32
MODALIZATION MODULATION
‘indicative’ type
‘imperative’ type
Figure 2.12 Relation of Modality to Polarity and Mood Halliday, 1994:357
2.3.6 Polarity
Matthiessen 1995:476
explains that polarity is the source of assessing the
arguability value of a clause: Yes or No the validity of proposition it isit isn’t or the actualization of proposal dodon’t. In the system of polarity, the option of
positive is unmarked, whereas negative is marked. The markedness of negative
polarity is reflected in various ways: 1
It is reflected in the realization of the terms. If the clause is positive, then no marker of polarity is present, if the clause is negative, a marker of polarity is
present. 2
The markedness is also reflected in probability. Positive is more probable than negative.
3 The markedness is also reflected by the choice of meaning between positive
and negative. Matthiessen, 1995:477 These are the example of positive and negative polarity:
negative allowed
required supposed
sometimes usually
It must be It will be
It may be Certainly
determined probably
possibly probability
inclination It is
usuality positive obligation Do
always Must do
Will do May do
keen willing
It isn’t Don’t
33
Table 2.4 Range of Realization of Polarity and Reversal value in Mood tag POLARITY
of clause Mood
Residue Mood Tag
Subject Finite
Adjunct Complement
reversed polarity
Positive They
are happy
aren’t they? They
are always
happy aren’t they?
They are
often happy
aren’t they? Somebody
is happy
aren’t they?
A few
people are
happy aren’t
they? They
are unhappy
aren’t they? Negative They
aren’t always
happy are
they? They
are never
happy are they?
They are
seldom happy
are they? They
are hardly
happy are they?
Nobody is
happy are
they? Few people
are happy
are they? They
aren’t happy
are they?
Source: Matthiessen 1995:478 Polarity is the speaker’s assessment of the initiation of the proposition it isit
isn’t or proposal dodon’t being exchanged. The choice between positive and negative is interpersonal in character, it is concerned with what the speaker judges
the addressee is likely to believe or do. Matthiessen 1995 explained that positive is unmarked option. The speaker chooses the negative if she judges that she has
to cancel what the addressee believes or will do. The choice of positive and negative polarity thus depends on the speaker maintaining and revising a model of
relationship between herself or himself and the addressee Matthiessen, 1995: 487.
2.3.7 Mood Tag
This type of clause falls midway between the declarative and polar interrogative. Structurally it has the sequence of a declarative, with the Subject
34
occurring before the Finite element. However, unlike the simple declarative, the tagged declarative has what so called as a “mood tag” added to it.
Amy Tsui in Coulthard, 1992 proposes four types of tag questions, those are: Type 1: Positive assumption + neutral expectation
He likes his job, doesn’t he? Rising tone Type 2: Negative assumption + neutral expectation
He doesn’t like his job, does he? Rising tone Type 3: Positive assumption + positive expectation
He likes his job, doesn’t he? Falling tone Type 4: Negative assumption + negative expectation
He doesn’t like his job, does he? falling tone She adds that the very construction of question tag suggests that the speaker has
certain assumption and is biased to a certain answer. Tags are always conductive, and they cannot be neutral. For a question tag with a rising tone, the discourse
context has led the speaker to cast doubt on his assumption and he invites the addressee to confirm it.
The structure of tag plays a lot with finite. These are the structures: Type 1: Positive polarity of declarative + negative polar interrogative
She loves her parents, doesn’t she? Finite Subject Mood tag
Type 2: Negative polarity of declarative + positive polarity of interrogative She doesn’t love her parents, does she?
Finite Subject
Mood tag
35
2.4 Language Acquisition
Kategori