THE MODAL CATEGORY OF MODERN MONGOLIAN

7/30/2019 THE MODAL CATEGORY OF MODERN MONGOLIAN

1/22

THE MODAL CATEGORY OF MODERN MONGOLIAN1

Ymjiriin MNKH-AMGALAN

Modal category, considered one of the most complicated problems inthe field of Semantics, is connected with the peculiarity of a language andextra linguistic factors and can be described in different ways.

Modal category as a universal phenomenon of every language isdirectly or indirectly related to all levels of language and other disciplineslike philosophy, social studies, psychology and logic by its semanticcapacity. That defines modal category in many different ways other thanpure logical concept, which expresses the absolute and relative truth of a text(Sh.Bally, 1955), (G.V.Kolshanskii, 1961) to the speakers attitude toward

the content of the text and feeling (N.E.Petrov, 1981).Academician V.V.Vinogradov (1894-1969) gave a broad explanation

of modal categories. Considering modality as a semantic category havinglexical and grammatical peculiarities, he wrote that Every sentence has amodal meaning as its main feature. In other words, it expresses the speakersattitude towards the real word (V.V.Vinogradov 1950, 41). V.Z.Panfilovdivided modal meaning into real (objective) and abstract (subjective). Formost linguists (and logicians) it is obvious that there are two kinds ofmodality: objective and subjective. The first of them expresses the objectiverelations of any situation, to which a cognitive process is directed. Theserelations are possible, real and necessary. The second one expresses theevaluation and attitudes of the speaker in understanding these relations, i.e. itindicates the reliability level of an authenticity of thoughts reflecting thesituation and includes problematic, simple and categorical authenticity(V.Z.Panfilov 1982, 164). A similar classification of modal meanings can befound in some works in the field of Mongol studies (G.Ts.Prbeew1981.26). (I.Ya.Schmidt 1832.93).

Several interesting ideas concerning the main issues of the modalcategory of modern Mongolian exist in the Grammar of Mongolian

Language, written by the Russian Mongolist I.Ya.Schmidt (1779-1847),which is considered the first work on the study of the Mongolian languageabroad known to us now. In the chapter on adverbs, we find a very

1 (2004) The Modal Category of Modern Mongolian. -Monggolhak(Mongolian Studies).Journal of The Korean Association for Mongolian Studies. Korea. Seoul.Vol.16. .157-185.


2/22

2

interesting conclusion regarding modal meaning. For example, on pages 88-89 of the German original of this book 2 , it was written: 146. DieBestimmungswrter der reinen Copula sind diejenigen Adverbia, welcheeineVerneinung oder Bejahung bezeichnen (adverbia negandi et affirmandi),und die Adverbia der Modalitt oder diejenigen, welche bestimmen, ob dieVerknpfung des Prdieats mit dem Subject mglich, wirklich, odernothwendig ist ; on page 94 of the Russian translation3 146. , , , .., ...; and onpage 45 of the Franch translation4 No 146. Les dterminatifs de la simplecopule sont ces adverbes qui dsignent une ngation ou une affirmation(adverbia negandi et affirmandi), et les adverbes de modalit, ou ceux quidterminent si Iunion de Iattribut aves le sujet est possible, effective ou

ncessaire. The main content of this sentence is that sentence combinationis defined by verbs indicating affirmation and negatation and by those whichexpress manner of action, or the possibility, reality, and necessity of it . Aswe understood, the main idea, having theoretical importance, made by I.Ya.Schmidt, can be explained as follows: Reality is connected with sigmatics,necessity- with langue, and possibilty- with parole. At that time Schmidt didnot mention especially about authenticity, but he collected such languagemeans of expression of modality of authenticity, like , , ,.

The prominent French scholar Sh.Bally tried to convert the conceptsof classic logic like modus and dictum into language studies and gavedefinition to them. According to him, modus is a compound structure withexplicit modality formed in the verbs of emotional actions like thinking,feeling and willingness (Sh.Bally 1955,44). The other part, called dictum,means reception by the speaker. (Sh.Bally 1955, 10-12). As we understood,dictum belongs to sigmatics and modus is linked with pragmatics. Scholarssuggested to divide modality into binary parts like real/abstract,first/secondary type, direct/indirect, full/partial, implicit/explicit andmain/additional semantic features. It is clear if we examine carefully, the

first of these binary pairs expresses the relationship between content and realsituations and the latter determines the connection between the content and

2 Grammatik der Mongolischen Sprache, verfasst von I.J.Schmidt. St.Petersburg, 1831.3... . , 1832.4 Grammaire Mongole de Schmidt. Traduite de l Allemand en 1845. I-Partie Franaise. Peiping.Imprimerie des Lazaristes, 1935.


3/22

3

attitude of the speaker towards the text. In other words, the first is based onsigmatics while the latter belongs to pragmatics.

In modern linguistics there has been a new trend to investigatelinguistic problems from the point of view of sigmatics and pragmaticslangue and parole.

The idea about objective and subjective modality which has beenformed by Academician V.V.Vinogradov and developed by V.Z.Panfilov isconnected with this new trend. According to this point of view objectivemodality is connected with sigmatics and langue, subjective modality isconnected with pragmatics and parole (M. Bazarragchaa 1987, 52).

G.A.Zolotova defined the modal category including 1) The speakersattitude to real situation, 2) The speakers attitude to content of a text, and 3)The relationship between the subject and predicate which contains the mainfeatures. According to her, the first two can be considered as external

features of syntax while the latter expresses the internal one (G.A.Zolotova1973, 140-157).

Western scholars still have contradictory opinions on the semanticfeatures of modal category. Particularly, modality was defined byM.A.K.Halliday (1973) and F.R.Palmer (1979) from the point of subjectivefeatures and extralinguistic factors. J.Lyons and F.Kiefer determined itsthree main peculiarities: 1) willingness, 2) necessity and responsibility, and3) confidentiality and possibility (J.Lyons 1977, 324-327). F.Kiefersclassification is different: 1) possibility and necessity, 2) propositionalattitudes, and 3) speakers attitudes (F.Kiefer 1987, 67).

N.Ye.Petrov divides modal category into three parts in his doctoral(Doctor of Science degree) dissertation as: 1) evaluating and assessing, 2)connecting, and 3) expressing feeling and emotions determining around 60different meanings (N.Ye.Petrov 1981, 99-100).

We have considered around 50 different works, including articles,scientific papers and dissertations on the semantic features of modalcategories by foreign and domestic researchers and compared their outputs.

These materials gave us the opportunity to determine from 5 up to 60different modal meanings and their nuances.

In 45 languages the high frequency of modal meanings and nuanceshas been defined as follows: Possibility-41, Necessity-36, Reality-34,Willingness- 32, Supposition-30, Hesitation-26, Authenticity-23,Conclusion-21, Confidentiality-20, and Probability-17.

As we noticed, the first 10 meanings with the highest frequency(excluding the meaning of willingness) were shown in research papers by


4/22

4

many linguists who investigated modal category from the logic-grammarpoint of view.

According to the above mentioned scholars modal category has beendiscussed and examined in three main directions: logic-grammar,communicative and functional-semantic. This trend has also been pulsed inMongolian linguistics.

The first 10 meanings have the highest frequency in differentlanguages as it was shown in research papers by many scholars. It configuresthe fact that modality as a universal phenomenon in languages also showsthat any sentence is based on logic-grammar structure forming therelationship between the sentence and the speakers intention. Modalcategory is functional and semantic category, which expresses thefruitfulness and probability of information and the speakers attitude to realsituations, contain extended content and capacity connected with different

levels of language. Researchers determined about 130 modal meaningsconsidering the modal categories from different points of view.(Y.Mnkh-Amgalan 1998, 310).

We have tried to review different approaches toward modality, auniversal category in many languages, by scholars and investigate modalcategories in Mongolian. Eventually we divide the semantic capacity ofMongolian modal category into a central and peripheral system, each ofthem having its own sub-system. This system would have to be investigatedin close relationship with sigmatics, langue, parole, and pragmatics.

The main part of this modal category forms the logic-grammarstructure of the sentence. By this central system, such modal meanings canbe called as objective on part of sigmatics, necessary on part of langue, itselfpossible on part of parole and authentic on part of pragmatics.

Comparing the works of 45 researchers we have found that the above-mentioned 4 main meanings have the highest frequency and show the centralsystem of modal categories. The 4 main meanings could be classified further

/See fig.1/.Objective modality, which is one of the constituents of the central

system of the modal category in modern Mongolian, is classified either as

the modal meaning of definite objective modality or as indefinite objectivemodality. In turn, both forms of the modality of reality are subdivided intoobjective modality in the past, present and future tenses.

For the expression of definite objective modality, analytical andsynthetic constructions are used such as V+ 4, V+ , V+ 4, V+ ; V+ (- ) , V+ , V+ ; V+, V+, N+ -, N+ , N+ . Various kinds of modal words, existing before


5/22

5

the predicate with definite modal meanings in the past, present and futuretenses, emphasize their content and such auxiliary words or predicativeparticles like 5, , residing after the predicate, modify andconfirm its meaning.

Analytical and synthetic constructions V+ (-), V+ ,V+, V+; V+ (-) , V+ 4

, V+ , N+ , - ; V +

, N+ , N+ are used to expressindefinite objective modality. Definite and indefinite objective modality areexpressed in the past, present and future tenses. For the expression of thesekinds of modal meanings, the following verb combination and introductoryforms are used: (, , , ), , , , , ,

, , ,

etc.The sentence of the Mongolian language has plenty of introductory

and supplementary forms, which express various kinds of modal meaningand the speakers emotional state. For example: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8). (. 1992. No 147). The above sentence, in English, may berepresented thus:In fact, preventing this disease is just not that difficult.(1) (It is possible to prevent, but maybe people will not actually

prevent the disease.)(2) (There are things that are much more difficult than this. Therefore,

it is not difficult.)(3) (It emphasizes the meaning of not that difficult.)(4) (It intensifies the whole content.)(5) (It affirmatively narrates and confirms.)(6) (It also confirms the information based on the definite reality.)(7) (It convinces and draws attention.)(8) (It causes understanding and belief.)The complete structure of this sentence is 1 + + 2+ 3 + + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8. The extended structure is

, and the unextended structure is.The supplementary forms can be found in up to 7 different orders from theliterary abstract model. For instance:

5 More information on this word can be found in the authors earlier article entitled - . ( The Functional - Semantic Features of the Word YUM inMongolian). (Colloquial Mongolian). Ulaanbaatar, 1996. pp. 28-52.


6/22

6

, , . This sentence exemplifies the most complicated analyticalstructure of the predicative part of the sentence.

The structure of sentences in Mongolian can be classified as follows:

unextended structure (1)central structure

extended structure (2)

Sentencestructure

structure withintroductory form (3)

structure withsingle form

peripheralstructure

structure withsupplementary form (4)

structure with double forms (5)(with introductory and supplementary form)

Example:(1) .(2) .(3) . (.).(4) . (.).(5) .

(.).


7/22

7

The peripheral structure, which is formed on the central structure, canbe shown in other types of simple sentences as well as in such differentmodels of composite sentences as compound sentences, complex sentences,compound-complex sentences, and complex sentences with multi-subordinate clauses. Thus, the structure of the sentence, the capacity of itsmeanings, and the range of its information extend from the unextendedstructure to a much more complex structure according to a centrifugalmotion. This is one of the specific pecularities of Mongolian, the structuralfeature of agglutination which characterizes the languages of the Altaicfamily.

The Mongolian language is rich with introductory forms thatcomplement minimal and expanded structural set-ups of sentences as well asexpress objective modality on the part of the sigmatics, and the modality ofcomplete authenticity on the part of pragmatics.

Such introductory forms like , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

, , , , , , , ,, , , ; ,

+pronoun, , ; , , , ,, , , , , , ,

, ; , , , , ,, , , , ,

, , , , , , ,, , and many others also serveas means of distinguishing rheme in sentences and of combining complexsyntactical units (discourses) in the text itself.

The modal meaning of necessity, which is one of the constituents ofthe central system of the modal category in modern Mongolian, stipulatesthe directly mutual relation between the speaker and listener. This type isexpressed by the form of future tense in a moment of speech. Either lifesituations lead to the forming of modal meaning.

To express the modality of necessity, analytical constructions and

word combinations are used such as V+/,V+/, V+/, V+, V+ ()

-(-) , (), V+-, V+ ()

-, V+ () -, V+/,V+, V+/, V+(,

), V+, , , , ,


8/22

8

, , , , , , , ... etc.

The modality of necessity is classified either as the modal meaning ofnecessary or as that of non-necessity.

Modal necessity is characterized by the modal meaning of necessitybased on natural phenomenon and social phenomena. For example: . (. 1992 27),

,

. (. 1992. 140),

(),

.( .1992.148).In turn, both forms of modality of necessity and non-necessity are

subdivided into sets of elementary sema.

The modal meaning of possibility, which is one of the componentparts of the central system of the modal category in modern Mongolian, isrelated to the category of philosophy about possibility.

The possibility of the fulfillment of any action always depends on thecorrelation of internal and external factors.

Potential modality also classifies the modal meaning of impossibility.For the expression of the modal meaning of possibility, analytical

constructions are used such as -, -, V+, V+,V+, V+, V+/, V+, +,

()+-, +, ()+-, V+-, V+,V+ ( ), V+ (-), V+, -

(-), - (-), - (-), - (-),V+, V+ ( ), - (-),

- (-), V+/, , , ,etc.

Modal possibility and impossibility are defined by stable and unstablemodal meanings of possibility and impossibility. For example:

. (.), -

. (. 1992. 155),

. (.), 3 - .

, , . ().

In turn, the two forms of potential modality are divided into someelementary sema.


9/22

9

Authentic modality is one of the component parts of the centralsystem of the modal category in modern Mongolian.

The modal meaning of authenticity is expressed pragmatically on thebasis of the interrelation between the content of the utterance and thespeaker.

Authentic modality is classified also as non-authentic modality.Authentic modality is divided into four subsystems: modality of

ordinary (simple) authenticity, modality of intensifying (enhanced)authenticity, modality of hesitation and modality of supposition. The firsttwo modalities make up incomplete authenticity.

For the expression of the modality of ordinary (simple) authenticity,indicative mood and analytical constructions are used with auxiliary verbs-, -. For example:. (.), . (.).

Verbs and constuctions such as -, -, -, - and the modal words , , , , , ,, , , , , , andalso some particles such as ,4 4, 2 are used for the expression ofthe modality of intensifying (enchanced) authenticity.

To express the modality of hesitation, analytical constructions andword combinations are used such as , V+ (), N+ (),V+, N+, , , , , , , , , (),

, , , , (), , ,

-, -, -, -, -,

-(-), -, -(-), -, -

()-, - etc.In turn, all forms of the modal meaning of authenticity are subdivided

into elementary sema.The modal meaning of supposition, which is one of the constituents of

authentic modality in modern Mongolian, is when the speaker treats ithopefully and it has some possible characters, although, from the point ofview of the real situation context of this expression, it is not definite to the

speaker.The modal meaning of supposition in Mongolian, which is one form

of the modal meaning that is stated in analytical and synthetic ways, is usedvery often in speech and has a large quantity of semantic context.

The modal meaning of supposition can be classified as real on part ofsigmatics, abstract on the part of langue, evaluative on the part of parole, andprobable on the part of pragmatics.


10/22

10

For the expression of the modal meaning of supposition, analyticaland synthetic constructions are used such as V+, V+,V+, V+, V+, V+, V+,V+, V+, , +, , V+4,

, - on the part of sigmatics, V+4 + ,V+, V+, V+, , , ,, V+, V+, on the part of langue, V+, , , V+, V+, V+ , V+,V+, V+, on the part of parole, V+4, , , ,, V+ , , V+ , V+ on the part ofpragmatics.

In the first place, the four forms of the modal meaning of suppositionare subdivided into sets of elementary sema.

Non-authentic modality is one of the component parts of the central

system of modal category in modern Mongolian.Non-authentic modality is classified either as complete non-authentic

modality or as incomplete non-authentic modality.Complete non-authentic modality can be classified as the modal

meaning of the non-authenticity to be connected with natural and logicallaws. For example: 1920- , . (),

,

. ().The incomplete non-authentic modality can also be classified as the

modal meaning of non-authenticity to be connected with communicative andsocial conditions. For example: , , , .(.1996).

.

().In turn, all forms of modal meaning of the non-authenticity are

subdivided into some elementary sema.Being opposite to the center, the periphery which extends the meanings

of the central part from the point of communication including speakers

attitude, manner of action and feeling, subjective approach, goal ofcommunication and features plays a key role in communication.

According to the results of the study, we have to say that theperipheral system is to be divided into such modal meanings as objective onthe part of sigmatics, basic on the part of langue, additional on the part ofparole and subjective on the part of pragmatics. /See fig.2/. The peripheralmeanings are subject to be divided into small groups.


11/22

11

The objective modality of the peripheral system of modal category isexpressed on the basis of sigmatics and is subdivided into a) modality ofwillingness and b) modality of aspect.

The modality of willingness expresses mainly the correlation betweenthe action doer and the action itself. In general, willingness is the feeling of aperson conscientiously expressing his inner need and it is expressed inrelation with his desirability, aim and action directed at satisfying theseneeds. The modality of willingness is classified as that of desirability,striving, approval, and intention. To express the modality of willingness,analytical constructions and word combinations are actively used such as-, -, -, -, V+, V+,V+

, V+-, V--, V+4, V+

2, V()+,

V+3+, V+ ()etc.

Some conditions of aspect express possible termination, completion,

intensification, repetition or regularity of action as well as the modality ofreality and possibility. In other words, there must be possibility, objectivecondition and reason for doing any action and it is specified by thecorrelation between a real situation and the content of an utterance. It maybe considered that the beginning, process, fulfillment and continuation of anaction express at the same time the modality of reality and possibility6. Suchanalytical and synthetic constructions as V+ (-), V+ , V+ , V+ (-, -, -) + auxiliary verbs, V+ (-, -, -) + auxiliary verbs,V+ are used to express some kinds of modal meaning. For example: . (). The ending - -expresses an intensifying meaning in verbs of motion, and in verbs ofcondition a diminishing meaning. For instance: (.).

The basic modality expresses the correlation between the sentence andthe judgment on the part of language (logic).

The meaning of basic modality is formed in double compositional(binary), unextended and narrative sentences and in terms of semantics, ithas two possible qualities affirmative or negative.

Basic modality can be divided into affirmative and negative modal

meanings. The affirmative modal meaning is expressed in the main modal ofan unexpanded sentence and is related to the definite and indefinite objective

6 More information on this issue can be found in the authors earlier article entitled .( The Study of Modal Meaning in Mongolian by T.Pagva ). . . . ( Scientific Journal.Institute of Mongol Studies. NUM). 1998. Vol.13( 139 ). pp. 209-215.


12/22

12

modal meaning on the part of sigmatics and to the simple, completeauthentic modal meaning on the part of pragmatics.

The negative modal meaning is the opposite of the affirmative modalmeaning and its ordinary negation. The meaning is expressed with the helpof such particles as , , , , , -, 7.

Additional modality is mostly related to the utterance and defines thepersonal attitude, subjective assessment and approval of the speaker of theutterance. The main relation connected with additional modality is themeaning indicating an assessment on the part of the speaker. Assessmentevaluating modality, which expresses the emotional state of the speaker, canbe divided into two categories by its favorable or positive characteristics andnegative or unfavorable characteristics.

The modal meaning of assessment, expressing the speakers positiveemotional state, can be divided into such general semantic fields as joy

[rejoicing (-, , . . ),gratitude (- .

. .), approval(-.), content (-!. . .) and other meanings of this type], permission [admittance (-. . .), recognition (-, . .), support (-, ..),justification (-. .) and other meanings of this type], pride [admiration(-, ..), respect(-! ..) ], praise(, . .), blessing ( . . ), compassion (, .) etc.

The modal meaning of assessment, expressing the speakers negativeemotional state, can be divided into such general semantic fields as sadness[melancholy (- , . . ), offence (-,

. .), recoil (-. .), regret (- . . .) and othermeanings of this type], rejection [interdiction (-,

7 More information on this word can be found in the authors earlier article entitled - (The Functional-Semantic Features of the Word ALGA inMongolian)... ( Scientific Journal.School of Mongol Studies. NUM ). 1999. Vol. 14 (151). pp.43-48.


13/22

13

. .), protest (-, .. ), dislike (-. . .),accusation (-. .) and other meanings ofthis type], malice [underrate (. .), indifference( , ? .)], abuse ( ,

? .), cursing (, , . .), hatred (-, !

. .) and etc.The relation expressing the personal opinion of the speaker is one

constituent of additional modality, particularly of the modal meaning thatreflects the speakers emotional state.

Subjective modality is related to the pragmatics of the peripheral

system of the modal category and is expressed on the part of usage on thebasis of the correlation between the content of an utterance and the speaker.A large component of subjective modality is imperative modality. It isexpressed with the help of utterances with purpose-oriented meaning for the1st person with the endings -, -, - (-..); and the ending -2, which has a meaning of urgency in the1st person ( . .);with an imperative meaning for the 2nd person with a zero ending (-! ! .); with a meaning ofrequest in the 2nd person with the ending -4 (, ! . .); with a demanding meaning in the2nd person with the ending -4 (- !... !. ); with a respectful meaning in the 2nd person with the ending -2( , . . ); with preventivemeaning in the 2nd person with the ending -2 (. .); with considerate meaning in the 3rd person with theending -(, ,, .

.); with a felicitous meaning in the 3rd person with the ending -2

(. .); and with adesirative meaning in the 3rd person with the ending -4( ,

. .).

The basic and secondary modal meanings expressed by the above-mentioned endings can be displayed in detail as follows:


14/22

14

1. The basic meaning of the 1st person endings is to decide. However,they have additional nuances. For example: the endings - , -, - expressthat the speaker him/herself decides to do something. The ending - 2

shows that the speaker places the task of doing something on another person.These two endings intersect not only by the basic meaning but also by suchperipheral meanings as: desire, intend, request, order etc.

2. Out of the 5 endings for the 2nd person - 4, - 4, - 2

have been united by the meaning to desire. The ending - 4 has anuance of request, - 4- demand, - 2- polite request, zero ending -imperative, -2- caution. The last two endings do not intersect with theother three endings and form independent semantic fields. But in this generalsemantic sphere the several peripheral meanings of desire, request,suggestion, command, order, invitation and respect, are in an intersectingrelationship.

3. The main meaning of the 3 endings for the 3rd person is to desire.The ending - has the nuance of consideration-request, - 2 -felicitation-wish, - 4 desire-wish. These endings are also connectedby the peripheral meanings of permission and imperative nuance.


15/22

15

4. These ten semantic fields, expressed by the above-mentioned 10endings, have been connected with each other by either the basic orperipheral meaning of to desire and form the general semantic field of thesubjunctive mood of the Mongolian language. The modal meaning of these10 endings are divided into four different sub-groups: 1) decision, 2) order, 3)desire, and 4) caution. Decision refers to the 1st person, caution - the 2ndperson, desire and order - the 2nd and 3rd persons. Out of the 10 endings, fiveendings belong to the 2nd person, three the 3rd person, and two the 1stperson. This fact proves that these endings have a pragmatic function,forming the concrete types of the communication between the speaker andthe listener. In other words, in terms of the "EGO" centered communication,it can be considered that the speaker turns directly toward to the 2nd person,who is closer to the speaker, and indirectly to the 3rd person, who is far awayfrom the speaker, using these specific endings of the subjunctive mood.

It is considered that the emphatic relation and notion of thepresupposition of an utterance can be comprised into subjective modality.For the expression of the emphatic relation of an utterance, such modalwords and introductory forms as , , ,, , , , , , ,

and others are used. For example: 12000 (. No1992. 143).Some modal words and particles, such as , , , , , express the meaning of the presupposition. For instance: (.), .

Some particular suffixes are used for the expression of modalmeanings. For instance: V+/-, -/-, -/-,V+/-, V+3 for the modality of necessity, V+,V+

4, V+

2, V+, V+ for the modality of possibility, N+,

N+, N+- for the modality of willingness, and N+3, N+3, N+

3, N+-

4, N+

4, N+

4, N+

4, N+

4, N+

4, N+-

4,

V+4, N+4, N+-2, N+4, N+-(-, -), N+-, N+, V+,N+

4, N+

2, N+, N+

2, N+

4 for the modality of assessment.The modality in modern Mongolian is a multi-semantic functional

category which is revealed with various means. The modal categorybecomes apparent with analytical and synthetic methods; an analyticalmethod is more useful and productive. Modality has a possibility to berevealed in principal and intervening levels of Mongolian.

For the expression of particular types of the modal meaning whichconcern the central and peripheral, general and secondary systems of themodal category, the frequency of the analytical and synthetic methods, as


16/22

16

well as the methods of the principal and intervening levels are mutuallydifferent.

According to the literature materials, the synthetic method, orordinary (simple) forms, of the indicative mood reveal definite and indefiniteobjective modal meanings. The analytical method, or composite (complex)forms, of the indicative mood expresses definite and indefinite objectivemeanings which belong to the central system, as well as other meanings suchas the objective, additional and subjective modal meaning which belong tothe peripheral system.

The combined model N+3 is used to form words with modalmeaning. There are some modal words that express suppositional modalmeaning: , , , , ,, , , , ..., and many others suchas , , , , , , ,

, , , , , ,, , , , , etc, all having different modal meanings.

The modelN+() is used to express the negative meaning ofthe above-mentioned modality.

The words having modal meaning are seldom used after thepredicate formed by indicative mood endings, but after the predicate formedby endings of verbal noun commonly occur. This phenomenon is concernedwith the interactions of the mood and modality in the predicate. Since theindicative mood expresses the objective modal meaning from the point ofview of sigmatics and the ordinary (simple) authentic modality from thepoint of view of pragmatics, except for the basic temporal meaning, veryfew modal words are used after it. When a verbal noun, which generally hasmodifying and connecting functions, turns into a predicate, it takes manymodal words behind it and matches the functional-semantic capacities of thetemporal and modal meanings. In fact, this is a specific regularity connectedwith the agglutinative peculiarity of the Mongolian language.

If the modal words of the Mongolian take initial position at thebeginning of a sentence and are connected with the whole utterance, it

becomes a means of text-building, having the function of connecting thegiven utterance with the previous utterance. If these words take the middleor at final position in a sentence, and are connected with a particular memberof the sentence, it expresses such different kinds of nuances of meaning as tointensify, diminish, modify, confirm, emphasize, consider significant or alsoto hesitate and suppose the authenticity of the content of given words or ofthe whole utterance. Such introductory modal forms take basically free


17/22

17

position in the sentence structure and connect with the action to select therheme and to distinguish it in accordance with communicative situation andthe speakers attitude. The modal words and particles used in the concreteorder after the predicate of the sentence increase the modal capacity andsemantic loading of an utterance and expand the range of the informationexpressed in the sentence in accordance with central modal meaning peripheral modal meaning emotional expression rhetoric expression. Itis a special phenomenon, which is connected with the typical peculiarities ofexpression of the central and peripheral meanings of the modal category inthe sphere of sentence structure of Mongolian.

Thus, the modality of Mongolian sentences requires further detailedinvestigation from the point of view of langue/parole andsigmatics/pragmatics to define the capacity of modal meaning and thesemantic loading according to the direction: central modal meaning

peripheral modal meaning emotional expression rhetoric expression,including its semantic capacity, way of expression; grammatical, functional-semantic and stylistic features.

REFERENCES

. / /. ., 1987.

Bazarragchaa M. The Mongolian Sentence. (Main Issues ofModern Syntactic Study).

. .., 1955.

Bally Sh. General Linguistics and Issues of the French Language.

. . .

. ., 1950. 2. . 38-79.Vinogradov V.V On the Modal Category and Modal Words in the Russian

Language.

.. .., 1973. //. .140-157.

Zolotova G.A. Essays on the Functional Syntax of the Russian


18/22

18

Language.

. . .. 1961.1. .94-98.

Kolshanskii G.V On the Content of the Category of the LanguageModality.

-. .., 1998.

Mnkh-Amgalan Y. Modal Category of Modern Mongolian.

.. .., 1982.

Panfilov V.Z. Cognitive Issues of the Philosophycal Problems of

Linguistics.

.. . . .,1981.

Petrov N.Ye. Language Modality and Means of Expression in theYakut Language.

.. . .. 1981.5. .25-30.

Prbeev G.Ts. Modal Category and Means of Expression in theMongolian Languages.

Halliday M.A.K.Explorations in the Functions of Language. London, 1973.

Kiefer F. On Defining Modality. In Folia Linguistica. ActaSocietatus Linguisticae Europaeae. Tomus XXI/I.

The Hague: Mouton Publishers.1987. pp. 67-94.

Lyons J. Semantics, 2 vols. London & New York: CambridgeUniversity Press, 1977.

Palmer F., R. Modality and the English Modals. London and New-York, 1979.


19/22

19

ABBREVIATIONS

. .. .. .. .. .. .. .

. .. .. .. .. .. . . .. .. .. .. .. .


20/22

20

.-,

. , -

, , . .

- -, , . - , , .

.

.

- , ,

50 , , , : -, -.

, -, ,


21/22

21

, .

, , , . /. 1/.

, , . /.2/.

,

. , , .. , .

, , , : - - - , , , , . .

, ,

. , , .. , . .


22/22

, , , , , , .

Date post:	14-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	tohunabohun
View:	236 times
Download:	3 times

THE MODAL CATEGORY OF MODERN MONGOLIAN

Documents