[INDOLOGY] modality, exclusion and pervasion

Patrick McAllister pma at rdorte.org
Fri Jul 2 08:39:01 UTC 2021

On Thu, Jul 01 2021, Brendan S. Gillon, Prof. via INDOLOGY wrote:

> Without gainsaying in the least either Patrick's point or Birgit's 
> supplement, let me say that `incompatibility' is a modal word in English 
> in virtue of the suffix `ability', whereas the Sanskrit word `virodha', 
> like the English word `exclusion', is not a modal word. Of course, that 
> does not preclude  an author using `virodha' modally, but
> linguistic evidence would have to be adduced to establish that.

Dear Brendan,

just to clarify: I was only expressing a hunch about where one could
start looking for notions of modality that are not just linguistic.  I
generally agree with the points made in this thread by Matthew Kapstein
and John Taber that modality was not a subject of systematic reflection
(though I would like to reread the arguments Birgit Kellner indicated in
this light), and I also share John Taber’s opinion about necessary truth
in this context.

Best wishes,

Patrick McAllister
long-term email: pma at rdorte.org

More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list