According to Downing and Locke “[m]odality is the category by which speakers express attitudes towards the event contained in the proposition” (Downing: 1992, 381). So when it comes to analysing political commitments concerning their modal structures, this will be a question of how far the speaker commits himself to the content of his speech. “[M]odality is [also] said to express arelationto reality, whereas an unmodalised declarative treats the processasreality” (Downing: 1992, 382). Especially in the field of politics, that is often regarded as a ‘game of lies and intrigues’. It is interesting to find out whether a politician really believes what he says or how he hides his real opinion behind the tools modality gives him. Modality gives us the opportunity to make an utterance sound clear and certain at first glance and it is only revealed at a closer look that the speaker is not as convinced as it seems to be. This term paper can be divided into two parts. The first part of it will be concerned with the theory of modality. As mood is closely linked to modality, it will start with giving a short introduction to this topic. This will also be helpful for the analysis at the end of this paper. Additionally, the topic of this paper is classified to the level of interpersonal meaning, which “[…] is expressed by choices from several different areas of the language which include modality, intonation and […] ‘moods’” (Downing: 1992, 164). This emphasizes the importance of dealing with mood in this paper. For obvious reasons it will not be possible though to analyse the text in the end concerning the speaker’s intonation. This chapter will be followed by explaining what modality is all about. The author of this term paper decided to orientate himself according to the division made by Downing and Locke, namely that of extrinsic modality on the one hand and that of instrinsic modality on the other (cf. Downing: 1992, 381-402). Most other concepts of modality by Lock, Quirk, Yule, and others can be adapted to this one, although some of them differ in their terms. [...]
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. Mood
III. Modality
III.1 Extrinsic modality
III.1.1 Certainty
III.1.2 Probability
III.1.3 Possibility
III.2 Intrinsic modality
III.2.1 Volition
III.2.2 Obligation and necessity
III.2.3 Intrinsic possibility, ability, permission
IV. Realisation of modal meanings
V. Text Study
VI. Results
Objectives and Topics
This academic paper examines the linguistic concept of modality within the context of political discourse, specifically analyzing how modal structures are employed by politicians to express degrees of commitment to their statements. The research investigates the relationship between grammatical mood, illocutionary force, and the speaker's underlying certainty, utilizing a speech by Tony Blair concerning the Hutton report as a primary case study.
- The theoretical classification of extrinsic and intrinsic modality.
- The distinction between direct and indirect illocutionary acts and their realization through mood.
- An empirical analysis of modal verb usage in political communication.
- The role of modality in shaping ambiguity and speaker responsibility in public statements.
Excerpt from the Book
III. Modality
An utterance like (2) It’s raining. can be called a categorical assertion. The speaker of this statement “[…] express[es] a proposition and at the same time commit[s] [himself] to the truth of that proposition” (Downing: 1992, 382). From a semantic point of view one should be able to assume that it is really raining in this situation and that the speaker is aware of this fact. Therefore he believes his own assertion to be true. No other statement can be more certain about its proposition because what the speaker says is reality. Consequently, “[…] an utterance such as It’s raining but I don’t believe it is semantically unacceptable since the second part contradicts the categorical assertion expressed in the first” (Downing: 1992, 382). In this case the speaker must have seen that it is raining and informs the hearer of it, but at the same time he neglects this fact. This simply does not make sense and is therefore a rather unusual utterance.
In contrast to that, a speaker still has the possibility to perform such illocutionary acts as (3) It may be raining. (4) It can’t be raining. (5) It must be raining. depending on the situations, in which they are uttered. In case of the fifth linguistic example the situation could be as follows: two people are sitting in a restaurant when someone comes in whose clothes are wet. Then one can deduce that it must be raining outside. The speaker only “[…] express[es] a relation with reality […]” (Downing: 1992, 382). However, one cannot be sure about this relation, but that does not matter because with such an utterance the speaker is […] not committing [himself] wholeheartedly to the truth of the proposition. [He is] not making a categorical assertion, but [is] rather modifying [his] commitment to some degree by expressing a judgement or assessment of the truth of the situation.
Summary of Chapters
I. Introduction: The introduction establishes the theoretical framework for analyzing modality in political speech and outlines the focus on Tony Blair’s statement regarding the Hutton report.
II. Mood: This chapter defines various mood types and explores their syntactic realization as well as their association with specific illocutionary acts.
III. Modality: This core section provides a detailed taxonomy of extrinsic (epistemic) and intrinsic (deontic/root) modality, including subcategories such as certainty, probability, volition, and obligation.
IV. Realisation of modal meanings: This chapter categorizes the different linguistic means, such as lexical verbs, auxiliaries, and modal disjuncts, through which modal meanings are expressed.
V. Text Study: This chapter applies the previously defined theoretical concepts to a systematic analysis of Tony Blair’s speech, evaluating his usage of modal structures.
VI. Results: The results present a quantitative overview of the findings, including diagrams illustrating the distribution of moods and modal verbs in the analyzed text.
Keywords
Modality, Extrinsic Modality, Intrinsic Modality, Political Discourse, Critical Discourse Analysis, Tony Blair, Illocutionary Act, Mood, Epistemic Modality, Deontic Modality, Modal Verbs, Certainty, Probability, Responsibility, Hutton Report.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental focus of this paper?
The paper examines how modal structures are utilized in political discourse to reveal the speaker's true degree of commitment to the propositions made in their speech.
Which central topics are discussed in the work?
Key topics include the grammatical theory of mood, the classification of modality into extrinsic and intrinsic categories, and the practical application of these concepts in linguistic text analysis.
What is the primary research goal?
The primary goal is to investigate how a politician, specifically Tony Blair, uses modal verbs and structures to maintain ambiguity or shift responsibility within a high-stakes political statement.
Which methodology is employed for the analysis?
The author uses a descriptive linguistic approach, applying Downing and Locke's framework of modality to analyze a specific transcript of a speech delivered to the House of Commons.
What is covered in the main section of the paper?
The main section moves from a foundational theoretical review of mood and modality to a detailed case study, concluding with a quantitative evaluation of the speaker's linguistic choices.
Which keywords best characterize the work?
The work is best characterized by terms such as modality, critical discourse analysis, political discourse, illocutionary force, and epistemic/intrinsic modality.
How does the author distinguish between extrinsic and intrinsic modality?
Extrinsic modality (or epistemic) relates to the speaker's knowledge and certainty regarding the truth of a proposition, whereas intrinsic modality (or root/deontic) relates to the speaker intervening in events through obligation, permission, or volition.
What did the analysis of Tony Blair’s speech reveal?
The analysis suggests that Blair’s speech is intentionally vague, relying on modal verbs to mitigate his commitment to specific claims while simultaneously using declarative forms to present his statements as fact.
- Quote paper
- Jonas Ole Langner (Author), 2005, Modal structures of political commitment, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/59078
