This study establishes the canonicality of Modality and Modal categories in Korean from the viewpoint of cognitive linguistics, and with these as foundation, presents and analyzes Korean modality expressions corresponding to each categories .
Chapter 1 suggests that there is a need to re-establish the concept of Modality and re-define the criteria for classification, and furthermore thoroughly examine semantic types of Modality as the current state lacks: common attributes in the categories of Modality, consistency in classification criteria, and categorical attributes of semantic types. In other words, as a result of reviewing previous studies on Korean Modality, it could be confirmed that linguistic phenomena that were difficult to include within the category of Modality were being discussed as a category of Modality. In addition, there is no consistent standard for classification, and even an argument that states that the all classifications should be grouped into one. Furthermore, semantic types of Modality discussed in previous studies are explained by meanings and functions of other grammatical categories that does not contain categorical attributes of Modality. As a result, Modality has been recognized as a complex and difficult category, and its status as an independent grammatical category has been obscured. This study examines the achievements and limitations of previous studies on Korean Modality and starts the discussions with three goals: to establish canonical features of Modality, to present consistent subtype classification criteria, and to examine semantic types of Modality through cognitive linguistics.
Chapter 2 reviews the theoretical background that are basis to the discussion to examine the canonical features, classification criteria, and semantic types of Modality. Categories of modality are closely related to a series of cognitive processes in which the conceptualizer conceptualizes the types of force dynamics of situation participants as abstract visual diagrams and the language format the conceptualized content is expressed in the relevant language society. In order to grasp the relationship between Modality and the cognitive process, Chapter 2 reveals that image schematic theory, force mechanics theory, and conceptual blending theory provide a valid analysis framework for Korean Modality studies.
Chapter 3 discusses the canonical features of Modality and its characteristics through a cognitive linguistic point approach in order to resolve ambiguity between Modality and its neighboring categories that arises from the achievements and limitations of previous studies. As a result, it is revealed that the canonical features of Modality are composed of five factors: the subject of Modality, the evaluator of Modality, the evaluator’s judgment, the content of judgment, and the category of Modality. Based on the aforementioned factors, the canonical features of Modality are summarized as follows: Modality is ‘a grammar category in which the speaker judges and expresses the potential of realizing the situation by evaluating the type of relationship between the dynamics of the situation and whether the realization of the situation is compulsory or possible.’ Thus, according to the canonical features of Modality, the common features of Modality categories are clear; and according to the level of judgment, Modality is consistently classified into subtypes. In other words, Modality is sub-classified to dynamic modality for intrinsic motivation, deontic modality for social interaction between individuals, and epistemic modality for cognitive awareness.
On the other hand, it was found that the sub-classifications of Modality are classified according to the level of judgment, whereas the types of force dynamics relations acted as a criterion for semantic types. In other words, the types of dynamic relations between the two forces that form a force dynamic relationship are largely divided into those that impose coerciveness or possibility on realizing the situation. The cognitive aspects of the sub-classified dynamic modality, deontic modality, and epistemic modality were examined by means of image diagrams and force dynamics. As a result, dynamic modality expresses the meaning of [willingness], [intention], [ability], and [hope], where the degree of potential for realization of the situation for [willingness] and [intention] are determined by intrinsic coercion, and [ability] and [hope] by intrinsic possibilities. Deontic modality is divided into semantic types of [obligation], [limitation], [right], [acceptance], and [exemption], where the degree of potential for realization of the situation for [obligation] and [limitation] are determined by social coercion and [right], [acceptance], and [exemption] by social possibilities. Furthermore, epistemic modality is analyzed by semantic types of [certainty], [probability], and [possibility] where the degree of realization for [certainty] is determined by cognitive coercion and [probability] and [possibility] by cognitive possibilities.
Chapter 4 expands upon the expressions of Korean Modality corresponding to the cognitive aspects of the sub-classified; namely [willingness], [intention], [ability], and [hope] for dynamic modality, [obligation], [limitation], [right], [acceptance], and [exemption] for deontic modality, and [certainty], [probability], and [possibility] for epistemic modality; and reveals that the ratings differ depending on the degree of potential for realizing the situation. Furthermore, it is argued that conceptual blending theory can be used to explain the linguistic form constructed according to the interaction in force dynamics.
The definition of Modality can be re-established to remove the ambiguity of the definition that was raised in the previous discussions as follows: Modality captures the dynamics of forces between the elements involved in the situation the speaker is trying to convey, and is a grammatical category that judges and expresses the potential for realizing the situation according to the type of force dynamics, In addition, by presenting a consistent classification criterion that divides subtypes into dynamic modality, deontic modality, and epistemic modality, it is shown that categorical attributes and individualities for all subtypes of Modality can be discussed within a single category.
This study is expected to be utilized as basic data for future studies related to typological studies, contrastive linguistic studies, and studies comparing communication strategies between languages, focusing on analyzing common and distinct characteristics of modal expressions from a syntactic point of view. However, as this is a study that systematizes the sub-classifications of Modality in a onomasiological approach to examine the conceptual semantic criteria that categorize specific language phenomena and identify linguistic expressions that correspond to semantic areas, there is a limitation that more specific discussions have not been made. Therefore, in the future, it will be necessary to conduct a comparative linguistic and typological follow-up study on Korean modal system, including results of previous studies that discusses morphological and syntactic features of Korean modal expressions from a semasiological approach.