2018-01-08
3838
1. Traditional and Independent use of verbal means expressing unreality
Some linguists distinguish between the independent (or free), structurally dependent and traditional use of verbal means expressing unreality (Гордон,Kpылова).
The independent (or free) use is observed when the choice of means is independent of the structure of the sentence and is only determined by meaning, or by the attitude of the speaker toward the actions expressed in the sentence. For example: Come here/ The use of the imperative mood is semantically conditioned and it is the meaning that presupposes both the form and the structural pattern of the sentence.
In a limited number of cases the use of the verbal means expressing unreality has become a matter of tradition and is to be treated as set phrases, as other sentences cannot be built up on their patterns. For example: God bless you! So be it! This is the traditional use of verbal means expressing unreality.
Let us consider each of the uses in detail[1].
1) The traditional use of verbal means expressing unreality includes such expressions as Success attend you! Be ours a happy meeting! Long live the King! Heaven forbid! Suffice to say...! As it were (как бы так сказать) and some others too. It is obvious that these are survivals of the old use of the Subjunctive mood, and most of them express indirect inducement. New sentences cannot be formed on this pattern.
2) The independent use of forms expressing unreality includes the following cases:
· Imperative mood forms in simple sentences used to express inducement: Stand up! Sit down! Behave yourselves! etc.
· Combinations of modal verbs (can/could, may/might) with the infinitive used to express supposition in simple sentences: She might be ruining his whole life! He could be one of my relatives.
· Combinations of modal words with (a) the Indicative mood forms: Maybe we are both kidding ourselves? and (b) combinations of modal verbs with the infinitive: Perhaps you may be able to discuss it with Mr Pearson? used to express supposition.
2. Dependent use of verbal means expressing unreality
The dependent use is observed when the choice of the means depends on the structure of the sentence (mainly on the type of the subordinate clause, in which this means occurs), and on the lexical character of the center of predication in the principle clause. For example: I suggest that he come here. The use of the imperative (according to L.S. Barchudarov's view) is preconditioned here by the structure of the complex sentence with the objective clause and the lexical meaning of the verb to suggest, which expresses indirect inducement.
3) The dependent use of verbal means expressing unreality can be observed in the following cases:
Non-factuality:
· The extinct form of the Subjunctive were, past tense forms (perfect and non-perfect phases) and combinations of modal verbs with the infinitive in object subordinate clauses with the verb to wish as the center of predication: She wished that Mike were with her. I wish I had been born you. I wish you wouldn't swear.
· Past tense forms (perfect and non-perfect phases) in object subordinate clauses with the idiomatic expression you would think as the center of predication: Anyone would think you'd been brought up on millions.
· The extinct form were and forms of the past tense (perfect and non-perfect phases) in predicative subordinate clauses and adverbial clauses of comparison introduced by conjunctions as if/ as though: I feel as if I were on another planet. She was looking at me as if her eyes had a voice. It looked as if he had been born a millionaire.
· The extinct form were and past tense forms (both phases) in subordinate clauses of condition: If there were no war, if there was peace in the world, I'd say fine, have fun! If she had been born in an African tribe she would have been a witch doctor.
· Combinations of modal verbs should/would with the infinitive (both phases) in the principal clause of a complex sentence with the subordinate clause of unreal condition (see the examples above). Some linguists treat this use as free (E.M.Gordon and I.P.Krylova) because such sentences can function as simple: She would be a load on you. However, they admit that the meaning of unreal condition is implicit here, it may be restored from the situation; * If you married her, she would be a load on you. It proves that such sentences may be considered elliptical and thus, structurally dependent.
Inducement:
· The form of the Imperative mood and combinationsof the modal verb should with the infinitive in object, appositive and predicative subordinate clauses with words of imperative semantics as centers of predication in the principal clause (to advise, to demand, request, suggestion, imperative, important, etc.). He did not even suggest that she take a seat, It is important that nothing should be touched. The President's instructions were that it should not become press sensation.
· Past tense forms (non-perfect phase) in object subordinate clauses with idiomatic expressions would rather, would sooner, it's time as centers of predication in the principal clause: If you came in to help I'd rather you helped. It's about time you stopped beating about the bush. I’d sooner you left.
Supposition:
· Mood, tense and phase forms, combinations of modal verbs with the infinitive in subordinate clauses of different types (object, appositive, predicative) with words of suppositional semantics (chance; possibility, likely, probable) as centers of predication: The possibility that she was making a dreadful mistake appalled her. It seemed likely that she might soon have to search for other employment.
In conclusion we can say that the use of verbal means to express inducement and supposition may be both free and dependent, while the use of verbal means expressing non-factuality is mainly dependent. It is induced both by the structural means (complex sentence) and lexical means used as centers of predication in the principal clause. The meanings of the grammatical and lexical means agree, they are compatible. The dependent use of these means may be explained by the fact that non-factuality is farther from reality than inducement and supposition. It is implicit negation of reality and as such may be represented only in a bound form.
Summary
To sum up, in treating the category of mood it is necessary to make a distinction between mood and modality.
Linguistic modality is a notional category, which expresses the relation of the utterance to reality as conceived by the speaker. There are two semantic types of modality: reality and unreality.
Reality represents actions as facts, while unreality is seen as comprising non-factuality, inducement and supposition.
Means of expressing modality are various. Mood is the morphological means of expressing modality.
There are different approaches to the system of moods in English, the most reasonable one seems the system proposed by professor Barchudarov. According to L.S. Barchudarov there are two moods in Modern English: the Indicative and the Imperative. The opposition lies in the sphere of the non-past only. Past tense forms and different combinations of modal verbs with the infinitive are used as morphological, lexical and syntactic means of expressing modality, different from the category of mood.
The use of verbal means expressing unreality may be free, structurally dependent and traditional.
[1] We shall proceed from the assumption that unreality includes three semantic typ* inducement, non-factuality and supposition. In our treatment of the verbal ve shall follow L.S.Barchudarov's theory of mood.
