Variable-force modals on the British Isles: semantic evolution of *motan

(1)

Variable-force modals on the British Isles:

semantic evolution of *motan

Igor Yanovich

MIT

SALT @ UC Santa Cruz May 3, 2013

(2)

Two problems

Historical linguistics

motan>moten>must evolution ♦ → we know it’s happened, but do not know how or why

Formal semantics

variable-force modals not ♦ , not

we know they exist, but don’t know much about them

This talk

Old English *motan: a variable-force modal of the “collapse” type

(3)

Standard analysis of *motan>must

Old English *motan

(1) bruc enjoy

þenden while

þu you

mote

motan.3sg.subj

manigra many

medo rewards

(Beo 1177-8)

‘Enjoy, while youmot, many rewards’

The (near) consensus story:

1 Earliest recorded OE:*motanambiguous between♦and

2 Very few-uses in Early OE (close to 0%)

3 Slow growth of-uses, reaching 100% in the 15-16th cent.

[Ono, 1958], [Tellier, 1962], [Visser, 1973], [Goossens, 1987]...; cf. [Solo, 1977]

(4)

Questions for the standard analysis

Modal meaning change is regular.

Development ofmustisregular: cf. Germanmüssen, Dutch moeten.

But no other instances of♦→outside or within Germanic.

⇒ something special about *motan and its cognates

Meaning change involves semantic reanalysis. But reanalyze ♦ as ?

Through permission implying obligation? (e.g. [Traugott, 1989])

...but♦-deontics don’t turn intos

Through “must not” ≈“may not”? (e.g. OED)

...but all♦deontics have fixed scope¬>♦([van der Auwera, 2001]) ...and besides, won’t work for German, asnicht müssenis¬>

⇒ both stories overgenerate

(5)

My proposal: preview

Old English *motan

not a ♦ , but a variable-force modal

⇓

Early Middle English *moten

♦ - ambiguity, with more frequent

⇓ Early Modern English must

pure : the less productive ♦ -uses have been lost

(6)

Variable-force modality

“Third type” modality: variable force

Variable-force modal: “third type” modal, neither ♦ nor .

Unambiguous, but may be rendered by either ♦ -s or -s in English, due to the lack of a perfect correlate.

St’át’imcets (Salish) variable-force deontic ka:

[Rullmann et al., 2008, (31)]

(2) lán-lhkacw already-2sg.subj

ka deon

áts’x-en see-dir

ti det

kwtámts-sw-a husband-2sg.poss-det

‘You {must/can/may} see your husband now.’

(7)

Variable-force modality

Pacific Northwest systems with variable force

NB: “variable force” is a descriptive term.

Different ways to create the “variable-force effect”

Different shapes of systems with variable force

St’át’imcets[Rullmann et al., 2008]

deontic future various epistemic

♦ ka kelh k’a; ku7(?); -an’(?)

Consultants selectparaphrases for variable force modals more often

Gitksan(Tsimshian) [Peterson, 2010], [Matthewson, 2013]

circ. deontic

♦ da’ak

¯hlxw anook sgi ¯

epist.

ima(’a);gat

Consultants select♦paraphrases for variable force modals more often

Nez Perce(Sahaptian) [Deal, 2011]

circ. and deontic

♦ o’qa

—

(8)

Methodological issues

1

In-depth analysis of the data

Discovery of variable force⇐primary semantic fieldwork

Cf. [Matthewson, 2012] onhow to (not) uncover semantic variation

Considering examples out of context = failure(cf. [Fischer, 1994]) Elizabeth Traugott (p.c.): check at least 10 lines of text above your example

(9)

Methodological issues

2

Dialectal variation may be huge

Differences in deontics across the British Isles:

from [Tagliamonte and Smith, 2006]

(10)

Methodological issues

3

Change may be very fast

The deontic system of Toronto English changed in 3 apparent-time generations:

from [Tagliamonte and D’Arcy, 2007], Toronto English

(11)

Historical datasets for this study

Early OE prose: core Alfredian texts (late 9th/early 10th cent.)

C(ura) P(astoralis) (edition [Sweet, 1871])

Bo(ethius) (edition [Godden and Irvine, 2009])

Sol(iloquies) (edition [Carnicelli, 1969]) Best possible shot at geographical and temporal consistency for the period.

72 instances of*motan

Early ME prose: ‘AB’ language (first half of 13th cent.)

S(einte) M(argarete) (edition [d’Ardenne, 1977])

A(ncrene) W(isse) (edition [Millett, 2005]) Written within a few miles from each other. SM predates AW by several decades.

76 instances of*moten

(12)

Alfredian *motan as a variable-force modal

Possibility-necessity collapse: the intuition

(3) a. Hu how

mæg can

he he

ðonne then

beon be

butan without

gitsunge, avarice ðonne

when he he

sceal had.to

ymb about

monigra many

monna men’s

are property

ðencan, think gif

if he he

nolde would.not

ða ða when

he he

moste

motan.sg.past.subj ymb about

his his

anes?

only

(CP:9.57.19)

b. Translation by [Sweet, 1871]:

“How can he be without covetousness when he has to consult the interests of many, if formerly he would not avoid it when hehadto consult his own interests alone?”

c. Translation by H.W. Norman, printed in [Giles et al., 1858]:

“How can he be without covetousness when he must think about many men’s sustenance, if he would not when hemightthink about his own alone?”

Not much contrast between the ♦ and readings:

it was an open possibility for the subject to think only about their own benefit, but they also actually thought only about themselves before being promoted.

(13)

Possibility-necessity collapse: the intuition

(4) A typical “possibility example”:

Ac but

se that

ðe which

unwærlice unwarily

ðone that

wuda wood

hiewð, hews,

&

and sua so

his his

freond friend

ofsliehð, slays, him

to.him bið is

nidðearf necessary

ðæt that

he he

fleo flee.subj

to to

ðara those.gen

ðreora three.gen

burga city.gen

anre, one.dat ðæt

that on in

sumere some

ðara of.those

weorðe become.subj

genered, saved,

ðæt that

he he

mote

motan.prs.subj libban;

live

‘But he who unwarily hews wood and by that slays his friend, it is necessary for him that he flee to one of those three cities, so that he be saved in one of them, so that hemote

live.’ would≈mote≈may (CP:21.167.15)

(5) A typical “necessity example”:

ealneg always

hi they

wepað, weep

&

æfter after

ðæm the

wope weeping

hi they

gewyrceað obtain

ðæt that

hi they

moton motan.pres eft

again wepan.

weep

‘always they are weeping, and after the weeping they make it so that theymotonweep

again.’ have to≈moton≈may (CP:54.421.14)

(14)

Alfredian *motan: the collapse analysis

Observation

In all 72 examples, virtually no contrast between the ♦ and readings.

With regular♦modals,♦pdoes not entail that phas to happen.

(6) Youmaytake this apple. But it’s not that you have to.

(7) My electric billscanbe paid online, though I never tried.

In Alfredian OE, possibilities expressed bymagan‘can, may’ and aliefed‘permitted’ work the same way, being consistent with¬p.

But notmotan!

(15)

Alfredian *motan: the collapse analysis

Analysis for motan(p)

Acc. relation: metaphysical modal base, stereotypical ordering source Presupposition: ♦ p → fut(p)

ifp has a chance to actualize, it will

Assertion: ♦ p

Metaphysical modal base: all w

⁰

sharing the history of the actual w Stereotypical ordering source: w

⁰⁰

where things go normally are best

E.g., nobody accidentally dies from heart attack, etc.

(16)

Alfredian *motan: the collapse analysis

motan(p) conveys both inevitability and possibility Variable-force effect:

Inevitability is stressed⇒translation

Openness of possibility is stressed⇒♦translation

Rarity of *motan:

Few contexts would support the collapse presupposition.

And indeed,*motanis rare in Alfredian OE:

≈70*motanvs.≈700sculan(>shall) and≈1000magan(>may)

Metaphysical+stereotypical may look circumstantial or deontic

In the data, no clear examples that distinguish the three modal flavors.

(17)

Alfredian vs. Pacific Northwest variable force

Alfredian system vs. the known Pacific Northwest systems

Alfredian Old English ability circ. deontic

♦ magan magan non-modal

— sculan sculan

circ./deontic

♦+ collapse presup. motan

St’át’imcets([Rullmann et al., 2008]) deontic future various epistemic

♦ ka kelh k’a; ku7(?); -an’(?)

Consultants selectparaphrases for variable force modals more often

Gitksan([Peterson, 2010], [Matthewson, 2013]) circ. deontic

♦ da’ak

¯hlxw anook sgi ¯

epist.

ima(’a);gat

Consultants select♦paraphrases for variable force modals more often

Nez Perce([Deal, 2011]) circ. and deontic

♦ o’qa

—

(18)

Alfredian system vs. the known Pacific Northwest systems

Empirical picture:

St’át’imcets and Gitksan are genuinely different from Alfredian OE Nez Perce is somewhat similar to Old English

Theoretical options:

with narrowing [Rullmann et al., 2008]

♦with widening [Peterson, 2010]

upper-end degree modal(≈somewhat probable) [Kratzer, 2012, analysis I]

modal with only 1 accessible world [Kratzer, 2012, analysis II]

regular♦without a dual [Deal, 2011]

(19)

Other variable-force analyses

Fit to Old English *motan:

with narrowing (for St’át’imcets) [Rullmann et al., 2008]

♦with widening (for Gitksan) [Peterson, 2010]

upper-end degree modal (for St’át’imcets) [Kratzer, 2012, analysis I]

modal with only 1 accessible world (for no language in particular) [Kratzer, 2012, analysis II]

regular♦without a dual(for Nez Perce) [Deal, 2011]

Collapse analysis vs. [Kratzer, 2012, analysis II]:

Similar intuition of♦-collapse

My analysis: collapse results from a presupposition My analysis: there may be>1 accessible world

[Standop, 1957]: a similar informal analysis(forgotten in the later literature)

(20)

Deal’s account of Nez Perce

[Deal, 2011] for Nez Perce:

Observation 1: in downward-entailing contexts,o’qabehaves as a♦ Observation 2: no would-bedual foro’qa

Claim: o’qais a regular♦

Deriving variable force: without a dual, no scalar implicatures

Deal’s account does not work for Old English:

¬motan(p)conveys impossibility⇐predicted by [Deal, 2011]

But thereis a would-be dual: sculan(>modernshall)

(21)

Collapse analysis applied to Nez Perce?

Does my analysis for OE work for Nez Perce? Doesn’t seem so.

[Deal, 2011]: o’qa is a clear ♦ in DE contexts

(8) c’alawí if

saykiptaw’atóo-nm doctor-erg

háamti’c quickly

páa-x-no’qa, 3/3-see-o’qa

simíinikem-x Lewiston-to

hi-kiy-ó’qa 3subj-go-o’qa a. ‘If the doctorcansee him in a hurry, then he should head over to Lewiston.’

b. #‘If the doctorneedsto see him in a hurry, then he should head over to Lewiston.’

Compare Nez Perce 8 to Old English 3:

(3) “How can he be without avarice when he has to think about the benefit of many people, if[he didn’t want to when he motan.3sg think only about his]?”

(22)

Emerging typology of variable force

Alfredian Old English St’át’imcets

Nez Perce Gitksan

(23)

Early Middle English: real ambiguity between♦and

No ♦ - collapse in Early Middle English

Circumstantial necessity: >50% of uses in Ancrene Wisse

(9) (AW 8:90-9) “You should have no animal but one cat only. An anchoress who has livestock seems more a housewife, as Martha was, she cannot easily be Mary, Martha’s sister, with her tranquillity of heart.”

for for

þenne then

mot moten.3sg

ha she

þenchen think

of of

þe the

kues cow’s

foddre fodder

<...>

‘For then she(=the anchoress)has tothink of the cow’s fodder <...>’

Nu Now

þenne, then

x^ef

if eani any

mot moten.3sg

nedlunge necessarily

habben have

hit, it,

loki see

þet that

hit it.nom

na no

mon man.acc ne

not eili ail

ne not

hearmi harm

‘Now then if any (anchoress) absolutelyhas tohave a cow, at least see to it that the cow does not hurt or ail anyone.’

(24)

...but Early ME *moten is not yet a pure

“Open possibility”: in≈5 out of 58 examples in AW, and more inSM, we seem to have a genuine existential meaning:

(10) Þah þe flesch beo ure fa, hit is us ihaten þet we halden hit up. Wa we motendon hit, as hit is wel ofte wurðe, ah nawt fordon mid alle;

(AW 3:284-5)

‘Though the flesh is our foe, it is commanded to us that we hold it up.

Woe wemaydo it as it is well often worthy of, but we should not destroy it altogether.’

Prayers:

(11) I þe wurðgunge, Iesu Crist, of þine tweof apostles, þet Ichmoteoueral folhin hare lare, þet Ichmotehabben þurh hare bonen þe tweolf bohes þe

bloweð of chearite, (AW 1:174-6)

‘In honor, Jesus Christ, of your twelve apostles,mayI everywhere follow their teaching,mayI have through their prayers the twelve branches that blossom with love’

(25)

*moten in Ancrene Wisse and Seinte Margarete

58 instances of moten in Ancrene Wisse

(only 2 in negative clauses)

5 main types of uses:

unavoidability (circumstantial,≈modernhave to) moral instruction (deontic,≈modernmust,ought) wish, prayer

“open possibility”

under attitudes (grant,swear, etc.)

18 instances of moten in Seinte Margarete

(only 1 in a negative clause)

A slightly different distribution:

no strict demarcation between prayers and other♦types moral-instruction uses are emerging from circumstantialuses

(26)

*moten’s modal neighbors

In OE, *motan was outside of the “regular” modal system:

ability circ. deontic

♦ magan magan non-modal

— sculan sculan

circ./deontic

♦+ collapse presup. motan

But in the 13th cent., *moten is an integral part of the system.

ahen(>modernought)

only deontic uses, mostly reportative sculen(>modernshall)

deontic uses, both performative and reportative future uses

“subjunctive” uses (≈modernwould)

(27)

The change trajectory

“destiny”? “open possibility” collapse variable force

u} ow %- (

prayer attitude complements

unavoidability moral instruction

collapse variable force ⇒ circumstantial

Presuppositions can conventionalize into assertions

(cf. [Schwenter and Waltereit, 2010])

(old♦assertion) ∧(new collapse assertion) =assertion

circumstantial ⇒ deontic : a well-attested development

(28)

Conclusion

Formal semantics

A new kind of variable force modality: collapse presupposition.

Historical linguistics No [ ♦ → ] path after all.

Instead, the [collapse → ] path.

Both areas

Distinction between true variable force and ♦ - ambiguity.

(29)

Data for Alfredian Old English (original OE examples, modern philological translations, and Latin parallels forCPandBo): http://tinyurl.com/d7okrzz

This project has benefitted from discussions with Cleo Condoravdi, Antonette diPaolo Healey, Daniel Donoghue, Regine Eckardt, Kai von Fintel, Olga Fischer, Martin Hackl, Irene Heim, Sabine Iatridou, Ian MacDougall, Lisa Matthewson, Paul Portner, Katrina Przyjemski, Donca Steriade, Sali Tagliamonte, and Elizabeth Traugott. Earlier stages of this work were presented at University of Ottawa, Georgetown University, Rutgers University, NYU, and UT Austin, and benefitted from the comments made there. All remaining mistakes are my responsibility only.

Corpora used:

York-Toronto-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Old English prose (YCOE) Penn Parsed Corpus of Early Middle English (PPCEME)

Parsed Corpus of Early English Correspondence (PCEEC)

The extensive commentary toBoethiusin [Godden and Irvine, 2009] was of great help in identifying the correspondences between the Latin original and the OE translation.

(30)

References

Carnicelli, T. A. (1969).

King Alfred’s version of St. Augustine’s Soliloquies.

Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

d’Ardenne, S. (1977).

The Katherine Group edited from MS. Bodley 34.

Société d’Edition “Les Belles Lettres”, Paris.

Deal, A. R. (2011).

Modals without scales.

Language, 87(3):559–585.

Fischer, O. (1994).

The development of quasi-auxiliaries in English and changes in word order.

Neophilologus, 78:137–164.

Giles et al., editor (1858).

The whole works of king Alfred the Great: with preliminary essays illustrative of the history, arts, and manners of the ninth century.

Bosworth & Harrison, London.

Godden, M. and Irvine, S. (2009).

The Old English Boethius.

Oxford University Press.

Goossens, L. (1987).

Modal tracks: the case ofmaganandmotan.

In Simon-Vanderbergen, A.-M., editor,Studies in honour of Rene Derolez, pages 216–236. Vitgeuer, Gent.

Kratzer, A. (2012).

Modals and conditionals.

Matthewson, L. (2012).

(31)

References

On how (not) to uncover cross-linguistic variation.

InProceedings of NELS 42.

Matthewson, L. (2013).

Gitksan modals.

International Journal of American Linguistics, 79(3).

Millett, B. (2005).

Ancrene Wisse. A corrected edition of the text in Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, MS 402, with variants from other manuscripts.

Drawing on the uncompleted edition by E.J.Dobson, with a glossary and additional notes by Richard Dance.

Ono, S. (1958).

Some notes on the auxiliary*motan.

Anglica, 3(3):64–80.

Peterson, T. (2010).

Epistemic Modality and Evidentiality in Gitksan at the Semantics-Pragmatics Interface.

PhD thesis, University of British Columbia.

Rullmann, H., Matthewson, L., and Davis, H. (2008).

Modals as distributive indefinites.

Natural Language Semantics, 16(4):317–357.

Schwenter, S. and Waltereit, R. (2010).

Presupposition accommodation and language change.

In Davidse, K., Vandenalotte, L., and Cuyckens, H., editors,Subjectification, intersubjectification and grammaticalization. Mouton de Gruyter.

Solo, H. J. (1977).

The meaning of*motan. A secondary denotation of necessity in Old English?

Neuphilologische Mitteilungen, 78:215–232.

(32)

References

Standop, E. (1957).

Syntax und Semantik der modalen Hilfsverben im Altenglischen magan, motan, sculan, willan.

Pöppinghaus, Bochum-Langendreer.

Sweet, H. (1871).

King Alfred’s West-Saxon version of Gregory’s Pastoral Care, volume 45 and 50 ofEarly English Text Society.

Tagliamonte, S. and D’Arcy, A. (2007).

The modals of obligation/necessity in Canadian perspective.

English World-Wide, 28(1):47–87.

Tagliamonte, S. and Smith, J. (2006).

Layering, competition and a twist of fate. deontic modality in dialects of English.

Diachronica, 23(2):341–380.

Tellier, A. (1962).

Les verbes perfecto-présents et les auxiliaires de mode en anglais ancien: (VIII^eS. - XVI^e S.).

C. Klincksieck, Paris.

Traugott, E. C. (1989).

On the rise of epistemic meanings in English: an example of subjectification in semantic change.

Language, 65(1):31–55.

van der Auwera, J. (2001).

On the typology of negative modals.

In Hoeksema, J., Rullmann, H., Sánchez-Valencia, V., and van der Wouden, T., editors,Perspectives on negation and polarity items, pages 23–48. John Benjamins, Amsterdam.

Visser, F. T. (1963-1973).

An historical syntax of the English language.

E. J. Brill, Leiden.

Variable-force modals on the British Isles: semantic evolution of *motan