Introduction To Mood Differences

4. Differences in discussion
4.1. Mood Confusion has risen out of the use of these terms because the terminological distinction between them is not always rigorously observed when modal concepts are being discussed. To give an introduction to mood, it may formally be defined as a morphosyntactic category akin to tense and aspect. According to Jespersen (1924), he stated that mood is an inherent verbal category: ‘...it is very important that we speak of mood only if the attitude of mind of the speaker is shown in the form of the verb: mood is thus a syntactic, not a notional category’. Lyons (1977) also retains that ‘mood is a grammatical category that is found in some, but not in all languages’. In describing the mood system in English,

In article (2), on the other hand, the researchers tried to distinguish between ‘deontic, and directive uses of modals. They tried to explain that the traditional definition of deontic modality in terms of the notions of permission and obligation is not appropriate. They also tried to explain that the directive uses of the modals (permission and obligation) does not belong under the label of deontic modality rather it should be analyzed in speech act terms. The researchers argue that the large majority of instances of mogen (may) and moeten (must) can be classified in terms of dynamic, deontic and directive modality. In this article the researchers explain these three modality with some examples. They are given

Actually, here the third line is an instruction. 4.2.2.3 Deontic modality:
The researchers define and analyze deontic modality. Here they show deontic modality is often not separated from dynamic modality, which indicates abilities or needs of the agent. The data for both modals feature a number of instances expressing ‘moral acceptability’ (in mogen) or ‘moral necessary’ (in moeten) without it involving a directive meaning of permission or obligation. Those examples support the argument that deontic modality should not be defined under directive modality but in separate terms. For example:
A: En gij gaat dan uw gedichten meebrengen of wat?
B: ja want ik kan zo moeilijk beslissen wat dat ‘k ga nemen. Ik moet er drie uitemen en ze moeten een beetje verband hebben met elkaar vind ik en 't mag nie‘ te zwartgallig zijn vind ik.
‘A: And you are going to bring your poems or what?
B: Yes, because I have such a hard time deciding which ones I am going to take. I have such a hard a hard time deciding which ones I am going to take. I have to select three, and they should [moeten] fit together somewhat, I think, and it shouldn’t be too sinister I