Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T23:39:26.308Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Should and ought: the rise of individually oriented modality in American English1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 September 2008

John Myhill
John Myhill
Affiliation:
Department of EnglishUniversity of HaifaMount CarmelHaifa 31905Israeljohn@research.haifa.ac.il
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Using data drawn from twenty American plays written since 1889, this paper analyzes the usage of the weak obligation modals should and ought, which previous researchers (e.g. Coates, 1983; Leech, 1987; Palmer, 1987) have regarded as essentially synonymous. It is shown that there is a clear distinction between these words, with should expressing individual opinions and ought emphasizing a common opinion regarding the obligation in question. This use of obligation should does not occur in five plays written between 1889 and 1911, appearing for the first time in this database in a play written in 1926. The development of obligation should parallels other changes in the modal system which have taken place at the same time – as should has increased in frequency, so have the other individually-oriented modals got to and gonna, and as ought has declined in frequency, so have the other group-oriented modals must and will.

Type
Articles
Information
English Language & Linguistics , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , May 1997 , pp. 3 - 23
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Data sources

Anderson, R. (1953). Tea and sympathy. In Strasberg, L. (ed.), Famous American plays of the 1950's. New York: Dell, 1962. 229–310.Google Scholar
Barry, P. (1927). Paris bound. In Quinn, (ed.), 1059–100.Google Scholar
Behrman, S. N. (1936). End of summer. In Clurman, H. (ed.), Famous American plays of the 1930's. New York: Dell, 1959. 95–198.Google Scholar
Cerf, B. and Cartmell, V. H. (eds.) (1963). Twenty-four favorite one act plays. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Connelly, M. (1926). The traveler. In Cerf, and Cartmell, (eds.), 277–86.Google Scholar
Crothers, R. (1911). He and she. In Quinn, (ed.), 891–928.Google Scholar
Crowley, M. (1968). The boys in the band. In Clurman, H. (ed.), Famous American plays of the 1960's. New York: Dell, 1972. 311–95.Google Scholar
Feiffer, J. (1982). Grown ups. In Marx, (ed.), 97–182.Google Scholar
Fitch, C. (1902). The girl with the green eyes. In Quinn, (ed.), 637–74.Google Scholar
Fletcher, L. (1948). Sorry, wrong number. In Cerf, and Cartmell, (eds.), 147–66.Google Scholar
Gillette, W. (1896). Secret service. In Quinn, (ed.), 545–620.Google Scholar
Haines, W. W. (1947). Command decision. In Quinn, (ed.), 1149–92.Google Scholar
Hoffman, T. (ed.) (1981). Famous American plays of the 1970's. New York: Dell.Google Scholar
Howard, B. (1889). Shenandoah. In Quinn, (ed.), 473–512.Google Scholar
Howard, S. (1926). The silver cord. In Quinn, (ed.), 1011–58.Google Scholar
Kaufman, G. S. (1925). The still alarm. In Cerf, and Cartmell, (eds.), 287–94.Google Scholar
Marx, R. (ed.) (1988). Famous American plays of the 1980's. New York: Dell.Google Scholar
Parker, D. (1931). Here we are. In Cerf, and Cartmell, (eds.), 265–76.Google Scholar
Quinn, A. H. (ed.) (1953). Representative American plays. 7th edn.New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
Sheldon, E. (1911). The boss. In Quinn, (ed.), 845–90.Google Scholar
Slade, B. (1975). Same time, next year. In Hoffman, (ed.), 237–314.Google Scholar
Trudeau, G. B. (1984). The Doonesbury chronicles. New York: Henry Holt.Google Scholar
Weller, M. (1970). Moonchildren. In Hoffman, (ed.), 117–96.Google Scholar
Wilson, L. (1976). The mound builders. New York: Hill and Wang.Google Scholar
Wilson, L. (1987). Bum this. New York: Hill and Wang.Google Scholar

References

Bloomfield, L. (1933). Language. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar
Bolinger, D. (1977). Meaning and form. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Bouma, L. (1975). On contrasting the semantics of the modal auxiliaries of German and English. Lingua 37: 313–39.Google Scholar
Coates, J. (1983). The semantics of the modal auxiliaries. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Diver, W. (1964). The modal system of the English verb. Word 20: 322–52.Google Scholar
Hermerén, L. (1978). On modality in English: a study of the semantics of the modals. Lund: CWK Gleerup.Google Scholar
Joos, M. (1964). The English verb: form and meanings. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Leech, G. N. (1987). Meaning and the English verb. 2nd edn.London: Longman.Google Scholar
Myhill, J. (1992). Typological discourse analysis. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Myhill, J. (1995a). A system for categorizing functions of will and gonna. MS.Google Scholar
Myhill, J. (1995b). The use of features of present-day AAVE in the Ex-Slave Recordings. American Speech 70: 115–47.Google Scholar
Myhill, J. (1995c). Change and continuity in the function of American English modals. Linguistics 33: 157–211.Google Scholar
Myhill, J. (1996). The development of the American English strong obligation markers. American Speech.Google Scholar
Palmer, F. R. (1979). Modality and the English modals. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Palmer, F. R. (1986). Mood and modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Palmer, F. R. (1987). The English verb. 2nd edn.London: Longman.Google Scholar
Simpson, J. A. & Weiner, E. S. C. (1989). The Oxford English dictionary. 2nd edn.Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Svartvik, J. & Wright, D. (1977). The use of ought in teenage English. In Greenbaum, S. (ed.), Acceptability in language. Mouton: The Hague. 179–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wierzbicka, A. (1985). Oats and wheat: the fallacy of arbitrariness. In Haiman, J. (ed.), Iconicity in syntax. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 311–46.Google Scholar