Termout.org logo/LING


Update: February 24, 2023 The new version of Termout.org is now online, so this web site is now obsolete and will soon be dismantled.

Lista de candidatos sometidos a examen:
1) modality (*)
(*) Términos presentes en el nuestro glosario de lingüística

1) Candidate: modality


Is in goldstandard

1
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines193 - : Politeness and modality: Discourse markers

2
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines371 - : both elements presented (image and text) are only visual results in less learning than if both are visual and auditory (less cognitive load). In Mayer’s terminology, this coincides perfectly well with his modality principle which states that “students learn better from animation and narration than from animation and on-screen text” (Mayer, 2001: 184 ). This cognitive load resulting from some types of presentations is associated to the redundancy effect when an extraneous load is introduced and information has to be processed in working memory by the same channel (visual: image and text) rather than by two channels (visual and auditory: image and narration). In Farías et al. (2009) we investigated the effects of two types of presentation in the retention and transfer of idiomatic expressions in an EFL context, one including narration, text and image and another only narration and text. Although there were no differences between groups, the discussion centered on the nature of the language

3
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines581 - : “They are classiffied as metaphorical because a modality that would usually be realized either as a Finite modal operator or an Adjunct in fact gets realized as a clause” (^[61]Eggins, 2004: 174 ).

4
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines597 - : “Intrinsic modality refers to actions and events that humans (or other agents) directly control: meanings relating to permission, obligation, and volition (or intention ). Extrinsic modality refers to the logical status of events or states, usually relating to assessments of likelihood: possibility, necessity, or prediction” (^[36]Biber et al., 1999: 485).

5
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines597 - : “Dynamic modality involves an ascription of a capacity or a need co the subject-participant in the state of affairs, or of a situation-internal potential or necessity for him/her/it to do something (usually this involves animate entities, but it can also be extended to inanimate subject)” (^[41]Nuyts, 2001: 25 ).

6
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines598 - : According to ^[32]Palmer (2001: 1), modality “is a category that is closely associated with tense and aspect” in the sense that they affect the clause in which these phenomena appear. A more specific definition given in the same source reads as follows: “Modality is concerned with the status of the proposition that describes the event” (^[33]Palmer, 2001: 1 ). This means that modality realised by modal particles has scope over the proposition, and this, in turn, represents the stance of the author regarding the contents of the proposition. However, the notion of modality is unevenly treated in the scientific literature on the subject. The following are some of the definitions of modality:

7
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines598 - : 5. “Modality is the semantic category associated with the basic human cognitive ability of thinking that things might be otherwise, that is thinking of alternatives: situations other than what is the case . Modality refers generally to the linguistic means that allow “one to say things about , or on the basis of, situations which need not be real” (^[39]Portner, 2009: 1, emphasis is ours). (^[40]Rocci, 2017: 3)

8
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines598 - : After this clarification, and turning again to the definitions of modality presented above, we highlight in all of them the evaluative and qualifying use of the proposition that the modal particle accompanies to make it more precise. Thus, the speaker’s perception according to that proposition is captured in the modal form used to express, for example, obligation or probability. This evaluative dimension of modality implies that its analysis can be framed within what are called perspective studies or, in English, stance, as noted by ^[49]Alonso-Almeida (2015a: 2):

9
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines598 - : 1. “Each modal can have two different types of meaning, which can be labeled intrinsic and extrinsic (also referred to as 'deontic' and 'epistemic' meanings). Intrinsic modality refers to actions and events that humans (or other agents) directly control: meanings relating to permission, obligation, and volition (or intention ). Extrinsic modality refers to the logical status of events or states, usually relating to assessments of likelihood: possibility, necessity, or prediction.” (^[59]Biber et al., 1999: 485)

10
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines598 - : Finally, event modality expresses an attitude towards the information provided and is divided into deontic modality and dynamic modality, which are related to meanings of obligation and ability respectively, among others. In the case of deontic modality, ^[74]Hoye (1997: 43 ) includes devices entailing “necessity of acts in terms of which the speaker gives permission or lays an obligation for the performance of actions at some time in the future”. The category of dynamic modality is included as a part of ^[75]Palmer’s event modality, in which deontic modality is incorporated. Palmer (2001: 10) believes that “dynamic modality relates to ability or willingness”. This is what we generally refer to as the skills, abilities and/or capacities one person or one object may have to carry out one action, such as in ‘Peter the translator can render this into English’, where ‘can’ expresses that the necessary conditions are met so that the action may be done. ^[76]Nuyts (2001) defines dynamic modality

11
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines598 - : Our notion of epistemic modality in this paper follows that of ^[119]Nuyts (2001: 21), which is as follows: epistemic modality refers to the “evaluation of the chances that a certain hypothetical state of affairs under consideration (or some aspect of it ) will occur, is occurring or has occurred in a possible world”. This sense of evaluation is also highlighted by ^[120]Cornillie (2009: 47) as an epistemic modal device hedging a proposition, “epistemic modality evaluates the likelihood that this proposition is true”.

Evaluando al candidato modality:


1) refers: 6
2) proposition: 6 (*)
3) epistemic: 5 (*)
4) dynamic: 5 (*)
5) obligation: 5 (*)
7) relating: 4
8) meanings: 4
10) deontic: 4 (*)
12) necessity: 4
13) visual: 4
15) narration: 4 (*)
16) palmer: 4
18) follows: 3

modality
Lengua: eng
Frec: 160
Docs: 47
Nombre propio: 1 / 160 = 0%
Coocurrencias con glosario: 6
Puntaje: 6.826 = (6 + (1+5.88264304936184) / (1+7.33091687811462)));
Candidato aceptado

Referencias bibliográficas encontradas sobre cada término

(Que existan referencias dedicadas a un término es también indicio de terminologicidad.)
modality
: Alonso-Almeida, F. & Álvarez-Gil, F. J. (submitted). Developing argumentation in history texts: Epistemic modality and evidentiality. Pragmalingüística.
: Alonso-Almeida, F. (2015a). On the mitigating function of modality and evidentiality. Evidence from English and Spanish medical research papers. Intercultural Pragmatics, 12(1), 33-57.
: Banks, D. (2003). A note on modality in French, Word, 54(3), 325-334.
: Bonyadi, A. (2011). Linguistic manifestations of modality in newspaper editorials. International Journal of Linguistics, 3(1), 1-13.
: Carrió-Pastor, M. L. (2012). A contrastive analysis of epistemic modality in scientific English. Revista de Lenguas para Fines Específicos, 18, 115-132.
: Charlow, N. (2016). Decision theory: Yes! Truth conditions: No! In N. Charlow & M. Chrisman (Eds.), Deontic modality (pp. 47-81). Oxford: Oxford University Press .
: Coates, J. (2003). The role of epistemic modality in women’s talk. In R. Facchinetti, M. Krug & F. Palmer (Eds.), Modality in contemporary English (pp. 331-348). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
: Cornillie, B. (2007). Evidentiality and epistemic Modality in Spanish (semi-) auxiliaries. A cognitive-functional approach. Berlín: Mouton de Gruyter.
: Cornillie, B. (2009). Evidentiality and Epistemic Modality. On the Close Relationship Between Two Different Categories. Functions of Language, 16(1), 44-62.
: Cuenca, M. & Marín, M. (2012). Discourse markers and modality in spoken Catalan: The case of (és) clar. Journal of Pragmatics , 44, 2211-2225.
: De Haan, F. (1999). Evidentiality and epistemic modality: Setting boundaries. Southwest Journal of Linguistics, 18, 83-101.
: Fernández-Montraveta, A. & Vázquez, G. (2014). The SenSem Corpus: An annotated corpus for Spanish and Catalan with information about aspectuality, modality, polarity and factuality. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 10(2), 273-288.
: Gavins, J. (2005). (Re)thinking modality: A text-world perspective. Journal of Literary Semantics, 34, 79-93.
: Gotti, M. & Dossena, M. (2001). Introduction. In M. Gotti (Ed.), Modality in specialized texts: Selected papers of the 1st CERLIS Conference (pp. 9-18). Bern: Peter Lang .
: Gotti, M. & Dossena, M. (Eds.) (2001). Modality in specialized texts. Bern: Peter Lang.
: Greco, P. (2018). Evidentiality and epistemic modality in witness testimony in the context of Italian criminal trials.Journal of Pragmatics, 128, 128-136.
: Halliday, M.A.K. (1970a). Functional diversity in language, as seen from a consideration of modality and mood in English. Foundations of Language, 6(3), 322–361.
: Hoye, L. F. (1997). Adverbs and modality in English. London: Longman .
: In some other cases, authors engage in a less direct dialogistic positioning through modality or counterexpectancies -through conjunctions, either concessives or continuatives (Martin & Rose, 2003), for example:
: Klinge, A. & Hoeg, H. (2005). Modality. Studies in form and function. London: Equinox.
: Kranich, S. (2009). Epistemic Modality in English Popular Scientific Texts and their German Translations. Trans-kom, 2(1), 26-41.
: Leahy, W. & Sweller, J. (2011). Cognitive load theory, modality of presentation and the transient information effect. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25, 943-951.
: Magaña, D. (2021). Modality across genres in Spanish as a heritage language. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada.
: Martín Martín, P. (2000). Epistemic modality in English and Spanish psychological texts. LFE. Revista de Lenguas para Fines Específicos, 7-8, 196-208.
: Marín Arrese, J. I. (2009). Effective vs. epistemic stance, and subjectivity/intersubjectivity in political discourse. A case study. In A. Tsangalidis & R. Facchinetti (Eds.), Studies on English modality. In honour of Frank R. Palmer (pp. 23-52). Bern: Peter Lang .
: Marín-Arrese, J. I. (2013). Stancetaking and inter/subjectivity in the Iraq Inquiry: Blair vs. Brown. En J. I. Marín-Arrese, M. Carretero & J. Arús Hita (Eds.), English Modality (pp. 411-445). Berlín/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
: Moreno, E. & Mayer, R. (1999). Cognitive principles of multimedia learning: The role of modality and contiguity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 358-368.
: Narrog, H. (2005). On defining modality again. Language Sciences, 27(2), 165-192.
: Narrog, H. (2012). Modality, subjectivity, and semantic change. Oxford: Oxford University Press .
: Nuyts, J. (2001). Epistemic modality, language, and conceptualization: A cognitive-pragmatic perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins .
: Palmer, F. (1986). Mood and Modality. Londres: Longman.
: Palmer, F. (2003). Modality in English: Theoretical, descriptive and typological issues. En R. Facchinetti, M. Krug & F. R. Palmer (Eds.), Modality in contemporary English (pp. 1-17). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
: Palmer, F. R. (1986). Mood and modality. Cambridge textbooks in linguistics. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.
: Palmer, F. R. (1995). Modality and the English modals. Londres: Longman.
: Palmer, F. R. (2001). Mood and Modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press . [105]https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139167178
: Pic, E. & Furmaniak, G. (2012). A study of epistemic modality in academic and popularised discourse: The case of possibility adverbs perhaps, maybe and possibly. Revista de Lenguas para Fines Específicos, 18, 13-44.
: Piqué-Angordans, J., Posteguillo, S. & Andreu-Besó, J. V. (2002). Epistemic and deontic modality: A linguistic indicator of disciplinary variation in academic English. LSP & Professional Communication, 2(2), 49-65.
: Portner, P. (2009). Modality. Oxford: Oxford University Press .
: Rezzano, S. (2003). Modality and modal responsibility in research articles in English. In R. Facchinetti & F. Palmer (Eds.), English modality in perspective: Genre analysis and contrastive studies. Bern: Peter Lang.
: Rocci, A. (2017). Modality in argumentation. Dordrecht, NE: Springer.
: Salager-Meyer, F. (1992). A text-type and move analysis of verb tense and modality distribution in medical English abstracts. English for Specific Purposes, 11(2), 93-115.
: Salager-Meyer, F., Defives, G. & Hamelynck, M. (1996). Epistemic modality in 19th and 20th century medical English written discourse: A principal component analysis. Interface. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10, 163-199.
: Samson, C. (2000). Modality markers as metadiscoursal strategy in written economics lectures [En línea, 01– 08–2001]. Disponible en: [75]www.eng.helsinki.fi/doe/ ESSE5–2000/christina.samson.htm
: Schmidt-Weigand, F., Kohnert, A. & Glowalla, U. (2010b). Explaining the modality and contiguity effects: New insights from investigations students’ viewing behaviour. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 24, 226-237.
: Schüler, A., Scheiter, K., Rummer, R. & Gerjets, P. (2012). Explaining the modality effect in multimedia learning: Is it due to a lack of temporal contiguity with written text and pictures? Learning and Instruction, 22(2), 92-102.
: Sydorenko, T. (2010). Modality of input and vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning and Technology, 14(2), 50-73.
: Usonienė, A. (2000). On the modality of the English verbs of seeming. Belgian Journal of Linguistics, 14(1), 185-205.
: Verstraete, J. C. (2001). Subjective and objective modality: Interpersonal and ideational functions in the English modal auxiliary system. Journal of Pragmatics, 33(10), 1505-1528.
: Verstraete, J. C. (2005). Scalar quantity implicatures and the interpretation of modality. Problems in the deontic domain. Journal of Pragmatics, 37(9), 1401-1418.
: Vetter, B. (2015). Potentiality. From dispositions to modality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
: Vold, E. (2006). Epistemic modality markers in research articles: A cross-linguistic and cross-disciplinary study. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 16(1), 61-87.
: White P.R.R. (2003a). Beyond modality and hedging: A dialogic view of the language of intersubjective stance. Text [special issue on Appraisal], 23(2), 259-284.
: White, P. (2000). Dialogue and inter–subjectivity: Reinterpreting the semantics of modality and hedging. En M. Coulthard, J. Cotterill & F. Rock (Eds.), Working with dialogue (pp. 67–80). Tubingen: Neimeyer.
: White, P. (2003). Beyond modality and hedging: A dialogic view of the language of intersubjective stance. Text, 23(2), 259-284.
: von Fintel, K. (2006). Modality and language. In D. M. Borchert (Ed.), Encyclopedia of philosophy. 2nd edition (pp. 20-27). Detroit, MI: Macmillan.