MODALITY IN ENGLISH AND KURDISH: A CONTRASTIVE STUDY

SHIVAN SHLAYMOON  TOMA; HAVAL ISMAIL AHMAD  SIMO

doi:10.26682/hjuod.2020.23.1.7

SHIVAN SHLAYMOON TOMA Dept.of Translation, College of Languages, University of Duhok, Kurdistan Region, Iraq
HAVAL ISMAIL AHMAD SIMO Dept.of Translation, College of Languages, University of Duhok, Kurdistan Region, Iraq

DOI: https://doi.org/10.26682/hjuod.2020.23.1.7

Keywords: Modality, Epistemic Modality, Deontic Modality, Behdini Kurdish, Modal Auxiliaries

Abstract

This study attempts a contrastive analysis of modality between English and Kurdish. The problem of the study is attributed to the difficulties faced by Kurdish learners and students at the Translation and English Departments at the College of Languages at the University of Duhok regarding mastering English modality in general and modal auxiliary verbs in particular. Modality is the category of meaning which is employed to express necessities and possibilities. The main aims of this study are to describe both epistemic and deontic modality in the two languages under study in order to define similarities and differences between them with respect to modality. The findings of the study show that modals in English are mostly grammatical auxiliaries, whereas in Kurdish they are mostly lexical items, and a variety of lexical items are employed for the expression of one single English modal auxiliary. The study ends up with a number of conclusions and recommendations.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ahmed, B, O. (2005). Darbŕīnī Reža la Diālektī Žurwi Zimānī Kûrdīdā [expressing mood in the northern dialect of Kurdish]. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Saladdin.
Bell, R. (1991). Translation of Translating: Theory and Practice. Essex: Longman.
Berk, L. (1999). English Syntax: From Word to Discourse. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bomba, R.M. (2001). Kirdārī Îlzāmī (wist w ārazw) la Zimāni KurdidāDiālectī Kirmānjī Nāwrast [The Subjunctive Verb in Kurdish –In the Central Dialect]. Unpublished MA Thesis. University of Sulaimani.
Celece-Murcia, M. and Larsern-Freemen, D. (1999). The Grammar Chandra Bose, A. (2005). The Problems in Learning Modal Auxiliary Coates, J. (1983). The Semantics of the Modal Auxiliaries. London: Croom Helm. Dissertation, http://www.languageinIndia.com/nov2005/chandrabos ee1.html.
Goossens, L. (1979). The English modal verb can: an open-ended semantic perspective. In S. De Vriendt & C. Peeters (eds.) Linguistics in Belgium II: 85- 93. Brussels.
Hacquard, V. and Cournane, A. (2016). Themes and variations in the expression of modality. @inproceedings{Hacquard2016ThemesAV, Book. Boston: Heinle and Heinle.
Halliday, M. (1970). Functional Diversity in Language as Seen from a Consideration of Modality and Mood in English. Chapter 5 in “Studies in English Language.” Vol. 7.
Kreidler, C. (1999). Introducing English Semantics. London: Routledge.
Leech, G. (1987). Meaning and the English Verb. (2nd ed.). Longman: London and New Linguistic Typology, 2, 79-124.
Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics. Vol. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Modality and Mood in English. In Foundations of Language 6. 322-361
Palmer, F. (1990). Modality and the English Modals. (2nd ed.). London: Longman.
Palmer, F. (2001). Modality and the English Modals. (4th ed.). London: Longman.
Quirk, R. and S. Greenbaum (1973). A University Grammar of English. Essex: Longman.
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartivik, J. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.
Sabir, P.H.S. (2008). Investigating the syntactic and semantic mastery of English auxiliaries by Kurd learners at college level. An MA Thesis: University of Sulaimani.
Steel, S., Akmajian, A., Demers, R., Jelinek, E., Kitagawa, C., Clerk, R., Wasow, T. (1981). An Encyclopedia of AUX: a Study in Cross Linguistic Equivalence. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Van der Auwera, J. and Plungian, V. (1998). On modality’s semantic map. Verbs in English at High School Level. Unpublished Ph. D. York.