Modal verbs

Formally, in NEE the central modal verbs can, could, may, might, must, shall, should, will, would are the same as in SE. However, usage and distribution of these forms differs in some respects from SE, to the extent that some regard the system as closer to that of Scots than it is to Standard English and English dialects in the South and Midlands (Beal et al. 2012: 65). The main contrasts with SE are demonstrated below in relation to shall, must, would, ‘double modals’ and two semi-modals. The discussion focuses mainly on modal verbs in clauses with positive polarity; see this section for an account of modal verbs with negative clitics attached.

Shall

Beal claims, based on an analysis of the NECTE corpus (the precursor of DECTE) that shall is 'hardly used at all in the North-east’ (2008: 386). In English generally, it is also the rarest of the central modals (LGSWE: 486) and has been in decline throughout the twentieth century (Mair 2006: 101-102), particularly in declaratives where it now has a rather formal quality. In present-day English it is mostly to be found in first-person interrogatives, as in (1). But in NEE, will is also acceptable in this context (2).

(1) What shall I do now? (2019)

(2) What will I do tonight after work. Suggestions please (2016)

Must

SE and NEE generally coincide in relation to must in clauses with positive polarity, where it is used with the meaning of obligation (example 3) or to express a conclusion (example 4). Beal et al. (2012:67) also note that in contrast to SE negative must not can be used to express conclusions (example 5) as well as obligations (2012: 67).

(3) Bruce must apologise (2011)

(4) Bruce must be running out of patience (2011)

(5) Thought I’d replied to this yesterday but it mustn’t have worked (2019)

In terms of the expression of obligation, Beal et al. (2012: 67) record a distinctive usage in relation to the semi-modal have got to. In SE the negative haven’t go to means ‘not obliged to’ (example 6); in NEE it can also be used to mean ‘obliged not to’ (example 7).

(6) at least I haven’t got to worry about it for another 5 year (2019)

(7) Only right, we haven’t got to upset toonies who shop there (2014)

Would

The respelling <wad> is common in RTG, and also has historical pedigree, appearing in the work of Burns, for example: ‘O wad some Pow’r the giftie gie us / To see oursels as others see us!’

(8) Oh yes I wad (2015)

(9) I wad have nee reason to go into town for owt (2014)

‘Double modals’

According to Schneider (2004: 285), ‘double modals’ (that is, two modal verbs appearing in a single verb phrase) are found in Scotland and northern England, the American south and the Caribbean. Beal et al. suggest that double modals are permissible in NEE ‘so long as the second modal is can or could’ (2012: 68). Evidence from RTG, however, would suggest that a wider range of permutations is possible.

(10) I think that might could be it (2014)

(11) i reckon we might could struggle (2013)

(12) Kent-Mackem would might be a bit of a clue for them (2019)

(12) Or maybe it should might inspire him to say right I’ll fucking show you lot (2019)

There is considerable scholarly debate about the origins of double modals. The main argument is over whether they should be seen as remnants of the earlier system in English (lasting until the transition from Middle English to Early Modern English) in which two-modal sequences were permissible, or as a later innovation in Scots and related dialects of the far north of England (see Schneider 2004: 286). Whatever the origin, by the nineteenth century they are firmly established in northern British varieties, as attested in the EDD (Fennell and Butters 1996) and survive in the contemporary NEE dialect (albeit at a low frequency). Although the claim by Beal et al. (2012: 68) that this construction is ‘receding northwards’ and is ‘now very rare in Tyneside and apparently unknown in Sunderland or Middlesbrough’ is broadly justifiable, it is perhaps slightly pessimistic, given the feature’s survival in RTG.

Semi-modal verbs

Had better and have (got) to have phonologically reduced forms in colloquial speech, captured orthographically in these RTG examples.

(13) So they better make a decision on Monday (2020)

(14) Geordies man, you gotta love em (2020)

In dialects in the north of England, forms in -r- can also be found.

(15) They berra not cancel it (2018)

(16) Gorra laugh like (2013)

These spellings represent a lexically-restricted connected speech process which Wells calls 'T-to-R' (1982: 370). This is a widespread northern/midlands feature in which /r/ replaces intervocalic /t/ in certain contexts, resulting in outputs such as ge[ɹ] off, ge[ɹ] in, shu[ɹ] up and hi[ɹ] 'im.

(17) Gerroff the pitch man Hancock!!(2020)

(18) GerrrrrrrrrrrRRRRIN yafukaz! (2016)

(19) Shurrup man you horse fiddler (2020)

(20) Hirrim in the eye, hirrim in the eye, hirrim in the eye with a Roker pie whey aye, whey aye (2011)

(21) Wot Can Ya Dee Wirra Fone That's Been Drowned? (2011)

Typically, T-to-R occurs cross-lexically, as in (16), (17), (18) and (19). However, sometimes the rule applies within a word, as in better → berra ['bɛɹə], though in this case it is restricted to morpheme boundaries (or what are perceived as morpheme boundaries), as in getting → gerrin, better → berra, matter → marra, little → lirrel. Th-to-R occurs occasionally cross-lexically, but only with with (21).

References

Beal, Joan. 2008. English Dialects in the North of England: Morphology and Syntax. In Varieties of English I: The British Isles, edited by Bernd Kortmann and Clive Upton, 373-403. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Beal, Joan, Lourdes Burbano-Elizondo, Carmen Llamas. 2012. Urban North-Eastern English: Tyneside to Teesside. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad, Edward Finegan. 1999. The Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Longman: Harlow.

Fennell, Barbara and Ronald Butters. 1996. Historical and Contemporary Distribution of Double Modals in English. In Focus on the USA. Varieties of English around the World, edited by Edgar Schneider, 265-288. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Mair, Christian. 2006. Twentieth Century English: History, Variation and Standardization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Schneider, Edgar. 2004. The English Dialect Heritage of the Southern United States. In Legacies of Colonial English: Studies in Transported Dialects, edited by Raymond Hickey, 262-309. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wells, John. 1982. Accents of English 2: The British Isles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.