Conjunctions. The types of the conjunctions

THE MINISTRY OF SCIENCE AND EDUCATION OF REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN

KAZAKH ABLAI KHAN UNIVERSITY OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND WORLD LANGUAGES

 

The chair of  English language

 

 

 

 

 

 

Course paper

 Theme: Conjunctions. The types of the conjunctions

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                       Received by: Sopieva B.A

                                                 Carried out by: Rusemova A.

RGPh -302

 

 

                                                                                                                                                                      

                                                                         

Almaty-2008

 

 

 

 

                            Contents

 

1. Introduction --------------------------------------------------3

 

2. Main part-----------------------------------------------------3
1. Modal words-------------------------------------------------------------4
2. Modal verbs--------------------------------------------------------------6
3. The meaning of modal verbs ------------------------------------------8
4. Difference between modal verbs and modal words----------------8
5. Types of modal verbs: can/could, may, must, to have to/ have

got to, to be to, need, ought, should, shall, will, dare.-----------------10

6. List-----------------------------------------------------------------------27

 

 

      3. Conclusion-------------------------------------------------30

 

      4.  List of literature------------------------------------------31

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                 Introduction

 

         Modality is expression of speaker's attitude to what his utterance denotes.

The speaker's judgment may be of different kinds, that is, the speaker may express various modal meanings. Modal verbs unlike other verbs, do not denote actions or states, but only show the attitude of the speaker towards the action expressed by the infinitive in combination with which they form compound modal predicates. These modal verbs may show that the action (or state, of process, or quality) is viewed by the speaker as possible, obligatory, doubtful, certain, permissible, advisable, requested, prohibited, ordered etc. Modal verbs occur only with the infinitive. This or that meaning is to a great degree determined by communicative type of the sentence and the form of the infinitive. That is a huge problem foi foreign learners of English, who make a great deal of mistakes in this field. So, the aim of my work is to show how modal verbs can be used, in what case we need one or other verb and why.

English modality can be expressed not only by modal verbs. Modality can be expressed by different linguistic means. In actual speech all forms expressing modality work together to make the meaning clear. But in every case there is some leading form that expresses the main attitude. These forms fall into four categories: phonetic (intonation), grammatical (mood), lexico-grammatical (modal verbs), lexical (modal words and phrases). But the most important from them is the third form, which includes modal verbs. It is important to take into account one more feature peculiar to modal verbs. They all show that a certain action is represented as necessary, doubtful, etc. From the point of view of the speaker, there are verbs which 'help' other verbs to express a meaning: it is important to realize that "modal verbs" have no meaning by themselves/ A modal verb such as would has several varying functions; it can be used, for example, to help verbs express ideas about the past, the present and the future. It is therefore wrong to simply believe that "would is the past of will": it is many other things.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                            Modal words

 

    The distinction between modal words and adverbs is, as we saw in our general survey of parts of speech, based on two criteria (1) their meaning: modal words express the speaker’s view concerning the reality of the action expressed in the sentence, (2)their syntactical function: they are not adverbial modifiers but parentheses, whether we take a parenthesis to

be a special part of the sentence or whether we say that it stands  outside its structure.

    We must emphasize that this view is far from being the only one possible: one might argue that the meanings of an adverb as a part of speech might be described in such a way as to include what we call modal words , and to mention the function of parenthesis among the syntactical function of adverbs. Where clear objective  morphological criteria fail there will always be room for different interpretations. We will not argue this point any further but start on the assumption that modal words do constitute a separate part of  speech.

      Modal words have been variously classified into group according to their meaning: those expressing certainty ,such as certainly, surely, undoubtedly, those expressing doubt, such as the perhaps, may be, possibly, etc. The number of types varies greatly with different authors. We need not go into this question here, as this is a lexicological, rather than a grammatical, problem. From the grammatical viewpoint it is sufficient to state that all modal words express some kind of attitude of the speaker concerning the reality of the action expressed in the sentence.

      In the vast majority of cases the modal word indicates the speaker’s attitude towards the whole thought expressed in the sentence, e.g. Look, there are those doves again. The one is really quite a bright red, is not it? She is a delicate little thing, perhaps nobody but me knows how delicate.

       If the modal word in each of the sentence is eliminated the whole thought will lose the  modal colouring  imparted to it by the modal word, and will appear to be stated as fact, without any specific mention of the speaker’s attitude. However, occasionally a modal word may refer to some one word or phrase only, and have no connection with the rest of the sentence. It may, for example, refer to a secondary part of the sentence, as in the following example: no one expected his arrival, except Rose presumably.

       A modal word can also make up a sentence by itself. This happens when it is used to answer a general question, that is, a question admitting of  a yes- or now-answer. Certainly, perhaps, maybe etc. maybe used in this way. In these cases, then, modal words are the main part of the sentence. This brings them close together with the sentence words yes and no. However, they differ from the sentence words in that the modal words can also be used as parentheses in a sentence. Thus, the question, Are you coming? May equally be answered, cannot be used as parentheses. Whether the answer is Yes, or Yes, I am , the yes is a sentence in both variants.

      It might be possible to argue that if the answer to the question  Are you coming? Is certainly, the word certainly is a parenthesis, and the rest of the answer, I am, is “understood”. While such a view cannot be disproved, it seems unnatural and far –fetched , and we will prefer the view that Certainly in this case is a sentence.

      The problem of  modal words is connected with the very difficult problem of modality as whole. This has been treated repeatedly by various scholars both with reference  to English and to Russian and in a wider context of general linguistics as well. We will not investigate here all aspects of the problem. We will only mention that there are various means of expressing  modality –modal words , modal verbs (can, must, etc) and the category of mood. Since two of them or even all three may be used simultaneously, it is evident that there may be several layers of modality in sentence. A great variety of combinations is possible here.

     The modal words express the speaker’s evaluation of the relation between the statement made in the sentence and reality. The speaker’s evaluation may be of different kinds, that is the speaker may express various degrees of certainty, doubt, desirability of the action expressed in the sentence.

      Most modal words have developed from adverbs, so very often there, exists a formal identity between modal words and adverbs. For instance such modal words as certainly, surely, happily are homonymous with the adverbs certainly, surely, happily. Such modal words as possibly, probably, indeed, also derived from adverbs, have no corresponding homonymous adverbs because the latter ceased to be used in Modern English. Though formally identical with adverbs, modal words differ from in meaning and syntactical function.

     According to their  meaning semantically modal words fall into three groups,             denoting:

(1)Word expressing certainty (certainly, of course, indeed, surely, decidedly, really, definitely, naturally, no doubt, etc.)

Certainly you’ll admit we could finish all this in a month.

(2)Supposition (perhaps, maybe, probably, obviously, possibly, evidently, apparently, etc.)

She was probably dissatisfied just as he was.

         (3)words showing  whether the speaker considers the action he speaks about                     desirable or undesirable (happily-unhappily; luckily-unluckily; fortunately-unfortunately;etc.)

If he were not married as happily  as he was ,might not something come of it?

Fortunately there were few people at the morning surgery.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                            Modal verbs

 

Function: Modal auxiliary verbs give additional information about the function of the main verb that follows it. Although having a great variety of communicative functions, these functions can all be related to a scale ranging from possibility (can) to necessity (must). Within this scale there are two functional divisions: one concerned with possibility and necessity in terms of freedom to act (including ability, permission and duty), and the other {shall not included) concerns itself with the theoretical possibility of propositions being true or not true, including likelihood and certainty: must = absolute (often moral) obligation, order, requirement, necessity; can!could = physical or mental ability; may/might = permission, option, choice; will = intention in 1st person, volition in 2nd and 3rd persons; and shall/should = in 1 st person objective though not moral obligation, no choice, as in: One day I shall die: we all shall die one day; in 2nd and third persons shall implies an incumbent obligation, destiny (// shall come to pass) or a command, decree, necessity imposed by the speaker, as in: A meeting shall take place on the last Friday of every month or a promise, namely that the speaker is stating his obligation to another party that an action or event take place, as in: You shall go to the ball, Cinderella. However, if a speaker ' states: I will let you go to the ball, Cinderella, in staling his intention, he is, in this instance, also making a promise.

As regards the modal auxiliary verbs shall/will, it is misleading to suggest either that these verbs are "future tense auxiliary verbs" that are used to form a future tense in English where shall is used for the first person and will for second and third persons (a "rule" of "traditional" grammar),

thereby forming a compound "simple future" or "pure future" tense, or that shall and will are interchangeable in modern English. This latter belief no doubt arises from the fact that the contracted forms of shall and will are identical ( 'II), as are the contracted forms of the past/subjunctive of shall and will, namely should and would ( 'd), which contractions having led to the usage of will/would for all persons in demotic English and most particularly in American English.

Shall and will have distinct meanings, but some of them sometimes overlap, as with I/we statements combining promise (a statement of obligation) and intention (a statement of willingness). With I/we questions used as suggestions or as requests for advice, only shall/should is possible: "Shall/Should I do something?" fundamentally asks if I am obliged to another party to do something, (cf. sollen in German: Was soil ich tun? [What shall I do?]) In most other cases, "will" is usable. Will in 2nd and 3rd persons can indicate a sure prediction if the statement/question is marked for future time {When will he arrive? - He will arrive tomorrow) or future time is understood in context (Do you think he will come? - Sure he will come), the certainty of prediction being marked by the speaker's belief that he knows the volition of the subject of the modal verb; if no futurity is marked or understood in context, then will, but not shall, carries meanings of (a) general deduction, (b) highest probability, (c) habit, or (d) habit-power, e.g.: (a) If George is British, he will be quite conservative in his opinions; (b) Did the caller have a British accent? - Then that will have been George (would have been George is still highly probable but there is a slight doubt implied by the past form of will that, in this context, is subjunctive in function; must have been George is also a high probability statement but it is a logical conclusion: the speaker is logically obliged ю believe that the caller was George); (c) He will always call me when I'm having lunch; (d) This bottle will hold at least two pints.

Most modal auxiliary verbs have two distinct interpretations, epistemic (expressing how certain the factual status of the embedded proposition is) and deontic (involving notions of permission and obligation). The following sentences illustrate the two uses of must:

•epistemic: You must be starving. (= "It is necessarily the case that you are starving.")

•deontic: You must leave now. (= "You are required to leave now.")

•ambiguous: You must speak Spanish.

о  epistemic = "It is surely the ca e that you speak Spanish (e.g., after

    having lived in Spain for ten years)."

о  deontic = "It is a requirement that you speak Spanish (e.g., if you want

    to get a job in Spain)."

Epistemic modals can be analyzed as raising verbs, while deontic modals can be analyzed as control verbs.

Another form of modal auxiliary is the verb indicating ability: "can" in English, "konnen" in German, and "possum" in Latin. For example, "I can say that in English," "Ich kann das auf Deutsch sagen," and "Illud Latine dicere possum."

Sometimes, the use of the modal auxiliary verbs varies in positive and negative statements. For example, in English, we have the sentence pair, "You may do that," and "You may not do that." However, in German, these ideas are expressed as "Sie dtirfen das tun," but "Sie miissen das nicht tun." The latter looks as if it would translate into English as "You must not do that," but it is more typically translated as "You may not do that."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                     The meanings of modal verbs

     The meanings of modal verbs are extremely important for understanding how modal verbs work. This or that modal verb in one meaning can't form the past tense, in another meaning is used only with a negative, in still another meaning can't form a question or, on the contrary, is used only in the form of a question, etc.

The meanings of modal verbs are created by the context and by the grammatical structures in which they are used. If the context is not clear enough, it may be difficult to understand in which meaning a modal verb is used. For example, look at this phrase: "You must speak English." Does it mean "You have to speak English" or "You probably speak English"? We need more context to say for sure, for example, "You must speak English at the conference" (strong necessity) or "You have lived in Canada for several years, you must speak English" (strong probability).

Certain grammatical structures also provide additional context and help us choose the right meaning of a modal verb. For example, quite often the use of the infinitive "be" after a modal verb is an indication that the meaning here is "probability" or "possibility", for example:

He must be rich. 

They may be at home. She could be sleeping now.

The meanings of modal verbs are a little difficult to single out and define clearly (especially if you try to define them in Russian). For example, when speaking about the main meaning of the verb "can", some linguists use the words "ability, possibility", others speak about "physical and mental ability", still others say "ability, power, skill, opportunity", etc.(1)

 

       Difference between modal verbs and modal words

Some modal words are synonyms and can be used instead of each other. For example, "should" and "ought to" are close synonyms; "will" and "would" are synonyms in polite requests, etc. It is sometimes difficult for language learners to choose the right synonym. Always choose a more general synonym out of a group of synonyms or a synonym with a more straightforward meaning. For example, "may", "might" and "could" are synonyms in the meaning "possibility". "May" has two other meanings, "could" has four other meanings, and two of them are pretty difficult to distinguish from "possibility" without a clear context. Only "might" has just one meaning: possibility. I think the choice is obvious - use "might" or "may" for "possibility". Recommendations which synonym to choose and use are given in the files on specific modal verbs.

Specific modal verbs are grouped by their meaning in the files "Ability: can, could, be able to", "Advice: should, ought to, had better".

 

 

(1)-www.yahoo.ru. modal verbs and modal words

 

 

Modal verbs	Modal words	Examples
Will ,must	Certainly	“Will you allow me to detain you one moment”, said he. Certainly, replied the unwelcome visitor.
May ,might	Probably	You must speak English. You probably speak English.

 

 

Formation of tenses: Modal verbs do not have the future tense form. The idea of the future is expressed by the present tense forms of modal words with the help of the context and adverbs of time referring to the future. (With the exception of the modal verbs "will" and "would", of course, which express the future themselves.)

Can I go there tomorrow? - Yes, you can. Can they go there now? - No, they can't. He shouldn't call her today. They should call her tomorrow.

Only two modal verbs can form the past by changing their forms directly. They are "can - could" and "will - would" (only in some of their meanings). The pair "may -might" in the meaning "possibility" used to work like that, too, but nowadays they are mostly used as two separate modal verbs. The pair "shall - should" in the meaning "the Future" can still work like that in British English, but in American English "will" is used instead of "shall" for all persons in the future and "shall" and "should" are mostly used as two different modal verbs, for example:

Shall we go there? (polite suggestion of some activity)

Should we go there? (advice; present or future)

You should have called her yesterday, (advice; past tense)

Forms of infinitive: All modal verbs take the infinitive without the particle "to". (The modal verb "ought to" consists of two parts: "ought" and "to".) There are several infinitive forms in English. Look at the infinitive forms of the verb "do" as an example:

to do - active / simple infinitive

to be doing - continuous infinitive

to have done - perfect infinitive

to have been doing - perfect continuous infinitive

to be done - passive infinitive

to have been done - perfect passive infinitive

The active / simple and the passive infinitives are the most common forms of the infinitive used in speech and in writing; the other forms are rarely used. (There are no equivalents for the other infinitive forms in Russian, so their translation here is approximate.) But modal verbs use all infinitive forms (without the particle "to")

to form certain tenses and create meanings in their own peculiar way, for example:

He must go. (must + active infinitive)

He must be in the other room, (must + active infinitive)

He must be sleeping, (must + continuous infinitive)

He must have gone home, (must + perfect infinitive)

He must have been sleeping, (must + perfect continuous infinitive)

It must be done quickly, (must + passive infinitive)

It must have been done already, (must + perfect passive infinitive) (2)

It is not particularly important for language learners to know which infinitive form it is. What is important to know, is that modal verbs have two tense forms: the present and the past. The idea of the future is expressed with the help of the present tense. These tenses are expressed in the following ways: