Contrastive Analysis of Discourse

pragmatic Aspects of Linguistic Genres

1st Edition Karin Aijmer
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/contrastive-analysis-of-discourse-pragmatic-aspects-
of-linguistic-genres-1st-edition-karin-aijmer/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Discourse Markers and Beyond: Descriptive and Critical

Perspectives on Discourse-Pragmatic Devices across
Genres and Languages Péter B. Furkó

https://textbookfull.com/product/discourse-markers-and-beyond-
descriptive-and-critical-perspectives-on-discourse-pragmatic-
devices-across-genres-and-languages-peter-b-furko/

A Contrastive View of Discourse Markers: Discourse

Markers of Saying in English and French Laure Lansari

https://textbookfull.com/product/a-contrastive-view-of-discourse-
markers-discourse-markers-of-saying-in-english-and-french-laure-
lansari/

Advances in Discourse Analysis of Translation and

Interpreting Linking Linguistic Approaches with Socio
cultural Interpretation 1st Edition Binhua Wang
(Editor)
https://textbookfull.com/product/advances-in-discourse-analysis-
of-translation-and-interpreting-linking-linguistic-approaches-
with-socio-cultural-interpretation-1st-edition-binhua-wang-
editor/

Pragmatic Aspects of Scalar Modifiers: The Semantics-

Pragmatics Interface 1st Edition Osamu Sawada

https://textbookfull.com/product/pragmatic-aspects-of-scalar-
modifiers-the-semantics-pragmatics-interface-1st-edition-osamu-
sawada/
The Anatomy of Dance Discourse: Literary and
Philosophical Approaches to Dance in the Later Graeco-
Roman World 1st Edition Karin Schlapbach

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-anatomy-of-dance-discourse-
literary-and-philosophical-approaches-to-dance-in-the-later-
graeco-roman-world-1st-edition-karin-schlapbach/

Discourse Structure and Linguistic Choice The Theory

and Applications of Molecular Sememics T. Price
Caldwell

https://textbookfull.com/product/discourse-structure-and-
linguistic-choice-the-theory-and-applications-of-molecular-
sememics-t-price-caldwell/

A Contrastive Metrical Analysis of Main Word Stress in

English and Cairene Colloquial Arabic 1st Edition
Mohamed Fathy Khalifa

https://textbookfull.com/product/a-contrastive-metrical-analysis-
of-main-word-stress-in-english-and-cairene-colloquial-arabic-1st-
edition-mohamed-fathy-khalifa/

Discourse Analysis: A Practical Introduction 1st

Edition Canning

https://textbookfull.com/product/discourse-analysis-a-practical-
introduction-1st-edition-canning/

Discourse Analysis: A Practical Introduction 1st

Edition Canning

https://textbookfull.com/product/discourse-analysis-a-practical-
introduction-1st-edition-canning-2/
Yearbook of Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics

Karin Aijmer
Diana Lewis Editors

Contrastive Analysis
of Discourse-
pragmatic Aspects of
Linguistic Genres
Yearbook of Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics

Series Editor
Jesús Romero-Trillo, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain

Reviews Editor
Dawn Knight, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK

Advisory Editorial Board

Karin Aijmer, University of Gothenburg, Sweden
Belén Díez-Bedmar, Universidad de Jaén, Spain
Ronald Geluykens, University of Oldenburg, Germany
Anna Gladkova, University of Sussex and University of Brighton, UK
Stefan Gries, University of California, Santa Barbara, USA
Leo Francis Hoye, University of Hong Kong, China
Jingyang Jiang, Zhejiang University, China
Anne O’Keeffe, Mary Immaculate College, Limerick, Ireland
Silvia Riesco-Bernier, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain
Anne-Marie Simon-Vandenbergen, University of Ghent, Belgium
Esther Vázquez y del Árbol, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain
Anne Wichmann, University of Central Lancashire, UK
More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/11559
Karin Aijmer • Diana Lewis
Editors

Contrastive Analysis of
Discourse-pragmatic Aspects
of Linguistic Genres
Editors
Karin Aijmer Diana Lewis
University of Gothenburg Department of English and
Gothenburg, Sweden Lerma Research Centre
Aix Marseille University
Aix-en-Provence, France

ISSN 2213-6819     ISSN 2213-6827 (electronic)

Yearbook of Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics
ISBN 978-3-319-54554-7    ISBN 978-3-319-54556-1 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-54556-1

Library of Congress Control Number: 2017936967

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of
the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation,
broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information
storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the
editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors
or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims
in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Printed on acid-free paper

This Springer imprint is published by Springer Nature

The registered company is Springer International Publishing AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
Contents

Introduction...................................................................................................... 1
Karin Aijmer and Diana Lewis

Part I Contrastive Analysis with Parallel Corpora

 he Semantic Field of Obligation in an English-Swedish
T
Contrastive Perspective................................................................................... 13
Karin Aijmer
English so and Dutch dus in a Parallel Corpus:
An Investigation into Their Mutual Translatability..................................... 33
Lieven Buysse
 hat English Translation Equivalents Can Reveal
W
about the Czech “Modal” Particle prý: A Cross-Register Study................. 63
Michaela Martinková and Markéta Janebová
 odal Adverbs of Certainty in EU Legal Discourse:
M
A Parallel Corpus Approach........................................................................... 91
Magdalena Szczyrbak

Part II Contrastive Analysis with Comparable Corpora

 dverbial Clauses in English and Norwegian Fiction and News................ 119
A
Hilde Hasselgård
 oherence Relations and Information Structure in English
C
and French Political Speeches......................................................................... 141
Diana Lewis

v
vi Contents

Part III Contrastive Analysis Across Genres of English

 allbacks in Stand-Up Comedy: Constructing Cohesion
C
at the Macro Level Within a Specific Genre.................................................. 165
Catherine Chauvin
 ush and Obama’s Addresses to the Arab World:
B
Recontextualizing Stance in Political Discourse............................................ 187
Laura Hidalgo-Downing and Yasra Hanawi
 he Role of Metadiscourse in Genre Analysis: Engagement Markers
T
in Undergraduate Textbooks and Research Articles.................................... 211
Tereza Guziurová
Contributors

Karin Aijmer University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden

Lieven Buysse Faculty of Arts, KU Leuven, Brussels, Belgium
Catherine Chauvin Department of English, University of Lorraine, Nancy, France
Yasra Hanawi Department of English, Facultad de Filosofía, Letras Universidad
Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Hilde Hasselgård Department of Literature, Area Studies and European Languages,
University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
Laura Hidalgo-Downing Department of English, Facultad de Filosofía, Letras
Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Markéta Janebová Department of English and American Studies, Faculty of Arts,
Palacký University, Olomouc, Czech Republic
Diana Lewis Department of English and Lerma Research Centre, Aix Marseille
University, Aix-en-Provence, France
Tereza Guziurová Faculty of Arts, Centre for the Research of Professional
Language, University of Ostrava, Ostrava, Czech Republic
Michaela Martinková Department of English and American Studies, Faculty of
Arts, Palacky University, Olomouc, Czech Republic
Magdalena Szczyrbak Institute of English Studies, Jagiellonian University,
Kraków, Poland

vii
Introduction

Karin Aijmer and Diana Lewis

Abstract The aim of this issue of the Yearbook of Corpus Linguistics and
Pragmatics is to explore the comparability of discourse-pragmatic characteristics of
genres across European languages, using parallel corpora (aligned translated texts)
and/or comparable corpora (genre-matched original texts). The articles have their
origin in a seminar at the 12th ESSE conference in Kosiče, Slovakia 29 August–2
September 2014 convened by the editors.

Keywords Contrastive linguistics • Parallel corpora • Comparable corpora • Genre

The aim of this issue of the Yearbook of Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics is to
explore the comparability of discourse-pragmatic characteristics of genres across
European languages, using parallel corpora (aligned translated texts) and/or compa-
rable corpora (genre-matched original texts). The articles have their origin in a
seminar at the 12th ESSE conference in Kosiče, Slovakia 29 August–2 September
2014 convened by the editors.

1 The ‘New’ Contrastive Analysis

Renewed interest in contrastive linguistics over the past couple of decades, together
with increasing availability of specialised digital corpora, have resulted in a new,
usage-based approach to language comparison. The domain of contrastive linguis-
tics centres on the comparison, in synchrony, of two languages. In a break with the
‘applied’ approach to contrastive linguistics of the 1960s and 1970s, which tended

K. Aijmer (*)
University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
e-mail: karin.aijmer@eng.gu.se
D. Lewis
Department of English and Lerma Research Centre, Aix Marseille University,
Aix-en-Provence, France
e-mail: diana.lewis@univ-amu.fr

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017 1

K. Aijmer, D. Lewis (eds.), Contrastive Analysis of Discourse-pragmatic
Aspects of Linguistic Genres, Yearbook of Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-54556-1_1
2 K. Aijmer and D. Lewis

to focus on particular differences in the structural features of two languages with a

view to predicting L2 learner difficulties, recent work has been more descriptive and
theoretical, and it has taken language usage into account, to compare frequencies
and distributions as well as structures. A number of recent monographs (e.g.
Johansson 2007, König and Gast 2009), collections (e.g. Gómez -González et al.
2008, Taboada et al. 2013) and journal issues (v. special issues of Languages in
Contrast) bear witness to the breadth and vigour of this new approach.
The ‘new’ contrastive linguistics has found its place among linguistic typology,
historical linguistics, cross-cultural communication and intralanguage variation,
overlapping somewhat with each of these other domains of enquiry (v. König 2011).
The current collection of papers can be seen as falling at the intersection of contras-
tive analysis and intralanguage variation.
Contrastive linguistics is “concerned with pairs of languages which are ‘socio-­
culturally linked’” (Gast 2012: 1). The two languages analysed are spoken by bilin-
guals fluent in both, are mutually translated, and have some comparable socio-cultural
institutions and practices that form a backdrop for comparison. This is particularly
relevant for contrastive genre analysis, since ‘equivalent’ socio-cultural practices
across the two speech communities will allow a genre in one speech community to
be paired with a genre in the other, to provide the tertium comparationis for the
comparison.

2 The Notion of Genre

Language needs to be studied in relation to aspects of the communication situation

and the wider cultural context. These aspects include the textual genre. Genre is
however a problematic concept. There is, for example, no agreement about terminol-
ogy but scholars use different terms such as genre, activity type (cf. Levinson 1979),
register, text type reflecting different perspectives and approaches. The definition of
genre usually includes sociolinguistic and contextual parameters. According to
Bhatia, ‘analysing genre means investigating instances of conventionalised or insti-
tutionalised textual artefacts in the context of specific institutional and disciplinary
practices, procedures and cultures in order to understand how members of specific
discourse communities construct, interpret and use these genres to achieve their com-
munity goals and why they write them the way they do’ (Bhatia 2002: 6). Text type,
on the other hand, is generally used to refer to a group of related texts in a corpus.
The term ‘register’ is used above all in systemic functional linguistics as a ‘contex-
tual category correlating groupings of linguistic features with recurrent situational
features’ (Gregory and Carroll 1978: 4, quoted from Swales 1990: 40).
Genres often show distinctive patterns of frequency and distribution of linguistic
features in relation to other genres or to the wider language. The articles deal with
patterns across English and (an)other language(s), in areas such as modality,
­pragmatic markers, speech acts, coherence relations and information structure.
Using a genre-based perspective the authors draw attention to how different dis-
Introduction 3

course strategies, power status, speaker roles associated with the genre can explain
both formal and functional properties of the patterns. The focus is on spoken, writ-
ten or multimodal genres within domains such as political discourse, public com-
munication, journalism, stand-up comedy, academic and professional discourse,
addressing both methodological and theoretical issues. All adopt a usage-based
approach, exploiting a range of corpus material to reveal patterns of form and use in
one or more languages.
Genre-specific recurrent patterns can also be studied contrastively. The contras-
tive point of view highlights the dependence of the patterns on different social and
cultural practices in the compared languages. Languages involved in the compari-
sons with English are Czech, Dutch, French, Polish, Norwegian, Spanish and
Swedish.

3 Parallel Corpora and Comparable Corpora

Central to the contrastive analysis of linguistic phenomena is the use of parallel and
comparable corpora, and this volume illustrates the use of both types. Parallel cor-
pora consist of translations from one language to the other. Comparable corpora
consist of texts in two or more languages which are comparable with regard to
genre, formality, subject-matter, time-span, etc. (Aijmer 2008).
Parallel corpora can be further characterized as unidirectional or bidirectional,
depending on the translation direction. A bidirectional parallel corpus makes it pos-
sible to analyse how words and constructions in one language have been rendered in
the target language and to retrace the process to find the sources of the translations.
Parallel corpora were first used for lexical and grammatical studies but are now also
used as a resource to study discourse and pragmatic phenomena. As illustrated in
this volume, there now exist parallel corpora for many different language pairs usu-
ally with English as either the source or the target language. A parallel corpus is
above all a method to show differences or similarities between lexical elements or
constructions in two or more languages which may not be apparent to intuition.
Another approach is to use the parallel corpus is to test a hypothesis about how a
particular function is expressed in another language by making observations about
correspondences and arrive at a theoretical statement which is empirically based (cf.
Gast 2015). Dyvik (1998) addressed the question how translational phenomena can
be used for the study of meanings. In this perspective the corpus can provide a
resource in lexical semantics by mirroring meanings and functions of an element in
one language in another language. Translators are excellent informants since they
use their judgments to find the appropriate translation as a part of their professional
duties thus avoiding the observer’s paradox (Labov 1972). Translations should be
used with caution, however. The disadvantages of using parallel corpora is that they
may suffer from ‘translationese’ (Baker 1993; Baroni and Bernardini 2005),
­source-­text influence, the translator’s fingerprints, and uneven translation quality.
The results of the translation analysis should therefore also be tested on the basis of
4 K. Aijmer and D. Lewis

monolingual corpora in the compared languages. Depending on the research aims,

comparable corpus analysis may also be desirable to avoid certain translation effects
(Baker 1993; McEnery and Xiao 2008:24).
There now exist parallel corpora dealing with many different language pairs.
However, parallel corpora are generally small compared with monolingual corpora
and restricted to genres which exist in translation. While a large number of texts
have been translated from English into other languages there may be fewer transla-
tions in the other direction. It is therefore sometimes necessary to use comparable
corpora rather than parallel corpora, for example if one wants to compare varieties
that are seldom translated.
In contrastive genre analysis, comparable corpora may be needed as well as, or
instead of, parallel corpora in certain cases. One such case is where similar cultural
practices in two linguistic communities give rise to dissimilar genres. Translators
are often faced with passages containing propositions that a target language speaker
would not express at all. As Mauranen (2002) puts it, “not only the expression but
the content of the original needs to be changed”. Instead, the translations in her
corpus “seem largely to transmit source culture linguistic and pragmatic practices”
and display “culturally untypical target language pragmatics” (Mauranen 2002).
Such differences in rhetorical traditions have led to a line of research in contrastive
rhetoric (e.g. Hinds 1990, Connor et al. 2008) based on analysis of native texts. At
the other extreme, certain genres, scientific or technical, may display remarkable
similarities across languages. A genre belongs to the (often highly specialist) dis-
course community that uses it and thereby participates in its ongoing evolution, and
such communities can cross linguistic boundaries. Comparable corpora are well
suited to revealing such patterns of relative frequency and distribution.
The main drawback of comparable corpora lies in corpus design. Texts are com-
parable if they are produced in comparable situations for comparable purposes, but
establishing comparability is problematic. Extreme care is called for in building
comparable corpora, and since true equivalence of genre is rarely possible across
language communities, the analyst must settle for approximation.

4 An Overview of the Volume

The volume is divided into three sections, according to the methodology and the
type of contrastive analysis carried out (cf. Aijmer 2008).

5 Contrastive Analysis with Parallel Corpora

The first section comprises four papers based on parallel (translated-text) corpora.
Karin Aijmer’s contribution discusses obligation across languages and genres.
The starting-point is the observation that in both English and Swedish the meaning
of obligation can be expressed by a modal auxiliary. However must and its Swedish
Introduction 5

cognate måste are not always each other’s translation equivalents reflecting the fact
that there are several grammatical and lexical ways to express obligation. The trans-
lations of Swedish måste into English showed that måste was frequently translated
by the semi-modal have to especially in fiction. If have to and had to were conflated
the frequency would be even higher than for must as a translation choice. Need to,
should and ought to, on the other hand, were all more frequent in non-fiction than in
fiction. In the Swedish translations from English måste was most frequent both in
fiction and non-fiction. Other alternatives are få (‘may’), ska(ll), skulle (‘shall’,
‘should’), behöva (‘need’), bör (‘ought to’). Must and have to express different
meanings as a translation of måste. Have to, especially when qualified by will, is
downtoning and polite, it can have a general or generic meaning and it can indicate
negative evaluation. In Swedish ska(ll)/skulle can be used to express power and få
indicates that an action is unwelcome to the hearer. In non-fiction must, have to and
need (and their Swedish correspondences) are associated with interactional goals
and how these are evaluated as good or bad. By using impersonal structures with a
collective we as the grammatical subject or an agentless passive the speaker can get
the message across to the hearer with maximum hedging.
The aim of Lieven Buysse’s contribution is to examine the mutual translat-
ability of Dutch dus and English so. The corpus used is the Dutch-English com-
ponent of the Dutch Parallel Corpus (1997–2009). The texts belong to five text
types: fictional and non-fictional literature, journalistic texts, instructive texts,
administrative texts, and external communication. The corpus has been balanced
for text type and for translation direction and amounts in all to five million words.
Since it is a bidirectional corpus all the examples of so translated to dus (and dus
from Dutch into English) were included as well as ‘back-translations’. The func-
tional ranges of these two discourse markers were shown to be remarkably simi-
lar – the polysemies of dus and so overlapped almost completely – but there were
significant differences in frequency and distribution, with dus being both more
frequent overall and more associated with inference than so, which occurred more
typically in resultative contexts. Significant genre effects were found: as well as
being unevenly distributed across genres, dus and so also tended to occur with
different functions in different genres and were differently distributed according
to language. Thus the study not only demonstrates how semantic equivalence does
not result in translation equivalence, with only a sixth of source-text dus being
translated by so in the corpus, but also how genre constrains the markers differ-
ently in the two languages.
Michaela Martinková and Markéta Janebová wanted to investigate the evi-
dential and epistemic senses of the Czech particle prý by studying the functions of
prý reflected in the correspondences in another language. The authors used the
English-Czech and Czech-English sections of the Czech National Corpus- InterCorp,
which is a multilingual parallel corpus of texts written in 39 different languages
with their Czech counterparts. Their study focused on three registers which were
represented in the corpus: fiction, journalistic texts and spoken language. The
­journalistic texts are represented by the PressEurope database (2009–2014). The
spoken language in InterCorp comes from Proceedings from the European
6 K. Aijmer and D. Lewis

Parliament and a corpus of Subtitles. Czech as source and as target language were
not differentiated in order to obtain a sensible amount of text from the European
Parliament. The sub-­corpora vary in size and come from different periods. Moreover
there were more translations than target texts in the corpus.
The authors found different patterns of prý usage and different frequencies
according to genre as well as different patterns of translation. From these translation
patterns, and with the great majority of correspondences being evidential, the
authors concluded that the epistemic uses of prý are context-bound: the interpreta-
tion of the particle as conveying doubt may arise in the context as an inference from
the context.
Magdalena Szczyrbak discusses the correspondences between English modal
adverbs of certainty and their Polish correspondences in argumentative legal writ-
ing. The material used for the study consists of 30 Opinions of Advocated General
at the European Court of Justice, issued between 2011 and 2013 comprising about
576,000 words. The data has been drawn from source texts in English and their
Polish translations. The English texts were written by a native speaker of English,
whereas the translations were made by professionals having Polish as their native
language. At the outset the most frequent modal adverbs were identified in the
English sub-corpus and then the equivalents in the Polish sub-corpus were
determined.
The genre of Opinion was chosen because it was assumed that it would be rich
in persuasive devices. Modal adverbs of certainty have been shown in previous stud-
ies to be useful rhetorical devices inextricably linked to stance and argumentation.
They are for instance used both to foreground and background legal arguments and
to demonstrate power and authority. The modal adverbs studied were indeed, neces-
sarily, of course, clearly and obviously and their Polish correspondences. The trans-
lations were used to study both the conventional meanings of the adverbs and the ad
hoc meanings associated with the particular genre. It is shown that there were
noticeable differences between the English adverbs and their Polish correspon-
dences with regard to the degree of persuasiveness and that the author’s presence
was less visible in the Polish translations. Omission of the modal adverb in the
translation was shown to lessen the rhetorical force of the translated text and its abil-
ity to influence the reader.

6 Contrastive Analysis with Comparable Corpora

The second part of the volume contains two papers based on comparable corpora.
Hilde Hasselgård’s study compares adverbial clause placement in English and
Norwegian cross-linguistically and across the genres fiction and news. End position
was the most common alternative in both English and Norwegian in both registers.
In the initial position there were both language and register differences. It is shown
that initial position was proportionally more frequent in fiction in English than in
Norwegian. However there was a higher frequency of initial clauses in news in both
Introduction 7

languages. The best predictors of adverbial clause placement were shown to be

finiteness and semantic property. Moreover, the positional preferences associated
with the semantic category of the adverbial were more important than iconic order.
With regard to information status initial adverbial clauses were ‘anchored’ in the
preceding discourse in 75–90% of the cases in both languages. However there were
more discourse-new initial clauses in Norwegian than in English, especially in fic-
tion. In final position the picture was the reverse. The information associated with
the adverbial clause was discourse-new in 75–80% of the examples.
The genre of political discourse is addressed in the chapter by Diana Lewis.
Using a comparable corpus of French and English ministerial speeches, she com-
pares patterns of discourse marking across the two languages. The focus is on the
marking of Additive relations, which are expected to be the least marked relations.
The French speeches are found to contain dense networks of Additive discourse
markers that both provide conventional frameworks or templates for the discourse
and regulate information flow. In the English speeches, by contrast, Additive dis-
course markers are sparse, and speakers rely mainly on also or on simple juxtaposi-
tion in such contexts. The very frequent French markers are seen to be bleaching
and grammaticalizing into information-structuring devices. A comparison of dic-
tionary equivalents en effet and indeed illustrates the French/English difference: en
effet appears to be grammaticalizing into a presentative within a wider ‘discourse
construction’ in which it is a quasi obligatory element, while indeed is rare. Overall,
English political discourse relies more on content allowing coherence relations to
be inferred, while French political discourse uses discourse markers to ‘frame’ the
content into more conventional, formal structures.

7 Contrastive Analysis Across Genres of English

The final section consists of three studies of particular English genres.

Catherine Chauvin’s chapter addresses cohesion in a rather particular genre --
that of stand-up comedy. It is a genre of relatively few speakers, each of whom cre-
ates a micro-genre by which to become an ‘identifiable persona’. Providing cohesion
to a stand-up comedy act is a highly skilled art, as the routine typically consists of a
series of self-contained gags, each on a new topic. ‘Callbacks’ (references to earlier
jokes) not only provide one way of creating some cohesion across the range of dis-
connected topics, to make the routine function as a whole, but are also themselves
humorous. They are shown to operate at the ‘macro’ level, helping to build the
entire act into a single cohesive whole. The chapter also explores the humorous
effects that can be achieved through the use of cohesive devices in contexts that are
clearly heterogeneous.
The study by Laura Hidalgo-Downing and Yasra Hanawi compares the differ-
ent stance styles used by presidents Bush and Obama in speeches addressed to the
Arab world. The former speech which was delivered by President Bush in Abu
Dhabi in 2008 is 3308 words long. The latter speech entitled ‘A New Beginning’
8 K. Aijmer and D. Lewis

was given by President Obama in Cairo in 2009 and is 5871 words long. The study
is both quantitative and qualitative. A search was made for the frequency of personal
pronouns, modality markers, mental verbs and negation in both speeches using a
Concordancer. The quantitative comparison showed that Obama’s speech had a
higher frequency of modality, especially epistemic modality, negation and first per-
son pronouns. In Bush’s speech negation was infrequent and you was more frequent
than other pronouns. It is argued that Obama’s speech can be interpreted as an
attempt to ‘recontextualise’ the position of the US policy towards the Middle East.
Negation in Obama’s speech is for example used to correct assumptions about the
US by Arabic speakers or about the relations between the US and the Arabic coun-
tries. Obama’s frequent use of modal auxiliaries indicates his personal involvement
with the topic addressed. Bush’s speech, on the other hand, shows a more conven-
tional discourse style characterized by a low frequency of stance markers and nega-
tion and a preference for second person pronouns. The preference for unmodalized
assertions further underlines an authoritative speaking style.
Metadiscourse has been frequently used to characterise academic genres. Tereza
Guziurová draws on the ‘integrative’ or broad approach to metadiscourse in order
to compare the distribution and uses of the engagement markers we and you, imper-
atives, questions in academic textbooks and research articles. The discussion focuses
on the pronoun we since this proved to be the most frequent engagement marker in
the data accounting for about 70% in both genres. We was used with a wide range of
semantic reference with different discourse functions depending on the genre. The
majority of examples of we in both genres referred to the writer and his/her readers.
The main reason for using the pronoun in the textbooks is that it draws students into
the shared world of disciplinary understanding. Another reason is that we helps to
make the exposition more interesting, relevant and approachable by referring to
people in general as language users. In research articles the writer uses we with the
aim of disguising him/herself as the agent. The study also discusses the potential
advantages and drawbacks of the integrative approach.

References

Aijmer, K. (2008). Parallel and comparable corpora. In A. Lüdeling & M. Kytö (Eds.), Corpus
linguistics. An international handbook (Vol. 1, pp. 275–291). Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.
Baker, M. (1993). Corpus linguistics and translation studies: Implications and applications. In
G. Francis, M. Baker, & E. T. Bonelli (Eds.), Text and technology: In Honour of John Sinclair
(pp. 233–252). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Bhatia, V. K. (2002). Applied genre analysis: A multi-perspective model. Ibérica, 4, 3–19.
Baroni, M., & Bernardini, S. (2005). A new approach to the study of translationese: Machine-­
learning the difference between original and translated text. Literary and Linguistic Computing,
21(3), 259–274.
Connor, U., Nagelhout, E., & Rozycki, W. V. (Eds.). (2008). Contrastive rhetoric: Reaching to
intercultural rhetoric. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Introduction 9

Dyvik, H. (1998). A translational basis for semantics. In S. Johansson & S. Oksefjell (Eds.),
Corpora and cross-linguistic research. Theory, method, and case studies. Amsterdam/Atlanta:
Rodopi.
Gast, V. (2012). Contrastive analysis: Theories and methods. In: B. Kortmann & J. Kabatek (Eds.),
Linguistic theory and methodology. (WSK-Dictionaries of Language and Communication
Science). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. http://www.personal.uni-jena.de/~mu65qev/papdf/
CA.pdf
Gast, V. (2015). On the use of translation corpora in contrastive linguistics. A case study of imper-
sonalization in English and German. Languages in Contrast, 15(1), 4–33.
González, G., de los Angeles, M., Lachlan Mackenzie, J., & Alvarez, E. G. (Eds.). (2008). Current
trends in contrastive linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Gregory, M., & Carroll, S. (1978). Language and situation: Language varieties and their social
contexts. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Hinds, J. (1990). Inductive, deductive, quasi-inductive: Expository writing in Japanese, Korean,
Chinese, and Thai. In U. Connor & A. M. Johns (Eds.), Coherence in writing: Research and
pedagogical perspective, Alexandria (pp. 87–109). VA: TESOL.
Johansson, S. (2007). Seeing through multilingual corpora: On the use of corpora in contrastive
studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
König, E. (2011). The place of contrastive linguistics in language comparison. ms. http://www.
personal.uni-jena.de/~mu65qev/e-g-ontrasts/papers/koenig_2011.pdf
König, E., &. Gast (2009). Understanding English-German contrasts (2nd ed.). Berlin: Schmidt.
Labov, W. (1972). Sociolinguistic patterns. Oxford: Blackwell.
Levinson, S. (1979). Activity types and language. Linguistics, 17, 365–379.
Mauranen, A. (2002). Where’s cultural adaptation? A corpus-based study on translation strategies.
In: B. Silvia & Z. Federico (Eds.) CULT2K, special issue of inTRAlinea. http://www.intralinea.
org/specials/article/1677
McEnery, T., & Xiao, R. (2008). Parallel and comparable corpora: What is happening? In
G. Anderman, & M. Rogers (Eds.), Incorporating corpora: The linguist and the translator
(pp. 18–31). Cleveland: Multilingual Matters.
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Taboada, M., Suárez, S. D., & Alvarez, E. G. (2013). Contrastive discourse analysis: Functional
and corpus perspectives. Sheffield: Equinox.
 Part I
Contrastive Analysis with Parallel Corpora
The Semantic Field of Obligation
in an English-Swedish Contrastive Perspective

Karin Aijmer

Abstract The article examines how genre (fiction and non-fiction) affects the dis-
tribution and uses of the modal auxiliaries must/måste in the obligation meaning and
their more or less grammaticalized alternatives in English and Swedish. In both
languages the obligation markers were associated with specific contexts of use
depending on genre. In fiction the obligation markers were frequent with first and
second person subjects. Must was used for exhortations. Have to was used with
generic subjects and instead of must for more general recommendation. In Swedish
there was no corresponding distinction. Must usually pointed forwards to something
desirable in the context of EU debates. Have to, on the other hand, was also found
in negative contexts in the non-fiction data. Swedish måste was used both about
positive and negative obligation. In Swedish få was an alternative to måste when the
imposition was not in the hearer’s interest.

Keywords Obligation • Genre • Parallel corpus • must/måste

1 Introduction

In both English and Swedish the meaning of obligation can be expressed by a modal
auxiliary (must or Swedish måste). This is in line with ‘a significant cross-linguistic
trend for languages to have a category of grammatical expression forms, usually
called the “modal” auxiliaries’ (Nuyts 2016: 13). However must and måste are not
always each other’s translation equivalents reflecting the fact that there are a large
number of grammatical and lexical alternatives to express obligation.
The English modal auxiliaries have attracted a great deal of interest because of
their changing patterns over time. Less attention has been given to the codification of
certain functions which can take place in particular genres. However, Lewis (2015)

With many thanks to Bengt Altenberg for reading an earlier version of the text.
K. Aijmer (*)
University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
e-mail: karin.aijmer@eng.gu.se

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017 13

K. Aijmer, D. Lewis (eds.), Contrastive Analysis of Discourse-pragmatic
Aspects of Linguistic Genres, Yearbook of Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-54556-1_2
14 K. Aijmer

has drawn attention to the specific distribution of obligation markers in ­political

speeches in English and French. As Lewis (2015: 153) puts it, ‘[w] here there is a
“marked” or atypical distribution of modal markers in a particular genre, there may
also be an atypical distribution in the “equivalent” genre in another language.’
The present study can be described as a contrastive corpus-based genre analysis
of modal expressions meaning obligation. The aim of the study is to examine how
genre (fiction and non-fiction) affects the distribution and uses of the modal auxilia-
ries must/måste and their more or less grammaticalized alternatives in English and
Swedish. The comparison of the modal forms will be carried out on the basis of
translation texts in the English-Swedish Parallel Corpus.
The structure of the paper is as follows. Obligation and necessity are defined in
Sect. 2. Section 3 presents the material and the methodology associated with the use
of parallel corpora to study modality across varieties. The marking of obligation and
the frequencies of the obligation markers is described in Sect. 4. Section 5 contains
the analysis of the obligation markers in fiction texts in English and Swedish.
Section 6 deals with the English and Swedish obligation markers in non-fiction.
Section 7 contains a concluding discussion.

2 Obligation and Necessity

It would be hard to give a dictionary description of the semantic notion of obligation

that could be used as the basis for comparing elements in the two languages.
Obligation is associated with modality and with the modal auxiliaries. However,
modality is a broad notion which is difficult to define. It has traditionally been sub-­
classified into root (obligation, permission) and epistemic modality (eg Coates
1983). Van der Auwera and Plungian (1998: 83) start from a different perspective
and suggest a division into four different semantic domains. Participant-internal
modality (cf Nuyts 2016: 34 ‘participant-inherent dynamic modality’) refers to the
speaker’s internal needs. It is illustrated by the verb need to:
Boris needs to sleep ten hours every night for him to function properly.
Participant-external modality refers to ‘circumstances that are external to the
participant, if any, engaged in the state of affairs and that make this state of affairs
either possible or necessary’ (van der Auwera and Plungian 1998: 80) (cf Nuyts
2016: 34 ‘participant-imposed dynamic modality’). In the example below the exter-
nal circumstances making something necessary are referred to explicitly:
To get to the station, you have to take bus 66.
A special case of participant-external modality is deontic modality. The use of
the term ‘deontic modality’ is ‘supposed to be fully unproblematic’ (van der Auwera
and Plungian 1998: 83). Deontic modality ‘identifies the enabling or competing
circumstances external to the participant as some person(s), often the speaker, and/
or as some social or ethical norm(s) permitting or obliging the participant to engage
The Semantic Field of Obligation in an English-Swedish Contrastive Perspective 15

in the state of affairs’ (van der Auwera and Plungian 1998: 81). Must is for example
deontic in the example below:
John must leave now
with the definition: ‘as far as the person with authority and /or the norm goes,
John’s leaving is necessary’ (van der Auwera and Plungian 1998: 83). The norms
here can be societal norms as well as moral assessments or judgements of desirabil-
ity (Nuyts 2016: 37).
An additional semantic domain is epistemic modality. The epistemic meaning of
must/måste has been defined in terms of a judgment by the speaker rather than in
terms of obligation: ‘a proposition is judged to be uncertain or probable in relation
to some judgment’ (van der Auwera and Plungian 1998: 81). The epistemic mean-
ing is illustrated by:
John must have arrived
Must (and måste) are available in all the domains. However all the epistemic
examples have been excluded from the investigation. They were less frequent than
the examples with obligation meaning and are mainly restricted to fiction.
In the present study I will focus on the importance of genre for understanding the
different frequencies and uses of the linguistic forms expressing obligation.
Following Biber (1988: 68) I will use the term ‘genre’ ‘to refer to text categoriza-
tions made on the basis of external criteria relating to author/speaker purpose’. The
genres used in the present study represent both fiction and non-fiction.

3 Material and Method

The data are taken from the English-Swedish Parallel Corpus (ESPC) (Altenberg
and Aijmer 2001). The ESPC contains original texts in English and Swedish with
their translations, altogether 2.8 million words making direct comparisons between
the languages possible. The texts represent both fiction and non-fiction texts in
equal proportions. Fiction texts consist of dialogues. Non-fiction is a hyperonym
covering the subject areas memoirs and biography, geography, humanities, natural
sciences, social sciences, applied sciences, legal documents, prepared speech
(Altenberg et al. 2001). I will use translation paradigms as the starting-point and
then compare the most frequent markers of obligation in different contexts of use in
English and Swedish.
16 K. Aijmer

4 The Marking of Obligation in English and Swedish

4.1 English Obligation Markers in a Translation Perspective

The corpus examples were selected in the following way. First all the examples of
måste and must were extracted from the original texts with their translations. On the
basis of the translations we can compare how obligation is expressed in the two
languages (in either fiction or non-fiction). Måste is, for example, not always trans-
lated as must but a large number of alternatives are found. At a second stage, I
examine the contexts and functions of the most important markers of obligation in
the two languages in both fiction and non-fiction
On the whole, both the auxiliaries were more frequent in non-fiction than in fic-
tion. Moreover, they were more frequent as obligation markers than as epistemic
auxiliaries (see Tables 1 and 2).
In non-fiction Swedish måste had obligation meaning in 96.3% of the examples
to be compared with must in 87.4% of the cases.
The smaller number of examples of must in the English texts is interesting against
the background that it has been claimed that must has declined in frequency within
a 30-year period during the last century and that it has been replaced by other ‘gram-
maticalizing’ elements (Leech et al. 2009).
Table 3 shows the correspondences of the Swedish måste in English (translations
of Swedish originals into English) and Table 4 (in Sect. 4.2) the correspondences of
English måste in Swedish (the translations from the English originals into Swedish).
Must, taking into account all its uses, was more frequent in non-fiction than in
fiction (see Table 2). This difference can be partly explained by the fact that there
are more occurrences of must with epistemic meaning in fiction (32.9% of the
examples were epistemic in fiction to be compared with only 12.6% in non-fiction).
Moreover, as noticed by the diachronic linguist, must has been replaced by have to
in many of its uses (Leech et al. 2009). A genre-type explanation of the discrepancy
is that must has a number of functions in non-fiction texts which are not paralleled
in the fiction texts.

Table 1 Epistemic and Fiction Non-fiction

obligation meanings of
Epistemic 109 (24%) 24 (3.7%)
Swedish måste
Obligation 345 (76%) 626 (96.3%)
Total 454 (100%) 650 (100%)

Table 2 Epistemic and Fiction Non-fiction

obligation meanings of
Epistemic 69 (32.9%) 42 (12.6%)
English must
Obligation 141 (67%) 292 (87.4%)
Total 210 (100%) 334 (100%)
The Semantic Field of Obligation in an English-Swedish Contrastive Perspective 17

Table 3 The English translations of Swedish måste (SO ->ET). Obligation meanings
ET fiction ET non-fiction Total
must 112 (30.4%) 357 (57.0%) 469 (48.3%)
have to 84 (22.8%) 85 (13.6%) 169 (17.4%)
had to 88 36 124
should 5 46 51
need to (or other forms with need)a 9 32 41
(have) got to 12 4 16
ought to 4 11 15
is (was) -ed 3 5 8
is necessary, essential – 8 8
be going to, will 4 1 5
be forced, be compelled, be made, be taken to – 4 4
x makes sb do sth 3 – 3
ø 4 – 4
other 6 27 33
Examples occurring once or twiceb 11 10 21
Total 345 626 971
a
Not all examples with need in the translations are semi-modals (cf ‘I need somone to talk to’).
b
The following examples occurred once or twice in either fiction or non-fiction: had better, neces-
sarily, of necessity, be in need of, be a need to, appreciate the need to, I should like to say, there is
no other way but, I cannot help but, be enough to, be due to, it was natural for X to do sth, it should
be incumbent on X to do sth, couldn’t possibly, emphatic do, it’s time, the imperative

Obligation can be expressed in many different (grammatical and lexical) ways

although with different frequencies Must is the prototypical obligation marker in
English (and måste in Swedish). If we look at the translations we see that måste is
translated as must in almost 50% of the examples (more often in non-fiction texts
than in fiction texts). However the translator may also choose a different translation
which is more appropriate in the context. Translators make their own analysis of the
context and select a translation which best mirrors the meaning of the modal expres-
sion in the original text.
Obligation can for example also be expressed by the semi-modals have to, had
to, got to, need to as shown by the translations. Semi-modals are not full modals but
are verb constructions which have been moving along the path of grammaticaliza-
tion and have gradually acquired an auxiliary-like function (cf. Leech et al. 2009:
91). Other translation alternatives were modal adverbs (inevitably, necessarily),
modal adjectives (necessary, essential). The markers can be ‘strong’ (be compelled
to, be forced to) or ‘weak’ (had better, ought to, should). Must was also rendered as
an imperative with a ‘directive’ function.
The semi-modal have to (without a formal equivalent in Swedish) was found in
17% of the examples. The uses of had to can be syntactically motivated. Had to is
for example the past tense of must (and have to). (If I had conflated have to and had
18 K. Aijmer

to the frequency would have been even higher.) Other frequent obligation markers
are (have) got to, need to and should.
Several other expressions have different frequencies in fiction and non-fiction.
Need to, should and ought to are strikingly more frequent in non-fiction than in fic-
tion. Have got to, on the other hand, occurs above all in fiction.

4.2 Swedish Obligation Markers in a Translation Perspective

The Swedish modal auxiliaries meaning obligation in my material are måste, få

(may), ska/skulle (shall, should), bör/borde (ought to) (see Table 4). They are
referred to as deontic modal auxiliaries in the Swedish reference grammar Teleman
et al. (1999). The most frequent obligation marker is måste. The Swedish obligation
markers have a different lexical origin than the English markers. Få and ska/skall
(unlike must/måste) have other modal meanings as well which do not appear in the
translations of must. Få is a modal auxiliary with the meaning of permission (‘may’)
which has acquired the meaning of obligation and ska/skall can be ambiguous
between deontically modal meaning and future meaning.
Få was more frequent in fiction than in non-fiction while ska(ll) appears more
often in the more formal non-fiction texts. Table 4 shows the correspondences of
must only. If I had looked instead at the translations of have to I would have found
some differences.1

Table 4 Correspondences of English must in the ESPC (EO-> ST)

Fiction Non-fiction Total
måste 90 (63.8%) 234 (80.1%) 324 (74.8%)
få (‘get’, ‘may’) 28a (19.9%) 18b (6.2%) 46 (10.6%)
ska(ll) 9 18 27
bör/borde (‘should’) 2 5 7
vara tvungen, tvingas (‘be obliged’) 3 1 4
imperative 2 – 2
kan – 2 2
tarvas (‘need’) 1 – 1
är en nödvändighet (‘is a necessity’) – 1 1
Ø 4 10 14
other 2 3 5
Total 141 292 433
18 examples were negated
a

15 examples were negated

b

1
Have to was for example translated into behöva (‘need to’) in three examples.
The Semantic Field of Obligation in an English-Swedish Contrastive Perspective 19

The translation paradigms provide only raw data. They do not provide any infor-
mation about the contexts in which must or its alternatives are chosen as a transla-
tion. In the following sections I will discuss must and its most frequent variants have
to and need and make comparisons with the Swedish correspondences. The
­following research questions will be asked: Are the factors determining the distribu-
tion and uses of obligation markers in English and Swedish the same? Are the fac-
tors the same in fiction and non-fiction?

5 Obligation Markers in English and Swedish Fiction

5.1 English Obligation Markers in Fiction

Must and måste can be regarded as ‘close relatives’ but they were not always trans-
lated into each other. Must was translated as måste in 74.8% of the cases but the
correspondence in the other direction was much lower (because of the existence of
English variants such as have to). In this section I will discuss must, have to and
need to as competitors in the fiction texts.
Must and have to often overlap in meaning. For example, the translator may have
chosen must but could also have opted for have to without any difference in mean-
ing. However, there are some contexts where must and have to seem to be doing
different things. With a first person subject the speaker is strongly involved in the
verbal action:

(1) Your mother is lucky she did not choose to eat corned beef on a Saturday
night. On Saturday nights we are extremely busy. Now I must go. A nurse
will be coming along soon.” (ST1)
Er mor kan skatta sig lycklig att hon inte valde en lördagkväll för att äta
corned beef. På lördagkvällarna är vi ytterst upptagna. Nu måste jag gå.
Det kommer snart en sjuksyster.” (ST 1T)

When have to is used the obligation requiring an action from the speaker is imposed
by external circumstances (non-deontic meaning). In (2) the speaker has been
watching the galleries for a long time and now feels obliged by the look of them to
‘work up to them’.

(2) Galleries are frightening places, places of evaluation, of judgment.

I have to work up to them. (MA1)
Gallerier är skrämmande platser, platser för värdering, för bedömning.
Jag är tvungen att hetsa upp mig för dem. (MA1T)

However although have to is not deontic it can be used instead of must with a first
person subject to soften the imposition of the action on the hearer. Will (‘ll) in com-
bination with have to makes the imposition more vague and less strong by placing
the action in the future:
20 K. Aijmer

(3) I ‘ll have to think on it and perhaps take a few soundings before I decide
where I can best place it. (FF1)
Jag måste fundera på det och kanske höra mig för här och var innan jag
bestämmer vart jag ska skicka det. (FF1T)

Obligation expressions have been associated with ‘performativity’ and situations

where a person is in control of the verbal action. Must with a second person subject
was used for positive actions such as ‘exhortation’ or admonition (expressing the
speaker’s strong wish that the action will take place).

(4) You must allow me this chance in Provence to make up my mind. (BR1)
Du måste låta mig få den här chansen att bestämma mig i Provence. (BR1T)

In (5) the speaker is using have to rather than must because it is less impositive
and therefore more polite. Have to treats the action as negative (face-threatening)
and therefore in need of hedging. Placing the imposition in the future (you’ll have)
is another hedging strategy (cf. I’ll have to):

(5) Reliving, mentally, the events of three days earlier, Andrew said “You ‘ll
have to make allowance for my having been a little dazed at the time.” (AH1)
Andrew gick i tankarna igenom händelserna tre dagar tidigare och sade: “Du
måste tänka på att jag var litet förvirrad just då.” (AH1T)

However in other examples have to does not overlap with the deontic must but refers
to external circumstances (it is important or crucial that you hurry if you’ll get the
colour off the hair):

(6) Matilda said, “I ‘d give it a good wash, dad, if I were you, with soap
and water.
But you ‘ll have to hurry.”(RD1)
Matilda sa: “Om jag vore som du så skulle jag gå och tvätta igenom det
ordentligt, pappa, med tvål och vatten.
Men du blir tvungen att snabba på.”(RD1T)

Out of 34 examples with you as the subject 19 were translated by a generic pronoun
in Swedish making the obligation more vague or general (expressing little speaker
involvement).

(7) “It ‘s electronic,” Annette said weakly.

“You have to put in the right numbers…” (DF1)
“Den är elektronisk”, sa Annette med svag röst.
“Man måste använda de rätta siffrorna…” (DF1T)
The Semantic Field of Obligation in an English-Swedish Contrastive Perspective 21

In (8) the translator has used behöver (‘need’) to mark what needs to be done (put-
ting less imposition on the hearer):

(8) You only have to drive through the West Midlands to see that if we are in the
Super-League of top industrial nations, somebody must be moving
the goalposts. (DL1)
Man behöver bara köra genom West Midlands för att se att någon måste
ha flyttat på målsnöret för att placera oss i superligan av
industrinationer. (DL1T)

The obligation markers can come with a certain ‘evaluative prosody’ depending on
whether they are associated with something positive or negative (good or bad, desir-
able or undesirable) (Partington 2015).
When the subject has no control over the action have to can come to express
evaluation rather than obligation (Myhill and Smith 1995). In example (9), for
example, have to is chosen to suggest that sitting in the front is something
negative:

(9) He gets carsick and I do not, which is why he has to sit in the front. (MA1)
Han blir bilsjuk och det blir inte jag, det är därför han måste sitta i framsätet.
(MA1T)

In (10) the big bad wolf has to go somewhere else for his dinner (against his will).

(10) The big bad wolf has to go somewhere else to get his dinner; these little
piggies are home free.” (SK1)
Den stora stygga vargen får leta efter sin middag någon annanstans, dom
tre små grisarna har klarat sej.”(SK1T)

Need to and should (or ought to) and their Swedish correspondences encode a
weak deontic meaning (the speaker is open to the possibility that the obligation may
not result in an action). Unlike must these markers do not involve self-imposition (in
the first person) but communicate the speaker’s felt needs to do something
(participant-­internal meaning). In non-fiction texts on the other hand need to and
should (ought to) were more frequent and sometimes translated with måste (signal-
ling strong obligation) (Sect. 6.1).
In the following sentence need to conveys that the subject did not feel the need
to sit down:

(11) “She did n’t need to sit. (PDJ1)

“Hon behövde inte sitta. (PDJ1T)
22 K. Aijmer

Need to can also signal the speaker’s positive attitude to the carrying out of the
action. With a generic second person subject need to can, for example, be inter-
preted as a recommendation:

(12) All you need to do is be prudent and not go there again. (RR1)
Allt man behöver göra är att vara försiktig och inte gå dit igen. (RR1T)

In (13) the speaker (a morgue attendant) uses need to rather than must or have to
with directive force:

(13) “We ‘ll need to know what arrangements you want made,” he said. (SG1)
“Vi behöver få veta hur ni vill arrangera begravningen”, sade han. (SG1T)

The authority imposed by the obligation marker is softened by the use of we (rather
than I) and by placing the time when the speaker needs to know in the future (cf. the
use of need to in non-fiction in Sect. 6.1).

5.2 Swedish Obligation Markers in Fiction

The Swedish modal auxiliaries meaning obligation in the data analysed are måste,
få (‘may’), ska/skulle (‘shall’, ‘should’), bör/borde (‘ought to’) (referred to as deon-
tic modal auxiliaries in the Swedish reference grammar Teleman et al. 1999). Få is
also an auxiliary with the meaning permission (=may) and ska/skall has developed
future meaning. Translations can show whether they have been interpreted as hav-
ing an obligation meaning.
According to Teleman et al. (1999: 296), få can have ‘approximately the same
meaning as måste in situations where it is clear that the action referred to in the
sentence is not in the hearer’s interest’ (my translation). This makes it different from
permission (the action is in the hearer’s interest). Let us consider some example
sentences with obligation få and their translations into an obligation marker in
English:
If the subject is the second person the verb has the illocutionary force of a
speaker-initiated directive. In (14) får conveys that the hearer does not intend to
open the gate willingly (it is not in his interest to do so):

(14) Nu kom Torsten ut i Johans synfält.

Han hade en kratta i handen och han gick och drog upp ränder i
gårdsgruset.
— Du får öppna grinn! ropade Vidart.
— Håll käft! skrek Torsten. (KE1)
Then Torsten came into Johan’s line of vision.
He had a rake in his hand and started raking the yard gravel.
“Open the gate!” Vidart shouted.
“Quiet!” Torsten yelled. (KE1T)
The Semantic Field of Obligation in an English-Swedish Contrastive Perspective 23

The constraint imposed can be associated with something negative. ‘Going to

hospital’ is regarded as something bad (unpleasant) and the directive therefore as
open to objections:

(15) Men han hade varit medvetslös en god stund och Birger ville inte ta nån
risk.— Du får åka till lasarettet, sa han.
Det hade Vidart ingenting emot.(KE1)
But he had been unconscious for quite a while, so Birger was taking no risks.
“You must go to hospital,” he said.
Vidart had no objections, but he was worried about the milk. (KE1T)

In (16) the action is treated as unwelcome to the hearer (‘you must show me the
harbour even if it involves some extra effort for you’). Få is therefore used with
persuasive force:

(16) - Gärna, svarade MacDuff på min inbjudan.

Men först får du visa mig hamnen.
Om jag inte har sagt det förut så är jag lots till yrket.
Hamnar är min speciella passion och hobby. (BL1)
MacDuff accepted my invitation.
“But first,” he said, “you must show me the harbour.
If I have n’t told you before, I ‘m a pilot by profession.
So I have a special interest in harbours.” (BL1T)

In all the examples of få some kind of negative evaluation takes place. Forgiving and
forgetting (an injustice) are a necessary evil if one is to survive.

(17) För man får glömma och förlåta om man ska överleva och förresten hade
priset på potatisen stigit till nästan två kronor för en tunna. (KE2)
One must forgive and forget if one is to survive, not to mention that the
price of potatoes had risen to nearly two kronor a barrel. (KE2T)

Behöva (‘need to’) is found in different patterns with different meanings.2 When
the subject is the first person the verb refers to a need felt by the speaker:

(18) Men jag behöver prata med dig några minuter. (HM2)
“I need to talk to you about something.” (HM2T)

The source of the need can be internal or external. In (19) the translator has chosen
have to indicating that the source is external (for example that the speaker needs the
cassette to make recordings) and to soften the imposition of the action:

(19) - Jag behöver ta med mig kassetten, sa han. (HM2)

“I ‘ll have to take the cassette with me,” he said. (HM2T)

2
Behöver was found as a translation equivalent of have to but not of must.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
purity and abstinence of his style, and we who speak it, for having
emboldened us to trust ourselves to take delight in simple things,
and to trust ourselves to our own instincts. And he hath his reward. It
needs not to

Bid Beaumont lie

A little farther off to make him room,

for there is no fear of crowding in that little society with whom he is

now enrolled as the fifth in the succession of the great English poets.
 LECTURE XII
THE FUNCTION OF THE POET

(Friday Evening, February 16, 1855)

XII
Whether, as some philosophers here assume, we possess only the
fragments of a great cycle of knowledge, in whose center stood the
primeval man in friendly relation with the powers of the universe, and
build our hovels out of the ruins of our ancestral palace; or whether,
according to the developing theory of others, we are rising gradually
and have come up from an atom instead of descending from an
Adam, so that the proudest pedigree might run up to a barnacle or a
zoöphyte at last, are questions which will keep for a good many
centuries yet. Confining myself to what little we can learn from
History, we find tribes rising slowly out of barbarism to a higher or
lower point of culture and civility, and everywhere the poet also is
found under one name or another, changing in certain outward
respects, but essentially the same.

But however far we go back, we shall find this also—that the poet
and the priest were united originally in the same person: which
means that the poet was he who was conscious of the world of spirit
as well as that of sense, and was the ambassador of the gods to
men. This was his highest function, and hence his name of seer.

I suppose the word epic originally meant nothing more than this, that
the poet was the person who was the greatest master of speech. His
were the ἔπεα πτερόεντα, the true winged words that could fly down
the unexplored future and carry thither the names of ancestral
heroes, of the brave, and wise, and good. It was thus that the poet
could reward virtue, and, by and by, as society grew more complex,
could burn in the brand of shame. This is Homer’s character of
Demodocus in the eighth book of the “Odyssey,”

When the Muse loved and gave the good and ill,

the gift of conferring good or evil immortality.

The first histories were in verse, and, sung as they were at the feasts
and gatherings of the people, they awoke in men the desire of fame,
which is the first promoter of courage and self-trust, because it
teaches men by degrees to appeal from the present to the future.
We may fancy what the influence of the early epics was when they
were recited to men who claimed the heroes celebrated in them for
their ancestors, by what Bouchardon, the sculptor, said only two
centuries ago: “When I read Homer I feel as if I were twenty feet
high.”

Nor have poets lost their power over the future in modern times.
Dante lifts up by the hair the face of some petty traitor, the Smith and
Brown of some provincial Italian town, lets the fire of his Inferno glare
upon it for a moment, and it is printed forever on the memory of
mankind. The historians may iron out the shoulders of Richard III. as
smooth as they can; they will never get over the wrench that
Shakspeare gave them.

The peculiarity of almost all early literature is that it seems to have a

double meaning; that underneath its natural we find ourselves
continually seeing and suspecting a supernatural meaning. Even in
the older epics the characters seem to be only half-historical and
half-typical. They appear as the Pilgrim Fathers do in Twenty-second
of December speeches at Plymouth. The names may be historical,
but the attributes are ideal. The orator draws a portrait rather of what
he thinks the founders ought to have been than a likeness which
contemporaries would have recognized. Thus did early poets
endeavor to make reality out of appearances. For, except a few
typical men in whom certain ideas get embodied, the generations of
mankind are mere apparitions who come out of the dark for a
purposeless moment, and enter the dark again after they have
performed the nothing they came for.

The poet’s gift, then, is that of seer. He it is that discovers the truth
as it exists in types and images; that is the spiritual meaning, which
abides forever under the sensual. And his instinct is to express
himself also in types and images. But it was not only necessary that
he himself should be delighted with his vision, but that he should
interest his hearers with the faculty divine. Pure truth is not
acceptable to the mental palate. It must be diluted with character and
incident; it must be humanized in order to be attractive. If the bones
of a mastodon be exhumed, a crowd will gather out of curiosity; but
let the skeleton of a man be turned up, and what a difference in the
expression of the features! Every bystander then creates his little
drama, in which those whitened bones take flesh upon them and
stalk as chief actor.

The poet is he who can best see or best say what is ideal; what
belongs to the world of soul and of beauty. Whether he celebrates
the brave and good, or the gods, or the beautiful as it appears in
man or nature, something of a religious character still clings to him.
He may be unconscious of his mission; he may be false to it, but in
proportion as he is a great poet, he rises to the level of it more often.
He does not always directly rebuke what is bad or base, but
indirectly, by making us feel what delight there is in the good and fair.
If he besiege evil it is with such beautiful engines of war (as Plutarch
tells us of Demetrius) that the besieged themselves are charmed
with them. Whoever reads the great poets cannot but be made better
by it, for they always introduce him to a higher society, to a greater
style of manners and of thinking. Whoever learns to love what is
beautiful is made incapable of the mean and low and bad. It is
something to be thought of, that all the great poets have been good
men. He who translates the divine into the vulgar, the spiritual into
the sensual, is the reverse of a poet.
It seems to be thought that we have come upon the earth too late;
that there has been a feast of the imagination formerly, and all that is
left for us is to steal the scraps. We hear that there is no poetry in
railroads, steamboats, and telegraphs, and especially in Brother
Jonathan. If this be true, so much the worse for him. But, because he
is a materialist, shall there be no poets? When we have said that we
live in a materialistic age, we have said something which meant
more than we intended. If we say it in the way of blame, we have
said a foolish thing, for probably one age is as good as another; and,
at any rate, the worst is good enough company for us. The age of
Shakspeare seems richer than our own only because he was lucky
enough to have such a pair of eyes as his to see it and such a gift as
his to report it. Shakspeare did not sit down and cry for the water of
Helicon to turn the wheels of his little private mill there at the
Bankside. He appears to have gone more quietly about his business
than any playwright in London; to have drawn off what water-power
he wanted from the great prosy current of affairs that flows alike for
all, and in spite of all; to have ground for the public what grist they
want, coarse or fine; and it seems a mere piece of luck that the
smooth stream of his activity reflected with ravishing clearness every
changing mood of heaven and earth, every stick and stone, every
dog and clown and courtier that stood upon its brink. It is a curious
illustration of the friendly manner in which Shakspeare received
everything that came along, of what a present man he was, that in
the very same year that the mulberry tree was brought into England,
he got one and planted it in his garden at Stratford.

It is perfectly true that this is a materialistic age, and for this very
reason we want our poets all the more. We find that every
generation contrives to catch its singing larks without the sky’s
falling. When the poet comes he always turns out to be the man who
discovers that the passing moment is the inspired one, and that the
secret of poetry is not to have lived in Homer’s day or Dante’s, but to
be alive now. To be alive now, that is the great art and mystery. They
are dead men who live in the past, and men yet unborn who live in
the future. We are like Hans-in-Luck, forever exchanging the
burthensome good we have for something else, till at last we come
home empty-handed. The people who find their own age prosaic are
those who see only its costume. And this is what makes it prosaic:
that we have not faith enough in ourselves to think that our own
clothes are good enough to be presented to Posterity in. The artists
seem to think that the court dress of posterity is that of Vandyke’s
time or Cæsar’s. I have seen the model of a statue of Sir Robert
Peel—a statesman whose merit consisted in yielding gracefully to
the present—in which the sculptor had done his best to travesty the
real man into a make-believe Roman. At the period when England
produced its greatest poets, we find exactly the reverse of this, and
we are thankful to the man who made the monument of Lord Bacon
that he had genius enough to copy every button of his dress,
everything down to the rosettes on his shoes. These men had faith
even in their own shoe-strings. Till Dante’s time the Italian poets
thought no language good enough to put their nothings into but Latin
(and, indeed, a dead tongue was the best for dead thoughts), but
Dante found the common speech of Florence, in which men
bargained, and scolded, and made love, good enough for him, and
out of the world around him made such a poem as no Roman ever
sang.

We cannot get rid of our wonder, we who have brought down the
wild lightning from writing fiery doom upon the walls of heaven to be
our errand-boy and penny postman. In this day of newspapers and
electric telegraphs, in which common-sense and ridicule can
magnetise a whole continent between dinner and tea, we may say
that such a phenomenon as Mahomet were impossible; and behold
Joe Smith and the State of Deseret! Turning over the yellow leaves
of the same copy of Webster on “Witchcraft” which Cotton Mather
studied, I thought, Well, that goblin is laid at last! And while I mused,
the tables were dancing and the chairs beating the devil’s tattoo all
over Christendom. I have a neighbor who dug down through tough
strata of clay-slate to a spring pointed out by a witch-hazel rod in the
hands of a seventh son’s seventh son, and the water is sweeter to
him for the wonder that is mixed with it. After all, it seems that our
scientific gas, be it never so brilliant, is not equal to the dingy old
Aladdin’s lamp.
It is impossible for men to live in the world without poetry of some
sort or another. If they cannot get the best, they will get at some
substitute for it. But there is as much poetry as ever in the world if we
can ever know how to find it out; and as much imagination, perhaps,
only that it takes a more prosaic direction. Every man who meets
with misfortune, who is stripped of his material prosperity, finds that
he has a little outlying mountain-farm of imagination, which does not
appear in the schedule of his effects, on which his spirit is able to
keep alive, though he never thought of it while he was fortunate. Job
turns out to be a great poet as soon as his flocks and herds are
taken away from him.

Perhaps our continent will begin to sing by and by, as the others
have done. We have had the Practical forced upon us by our
condition. We have had a whole hemisphere to clear up and put to
rights. And we are descended from men who were hardened and
stiffened by a downright wrestle with Necessity. There was no
chance for poetry among the Puritans. And yet if any people have a
right to imagination, it should be the descendants of those very
Puritans. They had enough of it, or they could not have conceived
the great epic they did, whose books are States, and which is written
on this continent from Maine to California.

John Quincy Adams, making a speech at New Bedford many years

ago, reckoned the number of whale ships (if I remember rightly) that
sailed out of that port, and, comparing it with some former period,
took it as a type of American success. But, alas! it is with quite other
oil that those far-shining lamps of a nation’s true glory which burn
forever must be filled. It is not by any amount of material splendor or
prosperity, but only by moral greatness, by ideas, by works of the
imagination, that a race can conquer the future. No voice comes to
us from the once mighty Assyria but the hoot of the owl that nests
amid her crumbling palaces; of Carthage, whose merchant fleets
once furled their sails in every port of the known world, nothing is left
but the deeds of Hannibal. She lies dead on the shore of her once
subject sea, and the wind of the desert flings its handfuls of burial-
sand upon her corpse. A fog can blot Holland or Switzerland out of
existence. But how large is the space occupied in the maps of the
soul by little Athens or powerless Italy. They were great by the soul,
and their vital force is as indestructible as the soul.

Till America has learned to love Art, not as an amusement, not as a

mere ornament of her cities, not as a superstition of what is comme il
faut for a great nation, but for its harmonizing and ennobling energy,
for its power of making men better by arousing in them the
perception of their own instincts for what is beautiful and sacred and
religious, and an eternal rebuke of the base and worldly, she will not
have succeeded in that high sense which alone makes a nation out
of a people, and raises it from a dead name to a living power. Were
our little mother-island sunk beneath the sea; or worse, were she
conquered by Scythian barbarians, yet Shakspeare would be an
immortal England, and would conquer countries when the bones of
her last sailor had kept their ghastly watch for ages in unhallowed
ooze beside the quenched thunders of her navy.

This lesson I learn from the past: that grace and goodness, the fair,
the noble, and the true will never cease out of the world till the God
from whom they emanate ceases out of it; that the sacred duty and
noble office of the poet is to reveal and justify them to man; that as
long as the soul endures, endures also the theme of new and
unexampled song; that while there is grace in grace, love in love,
and beauty in beauty, God will still send poets to find them, and bear
witness of them, and to hang their ideal portraitures in the gallery of
memory. God with us is forever the mystical theme of the hour that is
passing. The lives of the great poets teach us that they were men of
their generation who felt most deeply the meaning of the Present.

I have been more painfully conscious than any one else could be of
the inadequacy of what I have been able to say, when compared to
the richness and variety of my theme. I shall endeavor to make my
apology in verse, and will bid you farewell in a little poem in which I
have endeavored to express the futility of all effort to speak the
loveliness of things, and also my theory of where the Muse is to be
found, if ever. It is to her that I sing my hymn.
Mr. Lowell here read an original poem of considerable length, which
concluded the lecture, and was received with bursts of applause.
*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LECTURES ON
ENGLISH POETS ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions

will be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S.

copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright
in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and
distribute it in the United States without permission and without
paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General
Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and
distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the
PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project
Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if
you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of the
trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the
Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is
very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such
as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
research. Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and
printed and given away—you may do practically ANYTHING in
the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright
law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially
commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
 PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the

free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this
work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase
“Project Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of
the Full Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or
online at www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and

Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand,
agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual
property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to
abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease using
and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for
obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg™
electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms
of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only

be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by
people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.
There are a few things that you can do with most Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works even without complying with the
full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There
are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg™
electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and
help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright
law in the United States and you are located in the United
States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying,
distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works
based on the work as long as all references to Project
Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will
support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free
access to electronic works by freely sharing Project
Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of this
agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name
associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms
of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with
its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it
without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside
the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to
the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying,
displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works
based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The
Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright
status of any work in any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project

Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other

immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must
appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project
Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed,
viewed, copied or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United

States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it
away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg
License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United
States, you will have to check the laws of the country where
you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is

derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to
anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges.
If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the
work, you must comply either with the requirements of
paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use
of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth
in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is

posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and
distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through
1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder.
Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™
License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright
holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project

Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files
containing a part of this work or any other work associated with
Project Gutenberg™.
 1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute
this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1
with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the
Project Gutenberg™ License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if
you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project
Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or
other format used in the official version posted on the official
Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at
no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a
means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other
form. Any alternate format must include the full Project
Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,

performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™
works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or

providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
 about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who

notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that
s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and
discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project
Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of

any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in
the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90
days of receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project

Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different
terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain
permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™
trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3
below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend

considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on,
transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright
law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite
these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the
medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,”
such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt
data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other
medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES -

Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in
paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic
work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for
damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU
AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE,
STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH
OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH
1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER
THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR
ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE
OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF
THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If

you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of
receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you
paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you
received the work from. If you received the work on a physical
medium, you must return the medium with your written
explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the
defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu
of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or
entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.
If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund
in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set

forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’,
WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR
ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this
agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this
agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the
maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable
state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of
this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the

Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the
Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any
volunteers associated with the production, promotion and
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless
from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that
arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project
Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or
deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect
you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of

Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new
computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of
volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the

assistance they need are critical to reaching Project
Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™
collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In
2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was
created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project
Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your
efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the
Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-
profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the
laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by
the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal
tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax
deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and
your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500

West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact
links and up to date contact information can be found at the
Foundation’s website and official page at
www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to

the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission
of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works
that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form
accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated
equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly
important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws

regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of
the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform
and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many
fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not
solicit donations in locations where we have not received written
confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or
determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states

where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know
of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from
donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot

make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations
received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp
our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current

donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a
number of other ways including checks, online payments and
credit card donations. To donate, please visit:
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project

Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could
be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and