Forums » ESP - English for Specific Purposes » ESL Linguistics Discussion Forum » Modal verbs

Modal verbs
1 « 16 17 18 19 20 22 23 24
   Share on Facebook  
MrPedantic  #273322  Thu, 28 Sep 06 02:14 AM
 Milky wrote:

Mr P, please.

Internal/subjective modality:

"If your cold is not that severe and you (feel that you) must go to work, wash your hands frequently and keep your phone and computer germ free by wiping them down with alcohol wipes if others use them."

...

The employer hopes that the worker will not come to work. It's advice to stay at home.



It isn't the employer speaking. It's an advice page.

Besides, in the text above, your addition "feel that you" imports the very sense you find in the example.

If the writer had italicised "must", you might have had a point. As it is, the writer may mean "if you insist on going to work"; but she might also have meant "if you have no choice but to go to work". (For many employers, a light cold would not justify a sick day.)

MrP
  
Top 10 Contributor
Joined on Tue, Oct 12 2004
Veteran Member (12,053)
Proficient SpeakerSystemAdministrator
...opella forensis / adducit febris...
milky  #273386  Thu, 28 Sep 06 08:49 AM

<It isn't the employer speaking. It's an advice page.

Besides, in the text above, your addition "feel that you" imports the very sense you find in the example.

If the writer had italicised "must", you might have had a point>

IMO, the point is clear and justified by the common use of "if you must", which means "if you insist on/persist". I think you know that, but you are trying to bend things to suit your argument. Why? I don't know. If the reading is "if you are obliged to go", the to me it is not BE, but another variant.
  
Top 50 Contributor
Joined on Thu, Jan 15 2004
Senior Member (3,149)
Hume said that if we had perfect or complete descriptive knowledge of reality, we could not, by reasoning, derive a single valid "ought".
milky  #273389  Thu, 28 Sep 06 08:50 AM

Post :272794

No response?
  
milky  #273394  Thu, 28 Sep 06 08:55 AM

BE from the BNC. Is there pattern? A prototypical occurence?

1 A0D    married. In fact, I sent Geoffrey away, if you must know!" she shrilled. "And now somebody has sent
2 A0N    fears. "Go on through and see him if you must. She turned back into the bed as a sound came from
3 A0R    on the draining board and washed it. "If you must smoke you could at least go in the living room while I'm
4 A5H    the market for more affordable transport. Laugh, if you must, about Skoda, but its market share is increasing at a
5 A69    university; "give if you will; withhold if you must but understand if you can what nature of community we are and
6 A7A   " Frau Fegel was less than enthusiastic. "If you must." Must was the word and Erika left the music room
7 A7D    As bread and milk are not especially nutritious, if you must feed them try putting out dog food, raw mince, raw
8 ABS    advertising turf for sale in the local paper. If you must. In correct rural circles, having your lawn turfed is regarded
9 ABS    an onion and a little celery and leek, if you must, but make sure that the court bouillon is cold before you
10 AC3    his best imitation of an authoritarian voice. "If you must write --; you don't need to by the way, I
11 ACE    Alright, alright, leave us by all means if you must, Bumface. Come back and see me when you're less
12 ACR    the most international agricultural show in the world. If you must compare us with Paris, then look at the international visitors figures
13 ACV   " he said, not without affection. "If you must know, our Emily wasn't an only child. She had
14 AD0    as boiled or jacket potatoes rather than as chips. If you must have chips do them thick cut, as they absorb less fat
15 ALH   . He felt sick. He said, "If you must know, I broke my legs playing football." He wished
16 AN7    "We didn't go into the back close if you must know." He raised an eyebrow. "Oh?"
17 ANL   ." A shadow crossed her face. "If you must," she said. "We have very little information,
18 ANY    She's been having trouble with her periods, if you must know," she says, imputing a prurient inquisitiveness to Vic
19 ARA    you tell them a particular babysitter is coming. If you must use a stranger, make sure you get several references and check
20 ARJ    but Saas Fee is a good place to learn if you must. FRANCE The French invented factory skiing, along with all the checks
  
, , ,
MrPedantic  #275841  Wed, 04 Oct 06 12:26 AM

 Milky wrote:

 MrP wrote:

2. Many single mothers, like Annette Cowley, must go to work.

— Neither the speaker nor the subject imposes the obligation here. The source is objective: the force of circumstances.

And who has deduced that they must work? What do you think the single-mothers told their friends and family?

It's always pleasant to speculate; but what the single mothers told their families and friends is neither here nor there. The sentence is taken from this news item:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/473219.stm

In context, it's clear that external circumstances have constrained the single mothers to return to work, e.g. "Some have to go back to work out of financial necessity only two or three months after their babies are born."

Now let's see how this fits in with the Thompson-Palmer hypothesis. In an earlier post, you agreed that:

 Milky wrote:

 MrP wrote:

Thus, putting these two comments together, "must" (in Thompson's view) reflects an obligation imposed by the speaker on the subject, e.g.
1. I must give up smoking. [I impose; I give up.]
2. You must give up smoking. [I impose; you give up.]
3. He must give up smoking. [I impose; he gives up.]

I agree with your conclusion, apart from #1, which I feel is epistemic.

Clearly, the speaker (in this case, the BBC journalist) did not oblige Annette Cowley to return to work. So "must" in the original sentence is wrong, according to Thompson-Palmer.

You also agreed that:

 Milky wrote:

 MrP wrote:

So C must mean that "have to" reflects an obligation external to both subject and speaker,  i.e. one that is imposed by a third party and merely reported by the speaker.

You've got it right there.
 

Now we know that returning to work isn't an obligation imposed by the subject: Annette goes back to work because of "financial necessity".

And we know that the obligation isn't imposed by the speaker: the journalist has no say in whether Annette goes back to work or not.

It is therefore "external to both subject and speaker".

In which case (again, according to Thompson-Palmer), "have to" is the "clear choice" in the original sentence.

So the journalist must be wrong to use "must". Either that, or Thompson and Palmer are wrong in their analysis.

Which is it?

MrP
  
milky  #275895  Wed, 04 Oct 06 05:53 AM

<In context, it's clear that external circumstances have constrained the single mothers to return to work, e.g. "Some have to go back to work out of financial necessity only two or three months after their babies are born." >

Yes, that's showing external pressure.

<Clearly, the speaker (in this case, the BBC journalist) did not oblige Annette Cowley to return to work. So "must" in the original sentence is wrong, according to Thompson-Palmer. >

Do you know how journalist's report what was said by their interviewees?

?Single mothers must go to work, according to a government edict published today.

Single mothers must go to work, according to Anne Cowley, a mother interviewed today.

*Single mothers must go to work, according to me, the journalist.

Single mothers must go to work, if they are to survive. (according to...?)

Single mothers feel compelled to go to work. (Anne's word's, or the journalist's?)

So, no clearly about it, you are also speculating. My speculation is based on how reporters report the words of their interviewees.

<Now we know that returning to work isn't an obligation imposed by the subject: Annette goes back to work because of "financial necessity".>

If you keep fixing your head on imposed obligation, you'll get nowhere. Deontic modality can express real or assumed obligation, permission and necessity.

Annette to journalist: " Out of necessity, I must work."

?Annette to journalist: " I must work, the government says so." (Poor use of the modal from a BE standpoint.)

Annette to journalist: " I have to work, the government says so." (Good use of the modal from a BE standpoint.)

-----------

<In context, it's clear that external circumstances have constrained the single mothers to return to work, e.g. "Some have to go back to work out of financial necessity only two or three months after their babies are born." >

Again, there are many viewpoints in one story. A journalist gathers information from various sources.

In the article, I believe that the journalist is either reporting Anne's words in a semi-direct fashion (i.e. objectivised deontic modality) or is expressing his her own conclusion of the interview. In another part, he/she is stating (or is quoting the words of another journalist) that women have to go to work. So, if the writer of the article is Aminatta Forna, why he/she used "must" in one part of the article, and "have to" in another part to talk about the same situation.

 
  
, ,
MrPedantic  #275926  Wed, 04 Oct 06 08:11 AM

 Milky wrote:

Poor use of the modal from a BE standpoint.

Intriguing...

But now let's try out some of your other formulations:

 Milky wrote:

Remember to that all 9 core modals, are used to express the speaker's (or listener's) judgement at the moment of speaking. They are grounded in the present.  They can therefore be paraphrased as "in the present circumstances, my judgement is that it is possible/necessary/desirable that...":

Which you exemplify thus:

 Milky wrote:

Today: I must catch the train at five if I'm to be there before lunch.

(Paraphrase: "In the present circumstances, I see it as necessary to catch the six o'clock". not factual)

Now in our "single mother" example,

1. Many single mothers, like Annette Cowley, must go to work.

the speaker is the BBC journalist. And "must" expresses the speaker's judgement, according to Milky. So the Milkyesque paraphrase would be:

2. In the present circumstances, I (the journalist) see it as necessary for Annette Cowley to go to work. ["Not factual."]

In other words, "must" reflects the journalist's subjective opinion.

But wait a moment. That's a little different from what you implied just now:

 Milky wrote:

And who has deduced that they must work? What do you think the single-mothers told their friends and family?

The implication there is quite plain: "must" reflects the single mother's subjective opinion. It would therefore presumably paraphrase as:

3. Many single mothers, like Annette Cowley, see it as necessary in the present circumstances to go to work. ["Not factual."]

Clearly, in #2, "must" expresses the judgement of the speaker. But in #3, just as clearly, "must" expresses the judgement of the subject.

So what does "must" express here, Milky? The judgement of the speaker, or the judgement of the subject?

MrP
  
milky  #275929  Wed, 04 Oct 06 08:18 AM
<Now in our "single mother" example,

1. Many single mothers, like Annette Cowley, must go to work.

the speaker is the BBC journalist. And "must" expresses the speaker's judgement, according to Milky. So the Milkyesque paraphrase would be:

2. In the present circumstances, I (the journalist) see it as necessary for Annette Cowley to go to work. ["Not factual."]

In other words, "must" reflects the journalist's subjective opinion.>

Go back and see my comments about "reporting" another's opinions.

Re <<(i.e. objectivised deontic modality)>>

EG

Wife: My mother is coming to stay this weekend.

Husband: What! Well if she must come to stay, I guess I'll have to cancel my fishing trip." (Whose feeling of necessity is "must" expressing there?)
  
MrPedantic  #276205  Thu, 05 Oct 06 12:04 AM
 Milky wrote:

<Clearly, the speaker (in this case, the BBC journalist) did not oblige Annette Cowley to return to work. So "must" in the original sentence is wrong, according to Thompson-Palmer. >

Do you know how journalist's report what was said by their interviewees?

?Single mothers must go to work, according to a government edict published today.

Single mothers must go to work, according to Anne Cowley, a mother interviewed today.

*Single mothers must go to work, according to me, the journalist.

Single mothers must go to work, if they are to survive. (according to...?)

Single mothers feel compelled to go to work. (Anne's word's, or the journalist's?)

So, no clearly about it, you are also speculating. My speculation is based on how reporters report the words of their interviewees.

No, my "clearly" stands.

I said: "Clearly, the speaker (in this case, the BBC journalist) did not oblige Annette Cowley to return to work."

Clearly the BBC journalist didn't oblige AC to return to work.

MrP
  
1 « 16 17 18 19 20 22 23 24