Transformational-Generative Grammar - Assignment Example

QUESTION 1.

Introduction.

Transformational-generative grammar implies that sentences have deeper meanings, a difference from the surface meaning derived from the arrangement of words or clauses in a sentence. Chomsky pioneered Transformational-generative grammar. In transformational-generative grammar, we have two different sentence structures, surface, and deep structures, respectively (Chomsky,1957). Surface and deep structures are syntactically different from one another, yet each independently contributes to the general understanding of a given sentence. The surface structure is the outward arrangement and layout of a sentence. It is how the sentence is read or heard. Surface structure conveys a surface meaning that can be deduced by simply looking at the sentence. Deep structure, on the other hand, is more complex. Deep structure attempts to grant a deeper meaning to the sentence in question (Chomsky,1957). It organizes and describes the syntactical relationship present between the individual phrases, clauses, or words that make up the sentence. Deep structure is more of thoughts and ideas, while the surface structure is majorly words and language. (Maier,2015).

i)Surface Structure.

Surface structure of a sentence is in a more straightforward description, the way a sentence sounds, or is read. Surface structure includes the phonetic aspects of the given sentence. Surface structure is relatively easier to comprehend as compared to deep structure (Chomsky,1965). However, there is a profound relationship between the two. A single deep structure can produce a variety of surface structures. Take the following sentence; for example, Jack hit a man with a gun.

From this sentence, we can derive two different deep structures, two different meanings.

Jack used a gun to hit the man in question.

or

Jack struck a man who owned a gun.

We can also look at the following sentence. He took the dog outside. From this, we can still derive two distinct deep structures.

He took the dog out of the house, probably for a walk.

Or

Regarding the dog outside, he is the owner, and he took it from the pet store

Considerably, the sentence I know a boy who plays football can be argued to be a surface structure which can also compound to two deep structures; I know a boy, He plays football.

ii)Deep structure.

Contrary to the surface structure, the deep structure focuses on postulating the deeper meaning of a sentence. It factors in all the individual phrases, nouns and clauses, and explains their roles in conveying the intended meaning of the sentence. Deep structure functions reliably as the abstract representation of a sentence. By utilizing deep structure, the syntactic rules that dictate phrase structure can be well described and understood. Deep structure focuses more on logic and thoughts (Chomsky,1957). Interestingly also notice another significant relationship between deep and surface structure single deep structure can be compounded into several surface structures. Take for instance the following;

He opened the door (Active)

The door was opened by him (Passive)

The door was opened (Imperative)

The above are three surface structures. However, an insightful analysis reveals that the three surface structures all represent one deep structure. In simple terms, the three surface structures all convey the same ideas. Further examples;

Jack rode the skateboard (Active)

The Skateboard was ridden by Jack (Passive)

The skateboard was ridden (Imperative)

She called the Police (Active)

The Police were called by her (Passive)

The Police were called (Imperative)

Tree Diagrams.

Tree diagrams are used in analyzing the different phrases that form a sentence. It can also be argued that tree diagrams are essential in analyzing the deep structure of a sentence.

• Mary locked away the dictionary.

TP

NPVP

MaryV’

V’NP

VPdetN

lockedawaythe dictionary

In this case, the tree diagram segments the different phrases in the sentence and dissects them further. In this light, we can fully appreciate the individual phrases and their contribution to the sentence's overall meaning.

The snake swallowed the egg.

S

NPVP

DNVNP

The Snakeswallowed

DN

theegg

Conclusion.

Surface and deep structures are both dependent on each other. As depicted above, each aids the other towards accomplishing the desired lexical or semantic goal. They each individually and collectively play an important role in transformational generative grammar.

QUESTION 2.

Introduction.

Generative grammar refers to a compilation of rules that guide and define the structures and interpretations of the infinite number of sentences for a particular language. It stipulates the bare minimum rules that apply in the construction of sentences for them to be accepted as semantically and pragmatically correct and abiding by the given speakers of the said language. Idioms to this effect do not all the time obey the rules of grammar. The existence of extra-grammatic or substantive idioms are an instance. Idioms are also non-compositional, all the more proving troublesome for generative grammar. Therefore, I have undertaken to investigate and discuss the specific attributes of idioms that are of importance in addressing the question.

i)Grammar

Considering grammatical correctness, there exist two types of idioms; grammatic and extra-grammatic idioms. Grammatic idioms, as the name suggests, satisfy all the requirements and rules of grammar. They are relatively accommodatable in generative grammar. Extra-grammatic idioms are the absolute opposite of grammatic idioms. They do not obey the rules of grammar and hence are more problematic for generative grammar. An example of an extra grammatic idiom is the idiom, All of a Sudden. This idiom is understandable and effectively conveys its desired message. However, from a grammatical point of view, the idiom is marred grammatically incorrect. A noun phrase usually follows a quantifier, but this is not the case in the idiom since the quantifier a Preposition phrase is following all. Other extra-grammatic idioms include Sight unseen, So far So good, By and large.

ii). Pragmatism.

Idioms can either be pragmatically fixed or pragmatically flexible. Pragmatics refers to the conditions and context under which the idiom can be used. Idioms that have a pragmatic point are pragmatically fixed and can hence only be used in certain specific contexts or conditions. On the other hand, pragmatically flexible idioms are less restricted and can be used in a variety of contexts. An example is On the Whole.

iii)Non-compositionality.

Compositionality is a principle of generative grammar. Compositionality implies that the individual words in a given phrase contribute to the phrase or sentence's overall meaning, whichever the case. This means that by knowing the words in the said phrase or sentence, one is able to derive the meaning of the phrase or sentence accurately. However, idioms seem to defy this outrightly. These idioms are called non-compositional idioms. The individual words in these idioms do not necessarily contribute to the understanding of the idiom. An example of a non-compositional idiom is Kick the bucket. The surface meaning of this idiom is to kick over a bucket literally. This is entirely different from its ideal idiomatic meaning. The idiom refers to death. Non-compositional idioms, to an extent, challenge and defy generative grammar.

iv). Lexically filled.

In generative grammar, sentences or phrases are relatively lexically flexible. This means that replacing a word with let`s say, its synonym does not adversely affect the meaning of the sentence. Replacing a word in a phrase has less effect on the overall meaning. The words can also be re-arranged with the intended meaning still being conveyed.

However, idioms are lexically fixed. This means that any attempts to replace or rearrange any of the words that form the idiom results in the idiom losing its previous meaning. Take, for instance, our previous idiom, Kick the bucket. Altering this to Kick, the mop eliminates the meaning of the idiom. Similarly, to Spill the beans. Changing it into Spill the water results in the idiom losing its meaning.

Conclusion.

Generative grammar is guided by a set of rules as dictated by the users of the said language. Phrases and sentences must satisfy these grammatical rules for them to be accepted as part of the said language. However, idioms outrightly defy these set grammatical rules. Instances of extra-grammatic, lexically filled, and non-compositional idioms allude to this. As such, idioms cannot be perfectly placed under generative grammar.

QUESTION 3.

Introduction

Lightfoot`s transparency principle is considered as a hybrid of the first and second paradigms. He noted that a given language was always bound to be subject to diverse changes in its syntax. These syntactic changes that have a considerable impact on the physiognomy of the language should be accounted for. For this to be possible, then the tools and techniques used in examining these linguistic changes should also be updated and tailored accordingly to effectively take note and analyze these changes (Lightfoot,2013). Furthermore, the first and second paradigms were biased in their specific definitions of grammar. They all had more reason to adopt a broader perspective via lightfoot`s transparency principle. The transparency principle investigates and attempts to describe the elements of language that underwent syntactic changes. They could no longer be sustained, prompting omission or formalized changes in their linguistic properties and functions. (Kiss, Tibor, and Artemis,2015).

Exception features.

Much happened to English as a language during the Middle-English age. It was at this time that exceptional features in language become rampant. Exception features allowed for individual manipulations and variations in some phrases and words in the then English language. This accorded flexibility would see the affected words and phrases undergo tremendous syntactic changes and variations over time. For instance, the five basic verbs at that time; magan, cunnan, motan, sculan, and willan were accorded features of exception. (Lightfoot,2013).The flexibility allowed for individual variations, with some individuals arranging the verbs incorrectly, for instance, in the statement. She shall visit. Also, the use of the past and continuous participles of the five verbs was substantially avoided by individual English-speaking individuals. The changes ultimately led to the special classification of the five verbs and the relative omission of their singular third person suffix. These changes all being fueled by the presence of exception features, which allowed for marked individual variations.

To infinitives.

As stated earlier, the Transparency principle implies that the accordance of features of exception to a particular element of language game room for individual variations. These unique variations would then ultimately result to syntactic changes. to infinitives also fall into this category. There is reliable evidence that to infinitives served as Nouns during the old English age. There exist written materials where to infinitive appeared following a preposition. There is also considerable evidence to suggest that, at some point in time, to infinitives functioned as Gerunds; however, that's not the scenario today since they are being used as verbs. As expected, to infinitives also had features of exception.to infinitives lacked any specifically established specifier. It lacking a specifier meant that to infinitives were rarely utilized as prepositions in passive phrases. The feature of exception allowed for individual syntactic variation in its functions and position. In the long run, the use of to infinitives transited towards being used as verbs; as we know them today. (Lightfoot,2013).

Quantifiers.

The quantifiers all, both and each have also undergone syntactic changes over time. During the middle English age, these quantifiers were in abundant use. What was different from now was that there was relatively more freedom in terms of their positions in a sentence. These quantifiers could freely be used before and after a nominal. For instance, in the statement, Janice hates all books; we see the quantifier all is coming before the nominal books. Likewise, they were used after a nominal; The books all disappeared. Over the years, the positioning of the quantifiers became more and more rigid. Today, the quantifiers cannot be as regularly and as freely placed before or after a nominal as in the Middle English age. .(Kiss, Tibor, and Artemis,2015).

`Kwa`

The transparency theory applies to far and wide. In Africa, kwa is used as a preposition. However, this was not the case years back. Long ago, kwa was used by many African tribes as a serial verb. This meant that it was coupled with another verb so as to be complete. However, there were no clear syntactic or semantic rules that governed the selection and use of the second verb that accompanied Kwa. The exception feature presented itself by the sheer fact that the second verb had no specific inflectional properties. Considering this, different African communities had their variants of kwa. In the long run, it uses slowly migrated from a verb and into a preposition. This is still another example of the syntactic changes fueled by the presence of exceptional features that allowed variations.

Conclusion.

The first and second paradigms were not that well suited or equipped to effectively track and analyze syntactic changes. The two did not put into consideration the dynamism and presence of syntactic changes in the given language. Lightfoot`s transparency principle tries to record and analyze these changes. It also goes the extra mile in trying to describe the causes of the changes. The most notable reason for the change is the existence of features of exception. This allows for widespread in the language and hence the possibility of change in format and function.