Modal particle

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The articles modal particle and filler word overlap thematically. Help me to better differentiate or merge the articles (→  instructions ) . To do this, take part in the relevant redundancy discussion . Please remove this module only after the redundancy has been completely processed and do not forget to include the relevant entry on the redundancy discussion page{{ Done | 1 = ~~~~}}to mark. Minderbinder 16:53, May 6, 2018 (CEST)

Modal particles (also tinting particles, tinting words or MP ) are part of speech belonging to the particles . Among other things, they serve to express the attitude of a speaker with regard to the statement of the sentence or to judge it. They are particularly common in spoken language . The German is considered one of Modal extremely rich language, which is not self-evident. In many languages ​​there are few or no particles of this class (e.g. French, Spanish ), making them a challenge for translators . Due to their high frequency, they are also important when learning German for non- native speakers . This is particularly problematic because the meaning of both the class and the individual modal particles is not easy to grasp.

Other languages ​​in which modal particles play a larger role are Dutch , which is closely related to German, and z. B. Greek , Indonesian and Japanese .

definition

The modal particles belong in the German language next to z. B. the focus particles or enhancement particles to the class of particles in the narrower sense, i.e. the generally non- inflectable types of speech that cannot be assigned to prepositions , adverbs or conjunctions . Since all particles are non-deflectable, if one wants to undertake a subclassification, differences in the behavior of the individual particles in the sentence must be taken into account. There has been and is a long linguistic discussion about the exact characteristics that make up modal particles . The following criteria for recognizing the German modal particles are generally recognized:

  • They are inflexible (like all particles).
  • They do n't change the truth conditions of an utterance .
  • Modal particles cannot be negated.
  • They cannot act alone as an answer to a question. (A: "He may have a nice sweater!" B: "What does he have?" An answer with "maybe" in the sense of the modal particle is not possible.)
  • They cannot stand before the finite verb at the beginning of a main clause (they cannot be preceded).
  • Modal particles have homonyms in other parts of speech.
  • Modal particles cannot be coordinated, that is, they cannot be connected with and nor with or .

On the importance of selected criteria

What is noticeable about the list given is that most of the criteria represent negative features (“they cannot ...”). Hence, it is difficult to give a simple definition of what a modal particle is. More precisely it can be said for what they are not. This section goes into more detail about some of the key items on the list.

Modal particles do not change the truth conditions

However, the modal particle can serve to illustrate this point . The following two examples are the same except for the presence of the modal particles. The truth of the first sentence in a situation always follows the truth of the second sentence, and vice versa the transition is always possible without affecting the truth of the statement:

  • "Peter has but very hungry."
  • "Peter is very hungry."

This observation is not trivial, because it says that adding or leaving out the particles in a sentence does not change anything in its core message. that is, the modal particle does not belong to the expressed proposition . Modal particles do not add anything to the statement, but stand above it, so to speak. Instead, they give the listener indications of the speaker's level of information, assessments, or other aspects relating to the role of the statement in the context.

Modal particles cannot be negated

From this context that they are not part of the proposition, it can also be understood why modal particles cannot be in the sphere of influence of a negation, because negations have an influence on truth values.

Modal particles are not eligible

In the so-called field model of the German sentence , sentences are divided into three parts by the positions of the verb, the so-called sentence bracket : Vorfeld, Mittelfeldfeld and Nachfeld, as in the following examples. The modal particles can be found in the middle:

Apron left bracket midfield right bracket Nachfeld
He becomes Yes have noticed that I don't like it.
she roast meat probably just fish in the cafeteria.
Peter Has but very hungry had as it appears!

The particles yes, yes, but cannot be put in advance, at best they have other meanings:

Apron left bracket midfield right bracket Nachfeld
* Yes becomes he have noticed that I don't like it
* Well roast meat they just fish in the cafeteria.
# WELL roast meat they just fish in the cafeteria!
# But - Has Peter very hungry had? (* as it appears)

In the first example above, preceded by the modal particle is so unacceptable (marked by an * asterisk) to advance in the second example, the thumbnail position is unacceptable if the modal particle, as usual, is unstressed; The third example shows that a stressed one can be in the forefront, but has to have a different meaning (marked by the # double cross): This is not the modal particle that could be described as "likely", but a different element (a Adverb ), which marks a contradiction to a previous utterance. In the last example, however, the sentence preceded by the sentence can only be interpreted as a question sentence, so that the addition of the how sentence is no longer possible. Consequently, it is a verb first sentence with but not as a particle, but as a conjunction in the left periphery of the sentence (in the so-called connection field). Overall, it can be seen that modal particles cannot occur in advance.

The main class of modal particles

The main class of modal particles - which are sometimes also called tinting particles - include , also, just, because, yes, actually, about, stop, yes, sometimes, just, already, maybe and well . One of the criteria from the list is that modal particles have homonyms in other parts of speech. This means that the same sounding and spelled words can appear in other functions in the sentence. So z. B. yes act as an answer to a question and in this case belongs to the so-called answer particles. Maybe z. B. can be used as a sentence adverb (“Maybe the appointment is tomorrow”) and stand alone in advance. These homonyms have z. Sometimes behavior is completely different from that described in the list of criteria. However, in these cases they also have a different meaning.

The peripheral class of modal particles

In addition, there is a class of modal particles (sometimes called 'particles with a shading meaning' or 'particles capable of being shaded'), which are often also counted among the modal particles, but can be used in advance. These include B. fine, whole, straight, equal, simple, first, at least, finally, generally and calmly . The meaning of these particles does not change whether they are in the foreground or in the middle; therefore they do not have to have homonyms in other parts of speech.

Restrictions

Modal particles are subject to a number of restrictions that are difficult to describe. Modal particles can often not be combined at will. That's how it is

  • He is also awkward.

possible. But not the opposite:

  • * But he's also clumsy.

Furthermore, the respective particles can only occur in certain sentence modes . So it may be used in exclamations ("Does he maybe have a nice car!"), But not in real questions ("* Does he maybe have a nice car?").

The importance of the modal particles

Basics of meaning

In order to understand exactly what modal particles mean, it is important to be clear about what exactly is meaning. A distinction was made between two levels of meaning (see e.g. speech act theory ). On the one hand there is the already indicated sentence content, which is to be taken literally, so to speak: the proposition . On the other hand, there is what is known as illocution , the purpose of an utterance or, more simply: what should be expressed with the utterance of a sentence. This difference is important because the same sentence can mean different things in different contexts ( pragmatics ). While the majority of the words in a language contribute to the proposition, there are also words (such as the modal particles) that do not belong to the proposition, so to speak, on a meta level , but act in the illocutive area. In many theoretical approaches, reference is therefore made to models of common ground to explain their meaning . Maria Thurmair summarizes the importance of the modal particles for the illocutive level as follows:

“Essentially, the modal particles serve to integrate an utterance into the context of interaction. They can be used to refer to shared knowledge of the interlocutors, to assumptions or expectations of the speaker or listener, a specific reference to a previous utterance can be indicated, or the importance that the speaker attaches to the utterance can be marked. "

Thus, with the Modalpartikel indeed be pointed out that the expressed in the set of knowledge shared as already and is thus considered to be provided or the particles stop to indicate that it is knowledge that must be which is not discussed further.

Importance of individual modal particles

Examples of German modal particles are:

because
Importance of special interest, e.g. B. in "What is that?"
but
  • Amazement at information deficit, e.g. B. in "I was there before." (Implies: "As you should actually know.")
  • Mitigation of an imperative, e.g. B. in “go back one more time!”, “Read again what I wrote to you” instead of “go back one more time”, “read again what I wrote to you.” A prompt can go through the particles so their sharpness can be taken away.
just
Expression of a potentially annoying consequence, e.g. B. in "Then you just have to come back tomorrow."
eh
  • ( Upper German , replacing “anyway” more and more often): A situation is presented differently than before due to new information or knowledge, e.g. B .: "Then it is due tomorrow anyway [against the old, invalid information]", "X is anyway [contrary to expectations] on his feet!"
  • in Austrian dialects, however, "eh" can also serve as a reinforcement: "X is eh guad z 'Fuass": "X is really good on foot."
fei (Upper German dialects)
  • Marking that it is a hint from the speaker (usually unmarked in High German), e.g. B. "It is important that the flowers are watered every day."
  • In Thuringian , "ge" (Upper German and Southwest Central German dialects and colloquial languages ​​also "gell") takes on this function (always placed after the end of the sentence): "It is important that the flowers are watered every day, ge."
ready, pure
Reinforcement suggesting completeness, e.g. B. in "He knew absolutely nothing about it."
Yes
  • Indication that the addressee may already have the information "I was there before."
  • Reinforcement of happy as well as negative astonishment: "That's great / disgusting!"
stop (Upper German, replaces "just" more and more often)
Implication that something would have been possible earlier, e.g. B. in "I've been there before" or in "That's just the point." (Implies: "The insight that I've wanted to make clear to you for years.")
times ( colloquial short form of "once")
  • Implication that you cannot do something yourself (at the moment), e.g. B. in "Can you do that?" ("I don't have a free hand at the moment.")
  • Implication of negligence on the part of the addressee, e.g. B. in "Are you finally going to do that?" ("How long do you have to wait?")
beautiful
Negation of the relevance of a thing or person: "What can I do there?", "What does he have to say?", "What does that mean?"
maybe ( Rhenish, colloquial )
Affirmation of an opinion, e.g. B. in "I may be a clumsy man."

Overview of the modal particles

Overview of the main modal particles in German, whose characteristic the Polyfunctionality is

word Modal particle Outline Particle Enhancement Particles Temporal adverb Conjunctive adverb Coordinating conjunction Adverbial determination Comparison particle adjective Sentence adverbial
Yes Yes Yes not clear No No No No No No No
just Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No Yes No
stop Yes No No No No No No No No No
also Yes No Yes No Yes No No No No No
but Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes No No No
beautiful Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No No No
because Yes No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No
about Yes No Yes No No No No No No No
just Yes No Yes No Yes No No No No No
just Yes No Yes No Yes No No No Yes No
but Yes No No No No Yes Yes No No No
maybe Yes No No No No No No No No Yes
well Yes No No No No No No No No Yes

modified from Min-Jae Kwon (2005), p. 10

Genesis of the modal particles

According to Armin Burkhardt , the most common modal particles in use today were formed before the 17th century. Already in the Old High German were present for and yet; already the Middle High German known as and stop . The 16th to 19th centuries proved to be particularly productive, but the development of new modal particles in statu nascendi (for example slowly ) can also be observed in contemporary language . Others, on the other hand, have disappeared from the written language in the course of linguistic history, such as Middle High German ëht, which is still widespread in German dialects.

They evolved from

About the history of modal particle research

Modern research into modal particles began in the 1960s. Before the publication of Harald Weydt's book tinting particles. The German modal words and their French equivalents In 1969, modal particles were often dismissed as “content-free fillings” or “patch words”. Ludwig Reiners even referred to them as “lice in the fur of our language”. With Harald Weydt and a dissertation on modal particles from 1963, extensive linguistic research into modal particles began. Occasionally, however, there were even earlier descriptions and appreciations of the use of modal particles, for example by Johann Christoph Gottsched and Johann Friedrich Heynatz in the 18th century .

literature

Web links

Wiktionary: Tinting particles  - explanations of meanings, word origins, synonyms, translations
Wiktionary: fei  - explanations of meanings, word origins, synonyms, translations
Wiktionary: gell  - explanations of meanings, word origins, synonyms, translations

Individual evidence

  1. ^ Sonja Müller: Distribution and interpretation of modal particle combinations . In: Zenodo . Language Science Press, Berlin 2018, ISBN 978-3-96110-087-3 , doi : 10.5281 / zenodo.1244028 .
  2. ↑ W. Abraham: spokesman deixis and characteristic distribution differential of German modality elements. In: German language. Journal for Theory, Practice, Documentation 40, 2012, pp. 72–95;
    F. Bross: German modal particles and the common ground. In: Helikon. A Multidisciplinary Online Journal 2, 2012, pp. 182-209.
  3. ↑ M. Thurmair: Modal particles and their combinations. Tübingen 1989, p. 2.
  4. ↑ Fabian Bross: German modal particles and the common ground . (PDF; 1.5 MB). In: Helikon. A Multidisciplinary Online Journal 2 (2012), pp. 182-209.
  5. ↑ Min-Jae Kwon: Modal Particles and Sentence Mode Investigations into the syntax, semantics and pragmatics of the German modal particles. (PDF) Dissertation, Ludwig Maximilians University, Munich 2005, p. 10.
  6. ↑ This chapter (with the exception of the sentence about Middle High German ëht ) according to Armin Burkhardt: Tinting particles in German. Meaning and genesis. In: Journal for Germanistic Linguistics 22, 1994, pp. 129–151.
  7. ↑ Schweizerisches Idiotikon , Volume I, Column 82 f., Article genuine with annotation ( digitized version ); Christoph Landolt : Ächt & Ächt - which is a good is a good thing? In: Wortgeschichten from June 23, 2017, ed. from the editors of the Swiss Idiotikon.
  8. ↑ A. Lijndqvist: set of words. Gothenburg 1961, p. 24.
  9. ^ H. Moser: Colloquial language . In: Journal for Dialect Research. 27, 1960, p. 224.
  10. ↑ L. Reiners: German style art. A textbook of German prose . Munich 1943, p. 283.
  11. ↑ AF Krivonosov: The modal particles in the modern German. Kümmerle, Göppingen 1977 (= Göppinger works on German studies 214).
  12. ↑ Karsten Rinas: Language, style and strong sayings. Bastian Sick and his critics. Scientific Book Society, Darmstadt 2011, ISBN 978-3-650-24659-2 , p. 99-104 .