Abstract
In this research I intend to investigate from a syntactic-semantic perspective that modality in Southern Min has several types, which actually are modality on different syntactic levels and are in hierarchical order. Also the polysemy of modal verbs is due to the interpretation of different types of modal verbs that are influenced by the syntactic, conceptual, and contextual factors. Traditional semantic analysis divides modality into deontic and epistemic types. I argue that Southern Min modality has four levels: subject-oriented, speaker-oriented, epistemic, and discourse-oriented modalities, with the latter one in turn larger in scope and higher in hierarchy than the former. The four common modality constructions in Southern Min are modal predicates (i.e. verbs and adjectives), modal adverbs, modal nominals, and sentence-final particles. Although these four modality constructions look independent from each other, they are closely related in semantics and in syntactic hierarchical order. This phenomenon can be well interpreted on the basis of a syntactic model--Licensing Principle of Adverbs. Travis (1988) states that adverbs need to be properly licensed by the head features of the XP to which they are adjuncts so as to be grammatical. According to the principle, subject-oriented adverbs are licensed by the head features of PreP; epistemic adverbs, by IP; and discourse-oriented adverbs, by CP. With this analysis, the linear order of different types of modal adverbs, the linear order between modal adverbs and verbs, and the co-occurrence restriction between adverbs and other modal constructions can be well accounted for without extra theoretical cost. The polysemy of modal verbs is checked via an analysis of the syntagmatic elements in the sentence. It is found that within the IP complement following the modal, the stative verb, aspect markers such as progressive, completive, experiential markers etc., complement structures expressing result, possibility, completion of an action, final state of the subject, and modal verbs or particles denoting epistemic modality tend to give the matrix modal an epistemic modality. On the other hand, the dynamic verb, phase markers showing direction, movement, attempt etc., complement structures of frequency, duration etc., and the causative marker or patient marker etc. tend to give the matrix modal a subject-oriented modality. The number of person, animacy, and +/-definite of the subject NP will also influence the modality interpretation. Also, the epistemic modality is more limited in syntactic manifestations and usually does not occur with interrogation and negation on the same level. Contextual and conceptual factors also have an impact on the polysemy of modals. Contextually, the clues in the context, knowledge of the world, and the social norms will affect the modal meaning. Conceptual properties like concept of force, concept of dynamic, concept of a controlling agent, concept of later than the reference time, and concept of indefiniteness or non-factuality are all related to the subject-oriented modality. Modal verbs are analyzed based on modern linguistic theories of GB (Government and Binding) and MP (Minimalist Program). Epistemic modals are syntactically raising verbs with NP trace, subject-oriented modals are control verbs with PRO, and speaker-oriented modals vacillate between the two, with the raising verb structure and the control verb dynamic semantics. In GB model, the PRO is explained by the PRO theorem, c-selection, Case theory etc. MP analyzes the control/raising distinction in means of the [+Tense] difference in the Tense morpheme of TP in a non-finite complement clause after a modal. This analysis is more economical without extra linguistic cost since [+Tense] difference already exists in other syntactic operations such as VP-ellipsis, VP preposing, and relative tag etc.