A Study on the Differences Between the Modal Verbs "ke" and "keyi" from the Perspectives of Register Grammar and Prosodic Grammar
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70088/hwk6ta37Keywords:
modal verbs, register grammar, prosodic grammar, grammaticalization, chinese linguisticsAbstract
This paper comprehensively investigates the nuanced differences between the Chinese modal verbs "ke" and "keyi" from the dual perspectives of register grammar and prosodic grammar. By systematically examining dictionary definitions, conducting rigorous qualitative and quantitative analyses of exemplary vernacular Chinese corpora, and reviewing theoretical selections from the People's Daily, this research integrates diachronic evolution and grammaticalization theory to reveal several key findings. At the register level, the analysis demonstrates that "ke" predominantly aligns with the Solemn/Classical Register or the Formal Register, whereas "keyi" is firmly situated within the Common Register. Notably, in Modern Chinese, the Formal Register attribute of "ke" has significantly surpassed its historical Solemn/Classical Register attribute. At the prosodic level, the data indicate that "ke" is highly likely to be followed by disyllabic verbs, whereas "keyi" is more frequently followed by monosyllabic verbs. Furthermore, when preceded by adverbs, the proportion of "ke" following monosyllabic adverbs remains relatively high, but this frequency drops sharply when preceded by disyllabic and polysyllabic adverbs. Ultimately, the differences between these two modal verbs are not merely a matter of superficial prosodic matching; rather, they represent the complex result of a synergistic interaction between inherent register attributes and underlying prosodic rules. The study conclusively shows that register grammar and prosodic grammar mutually constrain and condition each other, jointly influencing the grammatical distribution and functional evolution of modal words in contemporary Chinese.References
B. Heine and B. Hong, World lexicon of grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019.
D. Biber, "Register as a predictor of linguistic variation," Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 9-37, 2012.
D. Biber, "Stance in spoken and written university registers," Journal of English for Academic Purposes, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 97-116, 2006.
D. Biber, "Historical patterns for the grammatical marking of stance: A cross-register comparison," Journal of Historical Pragmatics, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 107-136, 2004.
D. Biber, "A register perspective on grammar and discourse: Variability in the form and use of English complement clauses," Discourse Studies, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 131-150, 1999.
D. Atkinson and D. Biber, "Register: A review of empirical," in Sociolinguistic Perspectives on Register, pp. 351-369, 1994.
D. Biber, "Modal use across registers and time," in Studies in the History of the English Language II: Unfolding Conversations, vol. 2, pp. 189, 2004.
M. Ariel, "A grammar in every register?," Pragmatics and Beyond New Series, vol. 155, pp. 265, 2007.
D. Biber and S. Conrad, "Register variation: A corpus approach," in The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, pp. 175-196, 2005.
D. Mindt, An empirical grammar of the English verb: Modal verbs. Berlin: Cornelsen, 1995.
M. C. Samodra and B. Bram, "Modal verb 'shall' in contemporary American English: A corpus-based study," Respectus Philologicus, vol. 41, no. 46, pp. 67-82, 2022.
D. Biber, "What can a corpus tell us about registers and genres?," in The Routledge Handbook of Corpus Linguistics, pp. 241-254, 2010.
F. Suñer, J. Roche, and L. Van Vossel, "Bodily engagement in the learning and teaching of grammar: On the effects of different embodied practices on the acquisition of German modal verbs," Review of Cognitive Linguistics, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 35-63, 2023.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Yuyang Li (Author)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.








