FINALNI IMPERATIV U SAVREMENOM SRPSKOM JEZIKU

Abstract

The paper syntactically and semantically analyzes the constructions of the doubled imperative in which the second imperative has a final meaning only recognized in the latest syntactic literature, which is confirmed by the substitution of the imperative by the final infinitive and the final da-present-tense clause which is always possible, such as: Idi kupi [→ kupiti / da kupiš] novine. The basic question to be answered in the paper is: how, and in which syntac- tic-semantic conditions, is it possible that two finite verb forms separated neither by conjunctions, nor by punctuation, form a very specific asyndetic construction which is subordinate in its semantic status, and whose only conjunctive equivalent syntactically is a coordinated copulative sentence.In the conducted analysis the characteristics of doubled imperatives, unseparated or separated by commas were interrelated. Doubled comma-separated imperatives represent asyndetic copulative sentences. Thanks to the semantic correlation of imperative verbs, these sentences represent a special semantic subtype of copulative sentences: independent asyndetic and/or syn- detic copulative sentences with final meaning (e.g. Dođi, jedi / Dođi i jedi). The meaning of finality is thus, within an independent compound sentence, only a subtype of copulative meaning. The constructions of doubled imperatives not separated by commas represent a unique case of structurally subordinated constructions in the Serbian language. They are structured as dependent syntagms, since the second imperative performs the function of an adverbial complement or goal determination, just as the one the semantically equivalent final infinitive does, too. These constructions are synonymous constructions with three imperative particles: hajde, daj and de(der), due to the fact that these particles appear in the meaning of the imper- atives idi, pođi, dođi and the like (cf. Hajde / daj / deder donesi vode → Idi / pođi / kreni donesi vode). Having in mind that imperative particles form a compact intonation unit with the imperative verb following them, then there is no justification to separate the imperative particle from the verb in the imperative with a comma in writing. Since imperative particles are pragmatically synonymous with basic verbs of movement - this equivalence is also transferred to writing: no comma or any other punctuation mark is placed between the doubled imperatives. It is this fact that enables the final interpretation of the second imperative in the constructions of the doubled or reduplicated imperative. And its final meaning is confirmed by the possibility of substitution by a final infinitive and/or a final da-present-tense clause without changing the meaning of the utterance.