Possibility readings of can and may and their potential interchangeability

Vol.40,No.1(2014)

Petra Huschová

https://doi.org/10.5817/BSE2014-1-5

Stable URL (handle):
http://hdl.handle.net/11222.digilib/131484

PDF
Abstract
This paper is concerned with possibility meanings of the English modal auxiliaries CAN and MAY in contemporary written British English. It reviews the issues relating to their usage and distribution on the basis of a qualitative analysis, with regard to the degree of formality and stylistic stratification. The analysis focuses on the occurrences of CAN and MAY conveying possibility from the viewpoint of supposedly competing forms and attempts to demonstrate to what extent the senses involved are synonymous and in what way they are distinct. The paper thus aims to discuss the factors governing the interpretation and distribution of can and may in written language and summarizes the usage of their possibility meanings in different registers.

Keywords:
epistemic possibility; root possibility; the modal can; the modal may; overlapping senses; degree of formality

Pages:
89–104
References

Biber, Douglas, Stieg Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad and Edward Finegan (1999) Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.

Bybee, Joan L. and Suzanne Fleischman (eds.) (1995) Modality in Grammar and Discourse. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Coates, Jennifer (1980) " On the non-equivalence of may and can". Lingua 50, 209–220. | DOI 10.1016/0024-3841(80)90026-1

Coates, Jennifer (1983) The Semantics of the Modal Auxiliaries. London: Croom Helm.

Coates, Jennifer (1995) " The expression of root and epistemic possibility in English". In: Bybee, Joan L. and Suzanne Fleischman (eds.) Modality in Grammar and Discourse. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 55–66.

Coates, Jennifer and Geoffrey Leech (1980) " The meanings of the modals in modern British and American English". York Papers in Linguistics 8, 23–34.

Collins, Peter C. (2007) " Can and may: monosemy or polysemy?" In: Mushin, Ilana and Mary Laughren (eds.) Annual Meeting of the Australian Linguistic Society. St Lucia: University of Queensland, 1–12. http://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view.php?pid=UQ:12785

Downing, Angela and Philip Locke (1992) A University Course in English Grammar. London: Prentice Hall.

Dušková, Libuše (1972) " A contrastive study of can, may, must and their Czech equivalents". Studies in modern philology 1, 5–77.

Dušková, Libuše (1994) Mluvnice současné angličtiny na pozadí češtiny. Praha: Academia.

Ehrman, Madeline (1966) The Meanings of the Modals in Present-Day American English. The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter.

Facchinetti, Roberta (2003) " Pragmatic and sociological constraints on the functions of may in contemporary British English". In: Facchinetti, Roberta, Manfred Krug and Frank R. Palmer (eds.) Modality in Contemporary English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 302–327.

Huddleston, Rodney (1993) Introduction to the Grammar of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Huddleston, Rodney and Geoffrey Pullum (2002) The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Leech, Geoffrey (2003) " Modality on the move: The English modal auxiliaries 1961–1992". In: Facchinetti, Roberta, Manfred Krug and Frank R. Palmer (eds.) Modality in Contemporary English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 223–240.

Leech, Geoffrey (2004) Meaning and the English Verb. London: Longman.

Leech, Geoffrey and Jennifer Coates (1980) " Semantic Indeterminacy and the Modals". In Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech and Jan Svartvik (eds.) Studies in English Linguistics. London: Longman, 79–99.

Lyons, John (1977) Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Matthews, Richard (2003) " Modal auxiliary constructions, TAM and interrogatives". In: Facchinetti, Roberta, Manfred Krug and Frank R. Palmer (eds.) Modality in Contemporary English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 47–70.

Palmer, Frank R. (1990) Modality and the English Modals. London: Longman.

Palmer, Frank R. (2001) Mood and Modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Papafragou, Anna (2000) Modality: Issues in the Semantics-Pragmatics Interface. Oxford: Elsevier.

Perkins, Michael R. (1983) Modal Expressions in English. London: Frances Pinter.

Peters, Pam (2004) The Cambridge Guide to English Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech and Jan Svartvik (1985) A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.

Silva-Corvalán, Carmen (1995) " Interpretation of poder and deber". In: Bybee, Joan L. and Suzanne Fleischman (eds.) Modality in Grammar and Discourse. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 67–105.

Tárnyiková, Jarmila (1978) " Semantic components of some modal verbs". Germanica Olomucensia 4, 7–22.

Tárnyiková, Jarmila (1985) Modalita v angličtině. Olomouc: Univerzita Palackého.

" New Powers Against Organised and Financial Crime". http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/ (ADMIN) [FC]

" Countering International Terrorism: The United Kingdom's Strategy" http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/ (ADMIN) [IT]

" Government Response to the Health Committee's Report on NHS Charges" http://www.officialdocuments.gov.uk/ (ADMIN) [HC]

Jenkins, Jennifer (2000) The Phonology of the English Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (ACAD) [JJ]

New Scientist, July 2007. (NAT) [NS]

Focus, August 2007. (NAT) [FS]

The Times, April 10, 2004. (NEWS) [T1]

The Times, June 2, 2002. (NEWS) [T2]

Metrics

2

Crossref logo

1

5

Views

0

PDF views

PDF