(D）The use of a single modal device can hardly display the functions of various factors in discourse, such as cognition, pragmatic inputs and generic demands.
Thus, it does not suffice to analyze or study a single modal device in discourse only from individual perspectives.
As is seen above, some linguists (e.g.Hoye, 1997; Paradis, 2003）have paid attention to the co-occurrences of modal devices at the clause and even discourse levels.However, they have not explored MSAs as a means of modality supplementing in a theoretically and practically sound way.This dissertation believes that MSAs as a means of modality supplementing involve such factors as cognitive inputs, tenor and generic demands, and are worth studying.
While MSAs could function like MVs in many cases, it should be borne in mind that MSAs show their modal functions by “orbiting” around MVs.Thus, MSAs are similar to MVs in modal functions, but they are different as well, for in discourse the synergy of MSA + MV is different from the roles of either MVs or MAs (or simply adverbs).This situation makes it necessary to adopt a method of research on MSAs somewhat though not totally different from that on MVs, or MAs, or adverbs.
1.2 Objectives
This dissertation aims to reach the following seven objectives.
First, it will explore and exemplify the definition of MSAs as a means of modality supplementing in discourse.MSAs are those adverbs that can supplement modality in combination with MVs.Then, of course, not all adverbs can function as MSAs.Consider the following examples:
(8）More precisely, ideological categorization should be based on the perception of texts’ ideological consistency.
(9）However, they would be often hard pressed to justify their analysis.
More precisely in Example (8）functions as an MSA because it defines the degree of modality denoted by the MV should.In contrast, however in Example (9）is a conjunctive adverb that connects two consecutive clause complexes, and does not supplement the modality conveyed by the MV would.As is seen, MSA is a semantic and functional concept.Yet, it interacts with syntax as well.Morley (2000）gives an account of MAs and adjuncts from the perspectives of the interface between syntax and function, and Quirk et al.(1985）and Malrieu (1999: 83）present the classification of adverbs through the angle of the interface between syntax and semantics.Such theoretical studies can lay a foundation for the elaborations on the classification of MSAs.In a word, there should be an interface between function and syntax to be explored in order to define and classify MSAs.
MSAs are in the category of adverbs, and function modally in discourse.However, MSAs are different from other adverbs in that not all adverbs can serve the function of modality; they are also different from MAs in that some MSAs are not considered as MAs if they do not co-occur with MVs.Thus, in terms of number, syntax, semantics and functions, MSAs differ from either adverbs or MAs.The main cause lies in the parasitic relationships between MSAs and MVs.Such a connection tends to yield different features of MSAs and modality supplementing in different genres.
Second, it will demonstrate that the deployment of MSAs as a means of modality supplementing in discourse is justified from the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistics (hereafter SFL).As modality is a way of expressing varying degrees of commitment to, or belief in, a proposition, it can be multi-layered and pluralistic.By “multi-layered” (cf.Nuyts, 2001: 175), it is meant that one modal device can convey more than one modal sense or more than one modal device is combined to form a complex type of modality, and by “pluralistic” it is meant that one modal sense can have more than one modal expression.These two situations arise because of the complex interpersonal needs.For instance, an addresser may find that his or her attitudes or judgments should be conveyed with caution; therefore, other supplementary devices are necessary.This is similar to Internet files which are often than not accompanied by readings of similar topics, types or nature.To supplement information is parallel to supplementing modality, the former done to equip the audience with a better understanding of the information provided, while the latter to notify the audience of the addresser’s attitude in a better way, for experiential and interpersonal needs respectively.
Third, it will indicate that MSAs as a means of modality supplementing can be explored through the perspectives of cognition and pragmatic inputs.For instance, Papafragou (2000）studies MAs in connection with relevance theory.In her view, MAs can be the meta-representation devices of speech acts or the devices of evidentials attributing sources explicitly or implicitly.Also, Nuyts (2001）studies MAs from the perspectives of speech acts, evidentiality and informativity.These studies will form a basis for the explorations of MSAs.