A Relevance-theoretical Approach To English Modal Auxiliaries

In the light of the Relevance Theory as proposed by Sperber and Wilson (1995, 1986), this thesis follows a unitary approach to the interpretation of English modal verbs and tentatively proposes a monosemantic framework of the basic semantics of WILL, MAY, CAN, MUST and SHOULD, which can then be applied to solve such modality puzzles as the negation of MAY, the interpretation of politeness resulting from the use of some modals and the explanation of the epistemic strength of modals.Palmer (1979: preface) holds that it is the modal system that is most difficult to describe in English grammar. There is no surprise that approaches from the perspectives of ambiguity and polysemy are confronted with so many problems, which justifies the need to turn to the unitary approach. According to previous literature within the relevance-theoretical framework, such as Groefsema (1995), Berbeira (1996), Papafragou (1998a, 1998b, 1998c, 2000) and Klinge (1992), the modals are not polysemantic in nature: they have single basic meaning, which remains constant from context to context, and which gives rise to different interpretations depending on the interaction between these unitary meanings and assumptions in the context of the utterances. In the semantic level, the modals are not ambiguous; the distinction between different modalities(epistemic, deontic, dynamic) is a matter of utterance interpretation which depends on the contexts in which the modals occur, thus belonging to pragmatics. Following this view, modals are not ambiguous or polysemic concerning the choice of two or more unrelated or distinct senses. Actually, it is the interpretation process itself of the same core meaning in different contexts that assigns them to different categories. Modals are operators which encode procedural information and decide how the incomplete proposition encoded by the rest of the utterance is to be processed in accordance with the Relevance TheoryThe different interpretations of the modals are one more instance of the underdetermination of the propositional content by the semantic input of the sentences; their logical form of the utterances is incomplete, the addressee is to complete it by process of inferential enrichment; the inferences so made are called explicatures. The explicatures inferred from modalized utterances belong to the higher-level type, since they express the speaker's attitude toward the proposition. They are constructed in accordance with the principle of relevance, that is, the utterance must be processed in such a way that its contextual effects are greatest and compensate for the efforts involved in the process.This paper is composed of six chapters.Chapter One serves as an introduction to the paper. It gives a brief account of modality and the English modals, thus serving as a basis for later explanation. It also raises some problems that a satisfactory theory coping with modals should be able to solve.Chapter Two surveys the various approaches to the English verbs, expounds on their defects and paves the way for the new proposal put forward in this thesis.Chapter Three lays the theoretical foundations for the following arguments. It briefly outlines the basic assumptions of the Relevance Theory which may be of use in the pursuit of a systematic and consistent account of the semantics of English modals. It then makes a distinction between the conceptual information and procedural information, claiming that English modals are operators encoding procedural information. It also introduces such notions as domain, world situation and situational representation, which are instrumental in the interpretation of the modalized utterance.