3.3.3.2. Epistemic modality
Epistemic modality markers convey the signer’s evaluation or judgment about the possibility or impossibility that an event has occurred, is occurring or will occur. The signer can be more or less certain about his/her evaluation, which is formulated considering direct evidences or personal knowledge or belief. LIS employs several manual signs yielding epistemic modality, some of which also function as deontic markers (LEXICON 3.3.3.1). In these instances, it is only the context that allows to disambiguate the function of the modality marker.
In this section, we list the lexical markers of epistemic modality and their semantics. For details about the morphological properties of the corresponding non-manual markers, as well as the syntactic distribution of the epistemic markers, the reader is referred to MORPHOLOGY 3.4 and SYNTAX 2.3.1.3, respectively.
Epistemic certainty, namely certainty about the likelihood of the event in the utterance, is encoded through the modal be_able, and the signs obligation and sure. These yield slightly different semantics but share the certainty the signer has of the likelihood of the event described in the utterance, which is based on his/her knowledge or available evidences. We describe each in turn.
be_able encodes a strong degree of certainty, and it is used when the signer knows that the event is possible based on his/her knowledge of the external conditions. This is further specified by the articulation of the non-manuals head nod (hn) and furrowed eyebrows (fe) which in general express certainty (MORPHOLOGY 3.4.2).
fe
hn
be_able
‘Can’
In the example below, the signer implies that he has the possibility of checking the luggage because he knows that the situation allows him to do that (for instance, he does not have anything else to do).
fe
hn
suitcase poss3 ix1 control be_able ix1
‘I can watch her luggage.’
be_able also functions as epistemic marker when it conveys the certainty of the signer about the ability of someone/something else. In other words, it can be used when the signer is sure that the event is possible because he knows that the agent is capable of fulfilling it. In so doing, the marker has a double function in that it conveys both the ability of the interlocutor and the certainty of the signer about it. This holds both when the agent is human, in (a) below the signer is saying that he is sure that Gianni is able to win the competition, and when the agent is non-human, in (b) the signer knows that the electric car can drive for 400 km. In so doing, epistemic certainty is conveyed. In both instances, be_able is reduplicated and marked by furrowed eyebrows (fe), repeated head nod (hn) and puffed cheeks (pc), as to underline the certainty.
pc
hn
fe
a. gianni win be_able++
‘I am sure that Gianni is able to win (the competition).’
pc
hn
fe
b. four^hundred kilometre be_able++
‘(The electric car) has a driving range of 400 km.’
obligation is used when the signer describes an event that is inevitably going to happen due to the present conditions. In these instances, the sign occurs with the mouthing of the Italian word for ‘necessarily’, namely per forza.
obligation
‘Necessarily’
The example below shows the use of obligation to express that eating all chocolate cream is definitely going to happen.
Context: you and your girlfriend love chocolate cream. She bought a jar and hid it. You find it while she is not at home.
‘per forza’
ix1 eat all obligation
‘I eat it all, I can’t resist.’
One further possibility of expressing epistemic certainty is to employ the sign sure.
sure
‘(To) be sure’
‘Surely’
This sign can either function as a predicative adjective (a), or sentential adverb (b). It can be accompanied by head nod and furrowed eyebrows.
a. ix1 sure ix2 chess understand impossible_pa_pa
‘I am sure that you will never understand how to play chess.’
hn
fe
b. sure gianni come
‘Gianni is coming surely.’ (based on Lerose, 2012: 344)
The sign obvious, sometimes marked by head nod, can be employed as well. Interestingly, this could be an example of grammaticalisation of the adjective bright into a modal encoding epistemic certainty.
obvious
Below, we provide an example showing the use of obvious as lexical marker of epistemic modality.
lucaa ixa exam pass obvious
‘It is obvious that Luca will pass the exam.’
On the other hand, epistemic certainty that the event is surely not going to happen is conveyed in LIS through can^not and impossible_no_way.
can^not is used to convey that the event cannot happen because of the lack of favourable conditions. It implies that if the conditions change, the event may become possible. It can be accompanied by headshake.
can^not
‘(To) not be possible’
Below, we provide a couple of examples showing the use of can^not as lexical marker of epistemic modality.
cond
a. sea SASS(flat open 4): ‘flat’ wave exist.not leave surf can^not
‘If the sea is flat with no waves, it is not possible to surf.’
hs
b. car wheel hole CL(flat open 5): ‘deflate’. ix jack exist.not. wheel change can^not
‘You have a punctured tyre. You do not have the jack. It is impossible to change the wheel.’
The sign impossible_no_way is the strongest negative epistemic marker. It is lexically specified for the non-manual puffed cheeks (pc) and can be accompanied by headshake.
hs
pc
impossible_no_way
‘(To) be absolutely unlikely to happen’
This marker yields the knowledge of the signer that the event is surely not going to happen due to the absolute absence of favourable conditions.
a. wheel car ix1 change impossible_no_way
‘I cannot change the (car) wheel.’
b. ix1 surf impossible_no_way because shark exist ix(loc) ix1 not impossible_no_way
‘I am definitely not going to surf because there are sharks, I really can’t.’
When the signer is expressing his/her judgment about the likelihood of an event, (s)he uses be_possible(1) or be_possible(2). These manual signs only differ in their movement: be_possible(1) displays an arc-shaped downward path movement (a), whereas be_possible(2) shows a double downward short movement (b).
a. be_possible(1)
‘(To) be possible’
b. be_possible(2)
‘(To) be possible’
These epistemic markers can either be used if the signer has some evidence for the likelihood of the event, or to express his/her hypotheses and suppositions. The different degrees of certainty and possibility are encoded through non-manual markers (see MORPHOLOGY 3.4 for their possibility of spreading). Specifically, squinted eyes usually convey the signer uncertainty about the likelihood of the event (a); raised eyebrows and mouth corners down (md), sometimes combined with a head tilt backwards, express that the event could be possible but the signer is not sure due to lack of evidence. In other words, they express a presupposition (b). Head nod encodes a higher probability that the event can happen considering the circumstances (c-d), despite the lack of evidences. Signers can add a further manual marker, glossed palm_back in (d), to state that they do not have evidence for it at the time of the utterance.
sq
a. friend ix1 look_for find be_possible(1)
‘I (think) I can find the friend I am looking for.’
md
re
b. headache be_possible(1) reason sleep little
‘Maybe you have a headache because you did not sleep enough.’
hn
c. ixa daughter ixafuture queen be_possible(2)
‘In the future, the daughter could become queen.’
hn
d. date two^five december train ix(loc) seat empty be_possible(2) palm_back
‘It is possible to find free seats on the train on December 25th.’
When the signer has no knowledge or evidence about the likelihood of the event, (s)he can use the sentence adverbial maybe (a) (LEXICON 3.5), the modal seem (b), or the verb know^not (c) occurring with the typical non-manual for negation, i.e. headshake.
a. maybe
b. seem
c. know^not
‘Do not know’
We provide one example for each marker below.
a. maybe ix brother poss1 accident
‘Maybe my brother had a (car) accident.’
b. seem ix brother poss1 forget
‘It seems that my brother forgot (our appointment).’
hs
c. ix brother poss1 where ix1 know^not
‘I do not know where my brother is.’
