THE CRITICAL EVALUATION ON THE USE OF MODALITY IN ARTICLES PUBLISHED BY MODALITY JOURNAL OF UIN SJECH DJAMIL DJAMBEK BUKITTINGGI
This study aims to critically evaluate the use of modality in academic articles published in Modality Journal of UIN Sjech Djamil Djambek Bukittinggi, with a focus on how modal auxiliary verbs function to express degrees of certainty and politeness in academic writing. The research is driven by several identified problems: (1) a tendency among writers to overuse high-certainty modals such as must and will , which can create a dogmatic tone; (2) insufficient hedging through low- or medium-certainty modals like might or could ; and (3) a limited awareness of how modality influences interpersonal dynamics, particularly in balancing assertiveness and politeness. These issues may affect the credibility, persuasiveness, and reader reception of academic arguments. The research employs a mixed-methods approach, combining quantitative content analysis and qualitative critical discourse analysis to examine 32 articles from Modality Journal published in 2023 and 2024. Data were collected through systematic document analysis and coded based on Halliday’s classification of modality (degree of certainty: high, medium, low) and Palmer’s epistemic-deontic functions, while politeness strategies were analyzed using Brown and Levinson’s politeness theory. The data were categorized using structured coding sheets and analyzed both statistically (using frequency distribution and percentages) and thematically to interpret linguistic patterns and their rhetorical implications. The findings reveal that modal verbs such as can , may , should , and will are frequently used, with can and may serving primarily epistemic functions (expressing ability and possibility) and contributing to hedging, while should and Must often appear in deontic and predictive roles, respectively, typically in recommendations and conclusions. However, the overuse of high-certainty modals (must , should , will ) and lack of variation with softer modals (might , would , could ) reduce the level of politeness and collaborative tone in many articles. Although some authors employ mitigation strategies effectively, there is a general need for greater balance between certainty and caution. The study concludes that improving modal verb selection by increasing hedging variation and reducing absolutist language can enhance the academic nuance, credibility, and persuasiveness of scholarly writing in the journal.