Modal meanings become discourse-oriented

Van der Auwera and Plungian’s map of possibility and necessity paths, the main topic of the workshop from which this special issue emerged, offers a rearrangement of Bybee et al.’s data on grammaticalization paths in the domain of modality along three dimensions: necessity vs. possibility, pre-modal vs. modal vs. post-modal, and participant-internal vs. participant-external. In this article, I will argue for a different interpretation of ‘post-modality’ and a different model for dealing with the data. With respect to the pre-modal/modal/post-modal distinction, I will point out that most of the ‘post-modal’ functions are in fact still modal. Furthermore, I will point out that the overall direction of change is not towards ‘non-modal’ but rather an increase in discourse orientation. At the late stages in the development of modal meaning, dubbed as ‘post-modal’ in van der Auwera and Plungian, it signifies a shift toward meanings and functions that contribute to the construction of discourse. Additionally, in various hierarchical models of grammar, modal expressions unidirectionally shift into higher positions that correspond to a higher degree of discourse orientation, thus providing independent confirmation for the model of change proposed here.