Matulewska, Aleksandra2016-02-042016-02-042009Comparative Legilinguistics, vol. 1, 2009, pp. 133-145.2080-5926http://hdl.handle.net/10593/14256This paper deals with the methods of expressing deontic modality in statutory instruments. The author analyzes three pure meanings that is to say; (i) obligation, (ii) prohibition and (iii) permission. Within those three meanings three sub-meanings are distinguished. Within the meaning of obligation, the author distinguishes the following sub-meanings: (i) unlimited duty, (ii) conditional duty, and (iii) external duty. Within the meaning of prohibition the following three sub-meanings may be distinguished: (i) unlimited prohibition, (ii) conditional prohibition, and (iii) external prohibition. Within the meaning of permission we have distinguished three sub-meanings: (i) unlimited permission, (ii) conditional permission, and (iii) external permission. The exponents of deontic modality are presented in the tables and compared in order to show potential translation equivalents.eninfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessdeontic modalitystatutory instrumentslegal languageprohibitionpermissionobligationArtykuł