Cover not available
Article published In:
Constructions and Frames
Vol. 14:2 (2022) ► pp.226–261

From modals to modal constructions

An n-gram analysis of can, could and be able to

| University of Paris 8
The goal of this paper is to present the results of a corpus analysis aimed at identifying n-grams (i.e., lexical sequences) with the modals can, could and be able to. While details about the functional profile of these verbs are still being discussed (e.g., Leclercq & Depraetere 2022), it is surprising that relatively scarce attention is given to the lexico-grammatical patterns in which they are found and which come with their own semantic and pragmatic features. Using the methodology developed in Cappelle and Depraetere (2016b), a total of 1,640 n-grams were extracted from COCA (Davies 2008-). A number of these patterns are discussed and, in keeping with the approach developed in Construction Grammar (Hilpert 2019), it is shown that an enhanced understanding of these verbs can be achieved when viewed as part of more complex networks of constructions.
Keywords: can , could , be able to , mutual information, n-grams, modal idioms, modal networks, English modal constructicography
Article outline
  • 1.Background and aim
  • 2.Methodology
  • 3. Can, could and be able to: N-grams and modal constructions
    • 3.1Be able to n-grams
    • 3.2 Can and could n-grams
      • {Let’s} see if subj can VP
      • {For} as long as I can remember
      • subj could not be reached for comment
      • It {can/could} be argued that…
      • I can’t tell you how…
      • I {can/could}n’t help {but VP/V-ing}; You can’t help {but VP/V-ing}; Subj {can/could} not help {but VP/V-ing};
      • I can assure you that (…)
      • I don’t think we can VP
  • 4.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 22 December 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.21001.lec
References (62)
References
Aijmer, K. (2004). The semantic path from modality to aspect: Be able to in a crosslinguistic perspective. In H. Lindquist & C. Mair (Eds.), Corpus approaches to grammaticalization in English (pp. 57–78). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Arppe, A., Gilquin, G., Glynn, D., Hilpert, M., & Zeschel, A. (2010). Cognitive corpus linguistics: Five points of debate on current theory and methodology. Corpora, 5 (1), 1–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Longman.Google Scholar
Blumental-Dramé, A. (2012). Entrenchment in usage-based theories: What corpus data do and do not reveal about the mind. Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boogaart, R. (2009). Semantics and pragmatics in Construction Grammar: The case of modal verbs. In A. Bergs & G. Diewald (Eds.), Contexts and constructions (pp. 213–241). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brems, L., Ghesquière, L., & Van de Velde, F. (Eds.). (2012). English text construction, special issue: Intersections of intersubjectivity, 5 (1). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J. L. (2010). Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cappelle, B., & Depraetere, I. (2016a). Short-circuited interpretations of modal verb constructions: Some evidence from The Simpsons . Constructions and Frames, 8 (1), 7–39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016b). Response to Hilpert. Constructions and Frames, 8 (1), 86–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cappelle, B., Depraetere, I., & Lesuisse, M. (2019). The necessity modals have to, must, need to and should: Using n-grams to help identify common and distinct semantic and pragmatic aspects. Constructions and Frames, 11 (2), 220–243. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clear, J. (1993). From Firth principles. Computational tools for the study of collocation. In M. Baker, G. Francis & E. Tognini Bonelli (Eds.), Text and technology. In honour of John Sinclair (pp. 271–292). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coates, J. (1983). The semantics of the modal auxiliaries. Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Collins, C., & Postal, P. (2014). Classical NEG raising: An essay in the syntax of negation. MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Collins, P. (2009). Modals and quasi-modals in English. Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cormack, A., & Smith, N. (1998). Negation, polarity and V-positions in English. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics, 10 1, 285–322.Google Scholar
Cornillie, B., Marín-Arrese, J., & Wiemer, B. (2015). Evidentiality and the semantics-pragmatics interface: An introduction. Belgian Journal of Linguistics, 29 1, 1–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croft, W., & Cruse, D. A. (2004). Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dancygier, B., & Sweetser, E. (2014). Figurative language. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Davies, M. (2008–). The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA): 520 million words, 1990-present. Available online at [URL]
Dehé, N., & Kavalova, Y. (Eds.). (2007). Parentheticals. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Depraetere, I., & Kaltenböck, G. (2018). Modal meaning and illocutionary force: A corpus based analysis of hedged performatives. Paper presented at AMPRA 4 (American Pragmatics Association), University at Albany, State University of New York, 1–3 November.
Depraetere, I., & Reed, S. (2011). Towards a more explicit taxonomy of root possibility. English Language and Linguistics, 15 (1), 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Depraetere, I. & Verhulst, A. (2008). Source of modality: A reassessment. English Language and Linguistics, 12 1, 1–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Duffley, P. J. (2000). Gerund versus infinitive as complement of transitive verbs in English: The problems of ‘tense’ and ‘control’. Journal of English Linguistics, 28 1, 221–248. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N., Simpson-Vlach, R., & Maynard, C. (2008). Formulaic language in native and second language speakers: Psycholinguistics, corpus linguistics, and TESOL. TESOL Quarterly, 42 (3), 375–396. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flach, S. (2020). Beyond modal idioms and modal harmony: A corpus-based analysis of gradient idiomaticity in mod + adv collocations. English Language and Linguistics, 1–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fong, R. (2020). Is knowing the constructions enough to understand modality patterns in English?: A response to ‘Taming English modals – how a construction grammar approach helps to understand modal verbs’ by Sergio Torres–Martínez, English Today, 138, 35(2), 50–57, 2019. English Today, 1–7. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fraser, B. (1975). Hedged performatives. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics, 3: Speech acts (pp. 187–210). Academic Press.Google Scholar
Gablasova, D., Brezina, V., & McEnery, T. (2017). Collocations in corpus-based language learning research: Identifying, comparing and interpreting the evidence. Language Learning, 67 1, 155–179. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
(2006). Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gries, S. T. (2008). Phraseology and linguistic theory: A brief survey. In S. Granger & F. Meunier (Eds.), Phraseology: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 3–25). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Haan, F. (2012). The relevance of constructions for the interpretation of modal meaning: the case of must . English Studies, 93 (6), 700–728. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hilpert, M. (2013). Die englischen Modalverben im Daumenkino: Zur dynamischen Visualisierung von Phänomenen des Sprachwandels. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik, 42 1, 67–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016). Change in modal meanings: Another look at the shifting collocates of may . Constructions and Frames, 8 (1), 66–85. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019). Construction grammar and its application to English. Second edition. Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Hilpert, M., & Flach, S. (2020). Disentangling modal meanings with distributional semantics. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities, fqaa014. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Homer, V. (2015). Neg-raising and positive polarity: The view from modals. Semantics & Pragmatics, 8 1, 1–88. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Horn, L. R. (2001). A natural history of negation. Second edition. CSLI publications.Google Scholar
Hunston, S. (2002). Corpora in Applied Linguistics. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huschová, P. (2015). Exploring modal verbs conveying possibility in academic discourse. Discourse and Interaction, 8 (2), 35–47. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaltenböck, G. (2019). Hedged performatives: Function and grammatical status. Paper presented at The syntagmatic properties of complementation patterns: Accommodating lexical and grammatical uses of CTP-clauses , Liège, 9–10 May 2019.
Kita, K., Kato, Y., Omoto, T., & Yano, Y. (1994). A comparative study of automatic extraction of collocations from corpora: Mutual information vs. cost criteria. Journal of Natural Language Processing, 1 (1), 21–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leclercq, B. (2019). On the semantics–pragmatics interface: A theoretical bridge between Construction Grammar and Relevance Theory. PhD dissertation, University of Lille.
(2020). Semantics and pragmatics in Construction Grammar. Belgian Journal of Linguistics, 34 1, 225–234. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leclercq, B., & Depraetere, I. (2022). Making meaning with be able to: modality and actualization. English Language and Linguistics, 26 (1), 27–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leclercq, B., Cappelle, B., Depraetere, I. & Grandin, C. (2023). Necessity modals and the role of source as a predictive factor. In I. Depraetere, B. Cappelle & M. Hilpert et al., Models of modals: From pragmatics and corpus linguistics to machine learning (pp. 121–151). Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
McEnery, T., & Hardie, A. (2012). Corpus linguistics: Method, theory and practice. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nikiforidou, K. (2018). Genre and constructional analysis. Pragmatics & Cognition, 25 1, 543–575. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nuyts, J., & van der Auwera, J. (Eds.). (2016). The Oxford handbook of modality and mood. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Oakes, M. P. (1998). Statistics for corpus linguistics. Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Potts, C. (2002). The syntax and semantics of as-parentheticals. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 20 (3), 623–689. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmid, H-J. (2020). The dynamics of the linguistic system: Usage, conventionalization, and entrenchment. Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Searle, J. R. (1969). Speach acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stubbs, M. (1995). Collocations and semantic profiles: On the cause of the trouble with quantitative studies. Functions of Language, 2 (1), 23–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Torres-Martínez, S. (2019). Taming English modals – How a Construction Grammar approach helps to understand modal verbs. English Today, 35 (2), 50–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tovena, L. M. (2001). Neg-raising: negation as failure? In J. Hoeksema, H. Rullmann, V. Sánchez Valencia & T. van der Wouden (Eds.), Perspectives on negation and polarity items (pp. 331–356). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wärnsby, A. (2002). Modal constructions? The Department of English in Lund: Working Papers in Linguistics, 21.Google Scholar
(2016). On the adequacy of a constructionist approach to modality. Constructions and Frames, 8 1, 40–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Westney, P. (1995). Modals and periphrastics in English. Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wulff, S. (2008). Rethinking idiomaticity: A usage-based approach. Continuum.Google Scholar
(2013). Words and idioms. In T. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of construction grammar (pp. 274–289). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Leclercq, Benoît
2024. The post-modal grammaticalisation of concessive may and might . Constructions and Frames 16:1 ► pp. 130 ff. DOI logo
Römer-Barron, Ute
2024. How do constructions with modal verbs develop in second language learners of English?. Journal of Second Language Studies DOI logo
Ivanova, S. V. & S. N. Medvedeva
2023. Corpus Analysis as a Means of Meaning Disambiguation: Collocational Analysis of Near-Synonyms of the Verb ‘Destroy’. Professional Discourse & Communication 5:3 ► pp. 107 ff. DOI logo
Schneider, Ulrike
2023.  I couldn’t help but wonder: do modals and negation attract?. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory DOI logo
Torres-Martínez, Sergio
2023. The semiotics of motion encoding in Early English: a cognitive semiotic analysis of phrasal verbs in Old and Middle English. Semiotica 2023:251 ► pp. 55 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 september 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.