LICENCE

UE: General Linguistics

(Linguistique générale)
LING6205.2
The Microsystems of English Grammar
(Les microsystèmes de la grammaire
anglaise)

General Lecture (CM)

By
Prof. KPLI Jean François
 EC: The Microsystems of English
Grammar
 General Objectives
 Present the systemic and systematic
nature of the Grammar of English
 Present the underlining structuring
operations of English discourse
 Give students the clues to choose
between grammatical items in their
daily linguistic productions
 EC: The Microsystems of English
Grammar
 Specific Objectives

 Define Microsystems
 Present Microsystems of modals
 Teach students how to choose the
appropriate modal according to
the context
 Present the systemic order of
specific Microsystems
 EC: The Microsystems of English Grammar
 Expected Skills to be Developed
 Students must be able to choose the
appropriate modal according to the
context
 They must be able to justify the use
of a given operator in a specific
utterance
 At the end of the course students
should be able to make a coherent
analysis of underlining grammatical
operations
Microsystems of Modals in English
COURSE OUTLINE
 Definition of a Microsystem
 Recall of the Definition of language as a
system
 Definition of a Microsystem
 Definition of Modality
 General definition
 Grammatical Definition
Microsystems of Modals in English
COURSE OUTLINE (Cont)

 Microsystems of
[SHALL – WILL – MAY – CAN]
 Definition of a Microsystem
 Recall of the Definition of
language as a system
Language is defined as a system, a
consistent whole, that is, a set of
interrelated units.
Each unit holds its position by contrast
with the position of other units of the
system in such a way that no two units
are equal. Each unit has its own
distinctive value.(See picture)
 Definition of a Microsystem
Definition of a Microsystem
A Microsystem is a pair of units
sharing one feature that makes
them interchangeable and
remains different, each one of
them having its own distinctive
feature
 Definition of a Microsystem
Example with the sound system of
language:
The sounds (/p/) and (/b/) have the
same point of articulation. They are
pronounced with the lips (labials),
but they have two distinctive
features:
(/p/) is -V (voiceless)
(/b/) is +V (voiced)
 Definition of a Microsystem

These two sounds are interchangeable

because they share one feature, they
have the same point of articulation.

Units that are interchangeable at the

same linear position have something in
common, for example they belong to
the same paradigm: HE, SHE, John etc…,
are interchangeable in the same subject
position.
 Definition of a Microsystem
Just as the sound system, grammatical
units also form microsystems
Ex. A chair
The chair
They are close in system for two
reasons: 1) they are interchangeable
in the same position and 2) they
belong to the same paradigm
 Definition of Modality
 General definition
Modality is generally defined as the
attitude of the speaker toward his
own utterance.
Many words indicate that attitude
in the utterances
Ex. She has certainly missed her bus
 Definition of Modality
“Certainly” indicates that the
speaker is certain She has
missed her bus
Ex. Of words: Maybe, probably,
surely etc…
All such words are imprints,
marks of the speaker inside the
utterance
 Definition of Modality
Grammatical Definition
Modals quantify the chances of connecting the
Subject and the Predicate
Ex. You MUST be hungry

YOU highly likely be hungry

“MUST” determines the chances of connecting

the subject YOU and the predicate “BE
HUNGRY”
 Microsystems of
[SHALL – WILL – MAY – CAN]
 Summary of features

+ O. Pred - O. Pred

- Inherent [-i ] SHALL MAY

+ Inherent [+ i ] WILL CAN

 INHERENCE
 INHERENCE
 + Inherent [+i ]

[+i ] (WILL & CAN)

Means that the Predicate
already belongs to the Subject.
 + Inherent [+i ]

P  S
The predicate may
belong to the subject in
two ways:
 + Inherent [+i ]
1. By nature
Ex. Iron will rust
Oil will float on water
Babies will cry
“Rust” is an inherent property of
“iron” as well as “float on water”
for “oil” and “cry” for “babies”
 + Inherent [+i ]
Ex. with Can:
She can play the piano beautifully.
“Play the piano beautifully” is an
inherent property of “she”. It is the
nature of “she” to “play the piano
beautifully”
 + Inherent [+i ]
2. Through the eyes of the Speaker.
It is the Speaker who perceives
that the predicate already belongs
to the Subject.
Ex. Grand father will sleep at
church on Sundays
 + Inherent [+i ]
“Sleep at church on Sundays” is a
feature, an inherent property of
“Grand father”.
Other ex. She will drive with the
brake on
“Drive with the brake on” is a
feature of “she”
 + Inherent [+i ]
NOTE:

WILL does not materialize

TIME. It is not the mark of
time. In the first example the
time is indicated by « on
sundays »
 - Inherent [-i ]
 - Inherent [-i ]
[-i ] means that the predicate and the
subject are incompatible. The
Predicate is not an inherent property
of the S. S &P are mutually exclusive.
EX. He shall wash my car whether he
likes it or not
 - Inherent [-i ]
He shall wash my car whether he likes if or
not
“Whether he likes it or not” indicates that
the Subject “He” refuses to be in
relation whatsoever with the predicate
“wash the car”.
The Speaker strongly intervenes to try and
connect by force S to P.
 - Inherent [-i ]
MAY is also [-i ]
Ex. Tell him he may have one now
May indicates that “HE” is not yet in
contact with “have one now”.
The permission, which is a speech effect, is
built upon the non compatible nature of
the Predicative relation
 Oriented toward the Predication
(O.Pred)
 O. PRED.
This feature indicates that in the
process of connecting S & P, the
speaker ANNOUNCES THE
REALISATION OF THE PREDICATION.
This is the case of WILL or SHALL as
opposed to CAN or MAY
 Oriented toward the Predication
(O.Pred)
+ O.Pred vs – O.Pred.
Ex. They say that no one can do
something that can astonish Paris,
but I will.
“I Will” is the short form of “I will do
something that will astonish Paris”
 Oriented toward the Predication
(O.Pred)
While CAN indicates inherence it does
not announce the connection. Will
on the contrary, signals that the
speaker announces the connection.
This is typically the difference between
what is possible and what is
probable
 Oriented toward the Predication
(O.Pred)

Possible Can / May [- O.Pred]

Probable Shall /Will [+ O.Pred]

 Oriented toward the Predication
(O.Pred)

Ex. A. Peter said he will climb on top

of the Kilimajaro mountain next
holiday.
Peter - Well, I said I can not I will.
The microsystem of Shall and Will
 SHALL vs WILL
SHALL
Shall signals the absence of compatibility between
S and P. SHALL is an operator that connects
entities that were not meant to be connected. It
serves as a basis for the Speaker to force the
connection.

It signals the strong presence of the

Speaker.
The Microsystem of Shall and Will
Ex.
1. He shall pay for what he did (Threat)

2. You shall get your bicycle for Christmas

(promise)
3. You are safe now. No one shall hurt you
(I assure you)
The Microsystem of Shall and Will
With SHALL, the speaker guarantees
personally the predication. Hence the
speech effects of THREAT, PROMISE,
STRONG COMMITMENT..

The Speech effects are built upon the non-

congruence nature of the predicative
relation
The Microsystem of Shall and Will
WILL
WILL indicates compatibility,
congruence, inherence between S
and P.
The compatibility may be granted by
the context:
The Microsystem of Shall and Will
Ex. She will be Russian !
The speaker has identified in the
context proofs of her being Russian:
she has Slavic accent, a white
complexion etc. therefore it is highly
likely that she be Russian
The Microsystem of Shall and Will
The compatibility may also be based on the
acceptance of the predicative relation
Ex. (context: You are invited by your friends to
play football at nine)
- All right, I will come at nine.
I shall come at nine* is not possible.
It will be in contradiction with “all right” which
indicates the prior acceptance of the relation.
The Microsystem of Shall and Will
In the following examples Shall cannot be
possible due to the inherent nature of the
predicative relation.
1. Murder will out !
2. Accidents will happen
3. Time will tell
The predicate is part of the nature of the subject
Murder Shall out  I will commit a murder
 Shall and Will in co-occurrence
Typical example of the difference between shall
and will:
Patient: - Dr. I want to live
Dr. - You will live
Patient - Don’t be superficial. It’s too
serious
Dr. - You shall live
Patient - Ah, that’s better.
 Shall and Will in co-occurrence
Shall is a strong form of will

In the contraction form. The modal used is Will

not Shall
I’ll = I will not I shall*
 Important Rule
When in co-occurrence in the same
utterance or exchange, it is the
differential value that is at stake.

It will not make sense to base

the predication on the same
feature when it is exactly the
difference we are looking for.
The Microsystem of MAY and CAN
 MAY [-i, - O.Pred] vs CAN [+i, - O.Pred]

MAY and CAN do not announce the predication,

therefore it is the value [i] which is at stake.

 MAY
Indicates a strong intervention of the
speaker just like SHALL.
The Microsystem of MAY and CAN
Hence the speech effects of hope,
permission, wish, etc.
Ex. He raised his glass in a toast:
To my son Rudolph, on his birthday,
may he justify our hopes and rise to the
top.
The Microsystem of MAY and CAN

The Predicate “Justify our hopes”

is exactly what the speaker wants
“He” to do. We cannot assume
the validity of the relation when
we wish to connect that relation.
The Microsystem of MAY and CAN
 CAN
Can indicates that the Predicate is an
inherent property of the subject, the
Predicate has already something to
do with the subject.
The Microsystem of MAY and CAN
Ex. His own safety made him feel
shame. In a genuine war an officer
can always die with his men and so
keep his self-respect.

“Die with his men” is a predicate that

is part of the definition of an officer.
 MAY and CAN in co-occurrence
Ex.1.: A.- May I use your computer ?
B.- Of course you can.

CAN is a weak form of MAY just like WILL

is a weak form of SHALL. This is why it
appears in the answer to confirm the
relation by validating it. “Of course” acts
like a trigger of Can in that respect.
 MAY and CAN in co-occurrence
Ex.2 (Context: A child asking for
biscuit to his Mum)
Child. – May I have a biscuit Mum ?
Mum. - Of course Dear.
Child. - Can I have it now ?
Once the Mum has accepted the
relation, It is assumed valid, hence
the use of CAN
 A TRIGGER OF MAY
 “WH-” AS A TRIGGER OF MAY
A TRIGGER is an entity that compels
the speaker to choose a given
grammatical operator.
Ex. Come what may
Come what can* is not
acceptable.
 A TRIGGER OF MAY
ANALYSIS:
Come what may can be broken down into the
following:
COME WHAT MAY COME
S R Pred
What is a pro-form, an empty pocket awaiting
to be filled.
 A TRIGGER OF MAY
Until WHAT is filled, the Subject of that
utterance is not yet provided. Therefore
the relation is not complete.

« Can » will not be acceptable because it

would validate a relation that is not yet
complete
 Exercise
1. Among the modals “May”, “Can” and
“Will”, which one would be suitable in
the following context ?
A man has places in his heart which
do not yet exist and into them enters
suffering in order that they _ _ _ _
have existence

Fill in the blank and justify your selection