Modality in Editorials of Pakistani English Newspapers: A Corpus Based Study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modality is an important grammatical expression which finds its expression in the editorial section of newspapers in Pakistan. Firstly, this paper deals with the analysis of “Modals” in English and highlights their nature and function. Secondly, it reports on which modal verbs are commonly used by the editors. Thirdly, it is focused on how the modal verbs in Pakistani English newspapers are used to manipulate readers’ opinion towards specific issues. For this purpose, a corpus of two Pakistani English newspapers: The Dawn and The News, equally divided by editors, was analyzed wielding concordance tool. The comparative analysis of these newspapers revealed that both the editors chose mainly predictive auxiliary modals such as will and would to the other types of modal. The predictive modal for The News suggested that prediction about the future “what will/would happen” was the major apprehension of the editorial writers. On the other hand, comparing the modals of obligation in the two newspapers, The Daily Dawn was more focused on solution—what should be done.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it