Page 155 - Costellazioni 6

GÜNTER RADDEN, Meaningful Grammar

tion between deontic modality and epistemic modality is metaphorical
in nature: We understand the abstract domain of reasoning in terms
of the socio-physical domain of interaction, which in its turn is under-
stood in terms of the concrete domain of physical forces.
The view of modality in terms of force dynamics and metaphor
is subtle and persuasive, especially in view of the fact metaphorical
mappings from concrete domains onto abstract domains are noted all
over. However, it does not include disposition and intrinsic modality
and hence does not account for modality as a whole, the way people
probably understand it. Following Langacker (2013), a commonality
shared by all of the four types of modality is that the conceptualizer
does not accept the situation referred to as real and strives to bring its
potential realization under epistemic control. The force of reasoning
in assessing a present or future situation is a matter of coming to terms
with its uncertainty. The gist of this argument resides in the fact that
root modality also involves striving for epistemic control, since these
situations are to be realized in the future.

4. Conclusion

The two case studies on time/tense and modality have provided
evidence for the claim that grammar is meaningful. The meanings
of grammatical units are, of course, more general and more abstract
than lexical meanings. As a result, grammar abounds in polysemy,
and linguists are at pains to distinguish subtypes of a grammatical
category. At the same time, polysemy is at odds with the principle
of isomorphism, according to which one form corresponds to one
meaning. This semiotic principle is at work when we see soccer
players wearing the same jersey as belonging to the same team or
when monosyllabic words starting with the consonants /sp/, such
as spit, spew, and spill, evoke the same unpleasant connotation. Most
words and, even more so, most grammatical constructions,
however, have more than one meaning. Polysemy is, in fact, un-
avoidable in view of the limited stock of words and constructions
provided by the language and the unlimited number of concepts
people want to express.

153