From modals to modal constructions

Leclercq, Benoît

doi:10.1075/cf.21001.lec

Cited by 6 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…B. Leclercq and C. Morin, however, suggest renaming the principle into "the principle of no equivalence" thus making it more precise and explanatory. And while competition and distributional niche of near-synonyms remain essential to the principle, the researchers offer to take into account the "social" aspect of meaning along with denotative and pragmatic components [Leclercq & Morin, 2023]. Consequently, studying near-synonyms helps uncover linguocultural implications of the lexemes under study and as is specified by N.N.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Corpus Analysis as a Means of Meaning Disambiguation: Collocational Analysis of Near-Synonyms of the Verb ‘Destroy’

Ivanova,

Medvedeva

2023

PDC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current paper is aimed at corpus-based differentiation of near-synonymous lexemes with the meaning ‘to destroy’. The research implies a series of consecutive steps: to discuss synonymy-related problems in modern linguistics; to compile a list of near-synonymous lexemes with the meaning ‘to destroy’ by means of Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA); to analyze and compare definitions of the chosen verbs in Merriam-Webster Dictionary (MWD); to generate lists of right-context collocates for each of the verbs in COCA; to put the collocates into semantic clusters and compare the obtained clusters. The list of lexemes under study contains such verbs as ‘destroy’, ‘ruin’, ‘break’, ‘obliterate’, ‘raze’, ‘annihilate’, ‘crush’, ‘devastate’, ‘wreck’, and ‘demolish’. As a result, semantic clusterisation of the right-context collocates helped establish that all verbs of the group collocate with the lexemes representing values and threats where destroying values evokes negative feelings and associations while destroying threats is perceived as a positive action. The verb ‘ruin’ is typically used with the clusters ‘meals and food’, ‘holidays’, ‘leisure activities’, ‘entertainment’ and ‘human relations’, meaning deprivation of enjoyment and happiness. The verb ‘break’ has a wide array of collocates resulting in a variety of conventionalized expressions. The results of the corpus-based research of lexical semantics may be helpful to those professionally engaged in second language teaching as well as in translation and lexicographic practice.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Corpus Analysis as a Means of Meaning Disambiguation: Collocational Analysis of Near-Synonyms of the Verb ‘Destroy’

Ivanova,

Medvedeva

2023

PDC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The post-modal grammaticalisation of concessive may and might

Leclercq

2024

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The decline of certain core modals in English, including may and might, is a well-documented phenomenon (cf. Daugs 2017). It is less clear, however, whether this tendency will lead to the loss of these modals or whether other changes are also underway. I aim to address this issue by looking at the use of may and might in concessive clauses. I will first present the results of a corpus study (COHA) aimed at understanding the diachronic development of concessive may and might. The analysis reveals a significant increase of may and might in concessive contexts since the 1960s, especially in factual concessives with but. This new finding is important as it shows that, though decreasing in frequency, the two modals are developing new patterns of use. This raises the question whether the status of may and might as modal verbs is also changing. I argue that the two verbs are going through a process of post-modal (secondary) grammaticalisation and constructionalisation, and that the concessive meaning is linked to the more complex ‘subj {may/might} VP, but-clause’ construction. I also claim that, within the paradigm of concessive constructions, those with may and might are best viewed as hedged concessives that serve politeness purposes.

show abstract

How do constructions with modal verbs develop in second language learners of English?

Römer-Barron

2024

JSLS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study reported on in this paper uses data from a large, pseudolongitudinal corpus of second language (L2) learner writing to investigate how L2 knowledge of verb-argument constructions (VACs) develops from low-beginner to upper-intermediate proficiency levels. The focus is on learners from two L1 backgrounds (L1 German and L1 Spanish) and on a subset of VACs that contain modal auxiliaries in combination with lexical verbs (e.g., subject-modal-verb, as in I can cook). For each VAC, L1, and proficiency level, frequency lists of verbs were created and compared across datasets. Reference data on the same constructions was extracted from a corpus of L1 writing. Results suggest that modal VACs become more frequent, less predictable, more productive, and more aligned with L1 production as learner proficiency increases. The findings of this study help to expand our understanding of the processes that underlie L2 construction acquisition.

show abstract

From modals to modal constructions

Cited by 6 publications

References 44 publications

Corpus Analysis as a Means of Meaning Disambiguation: Collocational Analysis of Near-Synonyms of the Verb ‘Destroy’

Corpus Analysis as a Means of Meaning Disambiguation: Collocational Analysis of Near-Synonyms of the Verb ‘Destroy’

The post-modal grammaticalisation of concessive may and might

How do constructions with modal verbs develop in second language learners of English?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About