Characteristics of ability-signifying verbs in earlier English and other languages: A synchronic and diachronic investigation

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In Old English magan means not only ‘be (generally) able to’ but also ‘be possible’ and ‘be permitted to’. In contrast cunnan does not have any other meanings than ‘know (how to)’, ‘be mentally/intellectually able to’. This phenomenon can be observed with respect to similar pairs in other languages, such as French pouvoir and savoir. It thus seems that there is a cross-linguistic tendency whereby verbs which signify general ability have or develop other modal meanings such as possibility and permission, whereas those which signify mental/intellectual ability do not. This paper gives an account of this tendency by assigning appropriate formal semantic structures to the two types of ability-signifying verbs. The issue of why, although English CAN once signified mental/intellectual ability, it has today developed possibility and permission meanings will also be pursued, following the line of argument in my previous paper (1990).

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)361-396
Number of pages36
JournalLinguistics
Volume29
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1991

Fingerprint

ability
language
intellectual
know how
semantics
linguistics
Verbs
Signifying
Early English
Language
Diachrony
Permission
Semantic Structure
Old English
Formal Semantics
General Ability

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Language and Linguistics
  • Linguistics and Language

Cite this

@article{6f4ed7eac07e46168b6506ef49fd1d55,
title = "Characteristics of ability-signifying verbs in earlier English and other languages: A synchronic and diachronic investigation",
abstract = "In Old English magan means not only ‘be (generally) able to’ but also ‘be possible’ and ‘be permitted to’. In contrast cunnan does not have any other meanings than ‘know (how to)’, ‘be mentally/intellectually able to’. This phenomenon can be observed with respect to similar pairs in other languages, such as French pouvoir and savoir. It thus seems that there is a cross-linguistic tendency whereby verbs which signify general ability have or develop other modal meanings such as possibility and permission, whereas those which signify mental/intellectual ability do not. This paper gives an account of this tendency by assigning appropriate formal semantic structures to the two types of ability-signifying verbs. The issue of why, although English CAN once signified mental/intellectual ability, it has today developed possibility and permission meanings will also be pursued, following the line of argument in my previous paper (1990).",
author = "Toshiya Tanaka",
year = "1991",
doi = "10.1515/ling.1991.29.3.361",
language = "English",
volume = "29",
pages = "361--396",
journal = "Linguistics",
issn = "0024-3949",
publisher = "Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Characteristics of ability-signifying verbs in earlier English and other languages

T2 - A synchronic and diachronic investigation

AU - Tanaka, Toshiya

PY - 1991

Y1 - 1991

N2 - In Old English magan means not only ‘be (generally) able to’ but also ‘be possible’ and ‘be permitted to’. In contrast cunnan does not have any other meanings than ‘know (how to)’, ‘be mentally/intellectually able to’. This phenomenon can be observed with respect to similar pairs in other languages, such as French pouvoir and savoir. It thus seems that there is a cross-linguistic tendency whereby verbs which signify general ability have or develop other modal meanings such as possibility and permission, whereas those which signify mental/intellectual ability do not. This paper gives an account of this tendency by assigning appropriate formal semantic structures to the two types of ability-signifying verbs. The issue of why, although English CAN once signified mental/intellectual ability, it has today developed possibility and permission meanings will also be pursued, following the line of argument in my previous paper (1990).

AB - In Old English magan means not only ‘be (generally) able to’ but also ‘be possible’ and ‘be permitted to’. In contrast cunnan does not have any other meanings than ‘know (how to)’, ‘be mentally/intellectually able to’. This phenomenon can be observed with respect to similar pairs in other languages, such as French pouvoir and savoir. It thus seems that there is a cross-linguistic tendency whereby verbs which signify general ability have or develop other modal meanings such as possibility and permission, whereas those which signify mental/intellectual ability do not. This paper gives an account of this tendency by assigning appropriate formal semantic structures to the two types of ability-signifying verbs. The issue of why, although English CAN once signified mental/intellectual ability, it has today developed possibility and permission meanings will also be pursued, following the line of argument in my previous paper (1990).

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84930565292&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84930565292&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1515/ling.1991.29.3.361

DO - 10.1515/ling.1991.29.3.361

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84930565292

VL - 29

SP - 361

EP - 396

JO - Linguistics

JF - Linguistics

SN - 0024-3949

IS - 3

ER -