조동사 NEED의 쇠퇴에 대한 코퍼스 연구 = A Corpus Study of the Decline of the Auxiliary Verb NEED

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This paper is a corpus-based study in the modal auxiliary need, the main verb need to and their blends. The examination of the Corpus of Historical American English (COHA) covering from 1810 to 2009 shows the continuous fall of the frequency of the modal need: The frequency of [need not (needn’t)+bare infinitive] has dropped by 85.3% from its peak period (the 1880s) to the 2000s, and that of the inverted [need+nominative+bare infinitive] has dropped by 92.6% from the 1810s to the 2000s. By contrast, the frequency of the main verb need to shows the continuous rise from the 1810s to the 2000s: The 2000s shows about 100 times increase compared with the 1810s. The main verb use exceeded the modal use around 1910/20 and rapidly increased (showing a steep “s” curve) since the 1970s. The blending constructions have also been found throughout these years, such as [needs (not)+bare infinitive], [needed (not)+bare infinitive], [aux+need+bare infinitive], [need+nominative+to-infinitive], though they were unproductive. This paper attempts to explain why the modal use is declining while its counterpart is increasing. In the long span of history, NEED underwent grammaticalization, like the central modals WILL, SHALL, CAN, etc. However, NEED began to develop its grammatical function (i.e. modal verb) much later (around the end of the fifteenth century) than these central modals, and while the new function was not fully established and the layering of the old and new ones still existed, the reduction of the overall modals began to occur in recent English.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 1. 서론
• 2. 경계서법조동사 NEED의 특성
• 3. NEED의 역사적 변화
• 4. 코퍼스 분석
• 5. 변화의 속성과 요인
• 6. 결론
• 참고문헌

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 김혜리, "영어 중심서법조동사의 최근 변화" 현대문법학회 (66) : 21-46, 2011

2 van der Wouden, T, "Three Modal Verbs" 1996

3 Kim, H., "The Synchrony and Diachrony of English Impersonal Verbs: A Study of Syntactic and Lexical Change" Ohio State University 1996

4 Wahlén, N. J., "The Old English Impersonalia, Part I, Impersonal Expressions Containing Verbs of Material Import in the Active Voice" Elanders Boktryckeri 1925

5 Biber, D., "The Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English" Longman 1999

6 Iyeiri, Y., "The Development of Non-assertive Any in Later ME and the Decline of Multiple Negation, in And Gladly Wolde He Lerne and Gladly Tech: Essays on Medieval English Presented to Professor Matsuji Tajima on His Sixtieth Birthday" Kaibunsha 127-143,

7 Davies, M, "The Corpus of Historical American English (COHA): 400+ Million Words, 1810-2009"

8 Horn, L. R., "Remarks on Neg-Raising, in Syntax and Semantics 9: Pragmatics" Academic Press 129-220, 1978

9 Hopper, P. J., "On Some Principles of Grammaticization, in Approaches to Grammaticalization" John Benjamins 17-35, 1991

10 Fischer, O, "On Negative Raising in the History of English, in Negation in the History of English" Mouton de Gruyter 55-100, 1999

11 van der Wouden, T, "Negative Polarity Auxiliaries" 1996

12 Gajewski, J. R., "Neg-Raising and Polarity" 30 : 289-328, 2007

13 Hopper, P. J., "Grammaticalization" Cambridge University Press 1993

14 Denison, D, "English Historical Syntax" Longman 1993

15 Krug, M, "Emerging English Modals: A Corpus-based Study of Grammaticalization" Mouton de Gruyter 2000

16 Mair, C., "Current Changes in English Syntax, in The Handbook of English Linguistics" Blackwell 318-342, 2006

17 Leech, G., "Change in Contemporary English: A Grammatical Study" Cambridge University Press 2009

18 Bosworth, J., "An Anglo-Saxon Dictionary. 2 vols" Oxford University Press

19 Jespersen, O., "A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles" Allen & Unwin 1909

20 Palmer, F. R., "A Linguistic Study of the English Verb" Longman 1965

21 Quirk, R., "A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language" Longman 1985