35.3565, Review: Historical Linguistics; Modality in Contact: Gomwalk (2024)

[The LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-35-3565. Wed Dec 18 2024. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 35.3565, Review: Historical Linguistics; Modality in Contact: Gomwalk (2024)

Moderator: Steven Moran (linguist at linguistlist.org)
Managing Editor: Justin Fuller
Team: Helen Aristar-Dry, Steven Franks, Joel Jenkins, Daniel Swanson, Erin Steitz
Jobs: jobs at linguistlist.org | Conferences: callconf at linguistlist.org | Pubs: pubs at linguistlist.org

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Editor for this issue: Joel Jenkins <joel at linguistlist.org>

================================================================


Date: 18-Dec-2024
From: Philemon Gomwalk [philgomwalk at gmail.com]
Subject: Historical Linguistics; Modality in Contact: Gomwalk (2024)


Book announced at https://linguistlist.org/issues/35.2566

AUTHOR: Carmelo Alessandro Basile
TITLE: Modality in Contact
SUBTITLE: Necessity and Obligation in New Englishes
SERIES TITLE: Language Contact and Bilingualism [LCB]
PUBLISHER: De Gruyter Mouton
YEAR: 2024

REVIEWER: Philemon Gomwalk

SUMMARY

The book, Modality in Contact: Necessity and Obligation in New
Englishes, examines the operation of modality (of necessity and strong
obligation) in New World Englishes, with a special focus on
Singaporean English (SgE). Its author, Carmelo Alessandro Basile,
addresses three key questions, namely: (a) do English modal
constructions of necessity and obligation exhibit similar behaviours
geographically; (b) are the substrate languages the sole driving
forces behind the restructuring of the modal system of a contact
variety such as SgE; (c) can the contact-grammaticalization hypothesis
explain certain structural properties of the modal system of necessity
in SgE? In trying to provide viable answers to these questions, Basile
examines findings and insights from a synchronic cross-dialectal
corpus analysis of four dialects of English, namely British English
(BrE), Singaporean English (SgE), Indian English (IndE), and Hong Kong
English (HKE). The author also reports on related insights from
another diachronic intra-dialectal corpus analysis of data collected
from the 1990s to 2021, focused on the diachrony of key modal
constructions in contemporary Singapore English.

The book is divided into eight chapters. In Chapters 1–4, the reader
is provided with the coordinates that are essential for understanding
the main concepts in the book’s title, namely contact, modality, and
New Englishes. In Chapters 5–8, the focus is on the methodological
implications of the book’s focus on the investigations into modality,
the results derived from the investigations, their detailed discussion
and broader interpretations.

Chapter 1 (pp. 1-6) identifies the major research questions addressed
and the methodology adopted in the synchronic cross-dialectal corpus
analysis and discussions carried out in succeeding chapters of the
monograph.  This chapter also sets the overall tone and direction for
the detailed consideration of varying aspects of modality realization
in SgE (in particular) and other related New World Englishes (in
general).

Chapter 2 (pp. 7-52) highlights and discusses various hypotheses
concerning language contact, using examples from creoles and languages
originating from situations of intense contact and the terminology
associated with them (e.g. “substrate”, “adstrate”, “lexifier”,
“lexifier”, “pidgin”, “creole”, “Language R”, “Language M” etc.). Four
main hypotheses – universalist, substratist,
contact-grammaticalization, and superstratist – are explored as models
explaining the dynamics of contact. The Chapter emphasizes the
interconnection and validity of the substratist and
contact-grammaticalization hypotheses in particular, showcasing the
fluid roles of lexifier and substrate languages in language contact
phenomena.

Chapter 3 (pp. 53-89) highlights and illustrates the intricate concept
of modality and its associated terminology, focusing on relevant past
literature on it. The functional categories of modality, namely,
dynamic, deontic, and epistemic are defined and discussed as the key
sets of reference. In this chapter, it is argued that the category of
dynamic modality is usually associated with the domain of possibility
(as seen in Palmer 1990), although also holding significance and
validity within the domain of necessity as well. Drawing upon Bybee,
Perkins, and Pagliuca (1994), the chapter further argues that these
three categories can be viewed as reflections of three distinct
diachronic stages in the evolution of modality.

In Chapter 4 (pp. 90-119), the focus shifts on the history and
development of the three New Englishes under examination, namely SgE,
IndE, and HKE. The chapter explains how spatial contacts with other
languages spoken in Singapore, India and Hong Kong have contributed to
reshaping the grammatical systems of these New English varieties, thus
affecting their modality realizations in different ways. Schneider’s
(2007) “dynamic model” is presented as the most suitable for the
classification of New Englishes due to its evolutionary approach,
which integrates aspects of history, politics, identity constructions,
use and attitudes, and linguistic restructuring. The Chapter equally
reviews past studies on modality in New Englishes while emphasizing
their limits.

Chapter 5 (pp. 120-145) discusses the methodology adapted to
scrutinize the different modal constructions of necessity in the
different dialects. Corpus data are described as precious instruments
for tracking language patterns in specific historical moments and as
tools to hypothesize diachronic change. It emphasizes how rapidly
postcolonial varieties of English have changed since the first years
of colonization, by adapting continuously to their linguistic ecology.
Additional corpora comprising Singaporean blog data from the 2000s up
to 2021 are explored, aiming to sketch potential diachronic patterns
in SgE.

Chapter 6 (pp. 146-199) focuses on the findings from the analysis of
corpus and survey data. The synchronic cross-dialectal study, reported
and discussed in this chapter, is shown to have uncovered intriguing
patterns regarding the frequency and competition of different modal
constructions in SgE, IndE, and HKE.

Chapter 7 (pp. 200-224) explains the results of the corpus and survey
analyses in light of the theories of contact expounded upon in Chapter
2. Specifically, it attempts to determine and assess the validity of
the contact-grammaticalization and substrate hypotheses. This entails
investigating the degree to which substrate languages influence the
production of modality in New Englishes and discerning the role of the
historical parental variety, British English (BrE), in shaping the
reconfiguration (and grammaticalization rate) of modal constructions.
The Chapter introduces a novel “pan-stratist” model, which posits that
a fusion of intricate cognitive principles and the substratum force
(or SUB-FORCE) collectively wield pivotal roles in the dynamics of
contact.

Chapter 8 (pp. 225-231) concludes the overall discussion in the book
and offers potential directions to future research. This includes the
possibility of investigating modality with similar methodologies in
contact languages that do not have English as their parent varieties,
such as the case of French or Portuguese-based creole languages.

EVALUATION

Close consideration of all eight chapters in Basile’s book provides
the reader with many new insights into some key principles of modality
as it operates in contemporary SgE and other varieties of New World
Englishes as IndE and HKE. Many of such insights are provided through
the use of persuasive empirical data and appropriate graphic
illustrations in different sections of respective chapters of the
book. Many of the major issues concerning grammatical modality in New
World Englishes were identified, defined and comprehensively discussed
by the author in different chapters in the book. I find the
explanations of and graphic illustrations on these issues of modality
grammatical in contact language varieties quite robust, innovative and
stimulating.

For example, in Chapter 2 (pp.7-52), I note positively that the author
is able to provide the reader with very valuable information on major
theoretical models (alongside their underlying hypotheses) concerning
language contact, using examples from creoles and languages
originating from situations of intense contact. Attention is also
given to identifying and defining   the technical sociolinguistic
terminology associated with such contact situations. Four key models
of contact are identified and well-explained. These are the
universalist, the substratist, the contact-grammaticalization, and the
superstratist. In outlining the significance of these models, the
author aptly highlights the mutual interconnection of two of them in
particular--the substratist and contact-grammaticalization models--in
showcasing the fluid roles of lexifier and substrate languages in
language contact phenomena.

In Chapter 3 (pp.53-89), I am impressed with Basile’s attempts to
illustrate the complexity underlying the general notion of modality.
He chooses three distinct modal functions - dynamic, deontic, and
epistemic - for the classification of modal meanings of necessity,
which are consistently used in the discussions in the book. These
three modal functions are, in turn, defined according to two
discriminating notions, i.e. the notions of source (or origin) of
modality, (see Depraetere and Verhulst 2008), and of time reference.
In Basile’s account and discussion of the above-mentioned modal
functions, he rightly hypothesizes that these categories may in fact
be accounted for as the expression of three distinct diachronic stages
of the evolution of modality cross-linguistically. This hypothetical
position, as Basile himself admits, is indirectly derived from the
viewpoints distilled from Bybee, Perkins, and Pagliuca (1994) and van
der Auwera and Plungian (1998). I find this hypothetical posture
intuitively intriguing and innovative in outlook, especially as it
relates to the global research investigations into the nature and
unique linguistic characteristics of New World English varieties.

In Chapter 4(pp. 90-119), I find Basile’s discussion of
cross-dialectal restructuring of the grammatical systems in SgE, IndE,
and HKE very stimulating. His explanation of how their respective
linguistic ecologies and contact with other languages have contributed
to their unique linguistic characteristics is not only intuitively
convincing but also quite informative. I also partially agree with him
that Schneider’s (2007) dynamic model offers a viable theoretical
framework for understanding the evolution of New Englishes,
considering history, politics, identity construction, use and
attitudes, and linguistic restructuring as the main coordinates for
the formation of a new dialect. It is within the framework of
Schneider’s dynamic model that the reader can rightly evaluate the
relative validity of Basile’s subsequent characterization of
Singaporean English(SgE) as a dialect in its Endonormative
Stabilization (or phase 4), while characterizing both Indian
English(IndE) and Hong Kong English(HKE) as being in their
Nativization stage (or phase 3).

In this regard, I am however hesitant to fully agree with Basile’s
definitive dichotomization between SgE, IndE and HKE. This is
primarily because this categorization is far from being exhaustive. In
fact, such a dichotomization (as suggested in Chapter 4 of Basile’s
book) is being challenged by different empirical results, findings and
conclusions from other studies on New Englishes.  Such studies as
Mukherjee (2007,2010) and Fuchs (2020), for example, have produced
research results and findings which strongly suggest that IndE may
have already progressed to phase 4 in contemporary times. Moreover,
the definitive Exonormative Stabilization status of SgE (as  projected
and argued in Basile’s book) is known to be currently facing
increasing opposition from governmental policies aimed at discouraging
the widespread use of colloquial SgE. Instead, these policies are
designed to promote extended use of a ‘more standardized’ subvariety
of SgE which is more closely aligned with British English(BrE) (cf.
the ‘Speak Good English Movement’ launched in Singapore in the early
2000s).

In Chapter 5(pp. 120-145), I note that Basile succeeds in highlighting
and comprehensively explaining the theoretical significance of the
methodology he uses to scrutinize different modal constructions of
modal necessity observed in the specific dialects of New World
Englishes treated in his book. The extended discussion also succeeds
in covering contemporary SgE and other varieties of New-World
Englishes as IndE and HKE. In the specific case of Singaporean
English, he is able to reveal and graphically illustrate how this
variety of New World English, in comparison to others, has undergone a
remarkable expansion over the last three decades (from the mid-1990s
to date). While it was spoken in Singapore by less than 20 per cent of
the population in 1990, its prevalence has since surged to nearly 50
per cent in 2020 (Census of Population, 2020: Singapore, 2021).

The theoretical insights that Basile provides in Chapter 5 are also
further validated by his utilization of contemporary Singaporean blog
data from 2000-2021, to complement his use of data from the 1990s.  On
the whole, I find Basile’s treatment of key aspects of modality in
contemporary SgE and other varieties of New World Englishes as IndE
and HKE in Chapter 5 both incisive and significant. This because he
was able to offer an exhaustive parallel analysis, for example, on
under-explored ‘modal constructions’ involving the usage of the lexeme
‘better’, which has not previously been investigated in the context of
New World Englishes (see chapter 5, pp.120-135). This analysis serves
to demonstrate how a ‘typical, postcolonial’ variety of English, such
as SgE, can gradually change some of its linguistic features,
beginning from pre-colonial days extending into post-colonial times.
The variety essentially undergoes such changes by adapting
continuously to the peculiarities of its sociolinguistic ecology.

In Chapter 6 (pp. 146-199), Basile reports on and discusses results
obtained from the synchronic cross-dialectal investigations involving
grammaticalization of modal constructions in SgE, IndE, and HKE. The
investigations utilize both documentary corpus and survey data, the
statistical analyses of which point to noteworthy trends pertaining to
the frequency and competition of different modal constructions across
SgE, IndE, and HKE. With respect to the diachronic intra-dialectal
analysis conducted on data specifically derived from SgE, Basile was
able to establish that the use of modals of necessity and obligation
have increasingly expanded in scope since the 1990s, leading to a
marked reconfiguration of the modal system in present-day SgE. He also
confirms the occurrence of intriguing results obtained from the
analyses of survey data, indicating similar patterns to those observed
in the documentary corpus investigations of SgE.

After careful examination of the data sets and analysis provided in
different sections of Chapter 6, I find Basile’s linguistic
characterization and interpretation of the modal grammatical systems
in SgE, IndE, and HKE to be both incisive and persuasive. This is well
demonstrated by Basile’s use of vigorous arguments and illustrative
charts/ tables in outlining and presenting his cross-dialectal
analyses of data in Sections 6.2 (pp. 147-179). A similar level of
vigour in argumentation and the use of graphic charts/ tables is also
observed in Section 6.3 (pp. 180-198), where Basile also provides
interpretations and analyses, specifically derived from survey data in
SgE.

In Chapter 7(pp. 200-224), Basile refocuses on the three major
research questions he had posed in Chapter 1 and tries to provide some
viable answers to them. In trying to address both theoretical and
methodological issues associated with these questions, specifically as
they relate to SgE, Basile focuses on detailed discussions of selected
modality elements. In Section 7.2, he centres discussion on the modal
element, must-. attempting to explain why high rates of non-epistemic
modality are associated with this particular modal in Singapore.
Basile presents the concept of substrate force (or SUB-FORCE), which
is presented as an important factor in the high rate of occurrence of
this particular modal.

After a careful evaluation of his account of the relative frequency
distribution of this particular element in SgE (see sub-section 7.2,
pp. 201-213), I am persuaded by the validity of his position that the
‘‘… high rates of non-epistemic modality associated with this
particular modal in Singapore …is insufficient to justify this
tendency, suggesting the involvement of more complex mechanisms’’ (see
p. 201). As Basile has emphasized elsewhere in Section 7.2, it is
important that discussions about the grammar of contact languages
should never overlook the influence of intricate cognitive factors and
principles in determining both the direction and quantum of the
occurrence of specific change features in such language varieties (see
pp. 212-213).

In Sections 7.3, 7.3, 7.4 and 7.5 (pp. 213-223), Basile also provide
fairly detailed frequency analyses and interpretations of six other
modal elements that commonly occur in SgE, namely; have to, need to,
have got to, got to, gotta and better. After careful evaluation of the
accounts provided on these modal elements, I am also very impressed by
the depth of argumentation presented by Basile to demonstrate the
overall sociolinguistic significance of these specific modal elements
to a proper understanding of how the modality features found in
typical New World English varieties functionally operate, from both
synchronic and diachronic perspectives.

In Chapter 8 (pp. 225-231), Basile endeavours to summarize the major
highlights of all key issues relating to how specific (grammatical)
features of modal necessity and strong obligation operate in BrE, SgE,
IndE, and HKE, with primary focus on Singaporean English(SgE). The
extensive discussions provided by Basile in Chapters 2 to 7 (on
modality feature realizations in SgE, IndE, and HKE) confirm that past
investigations into such issues in many New World English varieties
have largely remained limited in both scope and depth. This, he notes,
is in marked contrast to the comparatively advanced state of
investigations of modality in ‘inner-circle’ varieties of English,
such as British English (BrE), American English (AmE), Australian
English(AusE) or Canadian English(CanE).

This point raised by Basile on the dearth of in-depth research efforts
on New World English varieties is no doubt a valid one, primarily
because of the insufficiency of critical diachronic data currently
available on the early stages of development of most New World English
varieties. It is precisely for this reason that linguists have been
unable to propose convincing hypotheses on the full trajectories of
language change in these varieties. I agree also with Basile’s
viewpoint that apparent-time methods exploiting synchronic data
provide some of the most reliable means of discovering and assessing
the potential significance of diachronic patterns, especially within
the framework of the time-tested sociolinguistic premise that the
speech traits of older language respondents tend to represent older,
more reliable forms of a language than the speech traits of younger
respondents (see pp. 224).

It is also significant that Basile draws attention to the existence of
studies by Hansen (2018) for IndE and HKE, and by Loureiro-Porto
(2019) for Phillipean English(PhilE), both of which also provide
credible empirical data to suggest that future investigations into New
World English varieties can and should ideally aim at incorporating
the use of both corpus-derived and survey-elicited data for more
in-depth and intuitive-satisfying understanding of issues related to
modality feature analyses in such language varieties.  I wish to note
with much satisfaction that the discussion in Basile’s book represents
a bold, comprehensive and well-illustrated documentary attempt to
provide new, in-depth understanding of how and why modality-related
features occur and are demographically distributed among speakers of
New World English varieties in different parts of the world today.

In general, I view the analyses and discussions provided throughout
Basile’s book as representing viable and innovative perspectives on
conducting and understanding current research trends in New World
English varieties. While these are often studied with either British
English(BrE) or United States English (UStE) taken as a logical
benchmark, it is also important to recognize the emergent historical
relevance as well as contemporary reality of different New English
varieties in the second decade of the 21st Century. In this regard,
Basile cites Hansen (2018) as one of the most comprehensive,
sociolinguistic accounts currently available on the treatment of
modality in New English varieties. It is in this regard that he cites
Hansen as fervently advocating for renewed in-depth investigations
into ‘New English’ varieties through non-colonial lenses (2018:
50–53).

This stance had previously been taken in Mufwene (2007), and further
elaborated upon in Mufwene (2021), in relation to creole languages. In
tandem with Hansen (2018), Mufwene strongly argues that contact
languages such as creoles are not inferior when compared to
“traditional languages”, a common misconception rooted in a prejudiced
colonial perspective, which considered non-Europeans, along with their
cultures and languages, as inferior to Europeans (Mufwene 2021: 85).
Apart from the expansive discussions, graphic illustrations and
valuable insights provided by Basile in his book, I am also impressed
his adaptation of both corpus and survey data as research resources
for investigating and assessing the impact of distinct substrates on
the production of specific grammatical constructions within New-World
English varieties, from both synchronic and diachronic points of view.

Past investigators have tended to rely solely on the use of corpus
data to determine both quantitative and qualitative changes that takes
place in structure of New-World Englishes. This limitation, as Basile
has rightly pointed out, tends to render past studies (on New-World
Englishes that are solely based on such data) incapable of effectively
revealing any fresh insights on the influence of such variable as age,
gender, or ethnicity on the production of specific constructions in
such New-World English varieties (see Chapter 1, p. 2 and Chapter 8,
p.231). However, it is gratifying to observe that the analyses and
illustrations provided in Basile’s book do not completely rely on
evidence drawn from corpus data alone; rather they are also
complemented by contemporary, survey-based data.

The theoretical insights provided in Basile’s book about the
grammatical realizations of modality in SgE accentuate the importance
of conducting corpus- and survey-based investigations on
contact–derived varieties of English, Spanish and other globalized
languages of the world in the 21st century. Indeed, a comparison of
recent diachronic data between different New World Englishes might
help to justify how developed such varieties are, within the framework
of Schneider’s (2007) dynamic model, which can be used for explaining
contact induced patterns of diachronic change and relative pace of
synchronic development. Admittedly, Basile’s treatments of the
grammatical realizations of modality in SgE, IndE and HKE may offer
only transitory glimpses into the vast realm of potential
investigations that can be carried out into the linguistic structures
of New World Englishes. It would be even more interesting and
challenging to witness similar investigations being carried out by
future researchers, in order to empirically test the applicability of
the pan-stratist approach to contact-induced language changes.
Additionally, analyses could extend to diverse grammatical categories
beyond modality in New Englishes, as well as in other contact
languages that have different lexifiers than English (cf. Boas and
Höder 2018, 2021).

On the whole, I strongly recommend Basile’s book as an invaluable
citation document for established theoretical, descriptive and
historical-comparative linguistic scholars. It should also be of
academic value to other language-related researchers interested in
deepening their current understanding of how grammatical modality
phenomena occur, operate and are demographically distributed among
speakers of New World English varieties in different parts of the
world today. Finally, it can be worthy of  interest and value to
advanced-level readers, who are familiar with the use of technical
terminologies in the language sciences.

References

Boas, Hans & Steffen Höder (eds.). 2018. Constructions in Contact:
Constructional Perspectives on Contact Phenomena in Germanic
languages. (Constructions Approaches to Language 24). Amsterdam: John
Benjamins.

Boas, Hans & Steffen Höder (eds.). 2021. Constructions in Contact 2:
Language Change, Multilingual Practices, and Additional Language
Acquisition. (Constructions Approaches to Language 30). Amsterdam:
John Benjamins.

Bybee, Joan L., Revere D. Perkins & William Pagliuca. 1994. The
Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect and Modality in the Languages of
the World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Census of Population 2020, Statistical Release 1. 2021. Department of
Statistics, Ministry of Trade & Industry, Republic of Singapore.
Available at:
<https://www.singstat.gov.sg/-/media/files/publications/cop2020/sr1/cop2020sr1.pdf>
(accessed February 2, 2022).

Depraetere, Ilse & An Verhulst. 2008. Source of modality: A
reassessment. English Language and Linguistics 12. 1–25.

Fuchs, Robert. 2020. The progressive in 19th and 20th century settler
and indigenous Indian English. World Englishes 39. 394–410.

Hansen, Beke. 2018. Corpus Linguistics and Sociolinguistics: A Study
of Variation and Change in the Modal System of World Englishes.
Leiden: Brill.

Loureiro-Porto, Lucía. 2019. Grammaticalization of semi-modals of
necessity in Asian Englishes. English World-Wide, 40. 115–142.

Mufwene, Salikoko. S. 2007. Population movements and contacts in
language evolution. Journal of Language Contact – Thema 1. 63–91.

Mufwene, Salikoko S. 2021. Créoles. Langage et Société – numéro
hors-série. 81–86.

Mukherjee, Joybrato. 2007. Steady states in the evolution of New
Englishes: Present-day Indian English as an equilibrium. Journal of
English Linguistics 35. 157–187.

Mukherjee, Joybrato. 2010. The development of the English language in
India. In Andy Kirkpatrick (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of World
Englishes, 167–180. London: Routledge.

Palmer, Frank R. 1990. Modality and the English Modals (2nd ed.).
London: Routledge.

Schneider, Edgar W. 2007. Postcolonial English: Varieties Around the
World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

van der Auwera, Johan & Vladimir Plungian. 1998. Modality’s Semantic
Map. Linguistic Typology, 2. 79–124.

ABOUT THE REVIEWER

Philemon Gomwalk is a teacher and researcher, currently affiliated to
the University of Jos in Nigeria, with research interests in the
diachronic linguistic study and analysis of languages belonging to the
Chadic sub-phylum of Afro-Asiatic within the Nigeria sociolinguistic
environment.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------

********************** LINGUIST List Support ***********************
Please consider donating to the Linguist List to support the student editors:

https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=87C2AXTVC4PP8

LINGUIST List is supported by the following publishers:

Bloomsbury Publishing http://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/

Brill http://www.brill.com

Cambridge University Press http://www.cambridge.org/linguistics

Cascadilla Press http://www.cascadilla.com/

De Gruyter Mouton https://cloud.newsletter.degruyter.com/mouton

Edinburgh University Press https://edinburghuniversitypress.com

Elsevier Ltd http://www.elsevier.com/linguistics

Equinox Publishing Ltd http://www.equinoxpub.com/

European Language Resources Association (ELRA) http://www.elra.info

John Benjamins http://www.benjamins.com/

Language Science Press http://langsci-press.org

Lincom GmbH https://lincom-shop.eu/

Multilingual Matters http://www.multilingual-matters.com/

Narr Francke Attempto Verlag GmbH + Co. KG http://www.narr.de/

Netherlands Graduate School of Linguistics / Landelijke (LOT) http://www.lotpublications.nl/

Oxford University Press http://www.oup.com/us

Wiley http://www.wiley.com


----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-35-3565
----------------------------------------------------------