Search

This article presents additional support to the theoretical views of Predrag Piper exposed in his work 2002 focussing some hitherto in the linguistic literature unconsidered ways in which noun items help impaling quantification.

Today all linguists are likely to agree that the correct interpretation of an utterance consists of the identification of what was ment by it. It has been pointed out that, besides their literal meaning, utterances may have informationally relevant presupositions or implications, which also need to be identified. The author’s analysis discloses some ways in which Serbian language data provide new support for this view.

This paper considers Serbian adjectives and adverbs denoting qualification property Z in cases when they occur in an utterance of the type ’X is more Z than Y’. The author’s analysis makes it evident that, depending on the lexical meaning of the given adjective / adverb, Z either does, or does not imply that both the X and Y entities are qualified by it. She shows moreover how, by introducing the word još into his utterance, the speaker succeeds to attribute the property Z to both X and Y in spite of its non-implicational meaning.

The goals of this paper are twofold. First, it is intended to highlight the reasons why now, in our days, many competent language investigators mention the problematic status of the famous anthropocentric theory. Second, it argues for the investigation of a problem which has so far received almost no attention, i.e. it focuses on some earlier Serbian lexical data, pointing to the unexpected fact that they fail to disclose the essential Human/non-human distinction. Namely, the lexical units životinja, živina, živinče have been used in Šumadija to denote all living things, including human beings.

Drawing on a corpus of conversational Standard Serbian materials, the author examines the ways in which the adjective dobar performs its evaluative function. She points to the following hitherto unnoticed facts: If the evaluation concerns an adult human being dobar is perceived as a moral quality, whereas to say of a child that he is dobar is to praise his behavioral property. If nomina professionalis are concerned, although syntactically used as an attributive adjective, dobar semantically functions in fact as an adverbial modifier disclosing the appropriate performance of the activities which make the person under consideration properly qualified for his/her occupation.

A problem not previously considered is whether the actual Standard Serbian vocabulary of manner adverbs coincides with the one attested in Vuk Karadzic' times. Pointing to some relevant facts concerning the co-occurrence of the speech act verbs with the manner modifier razgovetno, this paper not only delineates the differences in the expression of such a manner modification between the earlier stages of Standard Serbian and the contemporary language but also provides a novel argument for the validity of the author's claim (published in one of her previous articles) that it is theoretically as well as pragmatically important to distinguish between the partial and the total types of predicate modifiers.

The paper sets about to identify something researchers fail to consider: the principles that in Standard Serbian govern the occurrence of the pragmatic devices već, još, još uvek, and više (ne..) by means of which the speaker discloses that the information about an actual state of affairs he is giving to his conversation partner happens to be an unexpected news for him. It highlights also the informational effects of vec on somebody who is listening to the conversation between the speaker and the addressee but who does not share in all details their stock of knowledge about the conversational topic and it rises the relevant question of the theoretical status of such effects.

The central concern of this article is to bring into sharper focus some problems related to personal pronouns and anaphorization that need to receive their proper share of attention in Slavic grammatical descriptions. The topics examined in the article include: (1) the identification of factors preventing the occurrence of the anaphoric pronoun in a given discourse; (2) the answer to the question why Russian and Polish anaphoric pronominal expressions which substitute for the predicatively used noun do not have analogous equivalents in Modern Standard Serbian; (3) the fact that Slavic languages differ with regard to how they treat anaphoric personal pronouns in relation to "null" anaphor; (4) the phenomenon of the so-called bound I unbound anaphor; (5) the necessity to admit that the anaphorically used Serbian word jedan functions as a discrete marker for the 'indefiniteness' category; (6) the need to get still more insights into what governs the gender agreement in cases when the noun's gender semantics and its morphological gender type are noncongruent.‚.

It is well established that the choice of subject depends on what the speaker estimates as most responsible for the successful occurrence of the action he is speaking of. The author enlightens the principles according to which in Serbian such a subject promotion may concern objects conceived as instruments indispensable for the performance of the transitive activity denoted by the sentence predicate verb. Pointing, however, to some Dutch language facts which make it quite evident that those principles are by no means universally valid, she claims that still more information about the whole problem are needed. She is, namely, convinced that such line of inquiry would not only enrich our present knowledge of micro parametric variations within the linguistic world, but could also be of relevant help to those researchers who expect, through observation of the facts of language, to get better insights into the ways the human brain works.

The authoress analyses different forms and meanings of the genitive nominal form with od in situations when it performs a qualifying role, and calls attention to some urgent problems which is necessary to solve as soon as possible.