MODALITY

Modality also sometimes referred to as Mode simply refers to the attitude of a speaker towards a particular situation or event. It is a semantic category that captures the views of the speaker about the relevance of information to him/her. Cruse (2000) sees modal expressions as those which signal a particular attitude on the part of the speaker to the proposition expressed or the situation described (typically in a statement). It signals wheather the speaker believes in the reality or likelihood of a proposition. MODALITY IN ENGLISH In English modality is expressed using the following modals or modal verbs such as; can may, might, should, could, possible just to mention but a few. Cruse (2000) categorizes modality into two main categories; Deontic and Epistemic. Deontic modality and dynamic modality represent the two types of event modalities (Palmer 2001). They refer to events that have not actually occurred but have the potential to do so. Deontic modality recounts situations that are obligatory as well as those that require permission usually from an external source. Searle (1983) as cited in Palmer (2001) refers to them as directives where we try to get others to do things. The crux of this is that, the source of authority is the actual speaker who issues the permissions and also makes it an obligation for people to take certain actions. Below are examples each of permission and obligation. 1. You can use my car (permission) 2. You must use my car (obligation) The two types can be expressed in Kaakye as follows:

3. F

2SG FUT ABLATIVE COME you can come (permission) 4. s f f b

3SG BE THAT 2SG COME you must come (obligation) Dynamic modality represents the second type event modalities. It refers to the willingness and ability of an individual to do some act. Unlike Deontic which is obligational, Dynamic is volitional. It does not depend on the individuals only physical capabilities, but also on other relevant factors that will enable the individual to exercise his/her volitional ability. The examples below illustrate this. 5. Paul can swim (This connotes his personal ability) 7. Paul will paint your house for you (Although this also implies some personal ability, it also implies that the resources are there for Paul to do so)

Epistemic modality and Evidential modality according to Palmer(2001) are centered around the attitude of the speaker the truthfullness or factual status of a proposition. In epistemic modality, speakers express their judgments about the factual validity of a proposition. A point of variation between the two lies in the fact that, whilst epistemic modality is about the factual nature of a proposition, evidential modality is concerned with the evidence available to determine its factual status. Epistemic modality in general tends semantically to connote the idea of possibility, certainty and probability. For example:

8. She could get angry. (It is possible for her to get angry) 9. He may not have come ( It is possible he has come) 10. He must be here. (Certainty) These can also be expressed in Kaakye as follows: 11. Modu k d fwi

3SG Heart FUT ABLATIVE Boil s/he can/could be angry Cruse (2000) points out that, modal expressions that are grammatical may be used to to express both epistemic and deontic senses and that this seems to be a universal trend. HOW MODALITY IS MANIFESTED IN LANGUAGES Most Ghanaian languages make use of lexical items such as verbs and adverbs as modals in order to express semantic meaning. This situation arises because; most of these languages do not have the exact counterparts of words which are traditionally defined as modals as in the case of English. For instance the following are examples of modals in certainly, suppose probably possibly, and think just to mention but a few. These modals are used to express the degrees of certainty or the probability of the occurrence of a proposition.
Modality is not exclusively grammatical in nature; it is also a semantic phenomenon, Cruse (2000:287

Kaakye uses the following lexical items to express modality in the languge: D (be able), Waa f (do like/seems), Krgyi ( take eat/believe) 12. F k d y 2SG ABLATIVE GO you can go (permission

13.

waa

l he PST go

3SG (non human) make that

it seems he is gone (probability) 14. M krgyi f bt be in

1SG take-eat that 3SG

I believe that s/he is there (certainty) Birifor a Gur language spoken in North Western Ghana also uses the following lexcal items as modals: T (be able), Aminesn (maybe), Tr (think), S ka (suposed to), Frf (must, obligatory) 15. F n t kp 2SG be ABLATIVE ENTER you may enter 16. Aminesn wn wa na May Be 3SG 3SG come (uncertainty) may be he will come. 17. A s ka w wa It fit that 3SG come He is supposed to come (obligation) The Kaakye and Birifor examples listed above above show that languges employ a lexical verbs to express modality. These verbs are used to depict certainty, possibility or doubt. They show the speakers level of commitment to a particular proposition.

In conclusion, Modality plays a very important role with regards to the level of certainty and degree of compulsion that are attached to propositions as shown in English, Kaakye and Birifor examples cited above. There is no clear cut semantic basis for the choice of these modals in the examples above. Whilst some of them are verb, others are adjectives and adverbs.

References Cruse, Alan (2000). Meaning in Language: An Introduction to Semantics and Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Palmer Frank R.(2001).Mood and modality(2ed)Cambridge University press Payne, Thomas (0000) Describing morphosyntax.