Tema 26: EXPRESÓN DE LA DUDA.

CONDICIÓN, HIPÓTESIS Y CONTRASTE

OPENING REMARKS (See theme 24)

1. UNCERTAINTY: LIKELIHOOD AND ATTITUDES TO TRUTH
There are several ways to express people’s attitudes to the reality dealt with by the information
given in an utterance. This is conveyed through the speaker’s grammatical and lexical choices.

1.1. Modal auxiliaries

Modal auxiliaries have a paramount importance to the expression of attitude. Ten modal verbs are
normally given that name in their own right, as they share certain formal features that make them quite
different from other verbs; there are three “marginal” modal auxiliaries that do not fully meet the
requirements to be given the same status, since they are actually on the process of becoming full verbs:
can, could, may, might, will, would, shall, should, must ought to; marginal modal auxiliaries: need,
dare, used to. We must also draw a distinction between primary auxiliaries (BE, HAVE, DO) and
modals; these two categories share some features, but they differ in many respects.

Meaning and use. Primary auxiliaries have important grammatical functions, but little or no real
semantic meaning. Modal auxiliaries combine with “bare infinitives” (infinitives without “to”) to
express: the speaker’s attitude to basic information and his judgement about its likely degree of truth
(modality); the speaker’s relationship with the addressee (degree of politeness) and degrees of
certainty or probability –all except SHALL.

Formal features. In common with primary auxiliaries, modal verbs are OPERATORS: the
negative particle NOT is placed after the modal in negative statements (Sue might not come); subject
and modal exchange their positions as we go from statement to question (should I answer?); in cases of
ellipsis of the predication, short answers and tag questions, the modal stands as the pro-form for the
predicate (A: Jane may have arrived. B: So may Ann; It could be John, couldn’t it?).

In contrast to the primary auxiliaries, modals are DEFECTIVE VERBS, that is, they lack certain
formal features as are: infinitives (bare and to- infinitives) and gerund. Modals must thus be replaced
by other full verbs when needed after verbs that have to be followed by one of those forms (I would
like to (*can) be able to drive; I hate (*musting) having to do the housework). As a result of their lack
of infinitives, two or more modals cannot be combined; following the first of them, a lexical substitute
must be used to convey the meaning of the intended modal verb (I think I will (*can) be able to go to
your party); present and past participles. This entails their inability to form progressive or perfect
tenses, which are expressed by means of a perfect of progressive infinitive instead (he might be
playing chess in his room); proper forms for the past. Four of them were originally past forms
(COULD, MIGHT, SHOULD, WOULD) and they still survive in this functions, although in a
restricted use, since all have developed extra meaning which are unrelated to the notion of past time;
–(e)s morpheme for the third person singular of the Present Simple tense. Modals cannot be
abbreviated into a CONTRACTED FORM enclitic to the subject; contractions are only possible
between the modal and “not”. Modal auxiliaries must be followed by a BARE INFINITIVE form of a
full verb ONLY, except in the case of OUGHT TO and USED TO.

Time reference. Modals are not concerned with the expression of time, but with attitude and
MODALITY. Combinations with present or perfect infinitives will carry the notion of time when
necessary: MODAL + PRESENT INFINITIVE, present or future time reference (she can’t swim very
well; Susan may phone tomorrow); MODAL + PERFECT INFINITIVE, past time reference, usually
combined with either of these meanings: speculation (he must have arrived late), imagination (you
could have killed yourself driving like that!). The four past tense modals are used quite regularly as
past tense equivalents in indirect speech constructions; in other contexts, SHOULD and WOULD can
normally act as the “past time” equivalents of CAN and WILL, but it is not normally so with MIGHT
and SHOULD, although uses in this respect do occur.

1.2. Uncertainty: degrees of likelihood

L.G. Alexander writes about primary and secondary functions within the range of meanings that
modals may express, where the former would stand for that meaning exclusively carried by each
modal: can/could, ability; may/might, permission; must, obligation, etc. In their secondary function,
modal verbs, except shall, can be used to express the degree of certainty/uncertainty that a speaker
feels about a possibility, in terms of a scale. Likewise, Quirk et al., identify two types of meaning, both
present in each of the modal auxiliaries: intrinsic modality, concepts that involve some kind of
intrinsic human control over events: permission, volition, obligation … . Extrinsic modality,
meanings which do not entail human control of events, but do typically involve judgement of the
likelihood that events may or may not happen.

The scale of certainty. The language used to express feelings can be divided into a number of
general areas, each representing a different level of conviction: certainty-probability-possibility-
improbability-uncertainty… . The main point is that, whereas the lexical verb alone conveys the notion
of certainty (positive or negative), modal auxiliary verbs introduce various degrees of uncertainty or
probability. Note that the element of doubt can be increased in speech by stressing heavily the modal.

WILL/WON´T are probably the nearest in meaning to certainty, in relation to their common
future predictive value, although in this sense they can be understood as present predictions; some
information is available to make the speaker feel sure about the situation (similar to the “logical
necessity” sense of MUST. MUST is used when the speaker has drawn a conclusion from things
already known or observed (“logical necessity” or deduction); it cannot be used with the same
semantic value in the negative (=”prohibition”) or interrogative (=”obligation”), and CAN’T is used
instead to fill the gap. WOULD is a less frequent alternative to WILL for expressing a lower degree of
certainty in present prediction (A: Would that be Susan ringing? B: Oh, surely not. She’d be on the
plane at the moment). OUGHT TO & SHOULD are synonymous. The latter is more frequent in use.
The speaker cannot be sure about the truth of his statement, but tentatively concludes that it is true, on
the basis of the information available (John finishes work at 6 a.m., and it is 8.30; he should be at
home by now.

CAN is mainly used in negatives (equivalent to affirmative MUST) and questions in this sense of
possibility. Sometimes, CAN indicates a future possibility (if it’s raining tomorrow, the sports can take
place indoors). But most often it will convey a sense of theoretical possibility (the road can be
blocked = it is possible to block it at any time). COULD expresses a present possibility, not the past of
CAN (although it can express past possibility in indirect speech). Its meaning is very close to those of
MAY and MIGHT; all three indicate a middle point, uncertainty. COULDN’T has a different
meaning: negative deduction, strong doubt (= it’s impossible). MAY and MIGHT, and their
negatives, refer to a present or future possibility, and the latter indicates a smaller chance (not the past
of MAY, although again it may express past after a reporting past verb). We should notice the
difference between CAN (see above) and MAY (factual possibility) (the road may be blocked = it is
possible to block it at present).

1.3. Tag questions

English has a complex system of tags which can be used to express a subtle range of meanings.
There are three primary meanings that can be expressed by means of tag question, and two types of
questions for each meaning: a) uncertainty: the speaker asks for confirmation; b) agreement: the
speaker invites the hearer to agree with him; c) positive or negative orientation: in a variety of nuances
(surprise, irony, threat…). the structure oaf all six types is similar; they differ in polarity and in nuclear
tone.
 Structure. a)OPERATOR + SUBJECT: “…, are you?”; OPERATOR + n’t + SUBJECT: “…,
aren’t you?”; OPERATOR + SUBJECT + not: “…, are you not?” (formal). The operator is the same as
in the preceding statement; when there is no operator, DO/DOES/DID are used instead. A pronoun
replaces the preceding subject: your sister could have won, couldn’t she? b) Change of polarity (except
in two less common types): affirmative-negative, negative affirmative. c) nuclear tone (on the
operator): rising/falling.
Types of tag question. (note that the symbols /´/ and /`/ stand for intonation markers and the
underlining indicates the stressed words).
Rising tone. POSITIVE-NEGATIVE [1] he likes his j`ob, d´oesn’t he?
NEGATIVE-POSITIVE [2] He doesn’t like his j`ob, do´es he?
(Positive + Positive) [5] It’s better no`w , ´is it?
(Negative + Negative) [6] So you DON’T like my c`ooking, d´on’t you?

Falling tone. POSITIVE-NEGATIVE [3] He likes his j`ob, d`oesn’t he?

NEGATIVE-POSITIVE [4] He doesn’t like his j`ob, d`oes he?

The RISING TONE asks for confirmation, conveying a neutral expectation. With the less
common types [5] and [6], however, lack of any polarity change conveys different meanings (5:
inferential or sarcastic; 6: aggressive). Therefore, only questions [1] and [2] convey doubt by asking
for confirmation of a previous assumption (although an affirmative or negative answer is expected): “ I
assume he (1) likes/ (2) doesn’t like his job –am I right?”. by contrast the FALLING TONE (examples
[3] and [4] invites agreement; it has the force of a statement rather than a genuine question.

1.4. Other ways of expressing uncertainty

Adjectives used impersonally (It’s not -obvious/clear/certain- who is the winner); adjectives used
qualifying a noun or personal pronoun (I’m not -sure/certain/convinced/unsure/uncertain- who…/about
the winner); expressions with “DOUBT” (noun/verb) and other items(I doubt if, that/I don’t think he
will have won the election).

2. CONDITION AND HYPOTHESIS

A condition is something that has to be fulfilled before something else can happen.
2.1. Types of conditional sentences
The most widely accepted classification of the types of conditional sentences seems to be one that
divides the perception of the condition into REALITY and UNREALITY: Open conditions (also
factual, real, probable conditions). The condition may or may not be fulfilled: the truth or falsehood of
what the sentence describes is left unresolved –no clear expectations are given, both possibilities may
be effected. If Don works hard, he will pass the exam (the question whether he will pass or not is left
unanswered, “open”). The conditional clause often precedes the main clause, reflecting its meaning as
a prerequisite for the fulfilment of the main clause. Hypothetical conditions (also rejected, unreal,
improbable & impossible conditions). A theoretical , unreal condition is put forward: the speaker
assumes the improbability (unlikelihood) or impossibility (falsehood) of what he is talking about, and
the expectation is that the condition WILL NOT be fulfilled. Different meaning may be conveyed:
UNLIKELY FULFILMENT: “If John worked hard, he would pass the exam”; IMAGINARY
SUPPOSITION: “If Henry were here, he would know the answer”; IMPOSSIBLE: “If she had been
awake, she would have heard the noise”. The hypothetical meaning is signalled by the use of the
hypothetical past tense.

2.2. Verb tenses: sequence

Sentences of open condition.
CONDITIONAL CLAUSE MAIN CLAUSE
Present/Present Perfect Present
If you are right, I am wrong
 If you have been travelling all night, you probably need a rest

Future
If you help me I will help you
If she has arrived at the station, she will be here soon

Modals
If it’s raining tomorrow, I can/might give you a lift
If you have been travelling all night, you must be tired

Imperative
If it rains, come indoors at once
If Mary hasn’t left yet, tell her to bring her books

Past
If what you say is right, then what I said was wrong

Past/past perfect Present

If you spent last night on the train, you probably need a rest
If he hadn’t left any message when you called, he probably intends to be back before
Four

Past
If I said that, I was mistaken
If he had not arrived when you called, He was probably still at home

Modals can sometimes be used in the if-clause: If I can afford a new car, I will buy it. WILL
emphasises willingness (= want/would like to): if you will/would/could wait a moment, I’ll fetch the
money (polite); or insistence (stressed): if you w`ill go to bed so late, no wonder you’re tired.
SHOULD (“putative”) makes the conditions more doubtful; its use is optional: if I (should) see him,
I’ll ask him to ring you.

Sentences of hypothetical condition

Conditional clause Main clause
Past (or subjunctive) Should/would/could/might (present time)
If I had the money I should/would/could pay you back

Past (+ time adverb) Should/would/could/might (future time)

If Richard worked hard next term he would/would/might pass the exam
Should/were to + infinitive (future time)
If our train should/were to arrive punctually we might have time to visit your sister

Past perfect Should… + perfect inf. (past time)

If he had heard of your marriage (but he didn’t) He would have been surprised

2.3. Conditional constructions

The tendency is for them to assume initial position for emphasis. The main conjunctions to
express conditional meaning are IF (positive condition); IF NOT and UNLESS (negative condition)
(UNLESS + affirmative verb = IF NOT). UNLESS has the more exclusive meaning of “only if… not”,
“except on condition that”, and it is not possible in hypothetical situations: IF you doN’T/UNLESS
you change your mind, I won’t be able to help you.
 Alternative condition (two contrasting conditions, “contrary to expectations”) is expressed by
means of the correlative WHETHER… OR…: WHETHER I feel well OR NOT on Monday, I’m
going back to work. ON CONDITION THAT implies a restriction: They’ll lend us the flat ON
CONDITION (THAT) we look after it. PROVIDED (THAT), PROVIDING (THAT); AS LONG
AS, SO LONG AS (informal) convey a strong restriction (= “if and only if…”), resembling ON
CONDITION (THAT): “___ you clear your desk by this evening, you can have tomorrow off”.
ASSUMING (THAT), SUPPOSING (THAT), WHAT IF…?, SAY…?: SUPPOSING (THAT) we
miss the train, what shall we do?; WHAT IF/SAY you were to run out of money? What would you do?

IN CASE, IN CASE OF (prep.), IN THE EVENT THAT are used to introduce a future
condition that may or may not arise: You’d better take an umbrella IN CASE it rains, IN CASE OF
difficulty call the operator. Adverbials IN THAT CASE and THEN (informal) have a similar
meaning to those expressions in the previous group. OTHERWISE (= “if this doesn’t/ didn’t happen/
hadn’t happened”) expresses a negative condition: I used my calculator, OTHERWISE I’d have taken
longer. BUT FOR (= “if it weren’t/hadn’t been for…”): The car broke down. BUT FOR that, we’d
have been in time. IF ONLY conveys a wish or hope: IF ONLY he came, we’d be able to warn him.
WH-words compound with –EVER, NO MATTER WH-, ANYWAY… express the truth of the
main clause in “any of the conditions” covered: She looks pretty, WHATEVER/NO MATTER WHAT
she wears. She looks pretty ANYWAY.

Conditional relations of meaning are also implied in other, less obvious structures:
COORDINATION: AND (positive condition) and OR (ELSE) (negative condition). It is informal:
Take this medicine, AND you’ll feel better; you’d better put your coat on, OR (ELSE) you’ll catch a
cold; RELATIVE CLAUSES: Anyone WHO BETS on horses deserves to lose money (= if anyone
bets…, he deserves…); PARTICIPLE CLAUSES (formal): Cleared, the site would be valuable (= if
it were cleared…).

2.4. Hypothetical meaning

Any statement assumed to be false or unlikely by the speaker is called HYPOTHETICAL.
Hypothetical meaning is signalled by: the past tense in dependent clauses and would + infinitive in the
main clauses (or other modal auxiliary verbs) (If I SPOKE Chinese, I WOULD LIVE in China). Past
tense here has nothing to do with past time: reference is to present or future time. Reference to past
time combined with hypothesis is expressed by past perfect. Apart from conditional clauses,
hypothetical meaning may occur in a few other special constructions. The main ones are IT’S TIME
(+ past), AS IF, AS THOUGH, SUPPOSE, IN YOUR PLACE… Most of them have some hint of
conditional meaning as well.

In addition to past tense, there are other less common ways of expressing hypothetical meaning:
The WERE-Subjunctive (WAS is possible in informal style): I’d go climbing every weekend if I
WERE younger; WERE TO (or WAS TO, informal) + infinitive, used for hypothetical future in
rather formal contexts: If it WERE TO rain tomorrow, we wouldn’t go for a picnic; (“putative”)
SHOULD + infinitive (formal). It expresses a tentative condition in IF-clauses (or related structures).
It may be used in both hypothetical and open conditions: If a serious mistake SHOULD BE made, we
would be in trouble. OPERATOR-SUBJECT inversion, with no conditional link; the three
operations which occur in this construction are HAD, WERE (subjunctive) and SHOULD (putative)
(literary): HAD I KNOWN, I would have called before; SHOULD you know any further details,
please let me know.

3. CONTRAST AND CONCESSION

There is considerable overlap in the expression of condition, contrast and concession. The partial
coincidence between the three roles is highlighted by the use of subordinators: IF may introduce all
three types of clauses, and WHEREAS is used for both contrast and concession; moreover, EVEN IF
expresses the dependence of one situation upon another (condition) together with unexpected nature of
this dependence (concession). Nevertheless, there is a distinction between the two notions: Clauses of
contrast merely convey a contrast between two situations (Ann likes swimming, while her husband
enjoys climbing); Concessive clauses may also imply a contrast, but the implication is that the
situation in the main clause is surprising or unexpected in the light of the dependent (/concessive)
clause (Ann likes swimming, although she nearly drowned once).

3.1.Clauses of contrast
They are introduced by WHEREAS (formal), WHILE and WHILST (formal, mainly British
English): WHILE may imply a sort of parallelism; either clause can come first (WHILE many artists
die in poverty, he was famous in his lifetime); WHEREAS is the most strictly contrastive, but it may
occur indeed in clauses expressing concession; WHILST is a less common variant of WHILE, with
the same meaning and function. In fact, these three subordinators are very often interchangeable,
except that WHILST is found specially in British English. Contrast may also be expressed by means of
the coordinator BUT: Many artists die in poverty, BUT he was famous in his lifetime.

3.2. Clauses of concession

Apart from sharing some of their subordinators and other linking devices, it is very difficult to
distinguish the contrastive semantic nuances from the concessive ones. Clauses of concession are
introduced by ALTHOUGH or its more informal variant THOUGH: ALTHOUGH/THOUGH she
was Italian, she spent most of her life in Germany. WHILE/WHILST are more restricted to the
contrastive use, but they may be used to express a concessive relationship arising from a contrary
expectation; such meaning may be reinforced by introducing a contrasting adverb: WHILE7WHILST I
don’t really like modern art, (nevertheless) I find his work impressive. This is also true for the use of
WHEREAS. WHEN may also express concession; like WHEREAS, it requires antithesis between
two situations, but additionally has the meaning “in that same situation”: She stayed at her friend’s
WHEN she should have been helping at home.

EVEN THOUGH and EVEN WHEN are more emphatic forms of THOUGH and WHEN with
the added meaning of unexpectedness: I’m going sailing tomorrow, EVEN THOUGH the weather is
rough. Except for WHEN and WHEREAS, the concessive subordinators may introduce –ing, -ed and
verbless clauses: THOUGH (being) well over eighty, he can walk faster than I can. Concessive
meaning is also conveyed by means of an adjective in front position (for emphasis) + THOUGH/
AS/ THAT: Naked AS I was, I braved the storm. The concessive clause may refer to a fact, and in
that case the verb will be in one of the indicative tenses (present/past + aspect combinations):
THOUGH he talks a great deal, there isn’t much in what he says. But it may refer to a hypothetical
future, expressed by means of present/subjunctive (the latter is mainly American English) or
SHOULD: THOUGH everyone deserts/ desert/should desert you, I will not.

3.3. Condition + contrast

The ideas of condition (IF) and concession or implied contrast (EVEN) are combined in EVEN IF:
I’m going sailing tomorrow, EVEN IF the weather is rough. This subordinator contrasts with EVEN
THOUGH in that the latter presupposes “the weather is rough”, whereas EVEN IF leaves open
whether that is so or not. IF on its own may be used concessively, often in abbreviated verbless
clauses: IF he is poor, (at least) he’s honest (= Even though…).

Alternative conditional-concessive clauses. The overlap between condition and concession is

also marked in some of the structures already mentioned under the heading of “conditional
constructions” (see 2.3.). The correlative sequence WHETHER…OR(WHETHER) is an alternative
condition in that it combines the conditional meaning with the disjunctive meaning of “either…or”.
The concessive meaning emerges from the unexpected implication: the same situation will apply under
any of the two contrasting conditions. WHETHER we go on holidays OR (WHETHER) we stay at
home, I’m going to enjoy myself this summer. Alternative conditional-concessive meaning is also
carried by the more emphatic construction IT DOESN’T MATTER WHETHER (restricted to initial
position) and NO MATTER WHETHER: IT DOESN’T MATTER/NO MATTER WHETHER we
go on holiday… .all these subordinators also introduce non-finite and verbless clauses: WHETHER
trained or not, he’s doing an excellent job.

Universal conditional-concessive clauses. There is a contrast between this type of clauses and
alternative ones: the latter give a choice between two stated conditions, normally in sharp opposition,
whereas the universal conditional-concessive clause indicates a free choice from any number of
conditions. Compare: WHEREAS she wears jeans OR a silk dress, she always looks pretty/
WHATEVER she wears, she always looks pretty. These clauses are introduced by wh-words with –
ever and by it doesn’t matter and no matter followed by wh-elements. the verb be can be omitted of
the subject is a noun phrase: WHATEVER your problems, they can’t be that bad.

3.4. Contrastive preposition and conjunctions

Contrastive-concessive meaning may also be expressed by several prepositional phrases: We
enjoyed the picnic IN SPITE OF the weather; DESPITE public opposition, the controversial BILL
became an ACT (formal); NOTWITHSTANDING the rise in prices, luxury goods are still much in
demand (formal); FOR ALL his money, he will never be a gentleman; he rushed forward to help,
IRRESPECTIVE OF/REGARDLESS OF the consequences. All these prepositions may be followed
by THE FACT (THAT) + Relative clause.

Conjuncts are adverbials that have the function of joining independent units, adding the speaker’s
assessment of how he views the connection between them; they are also called “sentence adverbials”
because of their capacity to relate one sentence to another, while concerning sentences as a whole (not
a particular part, such as the predication, as is the case with adjuncts). CONTRASTIVE
CONJUNCTS are subdivided into four groups; they present some contrastive information in relation
to what has preceded: REFORMULATORY conjuncts replace what has been said by a different
formulation; some are, therefore, frequently preceded by OR (He invited several friends, (OR)
BETTER, several people that he th`ought were friends. Reformulatory conjuncts: better, rather, more
accurately, in other words… .

REPLACIVE: The speaker withdraws some information to replace it by a more important one.
They may be also preceded by OR (He was opposed by his mother OR, RATHER, by both his
parents). Replace conjuncts: again, alternatively rather, on the other hand, better, worse… .
ANTITHETIC: a direct antithesis is introduced (You promise to help me; THEN you let me down).
Antithetic conjuncts: instead, then, on the contrary, in contrast, on the other hand… .
CONCESSIVE: one unit is seen as unexpected in the light of the other. Some may be used in the main
clause to reinforce the contrast made by the subordinate clause (The weather was dreadful;
HOWEVER, the children enjoyed themselves. Concessive conjuncts: anyhow, anyway. Besides. Else,
however, nevertheless, only, still, though… .

3.5. Contrastive focus

A final remark to be made on the notion of contrast has to do with how meanings can be presented
and arranged for effective communication. The message is divided into tone units, “pieces of
information”; each containing one nucleus, which marks the FOCUS OF INFORMATION. Normally,
the nucleus is at the end of the tone unit, on the last open-class word (END FOCUS): The man told us
to park h`ere. But there are cases when the nucleus is shifted to an earlier place of the tone unit with a
contrastive purpose: (Are you painting the kitchen blue) N`o, I’m painting the b`edroom blue. As it
can be seen, intonation devices may carry as much meaning as lexicon or grammar.