Date: Fri, 1 Jul 1994 16:02:00 +1200
From: "George Halliday (09)483-9039" HALLIDAYG[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]SCHOOLS.MINEDU.GOVT.NZ
Subject: Re: Double modals in Utah
Within the context of this thread, modals are assumed to be
a small set of verbs defined by both their morphology and syntactic
behaviour. Morphologically these verbs lack particples and the
third person singular form in -s.
Need, and dare are modals in some dialects but not in others.
S. Mufwene gives two example sentences showing this variation
in need - the sentence with do support not having need as a
modal in this sense.
Be and have too, are not modals in this sense ever. Although of
course the term modal is sometimes used in a semantic sense and
in this sense has some cross-linguistic validity. That usage is
perfectly legitimate but not the way I understood the term to be
used in this thread. Sorry to be so long-winded - a clarification