Misunderstanding Modality In Responses To WH- Interrogatives [New]

Martin (1992: 39):

The one clause type to which the notion of negotiation through grading does not transparently apply is the wh interrogative. One might argue that in an adjacency pair like the following, the response simply supplies the missing experiential meaning; grading is not an issue:

What do you reckon would be good for a five-year-old kid?

— Fairy tales.

Note however that the elliptical response does take over the degree of probability coded in the wh interrogative; it's [sic] full form is She would like fairy tales, with modality probable, as opposed to possible or certain. The actual answer to this question is taken up in 2.8 below (text 2) and demonstrates that interlocutors are prepared to negotiate modality in the context of wh interrogatives where they feel uncomfortable with what an elliptical response might imply: — She'll like fairy tales, does she? The nonellipitical reply enables its speaker to adjust modality in the tag.

Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, this is all utter nonsense. The grading of modality in responses to WH- interrogatives is not at all problematical, as demonstrated by

What do you reckon would be good for a five-year-old kid?

— Fairy tales, possibly/probably/certainly. (elliptical)

— She'd possibly/probably/certainly like fairy tales. (non-elliptical)

[2] To be clear, because the Mood tag reprises the Finite element, the only way to "adjust modality in the tag" is to first "adjust" it in the Finite:

What do you reckon would be good for a five-year-old kid?

— She could like fairy tales, couldn't she? (low)

— She would like fairy tales, wouldn't she? (median)

— She must like fairy tales, mustn't she? (high)

Cf

What do you reckon would be good for a five-year-old kid?

— She'll possibly like fairy tales, won't she? (low)

— She'll probably like fairy tales, won't she? (median)

— She'll certainly like fairy tales, won't she? (high)