CONCLUSION
Pragmatics is the study of how to interpret the meaning of an
utterance depending on context. Any pragmatic study requires the analysis of
some key terms (reference, presupposition, implicature, speech act, and
inference) which show the relations of participants to discourse. Indeed, it is
the context that shapes the meaning of words; however, the speaker's intention
can affect his utterances so that the study of these utterances could
demonstrate how far the speaker is committed to his utterance. The appearance
of the attitude and the stance of the speaker towards the proposition is known
as modality. In English, modality is often limited to the set of modals because
they are the only words that have the criteria of double-meaning epistemic and
deontic. At first sight, the epistemic and the deontic senses overlaps since a
single modal conveys both meanings. A deeper analysis proves the existence of
distinctive features of the epistemic and the deontic uses. Having in mind
these criteria the student can not only know whether a modal is appropriate but
also he can use it appropriately. The issue is to find out whether students
bear these features in mind when interpreting the meaning of a modal or when
using a modal. To solve the problem, we must test students but, how to
undertake this test so that the recognition and the production of a modal in an
appropriate situation will reflect students' knowledge and understanding of
modals? The following chapter will provide the research methodology.
CHAPTER TWO: RESEARCH
METHODOLOGY
In this chapter we shall describe our research methodology.
For this, we shall divide the chapter into five sections: the approach, the
data collection techniques and instruments, the sampling, the problems
encountered in the field and solutions provided, and the data analysis
procedure.
II.1 - APPROACH
The main objective of our study is to find out how well first
year students at the department of Anglophone Studies, understand and make use
of English modals. That is, how well they use modals in appropriate contexts.
Do they consistently use the right modal in the right context? Do they
understand the meaning of modals?
Our hypothesis is that students don't always understand the
meanings of modals and that they do not always use modals appropriately because
modals express both deontic and epistemic meanings. The modals we shall study
are: must, may, should, will, shall, can, might, could and would.
We will check our hypothesis in the production and
comprehension of a sample of students. To test this hypothesis, two concepts
should be considered: production and understanding. By production, we mean the
use of modals through writing; Understanding refers to the capacity to
recognize the meaning of modals in written sentences. (cf. section II.2). The
appropriate use and the understanding of modals depend on the knowledge of the
speaker's subject (Who the speaker is and of whom he is speaking), his action
orientation (The speaker is talking about the state of facts or he is talking
about something that should be performed), the focus of his intention (The
speaker is drawing attention on a subject or on an event), the basis of his
point of view (The speaker's point of view rests on known facts or on
forthcoming facts), the periphrastic equivalence of the modals, and the
paraphrase of the modals (An adjective or adverb is convenient, or a past
participle).
A piece of research including all these points requires the
adoption of a pragmatic approach, since they would be well displayed through
the study of reference (speaker, addressee, subject), presupposition (social
status), implicature (knowledge of the speaker's action orientation); inference
( knowledge of the speaker's evidence) and speech act (representatives,
performatives). We used a quantitative approach to determine how many students
understand the meanings of modals and how many students use modals
appropriately. We used specific techniques and instruments to collect our data.
| 
