Editor for this issue: Terence Langendoen <terry
linguistlist.org>
Nuyts, Jan (2001) Epistemic Modality, Language and Conceptualization: A Cognitive-Pragmatic Perspective. John Benjamins Publishing Company, hardback ISBN: 1-55619-983-X, xix+428pp, $100.00, Human Cognitive Processing 5. Chaoqun Xie, Foreign Languages Institute, Fujian Teachers University, Fuzhou, Fujian, China Traditional linguistic research is still to a large extent characterized by an inclination to limit the scope of attention to purely linguistic aspects of language use, and to the organization of the linguistic system per se. Yet in reality language operates as an integral subpart of the human behavioral repertoire, serving a quite specific function in it. And the present monograph under review, built upon Nuyts (1992b), tries to approach language from a cognitive-pragmatic perspective. It "offers an in depth investigation into the semantic domain of epistemic modality" (p. 1). Most of all earlier empirical studies of epistemic modality have focused on the structural rather than on the semantic category, and there has hardly been systematic concern with the full range of structural and functional dimensions of epistemic expressions in general, let alone with the question how these might correlate with the nature of epistemic modality as a semantic category (cf. xvi). For Nuyts, epistemic modality "concerns an estimation of the likelihood that (some aspect of) a certain state of affairs is/has been/will be true (or false) in the context of the possible world under consideration" (pp. 21-22; cf. Aijmer 1980, 1996; Caton 1966; Sweetser 1990). And the analysis starts from the assumption that "epistemic modality is intertwined with the qualificational dimension of polarity" (p. 79). The aim of this monograph, as clearly summed up in the Conclusion, is twofold: one is to perform a paradigmatic investigation of the functional and structural properties, and their interrelations, of 4 major epistemic modal expression types in three West Germanic languages; the other is to use this investigation to add to our understanding of the cognitive infrastructure for language use, and specifically to inquire into the nature of and the relationship between linguistic structure and processing and conceptual structure and processing (cf. p. 1; p. 5). This book is divided into six chapters, plus the Preface, the Introduction, and the Conclusion. Chapter 1, "Preliminaries" (pp. 1- 54), presents the preliminaries to the investigation. First of all, it introduces the cognitive-pragmatic perspective on language. The adjective 'cognitive' relates to the observation that language is a dimension of human mental activity. On the other hand, the adjective 'pragmatic' relates to the observation that, in the context of the human behavioral repertoire, language has a specific role to play, viz. (primarily) to allow communication with other members of the species (cf. Grice 1969; Nuyts 1993b; Searle 1972). The cognitive and the pragmatic or functional dimensions of language, which are central to strong research traditions in the language sciences, are not just two separate issues; instead, they "are two faces of one phenomenon, which must be mutually interrelated and interdependent" (p. 3). According to Nuyts, the cognitive- pragmatic perspective assumes that an adequate account of language in general, or of any linguistic phenomenon in particular, has to do full justice to both dimensions simultaneously, in an integrative way (cf. p. xv). And even as two faces of one phenomenon, the cognitive and the functional dimension have a different status in the investigation of language. The cognitive dimension is hidden in the black box of the human mind, and can only be accessed through observing what the system perceives and how it behaves. The functional dimension of language, however, is part of the observable behavior. Hence, "analyzing the functional dimension of language is logically antecedent to analyzing the cognitive infrastructure for language" (pp. 3-4). Nuyts argues that language research is bound to be concerned with the linguistic and conceptual dimensions at the same time and that language is a dynamic entity (cf. pp. 5-21), herein lies the two key properties emanating from the cognitive-pragmatic perspectives. A clear understanding will undoubtedly help to get a better grasp of the empirical facts of language as such and to make functionalist linguistics a viable partner in the interdisciplinary enterprise of cognitive science. In the sections that follow, Nuyts presents an overview of the empirical analysis of epistemic modality that will be dwelled on in the subsequent chapters. Chapter 2 to 4 are devoted to a close scrutiny of corpus data for the four major expression types of epistemic modality in Dutch and German, with reference also to English, and with a discussion of issues concerning the linguistic characteristics of these expression types brought up in the literature. Chapter 2, "Modal adverbs and adjectives" (pp. 55-106), discusses the modal adverbs and adjectives. The author starts by presenting a comparative analysis of the epistemic modal sentence adverbs and the predicative epistemic modal adjectives as in the following two sentences: (1) Probably they have run out of fuel. (2) It is probable that they have run out of fuel. The author's opinion, in this regard, is that the epistemic adverbs and adjectives are closed classes, i.e. they consist of a fairly stable and delimited set of forms. The two classes overlap, yet are not identical (p. 54). Besides, there turn out to be several clear differences (cross- linguistically) in the semantic-syntactic behavior of these two form types. For one, it appears that adjectives can be questioned, whereas modal adverbs cannot. Thus, Nuyts is right in holding that (3) is perfectly acceptable, whereas (4) seems impossible. (3) Is it probable that they have run out of fuel? (4) a. *Probably that they have run out of fuel? b. *Did/Have they probably run out of fuel? A second clear difference the author notices is that there are no negative modal sentence adverbs, while there are negative modal adjective. So, (5) is correct, while (6) is not. (5) It is improbable that they have run out of fuel. (6) a. *Improbably they have run out or fuel. b. *They have improbably run out of fuel. And the corpus analyses that focus on Dutch waarschijnlijk and German wahrscheinlich 'probably/probable' used as an adverb and as an adjective evidently show that "both languages share a clear overall tendency (strongest in Dutch) for the adverb to be much more frequent than the adjective, irrespective of the discourse or text type" (p. 63). Nuyts calls our attention to the point that these properties, and the differences between the expression types more generally, cannot be accounted for in terms of just a single underlying cause, but require recourse to several factors, namely, evidentiality, performativity, information structure and, discourse strategy (cf. pp. 32-45). In the sections that follow, Nuyts discusses the behavior of the adverbs and adjectives in terms of these four factors. For each factor, the author shows first what the corpus data reveal regarding its role in the use of the expressions before pointing out how it contributes to understanding some of the behavioral properties of the expression s noted in the literature. Nuyts claims that by far, information structure serves as the most important factor differentiating between the use of the modal adverbs and adjectives (cf. p. 79). Also, the adjective can be used if the epistemic qualification acquires strong focality in the discourse context, which can find expression in the corpus (cf. 79- 100). Nuyts concludes in Chapter 2 that the adverb and adjective "probably do involve the same semantic category of epistemic modality, but with a different degree of likelihood" (106) and that "the functional differences between the epistemic adverbs and adjectives have nothing to do with (differences in) the semantic category of epistemic modality as such" (106). Chapter 3, "Mental state predicates" (pp. 107-170), expounds the mental state predicates, or 'propositional attitude predicates', as they are sometimes called, of the type illustrated in (7). (7) I think they have run out of fuel. For the sake of their complex semantic structure and their mysterious linguistic behavior, the mental state predicates are notoriously difficult, and in-depth literature to unravel the properties of this expression type is scarce. In this chapter, Nuyts, using the functional analysis of the adverbs and adjectives as his stronghold, carries out linguistic investigations of the use of the mental state predicates. The author asserts that, apart from the difference in word use and corresponding syntactic possibilities, these predicates differ from the adverbs and adjectives in at least two respects, viz.: (i) unlike the latter they both a qualificational and a non-qualificational meaning; and (ii) the nature of the qualificational meaning, and the structure of the lexical class in this respect, is quite different from that of the adverbs and adjectives (cf. pp. 122). In the sections that follows, the author, by drawing on corpus observations and on the special behavioral properties observed for the latter form types, the author discusses the status of the Dutch and German mental state predicates in terms of the four factors introduced before, concluding that the most important element distinguishing the mental state predicates from the adverbs and adjectives is the omnipresence of the evidential component. Chapter 4, "Modal Auxiliaries" (pp. 172-233), is devoted to the modal auxiliaries, as exemplified in (8). (8) They may have run out of fuel. Despite the strong interests in them the modals remains a highly controversial linguistic phenomenon. The reason for this is that "they show an enormously complex structural (syntactic and morphological) and semantic behavior" (p. 171). Besides, this behavior "turns out be extremely variable between individual forms and semantic groups of forms, in any one language as well as across languages" (p. 171). First, the precise delimitation of the category of the modal auxiliaries is a controversial matter. Opinions vary with regard to whether class membership should be determined primarily in terms of the grammatical or rather of the semantic properties of the forms. It is argued by the author that the epistemic modals are only a subset of the modals and that in the languages considered in this book, the epistemic modals are a rather well circumscribed and closed category, like the adverbs and adjectives, and unlike the mental state predicates. The data in the corpus show that Dutch and English only have clearly epistemic modals for expressing positions on the epistemic scale rather far on the positive side, viz. zullen and will, and close to the neutral point, viz. kunnen, and could or may. German has modals not only for those positions, viz. werden, and koennen or moegen, respectively, but also for a moderately positive position on the scale, viz. duerfte. English and Dutch also allow expression of the latter by means of combinations such as may well and kan goed, however, which, are strongly idiomaticized (cf. pp. 172-174). For the grammatical status of the modals, Nuyts points out that the modal auxiliaries hold a strange balance between a lexical and grammatical status: they figure as separate verbal morphemes, yet they also have properties of grammatical markers (cf. 176-178). After discussing the general characteristics of the modals, the author, recurring to data in the corpus, explores at great length the multiple meanings of the modals, with kunnen in Dutch and koennen in German as the object of comparison. And corpus observations reveal that the epistemic reading of these modals is far from well established. These modals are quite unlike their English 'counterpart' may, well established as an epistemic expression (pp. 187-195). Again, in the following sections, the modals are examined in terms of the four functional factors. The author concludes that 'there is not a single factor in terms of which the modal can be said to have a special profile: it is essentially neutral in terms of all of them' (p. 227). The postscript at the end of this chapter discusses the diachrony of the Dutch modals, pointing out that 'the Dutch modals in general have acquired their epistemic meaning only relatively recently, much more recently than the English modal' (p. 233). Chapter 5, "Information Structure: An Experiment" (pp. 235-260), aims to "see whether these correlations between (non-)focality and form types can be further corroborated" (p. 235) and "also to widen up the perspective towards other epistemic expression types not considered in the corpus study" (p. 235). By adopting the method of controlled data elicitation, this experiment, performed in a spoken and a written version, has turned out that the corpus findings regarding the information structure of epistemic expression types are largely supported, or at least not contradictory, by the present experimental findings: the adverbs never occur in focus; the adjectives, predominantly used focally, are the most import[ant?] expression type in focal conditions; the mental state predicates can be but rarely are used in focus, and if they are, only in the complementing form; and the modal auxiliaries can be used in focus, but it is undecidable whether this observation concerns epistemic uses of the modals, or rather dynamic ones. Nuyts concludes in this chapter that this experiment confirms the tendency apparent in the corpus investigation that speakers tend to avoid using epistemic expressions under conditions of focality (p. 259), and a persistent tendency for the epistemic qualification to assume a non-focal position in linguistic expression can be observed (cf. p. 263). Chapter 6, "The cognitive structure of epistemic modality" (pp. 261- 366), is the longest and, to the present reviewer's mind, the most important one of this book. It is in this chapter that Nuyts, by expounding the cognitive structure of epistemic modality, endeavors to solve the puzzling problem of how to interpret and understand human cognition and the role of language in it. After presenting some general reflections on the syntax of epistemic expressions (pp. 261- 272), Nuyts goes on to briefly outline the 'Functional Procedural Grammar' concept of language production in Section 6.2. Functional Procedural Grammar tries to blend the basics of traditional functionalist modeling of language structure with a general dynamic procedural concept of cognition more typical of language psychology. Functional Procedural Grammar attempts to offer a global encompassing overview of the process of language production, from the level of conceptual representation onwards (cf. pp. 272-279). And, so far as qualificational categories are concerned, the notion of 'hierarchical' or 'layered' representation serves as a key source of inspiration as well as object of critical reflection. For layered representation, there have been too substantial hypotheses regarding how to integrate a hierarchical system of layers of qualifications in a functional grammar model, namely, in the context of Van Valin's Role and Reference Grammar (RRG; cf. pp. 280-283) and of Dik's Functional Grammar (FG; cf. pp. 283-287). Regarding epistemic modality, the FG and RRG proposals differ in at least three respects: (inter)subjectivity, polarity, and time (cf. pp. 306-315). Nuyts argues that like RRG, Functional Grammar primarily deals with grammatical expressions of qualifications and with lexical expressions in optional constituents. Unlike in RRG, however, layered representation, organized at two main levels, the lowered, 'representational' level and the higher, 'interpersonal' level (cf. p. 284), is introduced at only one level, viz. in the 'prediction', which is the basic representation in the grammar. Nuyts claims that, on the one hand, the validity of the principle of layered representation to explain the behavior of qualifications in language adds a perspective 'in breadth' to the 'in-depth' investigation of epistemic modality by situating his findings in a wider context and evaluating their significance. And on the other hand, the findings may help us better understand "the position and format of layering in the cognitive systems for language use" (p. 286). In Section 6.4, Nuyts dwells on the matter of the nature of human conceptualization in general, arguing that conceptualization is non- linguistic, and maybe even non-propositional and that epistemic modality is not just a linguistic phenomenon but a basic conceptual category (cf. 287-304). Section 6.5 mainly addresses the global division of labor between the linguistic and the conceptual levels, focusing on the nature of the linguistic and the mapping relations between the two levels. Section 6.6 explores the principles of layering in conceptualization, concluding that even though what can be conceptualized must be innately determined, what is actually conceptualized depends on the needs and interactions of the organism in/with its physical environment, and that, the functionality of the conceptual system is quite different from that of the linguistic system (cf. pp. 334-366). Throughout this monograph, Nuyts tries to demonstrate the great significance of adopting a methodologically traditional functional linguistic approach to the study of epistemic modality, thereby going beyond the narrow limits of language per se into its wider cognitive context. Although the models and methods proposed in this book need to be further tested and validated, the present volume, in the present reviewer's opinion, serves as a valuable comprehensive and in most respects convincing paradigmatic analysis of epistemic modality, making a no-small contribution to helping us better understand linguistic structure and processing per se and more important, leading us to think more and know more about human conceptualizations. Needless to say this is only a superficial sketch of this rich and varied book, which is well-structured and written in an accessibly academic style. This book is cogent, coherent, and profound, meeting high standards both from a theoretical and from a descriptive point of view. This brilliant book would be of great interest to students of linguistics. REFERENCES Aijmer, K. (1980). Evidence and the declarative sentence. Almqvist & Wilsell International, Stockholm. Aijmer, K. (1996). "Swedish modal particles in a contrastiv perspective". Language Sciences 18: 393-427. Caton, C. (1966). "On the general structure of the epistemic qualification of things said in English". Foundations of Language 2, 37-66. Grice, H.P. (1969). "Utterer's meaning and intentions." Philosophical Review 78: 147-177. Nuyts, Jan (1992b). Aspects of a cognitive-pragmatic theory of language. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Nuyts, Jan (1993b). "On determining the functions of language." Semiotica 94: 201-232. Searle, John (1972). "Chomsky's revolution in linguistics." The New York Review of Books, June 29: 16-24. Sweetser, Eve (1990). From etymology to pragmatics: metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ABOUT THE REVIEWER: Chaoqun Xie is a lecturer with Foreign Languages Institute, Fujian Teachers University in Fuzhou, Fujian Province, China. His main areas of research interests include cognitive linguistics, pragmatics, translation and communication. He is particularly interested in relevance theory and politeness theory from the cognitive-pragmatic perspective and is seeking cooperation with researchers of the same interest.Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue