Epistemic Modality in English Buddhist Texts
คำแสดงทัศนะภาวะในตัวบทพระพุทธศาสนาที่เขียนเป็นภาษาอังกฤษ
Keywords:
Buddhist doctrine, English Buddhist texts, epistemic modalityAbstract
This study investigates the use of epistemic modality in English Buddhist texts. While previous studies in the field of epistemic modality focused on the study of epistemic modality markers in academic texts, this study contributes to the view of English Buddhists texts. The amount of 150,000 words of English Buddhist texts comprises 181 tokens. The epistemic modality markers such as may, might, and must are classified into three categories; including certainty, probability, and possibility. The data validation in this study was checked by three English instructors. The results show that the use of epistemic modality with the degree of possibility appears the highest in English Buddhist texts at 72.37 percent. The discussion of epistemic modality in this study reveals Buddhist doctrine in regard to unproven situations, estimation, and future prediction. It is hoped that the results in this study will be beneficial for those who are interested in the Buddhist doctrine as well as those learners of English as a Foreign Language and learners of English as a Second Language.
References
Arrese, J. M. (2009). Effective vs. epistemic stance, and subjective/ intersubjectivity in
political discourse: A case study. Anastasio Tsangalidis & Roberta Facchinetti (eds.).
In Studies on English modality: In honour of Frank Palmer (pp. 24-52). Germany: Peter Lang.
Bishop, E. & Willis, K. (2014). Without hope everything would be doom and gloom:
Young people talk about the importance of hope in their lives, Journal of Youth
study. 17(6). 778-793.
Bonyadi, A. (2011). Linguistic manifestations of modality in newspaper editorials.
International Journal of Linguistics. 3(1). 1-13.
Chaney, J., & Martin, J. (2005). Intercultural business communication, UK: Pearson Education.
Chiluwa, I. M., & Anurada, S. (2020). Expressing (un)certainty through modal verbs in
advance fee fraud emails. Covenant Journal of Language Studies. 8(1). 17-34.
Gabrielatos, C., & McEnery, T. (2005). Epistemic modality in MA dissertation. Fuertes
Olivera, P.A. (ed.). In Lenguay Sociedad: Investigaciones recientes en lingüística aplicada. Lingüística y Filologí (pp. 311-331). Valladolid: Universidad de Valladolid.
Hacquard, V., & Wellwoodm, A. (2012). Embedding epistemic modals in English: A corpus-
based study. Semantics & Pragmatics, 5(4), 1-29.
Hofstede, G. (2009). Making sense of cross-cultural communication: The Hofstede
model of cultural dimensions. Retrieved from http://www.clearlycultural.com /geert-hofstede-cultural-dimensions/uncertainty-avoidance-index/ on January, 21, 2020
Hu, C., & Li, X. (2015). Epistemic modality in the argumentative essays of Chinese EFL
Learners, English Language Learning, 8(6), 20-31.
Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. London: London
Continuum.
Landaw, J., Bodian, S., & Buhnemann, G. (2019). Buddhism for dummies. Canada: John
Wiley & Sons.
Ling, Z. (2015). Explicit grammar and implicit grammar teaching for English major students in
university. Sino US English Teaching, 12(8), 556-560.
Marin-Arrese, J. (2008). Commitment and subjectivity in the discourse of opinion columns
and leading article. a corpus study. Isabel Alonso Belmonte (ed.). In Different
Approaches to Newspaper Opinion Discourse (pp. 82-98). RAEL: revista electrónica de lingüística aplicada
McEnery, T., & Kifle, N. A. (2002). Epistemic modality in argumentative essays of second
language writers. Academic discourse, 182-195.
Martín, P. M. (2001). Epistemic modality in English and Spanish psychological texts. Revista
de Lenguas Para Fines Específicos, 8, 195-208.
Nhat, T., & Minh, N. (2019). Epistemic modality in TED talks on Education. VNU Journal of
Foreign Studies, 35(4), 75-91.
Nordlinger, R., & Traugott, E. C. (1997). Scope and the development of epistemic modality:
evidence from ought to. English Language and Linguistics, 1(2), 295-317.
O’Brien, T. (2006), Monk, Neighbor not at Peace. Heraldnet. Retrieved from
http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=65,3452,0,0,1,0 on January, 21, 2020.
Oh, S. Y. (2007). A corpus study of epistemic modality in Korean college students’ writing in
English. English Teaching, 62(2), 147-175.
Owen, B., Johnson, M., & Mitchell, T. (2013). Expressed humility in organizations:
implications for performance, Teams and Leadership. Organizational Science, 24(5),
-1538.
Panocová, R. (2008). Expression of modality in biomedical texts. Journal of Translation and
Interpretation, 1, 82-89.
Pasto, M. L. (2012). A contrastive analysis of epistemic modality in Scientific English.
Revista de Lenguas Para Fines Especificos, 18, 115-132.
Piqué, J. Posteguillo, S., & Andreu-Besó, J. V. (2001). A pragmatic analysis framework for
the description of modality usage in academic English contexts. ELIA, 2, 213-224.
Prebish, C. S., & Keown, D. (2010). Introducing Buddhism. USA: Routledge.
Rahman, A. M. A., & Rashid, R. A. (2017). Explicit and Implicit Grammar Instructions in Higher
Learning Institutions. English Language Teaching, 10(10), 92-101.
Sanders, J., & Spooren W. (1997). Perspective, subjectivity, and, modality from a cognitive
linguistic point of view. Wolf-Andreas Liebert, Gisela Redeker, and Linda Waugh
(eds.). In Discourse and Perspective in Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam/
Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Servaes, J. (2000). Reflections on the Differences in Asia and European Values and
Communication Modes, Retrieved From http://home.scarlet.be/~tor- 3018/servaes_singapore.pdf on January, 21, 2020
Swan, M. (2016). Practical English Usage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Traugott, E. C. (2010). (Inter)subjectivity and Intersubjectification: a reassessment. In
Kristin Davidse, Lieven Vandelanotte & Hubert Cuyken (eds.). Subjectification,
intersubjectification and grammaticalization (pp. 29-73). Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter
Vold, E. T. (2006). Epistemic modality markers in research articles: A cross-linguistics and
cross-disciplinary study. International Journal Applied Linguistics, 16(1), 61-87.
Vukovic, M. (2014). Strong epistemic modality in parliamentary discourse. Open Linguistics.
, 37-52.
Ziegler, E. (2017). The relative merits of explicit and implicit learning of contrasted algebra
principles. Cross Mark Educational Psychology Review Journal, 30(2), 4.
