Documentation

Studies.Narrog2012

Narrog (2012): Modality, Subjectivity, and Semantic Change #

This file formalizes the category hierarchy and the category-climbing hypothesis of [Nar12]. Scope data from Japanese order the grammatical categories of the verbal clause from voice and benefactives at the bottom through aspect, dynamic and deontic modality, negation and epistemic modality, and tense to mood and illocutionary modification at the top (GramCategory, GramCategory.scopeLevel), an empirical hierarchy finer than the stipulated universal one of [Cin99]; epistemic modality outscopes deontic and dynamic modality, and mood outscopes modality proper (epistemic_outscopes_deontic, mood_outscopes_modality). Scope level determines speaker orientation (scope_implies_orientation), and the non-modal categories that are only diachronic sources of modality lie strictly below those that are only its targets (GramCategory.IsSource, GramCategory.IsTarget, source_below_target), the structural precondition of the hypothesis that semantic change involving grammatical categories climbs from narrower to wider scope.

Implementation notes #

The scope levels follow the combined hierarchy of the book's third chapter, categories on a shared level being unordered. Possession, directionals, and the two kinds of honorification, which the book's table of source and target categories also lists, are not in the scope hierarchy and are left out. The most frequent attested changes of modal meaning are tabulated in Studies/Narrog2010, and the last section checks them against the scale.

TODO #

The book derives a category's role as source or target from its scope level relative to the modal categories. IsSource and IsTarget transcribe the table; deriving them turns on whether the speculative category on the level of volitive mood counts as modality or as mood.

References #

Speech act orientation at the three positions labelled on the vertical axis of the book's semantic map. The book treats the dimension as gradual and open-ended, a property of a use that follows from performativity, and gives most modal categories a broad range of positions.

  • eventOriented : SpeechActOrientation

    The modal judgment concerns conditions on the described event and its participants.

  • speakerOriented : SpeechActOrientation

    The modal judgment is the speaker's own at the time of speech.

  • speechActOriented : SpeechActOrientation

    The use is tied to the speech act itself, including the hearer and the discourse. Clausal mood and illocutionary modification lie here.

Instances For
    @[instance_reducible]
    Equations
    @[instance_reducible]
    Equations
    • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
    Equations
    • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
    Instances For
      @[instance_reducible]

      The positions are ordered as they are listed, from the event-oriented pole upwards. A change of use from o to o' conforms to the directionality hypothesis when o ≤ o'.

      Equations
      @[instance_reducible]
      Equations
      • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.

      Grammatical categories relevant to the verbal clause, drawn from [Nar12] Tables 3.5–3.9 and [Nar09].

      The categories are ordered by empirical scope from Japanese data: lower scope (event-oriented) to wider scope (speech-act-oriented). Categories at the same scope level are grouped into a shared scopeLevel.

      Instances For
        @[instance_reducible]
        Equations
        Equations
        • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
        Instances For

          Empirical scope level from Japanese data ([Nar09], [Nar12] Tables 3.5–3.7, 3.9). Lower number = narrower scope.

          Multiple categories can share a level; the ordering between categories at the same level is not empirically established.

          Level assignments follow the groupings established in the text (p. 97): "Evidentiality 3 and Epistemic modality 2... are located on the same level as Tense"; "Epistemic modality 1 and Evidentiality 2... are located at the same level as (Internal) negation." Non-modal anchors (Tense, Negation, Perf/Imperf, Phasal aspect) and the modal categories listed alongside them share the same level.

          Equations
          Instances For
            @[instance_reducible]

            Categories are compared by scope level, categories on one level lying below each other.

            Equations
            @[instance_reducible]
            Equations
            @[instance_reducible]
            Equations

            Epistemic modality outscopes deontic modality.

            Dynamic modality (ability) has narrower scope than deontic.

            Illocutionary modification is the widest-scope category.

            Map a category to its speaker-orientation level in Narrog's 2D map.

            Categories below the aspect boundary are event-oriented; categories at the modal level are speaker-oriented; mood and illocutionary modification are speech act-oriented.

            At scope level 2, event-oriented (perfective aspect) and speaker-oriented (deontic 1, evidentiality 1) categories coexist, reflecting Narrog's observation (p. 97, point 4) that volitive modalities rank low due to descriptive use. The mapping is therefore approximate at the event/speaker boundary; see scope_implies_orientation for the precise (strict <) relationship.

            Equations
            Instances For

              Strict scope increase implies non-decreasing orientation.

              If category a is strictly narrower in scope than b, then a's orientation is no higher than b's. This is the formal link between Narrog's Hypothesis I (category climbing: narrow → wide scope) and Hypothesis II (event-oriented → speech-act-oriented).

              The theorem requires strict < rather than ≤ because at the boundary between event-oriented and speaker-oriented categories (scope level 2), perfective/imperfective aspect (event-oriented) and deontic modality 1 (speaker-oriented) share the same scope level. Narrog (p. 97, point 4) notes this: volitive categories rank low in the scope hierarchy due to their descriptive use, even though their performative use is high.

              The non-modal categories from which modal markers may derive, in the book's table of potential source and target categories for modality: voice and benefactives, and aspect, tense, and negation, which the table lists as both source and target.

              Equations
              • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
              Instances For

                The non-modal categories into which modal markers may develop: mood and illocutionary modification, and aspect, tense, and negation.

                Equations
                • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                Instances For
                  @[instance_reducible]
                  Equations
                  • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                  @[instance_reducible]
                  Equations
                  • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                  theorem Narrog2012.source_below_target (c d : GramCategory) (hc : c.IsSource) (hc' : ¬c.IsTarget) (hd : d.IsTarget) (hd' : ¬d.IsSource) :
                  c < d

                  Every category that is only a source has strictly narrower scope than every category that is only a target, the structural precondition for category climbing.

                  The categories that are only sources are event-oriented.

                  The categories that are only targets are speech act-oriented.

                  The changes of [Nar10a] #

                  The lowest position a use of a meaning tabulated in [Nar10a] can take: the directive moods lie at the speech act-oriented end, and modality proper and the future reach down to the event-oriented pole.

                  Equations
                  Instances For

                    Every tabulated change into mood conforms to the directionality hypothesis wherever the source use lay.

                    A change out of mood would not conform unless its target were again speech act-oriented; none is tabulated (Narrog2010.source_not_isMood).