are the most central ones, and we will take these two together in order to bring out the important contrast between them. We will then conclude the section with a discussion of dynamic modality.

The epistemic vs deontic contrast

Epistemic modality expresses meanings relating primarily to what is necessary or possible given what we know (or believe): the term derives from the Greek word for "knowledge". Deontic modality expresses meanings relating primarily to what's required or permitted: this term derives from the Greek word for "obligation". The two kinds of meaning are illustrated in the following pairs:

[52]	a.	EPISTEMIC		DEONTIC
		He must have overslept.	b.	He must apologise.
11	a.	She may be ill.	b.	She may take as many as she needs.
111	a.	The storm should be over soon.	b.	We should call the police.

In the [a] examples the modals are interpreted epistemically: the varying degrees of non-factuality that they convey reflect limitations on the speaker's knowledge. In [ia], I may not know that he overslept, but I'm inferring that he did. In [ib], I don't know that she's ill, but I also don't know that she isn't, and am counte­ nancing it as a possibility. In [ic], I don't know how long the storm will last, but the probability or expectation is that it will be over soon.

The [b] examples are interpreted deontically: the meanings have to do with obli­ gation or permission of various kinds. More specifically, the operative notion in [ib] is obligation, in [iib] permission, and in [iiib] a milder kind of obligation where it is a matter of what is the right thing to do. These notions all have to do with authority and judgement rather than knowledge and belief. Very often

§8. 1 Uses of the modal auxiliaries

55

declarative clauses with deontic meanings of modals are used to try and influence what happens rather than simply to make assertions.

The link between the two families of meanings is that the concepts of necessity and possibility - the key concepts in modal logic - apply to both. But with epistemic modality, necessity and possibility relate to whether or not something is the case, is true, whereas with deontic modality they relate to whether or not something hap­ pens, or is done. In [52i], for example, I'm saying in [a] that it is necessarily the case that he overslept, and in [b] that it is necessary for him to apologise: in neither do I countenance any other possibility.

Epistemic and deontic meanings are not in general associated with different expressions. Many examples are ambiguous, allowing either kind of interpretation for the modal:

[53] You must be very tactful. [epistemic or deontic]

There is an epistemic interpretation of this under which it means I have evidence that leads me to believe you're very tactful. And there is also a deontic one that I might use to tell you there is an obligation or need for you to be very tactful (and perhaps thus to tell you to behave with tact).

Dynamic interpretations

Some of the modals have uses concerned with properties or dispositions of per­ sons or other entities involved in the situation:

[54] She can speakfive languages.

iiI've asked him to help us but he won't.

iiiI daren't tell you any more.

These are called dynamic interpretations, and are somewhat peripheral to the con­ cept of modality. In [i], can is used to describe an ABILITY of hers; in [ii], the nega­ tive form of willtalks about VOLITION (his unwillingness to help us); in [iii], dare says something about whether my COURAGE is sufficient for me to tell you any more. (Dare is unique among the modals in that it has ONLY a dynamic use.)

With can we find clear cases of ambiguity between a dynamic and either an epis­ temic or a deontic interpretation:

[55]	You can 't be serious.	[epistemic or dynamic]
II	She can drive.	[deontic or dynamic]

The epistemic interpretation of [i] denies the possibility that you are being seri­ ous: it suggests a context where you have said something that I take to be absurd. The dynamic interpretation says something about your personality: you are inca­ pable of being serious.

In [ii] the deontic reading is that she has permission to drive, while the dynamic one attributes an ability to her - she knows how to drive.

56 Chapter 3 Verbs, tense, aspect, and mood

Some people insist that can is not to be used in a deontic sense - that pennission should be expressed by may instead. There is absolutely no truth to this claim about can, which is used frequently in all of the threetypes of meaning we have distinguished, and has been for cen­ turies. No evidence whatever supports the view that the deontic use is in some way incorrect.

8.2Futurity, modality, and will

In this section we treat a special feature of the meaning of one modal, will. There are some languages that have a three-term tense system contrasting past, present and future. Contrary to what is traditionally assumed, English is not one of them: it has no future tense. It does have several ways of talking about future time, and the most basic one does involve the auxiliary will. Nonetheless, will belongs grammatically and semantically with the auxiliaries that mark mood rather than with the various markers of tense.

There is an intrinsic connection between future time and modality: we don't have the same kind of knowledge about the future as we do about the past and the present, so it isn't possible to be fully factual about future events or situations. It shouldn't be too surprising, then, that a modal auxiliary might be used for talking about the future.

The close association between will and modality may be illustrated with the fol­ lowing sets of contrasts:

[56]	a.	She beat him in under an hour.	b.	She will beat him in under an hour.
11	a.	He likesyou.	b.	He will like you.
[57]	a.	She left Paris yesterday.	b.	She will have left Paris yesterday.
11	a.	That is theplumber.	b.	That will be theplumber.
[58]	a. Australia meets Sweden in the		b. Australia will meet Sweden in the
		Davis Cupfinal in December.		Davis Cupfinal in December.

The examples in [56] illustrate the difference that is commonly found between statements about the past or present and those about the future: [ia] and [iia] will be construed as statements of fact, whereas [ib] and [iib] have more of the char­ acter of predictions.

In [57], will is used in the [b] versions with situations located in past and present time, and the difference between them and the [a] versions is clearly one of modality, not time. The [a] versions are presented as statements of fact, the [b] ones as inferences.

Both versions of [58] locate the situation in future time, so again the difference between them is one of modality, not time reference. The [a] version is more assured, and appropriate only in a context where the finalists have been deter­ mined; the [b] version could be used to make a prediction earlier in the competi­ tion (when it isn't clear who will survive until December without being knocked out of the tournament).

§8.3 The preterite fonns of the modals

57

In all three cases, the version without a modal is more assured than the one that has will. The differences are related to the speaker's knowledge. The meanings con­ tributed by will therefore belong in the epistemic family.5

8.3The preterite fonns of the modals

Four of the modal auxiliaries, can, may, will and shall have preterite fonns - could, might, would and should respectively. It is quite clear that they are preterites, but it must also be stressed that they are highly exceptional in their behav­ iour. We'll look briefly at both the similarities and the differences between the preterites of the modals and other preterites.

(a) Similarities with ordinary preterites

Could and would can be used with past time meaning and in the subordinate part of a remote conditional, and all four preterites are found in backshift:

[59]	I asked him to help me, but he couldn 't/wouldn 'to	[past time]
11	We'd save a lot o/money ifyou could/would cycle to work.	[remote conditional]
1lI	I thought I could/would/%should/might see her yesterday,
	but I had to work late at the offi ce.	[backshift]

Note that backshift is obligatory in the context of [iii], so that it would be ungram­ matical to replace the preterite fonns by present tense can/willfA'shall/may.6

(b) Differences from other preterites

With other verbs the modal remoteness use of the preterite is restricted to a few sub­ ordinate constructions, but with the modals it occurs freely in main clauses, in examples like these:

[60]I could/wouldfA'should/might do it ifthey offe red to pay me.

ii You could/might have been killed! III You should apologise.

iv Could/Wouldyou help me move these boxes?

Example [i] is a remote conditional construction (the open counterpart being I can/willfA'shall/may do it ifthey offer to pay me). Both the modal auxiliary and offered are modal preterites, but while any modal preterite can occur in the sub­ ordinate clause, only a modal auxiliary can occur in the main clause.

5With some predictions there isn't much doubt - e.g., when I say She 'll be two tomorrow on the day before a child's birthday. But there's no grammatical distinction between cases like this and cases like

the ones in [56] . In some varieties of English, especially BrE, shall is used with Ist person subjects as an alternant of will for future time situations, so we get %1 shall be glad when it's all over. This use is epistemic. But the most common use of shall is in interrogative clauses like Shall 1 pick you up at six? This shall is deontic because I'm asking you to tell me what to do.

6 Actually, some speakers do allow may here, which shows that for them the two forms have become separated - might is no longer the preterite form of lTUly for these speakers, so it isn't substituted for may in backshifting.

will.

58 Chapter 3 Verbs, tense, aspect, and mood

The salient interpretation of [ii] is that you have done something reckless, putting you at risk of being killed - but in fact you weren't killed.

In [iii] you owe someone an apology: the right thing for you to do is to apologise. In Present-day English, this use of preterite should is not perceived as semanti­ cally related to present tense shall: neither BrE nor AmE speakers normally say

%You shall apologise.

In [iv], interrogative clauses are used as directives: I'm asking for your help (cf. Ch. 9, §4.4). The preterites here sound more polite and diffident than present tense can and

8.4Irrealis were

English once had an inflectional mood system applying, like tense, to all verbs. Over the centuries this has been almost entirely lost. The meaning distinc­ tions are now conveyed by tense. We noted earlier the difference in meaning con­ trasts between preterite and present in [6 1 i] and [6 1 ii]:

[6 1 ]	PRETERITE TENSE	PRESENT TENSE
a.	He loved her.	b. He loves her.
ii a.	If he loved her he 'd change hisjob.	b. Ifhe loves her he'll change hisjob.

In [i] the contrast is straightforwardly one of time: [ia] refers to past time, [ib] to present time. In [ii], however, the contrast is one of modality: [iia] presents his lov­ ing her as a somewhat more remote possibility than [iib] . It is for this reason that we refer to loved in [iia] as a modal preterite - a use of the preterite where the mean­ ing has to do with modality, not time.

Now consider what happens when the verb concerned is be, and the subject is 1 st or 3rd person singular. One possibility is that we have a set of relationships just like those in [6 1 ] :

[62]		PRETERITE TENSE	PRESENT TENSE
	a.	He was in love with her.	b. He is in love with her.
ii	a.	If he was in love with her he 'd go.	b. Ifhe is in love with her he 'Il go.

Was in [ia] has the central preterite meaning of past time; was in [iia] is a modal preterite.

It is also possible, however, to have the form were in place of was in [iia] but not

[ia] . In this case the temporal and modal meanings are not different meanings of a single form: they are meanings of different forms. Was is a tense form, but this were is a mood form. We call it irrealis, indicating that it conveys varying degrees of remoteness from factuality:

[63]	IRREALIS MOOD	PRESENT TENSE
	a. Ifhe were in love with her he'd	b. If he is in love with her he 'Il
	change hisjob.	change hisjob.

§8.4 Irrealis were

59

The difference between [63a] and [62iia] is one of style level: were is here somewhat more formal than was.

This use of were is highly exceptional: there is no other verb in the language where the modal remoteness meaning is expressed by a different inflectional form from the past time meaning. The irrealis mood form is unique to be, and limited to the 1 st and 3rd person singular. It is an untidy relic of an earlier system, and some speakers usually, if not always, use preterite was instead.

Be is also unique in having three different present tense forms (instead of the usual two) and two different preterite forms (instead of one). This is by far the most irregular verb in the entire English vocabulary. Here is its full paradigm:

[64]			PRIMARY FORMS
		NEUTRAL			NEGATIVE
	1 st sg	3rd sg	Other	1 st sg	3rd sg	Other
Present	am	is	are	aren 'P	isn 't	aren 't
Preterite		was	were		wasn 't	weren 't
Irrealis		were	-	weren 't		-
		SECONDARY FORMS
	PLAIN FORM		PAST PARTICIPLE		GERUND-PARTICIPLE
	be		been		being

We include the irrealis forms among the primary forms, because there is a negative irrealis form, and also because of the close relation with preterite was and wasn 't. This is why we distinguish the two major subsets of inflectional forms as 'primary' vs 'secondary' rather than by the more transparent (and more usual) terms 'tensed' and 'non-tensed' .8

7Aren 't appears with I st person singular subjects only in clauses where it precedes the subject: we get Aren 't I? but not 'I aren 't. The form %amn 't is restricted to certain regional British dialects, and 'ain 't is definitely (notoriously) non-standard, so there isn't a standard 'n 't form of be for the I st person sin­

gular present when the subject precedes. However, I'm not is available, using the reduced 'm form of am with the separate word not instead of a negative form of be.

gThe non-negative forms in [64] are labelled 'neutral' rather than 'positive' because they occur in both positive and negative clauses (e.g. That iJ. true and That iJ. not true). Traditional grammar calls our irrealis a 'past subjunctive', contrasting with 'present subjunctive' be. But there are no grounds for

analysing this were as a past tense counterpart of the be that we find in constructions like It's vital that he be kind to her. We don't use 'subjunctive' as a term for an inflectional category, but for a syntactic construction employing the plain form of the verb (cf. §I.I).

60 Chapter 3 Verbs, tense, aspect, and mood

1 .

2.

3.

4.

For some but not all ofthe following verb lexernes, the preterite and past participle fonns have distinct shapes. Say for each whether the shapes are the same or different, and make up examples to show that you are right.

	burn	vi	forget
ii	buy	vii	hold
iii	draw	viii	ride
iv	drink	ix	run
v	fall	x	sing

The underlined verbs below are fonns of lexemes whose preterite and past participie have the same shape. Use the substitution test to detennine which fonn occurs in these instances, citing the evidence you use.

I don't think they found anything suspicious.

iiThat's not the edition I recommended.

iiiShe wasn't one of those arrested.

ivDo you think we'll get charged?

v Haven't you seen the mess they made?

viGet it repaired without delay.

viiWho said it was mine?

viiiI don't want anyone hurt.

ixI met him on a Monday.

x I don't believe we've met.

Detennine whether the underlined verbs below are plain forms or plain present tense fonns. Again, present the evidence on which you base your decision.

i The twins, he says, seem quite distraught.

iiIt would be best not to my. anything about it.

iiiHe thinks theydidn't like him.

ivTheywouldn't help me change the tyre. v Let's gQ to the movies.

VI We have written to the editor.

viiThey appreciate what you're doing for them.

viiiTell me what you want.

ixI doubt whether you really know her. x Do you know what time it is?

The verb beware (as in Beware of the dog) is highly exceptional in its inflection.

Construct example sentences containing the following kinds of clause with a fonn of beware as verb, marking the ones that turn out to be ungrammatical with *.

a clause with 3rd person singular subject and present tense verb;

iia clause with plural subject and present tense verb;

iiian imperative clause;

iva subjunctive clause;

v an infinitival clause;

via gerund-participial clause;

viia past-participial clause.

On the basis of yourdatagive a paradigm forbeware, leaving blank any position where the inflectional fonn is missing for this verb.

5. Classify the underlined clauses below as finite or non-finite.

Everyone arrestedat the demonstration has now been released.

iiIt is essential thathe cOll1/l.lete the course.

iiiI think thO'.ma)! not have read the instructions.

ivHavingbeen through a similar experience m)!selt I sympathise.

v I'dadviseyou not to take it too seriousl)!.

viHurry up. or we'll be late.

6.Change the following declarative clauses into interrogatives, write out the result, and say on this basis whether the underlined verbs are auxiliaries or lexical verbs.

They were informed of the change.

iiShe would rather we met later.

iiiThey ought to accept the offe r.

ivThey used to live together.

v We have to keep them informed.

viThey need to replace the cartridge.

viiI should inform thepolice.

viiiThey had it repaired.

ixYou usually help clear up.

x They keep telling her that.

7. Use the two negation tests to determine the status of the underlined verbs as auxiliaries or lexical verbs. Cite the evidence on which you base your answer.

iliary properties

You must get involved.

iiIt iJ. going to rain.

iiiThey tend to disagree.

ivShe would like to see them. v I saw them leave.

viHe wants to tell her.

viiHe might have told her.

viiiI'm going to solve it.

IX They can sardines to preserve them. X They can preserve sardines.

8 . In the uses illustrated in the following examples, the three underlined verbs bear some semantic and/or syntactic similarity to the modal auxiliaries, though syntacti­ cally they're not similar enough to modals to be included in the class.

i You are to reportfordutyat 8 a.m.

iiWe have to ask what's bestfor the child.

iiiThey don't like it.

Take the three verbs in turn and deter­ mine which, if any, of the threemodal aux­

described in this chapter apply to them. Construct examples where necessary, and explain your reasoning.

9.Determine whether the underlined verb­ forms in the following examples are

instances of the auxiliary lexemes have, need and dare or instances of the corre­ sponding lexical verbs.

They had better hurry or they'll miss it.

iiThey had their house burgled.

iiiThey had to call the police.

ivI had the staffdo a thorough search. v I have an idea about that.

viI doubt whether we needed to see it.

viiWe need more time tofinish the work.

viiiIdon't thinkyou needhave any worries. IX Did anyone dare remind him of his

promise?

x Notone of themdare voiceanycriticism.

10.During a 1 954 Senate committee hearing, US Army attorney Joseph Welch addressed to US Senator Joseph McCarthy a famous pair of rhetorical questions:

Have you no shame? and Have you no shred of decency? What does the syntax of these interrogative clauses tell you about American English of that period?

Exercises

6 1

1 1 . Which of the following allow a perfective interpretation? Consider just the main clauses, ignoring any subordinate ones embedded within them.

I think it's a disgrace.

iiI suggest you give up the idea.

iiiI now add a sprinkling ofpepper.

ivI want to get out of here. v I do my own shopping.

12.We have seen in this chapter that subordi­ nate clauses functioning as complement of before, ifand hope can have a future time interpretation. For example, ifit rains in

We'llpostpone the match ifit rains doesn't mean "if it is raining now", it means "if rain falls at some future time". For each of the following five prepositions and five verbs, construct an example to show whether or not it permits a future time interpretation of a present tense in its complement.

	PREPOSITIONS		VERBS
	after	vi	bet
II	although	vii	expect
III	because	viii	realise
iv	unless	ix	regret
v	until	x	wish

(You should avoid examples with a futu­ rate interpretation like I know that we leave forBerlin next Tuesday. For these, subordi­ nation is irrelevant: the interpretation is the same as for the main clause We leavefor Berlin next Tuesday. Thus futurate examples don't provide relevant evidence.)

1 3. Classify the following conditional con­ structions as open or remote. For the open ones, give their remote counterparts, and conversely for the remote ones give their open counterparts.

It won't matter ifI'm a little late.

iiHe couldeasilygetajob ifhe wantedone.

iiiIt wouldbedisastrous ifthey saw thefiles.

ivlfyou don'tpay up they'll call the police.

v You can stay here ifyou're stuck.

(Note that some open conditionals lack remote counterparts, and some remote conditionals lack open counterparts. Here

62 Chapter 3 Verbs, tense, aspect, and mood

we are considering only cases where the two constructions are in contrast.)

14. For each of the following statements, imagine that someone called Jill made that statement yesterday. Write reports of the speech events in question, in the form Jill said that . . . For each one give a back­ shifted report, and in those cases where backshift is optional give a non-back­ shifted report too. (For example, given It's too late you would supply Jill said it was too late and Jill said it's too late.)

i Myfather has a weak heart.

iiEd is arriving this evening.

iiiI have a terrible headache

ivI'm moving to Florida this month. v Everyone thinks I'm overreacting.

15. For the following examples, give counter­ parts in which the clause with the under­ lined verb has beenput in the perfect tense.

i I hope to finish soon.

iiYou should 1dJ. her the truth.

iiiThey mislaid thefile.

ivHe admined being an alcoholic. v She i! very helpful.

16. Describe, as carefully as you can, the dif­ ference in meaning or use between the [a]

and [b] members of the following pairs. a. I've been in the armyfor two years.

b.I was in the armyfor two years. ii a. Have you seen Jill?

b. Didyou see Jill?

iii a. Itwas the bestmealI've hadall week. b. Itwas the bestmealIhadallthatweek.

iv a. She has gone to Moscow. b. She went to Moscow.

va. I've got the milk. b. I got the milk.

17. As in Exercise 1 3, classify the following conditionals as open or remote, and give the counterpart of the opposite category. These examples differ from the earlier ones in that they all involve the perfect construction.

iIfshe hadn't sold her shares she would be very rich.

iiIfthe secretary hadn 't called the police someone else would have.

iiiIfEd has gone on holiday you can stay in his room.

ivIfJill didn't report thefault, Max may have.

vIfyou hadfinishedyour workyesterclay, you could come with us tomorrow.

1 8. Give progressive aspect counterparts to the following examples.

She lived in Berlin.

iiHe may regret his impulsiveness.

iiiThey neglect their children.

ivI have read the newspaper.

vHe didn'tpay any attention.

19.Discuss the difference in meaning or use between the [a] and [b] members of the following pairs.

a. I cycle to work.

b.I'm cycling to work.

ii a. When Tom called she phoned me.

b.When Tom called she wasphoning me.

iii a. The train arrived.

b.The train was arriving.

iva. You annoy me.

b. You're annoying me. v a. He wrote an editorial.

b. He was writing an editorial.

20.Discuss the interpretation of the following examples with respect to the distinction between epistemic, deontic, and dynamic modality, bearing in mind that some of them are ambiguous.

i You needn't bother to answer.

iiIt must surely rain soon.

iiiThey should be in Paris by now.

ivShe can't live with her parents.

v Itmay easilybe shown that this isfalse.

viThese animals can be dangerous.

viiIt needn't have been Jill that wrote the note.

viiiBill is one of those people who must always have the last word.

ixThere could be some other reason.

x Could I have another beer, please?