The pragmatic role of modal possibility utterances in the context of academic writing

This paper investigates the nature of modal possibility constructions and discursive factors that influence their use in contexts of academic writing. For the first time, the study involves data derived from comparative frequency analysis of Russian and German linguistic papers. From the pragmatic point of view, possibility constructions can be interpreted in two ways - they serve to transmit objective knowledge on the one hand, and are used as convincing, precaution and hedging strategies, on the other hand. With a specific focus on their intention and communicative value, possibility statements are brought into correspondence with epistemic and ontological modality.

References
[1] Gee P.J. How to do Discourse Analysis. A Toolkit. Second edition. London & New York, Routledge, 2014, 208 p.
[2] Ehlich K. Deutsch als fremde Wissenschaftssprache. Jahrbuch Deutsch als Fremdsprache, 1993, Bd. 19, S. 13-42.
[3] Nefedov S.T. Filologicheskie nauki. Voprosy teorii i praktiki - Philological Sciences. Issues of Theory and Practice, 2016, no. 9 (63), pp. 141-145.
[4] Meyer P.G. Hedging strategies in written academic discource: strenghtening the argument by weakening the claim. In: Markkanen R., Schroder H., eds. Hedging and discource: approaches to the analysis of a pragmatic phenomenon in academic texsts (Research in text theory=Untersuchungen zur Texttheorie; vol. 24). Berlin, New York, de Gruyter, 1997, pp. 21-42.
[5] Thue E. Epistemic modality markers in research articles: a cross-linguistic and cross-disciplinary study. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2006, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 616-87.
[6] Vazquez I., Giner D. Beyond Mood and Modality: Epistemic Modality Markers as Hedges in Research Articles. A Cross-Disciplinary Study. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses, 2008, no. 21, pp. 171-190.
[7] Kresta R. Realisierungsformen der InterpersonalitM in vier linguistischen Fachtextsorten des Englischen und des Deutschen. Frankfurt a/M et al., Lang, 1995, 406 S.
[8] Nefedov S.T. Nauchnoe obozrenie: gumanitarnye issledovaniya - Science Review: Humanities Research, 2016, no. 9, pp. 111-118.
[9] Admoni W. Der deutsche Sprachbau. Moskau, Verlag Prosveshchenie, 1986, 334 S.
[10] Nefedov S.T. Universitetskii nauchnyi zhurnal - Humanities & Science University Journal, 2016, no. 21, pp. 34-42.
[11] Krasheninnikova E.A. Modal’nye glagoly i chastitsy v nemetskom yazyke [Modal Verbs and Particles in the German Language]. Moscow, Uchpedgiz, 1958, 158 p.
[12] Bulygina T.V., Shmelev A.D. Yazykovaya kontseptualizatsiya mira (na materiale russkoi grammatiki) [Linguistic Conceptualization of the World (based on Russian Grammar Materials]. Moscow, Shkola "Yazyki russkoi kuTtury", 1997, 576 p.
[13] Konnen. Duden online. URL: http://www.duden.de/rechtschreibung/koennen (accessed January 12, 2017).
[14] Ozhegov S.I., Shvedova N.Yu., ed. Moch’. Tolkovyi slovar’ russkogo yazyka [Dictionary of the Russian Language]. Moscow, Az", 1992. Available at: http://www.lib.ru/DIC/OZHEGOW/ozhegow_m_o.txt (accessed January 12, 2017).
[15] Paducheva E.V. Evidentsial’nye pokazateli i ikh rezhimy interpretatsii [Evidential Markers and their Registers of Interpretation]. Acta linguistica petropolitana. Trudy instituta lingvisticheskikh issledovanii - Acta linguistica petropolitana. Transactions of the Institute for Linguistic Studies, 2014, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 529-541.
[16] Bakhmutova I.A. Voprosy yazykoznaniya - The Voprosy Jazykoznanija journal [Topics in the Study of Language], 2012, no. 3, pp. 122-144.
[17] Scharloth J., Okamura S. Die feinen Unterschiede. Zur sozialen Konstruktivitat von Begrnhungsritualen im Japanischen unter formal Statusgleichen. Zeitschrift fur allgemeine Linguistik, 2010, 52, S. 49-79.
[18] Bucking S. Zur Syntax hypothetischer Vergleichssatze im Deutschen. Zeitschrift fur germanistische Linguistik, 2015, 43 (2), S. 261-305.
[19] Nikitina E.N. Voprosy yazykoznaniya - The Voprosy Jazykoznanija journal [Topics in the Study of Language], 2011, no. 6, pp. 3-28.
[20] Kirichenko N.V. Nauchnyi stil’ [The Scientific Prose Style]. Kozhina M.N., ed. Stilisticheskii entsiklopedicheskii slovar’ russkogo yazyka [Stylistic Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Russian Language]. 2nd edition, revised and enlarged. Moscow, Flinta: Nauka, 2006, pp. 242-248.
[21] Steinhoff T. Wissenschaftliche Textkompetenz: Sprachgebrauch und Schreibentwicklung in wissenschaftlichen Texten von Studenten und Experten. Tubingen, Max Niemeyer Verlag, 2007, 455 S.
[22] Arkad’ev P.M. Voprosy yazykoznaniya - The Voprosy Jazykoznanija journal [Topics in the Study of Language], 2014, no. 5, pp. 68-96.
[23] Uryson E.V. Voprosy yazykoznaniya - The Voprosy Jazykoznanija journal [Topics in the Study of Language], 2010, no. 3, pp. 30-58.
[24] Paducheva E.V. Voprosy yazykoznaniya - The Voprosy Jazykoznanija journal [Topics in the Study of Language], 2011, no. 3, pp. 3-18.
[25] Brandt P. Generische Moglichkeit in Medial konstruktionen. Abraham W., Leiss E., Hrsg. Modalitat. Epistemik und Evidentialitat bei Modalverb, Adverb, Modalpartikel und Modus. Tubingen, Stauffenburg, 2009, S. 79-100.
[26] Eslon P.A. Modal’noe znachenie vozmozhnosti/nevozmozhnosti v russkom yazyke: tipologiya i sredstva vyrazheniya [The Modal Meaning of Possibility/Impossibility in the Russian Language: Typology and Forms of its Expression]. Diss. ... cand. filol. sc. Tartu, Tartuskii gos. un-t, 1986, 216 p.
[27] Zolotova G.A., Onipenko N.K., Sidorova M.Yu. Kommunikativnaya grammatika russkogo yazyka [The Communicative Grammar of the Russian Language]. Moscow, Nauka, 2004, 544 p.