thac_mac_muon_hoi_0723
New Member
Luận văn tiếng Anh: A study on deontic modality expressing means in English and Vietnamese declarative and interrogative sentences = Nghiên cứu các phương tiện diễn đạt tình thái chức phận trong câu tường thuật và câu hỏi tiếng Anh và tiếng Việt. M.1. Background to the study
2. Aim of the study
3. Scope of the study
4. Methodology
4.1. Methods of the study
4.2. Data collection procedures
4.2.1. Description of corpus
4.2.2. Compilation of a corpus procedure
4.3. Data analysis
4.3.1. Describing the data
4.3.2. Comparing the two sources of data
5. Structure of the study
CHAPTER I
LITERATURE REVIEW
1.1. Historical perspectives of modality
1.2. Modality
1.2.1. Definitions and different viewpoints
1.2.2. Types of modality
1.3. Deontic modality
1.3.1. Definitions and various viewpoints
1.3.2. Types of deontic modality
1.4. Types of deontic modality in English
1.4.1. Commissives
1.4.2. Directives
1.4.2.1. Deliberatives
1.4.2.2. Imperatives
1.4.2.3. Jussives
1.4.2.4. Obligatives
1.4.2.5. Permissives
1.4.2.6. Precatives
1.4.2.7. Prohibitives
1.4.3. Volitives
1.4.3.1. Imprecatives
1.4.3.2. Optatives
1.5. Types of deontic modality in Vietnamese
1.5.1. Commissives (tình thái cam kết/ hứa hẹn)
1.5.2. Directives (tình thái cầu khiến)
1.5.2.1. Deliberatives (yêu cầu)
1.5.2.2. Imperatives (mệnh lệnh)
1.5.2.3. Jussives (khuyến lệnh)
1.5.2.4. Obligatives (ép buộc)
1.5.2.5. Permissives (cho phép) A Thesis L1.5.2.6. Precatives (khẩn cầu)
1.5.2.7. Prohibitives (cấm đoán)
1.5.3. Volitives (tình thái ý nguyện)
1.5.3.1. Imprecatives (không mong muốn/nguyền rủa)
1.5.3.2. Optatives (ước vọng/ mong mỏi)
1.6. Contrastive framework
1.7. Summary
CHAPTER 2
COMMISSIVES AND VOLITIVES IN ENGLISH AND VIETNAME
2.1. Commissives in English and Vietnamese
2.1.1. Modal verbs in English and Vietnamese commisives
2.1.1.1. Syntactic features
2.1.1.2. Semantic features
2.1.2. Hedge verbs in English and Vietnamese commissives
2.1.2.1. Syntactic features
2.1.2.2. Semantic features
2.1.3. Performative verbs in English and Vietnamese commisives
2.1.3.1. Syntactic features
2.1.3.2. Semantic features
2.1.4. Modal adverbs in English and Vietnamese commisives
2.1.4.1. Syntactic features
2.1.4.2. Semantic features
2.1.5. Modal adjectives in English and Vietnamese commisives
2.1.5.1. Syntactic features
2.1.5.2. Semantic features
2.1.6. Expletives in English and Vietnamese commisives
2.1.6.1. Syntactic features
2.1.6.2. Semantic features
2.1.7. Modal conditionals in English and Vietnamese commisives
2.1.7.1. Syntactic features
2.1.7.2. Semantic features
2.2. Volitives in English and Vietnamese
2.2.1. Syntactic features
2.2.2. Semantic features
2.3. Summary
CHAPTER 3 DIRECTIVES IN ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE
3.1. Modal verbs in English and Vietnamese directives
3.1.1. Syntactic features
3.1.2. Semantic features
3.2. Hedge verbs in English and Vietnamese directives
3.2.1. Syntactic features
3.2.2. Semantic features 3.3. Performative verbs in English and Vietnamese directives
3.3.1. Syntactic features
3.3.2. Semantic features
3.4. Modal words
3.4.1. Syntactic features
3.4.2. Semantic features
3.5. Modal adverbs in English and Vietnamese directives
3.5.1. Syntactic features
3.5.2. Semantic features
3.6. Modal adjectives in English and Vietnamese directives
3.6.1. Syntactic features
3.6.2. Semantic features
3.7. Modal nouns in English and Vietnamese directives
3.7.1. Syntactic features
3.7.2. Semantic features
3.8. Particles
3.8.1. Syntactic features
3.8.2. Semantic features
3.9. Modal idioms in English and Vietnamese directives
3.9.1. Syntactic features
3.9.2. Semantic features
3.10. Expletives in English and Vietnamese directives
3.10.1. Syntactic features
3.10.2. Semantic features
3.11. Modal conditionals in English and Vietnamese directives
3.11.1. Syntactic features
3.11.2. Semantic features
3.12. Summary
CHAPTER
CONCLUSIONS
6.1. Recapitulation
2. Contributions
3. Pedagogical implications
4. Limitations of the study
5. Suggestions for further research
REFERENCES
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX B ABSTRACT
This research is an attempt to identify, describe, compare and contrast various linguistic means
of expressing deontic modality in English and Vietnamese within the theoretical frameworks
and typological studies by pioneering linguists, both foreign and Vietnamese, on deontic
modality. This study is both descriptive and contrastive in nature. Its main aims are to identify,
describe and compare the various linguistic resources available in English and Vietnamese in
indicating deontic modality and its three main types i.e. commissives, volitives, directives, and
their sub-types.
The main data used in this research are taken from the two corpora (421 declarative and
interrogative sentences in English), built on 50 English stories, a total of 2.060.389 words and
(422 declarative and interrogative sentences in Vietnamese) in 50 Vietnamese stories, a total of
2.003.486 words. The data collected are then qualitatively and quantitatively analyzed to show
similarities and differences in terms of syntactic - semantic features and equivalences and non
equivalences in the use of linguistic means to express deontic modality in English as a source
language and Vietnamese as a language of reference. Statistics also show the frequencies of
occurrences of various linguistic means in the respective languages to show their relative
importance in expressing deontic modality in the two languages under study.
Research findings show that while English and Vietnamese share some main linguistic devices
i.e., modal verbs, adjectives, adverbs, hedge verbs, etc. in the declaratives, the two languages
also show major differences and non-equivalences in the interrogatives in the availability and
the extent of the usage of various means to indicate deontic modality. While English relies more
on modal verbs, modal auxiliaries and moods, among others, Vietnamese relies more on its
system of sentence particles (mood words), modal words to indicate different meanings of
deontic modality.
It is hoped that the findings from this study will contribute to further understanding linguistic
resources available in English compared to Vietnamese and their shared and unshared features
in the use of linguistic devices in expressing modality in general and deontic modality in
particular. 1. Background to the study
Modality as an important component of linguistics has been extensively studied from syntactic,
grammatical, semantic and pragmatic perspectives. The study of modality expressions within
linguistics is one of the complicated problems. As Palmer (2003: 4) says “modality is realized
by linguistic terms from a wide range of grammatical classes, covering not only modal
auxiliaries and lexical verbs, but also nouns, adjectives, adverbs, idioms, particles, mood, and
prosody in speech.”
There are three types of modality that can be distinguished in the modal system of English. i.e.,
epistemic, deontic and dynamic that can be interpreted in terms of possibility and necessity
(Palmer, 2003: 7). This research will focus on one important type of modality i.e. deontic
modality. The term deontic modality “is a cover term for a range of semantic notions such as
ability, possibility, hypotheticality, obligation, and imperatives” (van der Auwera & Plungian,
1998: 81). In Vietnamese, deontic modality is rendered as “tình thái chức phận/ đạo nghĩa”
(Nguyễn Văn Hiệp, 2008: 103) denoting obligations, duties, necessity and the need for actions
which is also chosen as the working definition for this research.
A large number of studies have focused on theories of modality in general and deontic modality
in particular such as the works by Chung & Temberlake (1985), Palmer (1979, 1986, 1990,
1994, 2003, 2004, 2005) who have studied on modality both theoretical and corpus-based:
syntactic and semantic theory figured in various contributions. Palmer’s theory is applied
widely in linguistics and in many languages. Lyons (1977) also has a great concern with
semantic related to deontic modality. Lyons’ theoretical discussion finds ample confirmation in
various examples mostly from subjective and objective modality. Still within the field of
modality, van der Auwera & Plungian (1998) identify and describe the two types of modality
i.e., participant - internal modality and participant - external modality. This classification is seen
as a significant contribution to linguistics. So far, many comparative studies on modality have been carried out in different languages other
than English such as those in Korean and Japanese (Wymann. A.T, 1994), and in Chinese (Li,
2004). In Vietnam, many scholars have also studied modality in general and types of modality
in particular such as Nguyễn Thị Lương (1996), Cao Xuân Hạo (1999), Nguyễn Văn Hiệp
(2001, 2008), Ngũ Thiện Hùng (2003), Phạm Thị Ly (2003), Nguyễn Thị Cẩm Thanh (2003),
Bùi Trọng Ngoãn (2004), Võ Đại Quang (2009), who have studied modality in the Vietnamese
language.
However, no attempt has been made to conduct a contrastive study on linguistic means of
indicating deontic modality in English and Vietnamese. Therefore, this study is carried out to
address that research gap in order to provide a more articulate insight into similarities and
differences of deontic expressing means in the two languages, and to serve as a framework for
implicational purposes, which can be both theoretical and practical.
Regarding theoretical values, this dissertation is the first research into three types of deontic
modality in the English language compared with the Vietnamese language. Though deontic
expressing means have been touched upon by many reputed linguists, the description and
application of the three types of deontic modality in the study of Vietnamese have rarely been
found in the works by Vietnamese linguists.
With respect to practical purposes, a contrastive analysis on the three types of deontic modality
in English and Vietnamese helps teachers, students of English and those who are interested in
the field of linguistics understand deeply the language they deal with as well as the speakers’
attitudes or contexts that they refer to. In other words, this contrastive analysis will Giúp EFL
(English as a Foreign Language) learners better understand of the similarities and differences in
the use of deontic expressing means in both languages. The insignts gained from the study,
hopefully, will Giúp to find out error analysis in the English language teaching and learning.
2. Aim of the study
This study is aimed at finding the similarities and differences in deontic expressing means in
English and Vietnamese. In order to achieve the proposed aim, the objectives of the study are set as follows:
To analyze and describe linguistic means of expressing deontic modality in English and
Vietnamese.
To compare and contrast linguistic means of expressing deontic modality in terms of
grammatical and lexical features and frequencies of usage in expressing deontic
meanings in English and Vietnamese.
To achieve the above objectives, the following research questions are to be addressed:
1. What are the linguistic means of expressing deontic modality in English and in
Vietnamese?
2. What are the similarities and differences in linguistic means used in the three types
of deontic modality in terms of the syntactic and semantic features and the
frequencies of usage in English and Vietnamese?
3. Scope of the study
This study is focused on the descriptive account of syntactic and semantic features of linguistic
means of indicating three types of deontic modality in English and Vietnamese based on the
classification of Palmer (1994). They are commissives, directives and volitives with the seven
sub-types of directives (deliberatives, imperatives, jussives, obligatives, permissives, precatives,
prohibitives) and the two sub-types of volitives (imprecatives and optatives).
According to Chung & Temberlake (1985: 25), modality in English may be expressed
grammatically or semantically by auxiliaries, verbs, adjectives, nouns or adverbs. Nguyễn Văn
Hiệp (2008: 128) states that means of expressing modality can be categorized into grammatical
and lexical means. Prosody is said to have played a role in expressing modality in languages.
However, as Palmer (1986: 6) states, “prosody is a separate study and only rarely interacts in a
systematic way with grammatical systems of modality”, and modality or linguistic means of
indicating modality can be studied separately from prosody elements. Furthermore, in this
study, due to the nature of the data taken from the short stories and the usage of devices of a
Do Drive thay đổi chính sách, nên một số link cũ yêu cầu duyệt download. các bạn chỉ cần làm theo hướng dẫn.
Password giải nén nếu cần: ket-noi.com | Bấm trực tiếp vào Link để tải:
2. Aim of the study
3. Scope of the study
4. Methodology
4.1. Methods of the study
4.2. Data collection procedures
4.2.1. Description of corpus
4.2.2. Compilation of a corpus procedure
4.3. Data analysis
4.3.1. Describing the data
4.3.2. Comparing the two sources of data
5. Structure of the study
CHAPTER I
LITERATURE REVIEW
1.1. Historical perspectives of modality
1.2. Modality
1.2.1. Definitions and different viewpoints
1.2.2. Types of modality
1.3. Deontic modality
1.3.1. Definitions and various viewpoints
1.3.2. Types of deontic modality
1.4. Types of deontic modality in English
1.4.1. Commissives
1.4.2. Directives
1.4.2.1. Deliberatives
1.4.2.2. Imperatives
1.4.2.3. Jussives
1.4.2.4. Obligatives
1.4.2.5. Permissives
1.4.2.6. Precatives
1.4.2.7. Prohibitives
1.4.3. Volitives
1.4.3.1. Imprecatives
1.4.3.2. Optatives
1.5. Types of deontic modality in Vietnamese
1.5.1. Commissives (tình thái cam kết/ hứa hẹn)
1.5.2. Directives (tình thái cầu khiến)
1.5.2.1. Deliberatives (yêu cầu)
1.5.2.2. Imperatives (mệnh lệnh)
1.5.2.3. Jussives (khuyến lệnh)
1.5.2.4. Obligatives (ép buộc)
1.5.2.5. Permissives (cho phép) A Thesis L1.5.2.6. Precatives (khẩn cầu)
1.5.2.7. Prohibitives (cấm đoán)
1.5.3. Volitives (tình thái ý nguyện)
1.5.3.1. Imprecatives (không mong muốn/nguyền rủa)
1.5.3.2. Optatives (ước vọng/ mong mỏi)
1.6. Contrastive framework
1.7. Summary
CHAPTER 2
COMMISSIVES AND VOLITIVES IN ENGLISH AND VIETNAME
2.1. Commissives in English and Vietnamese
2.1.1. Modal verbs in English and Vietnamese commisives
2.1.1.1. Syntactic features
2.1.1.2. Semantic features
2.1.2. Hedge verbs in English and Vietnamese commissives
2.1.2.1. Syntactic features
2.1.2.2. Semantic features
2.1.3. Performative verbs in English and Vietnamese commisives
2.1.3.1. Syntactic features
2.1.3.2. Semantic features
2.1.4. Modal adverbs in English and Vietnamese commisives
2.1.4.1. Syntactic features
2.1.4.2. Semantic features
2.1.5. Modal adjectives in English and Vietnamese commisives
2.1.5.1. Syntactic features
2.1.5.2. Semantic features
2.1.6. Expletives in English and Vietnamese commisives
2.1.6.1. Syntactic features
2.1.6.2. Semantic features
2.1.7. Modal conditionals in English and Vietnamese commisives
2.1.7.1. Syntactic features
2.1.7.2. Semantic features
2.2. Volitives in English and Vietnamese
2.2.1. Syntactic features
2.2.2. Semantic features
2.3. Summary
CHAPTER 3 DIRECTIVES IN ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE
3.1. Modal verbs in English and Vietnamese directives
3.1.1. Syntactic features
3.1.2. Semantic features
3.2. Hedge verbs in English and Vietnamese directives
3.2.1. Syntactic features
3.2.2. Semantic features 3.3. Performative verbs in English and Vietnamese directives
3.3.1. Syntactic features
3.3.2. Semantic features
3.4. Modal words
3.4.1. Syntactic features
3.4.2. Semantic features
3.5. Modal adverbs in English and Vietnamese directives
3.5.1. Syntactic features
3.5.2. Semantic features
3.6. Modal adjectives in English and Vietnamese directives
3.6.1. Syntactic features
3.6.2. Semantic features
3.7. Modal nouns in English and Vietnamese directives
3.7.1. Syntactic features
3.7.2. Semantic features
3.8. Particles
3.8.1. Syntactic features
3.8.2. Semantic features
3.9. Modal idioms in English and Vietnamese directives
3.9.1. Syntactic features
3.9.2. Semantic features
3.10. Expletives in English and Vietnamese directives
3.10.1. Syntactic features
3.10.2. Semantic features
3.11. Modal conditionals in English and Vietnamese directives
3.11.1. Syntactic features
3.11.2. Semantic features
3.12. Summary
CHAPTER
CONCLUSIONS
6.1. Recapitulation
2. Contributions
3. Pedagogical implications
4. Limitations of the study
5. Suggestions for further research
REFERENCES
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX B ABSTRACT
This research is an attempt to identify, describe, compare and contrast various linguistic means
of expressing deontic modality in English and Vietnamese within the theoretical frameworks
and typological studies by pioneering linguists, both foreign and Vietnamese, on deontic
modality. This study is both descriptive and contrastive in nature. Its main aims are to identify,
describe and compare the various linguistic resources available in English and Vietnamese in
indicating deontic modality and its three main types i.e. commissives, volitives, directives, and
their sub-types.
The main data used in this research are taken from the two corpora (421 declarative and
interrogative sentences in English), built on 50 English stories, a total of 2.060.389 words and
(422 declarative and interrogative sentences in Vietnamese) in 50 Vietnamese stories, a total of
2.003.486 words. The data collected are then qualitatively and quantitatively analyzed to show
similarities and differences in terms of syntactic - semantic features and equivalences and non
equivalences in the use of linguistic means to express deontic modality in English as a source
language and Vietnamese as a language of reference. Statistics also show the frequencies of
occurrences of various linguistic means in the respective languages to show their relative
importance in expressing deontic modality in the two languages under study.
Research findings show that while English and Vietnamese share some main linguistic devices
i.e., modal verbs, adjectives, adverbs, hedge verbs, etc. in the declaratives, the two languages
also show major differences and non-equivalences in the interrogatives in the availability and
the extent of the usage of various means to indicate deontic modality. While English relies more
on modal verbs, modal auxiliaries and moods, among others, Vietnamese relies more on its
system of sentence particles (mood words), modal words to indicate different meanings of
deontic modality.
It is hoped that the findings from this study will contribute to further understanding linguistic
resources available in English compared to Vietnamese and their shared and unshared features
in the use of linguistic devices in expressing modality in general and deontic modality in
particular. 1. Background to the study
Modality as an important component of linguistics has been extensively studied from syntactic,
grammatical, semantic and pragmatic perspectives. The study of modality expressions within
linguistics is one of the complicated problems. As Palmer (2003: 4) says “modality is realized
by linguistic terms from a wide range of grammatical classes, covering not only modal
auxiliaries and lexical verbs, but also nouns, adjectives, adverbs, idioms, particles, mood, and
prosody in speech.”
There are three types of modality that can be distinguished in the modal system of English. i.e.,
epistemic, deontic and dynamic that can be interpreted in terms of possibility and necessity
(Palmer, 2003: 7). This research will focus on one important type of modality i.e. deontic
modality. The term deontic modality “is a cover term for a range of semantic notions such as
ability, possibility, hypotheticality, obligation, and imperatives” (van der Auwera & Plungian,
1998: 81). In Vietnamese, deontic modality is rendered as “tình thái chức phận/ đạo nghĩa”
(Nguyễn Văn Hiệp, 2008: 103) denoting obligations, duties, necessity and the need for actions
which is also chosen as the working definition for this research.
A large number of studies have focused on theories of modality in general and deontic modality
in particular such as the works by Chung & Temberlake (1985), Palmer (1979, 1986, 1990,
1994, 2003, 2004, 2005) who have studied on modality both theoretical and corpus-based:
syntactic and semantic theory figured in various contributions. Palmer’s theory is applied
widely in linguistics and in many languages. Lyons (1977) also has a great concern with
semantic related to deontic modality. Lyons’ theoretical discussion finds ample confirmation in
various examples mostly from subjective and objective modality. Still within the field of
modality, van der Auwera & Plungian (1998) identify and describe the two types of modality
i.e., participant - internal modality and participant - external modality. This classification is seen
as a significant contribution to linguistics. So far, many comparative studies on modality have been carried out in different languages other
than English such as those in Korean and Japanese (Wymann. A.T, 1994), and in Chinese (Li,
2004). In Vietnam, many scholars have also studied modality in general and types of modality
in particular such as Nguyễn Thị Lương (1996), Cao Xuân Hạo (1999), Nguyễn Văn Hiệp
(2001, 2008), Ngũ Thiện Hùng (2003), Phạm Thị Ly (2003), Nguyễn Thị Cẩm Thanh (2003),
Bùi Trọng Ngoãn (2004), Võ Đại Quang (2009), who have studied modality in the Vietnamese
language.
However, no attempt has been made to conduct a contrastive study on linguistic means of
indicating deontic modality in English and Vietnamese. Therefore, this study is carried out to
address that research gap in order to provide a more articulate insight into similarities and
differences of deontic expressing means in the two languages, and to serve as a framework for
implicational purposes, which can be both theoretical and practical.
Regarding theoretical values, this dissertation is the first research into three types of deontic
modality in the English language compared with the Vietnamese language. Though deontic
expressing means have been touched upon by many reputed linguists, the description and
application of the three types of deontic modality in the study of Vietnamese have rarely been
found in the works by Vietnamese linguists.
With respect to practical purposes, a contrastive analysis on the three types of deontic modality
in English and Vietnamese helps teachers, students of English and those who are interested in
the field of linguistics understand deeply the language they deal with as well as the speakers’
attitudes or contexts that they refer to. In other words, this contrastive analysis will Giúp EFL
(English as a Foreign Language) learners better understand of the similarities and differences in
the use of deontic expressing means in both languages. The insignts gained from the study,
hopefully, will Giúp to find out error analysis in the English language teaching and learning.
2. Aim of the study
This study is aimed at finding the similarities and differences in deontic expressing means in
English and Vietnamese. In order to achieve the proposed aim, the objectives of the study are set as follows:
To analyze and describe linguistic means of expressing deontic modality in English and
Vietnamese.
To compare and contrast linguistic means of expressing deontic modality in terms of
grammatical and lexical features and frequencies of usage in expressing deontic
meanings in English and Vietnamese.
To achieve the above objectives, the following research questions are to be addressed:
1. What are the linguistic means of expressing deontic modality in English and in
Vietnamese?
2. What are the similarities and differences in linguistic means used in the three types
of deontic modality in terms of the syntactic and semantic features and the
frequencies of usage in English and Vietnamese?
3. Scope of the study
This study is focused on the descriptive account of syntactic and semantic features of linguistic
means of indicating three types of deontic modality in English and Vietnamese based on the
classification of Palmer (1994). They are commissives, directives and volitives with the seven
sub-types of directives (deliberatives, imperatives, jussives, obligatives, permissives, precatives,
prohibitives) and the two sub-types of volitives (imprecatives and optatives).
According to Chung & Temberlake (1985: 25), modality in English may be expressed
grammatically or semantically by auxiliaries, verbs, adjectives, nouns or adverbs. Nguyễn Văn
Hiệp (2008: 128) states that means of expressing modality can be categorized into grammatical
and lexical means. Prosody is said to have played a role in expressing modality in languages.
However, as Palmer (1986: 6) states, “prosody is a separate study and only rarely interacts in a
systematic way with grammatical systems of modality”, and modality or linguistic means of
indicating modality can be studied separately from prosody elements. Furthermore, in this
study, due to the nature of the data taken from the short stories and the usage of devices of a
Do Drive thay đổi chính sách, nên một số link cũ yêu cầu duyệt download. các bạn chỉ cần làm theo hướng dẫn.
Password giải nén nếu cần: ket-noi.com | Bấm trực tiếp vào Link để tải:
You must be registered for see links