Động từ trạng thái và tình thái trong các bài báo kinh tế tiếng Anh

NGHIÊN CỨU - TRAO ĐỔI v<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> ĐỘNG TỪ TRẠNG THÁI<br /> VÀ TÌNH THÁI<br /> TRONG CÁC BÀI BÁO<br /> KINH TẾ TIẾNG ANH<br /> PHẠM THỊ THANH THÙY<br /> Đại học Kinh tế Quốc dân<br /> <br /> <br /> 1. INTRODUCTION<br /> <br /> TÓM TẮT Modality and transitivity has been the subject of<br /> linguistic studies and research. Modal expressions<br /> Trong lĩnh vực ngôn ngữ học, “nghĩa tình thái” là<br /> allow us to talk about a certain state of affair that may<br /> một thuật ngữ liên quan đến thái độ của người<br /> never occur in the actual world. Particularly, modality is<br /> nói đối với những gì đang được nói. Động từ trạng<br /> thái là một nhóm động từ đưa ra yêu cầu hoặc đề a facet of illocutionary force, signaled by grammatical<br /> xuất trong một trường hợp nhất định. Nghĩa tình devices that expresses (i) the illocutionary point or<br /> thái và động từ trạng thái trong các văn bản kinh general intent of a speaker or (ii) a speaker’s degree<br /> tế đại diện cho một lĩnh vực nghiên cứu nhỏ về of commitment to the expressed proposition’s<br /> khả năng ngữ dụng học (khả năng thực tế). Phần believability, obligatory, desirability, or reality. In the<br /> lớn sự chú ý tập trung vào lý thuyết, tập trung linguistics literature, it is widely acknowledged that<br /> vào các ví dụ trực quan và vào các ví dụ từ những modal expressions may be used to communicate<br /> ngữ cảnh thực tế. Do đó, bài viết này sẽ xem two great clusters of meanings: (i) epistemic modal<br /> xét các khái niệm trong một số chiến lược rộng<br /> meanings dealing with the possibility or necessity<br /> hơn cho việc thay đổi lực ngôn trung dựa trên<br /> of an inference drawn from available evidence, and<br /> sự phân tích nguồn đáng tin cậy từ các bài báo<br /> nghiên cứu kinh tế. Theo đó, bài viết này cố gắng (ii) deontic modal meanings concerning with the<br /> nghiên cứu xa hơn về biểu hiện phương thức và necessity or possibility of acts performed by morally<br /> động từ tình thái bằng cách tập trung vào phân responsible agents, e.g. obligation and permission<br /> tích các phát ngôn tình thái và động từ trạng thái (Lyons, 1977; Palmer, 1986, 1990). The paper attempts<br /> sử dụng trong các văn bản kinh tế được lựa chọn. to answer the following questions: (1) Are modal<br /> Bài viết này dựa trên nghiên cứu 15 bài báo kinh verbs or non-modals used in economic text more<br /> tế tiếng Anh. Thông tin trong 15 bài báo kinh tế passive or active? (2) Which kind of modal verbs are<br /> tiếng Anh bao gồm toàn bộ bài báo không tính frequently used in mental process? And (3) Is there<br /> phần tóm tắt vì tác giả cho rằng ngôn ngữ của any relationship between transitivity and modality?<br /> phần tóm lược thuộc một thể loại khác so với các<br /> phần còn lại trong một bài báo khoa học.<br /> The study is based on a corpus of research articles<br /> Từ khóa: bài báo nghiên cứu kinh tế, động từ drawn from English economic field. The corpus is<br /> khuyết thiếu, động từ trạng thái, tình thái made up of 15 economic research articles from The<br /> Economic Journal (5 articles); Journal of Economic<br /> Issues (3 articles); Quarterly Journal of Business and<br /> <br /> <br /> KHOA HỌC NGOẠI NGỮ QUÂN SỰ<br /> Số 3 - 9/2016 63<br /> v NGHIÊN CỨU - TRAO ĐỔI<br /> <br /> <br /> Economics (2 articles); The American Economic Review Since there are indefinitely many ways of drawing lines<br /> (3 articles); Australian Economic (2 articles). on purely semantic grounds, we must inquire which<br /> have systematic repercussions in the grammar. We see<br /> Only articles written by native speakers are chosen a good illustration in the criteria to show why mental<br /> in order to avoid possible interference from other processes (i.e. ‘sensing’) and material processes (i.e.<br /> languages. The articles which make up the corpus ‘doing’) constitute distinct grammatical categories.<br /> relate to the macro and micro-economics issues. ‘Mental process’ is distinct from ‘material process’ in:<br /> Based on the structure of the active English verb: (a) having as ‘participants’ a ‘human sensor’ endowed<br /> with consciousness and a ‘Phenomenon’ (as in “I like<br /> (modality) (perfect aspect) (progressive aspect) the quiet”), which cannot be equated with Actor and<br /> tense Goal in a material process (as in “the lion caught the<br /> tourist”); (b) being ‘representable’ as two-way or ‘bi-<br /> in which brackets indicate optional elements, all directional’ (as in “Mary liked the gift” versus “the gift<br /> verbs which fit into the above modality slot are pleased Mary”); (c) being a ‘Fact’ or a representation<br /> chosen as modal verbs. The study excludes ought, ready packaged, (as in “Jane saw that the stars had<br /> which requires the inclusion of the particle to, and come out”) as well as ‘a Thing’, or ‘a phenomenon of<br /> have to, which, in any case, has syntactic features our experience’ (as in “Jane saw the stars”); and (d)<br /> which distinguish it from the modal verbs. having as unmarked simple present tense (as in “I see<br /> the stars”), whereas the material process has ‘present<br /> 2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE<br /> in present’ (as in “they are building a house”).<br /> 2.1. Transitivity<br /> 2.2. Modality<br /> Halliday’s (1970) way of classifying processes<br /> From various points of view, despite an enormous<br /> instructively shows his balancing the plausible with the amount of work done on the analysis of modality in<br /> technical as well as the semantic with the grammatical. languages, it is still not easy to identify what modality<br /> Mental processes have the principal subtypes of actually means (Palmer, 1986).<br /> perception (“seeing, hearing”, etc.), affection (“liking,<br /> fearing”, etc.), and cognition (“thinking, knowing, According to Quirk et al. (1972), modality is used<br /> understanding”, etc.). Meanwhile, material processes as a cover term for different types of modification<br /> are divided into dispositive (“doing to”) and creative the speaker can express towards a state of affairs<br /> (“bringing about”), each of which may be either contained in the proposition. In this usage, it is<br /> concrete or abstract. identified with the speaker’s comment or evaluation<br /> on the representational content of the utterance.<br /> According to Halliday, every language accommodates “Attitude” and “opinion” in this sense have nothing to<br /> in its grammar a number of distinct ways of being and do with the emotional state that a person undergoes<br /> English has intensive (i.e., ‘a relation of sameness’) (as such as “like”, “love”, “hate”…. Moreover, modality<br /> in “Tony is the leader”), circumstantial (as in “the fair is excludes factual evaluation from its domain. Linguistic<br /> on a Thursday”), and possessive (as in “Kate has a car”). discussions witness three kinds of modality: epistemic,<br /> Each of these three comes in two modes: attributive deontic and dynamic. Epistemic modality deals with<br /> which has the functions of ‘attribute and carrier’ (as in the degree of the speaker’s commitment to the truth<br /> “Sarah is wise”), and identifying which has identified of the proposition expressed and thus indicates some<br /> and identifier (as in “tomorrow is the tenth”). Only degree of certainty (as in “He must know the answer of<br /> identifying clauses are reversible and have a passive the question”) or uncertainty (as in “He might know the<br /> (as in “Tony plays the leader” and “the leader is played answer of the question”).<br /> by Tony”); but attributives do not (as in “the fair lasts all<br /> day” but not “all day is lasted by the fair”), because an Deontic modality is concerned with the necessity or<br /> attribute is not a participant and so cannot become a possibility of acts performed by morally responsible<br /> subject of a sentence. agents and thus mainly covers such notions as<br /> <br /> <br /> KHOA HỌC NGOẠI NGỮ QUÂN SỰ<br /> 64 Số 3 - 9/2016<br />  NGHIÊN CỨU - TRAO ĐỔI v<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> obligation (e.g. “You must take care of the child until perception (reaction) may not then increase in the firm’s<br /> 31st Dec.”) and permission (e.g. “You may check in systematic risk level.<br /> books for 2 weeks).<br /> Relation processes are either attributive, where a<br /> According to Von Wright (1951), dynamic modality is qualitative attribute is assigned to the subject: (6)<br /> introduced for cases where circumstances in the real … increasing price in… may be risky…or identifying,<br /> world make possible or necessary the actualization of where the process serves to define the identity of the<br /> a state of affairs. Dynamic modality includes two sub- subject: (7)…both financial and non-financial private<br /> categories: subject-oriented, where the circumstances benefits of control… which may create incentives for<br /> are characteristics of the subject (as in “She can’t think corporate insiders…<br /> on her own”); and neutral, where the circumstances<br /> are general conditions holding in the world (as in Only four positions in the network introduced by<br /> “that career might be the most wanted job in the next Halliday (1985) accept a selection between active<br /> few years”). However, dynamic modality is not as clear and passive voice; they are the causative, transitive,<br /> as it seems not to relate to the speaker. Therefore, mental, and identifying processes. Table 1 shows the<br /> linguists always mention to two broad kinds of distribution of modal verbs in economic research<br /> modality only: epistemic and deontic, and many of articles from the corpus by process and distinguishes<br /> them use “root modality” or “non-epistemic” modality between active and passive where appropriate.<br /> as a term covering both deontic and dynamic cases<br /> (Coates, 1983). Table 1: Distribution by process and active, passive<br /> voice (data from writer’s research)<br /> 3. MODALITY AND TRANSITIVITY IN ENGLISH<br /> ECONOMIC RESEARCH ARTICLES Processes and Voices Number of Frequency<br /> modal verbs<br /> Data from the corpus show that while 31% of finite Active 3 1%<br /> verbs are passive, 41% of modal verbs occur in the Causative<br /> Passive 3 1%<br /> passive form. Based on a simple transitivity network Non-causative 9 4%<br /> introduced by Berry (1975) and Halliday (1985), Middle 17 7%<br /> passivization and transitivity are considered. Active 21 9%<br /> Transitive<br /> Passive 26 11%<br /> In economic research articles, all processes are either<br /> Intransitive 2 1%<br /> mental or relational. Material processes are either<br /> Active 34 14%<br /> unrestricted or restricted. In other word, the number Mental<br /> of inherent participants is fixed (restricted) or not Passive 72 29%<br /> (unrestricted). Unrestricted processes may occur Attributive 49 20%<br /> with two participants, and thus be causative: (1)… Active 14 6%<br /> Identifying<br /> corporate insiders must promote risk-taking decisions Passive 2 1%<br /> to capitalize... or, with a single participant, in which<br /> case they are non-causative: (2)… petrol price will From the table 1, it is seen that mental process<br /> similarly increase. Restricted processes may be accounts for the largest number of cases (106 or<br /> restricted to a single participant, and thus be middle: 43%), followed by the material (81 or 34%). Relational<br /> (3) When we use the three years at the same time, N in process takes up 65 cases (26%). As has been said,<br /> that model can be bigger than the N of each year. 41% of the modal examples occur in the passive form.<br /> However, the result shown in the study expresses a<br /> Where restricted processes are restricted to two misleading, in the sense that in four of the process<br /> participants (effective process), both participants may types (non-causative, middle, intransitive and<br /> be expressed giving the transitive process: (4) … they attributive) the active/passive choice is not available.<br /> [insiders] can create an adversarial relationship among These are processes occurring uniquely in the active<br /> partners…or only one participant may be expressed form; no passive correlate exists. Of the other types,<br /> giving the intransitive process: (5) A negative market causative has few examples, but those that do occur<br /> <br /> <br /> KHOA HỌC NGOẠI NGỮ QUÂN SỰ<br /> Số 3 - 9/2016 65<br /> v NGHIÊN CỨU - TRAO ĐỔI<br /> <br /> <br /> are evenly divided between active and passive. The transitive cases are also fairly evenly divided, with a slight<br /> bias towards passive (55%). The identifying cases are not many but are more so than causative. Passive is rare in<br /> this case with only 12% of the cases.<br /> <br /> From the results, there seems to be some slight correlation between modality and mental process: 42% of the<br /> modal verbs in the corpus are mental processes, compared with 33% material and 25% relational processes.<br /> In the material process category, active and passive examples seem equally probable; in the mental process<br /> category, there seems to be a strong tendency towards the passive. On the other hand, passive seems extremely<br /> rare in the relational process.<br /> <br /> It is reasonable that there are some links between modality and mental process. According to Halliday (1985),<br /> mental process deal with the human appreciation of the world, it may be well that this is a situation where<br /> the normative economists tend to hedge their bets, leaving themselves an escape route rather than making<br /> unqualified statements. The qualification provided by the modal would then allow the readers to follow the line<br /> of reasoning suggested. McCloskey (1985) has shown that when talking about the supposed errors of others,<br /> normative economists tend to do so in a non-specific way when speaking in a formal situation, as opposed<br /> to the informal situations where they tend to be much more specific and assertive. Therefore, it would seem<br /> reasonable that such a formal situation as in research articles will lead economists to be less assertive to hedge<br /> their bets, on points that might be open to disagreement.<br /> <br /> Table 2 indicates the distribution of the various modal verbs in the corpus occurring in mental processes.<br /> <br /> Table 2: Distribution of modal verbs in mental processes (data from writer’s research)<br /> <br /> Modal Active Passive Total Mental<br /> Verbs<br /> Number Frequency Number Frequency Number Frequency<br /> Will 3 9% 5 7% 8 8%<br /> Would 7 21% 3 4% 10 10%<br /> Shall - - - - - -<br /> Should 3 9% 3 4% 6 6%<br /> Can 15 42% 34 47% 49 46%<br /> Could 1 3% 4 6% 5 5%<br /> May 4 12% 15 21% 19 18%<br /> Might - - 6 8% 6 6%<br /> Must 1 3% 2 3% 3 3%<br /> <br /> Table 3 shows the frequency of the various modal verbs by process and by voice. The modal verbs are ordered<br /> according to their high frequency.<br /> <br /> Table 3: The distribution of the various modal verbs by process and by voice (data from writer’s research)<br /> <br /> Modal Verbs Material Mental Relational<br /> Active Passive Active Passive Active Passive<br /> Can 6 7 15 34 4 -<br /> May 10 5 4 15 20 1<br /> Would 12 4 7 3 15 1<br /> Will 11 1 3 5 7 -<br /> Should 1 4 3 3 8 -<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> KHOA HỌC NGOẠI NGỮ QUÂN SỰ<br /> 66 Số 3 - 9/2016<br />  NGHIÊN CỨU - TRAO ĐỔI v<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Could 6 4 1 4 2 -<br /> Must 7 2 1 2 4 -<br /> Might - 1 - 6 3 -<br /> <br /> The above tables indicate that can makes up almost half of the modal verbs occurring. This is true for both the<br /> active and passive cases, with 42% and 47% respectively in mental processes. May is also accounts for a high<br /> ratio. These two modal verbs can and may will further be considered in the next section.<br /> <br /> 3.1. Mental process and passive May and Can<br /> <br /> Huddleston (1971) claims that there are six uses of the epistemic may as follow:<br /> <br /> 1. Qualified generalization: x is true for at least some members of the group but not necessarily any particular<br /> individual.<br /> <br /> 2. Exhaustive disjunction: x is at least one of the attributes proposed.<br /> <br /> 3. Uncertainty: the truth of x is not certain (i.e. possibility).<br /> <br /> 4. Concession: whether x is true or not, y is the case.<br /> <br /> 5. Legitimacy: x is legitimate, valid.<br /> <br /> 6. Ability: people are able to do x.<br /> <br /> The epistemic can has the same uses as may with the exclusion of the fourth use: concession. Besides,<br /> Huddleston seems to imply that there is little difference between may and can. Palmer (1974) when mentioning<br /> English verbs also shares the same idea links can to the notion of non-assertion. Of the notions suggested by<br /> Huddleston (1971), those of the uncertainly/possibility, legitimacy and ability seem to cover all of the examples<br /> found in the sample.<br /> <br /> The examples of passive can in the mental process are never of a deontic type. All of the examples can be<br /> classified as epistemic in some forms. To the extent that these can be divided into an ability type and a<br /> possibility type. For example: (8) Hence, it can be argued that the nature of and changes in corporate governance<br /> have potential implications for the firm’s riskiness; (9) The differences in securities underwritten by commercial banks<br /> (or their affiliates) can be neglected.<br /> <br /> However, a considerable number of the examples are not easily classified as being one rather than the other,<br /> and seem to combine aspects of both possible interpretations, or indeed to be neutral as to which one should<br /> be selected.<br /> <br /> The examples of passive, may in the mental process are also exclusively of the epistemic type, i.e. indicating<br /> some form of possibility. (10)… the present work may be considered an extension of Walter’s analysis…<br /> <br /> Here the majority of the cases of passive may in mental process (15 out of 17 cases) are examples of the legitimacy<br /> use: (11)… without controlling for other factors that will affect this spread, no strong conclusions may be drawn from<br /> these univariate results.<br /> <br /> The ability category of may can also be seen in the economic research articles (here again some cases are not<br /> easy to categorize).<br /> <br /> <br /> KHOA HỌC NGOẠI NGỮ QUÂN SỰ<br /> Số 3 - 9/2016 67<br /> v NGHIÊN CỨU - TRAO ĐỔI<br /> <br /> <br /> To the extent that can and may cover similar semantic While the other examples express ability, for example:<br /> areas in similar proportions, it might seem that the (18)…lacking suitable data we cannot quantify the loss<br /> “virtually no difference” approach is justified, and it from that economic decision.<br /> is true that in many cases substituting may for can<br /> or vice versa would make “virtually” no difference. Some examples are neutral as to an ability or<br /> However, in this example, “can” does not lend legitimacy interpretation as (19) We can check<br /> themselves to this ploy. (12)… it can be shown that whether the loss Profile B is plausible…; (20) We may<br /> the procedure… is reasonable… The substitution of conduct further tests to clarify the effects of time on the<br /> may in example (13)… in the United States, the capital perception of a conflict of interest.<br /> market needs of smaller firms may be ignored …places<br /> the reasonableness much more in the domain of The above corpus examples then present two basic<br /> possibility. This seems to go against Palmer’s use of differences between active may and active can in<br /> non-assertion as a distinguishing feature of epistemic mental process. Firstly, may, but not can, occurs<br /> can. Both may and can express a procedure which more frequently with untypical animacy; whereas<br /> is considered legitimate. However, in the case of may expresses primarily uncertainty and secondarily<br /> can, this legitimacy is considered to be the only one legitimacy, can expresses primarily legitimacy and<br /> available in the present state of our knowledge, and it secondarily ability. The numbers are too small to<br /> is used until it is shown to be less adequate than some warrant extrapolation, but it would be interesting to<br /> other procedures. This interpretation is supported see if these results are confirmed in a larger sample.<br /> by the fact that in many cases there seems to be<br /> 4. CONCLUSION<br /> little difference, or at least only marginal difference,<br /> between the use of can and a non-modal sentence. In conclusion, the study presents some observations<br /> concerning transitivity and modality in economic<br /> 3.2. Mental Process and Active May and Can<br /> research articles. It can be concluded that there is a<br /> Mental process, by definition, typically requires an series of relationships between processes (transitivity)<br /> intelligent agent. Economic discourse tends to avoid and modality. These are manifested in the form of<br /> the use of human agent subjects. It might expect then tendencies, in some cases particularly strong, for<br /> that active mental process would be rare in this type particular processes to have strong collocations with<br /> of document. As far as may is concerned, this is true. In specific forms of modal choice in economic writing.<br /> addition, example with human subject is rarely found. Transitivity is then a significant parameter in the<br /> Subject in most of the cases might be called “untypical analysis of modality in economic research articles.<br /> animacy” (the term used by Berry (1975)); that is, in this<br /> Because of the scope of a seminar topic, the study is<br /> case, an inanimate subject occurring where the process<br /> only an extrapolative result found for transitivity and<br /> would normally require an animate one. For example,<br /> modality in a small numbers of the sample. It would<br /> (14) This firm-specific error can control for unobservable firm<br /> be interesting to see whether the tendencies found<br /> effects not captured in the OLS model; (15) According to our<br /> here are corroborated in a larger sample. Also, further<br /> hypothesis, a conflict of interest may exist when a firm with a<br /> research on the other categories of transitivity and<br /> loanoutstandingissuesasecurityunderwrittenbythebank…<br /> modality would be useful./.<br /> There is a rather higher number of examples of active<br /> References:<br /> can in the mental process. Furthermore, one might<br /> add here that the pronoun we as subject, which 1. Berry, M. (1975), Introduction to Systemic Linguistics,<br /> constitutes an unusually high concentration for this Structures and Systems, 1. U.K: Batsford<br /> type of discourse, occurs quite often. Most of the<br /> examples with the pronoun we as subject express 2. Coats, J. (1983), The Semantics of the Modal<br /> legitimacy: (16) We can now state…that… there is no Auxiliaries. London and Canberra: Croom Helm.<br /> evidence…; (17) The second alternative… not only can<br /> account for the increased productivity… 3. Halliday, M.A.K. (1970), Functional diversity in<br /> <br /> <br /> KHOA HỌC NGOẠI NGỮ QUÂN SỰ<br /> 68 Số 3 - 9/2016<br />  NGHIÊN CỨU - TRAO ĐỔI v<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> language as seen from a consideration of modality 8. Palmer, F. (1974), The English Verb. U.K.: Longman.<br /> and mood in English. Foundations of Language, 6,<br /> 322-361. 9. Palmer, F. (1986), Mood and Modality. Cambridge<br /> University Press, Cambridge.<br /> 4. Halliday, M.A.K. (1985), An Introduction to Functional<br /> 10. Palmer, F. (1990), Modality and the English Modals.<br /> Grammar. U.K.: Edward Arnold. Huddleston, R.D.<br /> Longman, London and New York.<br /> 5. Huddleston, R.D. (1971), The Sentence in Written<br /> 11. Quirk, R. et al. (1972a), A Comprehensive Grammar<br /> English, a Syntactic Study Based on an Analysis of of the English Language. London and New York:<br /> Scientific Texts, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. Longman.<br /> <br /> 6. Lyons, J. (1977), Semantics. Cambridge University 12. Quirk, R. et al. (1972b), A Grammar of Contemporary<br /> Press, Cambridge. English. London and New York: Lonman.<br /> <br /> 7. McCloskey, D.N. 1985, The Rhetoric of Economics. 13. Von Wright, G.H. (1951), An Essay in Modal Logic.<br /> Harvester Press. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> TRANSITIVITY AND MODALITY IN ENGLISH ECONOMIC RESEARCH ARTICLES<br /> <br /> PHAM THI THANH THUY<br /> <br /> Abstract: In the linguistics literature, modality is a semantic term concerning the speaker’s attitude<br /> toward what is being said. Meanwhile, transitivity is the number of objects a verb requires or takes<br /> in a given instance. Much of the attracted attention has been on theoretical nature, and intuitive and<br /> de-contextualized examples. The paper, therefore, helps situate the concept within wider strategies<br /> for modifying illocutionary force basing on an analysis of authentic sources from economic research<br /> articles. Accordingly, the study attempts to further advance research on modal expressions and<br /> transitivity by focusing on analyzing modal verbs and transitivity used in selected economic texts. The<br /> study is based on a corpus of 15 economic research articles drawn from English economic field. The<br /> corpus contains the whole of the text of the articles, excluding the abstract since the language of an<br /> abstract is a register in itself, so it is not like an academic article.<br /> <br /> Keywords: economic research articles, modal verb, transitivity, modality<br /> <br /> Ngày nhận: 18/7/2016<br /> Ngày phản biện: 02/9/2016<br /> Ngày duyệt đăng: 20/9/2016<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> KHOA HỌC NGOẠI NGỮ QUÂN SỰ<br /> Số 3 - 9/2016 69<br />