조동사 ‘會’의 ‘가능성’ 의미는 많은 학자들에 의해 연구되어 왔지만, 이 ‘가능성 會’ 의 핵심 의미가 무엇인지에 대해서는 논의가 적은 편이었다. 본고는 ‘가능성 會’의 핵심 의미를 밝히고, 이를 통해 ‘가능성 會’의 다양한 의미에 접근해보고자 했다. ‘가 능성 會’는 흔히 ‘미래’와 관련지어 논의되어 왔다. ‘미래’의 중요 기능은 ‘의도’와 ‘예 측’이며, ‘예측’은 통제할 수 없는 상황을 나타내는데 쓰인다. ‘會’도 ‘예측’을 나타내며 통제할 수 없는 상황에 쓰이므로 ‘예측 기반 미래’를 나타낸다고 볼 수 있다. ‘가능성 會’가 ‘예측 기반 미래’의 의미 특징을 보이는 것은 ‘가능성 會’의 핵심 의미 때문이 다. ‘가능성 會’의 핵심 의미는 ‘어떤 조건에 따라 어떤 결과가 자연스럽게 발생함’으 로 볼 수 있다. ‘가능성 會’의 의미들은 ‘예측’의 의미가 내포되는지 여부로 나눌 수 있는데, ‘예측’ 의미는 ‘會’의 의미 해석에서 화자가 자신의 시점을 ‘조건’ 부분에 둘 때만 나타난다.

Textbook is very important in English learning and teaching. The goals of this paper are (i) to analyze the distributions of modal auxiliaries in middle school and high school English textbooks and (ii) to compare the analysis results with those of the general- purpose English corpora. Our study is based on Corpus Linguistics, and we are using corpus-analysis methods and tools in our research. In our study, we consider English textbooks as corpus texts and we will analyze them with NLPTools, which is a corpus- analyzing program. After we survey the distributions of modal auxiliaries, we will focus on a modal auxiliary can. We will examine not only syntactical distributions of a modal can but also semantic/functional distributions of this modal in English textbooks. In order to analyze the semantical distributions of can, we will use semantic tags and divide its semantic/functional category into three groups: ability, permission, and possibility. We will also divide the syntactic distributions into the nine verb phrase structures. After we closely examine the syntactic and semantic/functional distributions of a modal can, we will compare the analysis results with those of the LLC Corpus, the LOB Corpus, and the British National Corpus. Through the study, we want to show that the actual distributions and usages of a modal can in middle and high school English textbooks are a little different from those in other general-purpose English corpora.

This paper aims to examine hedging expressions expressed by epistemic modal auxiliaries and to analyze their grammatical function, intrinsic meaning and scope in English. Meaning difference in sentences merged with an epistemic modal auxiliary is revealed by the scope parameter between the unmarked and marked interpretation of it. At the C-I interface, the unmarked use of an epistemic modal auxiliary doesn't contribute to the truth-conditional meaning, whereas the marked use of it sometimes contributes to the truthconditional meaning. An epistemic modal auxiliary moves to C from T at the C-I interface, then it functions subjectively as a discourse-related information marker connoting an illocutionary force feature there. But when it functions objectively at T without movement, an epistemic modal auxiliary links thematic relation to its subject. In order to confirm the scope of epistemic modals, 20 native speakers checked the grammaticality of sentences that containing both an epistemic modal auxiliary and a quantifier concurrently. The result shows that all the native speakers interpret the epistemic modal auxiliary as denoting wide scope, but they don’t agree one another on the interpretation of it as denoting narrow scope.

This article is a diachronic study of different constructions involving the verb DARE from Old English (OE) to Modern English (ModE). With regard to the Late ModE (lModE) change, this paper examines the Corpus of Historical American English (COHA) covering 1810 to 2009. It is found that the general tendency is a decline of the frequency of DARE in terms of both the modal auxiliary and the main (lexical) verb uses in American English. However, the frequency of the auxiliary use, contra Taeymans (2004), has more rapidly decreased, while that of the main verb use has less drastically dropped. The blend constructions have had a low frequency throughout the past 200 years. Yet, the inflected blends(e.g. dared, dares) showed gradual decrease of frequency, whereas the DO-support blends did not. This study also examines historical changes from OE to Early ModE (eModE). It is found that lexical and modal properties coexisted from OE to Early Middle English (eME), the modal ones climaxing during the eME period. This paper argues that the grammaticalization from lexical to modal was triggered before the OE period and thereafter until eME is the period of gradual extension. From the lME period lexical properties increasingly occurred, which led Beths (1999) and Taeymans (2004) to argue for degrammaticalization. This paper accounts for the same phenomenon in terms of renewal, a natural process in grammaticalization. There are lME evidences showing phonological and semantic reductions of DARE, which necessitated a renewal of DARE. This study, moreover, shows that the words of the same category can follow different paths of change with time.

This paper examines the change of frequency of the core modal auxiliaries will/would, shall/should, can/could, may/might, and must in the Corpus of Historical American English (COHA) covering 1810 to 2009. The most common modals used in this period were would (average 2,827.69 per mil), followed by will (2,262.94), can (1,783.77), could (1,782.83), may (1,138.85), should (1,081.55), must (1,019.18), might (729.83) and shall (609.54). The top four modals accounts for 65.4%. The general trend is a significant decline in use of core modals with time: In a simple comparison between 1810s and 2000s, shall reveals the most remarkable decline (-97.23%), then follows must (-78.34%), may (-77.76%), will (-65.48%), should (-59.21%), can (-29.53%), might (-27.17%), would (-17.13%), though can and would shows repetition of rises and falls, and could shows a rise in frequency. This paper shows that the decline of core modals goes along with the increase of such lexical verbs as semi-auxiliaries and main verbs, and argues for grammaticalization and democratization as the determinants of this change: The increase of lexical verbs is due to a 'renewal' in a grammaticalization process and the notable loss of must and shall is related to the sociocultural change of democratization.

This article examines if English auxiliary shall is really dying, where it is still used, and why it is dying, and then speculates how long it will survive in what constructions. Our method of the examination is the search of the large-scale corpora like the COHA (The Corpus of Historical American English), which shows the relatively long-term changes of (American) English because it covers the recent 200 years (1810s-2000s) and the BNC (The British National Corpus), which is British English data. There have been so many reports about the disappearing shall-future, e.g. Mair and Leech (2006: 320), which are borne out through our examination of the corpora. The search result is the confirmation of the report that shall is dying. But it is not dead yet. It is still widely used mainly in the 1st person construction. The obsolescence of shall has been caused by both language-internal and external factors. Language internally, the loss (or grammaticalization) of the original lexical meaning of shall, i.e., 'obligation' or 'necessity', is the main reason for its reduction, because the remaining 'pure future' meaning can be expressed by will or other expressions like be going to. In general, language does not tolerate two words or constructions of the same meaning or function that can be exchanged each other anytime. Language externally, such factors as Americanization and colloquialization intervene in the loss of shall. Nevertheless, we cannot predict the complete disappearance of shall with certainty, because not a few historical changes leave the so-called historical remnants. Therefore, we cannot exclude the possibility that shall remains to be used in a certain formal situation or in a number of formulaic uses.

Jeongsil Song. 2001. Auxiliary Do. Studies in Modern Grammar 23, 75-93. This study discusses the distribution of the auxiliary do in the framework of the Minimalist Program. It is generally assumed that the auxiliary do appears in the context where Infl is not allowed to attach to a verbal element, that is, Infl is stranded. But how the context results doesn`t seem to have been clarified yet except a few typical cases such as negative and interrogative sentences. The auxiliary do also appear emphatic, imperative and VP-ellipsis sentences. Particularly in case of the imperative, the context seems quite difficult to describe. All the Infl-stranding contexts should be explained in the same manner. This study does that as follows. The emphatic sentence needs do when Aff, which is the emphatic morpheme appearing in the same position as not, blocks the covert raising of the main verb. The VP-ellipsis sentence needs do when the ellipsis leaves I stranded. The imperative needs do when negative or emphatic, regardless of auxiliary be or have appearing. This is because the auxiliary has some meaning and thus is not allowed to raise. The inverted ordering Don`t you - in the imperative is due to its lack of the EPP effect.

Lim, Sang-bong. 1998. Acquisition of Subject-auxiliary Inversion in Child English and Optimality Theory. Studies in Modern Grammar 14, 349-364. The purpose of this paper is to examine whether the patterns of subject-auxiliary inversion in child English questions can be explained by the constraints in Grimshaw`s(1992) Optimality Theory account of inversion patterns in adult English questions. I briefly review the treatment of subject-auxiliary inversion within the Minimalist Theory. The theory claims that subject-auxiliary inversion is a subcase of head movement that moves an auxiliary across the sentence to the head of the presentential complementizer(CP) position in nonselected CPs. In this paper I try to show that the stages of acquisition in subject-auxiliary inversion and the patterns of inversion in child English. And I also show that an Optimality-Theoretic approach can explain several facts regarding the pattern of auxiliary inversion in child English. In addition, this paper argues that the constraints ranking of child English must be different from those of adult English to capture the characteristics of subject-auxiliary inversion in child English.

Sun Ok Park. 1998. Differences in Discourse Functions of Modal Auxiliaries and Quasi-Modals. Studies in Modern Grammar 13, 107-131. The main concern of this study is to provide the English learners with the differences in discourse functions of will and be going to and suggest the differences can be applied to other modal auxiliaries and quasi-modals. Will has hypothetical condition and the speaker reaches his or her subjective prediction using the background experience and common sense. Be going to has present indication for the future event, so the speaker reaches his or her prediction based on the actual condition. The modal auxiliaries, must and can also have the speaker`s subjectivity while the corresponding quasi-modals, have to and be able to don`t.

Lee, Sang-oh. 1998. Auxiliary Inversion of Wh-interrogative Questions and Checking. Studies in Modern Grammatical Theories 12, 125-139. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the auxiliary inversion and its checking relation of wh-interrogative questions in English in the light of various assumptions made by minimalist theory in linguistics. Following the basic hypothesis that the auxiliary inversion in wh-questions depends on the strength of the head C of CP, the requirement that the C of CP be filled by some element fulfills the operation of auxiliary inversion by being attracted (adjoined) to the question affix(Q). Furthermore, the data drawn from Belfast English and the successive cyclic A´-movement of wh-expressions are used to discuss the function of the specifiers of CP containing overt or null elements, which play important roles in explaining the auxiliary inversion in wh-interrogative questions. The constructions such as subject questions, non-interrogative embedded clauses, and non-interrogative questions are also discussed for the aim of suggestion that only the head feature of C of CP containing overt wh-specifiers is strong enough to attract the auxiliary into the question affix.