PDA

View Full Version : Pash



pash
09-24-2006, 10:26 AM
Could someone please explain. in the simplest terms possible, the idea expressed by the quote below?

with must, not negates the predication, but with have to, not negates the modality (Antinucci—Parisi 1971: 35; Coates 1983: 55, 57; Perkins 1983: 61; Palmer 1979: 94-95; 1987: 130):

I understand the vocabulary, but not the idea. I need examples to help me understand.

Thanks in advance.

newmod
09-24-2006, 12:16 PM
I think I´ve got this right, but stand to be corrected.

must not is negative obligation, You must not talk to strangers.

don´t have to means it is not obligatory, You don´t have to come, if you don´t want to.

pash
09-24-2006, 01:13 PM
I think I´ve got this right, but stand to be corrected.

must not is negative obligation, You must not talk to strangers.

don´t have to means it is not obligatory, You don´t have to come, if you don´t want to.

Yes, Newmod. I understand that, but can you take me through the meaning of the quote in the topic hread step-by-step?

Could you please show me how "must not" negates the predication and "have + not" negates the modality?

Thanks

Medievalist
09-24-2006, 07:33 PM
The "predication" is sloppy linguist speak for "verb."

The "modality" is sloppy linguist speak for the use of "have" as an auxilliary/helping/modal verb.

Think of "you do" as the main verb phrase; "have to" is an auxilliary/helping/modal verb phrase (depending on which grammar religion you practice, since the terms for parts of speech vary).

You do isn't being negated by "not"; "have to" is receiving the negation imposed by not.

And why are you reading this, you poor soul?

Wordworm
09-24-2006, 07:37 PM
And why are you reading this, you poor soul?
I'm so glad you asked that. For the life of me, I couldn't imagine either. It sounds like some sort of convoluted sentence out of a Hindu-English textbook.

Medievalist
09-24-2006, 07:40 PM
It's from something meant to be read by linguists, not [cough] lesser mortals.

pash
09-24-2006, 10:03 PM
...

You do isn't being negated by "not"; "have to" is receiving the negation imposed by not.

.

And why are you reading this, you poor soul?



I understand now. Thanks I'm reading it because I'm about to begin my first year of a degree in Corpus Linguistics.

Compulsory stuff.

Medievalist
09-24-2006, 10:40 PM
I understand now. Thanks I'm reading it because I'm about to begin my first year of a degree in Corpus Linguistics.

Compulsory stuff.


Gah. Well, you might want to start with some more understandable stuff first; this is written for members of the Linguistics Religion.

Is this for an undergrad or grad degree.

pash
09-24-2006, 11:15 PM
Gah. Well, you might want to start with some more understandable stuff first; this is written for members of the Linguistics Religion.

Is this for an undergrad or grad degree.

Grad.

Medievalist
09-24-2006, 11:23 PM
Pash if you want a reading list to ease you into the new [cough] religion, email or PM me. I'll post it here, but I don't want to bore folk.

pash
09-25-2006, 03:18 AM
Pash if you want a reading list to ease you into the new [cough] religion, email or PM me. I'll post it here, but I don't want to bore folk.

Well thanks for the offer, but we have been provided with a mega-list by the university.