KOLOSTRUKCIONA ANALIZA: (NE)ZAMENJIVOST MODALNIH GLAGOLA „MUST“ I „HAVE TO“

Zbornik radova sa XVII naučnog skupa mladih filologa Srbije, održanog 22. juna 2025. godine na Filološko-umetničkom fakultetu u Kragujevcu, Knj. 1(2026)  [29-44]
 
AUTHOR(S) / AUTOR(I): Đurđina T. Jovanović 
Download Full Pdf   

DOI: https://doi.org/10.46793/MFXVII-1.029J

ABSTRACT / SAŽETAK:

Predmet ovog rada jeste analiza distinktivnih koleksema modalnih glagola must i have to u engleskom jeziku. Ispitivani modali, iz perspektive konstrukcione gramatike, predstavljaju konstrukcije sa praznim poljima namenjenim infinitivnim dopunama. Analiza distinktivnih koleksema ovih modala podrazumeva određivanje infinitiva koje privlači jedna, a koje druga konstrukcija. Cilj istraživanja jeste utvrđivanje razlika između dva naizgled sinonimna modala i njihove (ne)zamenjivosti na osnovu glagola koje privlače. Istraživanje je sprovedeno na onlajn britanskom korpusu British National Corpus, primenom jedne od kvantitativnih metoda u okviru kolostrukcione analize. Kvalitativno analizirani rezultati pokazali su da se glagoli koje konstrukcije privlače razlikuju na osnovu registra kojem pripadaju i određenih semantičkih svojstava. Zapaženo je, takođe, da je modal must formalniji i učestaliji u pisanom, dok je have to, kao neformalnija varijanta, najučestaliji u govorenom diskursu.

KEYWORDS / KLJUČNE REČI:

konstrukciona gramatika, modalni glagoli, must, have to, infinitiv, kolostrukciona analiza.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT / PROJEKAT:

Istraživanje sprovedeno u radu finansiralo je Ministarstvo nauke, tehnološkog razvoja i inovacija Republike Srbije (Ugovor o prenosu sredstava za finansiranje naučnoistraživačkog rada istraživača na akreditovanim visokoškolskim ustanovama u 2025. godini broj: 451-03-136/2025-03/ 200198).

REFERENCES / LITERATURA:

Izvori
Literatura
  • Arts 2011: B. Aarts, Oxford modern English grammar. Oxford University Press.
  • Bajber i dr. 2002: D. Biber, S. Conrad, G. N. Leech, Longman Student Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow Essex England: Longman.
  • Vaseršajt 2019: Ph. Wasserscheidt, Construction Grammar: Basic Principles and Concepts, Ukrainian Linguistics, 49(49): 94–116.
  • Goldberg 1995: A. E. Goldberg, Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to  Argument Structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Goldberg 2003: A. E. Goldberg, Constructions: a new theoretical approach to language, TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences, 7 (5): 219–224.
  • Goldberg 2006: A. Goldberg, Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Gris 2012: S.T. Gries, Collostructions. In Peter Robinson (eds.), The Routledge Encyclopedia of second language acquisition. New York and London: Routledge, Taylor&Francis Group, 92-95.
  • Gris 2015: S. Gries, More (old and new) misunderstandings of collostructional analysis: On Schmid and Küchenhoff (2013), Cognitive Linguistics, 26(3), 505–536.
  • Gris 2023: S. T. Gries, Overhauling collostructional analysis: Towards more descriptive simplicity and more explanatory adequacy. Cognitive Semantics, 9(3), 351–386.
  • Gris i Stefanovič 2004: S.T. Gries, A. Stefanowitsch, Extending collostructional analysis: A corpus-based perspective on alternations. International journal of corpus linguistics, 97- 129.
  • Dauning i Lok 2006: A. Downing, P. Locke, English grammar: A university course. Routledge.
  • Klous i Arts 2010: J. Close and B. Aarts, Current change in the modal system of English: a case study of must, have to and have got to. In U. Lenker, J. Huber, and R. Mailhammer (eds), The History of English Verbal and Nominal Constructions. Volume 1 of English historical linguistics 2008: Selected papers from the fifteenth International Conference on English Historical Linguistics (ICEHL 15), Munich 24-30 August 2008. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 165-181.
  • Korpas Pastor 2021: G. Corpas Pastor, Constructional idioms of ’insanity’ in English and Spanish: A corpus-based study, Lingua, 254: 1–20.
  • Kroft i Kruz 2004: W. Croft and A. D. Cruse, Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: CUP.
  • Lič 2003: G. Leech, “Modality on the Move: The English Modal Auxiliaries 1961 1992.” Modality in Contemporary English ed. by Roberta Facchinetti, Manfred Krug & Frank Palmer, 223–240. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Lič i dr. 2009: G. Leech, M. Hundt, Ch. Mair and N. Smith, Change in contemporary English: A grammatical study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Mikaelis 2004: L. A. Michaelis, Type Shifting in Construction Grammar: An Integrated Approach to Aspectual Coercion. Cognitive Linguistics 15: 1–67.
  • Pavlović 2021: V. Pavlović, Konstrukciona gramatika i kolostrukciona analiza. Niš: Filozofski fakultet.
  • Palmer 1990: F. R. Palmer, Modality and the English Modals (second edition). London: Longman.
  • Stefanovič 2013: A. Stefanowitsch, Collostructional analysis. In Thomas Hoffmann, and  Graeme Trousdale (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar, 290-306.
  • Stefanovič i Gris 2003: A. Stefanowitsch, S. T. Gries, Collostructions: Investigating the interaction of words and constructions, International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 8/2, 209–243.
  • Tošić Lojanica 2021: T. Tošić Lojanica, Exploring present ability: a collostructional approach, Nasleđe, 48: 105−115.
  • Flah 2021: S. Flach, Collostructions: An R implementation for the family of collostructional methods. Package version v.0.2.0, https://sfla.ch/collostructions/
  • Hadlston i Pulam 2002: R. Huddleston, G. K. Pullum, The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Hilpert 2014a: M. Hilpert, Construction grammar and its application to English. Edinburgh University Press.
  • Hilpert 2014b: M. Hilpert, Collostructional analysis. In Corpus methods for semantics: Quantitative studies in polysemy and synonymy, 391-397.
  • Šmid i Kuhenhof 2103: H. Schmid, H. Küchenhoff, Collostructional analysis and other ways of measuring lexicogrammatical attraction: Theoretical premises, practical problems and cognitive underpinnings, Cognitive Linguistics, 24, 531–577.