L’évolution du modal should s’est caractérisée par l’émergence progressive d’une interprétation non-déontique en construction hypotaxique. En effet, certaines constructions comportant should, du type It is surprising that he should say that, révèle un conflit sur une valeur construite ; celle-ci n’est alors plus repérée comme «effective» mais comme «fictive», et est considérée comme inattendue. Cette contribution se propose d’analyser le lien entre représentation attendue/inattendue et interaction de marqueurs hypotaxiques. L’examen d’exemples authentiques d’anglais contemporain révèle, en effet, la coexistence de plusieurs formes après la séquence It is + adjectif de valuation : constructions en for … to, propositions introduites par that (ou ∅) comportant should ou une forme assertée ou une base verbale. Il s’agit de montrer les différences de repérages entre ces formes et de rendre compte de l’apparition de l’une plutt que de l’autre en contexte.

The modal auxiliary SHOULD may express expected representation through deontic modality but it also conveys unexpected meaning in hypotactic structures. This phenomenon is to be addressed in a number of well-known sequences, such as It is surprising that he should say that. The aim of this paper is to study the relationship between an expected or unexpected representation and the interplay of hypotactic markers. By examining authentic examples taken from a variety of sources, we shall take into account the parallel existence of different constructions following the sequence It is + modalizing adjective (for … to-clauses or that/∅-clauses exhibiting should or a bare infinitive form or a form of assertion) and demonstrate that they are not synonymous through the examination of distinguishing contextual features. We argue that particular types of location, inter-subjective discordance and the treatment of the notional domain shed light on the process of meaning construal.