Курсовая теория на тему Особенности употребления средств выражения модальности в английском и французском языках

Содержание:

Introduction 3
Chapter 1. The concept of modality as a linguistic category 5
1.1. The concept of modality in linguistics 5
1.2. Journalistic text as the basis for the study of modality 9
1.3. Ways to implement modality in English texts 11
Chapter 2. Reflection of the category of modality in the French and British media 15
2.1. The specificity of modality in The economist 15
2.2. Specificity of the reflection of modality in the French language as exemplified by the French media 26
Conclusion 32
Bibliography 34

Введение:

Modality is a multifaceted phenomenon; therefore, in linguistic literature we can find different thoughts about the essence of this phenomenon. Modality (from Latin modus — measure, method, shape) in different object domains is a category that characterizes modus operandi or attitude to action.
Human thinking is the result of the perception of the world and is closely related to language — the main means of expression. The category of modality is a category of language, therefore it represents a judgment of reality or a statement related to phenomena of reality. In general, modality can be defined as the relation of the speaker to the content of his statement and the relation of the content of the statement to reality.
In other words, modality is a category of linguistic meaning associated with the expression of possibility and necessity. This is a grammatical and semantic category expressing the speaker’s attitude to expression, his assessment of the relationship to objective reality.
Traditionally, modality is divided into two types: objective modality and subjective modality. This approach was based on the work of the Russian scientist V.Z. Panfilov. In this case, objective modality is the relation of expression to reality (reality or unreality, possibility or impossibility, necessity or probability, etc.), and subjective modality is an expression of the speaker’s attitude to the utterance. The subjective modality is realized based on the author’s assessment of the subject of speech.
In Russian linguistics, evaluation as a reflection of modality has been the subject of interest for many scholars. For example, academician V.V. Vinogradov, one of the first who gave a very broad interpretation of the category of modality. His works on the problem of modality are very important for modern linguists. VV Vinogradov first relates modality to “the fundamental structural characteristic of any sentence” and characterizes it as “an oratory assessment of the relationship between the content of the statement and reality” [6; with. 24].
His definition of modality is widely used in studies in the English language, possibly because, as I.R. Halperin mentions: “… modern English grammars avoid defining this category, and when they deal with it, they are limited to indicating the forms in which modality is realized” [2, p. 41].
In his opinion, in any pronunciation / expression, we can distinguish the main content (dictum) and the modal part (mode), which expresses the intellectual, emotional and volitional consideration of the speaker regarding the statement. He distinguishes between explicit and implicit modes. The main form of expression explicite modus is the main sentence, consisting of a compound sentence with the sentence of the object. Thus, modality is presented as a syntactic category, in the expression of which modal verbs play a major role.
The category of modality is divided into two types: objective and subjective. Objective modality is mandatory because it is one of the categories that form the predicative unit — the sentence. It expresses the relationship of the reported to reality in terms of implementation or feasibility. Objective modality is organically linked to the category of time and differentiates based on temporal certainty — uncertainty. The meaning of time and reality is the fusion of unreality, the complex of these meanings is called object-modal meanings.
Subjective modality expresses the speaker’s attitude to information; this is an additional function of the utterance. The semantic basis of a subjective assessment of the concept of forms of modality in the broad sense, including not only transmitted intellectual and rational skills, but also various types of emotional reactions.
Assessing the surrounding reality, we pay attention to the fact that each statement has its own assessment (subjective characteristics, facts, events of qualities, properties, the nature of occurrence in time) or its relationship and relationship with other facts and events.
The characterization of modality is best reflected in the journalistic text. This is because it is the media that actively influence the reader, which is expressed in the use of a large number of emotional means. Moreover, the media like no other education does not reflect the features of a living foreign language.
An object is a semantic category of authorial modality in a journalistic text.
The subject is the lexical and stylistic means of expressing the author’s modality in the English and French media.
The purpose of the work is to identify the lexical-semantic structure of the categories of author’s modality in the English and French media
To achieve the goal of the study, the following tasks were set:
1) Consideration of the features of the modality category
2) To analyse the implementation of the modality in the French language
3) describe the features of the implementation of units;
The study involves the use of the following methods: continuous sampling method, contextual and stylistic analysis, quantitative calculation.
The structure of the work consists of an introduction, two chapters, conclusion and list of references.

Заключение:

Modality in itself becomes a means of using language. This also applies to everyday language, through which people express their position and their attitude to various facts and events, and theoretical statements, or the conceptualization of morality in philosophical and scientific systems.
Modality includes everyday judgment. At the same time, the perception of realities is quite subjective and requires explanation from the position of linguistic and philosophical realities. Philosophy, characterizing the language of morality. criticizes him.
The category of modality is divided into two types: objective and subjective. Objective modality is mandatory because it is one of the categories that form the predicative unit — the sentence. It expresses the relationship of the reported to reality in terms of implementation or feasibility. Subjective modality is realized as a person’s opinion on the reality of reality.
Modal arguments tend to occupy a large layer of vocabulary in contemporary political debate. This is due to the fact that the language of politics is ambivalent and polysemic. Contradictions are associated with the designation of moral indicators, such as justice, equality, the public good, which are quite vague and in the context of various situations can mean completely different things.
Modal terms are freely used today in descriptions and in language descriptions. Value meaning distinguishes them from other types of utterance. Characterization directly depends on those moral principles that are contained in the statement. Moreover, their activation occurs, as a rule, now when a violation of moral standards is realized.
We examined various classifications of the category of modality, we established that linguists distinguish, on the one hand, objective and subjective modalities, on the other hand, classify modality into aletic, deontic, and epistemic. We also examined the classifications of O.N. Laguta, who distinguishes Aletic, deontic, epistemic, as well as temporary, axiological and selective modalities and the classification of A.A. Ivina, who distinguishes logical, ontological, epistemic, deontic, axiological and temporal modalities.
We have determined that the category of modality is realized at the grammatical, lexical and intonational levels. Grammatical means of expressing modality are moods and temporal forms of verbs, lexical ones are modal verbs, verbs with modal meaning, modal words, modal expressions or phrases.
Having examined the concept of ontology, its main features and varieties, we determined that the consideration of the implementation of the category of modality in the ontological aspect is an analysis from the point of view of modal values of the possibility, reality and the need for spatial-temporal orientation, which is carried out by a systematic analysis: quantitative and positional.
A quantitative analysis showed a greater modality of the French language compared to English, in French the predominance of lexical realizations of the modality category was manifested in all modal categories: modal verbs, verbs with modal meaning, modal words and expressions. Political topics were the most modal, and sports the least modal in both languages.

Фрагмент текста работы:

Chapter 1. The concept of modality as a linguistic category

1.1. The concept of modality in linguistics

Modality — a characteristic of the existence of a certain object or phenomenon, the process (physical modalities), as well as methods of constructing and understanding judgments and logical reasoning about objects, phenomena, events and processes (logical modality).
In logic, modality is defined as the “contextual characteristic of the utterance”, which is expressed in the natural language “with the help of special language constructions … attached to affirmative sentences”.
A large encyclopaedic dictionary gives the following definition of modality: “a functional-semantic category expressing different types of attitude of a statement to reality, as well as different types of subjective qualifications of a communicable” [4, p. 303]. Modality in linguistics is also considered as “the speaker’s relation to the message”, “correlates the content of the sentence to reality in terms of reality or unreality” [10, p. 108].
In linguistic terms, the history of the study of modality is relatively small, but the range of opinions in this category is prohibitive. An analysis of existing works on this language problem indicates that, in general, all points of view on the nature of language modality can be grouped around the following points: it is widely believed that modality is a grammatical category that characterizes the reality-unreality of the content of a statement; according to another point of view, the modality that functions in the process of forming a sentence at the syntax level is elevated to the logical-grammatical level, as a result of which a dispute arises regarding the classification of modality as a syntactic or logical-grammatical category; sometimes modality is interpreted as an analogy of the modality of judgment; there is a point of view according to which the modality problem must be solved based on the provisions of linguistics, logic, and philosophy.
Indeed, being at the intersection of logic, linguistics, and philosophy of language, the category of modality requires the broadest possible approach from anyone who is trying to understand its essence as one of the fundamental characteristics of the process of human reflection of reality and describe specific objects that exist in a particular language. It is no accident that those authors who try to define modality by pointing to specific ways of expressing it in any language invariably come to conflicting conclusions or find that their definition of modality is incomplete, since it does not cover all possible ways of expressing this semantic category. This suggests the feasibility of cross-language study of modality and varieties of modal meanings.
Modality is ambiguous in form and content in a super category covering both linguistic and speech systems. This category determines the nature of predicatively and more broadly — the completely grammatical meaning of the sentence.
The theory of sentences has been central to syntactic science since its inception as a branch of linguistics. Over the entire period of development, the syntax of a sentence has gone from logical to psychological, then grammatical, and from them to communicative, semantic and pragmatic theories.
The modern syntax in the development of the theory of sentences has a direct relationship with other linguistic phenomena, such as syntagmatic, semiotics with its three components: semantics as an area of meaning and truth of statements; pragmatics as an area of opinions, evaluations, presumptions and the installation of the speaker; syntactic as a field of formal inference and communication theory. In this regard, the field of activity of syntactic science itself has expanded due to the appearance of various directions in it.
Modern research identifies up to ten directions in syntax: grammatical syntax that studies the structure of speech as a system from form to content (from syntax to semantics) or from content to form (from semantics to syntactic); semiotic syntax studying syntactic, semantics and pragmatics of speech; communicative syntax studying the subject-rheumatic structure of speech; functional syntax describing the rules for the functioning of syntactic units at different levels of the language system; varieties syntax considering variants of syntactic units; expressive syntax studying syntactic methods of expressing expression; semantic syntax studying the meaning of a sentence; structural (generative, generative, transformational) syntax; the pragmatic syntax that defines the relationship between signs and the addressee (listener) also distinguishes syntagmatic syntax that studies the valence, relational and distributive possibilities of words in a sentence.
Such a variety of syntax directions is associated with the presence of various aspects of a sentence. V.V. Bogdanov identifies eight directions of syntax concerning eight aspects of a sentence: categorical syntax representing the process of distributing elements of a sentence in parts of speech; functional syntax describing the syntactic functions of sentence members; structural syntax, reflecting syntactic intra-time combinational relations; linear syntax showing linear deployment of a sentence; intonation syntax that studies the intonation design of a sentence; communication syntax describing the actual division of a sentence; coherent text syntax studying interphase relationships and the structure of super phrase phrases; syntactic semantics reflecting the meaning of a single sentence [4].