3.3.3.1. Deontic modality
LIS employs several manual signs to encode obligation, prohibition, necessity, recommendation, ability, permission, intention and volition.
Obligation can be conveyed through the signs must and obligation. The modal must is the unmarked marker mainly encoding participant-internal obligation. It can be marked by furrowed eyebrows (fe).
must
Below, we provide a couple of examples showing the use of must in context.
cond
a. palm_up tooth hurt extract must
‘Well, if your tooth hurts, it must be extracted.’
fe
b. room poss(G)1 mess. mum ix say1 arrange must
‘My room was a mess. My mother told me: “You must tidy it.”’
Obligation imposed by participant-external conditions, such as public policies or laws, is encoded through the marker obligation, which is likely to be an example of grammaticalisation into modality marker.
obligation
‘It is obligatory/Have to’
The example below shows the use of obligation in context.
cond
competition participate want ix2 registration obligation
‘If you want to participate in the competition, you have to sign up for it.’
It should be noted that the sign obligation can also be used as an agreement verb. This is illustrated below.
sq y/n
ix2 film ixa horrora ixa fear ix2 ix1 1obligation2 seea
‘As for horror films, do they scare you? I force you to watch them.’
Prohibition is expressed through the markers must^not and forbidden. Both can occur with the typical negative non-manual marker, i.e. headshake (hs). must^not encodes a general prohibition.
must^not
‘Must not’
The example below shows the use of must^not in context.
hs
earlier ix1+2 go_out house father ixa say3a must^not
‘You must not tell dad that we went out earlier.’
forbidden is used to express prohibitions regulated by public policies that cannot be avoided or changed.
forbidden
The example below shows the use of forbidden in context.
sq re hs
friary enter clothes t-shirt shorts forbidden absolutely
‘It is absolutely forbidden to enter a friary with a t-shirt and shorts.’
Necessity is conveyed through the markers must and be_forced. must can be used to convey a necessity connected to unexpected participant-internal conditions.
must
In the example below, the signer expresses the necessity to go to the supermarket since he is having friends for dinner but he finds out that his fridge is empty. As the example shows, must is marked by head nod (hn) rather than furrowed eyebrows as is usually the case when must encodes obligation.
hn
ix1 supermarket go must
‘I have to go to the supermarket.’
On the other hand, when necessity is imposed by external conditions, and we have no possibility of avoiding it, we use be_forced. This marker is lexically specified for the non-manuals grinding teeth (gt) and head tilt backward (ht-b).
gt
ht-b
be_forced
‘(To) be forced to’
Below, we provide an example showing the use of be_forced in context.
gt
ht-b
venice ix(loc)a be_common ixa water CL(5): ‘raise’ ix1 be_forced boot buy
‘The high-tide is very common in Venice. I have to buy boots.’
Recommendations can be expressed by employing the sign better, usually accompanied by a head tilt to the side. This is illustrated below.
ht-left
better
The use of better in recommendations is illustrated below.
cond ht-left
tooth hurt ix2 better tooth^extract go
‘If your tooth hurts, you should get it extracted.’
Ability is conveyed through the sign be_able.
be_able
‘(To) be able to’
be_able can either occur with the mouthing of the Italian modal potere ‘can’ inflected for the third singular person, i.e. può (a), or with the mouthing of the Italian word meaning ‘be able’, namely capace (b). In both instances, the sign expresses ability and can be marked by head nod. We provide two illustrative examples below.
y/n
‘può’
a. car wheel change be_able ix2
‘Can you change the car wheel?’
hn
‘capace’
b. ix1 surf be_able ix1
‘I can surf.’
The deontic negative counterparts of be_able are be_able^not and impossible_pa_pa (SYNTAX 1.5.1.1.2). Both occur with the typical non-manual for negation, i.e. headshake (hs).
hs
be_able^not
be_able^not is used to express the inability of doing something, as exemplified below.
hs
‘capace’
ix1 swim be_able^not
‘I cannot swim.’
The sign impossible_pa_pa is glossed this way because it is obligatory accompanied by the mouth gesture [pa pa].
hs
[pa pa]
impossible_pa_pa
‘(To) not be able to’
This sign conveys the inability of doing something despite having tried hard to succeed in it. In other words, it implies various attempts, which eventually failed.
hs
ix3 mirko 3teach1 chess rule ix1 understand impossible_pa_pa
‘Mirko tried hard to teach me the rules of chess, but I cannot understand them.’
Permission in LIS involves three different markers: be_able, can and feel_free. be_able is used to grant permission to do something, with respect to external conditions. It can be marked by furrowed eyebrows and/or head nod. Since its articulation is homophonous to the marker employed to encode ability, it is only the context that allows to disambiguate its function.
be_able
‘(To) be allowed to’
For instance, in (a) it is used to convey that the daughter is now allowed to return home later since she is older. In (b), the permission conveyed by the sign be_able depends on the time allotted to visitors in the hospital.
hn
fe
a. today ix2 house come_back time late be_able
‘Today, you are allowed to come home later.’
hn
fe
b. hospital 2come1 be_able time at_eight close
‘You are allowed to come to the hospital until 8.’
can is employed to ask or give permission to do something, depending on personal (i.e. participant-internal) conditions.
can
The use of can in context is shown in the two examples below.
a. ix2 hospital come can. ix1 happy ix1
‘You can come to visit me at the hospital. I am glad if you do.’
b. suitcase ix2 stay can
‘You can leave your luggage (here).’
feel_free yields a more general sense of permission.
feel_free
‘(To) feel free to’
Below, we provide an example showing the use of feel_free in interaction.
y/n
A: ix11ask2 computer touch ix1 type
B: feel_free ix
‘I ask you if I can use that computer?’ ‘Yes, feel free to do so.’
The deontic negative counterpart of be_able encoding permission is be_able^not, which conveys the general impossibility for a state of affairs to occur. In other words, it encodes that the event is not allowed due to external conditions. It is usually marked by headshake on the negation not.
hs
be_able^not
‘(To) not be allowed’
The example below shows the use of be_able^not in context.
hs
gianni smoke be_able^not
‘Gianni is not allowed to smoke.’
The deontic negative counterpart of can is can^not (marked by headshake), which is used to deny the permission to do something, depending on participant-internal conditions. This is illustrated in the example below.
hs
can^not
‘Cannot’
Below, we provide an example showing the use of can^not in context.
hs
ix3 hospital come can^not reason ix1+3 argue
‘He cannot come to the hospital because we had a quarrel.’
Intention/volition is conveyed in LIS through the modal want, which can be accompanied by head nod.
want
The example below shows the use of want to convey the intention to buy a house.
hn
ix1 house buy want ix1
‘I want to buy a house.’
Crucially, when the signer wants to express a desire, rather than a true intention of doing something, the modal want displays a reduplicated and reduced articulation. Moreover, the verb is marked by the non-manual consisting in head tilting left and right, to encode the wish which is being expressed.
ht-right-left
ix1 house buy want++
‘I would like to buy a house.’
The negative counterpart is want^not marked by headshake, as in the example below.
hs
ix1 film ix1 see want^not
‘I don’t want to watch a film.’
